Disruption - running fast to make up time

[davews]

I think this has been discussed in great depth before...

Yesterday I got caught up with the SWR disruption caused by a trespasser on the tracks near Wandsworth Town.. My 1520 departure from Waterloo sat at Clapham Junction for half an hour while it was sorted (whether there actually was a trespasser or just a potential one I don't know). The decision was taken that it would run fast Staines/Ascot/Reading. I got off at Ascot and then waited (and shivered) there for another half hour until the equally delayed following train came to take me to Martins Heron.

I know they have to try and get their timetables back on track (and it seems in this case the disruption was relatively short lived) but they also have a duty to get their passengers to their destination. There were a lot those sitting waiting at the intermediate stations who could have not been left stranded. What for me could have been a 30 minute delay turned out to be well over an hour. At least the delay replay is in...

Our guard was very helpful all the time with announcements and guidance but I got the impression that even he didn't really know what was going on.

Thoughts?

 

[skyhigh]

Thoughts?

Looking at your particular example, the 1520 arrived at 1700 and left for the return trip at 1709 (on time). If it had stopped at all booked stops, it would have been late back again as well.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Its also getting the crews back on time. If drivers or guards are late for their next workings, things can snowball very quickly

 

[66701GBRF]

I think this has been discussed in great depth before...

Yesterday I got caught up with the SWR disruption caused by a trespasser on the tracks near Wandsworth Town.. My 1520 departure from Waterloo sat at Clapham Junction for half an hour while it was sorted (whether there actually was a trespasser or just a potential one I don't know). The decision was taken that it would run fast Staines/Ascot/Reading. I got off at Ascot and then waited (and shivered) there for another half hour until the equally delayed following train came to take me to Martins Heron.

I know they have to try and get their timetables back on track (and it seems in this case the disruption was relatively short lived) but they also have a duty to get their passengers to their destination. There were a lot those sitting waiting at the intermediate stations who could have not been left stranded. What for me could have been a 30 minute delay turned out to be well over an hour. At least the delay replay is in...

Our guard was very helpful all the time with announcements and guidance but I got the impression that even he didn't really know what was going on.

Thoughts?

They have a duty to get you to your destination, not necessarily on time during disruption. Delay repay exists for situations like this. While I know its inconvenient, running fast, terminating short, or canceling altogether really are the only ways to get back on track and prevent further overall delays to many more people. Remember, you were on the rough side this time, but may benefit next time.

 

[Kite159]

Its the railways way of putting the passenger first...

SWR are probably just as bad as Merseyrail at ripping out stops when trains start running late, even if it means that passengers are delayed by over an hour for the following train (which will no doubt be busier as a result of the earlier train running nonstop).

 

[JonathanH]

Its the railways way of putting the passenger first...

It is putting some passengers first, maybe not all passengers, but those travelling from Reading on the up service benefitted, while others lost out. In this instance, there appears to be no solution which would have benefitted all passengers.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

It is putting some passengers first, maybe not all passengers, but those travelling from Reading on the up service benefitted, while others lost out. In this instance, there appears to be no solution which would have benefitted all passengers.

Indeed.

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".

Or something profound like that!

 

[davews]

OK chaps I hear what you say.... it is always hard to please everybody.
Remember this was in evening rush hour so there would have been a lot more people travelling on the down direction out of London than heading to town the other way. We on 2C45 were the first train to run after the blockade and the decision to run fast seemed to have been made before the following train, 2C47, had left Waterloo. If that had as suggested been just a few minutes behind there would have been no issues but it was also severely delayed. I see there were comments on their twitter from people at Bracknell who had no train between 1553 and 1729. I can see what they are trying to do and it is a narrow line between keeping trains on time and getting passengers to their destinations but it does seem in this case they got it wrong.

Small delays in this case compared with what has happened elsewhere on the network.

 

[Bald Rick]

Remember this was in evening rush hour so there would have been a lot more people travelling on the down direction out of London than heading to town the other way.

But it wasn’t the evening rush hour - you were on the 1520 which is off peak territory.

The train it formed at Reading, the 1709, very much is the evening rush hour out of Reading (I don’t know the specifics of that train but I’m willing to bet it’s busy). This return service then forms the 1850 from Waterloo to Reading, which again is the evening rush hour. Just on the basis of these trains, more people had On time journeys than were delayed. And that’s before the impact of reactionary delay affecting other services as you try to force an out of path delayed train through the busy approaches to Waterloo.

Absolutely no doubt it was the right decision. No consolation for you, I know, and I’m sorry your journey was delayed.

 

[Flying Snail]

I think this has been discussed in great depth before...

Yesterday I got caught up with the SWR disruption caused by a trespasser on the tracks near Wandsworth Town.. My 1520 departure from Waterloo sat at Clapham Junction for half an hour while it was sorted (whether there actually was a trespasser or just a potential one I don't know). The decision was taken that it would run fast Staines/Ascot/Reading. I got off at Ascot and then waited (and shivered) there for another half hour until the equally delayed following train came to take me to Martins Heron.

I know they have to try and get their timetables back on track (and it seems in this case the disruption was relatively short lived) but they also have a duty to get their passengers to their destination. There were a lot those sitting waiting at the intermediate stations who could have not been left stranded. What for me could have been a 30 minute delay turned out to be well over an hour. At least the delay replay is in...

Our guard was very helpful all the time with announcements and guidance but I got the impression that even he didn't really know what was going on.

Thoughts?

Nobody was "Left Stranded", you were delayed by a relatively short amount more than had the train not been run fast. Let's try and not over dramatise things for effect.

 

[Snow1964]

OK chaps I hear what you say.... it is always hard to please everybody.
Remember this was in evening rush hour so there would have been a lot more people travelling on the down direction out of London than heading to town the other way. We on 2C45 were the first train to run after the blockade and the decision to run fast seemed to have been made before the following train, 2C47, had left Waterloo. If that had as suggested been just a few minutes behind there would have been no issues but it was also severely delayed. I see there were comments on their twitter from people at Bracknell who had no train between 1553 and 1729. I can see what they are trying to do and it is a narrow line between keeping trains on time and getting passengers to their destinations but it does seem in this case they got it wrong.

Small delays in this case compared with what has happened elsewhere on the network.

Although it is possible to reverse trains at places like Twickenham, Staines, Ascot etc to fill in gaps in opposite direction. It seems to only be done if there is going to be massive delay reopening (and in that situation trains can’t go forward into temporarily closed section anyway).

Of course being creative means stock and crews are then in wrong place, and some crews would be due a break. Others would be finishing shift (although very few are timed to do so in middle of evening rush hour).

However SWR doesn’t always get it right, especially on the sections further from Waterloo where frequency is lower (like Bracknell), and leaving gaps of over an hour, just to make it easier at Waterloo end is less than ideal.

 

[muz379]

Also bear in mind there is the benefit of hindsight but also intricate knowledge of ones own journey in posts such as this .

Controllers who make this decision have more than one service to make decisions about and a more global aim which is to return to the timetable as quickly as possible .

 

[swt_passenger]

Damned if they do, and damned if they don’t. How many times have SWR/SWT been criticised for a relatively minor incident affecting services for about 5 or 6 hours afterwards? ISTM running fast to recover the timetable is the only sensible option if it’s just coming up towards the am or pm peak?

 

[Edsmith]

I think this has been discussed in great depth before...

Yesterday I got caught up with the SWR disruption caused by a trespasser on the tracks near Wandsworth Town.. My 1520 departure from Waterloo sat at Clapham Junction for half an hour while it was sorted (whether there actually was a trespasser or just a potential one I don't know). The decision was taken that it would run fast Staines/Ascot/Reading. I got off at Ascot and then waited (and shivered) there for another half hour until the equally delayed following train came to take me to Martins Heron.

I know they have to try and get their timetables back on track (and it seems in this case the disruption was relatively short lived) but they also have a duty to get their passengers to their destination. There were a lot those sitting waiting at the intermediate stations who could have not been left stranded. What for me could have been a 30 minute delay turned out to be well over an hour. At least the delay replay is in...

Our guard was very helpful all the time with announcements and guidance but I got the impression that even he didn't really know what was going on.

Thoughts?

Shivered? It's like summer here in Kent. Anyway a half hour wait for the next train isn't good whatever the weather, usually when this happens on Southeastern there is another train not far behind although SWR are stuck between a rock and a hard place and somebody isn't going to be happy whatever they do.

 

[30907]

Nobody was "Left Stranded", you were delayed by a relatively short amount more than had the train not been run fast. Let's try and not over dramatise things for effect.

The following 1550 Waterloo had a very poor run, leaving +13 but losing 20min to Staines because of other late running Windsor line services - had it had a decent run, the OP would have much less time to shiver (it was only 14deg!) on Ascot platform.
As it was, staying on the train to Bracknell and coming back one stop would have saved the OP a full half hour. Hindsight (and RTT) is wonderful.

 

[Starmill]

As it was, staying on the train to Bracknell and coming back one stop would have saved the OP a full half hour. Hindsight (and RTT) is wonderful.

The OP's post says they were informed that after Staines, the train would only call at Ascot and Reading.

Also, if the OP's original ticket were not valid to travel via Bracknell, generally train companies will not grant special permission to do this during disruption.

 

[Edsmith]

The OP's post says they were informed that after Staines, the train would only call at Ascot and Reading.

Also, if the OP's original ticket were not valid to travel via Bracknell, generally train companies will not grant special permission to do this during disruption.

I think common sense would have been applied if the OP had travelled onto Bracknell although as you say his post suggests the train wasn't stopping there either.

 

[bramling]

It is putting some passengers first, maybe not all passengers, but those travelling from Reading on the up service benefitted, while others lost out. In this instance, there appears to be no solution which would have benefitted all passengers.

Of course, if timetables, diagrams and duty schedules were constructed with built-in slack, especially at turnarounds, there would be less need to omit stops. Horsham to Peterborough is an example where there’s not a massive amount of recovery at each end, Brighton to Cambridge is okay at the Brighton end but not wonderful at the Cambridge end. I realise there’s a cost to this, and the infrastructure doesn’t always allow space for trains to have places to sit for half an hour, but the cost is unreliability, and there isn’t much point in running a railway like the empty hospital in yes minister.

 

[Starmill]

I think common sense would have been applied

I know that it's likely this would go undetected, but assuming that "common sense" will apply is precisely what many people think right before they receive a Penalty Fare, or a letter alleging an offence and threatening prosecution.

The customer could have asked for special permission, but it would be unlikely to be granted.

 

[JonathanH]

Of course, if timetables, diagrams and duty schedules were constructed with built-in slack, especially at turnarounds, there would be less need to omit stops.

Waterloo to Reading trains already have the best part of 30 minutes sitting at Reading. How much more do they need to cope with all eventualities?

Horsham to Peterborough is an example where there’s not a massive amount of recovery at each end, Brighton to Cambridge is okay at the Brighton end but not wonderful at the Cambridge end. I realise there’s a cost to this, and the infrastructure doesn’t always allow space for trains to have places to sit for half an hour, but the cost is unreliability, and there isn’t much point in running a railway like the empty hospital in yes minister.

They could keep a crewed 700 in the sidings at Peterborough and Horsham ready to step in as a result of late running but the cost of that would be phenomenal. Would users be prepared to pay a substantially higher fare to cover the cost of the extra rolling stock and traincrew to provide that sort of cover?

 

[bramling]

Waterloo to Reading trains already have the best part of 30 minutes sitting at Reading. How much more do they need to cope with all eventualities?

Agree 30 minutes is sufficient. However there’s plenty of examples where that doesn’t apply, Horsham to Peterborough being one. Look at parts of Merseyrail for another. It’s not just what the train does, but also the driver duties too.

 

[davews]

Indeed, it wasn't stopping at Bracknell. If it had I would have walked home from there. Staines/Ascot/Reading fast is not their normal skipping stations routine.

 

[bramling]

I know that it's likely this would go undetected, but assuming that "common sense" will apply is precisely what many people think right before they receive a Penalty Fare, or a letter alleging an offence and threatening prosecution.

The customer could have asked for special permission, but it would be unlikely to be granted.

The problem is common sense doesn’t really have the space to be fitted in with service recovery. If the service has a crew relief at the terminus then omitting stops is likely to be the chosen solution, if not then turning short. It is more a function of the train and driver diagrams, the scope for control to do things to their own taste can be quite limited. Of course, it is possible for an operator to have their own policies, for example “no non stopping”, but the trade off for this is probably going to be disruption lasts longer, more overtime having to be paid, etc.

 

[Siemens Staines]

Agree 30 minutes is sufficient. However there’s plenty of examples where that doesn’t apply, Horsham to Peterborough being one. Look at parts of Merseyrail for another. It’s not just what the train does, but also the driver duties too.

Had the proposed SWR Reading all-day 4tph service seen the light of the day, then the turn round times at Reading would have reduced to 12 minutes, and this sort of running fast would have been far more prevalent than it is now with with what is essentialy the SWT created off-peak timetable. In fact on the pre-covid Dec 2019 timetable this 1520 Waterloo - Reading used to work the 1650 Reading - Waterloo on a 9 min turn round, and even less during the leaf-fall season (i.e now).

 

[bramling]

Had the proposed SWR Reading all-day 4tph service seen the light of the day, then the turn round times at Reading would have reduced to 12 minutes, and this sort of running fast would have been far more prevalent than it is now with with what is essentialy the SWT created off-peak timetable. In fact on the pre-covid Dec 2019 timetable this 1520 Waterloo - Reading used to work the 1650 Reading - Waterloo on a 9 min turn round, and even less during the leaf-fall season (i.e now).

They could get away with that if there were a crew depot at Reading, plenty of reliefs, plenty of slack in the crew diagrams, and ideally every service formed of the same stock make-up. I’m not fully familiar with the Reading line, but from what I do know I’m not sure much if any of the above applies…

 

[Edsmith]

I know that it's likely this would go undetected, but assuming that "common sense" will apply is precisely what many people think right before they receive a Penalty Fare, or a letter alleging an offence and threatening prosecution.

The customer could have asked for special permission, but it would be unlikely to be granted.

Well yes that's a fair point but for example I recently overheard a passenger showing a ticket to the guard on a Southeastern train and asking if they could use it on this train during some serious disruption and the guard waved them on board and said something to the effect that ticket restrictions are relaxed at a time like this, I'd like to think such a common sense attitude would be the norm but............!

 

[Starmill]

Well yes that's a fair point but for example I recently overheard a passenger showing a ticket to the guard on a Southeastern train and asking if they could use it on this train during some serious disruption and the guard waved them on board and said something to the effect that ticket restrictions are relaxed at a time like this, I'd like to think such a common sense attitude would be the norm but............!

Yes indeed, many conductors deliberately won't actually ask to see tickets when going through the train during serious disruption, so as not to raise the issue. But it would only take there to be a planned all-afternoon revenue block on at Bracknell, and the customer will likely be treated no differently on account of the disruption, even if the ticket is actually the same price anyway.

 

[davews]

And if I had just stayed on the train all the way to Reading then went back (on what would actually be the same train)? Which would actually have been quicker in the event.
There were no ticket checks at all on the train and the guard was happily chatting to passengers.

 

[Edsmith]

Yes indeed, many conductors deliberately won't actually ask to see tickets when going through the train during serious disruption, so as not to raise the issue. But it would only take there to be a planned all-afternoon revenue block on at Bracknell, and the customer will likely be treated no differently on account of the disruption, even if the ticket is actually the same price anyway.

Hopefully revenue staff could use some common sense in such circumstances. I think guards don't bother with ticket checks at times of disruption as passengers are likely to be stressed enough as it is.

 

[30907]

The OP's post says they were informed that after Staines, the train would only call at Ascot and Reading.

Sorry, went by RTT, and I should know that isn't 100% accurate on missed calls.

The OP would have needed a crystal ball, anyway, to know that the following train would be significantly delayed en route.