Bad week for GWML

[matt_world2004]

As someone who works in a control room, I can assure you costs do not come into the decisions we make.

We all want the time table back to 100% asap, we not concern ourselves with what money we get from NWR, or how much delay repay will cost if we make a certain decision.

The sole focus is getting the timetable back to normal and doing the best for ALL the customers.

Costs may not come into it on a control room but it would dictate policies on a managment level which would go into policy and guidance on how to recover a service .

For example on the Elizabeth line each station is assigned a specific value which dictates where to prioritise resources when recovering a service. The value is based on the levels of fines the operator receives for not serviing that station. With the fines doubling if consecutive services do not serve that that station

Iirc Heathrow is assigned a value of 15 points which makes it a high priority that station is serves whereas Hanwell may only be assigned a value of 3-6 points

 

[geoffk]

One issue is increasingly lack of diversionary routes. Now Exeter GWR drivers do the majority of B and H work, they do not sign the line via Box, so cannot divert when needed. Same for Plymouth GWR drivers. Only HSS drivers can sign both ways , but in Plymouth case not Taunton to Bristol, just Westbury to Chippenham. This ability to divert is crucial on the Western and is something that happens with surprising regularity to those of us able to divert. I reckon I got diverted about 5 times in past year via Melksham. Unfortunately the reason for all this IS ideology within the company, and a GWR good, HSS bad attitude.

Excuse my ignorance, but what's HSS? (apart from a tool hire firm).

 

[irish_rail]

Excuse my ignorance, but what's HSS? (apart from a tool hire firm).

HSS stands for High Speed Service. Its a pretty antiquated term now, but it is the group of drivers who drove HSTs before IETs took over. We have different terms and conditions to the ex LTV and West drivers (basically the former Turbo and sprinter drivers). Now everyone drives everywhere and everything. Great in theory but it means everything is very thinly spread, hence loss of route knowledge. Previously HSS drivers had massive route cards , and as they drove all the long distance stuff it meant whenever a long distance train needed to be diverted there wasn't an issue. Now GWR insist that all the ex sprinter " local" drivers must also drive the long distance trains, it means there isn't enough work to go round . There are arguments for and against, in theory you have a bigger pool of drivers who can drive a London train, but as I explained there are negatives when not everyone knows all ways to London.

 

[geoffk]

HSS stands for High Speed Service. Its a pretty antiquated term now, but it is the group of drivers who drove HSTs before IETs took over. We have different terms and conditions to the ex LTV and West drivers (basically the former Turbo and sprinter drivers). Now everyone drives everywhere and everything. Great in theory but it means everything is very thinly spread, hence loss of route knowledge. Previously HSS drivers had massive route cards , and as they drove all the long distance stuff it meant whenever a long distance train needed to be diverted there wasn't an issue. Now GWR insist that all the ex sprinter " local" drivers must also drive the long distance trains, it means there isn't enough work to go round . There are arguments for and against, in theory you have a bigger pool of drivers who can drive a London train, but as I explained there are negatives when not everyone knows all ways to London.

OK thanks.

 

[FGW_DID]

Being picky but HSS is High Speed & Sleeper.

Up until a recent re-org in Control there were three areas:

LTV: London & Thames Valley - responsible for those services operated by 16x DMU & 387 EMU. Includes the Kennet Valley DMU / EMU services to Newbury / Bedwyn and services on North Downs & any DMUs on the North Cotswolds.
HSS: High Speed & Sleeper - responsible for all services operated by an HST / IET and the Night Riviera Sleeper.
West: Responsible for all services operated by DMU in an area from Swindon - Penzance!

 

[Taunton]

It’s always very amusing when these kind of cynical comments about not recovering the train service because it is more profitable - I tend not to bite but I will today.

As a service controller, for GWR, my job is simply to run as much of the train service as possible, with the resources available to me (fleet/crew/infra), and in line with agreed industry plans for when there is reduced capacity - you cannot fit all of our/MTR/freight timetabled trains in when 2/4 lines are shut through Slough, for example, so there’s cross-industry agreements as to how much we each get to run. I can assure you that I and any of my direct colleagues have less than zero interest in the fiscal elements of train service recovery - in terms both of TOC<>NR (Schedule 8 etc) and TOC<>Customer (Delay Repay). Neither have any bearing whatsoever on what we do. It simply isn’t even on our radar. Moreover we don’t want to know, or have it used as a metric as it’s generally at odds with good train service recovery.

Not altogether cynical, because TOCs at the HQ level in their financial budgeting have an anticipated revenue line from Schedule 8 payments. It can be a substantial amount over the year, and is income that needs to be budgeted for. One of the financial issues that GNER (I think it was) ran into at the end was that actual Schedule 8 revenue from delays etc was significantly less than they had budgeted for.

 

[zwk500]

One of the financial issues that GNER (I think it was) ran into at the end was that actual Schedule 8 revenue from delays etc was significantly less than they had budgeted for.

Does this not kind of demonstrate the controllers don't worry about the finances when sorting out the delays?

 

[TurboMan]

HSS stands for High Speed Service. Its a pretty antiquated term now, but it is the group of drivers who drove HSTs before IETs took over. We have different terms and conditions to the ex LTV and West drivers (basically the former Turbo and sprinter drivers). Now everyone drives everywhere and everything. Great in theory but it means everything is very thinly spread, hence loss of route knowledge. Previously HSS drivers had massive route cards , and as they drove all the long distance stuff it meant whenever a long distance train needed to be diverted there wasn't an issue. Now GWR insist that all the ex sprinter " local" drivers must also drive the long distance trains, it means there isn't enough work to go round . There are arguments for and against, in theory you have a bigger pool of drivers who can drive a London train, but as I explained there are negatives when not everyone knows all ways to London.

The reason for this needs explaining for context: the different T&Cs date back to before GWR existed when drivers worked for First Great Western, Thames Trains, Wessex Trains etc. Once these companies were amalgamated, initially as FGW then GWR, drivers at the same depot could either be on HSS T&Cs or LTV T&Cs/West T&Cs. Career progression was in the form of moving to an HSS link when a vacancy became available, seen by some as a promotion.

A few years ago, a harmonisation deal was agreed, as part of which there would be two driving grades, HSS and GWR, the latter being drivers on former LTV and West T&Cs. The HSS links are now ring-fenced meaning that there is no longer any 'promotion' (if it can be seen as such - I don't see it that way) of GWR drivers. As drivers in HSS links retire/leave, and the number of drivers in these links shrinks, the HSS work will move over to GWR links, hence the expansion in traction and route knowledge for GWR drivers.

HSS drivers can apply to move to GWR links, so it's not the case that there will be no more work for current HSS drivers when their links cease to exist (which is probably a long way off anyway), but the eventual aim is that drivers at GWR are all on the same T&Cs which seems perfectly fair to me.

 

[Horizon22]

Being picky but HSS is High Speed & Sleeper.

Up until a recent re-org in Control there were three areas:

LTV: London & Thames Valley - responsible for those services operated by 16x DMU & 387 EMU. Includes the Kennet Valley DMU / EMU services to Newbury / Bedwyn and services on North Downs & any DMUs on the North Cotswolds.
HSS: High Speed & Sleeper - responsible for all services operated by an HST / IET and the Night Riviera Sleeper.
West: Responsible for all services operated by DMU in an area from Swindon - Penzance!

Of course LTV would have been responsible for a bunch of services now under Elizabeth line /TfL control, thus the workload must have become unbalanced.

 

[matt_world2004]

Does this not kind of demonstrate the controllers don't worry about the finances when sorting out the delays?

It's not the controllers setting policy it's their managers and a service recovery policy will take into account the specific penalties for individual stations or lines

 

[zwk500]

It's not the controllers setting policy it's their managers and a service recovery policy will take into account the specific penalties for individual stations or lines

But a policy can't (and doesn't) cover all eventualities, and the location of an incident can have a massive bearing on what options are open to recovery. And the service policy would certainly not formally set out to extend delays for financial gain.

 

[matt_world2004]

But a policy can't (and doesn't) cover all eventualities, and the location of an incident can have a massive bearing on what options are open to recovery. And the service policy would certainly not formally set out to extend delays for financial gain.

No but it would cover the common ones. And there would be a priority list of how to recover services based on the financial implications for example Heathrow maybe a higher priority than Hanwell to serve during disruption because the fines for not serving Heathrow are bigger.

 

[zwk500]

No but it would cover the common ones. And there would be a priority list of how to recover services based on the financial implications for example Heathrow maybe a higher priority than Hanwell to serve during disruption because the fines for not serving Heathrow are bigger.

Of course, the financial implications are (theoretically) linked to the greatest number of passengers, so even if there was no money involved the recovery policy should look broad the same.

 

[matt_world2004]

Of course, the financial implications are (theoretically) linked to the greatest number of passengers, so even if there was no money involved the recovery policy should look broad the same.

Not always the station stop value for Heathrow on the Elizabeth line is higher than every other individual station on the network because of the price tfl have to pay for serving it. This leads to situations where MTR would rather skip every stop to serve Heathrow than get ticket acceptance on the Heathrow express and terminating the train early at Hayes

 

[zwk500]

Not always the station stop value for Heathrow on the Elizabeth line is higher than every other individual station on the network because of the price tfl have to pay for serving it. This leads to situations where MTR would rather skip every stop to serve Heathrow than get ticket acceptance on the Heathrow express and terminating the train early at Hayes

Which is better for the greatest number of passengers, ignoring any money?

 

[matt_world2004]

Which is better for the greatest number of passengers, ignoring any money?

The example I have gave isn't better for passengers is it ?

 

[zwk500]

The example I have gave isn't better for passengers is it ?

Is it better for the greatest number of passengers to run EL trains from the core directly to Heathrow and let the next EL pick up the stops, or to boot people out at Pad onto the next HEx and then terminate early anyway, so anybody in West London wanting Heathrow can't get to the airport in any event?

 

[matt_world2004]

Is it better for the greatest number of passengers to run EL trains from the core directly to Heathrow and let the next EL pick up the stops, or to boot people out at Pad onto the next HEx and then terminate early anyway, so anybody in West London wanting Heathrow can't get to the airport in any event?

Heathrow stations get half the passengers of Ealing Broadway based on 2019 figures so the higher priority station should be Ealing Broadway

Also Heathrow is a higher priority station to serve than Tottenham Court road , Bond Street and canary wharf

And Heathrow Airport was a high priority during covid despite having very few passengers

 

[ComUtoR]

Iirc Heathrow is assigned a value of 15 points which makes it a high priority that station is serves whereas Hanwell may only be assigned a value of 3-6 points

Is this information publicly available ? I'd be interesting to see the value for each station

 

[matt_world2004]

Is this information publicly available ? I'd be interesting to see the value for each station

It's in the crossraol concession agreement and it's unredacted. Ieach station is assigned points and this corresponds to the levels of fines recieved for not serving each station.

Frequency per passenger seems to be used to set the points level (IIRC Hanwell was higher than Hayes and Harlington because a failure to serve Hanwell meant a longer gap in service)

Another factor is the fine would increase proportionally based on the number of consecutive services not serving the station so say Hanwell was worth 6 points . If the second consecutive train failed to serve Hanwell that penalty would be worth the eulquivilant of 12 points. A third consecutive train 18 points etc etc .also if in mitigation a nontimetabled service served the station to pick up passengers (For example if a reading train stopped at hanwell) , to mitigate the loss of an earlier timetabled service . There would still be a financial penalty but it would be lower

 

[Horizon22]

Finan

Heathrow stations get half the passengers of Ealing Broadway based on 2019 figures so the higher priority station should be Ealing Broadway

Also Heathrow is a higher priority station to serve than Tottenham Court road , Bond Street and canary wharf

And Heathrow Airport was a high priority during covid despite having very few passengers

All primarily because of high track charges and also Heathrow being seen as a "premium" destination with a lot of people going there.

Recovering a service might involve running non-stop between Paddington and Heathrow or terminating / restarting the train at Hayes. There is a financial penalty for not serving Heathrow (twice if you including Terminals 2/3) that is in excess of skipping all the intermediate stations. If you skip consecutive stations though, the penalty is multiplied several times.

Is this information publicly available ? I'd be interesting to see the value for each station

I think it's out there, but might be had to find. But generally, its based primarily around stations with higher footfall and also stations which are more 'awkward' and may be more impacted more significantly. It's a balance. In that regard, it's no similar to the way other TOCs run fast / divert / terminate early etc and considering major interchanges and trying to balance passenger needs with operational requirements.

 

[matt_world2004]

Finan


All primarily because of high track charges and also Heathrow being seen as a "premium" destination with a lot of people going there.

So it's an example of control decisions being made based on the level of financial penalty

 

[Benjwri]

Heathrow stations get half the passengers of Ealing Broadway based on 2019 figures so the higher priority station should be Ealing Broadway

Also Heathrow is a higher priority station to serve than Tottenham Court road , Bond Street and canary wharf

And Heathrow Airport was a high priority during covid despite having very few passengers

Would a terminus station not be assigned far higher points because by nature if it’s being served an intermediate station is. If services are running to a terminus and can stop inbetween they will, there is no point in not stopping when you’re getting a fine.

It would make logical sense to prioritise terminus stations because that keeps operators from cutting every service short. If Heathrow was low priority it could just be canned, whereas if Ealing is canned it doesn’t really benefit the TOC as there is no point in doing it unless Heathrow is canned too.

 

[Horizon22]

So it's an example of control decisions being made based on the level of financial penalty

But that’s somewhat linked to the intended aim which is to connect to Heathrow. To not do that therefore incurs a penalty. So it’s linked to financial decisions but doesn’t necessarily always drive them.

 

[zwk500]

So it's an example of control decisions being made based on the level of financial penalty

The reason why Heathrow is a premium destination is because its very busy.

 

[Taunton]

So why would one incentivise a service, running nonstop to catch up time, which is a complete duplicate of the Heathrow Express, over serving the intermediate points which have no alternative?

 

[matt_world2004]

The reason why Heathrow is a premium destination is because its very busy.

Yet less busy than Ealing Broadway. And they were doing the same policy during covid. When terminal 4 was closed. They were skipping stops during lockdown to serve a closed station

I guess the 151 passengers a year that needed to reach terminal 4 during covid were really dependent on that service.

 

[JN114]

So it's an example of control decisions being made based on the level of financial penalty

Following a script isn’t decision making. It also rears a very ugly head when you have a situation for which no script has been written - as has happened a few times recently. Crossrail have taken a very different path to other operators as to how they run and recover their train service. I personally wouldn’t hold them up as an example of how a train service is run, as the way they do things is very different to the rest of the industry. Whether it’s the right path is too early to say, but I’m not presently convinced. The latest industry initiatives on disruption management also aren’t headed that way. From where I’m sat, controller (or whatever job title you give it) is a very different job. Fundamentally we’re recruited, trained, assessed and paid as problem solvers; not script readers.

 

[Benjwri]

So why would one incentivise a service, running nonstop to catch up time, which is a complete duplicate of the Heathrow Express, over serving the intermediate points which have no alternative?

Except they wouldn’t do that. There’s too much traffic on the reliefs to do that. If they tried to run non stop to Heathrow they would just be sitting at a red light at each station anyways, so they might as well stop and not incur a fine. As I said above Heathrow is incentivised because as the terminus there is something to gain from not serving it.

 

[matt_world2004]

Except they wouldn’t do that. There’s too much traffic on the reliefs to do that. If they tried to run non stop to Heathrow they would just be sitting at a red light at each station anyways, so they might as well stop and not incur a fine. As I said above Heathrow is incentivised because as the terminus there is something to gain from not serving it.

They do run non stop to Heathrow and have done in the last two weeks