ORR: Train Punctuality Concerns on Eastern region

[Nicholas Lewis]

ORR has raised concerns about deteriorating performance across Eastern Region in a letter to NR citing

This continues a slow decline in on-time services and an increase in cancellations evident during the past two years. While due in part to factors outside its control, this has been accompanied by a notable increase in the amount of delay attributed to Network Rail. Since August 2022, Network Rail’s delay minutes per annum have increased from 2.4 million minutes to 3.3 million minutes; an increase remains evident, even once changes in train service are considered. Delay caused by operators has remained static across the same period, at 2.3 million minutes.

So pointing the figure at infrastructure issues and then further says

East Midlands route has seen an abrupt worsening of both On Time and Network Rail delay over the last year and, while North & East performance has stabilised to some extent, it remains at an historically poor level. Delay caused by track quality on East Coast has reduced, but overall delay has worsened and passenger outcomes have slowly declined.

Then request rather politely that NR update its performance improvement plan.

I ask that you review and then refresh the Eastern region’s improvement plan that has been previously shared with ORR. We recognise each route’s part of the plan may be sized differently and contain some different, appropriate initiatives specific to the challenges it faces; we do not expect a ‘one size fits all’ approach.

You would expect by now surely that NR would be proactive in these areas and acknowledge to stakeholders that they need to do something about deteriorating performance and show what they are doing rather than waiting for ORR to intervene.

 

[Parham Wood]

ORR has raised concerns about deteriorating performance across Eastern Region in a letter to NR citing


So pointing the figure at infrastructure issues and then further says

Then request rather politely that NR update its performance improvement plan.

You would expect by now surely that NR would be proactive in these areas and acknowledge to stakeholders that they need to do something about deteriorating performance and show what they are doing rather than waiting for ORR to intervene.

I would hope that the ORR included in its letter a date by which they expected this update to be done.

 

[GuyGibsonVC]

I have no doubt Eastern will use the plan that Wales and Western produced and adapt it accordingly.

The actual number of service affecting failures has decreased. However, those with big impacts such as fatalities, trespass and OLE damage have caused some serious delays. This, combined with the inability to get the On Time performance to an acceptable level, has had the ORR sniffing around.

 

[Omnishambles]

Has an analysis of y-coded delays been examined to look into how operators can be pushed/supported into better recovering services after both operator and infrastructure caused events ?

 

[Taunton]

Has an analysis of y-coded delays been examined to look into how operators can be pushed/supported into better recovering services after both operator and infrastructure caused events ?

It's a good point. It does appear that time taken to recover from "given" operating issues (if there can be such a classification) has notably risen over the years, in some cases exponentially, and delays through to the end of the day seem incapable of being resolved. Now one of the ideas behind delay attribution financial compensation between NR and TOC was it offset the costs of overtime etc needed to recover the service. Is there an advantage to claiming for many services delayed/cancelled by "knock-on" impacts, while not actually spending the money on overcoming it?

 

[mike57]

how operators can be pushed/supported into better recovering services after both operator and infrastructure caused events ?

Experienced this recently at Kings Cross. All platforms were occupied, with trains stacked up to the north. Because there seems to be no way of moving trains to the depot the situation just got worse, with incoming trains delayed further, working hours reached, all the other knock ons. Trains in platforms didnt have drivers because they were stuck on the incoming trains in some cases. There really isnt a back up plan when things go wrong.

Surely some simple things like drivers knowledge to include and retain routes to the depot at Kings Cross would help, if two or three platforms could have been cleared things would have got back to normal much quicker. When things go wrong put a plan in place, if a service cannot leave and is likely to be cancelled get it out of the way. It seems to be another side effect of the TOC silo effect.

 

[43066]

Surely some simple things like drivers knowledge to include and retain routes to the depot at Kings Cross would help, if two or three platforms could have been cleared things would have got back to normal much quicker.

The issue won’t be lack of route knowledge. There will be a standby and possibly spare drivers who would be able to move trains to the depot, but once they’ve been used, they’ve been used!

 

[Omnishambles]

It's a good point. It does appear that time taken to recover from "given" operating issues (if there can be such a classification) has notably risen over the years, in some cases exponentially, and delays through to the end of the day seem incapable of being resolved. Now one of the ideas behind delay attribution financial compensation between NR and TOC was it offset the costs of overtime etc needed to recover the service. Is there an advantage to claiming for many services delayed/cancelled by "knock-on" impacts, while not actually spending the money on overcoming it?

I would still like to think that the staff on the ground that are responsible for recovering services post-incident are professional enough to manage this regardless of the event, although I have heard TOC controllers state "No rush, it's an NR issue and we are getting paid anyway" but this was always said in jest as a coping mechanism to get through the chaos !

 

[jayah]

I would still like to think that the staff on the ground that are responsible for recovering services post-incident are professional enough to manage this regardless of the event, although I have heard TOC controllers state "No rush, it's an NR issue and we are getting paid anyway" but this was always said in jest as a coping mechanism to get through the chaos !

The staff on the ground aren't responsible for recovering the service that is the problem.

Decision making is over centralised and the small number of people making all the decisions are probably being overwhelmed when it hits the fan.

We've read the threads about SWR not running trains west of Southampton when there is disruption at Waterloo and we've seen the Elizabeth Line trains stopped at Slough unable to proceed west, but without being cancelled and turned back either.

 

[Taunton]

The staff on the ground aren't responsible for recovering the service that is the problem.

To an extent they are, and in former times certainly used to try. Not long ago I was on a Waterloo to Reading service. That was delayed 15 minutes between Clapham Jc and Barnes because there was a Network Rail engineering train stopped on the fast lines. For the whole rest of the journey no attempt seemed made to recover time, 15 late at Richmond was 15 late at Bracknell. I looked out at a couple of the stops and all around was deserted. This is one of the lines where trains now take over 10 minutes longer than BR days. It is almost as if a diktat has come from HQ never to attempt any time recovery.

 

[JonathanH]

For the whole rest of the journey no attempt seemed made to recover time, 15 late at Richmond was 15 late at Bracknell. I looked out at a couple of the stops and all around was deserted.

With a near 30 minute turnaround at Reading there is very little reason for SWR to cut out stops on the Reading route for a fifteen minute delay.

Service recovery isn't always about cutting out the stops to benefit through passengers, even if that is sometimes the strategy.

 

[Bald Rick]

Experienced this recently at Kings Cross. All platforms were occupied, with trains stacked up to the north. Because there seems to be no way of moving trains to the depot the situation just got worse, with incoming trains delayed further, working hours reached, all the other knock ons. Trains in platforms didnt have drivers because they were stuck on the incoming trains in some cases. There really isnt a back up plan when things go wrong.

Surely some simple things like drivers knowledge to include and retain routes to the depot at Kings Cross would help, if two or three platforms could have been cleared things would have got back to normal much quicker. When things go wrong put a plan in place, if a service cannot leave and is likely to be cancelled get it out of the way. It seems to be another side effect of the TOC silo effect.

The issue won’t be lack of route knowledge. There will be a standby and possibly spare drivers who would be able to move trains to the depot, but once they’ve been used, they’ve been used!

The answer until a few weeks ago for LNER was to use Driver Managers to shift trains out of the way, but that particular avenue was closed off…

 

[43066]

The answer until a few weeks ago for LNER was to use Driver Managers to shift trains out of the way, but that particular avenue was closed off…

It was an answer, but probably the wrong one when it antagonised the union representing employees who are the core of the operation.

How LNER driver managers ever had time to drive trains is another question. Ours wouldn’t.

 

[Omnishambles]

The staff on the ground aren't responsible for recovering the service that is the problem.

Decision making is over centralised and the small number of people making all the decisions are probably being overwhelmed when it hits the fan.

We've read the threads about SWR not running trains west of Southampton when there is disruption at Waterloo and we've seen the Elizabeth Line trains stopped at Slough unable to proceed west, but without being cancelled and turned back either.

With ‘staff on the ground’ I was referring to that exact centralised Control position which over the years has moved from previous smaller area or local controls to now, in most cases co-located with TOC, office.
People dealing with incidents has changed in both a declining number over the years as areas of management became larger resulting in fewer staff or role responsibilities were amended leaving some focussed on incident management and a smaller number than previous on recovery.
Regardless and this was the case 35 years ago when I started and is evident now 100 staff would be overwhelmed never mind 10 in managing an event and recovery.
What has changed over those years, more trains, less flexible diagramming (in some circumstances), lesser experienced staff to name just a few.
As for the SWR/EL examples, on the face of it seems like schoolboy stuff in how to manage that ?

 

[Taunton]

With a near 30 minute turnaround at Reading there is very little reason for SWR to cut out stops on the Reading route for a fifteen minute delay.

If this implies that the only means now considered for recovery of any time is by cutting out stops, to the considerable inconvenience of passengers, then it is certainly disappointing this has got into the corporate rail memory. Smart station working, driving with full acceleration up to the line limit, and other aspects of eliminated wasted seconds, surely come into play. It's not really relevant that there's no value because there's a big turnround - I was travelling to Bracknell and I was 15 minutes late arriving, because not a minute was recovered from the Barnes delay. It was quiet midmorning, so station dwell times the same as at peak periods are surely not applicable.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

If this implies that the only means now considered for recovery of any time is by cutting out stops, to the considerable inconvenience of passengers, then it is certainly disappointing this has got into the corporate rail memory. Smart station working, driving with full acceleration up to the line limit, and other aspects of eliminated wasted seconds, surely come into play. It's not really relevant that there's no value because there's a big turnround - I was travelling to Bracknell and I was 15 minutes late arriving, because not a minute was recovered from the Barnes delay. It was quiet midmorning, so station dwell times the same as at peak periods are surely not applicable.

Operational processes and risk adverseness don't allow any recovery now. My take with 450s specifically is that dwell times are unachievable on the Windsor side maybe the 701s with improved acceleration will improve things.