Avanti shenanigans at Preston again today

[Falcon1200]

i think a lot of the emergency planning leaves a lot to be desired to be honest. I think better planning would help.

e.g. If there is disruption north of Preston blocking one track you probably do London-glasgow (fast) and Manchester-Edinburgh as your two trains an hour. and if there is space you keep barrow-Manchester in play as well - otherwise that can terminate at Lancaster.

i assume when lines are blocked the freight is cancelled or rerouted.

Two issues, where are you diverting the freight, and there aren't enough crossovers to do single line working to a significant extent.

As I may have said once or twice before (or actually, innumerable times when I was Controller for the WCML in Scotland) bi-directional signalling between say Preston and Law Jc, where the route is mostly double track with no feasible diversion, would be invaluable. However under the current signalling, staff have to attend on site for Single Line Working (SLW), by the time this is introduced trains on the blocked line will already have been standing for up two hours, and once SLW is in operation trains on the unaffected line are disrupted too; Not to mention the next workings of the stock and crew of all those trains.

As to freights, these have a right to run too, and cannot simply be abandoned.

 

[MatthewHutton]

Two issues, where are you diverting the freight, and there aren't enough crossovers to do single line working to a significant extent.

I think if there aren’t enough crossovers to do single track running for say 2-3tph running in a flighted pair on such a busy line then adding more would be a worthwhile investment.

As I may have said once or twice before (or actually, innumerable times when I was Controller for the WCML in Scotland) bi-directional signalling between say Preston and Law Jc, where the route is mostly double track with no feasible diversion, would be invaluable. However under the current signalling, staff have to attend on site for Single Line Working (SLW), by the time this is introduced trains on the blocked line will already have been standing for up two hours, and once SLW is in operation trains on the unaffected line are disrupted too; Not to mention the next workings of the stock and crew of all those trains.

As to freights, these have a right to run too, and cannot simply be abandoned.

Fair enough - also improving the signalling seems worth doing to me.

 

[rishtonlad]

With regards to the i had planned to catch the 1928 (the 20:31 left before the 19:28) but noticed earlier on in the day it was cancelled from Crewe so caught the 18:53 Manchester, along with a few others. However the Manchester was a 9 coach, i wish Avanti coould of made it an 11 car as the previous Manchester wad cancelled.

 

[NeakPed]

I think if there aren’t enough crossovers to do single track running for say 2-3tph running in a flighted pair on such a busy line then adding more would be a worthwhile investment.

I may be wrong, but I believe a number of ground frames/crossovers were removed during the West Coast Route modernisation programme (although that was primarily the south end of the route).
It seems that the aim during resignalling schemes is to rationalise infrastructure to reduce potential points of failure (and maintenance costs).

 

[Horizon22]

During disruption the Birmingham train can use one of the two spare platforms at Preston to terminate or go onto Blackpool north.

It was more that you’ve sent 2-3tph trains north, they have to go come back southbound…

Dependent on how long the single track section is (for SLW in the absence of bi-di signalling), this will be very problematic.

 

[The Planner]

I may be wrong, but I believe a number of ground frames/crossovers were removed during the West Coast Route modernisation programme (although that was primarily the south end of the route).
It seems that the aim during resignalling schemes is to rationalise infrastructure to reduce potential points of failure (and maintenance costs).

A few were removed north of Preston over the last 20 odd years.

 

[hux385]

The Trilink programme, which will roll out ETCS between Warrington and Carlisle, will help with the bi-directional signalling issue and reduce the need for single line working when there's an issue one one of the lines. But when is this due for completion? I hope that this might also make it easier to turn sets at Oxenholme or Penrith should there be issues, rather than giving up and terminating everything at Preston. Unfortunately, this does nothing for the WCML between Carlisle and Carstairs/Law Junction though.

With GBR on the horizon, and even in the meantime, Avanti and TPE should really be working together to get people moving during disruption. Once they are both under the GBR umbrella, this will make ticket acceptance automatic and immediate which will be a massive improvement for passengers. They should really have some sort of agreement already, although the fact that TPE run significantly shorter trains than Avanti will make this quite hard (imagine a cancelled 11-carriage worth load of passengers trying to squeeze into a 5-car 397). Being able to couple 397s and run them as 10 cars could make them more useful at shuttling large amounts of passengers between Carlisle and Preston once lines reopen after a hypothetical incident. I know Avanti are running Settle-Carlisle shuttles during planned engineering works in January with 805s, but for unplanned disruption, I'm not sure what we can realistically expect to change? I don't think they ordinarily have any bimodes spare that can be used for regular Preston-Scotland work, and TPE only send a couple of 802s up the West Coast each day (and they don't sign any diversions).

Something clearly needs to change with contingency planning on the WCML north of Preston, rather than just giving up. I do hope Trilink will help to some degree as well as more integration under GBR, but I fear we will be stuck with the same level of unreliability and disorganisation for a few years.

 

[The Planner]

The Trilink programme, which will roll out ETCS between Warrington and Carlisle, will help with the bi-directional signalling issue and reduce the need for single line working when there's an issue one one of the lines. But when is this due for completion? I hope that this might also make it easier to turn sets at Oxenholme or Penrith should there be issues, rather than giving up and terminating everything at Preston. Unfortunately, this does nothing for the WCML between Carlisle and Carstairs/Law Junction though.

With GBR on the horizon, and even in the meantime, Avanti and TPE should really be working together to get people moving during disruption. Once they are both under the GBR umbrella, this will make ticket acceptance automatic and immediate which will be a massive improvement for passengers. They should really have some sort of agreement already, although the fact that TPE run significantly shorter trains than Avanti will make this quite hard (imagine a cancelled 11-carriage worth load of passengers trying to squeeze into a 5-car 397). Being able to couple 397s and run them as 10 cars could make them more useful at shuttling large amounts of passengers between Carlisle and Preston once lines reopen after a hypothetical incident. I know Avanti are running Settle-Carlisle shuttles during planned engineering works in January with 805s, but for unplanned disruption, I'm not sure what we can realistically expect to change? I don't think they ordinarily have any bimodes spare that can be used for regular Preston-Scotland work, and TPE only send a couple of 802s up the West Coast each day (and they don't sign any diversions).

Something clearly needs to change with contingency planning on the WCML north of Preston, rather than just giving up. I do hope Trilink will help to some degree as well as more integration under GBR, but I fear we will be stuck with the same level of unreliability and disorganisation for a few years.

Complete ETCS north of Preston is 15 years away at least.

 

[MatthewHutton]

A few were removed north of Preston over the last 20 odd years.

I am not sure that was particularly wise.

 

[Horizon22]

I am not sure that was particularly wise.

On the contrary there’s a couple of benefits:

1. Redundant or very rarely used point work can fail and cause disruption where otherwise a “standard” layout wouldn’t.
2. Simpler track layouts are easier and cheaper to maintain.

Now of course there’s some cost-benefit analysis and a loss of redundancy to this but it was probably assessed against the level of disruption at the time. It could be seen as short-sighted, but nobody has a crystal ball.

 

[D1511]

Another couple of northbound cancellations at Preston tonight.
9S80 was cancelled at Preston (MN - Brake system fault (including wheel flats)), despite it keeping to time from Stafford
Then 1S82 was cancelled at 18.57 despite being on time all the way.....with same reason MN given.
That seems like a very unfortunate coincidence, or the cancellation reasons aren't correct.
Anyone know what happened?

 

[hexagon789]

Another couple of northbound cancellations at Preston tonight.
9S80 was cancelled at Preston (MN - Brake system fault (including wheel flats)), despite it keeping to time from Stafford
Then 1S82 was cancelled at 18.57 despite being on time all the way.....with same reason MN given.
That seems like a very unfortunate coincidence, or the cancellation reasons aren't correct.
Anyone know what happened?

1M15 1434 Glasgow Central to London Euston (390119) failed approaching Lancaster.

Took around 2 hours to move.

But that only blocked the southbound line, unless there were crew due to work one of the cancelled trains back from Preston?

 

[CEB24]

1M15 failed with a brake fault, which the Driver had issues rectifying whilst a Fitter was delayed en-route from Preston. I believe the reason for the termination at Lancaster could be the planned crew change for Preston to Euston, and perhaps the related hours limitations on their shifts?

 

[D1511]

Thanks both....so the MN cancellation reason was related to the service that caused the original bother, not the cancelled northbound services themselves. Using reason YJ might have made it a bit clearer.
At least they appear not to have run ECS to Edinburgh & Glasgow respectively this time.

 

[Toby268]

1M15 1434 Glasgow Central to London Euston (390119) failed approaching Lancaster.

Took around 2 hours to move.

But that only blocked the southbound line, unless there were crew due to work one of the cancelled trains back from Preston?

The driver of the 1434 has minimum PNB at Preston to work 9S80. That’s why it was binned.

 

[Tezza1978]

2030 and 2110 from EUS to PRE both cancelled tonight due to knock on effects from this. Was booked on 2110 to WBQ, ended up getting a LNW train before 2100 to Crewe then jumped in an Uber to get home. Yet another taxi claim to Avanti incoming....

 

[Bletchleyite]

The 21xx Birmingham to Euston was about an hour and a half late due to this. Unsurprisingly it went down the Trent but was still showing, when I left MKC having travelled on the 2217, as well over an hour late on the displays. The last one of the day wasn't sent down the Trent but was also very late indeed as a result.

 

[Mike99]

The 21xx Birmingham to Euston was about an hour and a half late due to this. Unsurprisingly it went down the Trent but was still showing, when I left MKC having travelled on the 2217, as well over an hour late on the displays. The last one of the day wasn't sent down the Trent but was also very late indeed as a result.

Wolves v Arsenal football match finished around 22:00 last night so maybe the last one still went via Wolverhampton to get any supporters back to London, I see it arrived back at London Euston at 01:34