Are Swiss trains genuinely reliable?

[johncrossley]

What I'd really like to know is how often trains are late because of signalling or points failures, regular reasons why trains in Britain are late.

 

[nwales58]

When I was young (OK, everyone groans) a young grad engineer's career was boosted by making things work. By the time I'd retired it seemed that precisely following organisational plans, priorities and the like was what mattered even if there were problems glaring at you screaming to be solved, in the UK at least. Switzerland looks different.

Has a systematic solution to the 197 toilet problems been implemented yet?

 

[NCT]

Swiss railways generally have a recovery margin of around 7% (four minutes in an hour) and sometimes more for mountain railways.

If I may use British parlance, how is that 7% reflected in the working timetable? Is this built into the sectional running times, or added as discrete allowances in the working timetable? The British equivalent would be performance time.

Swiss trains often add additional coaches at busy travel times slowing speeds.

I've wondered how variable train lengths are dealt with in run-time applications. Are run times calculated for reasonable maximum consist? British sectional running times are highly rolling stock specific (sometimes too specific with different sets of SRTs for the same class of different lengths). Of course in the loco-hauled days 'just bung on an extra carriage' wasn't uncommon.

 

[Route115?]

I'm not sure to be honest.

 

[Krokodil]

Has a systematic solution to the 197 toilet problems been implemented yet?

Software fixes for the toilet bowl (to get it to self-clear minor blockages without waiting for the guard to initiate it) seem to have worked. The doors still need regularly resetting.

 

[30907]

I've wondered how variable train lengths are dealt with in run-time applications. Are run times calculated for reasonable maximum consist?

The additional coaches are commonly accompamied by an additional loco.

British sectional running times are highly rolling stock specific (sometimes too specific with different sets of SRTs for the same class of different lengths). Of course in the loco-hauled days 'just bung on an extra carriage' wasn't uncommon.

...provided the timing load wasn't exceeded of course

 

[eldomtom2]

Swiss railways generally have a recovery margin of around 7% (four minutes in an hour) and sometimes more for mountain railways.

Do you recall where you read this? I'm trying to track down sources for Swiss timetable padding practices.

 

[Route115?]

It was on a study tour to the country several years ago. I've googled (swiss trains timetable recovery margin) it but unfortunately got an AI reply without any sources.

 

[RT4038]

The gist of this thread is that infrastructure failures can be minimised by good maintenance. That somewhat contradicts the response I got on another thread which basically said there is little can be done and disruption is inevitable.

I think that is a bit of a mischevious interpretation of another thread - it is pretty obvious that infrastructure failure and disruption is inevitable, however the quantity can be reduced by increased maintenance and/or replacement, the cost of which increases exponentially for each percentage point that failure and disruption is reduced.

On the basis of current expenditure, there is little to be done.

Disruption could be reduced by enlarging the infrastructure and operations to allow diversions either to adjacent lines or other routes and stations could be enlarged with more platforms etc all at increased cost. However this is beyond likelihood in the current horizon.

Are these 'lessons' to be learnt [ or probably already known? ] but are simply not probable in our culture of financial priority?

 

[eldomtom2]

I think that is a bit of a mischevious interpretation of another thread - it is pretty obvious that infrastructure failure and disruption is inevitable, however the quantity can be reduced by increased maintenance and/or replacement, the cost of which increases exponentially for each percentage point that failure and disruption is reduced. On the basis of current expenditure, there is little to be done. Disruption could be reduced by enlarging the infrastructure and operations to allow diversions either to adjacent lines or other routes and stations could be enlarged with more platforms etc all at increased cost. However this is beyond likelihood in the current horizon. Are these 'lessons' to be learnt [ or probably already known? ] but are simply not probable in our culture of financial priority?

Well, for starters there's several other possibilities, including that Swiss methods of handling disruption are better and don't incur much extra costs, or that Swiss maintenance practices end up cheaper. I don't think it's quite as simple as just "the Swiss spend more" - and I don't even know if that's accurate, because I don't have figures comparing UK and Swiss expenditure.

 

[The Pelican]

I think that is a bit of a mischevious interpretation of another thread - it is pretty obvious that infrastructure failure and disruption is inevitable, however the quantity can be reduced by increased maintenance and/or replacement, the cost of which increases exponentially for each percentage point that failure and disruption is reduced. On the basis of current expenditure, there is little to be done. Disruption could be reduced by enlarging the infrastructure and operations to allow diversions either to adjacent lines or other routes and stations could be enlarged with more platforms etc all at increased cost. However this is beyond likelihood in the current horizon. Are these 'lessons' to be learnt [ or probably already known? ] but are simply not probable in our culture of financial priority?

I think in the UK just having a press discussion of high reliability and how much it costs would do wonders- people expect it to be very high, but to be able to put a number on it, and understand what the tradeoff might be for speed, frequency or train length would help customers put up with the delays that do occur more. There is also a lot to be said for things like Delay Repay, which compensates passengers for the delay that does occur. What if you could buy differently priced tickets with different compensation reigimes in the event of a delay, for example?

It also seems useful for future planning- Oxford to London became a lot more reliable when Chiltern opened, what other largish cities near London could do with a diversionary route? Alternatively, granted that the two-route cities Oxford, Exeter, Birmingham, Edinburgh have reliable services to London on a certain number of days a year, how much higher is this than cities like Bristol, Manchester, Liverpool, Cardiff, Newcastle, with only one route? Could you just improve resiliancy towards those cities to match the levels a diversionary route enables?

 

[35B]

I think in the UK just having a press discussion of high reliability and how much it costs would do wonders- people expect it to be very high, but to be able to put a number on it, and understand what the tradeoff might be for speed, frequency or train length would help customers put up with the delays that do occur more. There is also a lot to be said for things like Delay Repay, which compensates passengers for the delay that does occur. What if you could buy differently priced tickets with different compensation reigimes in the event of a delay, for example?

I wish I shared your confidence. That discussion hasn’t got us anywhere with hospital bed capacity, for example, so I’m far from convinced that there’s a sensible grown up public conversation to be had on what railways should cost to be resilient. And that’s even without considering the wider differences between Britain and Switzerland, which will influence (for example) how much a mile of overhead wiring, or a crossover, will cost.

It also seems useful for future planning- Oxford to London became a lot more reliable when Chiltern opened, what other largish cities near London could do with a diversionary route? Alternatively, granted that the two-route cities Oxford, Exeter, Birmingham, Edinburgh have reliable services to London on a certain number of days a year, how much higher is this than cities like Bristol, Manchester, Liverpool, Cardiff, Newcastle, with only one route? Could you just improve resiliancy towards those cities to match the levels a diversionary route enables?

This, sadly, is an example of where even a sensible conversation goes awry. Swiss resilience isn’t particularly about duplicate routes (and, yes, they do have their benefits), but keeping trains moving when there are problems. Crossovers, passing loops, OHL, all contribute to that resilience and allow capacity to be maintained.

20-odd years ago, the fashion was for “Japanese style reliability”, and mags like Modern Railways had reports of study visits. As a punter, all I now see are purchases from Hitachi whose availability suggests that the Japanese model may not be quite what it was presented as - or that the useful lessons were not absorbed.

 

[furnessvale]

Well, for starters there's several other possibilities, including that Swiss methods of handling disruption are better and don't incur much extra costs, or that Swiss maintenance practices end up cheaper. I don't think it's quite as simple as just "the Swiss spend more" - and I don't even know if that's accurate, because I don't have figures comparing UK and Swiss expenditure.

Yes. The whole ethos of train regulation seems different in CH. Using the second hand on the station clock, at 10secs before time, the brakes are already blowing off and at time + or - a second the wheels are turning.

At a major station near me, it is not unusual to see platform staff strolling towards the right away button "on time". By the time the driver has blown off the brakes the train is leaving 30 secs late.

 

[RT4038]

It also seems useful for future planning- Oxford to London became a lot more reliable when Chiltern opened, what other largish cities near London could do with a diversionary route? Alternatively, granted that the two-route cities Oxford, Exeter, Birmingham, Edinburgh have reliable services to London on a certain number of days a year, how much higher is this than cities like Bristol, Manchester, Liverpool, Cardiff, Newcastle, with only one route? Could you just improve resiliancy towards those cities to match the levels a diversionary route enables?

We could spend a huge amount of money on this and make little dent in the punctuality/reliability of individual passengers' journeys. None of your 'two-route' cities have in practice genuine diversionary routes for trains - yes, passengers can transfer to the alternative line, but only at the existing capacity which generally means for a miserable overcrowded trip on an extended journey time. Our railway culture makes diverting trains very expensive, assuming capacity is available.

Well, for starters there's several other possibilities, including that Swiss methods of handling disruption are better and don't incur much extra costs, or that Swiss maintenance practices end up cheaper. I don't think it's quite as simple as just "the Swiss spend more" - and I don't even know if that's accurate, because I don't have figures comparing UK and Swiss expenditure.

Yes. The whole ethos of train regulation seems different in CH. Using the second hand on the station clock, at 10secs before time, the brakes are already blowing off and at time + or - a second the wheels are turning.

At a major station near me, it is not unusual to see platform staff strolling towards the right away button "on time". By the time the driver has blown off the brakes the train is leaving 30 secs late.

And of course Swiss methods and practices will be influenced by Swiss culture in general, which is not going to be easily replicated in the UK.

I wish I shared your confidence. That discussion hasn’t got us anywhere with hospital bed capacity, for example, so I’m far from convinced that there’s a sensible grown up public conversation to be had on what railways should cost to be resilient. And that’s even without considering the wider differences between Britain and Switzerland, which will influence (for example) how much a mile of overhead wiring, or a crossover, will cost.

This, sadly, is an example of where even a sensible conversation goes awry. Swiss resilience isn’t particularly about duplicate routes (and, yes, they do have their benefits), but keeping trains moving when there are problems. Crossovers, passing loops, OHL, all contribute to that resilience and allow capacity to be maintained.

Swiss resilience covers a multitude of different facets - inter alia, how many incidences of 'person hit by a train' and their aftermath, maintenance procedures, renewal procedures, infrastructure redundancy, rolling stock redundancy, interoperability of rolling stock, staff culture, passenger and general society culture. I doubt you can point at one thing to say this is a 'lesson' the UK hasn't learnt (or takes no notice of), as they are all interwined.

20-odd years ago, the fashion was for “Japanese style reliability”, and mags like Modern Railways had reports of study visits. As a punter, all I now see are purchases from Hitachi whose availability suggests that the Japanese model may not be quite what it was presented as - or that the useful lessons were not absorbed.

Because they are not being operated by Japanese people, maintained by Japanese people and being used by Japanese people within the context of Japanese culture. Generally we expect a much higher standard from our fellow citizens than we are prepared to put in ourselves - our own punctuality and reliability is not good enough but we expect others to be exemplary. Our culture - how do we change that first?

 

[bahnause]

Yes. The whole ethos of train regulation seems different in CH. Using the second hand on the station clock, at 10secs before time, the brakes are already blowing off and at time + or - a second the wheels are turning.

At a major station near me, it is not unusual to see platform staff strolling towards the right away button "on time". By the time the driver has blown off the brakes the train is leaving 30 secs late.

In Switzerland, timetables take dispatch times into account. Therefore, there is no reason to start the procedure before the published departure time. According to the rule book, it is not permitted for trains published in the public timetable to close doors or leave the station early.

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

Because they are not being operated by Japanese people, maintained by Japanese people and being used by Japanese people within the context of Japanese culture.

Nor are they running on track constructed according to Japanese methods and standards.

 

[Tester]

In Switzerland, timetables take dispatch times into account. Therefore, there is no reason to start the procedure before the published departure time. According to the rule book, it is not permitted for trains published in the public timetable to close doors or leave the station early.

And of course that is exactly as it should be.

I am constantly amazed at the apologists for 'train doors will close xx seconds/minutes before departure time' who turn up to insist that it is a good idea.

 

[johncrossley]

Yes. The whole ethos of train regulation seems different in CH. Using the second hand on the station clock, at 10secs before time, the brakes are already blowing off and at time + or - a second the wheels are turning.

At a major station near me, it is not unusual to see platform staff strolling towards the right away button "on time". By the time the driver has blown off the brakes the train is leaving 30 secs late.

Standard practice in the UK is to run up to 30 seconds early as a way of cheating in the punctuality statistics. As far as I could tell, they don't leave so early in Switzerland and so make punctuality targets even more difficult to meet. Of course, where you have connecting trains to wait for this makes it even harder to be on time.

 

[mountainpixel]

Standard practice in the UK is to run up to 30 seconds early as a way of cheating in the punctuality statistics. As far as I could tell, they don't leave so early in Switzerland and so make punctuality targets even more difficult to meet. Of course, where you have connecting trains to wait for this makes it even harder to be on time.

The whistle is blown about 20 seconds before departure to signal that the train is about to depart. The door is locked exactly when the clock springs to the next minute. The train then start rolling about 10–20 seconds later. The public timetable does not always reflect the running timetable. The public timetable is then always rounded to the last full minute (sometimes even more to get a nice symmetrical public timetable or signal urgency when boarding).

 

[NCT]

The whistle is blown about 20 seconds before departure to signal that the train is about to depart. The door is locked exactly when the clock springs to the next minute. The train then start rolling about 10–20 seconds later. The public timetable does not always reflect the running timetable. The public timetable is then always rounded to the last full minute (sometimes even more to get a nice symmetrical public timetable or signal urgency when boarding).

Is this describing the Swiss or UK practice?

 

[RT4038]

And of course that is exactly as it should be.

I am constantly amazed at the apologists for 'train doors will close xx seconds/minutes before departure time' who turn up to insist that it is a good idea.

Standard practice in the UK is to run up to 30 seconds early as a way of cheating in the punctuality statistics. As far as I could tell, they don't leave so early in Switzerland and so make punctuality targets even more difficult to meet. Of course, where you have connecting trains to wait for this makes it even harder to be on time.

The whistle is blown about 20 seconds before departure to signal that the train is about to depart. The door is locked exactly when the clock springs to the next minute. The train then start rolling about 10–20 seconds later. The public timetable does not always reflect the running timetable. The public timetable is then always rounded to the last full minute (sometimes even more to get a nice symmetrical public timetable or signal urgency when boarding).

I think this is going off track into a particular axe to grind which is not useful to the overall debate - in the UK we cannot get the clocks working consistently or to show the same time, nor (as has been pointed out), get staff or passengers to recognise such sharp punctuality.

 

[mountainpixel]

Is this describing the Swiss or UK practice?

Standard practice (simplified) on swiss long distance trains with a conductor.

 

[Tester]

I think this is going off track into a particular axe to grind which is not useful to the overall debate - in the UK we cannot get the clocks working consistently or to show the same time, nor (as has been pointed out), get staff or passengers to recognise such sharp punctuality.

We can of course have different opinions, but to me it is the whole point of the debate!

 

[godfreycomplex]

20-odd years ago, the fashion was for “Japanese style reliability”, and mags like Modern Railways had reports of study visits. As a punter, all I now see are purchases from Hitachi whose availability suggests that the Japanese model may not be quite what it was presented as - or that the useful lessons were not absorbed.

The aspiration to “Japanese style reliability” disappeared once the reports into the Amagasaki derailment were published, when it became very clear that the human cost of delivering that reliability was too high.

The issue with Swiss reliability is, as has been said, is that the capital cost is too high. Swiss railways are generally very good employers, by all accounts.

 

[eldomtom2]

And of course Swiss methods and practices will be influenced by Swiss culture in general, which is not going to be easily replicated in the UK.

Because they are not being operated by Japanese people, maintained by Japanese people and being used by Japanese people within the context of Japanese culture. Generally we expect a much higher standard from our fellow citizens than we are prepared to put in ourselves - our own punctuality and reliability is not good enough but we expect others to be exemplary. Our culture - how do we change that first?

I always feel this "it's national culture" answer is a bit defeatist - it's rather vague on what specifically is being referred to by "culture" and seems to be treating it as immutable. However, personally I don't think that there is nothing the railways can do to change passenger behaviour when it comes to boarding procedures etc.

 

[Tester]

I always feel this "it's national culture" answer is a bit defeatist - it's rather vague on what specifically is being referred to by "culture" and seems to be treating it as immutable. However, personally I don't think that there is nothing the railways can do to change passenger behaviour when it comes to boarding procedures etc.

Agreed

The railways (however defined) can do many beneficial things - if they cared to do so.

Sadly, it appears to me that they don't care, so we are where we are.

 

[johncrossley]

Culture is constantly evolving and changing with differences between different countries narrowing all the time because of globalisation.

 

[RT4038]

I always feel this "it's national culture" answer is a bit defeatist - it's rather vague on what specifically is being referred to by "culture" and seems to be treating it as immutable. However, personally I don't think that there is nothing the railways can do to change passenger behaviour when it comes to boarding procedures etc.

Such as? Our national culture pervades all through society, from the actions of the general public, the railway staff, the railway management, the electorate, the Government they elect and the civil Service they don't. If you think 'the railways' as in their staff of all grades can 'change passenger behaviour' to have a meaningful effect on train punctuality in our national culture then lets hear how it can be done.

I understand that during the Covid shutdowns, when there were few passengers and a much reduced train service, the service ran much more punctually....

 

[30907]

One factor that hasn't (I think - apologies if wrong) been mentioned is that Swiss main lines carry typically 1/2 to 2/3 the "InterCity" traffic of routes from London: the Zurich-Basel-Bern triangle through Olten carries 6-7 IC/IR trains per hour on each leg (one of which is the 1960s new line via Lenzburg, the other two significantly upgraded to allow the Taktfahrplan).
The EC/WC/GW main lines carry much more than that for a considerable way out of London. So far greater stress on infrastructure and far less leeway for recovery. They are much more like the DB routes through NRW which, even without neglect, have been congested for years.

 

[Belperpete]

My experiences of Swiss travel are mainly on the RhB pre COVID. Timekeeping was generally good, but nothing to shout about. Late running was not uncommon, but rarely more than about half an hour. I think their mix of expresses, stopping and freight services on an intensively used network of single lines doesn't help.

My regular experiences of travel in Austria (mainly around Vienna suburban area) and the Netherlands (Amsterdam and Utrecht) has been that timekeeping is comparable with the UK. Not uncommon to find late running or cancelled trains.

On a visit to Vienna last year, the train I was on to the airport came to a grinding halt in the middle of some nondescript industrial area. After half an hour of various dual language announcements giving various explanations and promises that we would soon be on the move, we got a very brief announcement in German only to tell us that the train was cancelled. What did that mean for us? We soon discovered, as the train reversed all the way back to Vienna station, where passengers were waiting to board for the train's next departure, unfortunately not to the airport. Equally unfortunately the next hourly service to the airport was leaving just as we pulled in, they didn't hold it for us. No announcements, no apologies, no staff to tell us what to do, no assistance whatsoever. I went to the information centre, but again no apology, the next departure is in another hour's time was the only help I got. Fortunately I had allowed plenty of time, but when we finally got to the airport there were a lot of people in full panic mode rushing for the airport. I came to the conclusion that getting the set back onto it's booked path was far more important than any idea of customer service.