GB should have a national clockface timetable

[Route115?]

What we need is a national clockface timetable like they have in Switzerland and are developing in Germany. That would be at lease a 20 year task even at generous levels of investment and would need a major change in approach and attitide at all levels. Its a tantalising thought, mind you.

 

[JonathanH]

What we need is a national clockface timetable like they have in Switzerland and are developing in Germany.

Most routes have a clockface timetable to the extent possible.

However, we don't have the infrastructure which allows a clockface timetable which allows A-C and B-D services to have perfect interchanges at X, so that all connections are possible, and even modest investment wouldn't really make it possible.

 

[etr221]

Most routes have a clockface timetable to the extent possible.

However, we don't have the infrastructure which allows a clockface timetable which allows A-C and B-D services to have perfect interchanges at X, so that all connections are possible, and even modest investment wouldn't really make it possible.

My recollection is that when the Swiss decided on a national clockface, interconnecting timetable, back in the 1970s, that drove a substantial amount of investment to facilitate it. And the same will be required here.

 

[6Gman]

What we need is a national clockface timetable like they have in Switzerland and are developing in Germany. That would be at lease a 20 year task even at generous levels of investment and would need a major change in approach and attitide at all levels. Its a tantalising thought, mind you.

Why?

(Genuine question)

 

[30907]

I sort-of-agree, but how do you integrate a Taktfahrplan with a heavily London-centric demand? The nearest equivalent European country is France rather than Germany or Switzerland.

 

[HSTEd]

I completely agree, conceptually.

But given the available infrastructure, existing working practices and the political imperative for continuing and expanded freight operations, the capacity simply does not exist.

 

[The Planner]

I completely agree, conceptually.

But given the available infrastructure, existing working practices and the political imperative for continuing and expanded freight operations, the capacity simply does not exist.

I am adding this to my bingo card, Brighton, Liverpool, Nottingham to Glasgow and HSTEd quest to remove freight.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I sort-of-agree, but how do you integrate a Taktfahrplan with a heavily London-centric demand? The nearest equivalent European country is France rather than Germany or Switzerland.

The south WCML now has, bar peak extras and the extreme ends of the day, a fully clockface timetable. If it can be done there...

 

[Bertie the bus]

Why?

(Genuine question)

Because the Swiss have one and the Germans have a word for it.

 

[zwk500]

If you can find the kind of money needed to do it, then brilliant.

 

[43074]

If you can find the kind of money needed to do it, then brilliant.

It would save money and generate revenue if done properly though.

That's what happened when a conceptually similar timetable was implemented in Scotland in the 1980s, train mileage was cut 10% but revenue increased. Same in Switzerland when that was first introduced, there were traincrew and signaller savings because signal boxes could be locked out if they weren't required for the standard pattern.

The biggest barrier to the UK implementing a clockface, symmetrical timetable is how fragmented the industry is, see also how we can't even do a re-write of the East Coast Main Line (bit of a blessing given how poor the proposals were in many places).

 

[zwk500]

It would save money and generate revenue if done properly though.

That's what happened when a conceptually similar timetable was implemented in Scotland in the 1980s, train mileage was cut 10% but revenue increased. Same in Switzerland when that was first introduced, there were traincrew and signaller savings because signal boxes could be locked out if they weren't required for the standard pattern.

The biggest barrier to the UK implementing a clockface, symmetrical timetable is how fragmented the industry is, see also how we can't even do a re-write of the East Coast Main Line (bit of a blessing given how poor the proposals were in many places).

It would, but you need the money to rebuild stations to keep trains separate so they can arrive within seconds of each other on the same platform island.

 

[island]

This gets brought up quite regularly. Perhaps a search of forum threads will show the several issues that have prevented it from happening to date.

 

[HSTEd]

It would save money and generate revenue if done properly though.

That's what happened when a conceptually similar timetable was implemented in Scotland in the 1980s, train mileage was cut 10% but revenue increased. Same in Switzerland when that was first introduced, there were traincrew and signaller savings because signal boxes could be locked out if they weren't required for the standard pattern.

The biggest barrier to the UK implementing a clockface, symmetrical timetable is how fragmented the industry is, see also how we can't even do a re-write of the East Coast Main Line (bit of a blessing given how poor the proposals were in many places).

A lot of infrastructure has to be built before such a timetable can really be implemented without swingeing service cuts.

We have an extremely complex network run to a very high percentage of its capability with a very complex set of stopping patterns and routings.

We then have freight trains running once or twice a day (or less) on vast numbers of disparate routings which is going to cause serious problems for any attempt at a clockface timetable. And that's before we get to the performance discrepancies between passenger trains and container trains down to low power drag freights at the bottom end.

To maintain freight service you either have to try and force the industry into network spanning set of clockface paths, or you have to build substantial surplus capacity into the system to allow freight to work around the clockface timetbale - which destroys network utilisation.

Passenger trains largely operate in a quasi clockface pattern already, the big challenge is the "mixed traffic" system. Perhaps massive use of "jumbo" trains would help, but I am somewhat skeptical.

 

[Krokodil]

Most routes have a clockface timetable to the extent possible

Most routes do indeed have trains leaving at roughly X minutes past every hour. Often though, there are unexplained anomalies, such as trains leaving a few minutes earlier or later, or where an otherwise standard stopping pattern misses/adds a few calls at a certain time. In some cases there may be good reason for these (or alternatively there might be a political reason). Often though it'll just be an anomaly which has been overlooked and there's no real reason (except available manpower at train planning to fix it) for it to remain. Maybe there was a good reason in the past but the factory shift change it served has gone.

To take one example of where anomalies have gone uncorrected, a train sits in Llandudno for 20 minutes, then shuttles to Llandudno Junction and back, arriving after a down train has departed and leaving before an up train arrives. If that shuttle left Llandudno earlier to meet the down train, and waited for the up train it could serve four separate flows very well. As it is, it only really serves two of them, everyone else is left with a fester before a connection.

Llandudno Junction did formerly work on a similar principle to Swiss interchanges where trains would all converge at the station at once, but over the years this has disappeared in part because train planning is centralised so there is no longer the local knowledge maintained to remember why the timetable is written the way it is (which is why they removed all of the request stops from what used to be a school train a few years ago).

 

[bahnause]

We have an extremely complex network run to a very high percentage of its capability with a very complex set of stopping patterns and routings.

A symmetrical and standardised timetable might help to solve this problem.

However, it is a fundamental shift from a demand-driven to a supply-driven system. That's a big change. It needs more flexibility when it comes to train capacities.

 

[tomuk]

Llandudno Junction did formerly work on a similar principle to Swiss interchanges where trains would all converge at the station at once, but over the years this has disappeared in part because train planning is centralised so there is no longer the local knowledge maintained to remember why the timetable is written the way it is (which is why they removed all of the request stops from what used to be a school train a few years ago).

How did the timings change with the introduction of the ATW clock face timetable at the end of 2005?

 

[swt_passenger]

What does “national clock face” even mean at a major terminus like Waterloo, or a combined terminus and through station like London Bridge?

Same minutes each hour to every distant destination, repeating at same intervals every hour is going to be almost achievable, but only a select few will be memorable times. So if the Portsmouth route happens to get xx00, xx15, xx30, xx45, no other mainline service can.

But what does clock face timetable mean if you are looking at a short suburban journey such as to Clapham Junction?

 

[HSTEd]

Are we talking about a Swiss style system with all trains connecting with all others at various stations, or simply a timetable where all trains are run at clockface frequencies?

One is a rather bigger challenge than the other.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Two words: Political Will. That's not about the politicians, it's about the views of the people who elect them and whether they accept that improved public services, even where there is private sector involvement, require increased levels of taxation. Unfortunately in this country, or at least in England, we have become somewhat Americanised meaning that we tend to view taxes as an evil to be reduced (or avoided) as far as possible and that political parties suggesting otherwise are economically incompetent.

And don't kid yourself that a Takt timetable is just about better writing of timetables. As others have already said it needs sufficient capacity to allow a certain amount of segregation/separation of different traffic flows. Not just freight and passenger but between different passenger service routes especially in and around interchanges.

Typically this means each route direction and/or service type from a nodal station having its own platform with extras if there are any terminating services. It means grade-separated junctions in busier areas. And it means that where higher speed services are provided over longer distances that any local services for intermediate stations are provided by dedicated local trains rather than odd stops being added to those fast trains. That separation of service types will also lead to fast trains having to overtake slower trains at stations if the route is not four-tracked: so the slow train may wait 10-15 minutes for the overtake to happen, though that also allows for proper interchange between the two, hence the need for the extra platforms.

Just think about how much capacity would need adding to our network to allow those things to happen and then think about how long it would take to build up that capacity and how much it would cost. Frankly if you want to have access to a Takt driven rail network you need to live in another country.

 

[Krokodil]

How did the timings change with the introduction of the ATW clock face timetable at the end of 2005?

I'm not that old. What I do know is that as late as 2019 the connections worked. As the timetable slowly restarted post-pandemic no effort was made to ensure that connections still existed.

 

[HSTEd]

That separation of service types will also lead to fast trains having to overtake slower trains at stations if the route is not four-tracked: so the slow train may wait 10-15 minutes for the overtake to happen, though that also allows for proper interchange between the two, hence the need for the extra platforms.

I can't really think of many places where a two track railway would benefit from that style of operation in the UK.

Most major railways are either four track or have sufficiently low stop density that just running all trains to all stations is the better option.

Modern very high acceleration multiple units have signficantly reduced the time penalty for stopping, even in the very highest speed areas.

 

[zwk500]

I can't really think of many places where a two track railway would benefit from that style of operation in the UK.

Most major railways are either four track or have sufficiently low stop density that just running all trains to all stations is the better option.

Modern very high acceleration multiple units have signficantly reduced the time penalty for stopping, even in the very highest speed areas.

Agreed. Also UK travel patterns would be massively penalised by looping passenger trains in most areas.

 

[Krokodil]

And don't kid yourself that a Takt timetable is just about better writing of timetables.

I broadly agree, the Swiss invested heavily in grade separation and other measures to reduce conflicts. We're not going to see services all descending upon interchanges at the same time as they do, but we could still run our existing infrastructure better than we do, both in respect of planning connections in the timetable and in respect of offering a predictable timetable that passengers can memorise.

Some areas are very congested - though Manchester Oxford Road does more or less run an exact X minutes past the hour pattern for the most part and that's a pretty congested location. There are plenty of other areas where the timetable could be standardised, such that the train to A always leaves at exactly X minutes past the hour, the train to B always leaves at exactly Y past etc.

Alternating destinations each hour can provide an hourly service for a core route while still having direct trains to a wider list of destinations - see how TfW runs an hourly service between Holyhead and Shrewsbury, which then alternates between Birmingham and Cardiff. This connects at Shrewsbury with Cambrian services to fill in the alternate hours to Birmingham with a change of trains.

 

[Dr Hoo]

What we need is a national clockface timetable like they have in Switzerland and are developing in Germany. That would be at lease a 20 year task even at generous levels of investment and would need a major change in approach and attitide at all levels. Its a tantalising thought, mind you.

I see from Europe View in the May 2023 Modern Railways that the German Transport Minister now sees the 'Deutschland Takt' plans as taking 50 years to implement. There even seems to be talk of new road building in the interim.

Bearing in mind that Great Britain is starting from a position well 'behind' Germany in terms of political support, investment, current timetable development, spare capacity, etc. it would seem sensible to assume that a 100-year time horizon would be a more likely scenario. If you think about it, it has taken broadly 100 years to get from some of the first regular interval electric services on the freshly-grouped Southern Railway to get to where we are today. So it seems reasonable that it will take another century or so to finish the job.

(This is purely intended as a realistic and pragmatic assessment. It is no judgement on the desirability or urgency of a full national clock face timetable with reasonably optimal connections. Meanwhile passengers from (say) Dore & Totley to Dronfield - all of three miles along the Midland Main Line can arrive at Sheffield at xx05, watch the xx05 departure for Dronfield pull out, wait for an hour for the yy05 and get to their destination around 75 minutes after starting out. Walking is an option for the able bodied.)

 

[DelW]

I'm not that old. What I do know is that as late as 2019 the connections worked. As the timetable slowly restarted post-pandemic no effort was made to ensure that connections still existed.

That's a network wide problem unfortunately. When the timetables were cut as an emergency response to much reduced demand because of Covid, there wasn't time to co-ordinate cuts between adjacent TOCs, or even apparently between different service groups within a TOC. Now those poorly co-ordinated timetables are being baked-in as the fixed provision for the foreseeable future, thanks to DfT's refusal to contemplate even minor enhancements. Many journeys involving connections are much slower than they were in 2019, with the extra time mainly spent hanging around at stations where connections just miss. It's meant that I've reverted to taking my car for a number of regular trips that I always used to do by train.

 

[Krokodil]

I see from Europe View in the May 2023 Modern Railways that the German Transport Minister now sees the 'Deutschland Takt' plans as taking 50 years to implement.

We shouldn't get hung up on what we can't achieve, that's letting perfection be the enemy of 'good enough'. You're never going to get major interchanges like Manchester Piccadilly and Birmingham New Street to have everything arriving from everywhere and then leaving to everywhere at the same time, it won't happen, we're never going to build that sort of infrastructure (it's hard enough persuading the government to cough up for more than the two existing through platforms at Man Picc). What is achievable is for most lines to have a service at X minutes past every hour and thus a regular can look at their watch and say "it's five past now, there will be a train to A in ten minutes" without having to refer to a timetable to check if this is the one train to B per day that skips A, or if it departs five minutes earlier at lunchtime.

What is also achievable is for connections to converge at many cat B and cat C interchanges. Not necessarily every single train together, but in many cases you can get 50% of them on the hour, and the other 50% on the half hour. At Chester the services to/from Crewe, Llandudno, Manchester Airport (via Warrington) and Manchester Piccadilly (via Northwich) all converge such that the longest connection between any of those pairs is 17 minutes or so; while services to/from Holyhead, Shrewsbury, London and Leeds also converge (there are a few longer connections, particularly those arriving from Leeds or London but most people aren't going to be waiting more than 20 minutes). Shrewsbury concentrates most of its trains around an xx:25 node, the main exception being the Milford Haven-Manchester service. Obviously services run at a metro frequency don't matter when planning connections, they're frequent enough that something will connect.

I think the biggest change needed is in weekend timetables. Obviously there will always be some differences, weekend timetables will continue to start later and may have a thinner frequency in areas less focused on leisure travel, but can they please make the overall concept match with the weekdays where possible? The Sunday timetable up here is roughly what the weekday timetable was before the W&B amalgamation. Great way to confuse passengers.

Finally, buses. Where you have a town with a two-hourly train service, and a two-hourly bus, wouldn't it be great if they lined up?

If we can make integrated transport work in some places, we should attempt to implement it in those places. We shouldn't just give up entirely because we can't change every last city.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

The key point about Takt is not only to have a pattern but that it should apply all day, or at least to whatever time the service finishes. Yet we have places where we are some way from such a situation. Take Durham to Chester-le-Street, just a 6 minute journey time apart yet the basic service between the two is 2-hourly and not even exactly 120 minutes apart and the evening intervals are somewhat random in the southbound direction. Yet there are a number of additional peak journey opportunities. In other words adding stops to passing services is possible but only done selectively. It would appear that an exact hourly all-day service might be possible but I suspect that doing so would have a knock-on effect north of Newcastle.

For a more bizarre case consider Wilnecote and Willington. They are very much on the same route with a 22 minute journey time. But the northbound service has departures at 0704,0804, 1504, 1808 and 2104 while southbound there only trains at 0745 and 2117. Yes there are opportunities to travel via Derby but they require paying an additional fare. Of course both stations have many more trains than these but those don't call at both. That suggests to me that pathing issues are very much preventing an all-day all stops service on the route and providing one would need some extra capacity somewhere: an additional island platform at Burton perhaps?

And there are other places where capacity constraints are clearly preventing operation of a regular interval service. I have already hinted at the ECML north of Newcastle. Oxenholme-Windermere is another if through services to points south are to run but also having to fit around similar services on the Furness line. Indeed the need to leave room for an hourly freight path, whether or not it is used, is restricting timetabling opportunities on the WCML for much of the route north of Weaver Junction. On the positive side a few years ago an additional track was provided between Springs Branch Jn and Wigan NW allowing Liverpool terminators to run without interacting with mainline services.

As for a timescale for a full nationwide Takt it comes back to political will and the resultant affect on public funding. As suggested in an infrastructure thread perhaps a JFK style deadline would be needed to focus minds on delivery. One point worth mentioning from the Swiss example: studies on an improved national Takt led them to build a relatively short section of higher speed line (not a true HSL) in order to bring two critical nodes closer together timewise. Without it many connections wouldn't work in the proposed plan given the number of routes unable to justify anything more than hourly service with a ripple effect across a wide area. So money was spent but in an utterly pragmatic manner.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Do many passengers have a clue what the timetable is? Don't most passengers these days just go onto a ticketing site, put their start and end stations in and the time they wish to leave or arrive and are told which services they should catch and where to change? They really aren't going to be that bothered whether the train before leaves at xx:18 but their train departs at xx:20.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Do many passengers have a clue what the timetable is? Don't most passengers these days just go onto a ticketing site, put their start and end stations in and the time they wish to leave or arrive and are told which services they should catch and where to change? They really aren't going to be that bothered whether the train before leaves at xx:18 but their train departs at xx:20.

For occasional passengers I'm sure you're right. But converting them to regular passengers is a little easier if they can simply have a regular departure slot to remember. And operationally it makes consistency of delivery more likely.