Network Rail Puntuality Figures

[ayrshire_voyager]

Interesting reading, the "true" numbers resonate with me ,I am regularly delayed by 3,4,5,6 minutes on journeys from Renfrewshire to Ayrshire, usually with zero explanation ( for a 30 min journey)

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/about/performance/

 

[Philip Elliott]

First Great Western HSS services bottom of the league again....

 

[tsr]

First Great Western HSS services bottom of the league again....

Ah, but have you seen Virgin? I don't think Beardy will be wanting to shout about that... their services into Scotland are at 79% PPM MAA!

 

[Flamingo]

First Great Western HSS services bottom of the league again....

89% over the past 12 months, not bad if you look at the weather disruption we experienced over the period. Cast your mind back past July...

 

[Geezertronic]

The WCML South performance cannot of helped either

 

[Philip Elliott]

89% over the past 12 months, not bad if you look at the weather disruption we experienced over the period. Cast your mind back past July...

The document says 82.6% MAA for HSS services. 89% is for all three units combined.

 

[chuckles1066]

Am I alone in believing that punctuality is secondary to reliability?

I've posted here previously; I don't mind my train rolling in 3,4,5,6 minutes late as long as I can get on it.

Shortforming is the biggest issue that I experienced whilst using the railways?

Your mileage may vary depending on where you are, I guess.

 

[1e10]

Am I alone in believing that punctuality is secondary to reliability?

I've posted here previously; I don't mind my train rolling in 3,4,5,6 minutes late as long as I can get on it.

Shortforming is the biggest issue that I experienced whilst using the railways?

Your mileage may vary depending on where you are, I guess.

Nope, I'm with with on that one. FGW in my area sometimes cancel stops on services if it's running late and run it straight to its destination so that it arrives on-time. No good for passengers of course, good for the figures though.

 

[ainsworth74]

Though it's probably good for the other passengers on that train and the passengers who'll be on the next service that train will form as it will now leave on time...

 

[WatcherZero]

On average
60% of delays attributed to NR of which 30% are caused by external factors
20% of delays are external factors
20% of delays down to Toc in question

For Virgin its lower:

During period 5 Network Rail was directly responsible for 50% of delays to Virgin trains with a further 20% down to external factors (such as fatalities). Virgin itself was responsible for 16% of delays with other operators responsible for 14%

Im impressed Virgin, East Coast, TPE etc have the performance they do considering journey length, naturally they rely on some recovery time being built in. Look at Merseyrail, average service length something like just an hour but only 73.0% Right time punctuality, Virgin and East Coast have service lengths of many hours traveling much greater distances and exposing them to a much greater risk of delay, but not much lower ratio of less than a minute late.


Edit: I would love to see a ratio of delay minutes to km travelled, that could be very telling for directly comparing tocs.

 

[greatkingrat]

Nope, I'm with with on that one. FGW in my area sometimes cancel stops on services if it's running late and run it straight to its destination so that it arrives on-time. No good for passengers of course, good for the figures though.

Not true - if any stops are cancelled it will still count as a failure for the purposes of punctuality figures, regardless of the actual arrival time.

 

[Muzer]

Edit: I would love to see a ratio of delay minutes to km travelled, that could be very telling for directly comparing tocs.

That would be an interesting statistic - especially if it were done in a fine-grained manner, ie for each train is delayed, add delay minutes/distance of that train's journey.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Nope, I'm with with on that one. FGW in my area sometimes cancel stops on services if it's running late and run it straight to its destination so that it arrives on-time. No good for passengers of course, good for the figures though.

What greatkingrat said is correct - this is done solely to ensure that future services that require that train/crew aren't delayed, and therefore is best for passengers overall so that the service won't be horribly broken for the rest of the day.

 

[Mojo]

On average
60% of delays attributed to NR of which 30% are caused by external factors
20% of delays are external factors
20% of delays down to Toc in question

How many 'external' factors however would have been preventable or reduced in impact for minimal effort on the part of the rail industry. Further, I think that incident response is a key measure which the industry should be measured against, rather than just performance and reliability.

Unlike the newspapers recently I'm not one to express outrage at the difference in stats between a train being 59 Sec late and 4 Min 59 Sec late.

 

[1e10]

http://www.opentraintimes.com/stats/rtppm/detail

This makes it sound like trains are timed on arrival of their final destination only.

 

[The Planner]

Which is correct, PPM is measured at destination only.

 

[chuckles1066]

Which is correct, PPM is measured at destination only.

Doesn't that lead to what I'd call "artificial padding" of timetables?

I guess the industry term would be something different.

I always remember back in the winter of 2010 that (from memory) the 17:24 service from Bath Spa was due into Bristol Temple Meads at 17:41......it was a HST (as I knew them) and the thing only ever took 9 minutes maximum.

I always wondered why FGW had decreed a journey time of 17 minutes?

 

[Searle]

Which is correct, PPM is measured at destination only.

so is there any penalty at all for the TOC, if they cancel all stops apart from the last one?

 

[Tomnick]

Yes, any fail-to-stops automatically result in a PPM failure.

 

[Bald Rick]

A 'fail to stop' counts as a PPM failure AND a cancellation. Depending on the TOCs franchise agreement, every 'self caused' cancellation has a financial implication. In extremis, too many cancellations may lead to default on the franchise. Hence a TOC on a bad run will be reluctant to cancel trains (including FTS) even if it is the right thing to do for the situation on the day.

 

[IanXC]

I love the way we're presented with 2 different ways of expressing the same thing:

• During period 5 Network Rail was directly responsible for 50% of delays to Virgin trains with a further 20% down to external factors (such as fatalities). Virgin itself was responsible for 16% of delays with other operators responsible for 14%
• Delays attributable to Network Rail (this includes external factors such as fatalities which made up around a quarter of these delays) accounted for 69% of delays to East Coast services during the period

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/about/performance/

So for Virgin we're told:

Network Rail 50%
External 20%

But for East Coast we're told:

Network Rail 69% (including external factors)

Think of someone glancing at that data, and draw your own conclusion!

 

[The Planner]

Doesn't that lead to what I'd call "artificial padding" of timetables?

I guess the industry term would be something different.

I always remember back in the winter of 2010 that (from memory) the 17:24 service from Bath Spa was due into Bristol Temple Meads at 17:41......it was a HST (as I knew them) and the thing only ever took 9 minutes maximum.

I always wondered why FGW had decreed a journey time of 17 minutes?

It will be a PTT differential at the destination, that is determined by the TOC and makes no difference to WTT times which is what I work to. It is a blag on their part but they are entitled to do it.

 

[WatcherZero]

I love the way we're presented with 2 different ways of expressing the same thing:



http://www.networkrail.co.uk/about/performance/

So for Virgin we're told:

Network Rail 50%
External 20%

But for East Coast we're told:

Network Rail 69% (including external factors)

Think of someone glancing at that data, and draw your own conclusion!

Trying not to reference the famous Rumsfeld speach about known knowns and known unknowns.....

Your misinterpreting slightly, In the attributing of delays there are things that are outside NR's control but still attributed to them in delay calculation such as a lorry hitting a bridge or a lightning stike, and stuff outside their control which isnt attributed to them such as grease on the rails (subcontractors fault), kids throwing stuff at trains in depots (depot owners fault) or fires close to the line.

http://www.delayattributionboard.co...ion Guide Issue dated 16th September 2012.pdf


What the figures do indeed indicate is more infrastructure problems on the East Coast than the West Coast and possibly fewer incidents of other TOCs trains causing delay to East Coast on the ECML than to Virgin on the WCML.

 

[Bald Rick]

Trying not to reference the famous Rumsfeld speach about known knowns and known unknowns.....

Your misinterpreting slightly, In the attributing of delays there are things that are outside NR's control but still attributed to them in delay calculation such as a lorry hitting a bridge or a lightning stike, and stuff outside their control which isnt attributed to them such as grease on the rails (subcontractors fault), kids throwing stuff at trains in depots (depot owners fault) or fires close to the line.

Grease on the line and fires near the railway are both attributed to NR. Unless the grease or fire has come from a TOC / FOC.