Thameslink - how naive can I be?

[LBMPSB]

Is it really that difficult? If Cannon Street services use platform 2 up and platform 1 down at London Bridge, does it not leave platform 3 for reversals or for southbound Thameslink services to avoid a reversal in platform 4?

Usual service for Cannon Street lines is Up platforms 2 & 3 Morning peak duringthe day, Down platform 1. Evening Peak Down 1 & 2 and Up 3 until end f peak then revert to Down 1 up 2 & 3. It is easily possible to send all Cannon Street Trains Up 3 during off peak times and spin the Rainham Thameslink in Platform 2, but during the peaks it is impossible without delays. However, what is wrong with Platforms 4 & 5 (Thameslink Platforms) if no trains are going north? The issue is, no one has thought of what happens to all those trains if the Core is closed. Joys of privatisation also limits Driver knowledge of alternative lines. But lack of terminating/spinning around locations is very poor, plus Drivers Diagrams need to be changed, also Controls do not seem to like stepping up stock, they would rather run it fast or hold it some where for its next booked service. There is little space in Kings Cross, St Pancras and London Bridge (Brighton Side). Potentially there are 4 platforms at London Bridge that could be used, Platform 4 & 5 and South Eastern's Platform 3 & 6 (off peak only). Appears to be easier just to cancel the service and tell passengers not to travel.

 

[zwk500]

I am not sure I agree. At the moment obviously. The connection doesn’t exist. When it does exist people need to get from A to B even if that means being held to get on to platforms etc. A system like London’s has to have flexibility in that regard and that happens when other lines are down.

but it also needs to be safe, and you can offer alternatives such as Victoria line for trains to Croydon and South thereof

For instance, northern line passengers are not being advised to stay at home during the blockade are they.

Yes they are

Especially if they are civil servants They are told about workarounds that include very busy alternative routes.

Civil servants wouldn't use that branch of the northern line, and are working from home anyway

The other reason I would have thought it sensible to turn services at London Bridge, E&C and St P is to help improve service recovery. I am not an expert in this regard at all but it seems to me the plan on TL is often to stack rather than turn, then cancellations galore, so the whole thing just seizes up and passengers are really left high and dry.

Turning a train requires a longer platform time and appropriate crossovers, as well as smashing the diagram to bits. If trains and drivers are in the wrong place the service will only get worse. Also there's the passenger loading risk at the platforms to consider.

 

[modernrail]

but it also needs to be safe, and you can offer alternatives such as Victoria line for trains to Croydon and South thereof

Yes they are

Civil servants wouldn't use that branch of the northern line, and are working from home anyway

Turning a train requires a longer platform time and appropriate crossovers, as well as smashing the diagram to bits. If trains and drivers are in the wrong place the service will only get worse. Also there's the passenger loading risk at the platforms to consider.

All I can say is that any of those responses (other than the last one) are accurate pity the poor worker who has busted a gut working through the pandemic in difficult circumstances and is now being told by TfL not to travel at the same time as being told be one of our most hideous public figures to do the opposite.

As for the last bit, well there is obviously lots of discussion on here about what to do for the best to recover TL services. All I can say as a very regular user is that I find it hard to believe there isn’t a better way than at present and if there really isn’t then maybe more work needs doing on the points of failure. The service might be regular through the core but it is less regular in the limbs and they just love cutting the shortest limbs off first, which regularly screws me over.

 

[zwk500]

All I can say is that any of those responses (other than the last one) are accurate pity the poor worker who has busted a gut working through the pandemic in difficult circumstances and is now being told by TfL not to travel at the same time as being told be one of our most hideous public figures to do the opposite.

I do pity them, the amount of conflicting guidance has been absurd at times. Similar situations have existed with different mask mandates and which shops/amenities can open in the different home nations of course.

As for the last bit, well there is obviously lots of discussion on here about what to do for the best to recover TL services. All I can say as a very regular user is that I find it hard to believe there isn’t a better way than at present and if there really isn’t then maybe more work needs doing on the points of failure. The service might be regular through the core but it is less regular in the limbs and they just love cutting the shortest limbs off first, which regularly screws me over.

I'm not saying it's the best there is, but turning a 12-car train round will take somewhere in the region of 7 minutes from arrival to departure, and it takes about 3 minutes from outbound departure before the next arrival from the conflicting direction. So that's a capacity of 6tph per platform. Therefore in theory the max capacity is 12tph in each half of the core. There's normally 20tph so you're still needing to chop 8tph out of the plan. And that's before you look at getting all the drivers home and the units to the right depot at the end of the night. If you split the service in two and a Brighton based driver gets stuck north of the river, you run a real risk of maxing out their hours and needing to delay their next shift for the mandatory rest period.

I think they could be more selective in making sure everywhere retains at least 1tph service until recovery can start, but then again these incidents often happen so fast that the priority is to avoid a logjam that starts cascading delay to other lines like wildfire.

 

[bramling]

but it also needs to be safe, and you can offer alternatives such as Victoria line for trains to Croydon and South thereof

Yes they are

Civil servants wouldn't use that branch of the northern line, and are working from home anyway

Turning a train requires a longer platform time and appropriate crossovers, as well as smashing the diagram to bits. If trains and drivers are in the wrong place the service will only get worse. Also there's the passenger loading risk at the platforms to consider.

It’s a difficult one because there’s pros and cons.

I’m not so familiar with the Midland side so am not going to comment on that, but on the GN side of Thameslink much depends what the crew duties are.

If you have a driver based at Cambridge, your ideal duty is likely to be a Brighton and back, PNR, followed by another Brighton and back. This heavily impacts what recovery options are available - on the first trip a turn short is possible, but divert to Kings Cross and the driver will be too early for the journey back. If really late the driver could remain at Brighton and just do the last trip back. On both northbound trips the train will need to get to Cambridge so skipping stops would likely be the preferred choice, especially to get the PNB to occur on time.

The Finsbury Park crew reliefs are quite convenient in allowing trains to be diverted to King’s Cross as they allow the driver to renumber up as their next trip. But at the risk of disruption if a train turns up at Finsbury Park with no relief.

The real problem with Thameslink is on every trip there’s more than double the chance of encountering disruption compared to when it was just one side of London. For a Cambridge to Brighton you may be disrupted on the GN side, in the core, or south of the river. Sometimes the disruption might not be on the route itself - for example last week there was a fatality between East Croydon and Victoria, the blocking back through East Croydon meant Thameslink services were picking up delays of 15-20 mins.

Cambridge to Maidstone would be the worst, as being a stopping service over the GN side any late running would very quickly transmit elsewhere. I can’t see this service ever happening for this reason. Cambridge to Brighton is bad enough - slightest whiff of trouble and it’s ditched completely.

 

[Need2]

I'm not saying it's the best there is, but turning a 12-car train round will take somewhere in the region of 7 minutes from arrival to departure,

7 minutes, dream on!
On a 700 RLU the minimum is 8 minutes, FLU is min 10.

 

[Minstral25]

It’s a difficult one because there’s pros and cons.

I’m not so familiar with the Midland side so am not going to comment on that, but on the GN side of Thameslink much depends what the crew duties are.

If you have a driver based at Cambridge, your ideal duty is likely to be a Brighton and back, PNR, followed by another Brighton and back. This heavily impacts what recovery options are available - on the first trip a turn short is possible, but divert to Kings Cross and the driver will be too early for the journey back. If really late the driver could remain at Brighton and just do the last trip back. On both northbound trips the train will need to get to Cambridge so skipping stops would likely be the preferred choice, especially to get the PNB to occur on time.

The Finsbury Park crew reliefs are quite convenient in allowing trains to be diverted to King’s Cross as they allow the driver to renumber up as their next trip. But at the risk of disruption if a train turns up at Finsbury Park with no relief.

The real problem with Thameslink is on every trip there’s more than double the chance of encountering disruption compared to when it was just one side of London. For a Cambridge to Brighton you may be disrupted on the GN side, in the core, or south of the river. Sometimes the disruption might not be on the route itself - for example last week there was a fatality between East Croydon and Victoria, the blocking back through East Croydon meant Thameslink services were picking up delays of 15-20 mins.

Cambridge to Maidstone would be the worst, as being a stopping service over the GN side any late running would very quickly transmit elsewhere. I can’t see this service ever happening for this reason. Cambridge to Brighton is bad enough - slightest whiff of trouble and it’s ditched completely.

Your words ring very true. As a user from the south we get problems when either the Bedford or the Peterborough services are disrupted.

There is no efficient workable turnaround point for services heading into the core from the South specifically from East Croydon routes. London Bridge low level (10-15) is full with Southern (we assume as Thameslink only use it when their is engineering works plus Horsham's on Sunday) and it seems they won't turn round in platform 4/5 as it will disrupt through services. Blackfriars bays are not accessible and they won't turn round in the through platforms for same reason at London Bridge.

Even if they could turn around it still too difficult, as firstly units would end up going all over the place but secondly as you say is crew diagramming would go all over the place. With Drivers running full length it is inevitable that a portion will be on the wrong side of the core to finish their duties when disruption occurs and others cannot get through the core. I guess scrapping the crew change at Blackfriars is the root cause of that problem - scrapped to ensure reliability in the core it has become the main cause of continuing disruption throughout the day.

As a passenger I feel they need to make changes to the operational plan that means it recovers better. That should be sorting out turnaround points for services from the south and allowing crew changes at convenient points, rather than a driver running right through. Of course there is no incentive to do anything and it will continue to be a frustration at least once a week as it s now on average.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Your words ring very true. As a user from the south we get problems when either the Bedford or the Peterborough services are disrupted.

There is no efficient workable turnaround point for services heading into the core from the South specifically from East Croydon routes. London Bridge low level (10-15) is full with Southern (we assume as Thameslink only use it when their is engineering works plus Horsham's on Sunday) and it seems they won't turn round in platform 4/5 as it will disrupt through services. Blackfriars bays are not accessible and they won't turn round in the through platforms for same reason at London Bridge.

Even if they could turn around it still too difficult, as firstly units would end up going all over the place but secondly as you say is crew diagramming would go all over the place. With Drivers running full length it is inevitable that a portion will be on the wrong side of the core to finish their duties when disruption occurs and others cannot get through the core. I guess scrapping the crew change at Blackfriars is the root cause of that problem - scrapped to ensure reliability in the core it has become the main cause of continuing disruption throughout the day.

As a passenger I feel they need to make changes to the operational plan that means it recovers better. That should be sorting out turnaround points for services from the south and allowing crew changes at convenient points, rather than a driver running right through. Of course there is no incentive to do anything and it will continue to be a frustration at least once a week as it s now on average.

LB (LL) could easily release one platform to TlK if an incident blocks the core and probably two given the scythe they've taken to the service in May. This would then support some use of 4 & 5 to turn 4-6 TPH. The industry says its putting the passenger first but many comments above suggest that what we are actually doing is putting the customer first tomorrow as we are more concerned today with getting crews and units in the right place for tomorrow. Problem is unfortunately passengers remember the journey that was naff not the ones that were good and their experience under disruption is what they will tell their mates, colleagues and friends about and influence those peoples choices about whether they take a train in the future.

 

[whoosh]

It’s a difficult one because there’s pros and cons.

I’m not so familiar with the Midland side so am not going to comment on that, but on the GN side of Thameslink much depends what the crew duties are.

If you have a driver based at Cambridge, your ideal duty is likely to be a Brighton and back, PNR, followed by another Brighton and back. This heavily impacts what recovery options are available - on the first trip a turn short is possible, but divert to Kings Cross and the driver will be too early for the journey back. If really late the driver could remain at Brighton and just do the last trip back. On both northbound trips the train will need to get to Cambridge so skipping stops would likely be the preferred choice, especially to get the PNB to occur on time.

You won't ever have a Cambridge driver do a double Brighton! Not in under 12 hours, and certainly not in under their maximum rostered duty time of 9h54.
Kings Lynn and back, then Brighton and back has been done as a duty before.

 

[Magdalia]

Cambridge to Maidstone would be the worst, as being a stopping service over the GN side any late running would very quickly transmit elsewhere. I can’t see this service ever happening for this reason. Cambridge to Brighton is bad enough - slightest whiff of trouble and it’s ditched completely.

Maidstone East to Cambridge trains stopping at Welwyn North has to be the most stupid idea in the history of timetable planning. Hopefully we will never find out what a nightmare it would have been. For punctual ECML running the most important trains are those that stop at Welwyn North. Whereas a non-stopping train takes less than 2 minutes to clear the 2 track section, a stopping train takes about 4 minutes, effectively a double path. As anyone who has ever commuted on the GN will know, any slight late running of Welwyn North stoppers, especially in the evening peak, quickly leads to a queue of trains, on the down road back at least to Hatfield. Punctuality is lost right through the peak, because every train runs through the 2 track section on single yellows, taking 4 minutes to clear the 2 track section instead of 2 minutes, and capacity is reduced by almost half. In pre Thameslink days most evening peak Welwyn North stoppers were formed from cars from the sidings, or on long turn rounds at Kings Cross, to maximise the chances of punctual running.

7 minutes, dream on!
On a 700 RLU the minimum is 8 minutes, FLU is min 10.

In my commuting days I used to reckon I could walk a coach length in 10 seconds if in a hurry. Drivers should not have to hurry: walking the length of an RLU needs to be allowed least 2 minutes and walking the length of an FLU needs to be allowed least 3 minutes.

You won't ever have a Cambridge driver do a double Brighton! Not in under 12 hours, and certainly not in under their maximum rostered duty time of 9h54.
Kings Lynn and back, then Brighton and back has been done as a duty before.

I hope that it is never Brighton first and then Kings Lynn. Your train to Kings Lynn is cancelled because your driver is in Brighton. Another example of how train and crew planning build fragility into the timetable and ignore the need for resilience.

 

[Gerald Fiennes]

The only practical turnround point from the South is surely Gatwick Airport, just about, under today's reduced frequency timetable. East Croydon is out and, largely, London Bridge is as well. It would presumably a bold control decision to stop the Horshams and Brightons at GTW the moment there is disruption of eg. >10 mins in the central section.... but maybe that's what needs to be done?

From the Midland, there is West Hampstead and, from the GN, there is ... er... nothing South of Letchworth. (Could perhaps reverse a few over the flyover at WGC, now that Fordland only has 2tph all stations....but nice two face platforms to play with?)

So, we are back to the #1 issue with TL: since it cannot practically ever be stopped when in operation, all of the infrastructure and trains from Gatwick to West Hampstead/Hitchin have to be maintained in tip-top condition to stop faults occurring in the first place. That means 'tip-top', not the standard level UK rail normally runs to. The Victoria line manages it, mostly, and even runs more trains per hour (although of course the fallbacks here are simpler). This means broken rails, track circuit faults, signalling failures, power supply failures and (fortunately more rare these days) door and train failures simply have to be prevented in the first place. End of story.

As an occasional user of this route (and someone caught up in Monday's fault at 0645) and having been involved in its planning in earlier stages, despite a great deal of effort, we are not there yet. As you all know, there's simply no way that 24tph could happen at present (and, fortunately, the demand isn't there!)

PS I seem to recall that the Maidstone service is trying to solve another problem, ie. where to put the trains from this route as they become 12 car due to demand growth. Similarly for the Rainhams. Less of a problem now, so switching back to VIC and Charing Cross less of an issue...?

 

[ComUtoR]

In my commuting days I used to reckon I could walk a coach length in 10 seconds if in a hurry. Drivers should not have to hurry: walking the length of an RLU needs to be allowed least 2 minutes and walking the length of an FLU needs to be allowed least 3 minutes.

Another classic example where there is a lack of understanding.

So, for some clarity.

Turnaround times are not just about walking the length of a unit, neither are they minimum timings.

Built in to the 10 minutes is :
Time to key off and shut down the cab.
Grab your bag and coats etc.
Secure the unit and check headlights.
Walk the length of the unit.
Open up the cab.
Set up seat, and cab environment.
Check diagram and stopping pattern.
Setup cab radio, pis, etc.
Brake tests,
Set lights etc.

The 10 minutes is the time allowed. Some Drivers will do it quicker and some will always take their maximum time allowance.

 

[JonathanH]

The only practical turnround point from the South is surely Gatwick Airport, just about, under today's reduced frequency timetable. East Croydon is out

East Croydon has been used as a termination point from the south using the siding north of the station east of the down slow lines but capacity to use it is obviously limited.

Southern often turn late running services from the south in platform 2

 

[Magdalia]

Another classic example where there is a lack of understanding.

So, for some clarity.

Turnaround times are not just about walking the length of a unit, neither are they minimum timings.

Built in to the 10 minutes is :
Time to key off and shut down the cab.
Grab your bag and coats etc.
Secure the unit and check headlights.
Walk the length of the unit.
Open up the cab.
Set up seat, and cab environment.
Check diagram and stopping pattern.
Setup cab radio, pis, etc.
Brake tests,
Set lights etc.

The 10 minutes is the time allowed. Some Drivers will do it quicker and some will always take their maximum time allowance.

Absolutely. I wasn't trying to imply that walking the length of the train was all that a driver needed to do as part of a turnround, only that walking the length of the train is a significant part of the overall time, and needs to be longer for FLU than RLU.

 

[choochoochoo]

Another classic example where there is a lack of understanding.

So, for some clarity.

Turnaround times are not just about walking the length of a unit, neither are they minimum timings.

Built in to the 10 minutes is :
Time to key off and shut down the cab.
Grab your bag and coats etc.
Secure the unit and check headlights.
Walk the length of the unit.
Open up the cab.
Set up seat, and cab environment.
Check diagram and stopping pattern.
Setup cab radio, pis, etc.
Brake tests,
Set lights etc.

The 10 minutes is the time allowed. Some Drivers will do it quicker and some will always take their maximum time allowance.

10 minutes ? You're lucky

717 drivers get 6 minutes to turn around at moorgate and that includes walking against a wave of commuters in the rush hour !!

 

[Need2]

10 minutes ? You're lucky

717 drivers get 6 minutes to turn around at moorgate and that includes walking against a wave of commuters in the rush hour !!

Is that for a 6 car though?

 

[GN Boy]

Is that for a 6 car though?

That’s right. Six minutes is still pushing it somewhat, though. Welwyn Garden is quite often six minutes and you’re more often than not late arriving anyway, so it turns into a four to five minute turnaround!

 

[Horizon22]

General rule of thumb for most stock at most TOCs is minute/coach, and generally around 10 minutes for longest stock.

 

[Need2]

General rule of thumb for most stock at most TOCs is minute/coach, and generally around 10 minutes for longest stock.

Does seem to fit, although all you need to do is go for even a quick ‘number 1’ and you’ll find yourself leaving late!

 

[whoosh]

From the Midland, there is West Hampstead and, from the GN, there is ... er... nothing South of Letchworth. (Could perhaps reverse a few over the flyover at WGC...)

Not any 12 cars you won't!

 

[fkofilee]

IIRC - Doesnt Plat 4 and 5 @ London Bridge have crossovers to Plats 3 & 6? So could allow for flexibility?

 

[Horizon22]

Does seem to fit, although all you need to do is go for even a quick ‘number 1’ and you’ll find yourself leaving late!

That's why drivers have breaks within their diagram, but yes occasionally you've gotta go when you've gotta go! Tight turnarounds means a late arrival often means a late departure.

 

[zwk500]

IIRC - Doesnt Plat 4 and 5 @ London Bridge have crossovers to Plats 3 & 6? So could allow for flexibility?

Yes, although at the cost of disrupting Up trains to Cannon Street or Down trains from Charing Cross.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

Yes, although at the cost of disrupting Up trains to Cannon Street or Down trains from Charing Cross.

At weekends, Cannon Street traffic really doesn't need all three platforms, and can easily just use Platforms 1 and 2 or 1 and 3.

Its only in the peaks that this would cause a problem.

 

[fkofilee]

Yes, although at the cost of disrupting Up trains to Cannon Street or Down trains from Charing Cross.

True as well but I would say that SE have spare platforms @ London Bridge as mentioned earlier in this thread.
Im sure you could work around with that.

 

[Man of Kent]

True as well but I would say that SE have spare platforms @ London Bridge as mentioned earlier in this thread.
Im sure you could work around with that.

There seem to be frequent staff shortages at London Bridge that take platform 1 out of use, so that's another barrier to contend with.

 

[zwk500]

True as well but I would say that SE have spare platforms @ London Bridge as mentioned earlier in this thread.
Im sure you could work around with that.

You can work around it, but at London Bridge any delay will quickly multiply across the region. It's a judgement call. There's also the disruption caused by platform changes as the crowd of people go up and down the escalators, and the fact that thameslink trains would be using the SE platforms in the wrong direction.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The only practical turnround point from the South is surely Gatwick Airport, just about, under today's reduced frequency timetable. East Croydon is out and, largely, London Bridge is as well. It would presumably a bold control decision to stop the Horshams and Brightons at GTW the moment there is disruption of eg. >10 mins in the central section.... but maybe that's what needs to be done?

From the Midland, there is West Hampstead and, from the GN, there is ... er... nothing South of Letchworth. (Could perhaps reverse a few over the flyover at WGC, now that Fordland only has 2tph all stations....but nice two face platforms to play with?)

So, we are back to the #1 issue with TL: since it cannot practically ever be stopped when in operation, all of the infrastructure and trains from Gatwick to West Hampstead/Hitchin have to be maintained in tip-top condition to stop faults occurring in the first place. That means 'tip-top', not the standard level UK rail normally runs to. The Victoria line manages it, mostly, and even runs more trains per hour (although of course the fallbacks here are simpler). This means broken rails, track circuit faults, signalling failures, power supply failures and (fortunately more rare these days) door and train failures simply have to be prevented in the first place. End of story.

As an occasional user of this route (and someone caught up in Monday's fault at 0645) and having been involved in its planning in earlier stages, despite a great deal of effort, we are not there yet. As you all know, there's simply no way that 24tph could happen at present (and, fortunately, the demand isn't there!)

PS I seem to recall that the Maidstone service is trying to solve another problem, ie. where to put the trains from this route as they become 12 car due to demand growth. Similarly for the Rainhams. Less of a problem now, so switching back to VIC and Charing Cross less of an issue...?

The core has extended overnights on sat/sun to give maintenance teams good access to for inspections along with regular Sunday closures to undertake physical interventions but of course not every issue can be detected.

Yes, although at the cost of disrupting Up trains to Cannon Street or Down trains from Charing Cross.

Interestingly Thameslink are using platform 6 on 8th May according to their engineering pages

 

[zwk500]

The core has extended overnights on sat/sun to give maintenance teams good access to for inspections along with regular Sunday closures to undertake physical interventions but of course not every issue can be detected.

Interestingly Thameslink are using platform 6 on 8th May according to their engineering pages

As I said, it's a judgement call. Obviously when you can plan in advance you have a better idea of what the level of change will be. Pre-planned amended sunday service is slightly different to unplanned line block service recovery.

 

[Bald Rick]

This means broken rails, track circuit faults, signalling failures, power supply failures and (fortunately more rare these days) door and train failures simply have to be prevented in the first place. End of story.

whilst I don’t disagree, as I mentioned upthread this is the first broken rail or even significant rail defect I can recall in the core for a decade at least. And, as I understand it, it was a rather small ‘break’, discovered by a patroller, and not one that could be easily identified before it went due to where it was. The rail is of special (and expensive) type that reduces faults specifically because defects are so potentially disruptive down there.

most track circuit and signalling faults are almost entirely negated by the POSA signals (which is why they were put in).