Storm Goretti disruption - 8/9 January 2026

[Horizon22]

Would expect it was running at severely reduced speed limit given Network Rail wanted the line closed earlier. UPDATE: now reached Hayle so running 3 hours 45 mins late !

There’s about 5 trees or large branches down on the line in the Cornwall area over the last 3 hours. You can see why the line was closed in advance as there will also need to be route proving tomorrow. Looe <> Liskeard has been suspended due to flooding unsurprisingly.

 

[Bald Rick]

I have watched this thread unfold with interest, popcorn, and then utter disbelief.

It is so easy to criticise the decisions made when having no responsibility for the outcome of those decisions, or having to face the potential consequences, legal and other.

As one of the few people commenting here who have been in the position of having to take decisions such as those made in the last 48 hours, and also having been party to the decisions made in the last 48 hours, I wholeheartedly agree. There seems to be a number of armchair controllers out there who perhaps don’t understand the realities of operating the railway.


For the avoidance of doubt no-one that is responsible for these decisons is “throwing in the towel”. The decisions are made using the best advice available from weather forecasters, knowledge of available resources, discussions with other authorities (including BTP, emergency services and relevant local authorities), and experience gained from previous incidents, including recommendations made from resulting investigations.

A decison to close any part of the network in advance of severe weather is not taken lightly. However, when it is taken, it is done so to provide passengers advance notice of no service, rather than only advising them after an incident when many will be mid journey.

Except Schiphol Airport is still trying to run and our railways arent. Half of the flights still ran, and most of the cancellations were narrow body planes with long haul and freight being relatively unaffected.

I was not going to single out silly comments, but this one defies belief. Trains are running on most of the GB network as normal. I’ve not long got off one myself (it was on time). Trains have been withdrawn on a relatively small proportion of the network, where the risk to passengers and staff is greatest. To a) suggest that the railways “aren’t trying to run” and b) compare a countrywide network to one airport are both just nonsense.

Whilst on the subject of NS, the weather data supplied to the GB railway also (by chance) includes detailed forecasts for much of France, Belgium and the Netherlands. The snow NS are expecting in the next 36 hours is nothing like as severe as what we are expecting to see in parts of the midlands and pennines in the next 12 hours. And with the Netherlands being, generally, somewhat more generously provided with transport infrastructure than, say, the Peak district or mid-Wales, it is rather easier to attend to any incidents that do happen.

None of this is to claim that the GB rail network is as good as it can be in such circumstances. There is always room for improvement. But to suggest that we in the railway are not trying, or not caring about passengers is frankly offensive. And I’d quite like some of you to come and say it to me in person in control one day.

 

[Bikeman78]

How risk averse it the Netherlands compared to the UK, just out of interest?

Massively less so, to be blunt. Still hundreds of automatic level crossings and little in the way of fencing. People will ride bicycles in all weathers.

 

[Russel]

Everytime, RTT error as usual giving poor reasons which are then misinterpreted far too often.

It has been said plenty of times in the past, but RTT uses its own interpretations of the delay codes.
Code X4 is (as per the Open Rail Data Wiki) for

I think most of us know it's not the right delay code, it's still amusing though...

Massively less so, to be blunt. Still hundreds of automatic level crossings and little in the way of fencing. People will ride bicycles in all weathers.

That's how it should be, to be honest, we spend so long wrapping people in cotton wool in the UK that common sense and self responsibility are rapidly becoming a thing of the past.

 

[WirralLine]

I can't believe Transport for Wales cancelled all Llandudno Junction - Llandudno shuttles from 3pm today. Absolutely no chance it will snow and the winds are in the high teens.

Cue my "Michael Fish" moment when I wake up tomorrow under a blanket of snow.

Also the TFW Chester to Liverpool ... last one being 1243 off Chester (1347 return from Lime Street) the rest cancelled due to severe forcasted weather. Meanwhile other trains are running between Liverpool and Runcorn (albeit disrupted due to issues further south) and TFW trains are running between Chester and Frodsham on the Manchester services (currently all on time) so unless the Halton Curve is an oddball and predicted to be the only place in the region to have 100mph gales and 10ft of snow it doesnt make much sense! Its barely at freezing temperature around these parts and its not even rained that much this evening - it is trying to snow a little bit though. Theres definitely no significant wind, Liverpool Airport weather info is currently showing 14knots.

Theyve also curtailed the Manchester-Llandudno services at Chester since mid afternoon although the North Wales Coast to Holyhead seems to be running without a hitch (bar some disrupted Avantis due to the WCML).

Somebody said earlier its a Network Rail decision to avoid points freezing in a less important direction so they can keep main /higher priority routes going if they do freeze - whether theres any truth in it I don't know.

I can understand them pulling the Conwy Valley branch given its frequent weather related problems even in average bad weather.

That's how it should be, to be honest, we spend so long wrapping people in cotton wool in the UK that common sense and self responsibility are rapidly becoming a thing of the past.

Absolutely agree.

 

[yoyothehobo]

I have watched this thread unfold with interest, popcorn, and then utter disbelief.



As one of the few people commenting here who have been in the position of having to take decisons such as those made in the last 48 hours, and also having been party to the decisions made in the last 48 hours, I wholeheartedly agree. There seems to be a number of armchair controllers out there who perhaps don’t understand the realities of operstign the railway.


For the avoidance of doubt no-one that is responsible for these decisons is “throwing in the towel”. The decisions are made using the best advice available from weather forecasters, knowledge of available resources, discussions with other authorities (including BTP, emergency services and relevant local authorities), and experience gained from previous incidents, including recommendations made from resulting investigations.

A decison to close any part of the network in advance of severe weather is not taken lightly. However, when it is taken, it is done so to provide passengers advance notice of no service, rather than only advising them after an incident when many will be mid journey.



I was not going to single out silly comments, but this one defies belief. Trains are running on most of the GB network as normal. I’ve not long got off one myself (it was on time). Trains have been withdrawn on a relatively small proportion of the network, where the risk to passengers and staff is greatest. To a) suggest that the railways “aren’t trying to run” and b) compare a countrywide network to one airport are both just nonsense.

Whilst on the subject of NS, the weather data supplied to the GB railway also (by chance) includes detailed forecasts for much of France, Belgium and the Netherlands. The snow NS are expecting in the next 36 hours is nothing like as severe as what we are expecting to see in parts of the midlands and pennines in the next 12 hours. And with the Netherlands being, generally, somewhat more generously provided with transport infrastructure than, say, the Peak district or mid-Wales, it is rather easier to attned to any incidents that do happen.

None of this is to claim that the GB rail network is as good as it can be in such circumstances. There is always room for improvement. But to suggest that we in the railway are not trying, or not caring about passengers is frankly offensive. And I’d quite like some of you to come and say it to me in person in control one day.

100%

 

[Amaranthe]

This thread has brought back memories from I think the mid 80s...

My Dad was the guard on an Inverness to Aberdeen service that got stuck in a snowdrift just outside Huntly for 28 hours.

Staff from the local hotel brought hot drinks, food and blankets down to the train for passengers.

 

[Straus]

I have watched this thread unfold with interest, popcorn, and then utter disbelief.



As one of the few people commenting here who have been in the position of having to take decisions such as those made in the last 48 hours, and also having been party to the decisions made in the last 48 hours, I wholeheartedly agree. There seems to be a number of armchair controllers out there who perhaps don’t understand the realities of operating the railway.


For the avoidance of doubt no-one that is responsible for these decisons is “throwing in the towel”. The decisions are made using the best advice available from weather forecasters, knowledge of available resources, discussions with other authorities (including BTP, emergency services and relevant local authorities), and experience gained from previous incidents, including recommendations made from resulting investigations.

A decison to close any part of the network in advance of severe weather is not taken lightly. However, when it is taken, it is done so to provide passengers advance notice of no service, rather than only advising them after an incident when many will be mid journey.



I was not going to single out silly comments, but this one defies belief. Trains are running on most of the GB network as normal. I’ve not long got off one myself (it was on time). Trains have been withdrawn on a relatively small proportion of the network, where the risk to passengers and staff is greatest. To a) suggest that the railways “aren’t trying to run” and b) compare a countrywide network to one airport are both just nonsense.

Whilst on the subject of NS, the weather data supplied to the GB railway also (by chance) includes detailed forecasts for much of France, Belgium and the Netherlands. The snow NS are expecting in the next 36 hours is nothing like as severe as what we are expecting to see in parts of the midlands and pennines in the next 12 hours. And with the Netherlands being, generally, somewhat more generously provided with transport infrastructure than, say, the Peak district or mid-Wales, it is rather easier to attned to any incidents that do happen.

None of this is to claim that the GB rail network is as good as it can be in such circumstances. There is always room for improvement. But to suggest that we in the railway are not trying, or not caring about passengers is frankly offensive. And I’d quite like some of you to come and say it to me in person in control one day.

Refreshing to hear a point of view grounded in sense

 

[Freemo]

That's how it should be, to be honest, we spend so long wrapping people in cotton wool in the UK that common sense and self responsibility are rapidly becoming a thing of the past.

From experience, if you go cycling in icy conditions being wrapped in cotton wool is a good idea.

 

[bramling]

I have watched this thread unfold with interest, popcorn, and then utter disbelief.



As one of the few people commenting here who have been in the position of having to take decisions such as those made in the last 48 hours, and also having been party to the decisions made in the last 48 hours, I wholeheartedly agree. There seems to be a number of armchair controllers out there who perhaps don’t understand the realities of operating the railway.


For the avoidance of doubt no-one that is responsible for these decisons is “throwing in the towel”. The decisions are made using the best advice available from weather forecasters, knowledge of available resources, discussions with other authorities (including BTP, emergency services and relevant local authorities), and experience gained from previous incidents, including recommendations made from resulting investigations.

A decison to close any part of the network in advance of severe weather is not taken lightly. However, when it is taken, it is done so to provide passengers advance notice of no service, rather than only advising them after an incident when many will be mid journey.



I was not going to single out silly comments, but this one defies belief. Trains are running on most of the GB network as normal. I’ve not long got off one myself (it was on time). Trains have been withdrawn on a relatively small proportion of the network, where the risk to passengers and staff is greatest. To a) suggest that the railways “aren’t trying to run” and b) compare a countrywide network to one airport are both just nonsense.

Whilst on the subject of NS, the weather data supplied to the GB railway also (by chance) includes detailed forecasts for much of France, Belgium and the Netherlands. The snow NS are expecting in the next 36 hours is nothing like as severe as what we are expecting to see in parts of the midlands and pennines in the next 12 hours. And with the Netherlands being, generally, somewhat more generously provided with transport infrastructure than, say, the Peak district or mid-Wales, it is rather easier to attend to any incidents that do happen.

None of this is to claim that the GB rail network is as good as it can be in such circumstances. There is always room for improvement. But to suggest that we in the railway are not trying, or not caring about passengers is frankly offensive. And I’d quite like some of you to come and say it to me in person in control one day.

Whilst I don’t in principle disagree with any of the above, one has to wonder why there’s a perception that (elements of the industry) appear to “throw in the towel”. Clearly the industry is getting something wrong, either in terms of what it is doing, or the dissemination of information.

Thinking back to the Stevenage fatality last month, unfortunately I can well understand why people just don’t have the confidence that the system as a whole is as oriented round the end user as it might be, or perhaps has been in the past.

 

[Russel]

From experience, if you go cycling in icy conditions being wrapped in cotton wool is a good idea.

I was waiting for someone to pick up on that bit!

 

[driverd]

None of this is to claim that the GB rail network is as good as it can be in such circumstances. There is always room for improvement.

I think this is my general point when it comes to these types of event. Historically speaking, the railways have often been able to play to their strengths and been able to deliver when other modes of transport have not. I think, in a large part, this reflects a number of concurrent issues around investment, infrastructure age and the many many issues posed by fragmentation during franchising.

From a personal perspective, the risk tolerance of the industry is what I've noticed change the most and I do think that's a real shame, as it prevents rail as a mode from shining through when it really can excel itself compared to, say, a bus service or air travel. All that said, I think there is something in comments from other that tolerance to disruption has reduced amongst users (and perhaps theres an expectations management exercise to be done there). I also think the industry's approach to image management has moved more to delivering a reliable/regular service when we can, rather than delivering what we can all the time.

I appreciate the arguements on both sides and I do think, sometimes, on these threads theres a tendency that I'm certainly not immune to, of making the conversation into a binary arguement of run everything vs cancel everything. This sometimes results in arguements that venture toward the ludicrous, which quite clearly is not really what either side is trying to say (generally speaking).

The reality is foul weather puts most people off traveling, so whether trains run or not, the impact is always going to be lesser than during, for example, a fatality just outside a major hub on a peak summer match day. To that extent, whatever decision is taken (pre-cancel service or not), less people will be affected, but I do think that often leaves those who have very little choice but to travel (and we can't ignore the fact that these are often the less socially mobile members of public), with little choice and indeed pushes them towards difficult decisions around modes of transport etc. Maybe the railway should do more to try and meet its obligations as a taxpayer funded public service, but again, if your risk tolerance is low, there isn't much room for maneuver here.

I do believe that the industry has the potential to do more and be more adaptive, but without atleast some modest investment  or a preparedness to be less risk averse, there is little room for maneuver here.

But to suggest that we in the railway are not trying, or not caring about passengers is frankly offensive. And I’d quite like some of you to come and say it to me in person in control one day.

If theres an offer for a visit to control packaged in there, I'd happily take you up on that (though, maybe chose my words carefully)!

 

[nilvaj395]

I have watched this thread unfold with interest, popcorn, and then utter disbelief.



As one of the few people commenting here who have been in the position of having to take decisions such as those made in the last 48 hours, and also having been party to the decisions made in the last 48 hours, I wholeheartedly agree. There seems to be a number of armchair controllers out there who perhaps don’t understand the realities of operating the railway.


For the avoidance of doubt no-one that is responsible for these decisons is “throwing in the towel”. The decisions are made using the best advice available from weather forecasters, knowledge of available resources, discussions with other authorities (including BTP, emergency services and relevant local authorities), and experience gained from previous incidents, including recommendations made from resulting investigations.

A decison to close any part of the network in advance of severe weather is not taken lightly. However, when it is taken, it is done so to provide passengers advance notice of no service, rather than only advising them after an incident when many will be mid journey.



I was not going to single out silly comments, but this one defies belief. Trains are running on most of the GB network as normal. I’ve not long got off one myself (it was on time). Trains have been withdrawn on a relatively small proportion of the network, where the risk to passengers and staff is greatest. To a) suggest that the railways “aren’t trying to run” and b) compare a countrywide network to one airport are both just nonsense.

Whilst on the subject of NS, the weather data supplied to the GB railway also (by chance) includes detailed forecasts for much of France, Belgium and the Netherlands. The snow NS are expecting in the next 36 hours is nothing like as severe as what we are expecting to see in parts of the midlands and pennines in the next 12 hours. And with the Netherlands being, generally, somewhat more generously provided with transport infrastructure than, say, the Peak district or mid-Wales, it is rather easier to attend to any incidents that do happen.

None of this is to claim that the GB rail network is as good as it can be in such circumstances. There is always room for improvement. But to suggest that we in the railway are not trying, or not caring about passengers is frankly offensive. And I’d quite like some of you to come and say it to me in person in control one day.

So, because you haven't had issues in your part of the world, then no one else should complain about them rightfully being devoid of all service in their local area (even lack of replacements)? A singular rail line might be the only 'dependable' transport link that serves the entire region/area, so losing that is a bigger hit to people's mobility and lives than someone might think. Referring to these instances in context/comparison to the entire GB rail network as a whole is not fair, as you're taking out the local community impact of the decisions being made and justifying it by saying "well, the network as a whole is fine". If we had many more rail lines like we did pre-beeching going through areas/regions, then sure, some being shut wouldn't be as much of an issue, but that's not the case.

Northern can't even be bothered giving out RRBs and are just offloading people onto TfGM buses with inferior connections. I'm sure someone else in the affected area(s) will feel very different to that opinion, regardless of how sympathetic or "in their best interest" you make it feel when they realise they will have to lose a day's (or more) pay or be sanctioned for not turning up. There are also very clear cases of Northern as in the last storm not operating services on lines which were not affected at all, so there are definitely cases of throwing in the towel around.

It's all well and dandy to give people a warning, but it still inconveniences people, even if it gives them more heads up. The railway can do much, much better if it wants to be taken with any ounce of seriousness. It will need to build climate resilience in many ways and fast, or else it will just keep failing and letting people down every winter or every time there is a weather event of any description.

And it wasn't me that made that comparison to Schiphol in the first place. I think it's forgotten that parts of the Netherlands are also rural outside of the Randstad; it's not all urban. Being low-lying and flat, they're arguably more susceptible to flooding and wind than we are, but they do not give up. We can do everything the Netherlands does if we want to, even despite our different geography and challenges, but we won't.


== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jan 2026 ==

I think this is my general point when it comes to these types of event. Historically speaking, the railways have often been able to play to their strengths and been able to deliver when other modes of transport have not. I think, in a large part, this reflects a number of concurrent issues around investment, infrastructure age and the many many issues posed by fragmentation during franchising.

From a personal perspective, the risk tolerance of the industry is what I've noticed change the most and I do think that's a real shame, as it prevents rail as a mode from shining through when it really can excel itself compared to, say, a bus service or air travel. All that said, I think there is something in comments from other that tolerance to disruption has reduced amongst users (and perhaps theres an expectations management exercise to be done there). I also think the industry's approach to image management has moved more to delivering a reliable/regular service when we can, rather than delivering what we can all the time.

I appreciate the arguements on both sides and I do think, sometimes, on these threads theres a tendency that I'm certainly not immune to, of making the conversation into a binary arguement of run everything vs cancel everything. This sometimes results in arguements that venture toward the ludicrous, which quite clearly is not really what either side is trying to say (generally speaking).

The reality is foul weather puts most people off traveling, so whether trains run or not, the impact is always going to be lesser than during, for example, a fatality just outside a major hub on a peak summer match day. To that extent, whatever decision is taken (pre-cancel service or not), less people will be affected, but I do think that often leaves those who have very little choice but to travel (and we can't ignore the fact that these are often the less socially mobile members of public), with little choice and indeed pushes them towards difficult decisions around modes of transport etc. Maybe the railway should do more to try and meet its obligations as a taxpayer funded public service, but again, if your risk tolerance is low, there isn't much room for maneuver here.

I do believe that the industry has the potential to do more and be more adaptive, but without atleast some modest investment  or a preparedness to be less risk averse, there is little room for maneuver here.



If theres an offer for a visit to control packaged in there, I'd happily take you up on that (though, maybe chose my words carefully)!

100%, covered my ideas exactly in better words than myself could. Obviously, it can't always run exactly in all weather conditions; that would be unrealistic. But the railways are there for the public good and the local communities they serve and they should do more if they want to be taken as a serious alternative. Some people (often those who have to be at work the most as others have said) don't even get the luxury of choosing between public transport and driving, and it lets those people down more so. Ideally, a railway should be trying to capture both groups of people through being reliable and dependable, even when it comes to arranging alternatives at a minimum (unless absolutely impractical) when there are events like this. Otherwise those who can afford it will drive full time as opposed to stump up for both a season ticket and driving, and those who can't afford to drive will have to limit their lives around the train service because British society is very much "anyone who is not a driver is less valued".

 

[BAFRA77]

Just seen this on X - seems West Mids Rail are now getting Joe Public to give service updates as to what trains they’re running as they don’t seem to know themselves…

https://x.com/siralynfriction/status/2009394700772372775?s=46&t=oy-pUnvtW8-v3fTQpmXagg

 

[Tetchytyke]

A decison to close any part of the network in advance of severe weather is not taken lightly.

That’s not how it comes across, though.

I cannot see a justifiable reason for deciding 48 hours in advance to close everything on Friday. That decision could have been made later tonight or even first thing tomorrow, once the reality of the situation was known. Maybe it will turn out that Friday has huge snowdrifts and that NR were right. Maybe it won’t.

The conclusion I take from all of this is that it is operationally more convenient for the railway to make these decisions 48 hours in advance based on hypotheses, so that is what the railway does. And if the snow doesn’t arrive well, too late, we can’t change our mind now.

 

[Russel]

Just seen this on X - seems West Mids Rail are now getting Joe Public to give service updates as to what trains they’re running as they don’t seem to know themselves…

https://x.com/siralynfriction/status/2009394700772372775?s=46&t=oy-pUnvtW8-v3fTQpmXagg

I get that things are somewhat chaotic, but that really isn't a good look.

 

[Lewisham2221]

That’s not how it comes across, though.

I cannot see a justifiable reason for deciding 48 hours in advance to close everything on Friday. That decision could have been made later tonight or even first thing tomorrow, once the reality of the situation was known. Maybe it will turn out that Friday has huge snowdrifts and that NR were right. Maybe it won’t.

The conclusion I take from all of this is that it is operationally more convenient for the railway to make these decisions 48 hours in advance based on hypotheses, so that is what the railway does. And if the snow doesn’t arrive well, too late, we can’t change our mind now.

Because if you make decisions in advance, you can give people more notice and they are better able to make alternative arrangements. The longer you leave it, the more people you're likely to get who've made their outward journey and need to get back

 

[voyagerdude220]

It looks like this evening's 9S93 17:40 London Euston to Preston via Birmingham has been stuck near Wolverhampton since 19:53, as of 23:22 still not got into the Station.

 

[Krokodil]

Somebody said earlier its a Network Rail decision to avoid points freezing in a less important direction so they can keep main /higher priority routes going if they do freeze - whether theres any truth in it I don't know.

It's possible that this explains the (otherwise) bizarre decisions to ditch the Halton Curve and Llandudno services. At Llandudno Junction the points heaters were removed about a year ago (something about them no longer being compatible with the track circuits) and there was chaos when we had that cold snap recently. Certainly everything at Llandudno Junction today was being replatformed to platforms 3 (Up) and 4 (Down) which backs up the 'plain line' argument. However there was a unit stabled in platform 2 today and it is possible to run between platforms 1 or 2 and Llandudno entirely independently of moves on the mainline. There would be one crossover on the branch to use, plus a single set of points onto the single line in Llandudno but it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possiblity to ensure that both sets of points were proven before allowing a train to depart from either end, thus avoiding any stranding at Deganwy.

However, it was five degrees out there today!

And if points failures were the sole concern - because nothing about the weather in Llandudno was forecast to be the slightest bit "severe", the town including Llandudno Junction was outside even the yellow area; it was just cold, damp and miserable - then there's no excuse for not laying on buses.

Despite Llandudno being cut off without replacement in pretty humdrum weather conditions, services still ran on routes that were encompassed by the Amber restriction. Right up until the point at which trains had to be abandoned at various stations on the Marches.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Because if you make decisions in advance, you can give people more notice and they are better able to make alternative arrangements.

I can appreciate why the decision to close the lines early this evening was made in advance, for the reasons you give.

I cannot appreciate why the decision to remain closed tomorrow was made so far in advance.

 

[tumbledown]

It looks like this evening's 9S93 17:40 London Euston to Preston via Birmingham has been stuck near Wolverhampton since 19:53, as of 23:22 still not got into the Station.

9S97 i believe you mean.

 

[Horizon22]

Whilst I don’t in principle disagree with any of the above, one has to wonder why there’s a perception that (elements of the industry) appear to “throw in the towel”. Clearly the industry is getting something wrong, either in terms of what it is doing, or the dissemination of information.

Because people generally have a bad concept of risk perception and also there are an increasingly number of "armchair experts" out there who believe there are simple solutions to complex problems and situations and don't consider the secondary/tertiary impact(s). Bear in mind this does not just apply to the railway but just because almost everyone has a opinion, does not mean it should automatically be a valid opinion.

People also don't like "bad news", which the closure/withdrawal/cancellations of public transport is and see it to be somehow systematic of some sort of wider decline.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jan 2026 ==

I cannot appreciate why the decision to remain closed tomorrow was made so far in advance.

It depends where. There may be a need to do "route-proving" on certain routes, and that requires available resources to be able to assist if the route proving train runs into a downed tree or a snowdrift etc. Much better to do this rather than run the first passenger trip up straight away and effectively hope for the best.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jan 2026 ==

That’s not how it comes across, though.

I am curious, how should it "come across" though in your opinion? Do you know what the alternatives were that were discussed?

 

[Russel]

Because people generally have a bad concept of risk perception and also there are an increasingly number of "armchair experts" out there who believe there are simple solutions to complex problems and situations and don't consider the secondary/tertiary impact(s). Bear in mind this does not just apply to the railway but just because almost everyone has a opinion, does not mean it should automatically be a valid opinion.

I personally feel that is partly down to how risk averse we have become, people no longer feel they need to take responsibility for their own safety or actions because the H&S overlords are looking out for them.

 

[Freemo]

And it wasn't me that made that comparison to Schiphol in the first place.

I made that point because it seemed a convenient combination of two of the 'common sense' takes I often see on here which seems to ignore differences between one thing and another:

1) the perception that airports do not 'throw in the towel'; they are mainly concerned with the runway and taxiways which are not comparable with the length and complexity of a railway, and even then cancellations are widespread, sometimes worse when viewed on a network-wide basis;

2) that other countries aren't as alarmist about the weather, when what they are experiencing is objectively not as bad as what is being discussed here.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

9S97 I believe you mean.

What's even more interesting is there seem to be two trains stuck north of Wolverhampton which must have been diverted via Stafford instead of running via New Street.

9G44 is the 20.16 Euston to New Street, formed of 390 155; this appears to have diverted along the Trent Valley from Rugby. Behind it is 9G41, which is the 19.16 Euston to Wolverhampton - and this appears to have diverted from Coventry; presumably reversing to Rugby and then proceeding along the Trent Valley.

Open Train Times screenshot below.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I am curious, how should it "come across" though in your opinion? Do you know what the alternatives were that were discussed?

Obviously I do not know what alternatives, if any, were discussed. The railway chooses not to communicate that. Their communication is limited to “we’re closed on Friday, your problem not ours.”

How should it come across? Perhaps they could explain why they make a decision like this 48 hours in advance based on nothing more than a well-informed hypothesis. Why can’t they wait and see what actually happens tonight first?

I can appreciate why they closed early this evening and made that decision early. I cannot appreciate why they are closed tomorrow all day based on nothing more than a forecast which may or may not happen.

Other industries don’t make these decisions so far in advance. The bus companies will decide tomorrow based on what it looks like in the morning. The schools will decide in the morning whether they will be open or closed. Same with employers.

If the snow doesn’t fall as expected tonight then we’re going to be in the position tomorrow that schools will be open and employers will be open but the railway will be shut. Sorry, too late to change our mind now, no trains. We’ve seen it happen so many times before where the weather isn’t as bad as forecast, or doesn’t land where they thought it would, but the railway still doesn’t operate anything.

 

[JamesT]

Obviously I do not know what alternatives, if any, were discussed. The railway chooses not to communicate that. Their communication is limited to “we’re closed on Friday, your problem not ours.”

How should it come across? Perhaps they could explain why they make a decision like this 48 hours in advance based on nothing more than a well-informed hypothesis. Why can’t they wait and see what actually happens tonight first?

I can appreciate why they closed early this evening and made that decision early. I cannot appreciate why they are closed tomorrow all day based on nothing more than a forecast which may or may not happen.

Other industries don’t make these decisions so far in advance. The bus companies will decide tomorrow based on what it looks like in the morning. The schools will decide in the morning whether they will be open or closed. Same with employers.

If the snow doesn’t fall as expected tonight then we’re going to be in the position tomorrow that schools will be open and employers will be open but the railway will be shut. Sorry, too late to change our mind now, no trains. We’ve seen it happen so many times before where the weather isn’t as bad as forecast, or doesn’t land where they thought it would, but the railway still doesn’t operate anything.

Many schools in Wales and the Midlands already announced closures for tomorrow.

 

[ValentaFan1974]

XC services 1M83 and 1M85 into Birmingham New Street have been stuck at Bromsgrove for a couple of hours…

 

[driverd]

I made that point because it seemed a convenient combination of two of the 'common sense' takes I often see on here which seems to ignore differences between one thing and another:

1) the perception that airports do not 'throw in the towel'; they are mainly concerned with the runway and taxiways which are not comparable with the length and complexity of a railway, and even then cancellations are widespread, sometimes worse when viewed on a network-wide basis;

If thats aimed in any way at my earlier comments regarding Birmingham Airport, I'd just like to clarify that I had specifically chosen an airport that was affected by the weather warning and was highlighting the different approach; namely no pre-planned cancellations and to continue operations until such a point as they could not.

As it happens, there have been some flight diversions this evening, with an Air India flight ending up at Heathrow and a TUI to Manchester, amongst others.

I don't think anyone is claiming that airports don't stop operations when it is unsafe to do so - aircraft are far more vulnerable to severe weather - it's simply to highlight different ways of dealing with weather and perhaps learning points from an industry more vulnerable to weather extremes.

 

[diffident]

XC services 1M83 and 1M85 into Birmingham New Street have been stuck at Bromsgrove for a couple of hours…

I live in Bromsgrove, and that station is nowhere near the town... infact shockingly so. I'd not want to end up stranded there that's for sure.