When is a delay really a delay?

[30909]

Apologies, doubtless this has been covered, by more threads than hot dinners but here goes.
As one of those irritating necessities of the rail industry, one of the millions of “self-loading freight” (SLF), those who are ignorant of what makes railways works, I have had this thought for years.
My lack of knowledge from more than 60 years of regular rail travel, though thankfully irregular commuting will now be demonstrated by my naivety.
To me a delay to a service is inconvenient and can become frustrating if you are “loaded” on the delayed services and stationary or crawling along with little or no information. However where the service frequency is one hour or less e.g. on a journey end to end of no more than two or three hours, on arrival at my point of departure, having always factored in at least 30 minutes slack for potential delays, I just load on to the next available service, if not excessively overcrowded, and don’t get stressed that the xx.xx scheduled is running 20 min late.
Admittedly this does not take into account those journeys that have planned connections and restricted tickets but connections, without ticket restrictions, may well be into services of acceptable frequency for the overall effect to be minimal.
This simplistic view of travel “convenience” does ignore the problems that may be caused to SLF at the start and end of service or, for that matter, the difficulties for TOC and NR staff in operating and control.
Life is too short, even for “Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells”, to manage your time to such close tolerances that an hour or so inconvenience raises ire and blood pressure.
Tin hat on and into the bunker!

 

[jnjkerbin]

I agree with most of this. What the problem is with delays, in my opinion is a lack of communication from staff (because of a lack of information that they recieve.) Perhaps if TOCs also explained what was causing these delays, passengers would be more understanding - or some would at least.

 

[stut]

30909, for longer distance travel, I'd generally agree with you, particularly when in one of the more comfortable trains. Half an hour more reading a book - ach, I'll live!

But for commuting, it's frustrating. When you're travelling a decent amount every day (I normally have 75-90 minutes each way door-to-door), and tend to have just one fast train an hour, the time becomes more precious. Do I really want to give up an hour of my free time every day for contingency? Not really. And then there's work pressures - if I need to be in a 9am meeting, should I really have to get the train that gets me in at 7:30am just for that contingency?

There's no point in fretting over what you can't control, and everybody working in a London office understands that public transport can on occasion let you down. But that won't stop me from wanting to make the most of my free time, even if that includes some tight timings. I'd rather that, and be disappointed occasionally.

 

[TheEdge]

Perhaps if TOCs also explained what was causing these delays, passengers would be more understanding - or some would at least.

You are 'Disgusted from Tunbridge Wells', your only knowledge of train is the time of your train from home to work and nothing more. Over the PA comes;

'Due to a track circuit failure in the next section the train will have to pause until the driver receives authority to pass the next signal at danger. This will result in a delay of approximately two minutes'.

That is entirely meaningless jargon and the only useful piece of information (the delay) can equally be given by simply 'Due to a signaling problem there will be a delay of approximately two minutes'

For the average member of the traveling public there is no point in going into any more detail than is given by the standard signaling problem/train fault reasons. Anyone who wants to know more will ask.

 

[SETCommuter]

So I book a table at a restaurant for 7pm as I have tickets for a show at 9pm. When I arrive at the restaurant, my table isn't ready and we don't get to sit down until 7:30pm. The service is slow and as such, we don't get out of the restaurant until 9pm thus missing part of the show that has already started.

What you're saying is that this is my fault and I should have booked a table for 6pm ? Despite the booking being for 7pm which should have left us plenty of time ?

 

[jnjkerbin]

You are 'Disgusted from Tunbridge Wells', your only knowledge of train is the time of your train from home to work and nothing more. Over the PA comes;

'Due to a track circuit failure in the next section the train will have to pause until the driver receives authority to pass the next signal at danger. This will result in a delay of approximately two minutes'.

That is entirely meaningless jargon and the only useful piece of information (the delay) can equally be given by simply 'Due to a signaling problem there will be a delay of approximately two minutes'

For the average member of the traveling public there is no point in going into any more detail than is given by the standard signaling problem/train fault reasons. Anyone who wants to know more will ask.

I'm not advocating the use of that sort of jargon. What I am saying is that when a reason is known it should be given. I am not saying we need information for a tiny couple of minutes worth of delay, nor do we need to know its a track circuit failure. However, telling us it is a signalling problem when the delay is over 5 minutes, if this is known is better than just saying a train is "running late" which is what we have all encountered from time to time.

I certainly don't think jargon is what we need. What I am saying is that where possible, information like "a signalling problem" should be given. In the same way that a TCF means nothing to the general public, a "lineside problem" means nothing either.

Likewise passengers would be more understanding if "a fault with the doors" was used rather than "a train fault", because then it sounds more like a genuine reason rather than an excuse, which is what many see it as.

So I book a table at a restaurant for 7pm as I have tickets for a show at 9pm. When I arrive at the restaurant, my table isn't ready and we don't get to sit down until 7:30pm. The service is slow and as such, we don't get out of the restaurant until 9pm thus missing part of the show that has already started.

What you're saying is that this is my fault and I should have booked a table for 6pm ? Despite the booking being for 7pm which should have left us plenty of time ?

I think the OP's point is that things do go wrong and we should put up with it, rather than we should travel hours in advance of when we need to.

 

[asylumxl]

Personally I don't like delays bother me on my commute. I get there when I get there. Yes, it can be irritating and it can create various issues at work but at the end of the day it's something I have no control over so may as well just enjoy the ride .

 

[maniacmartin]

The most annoying is when the delay totally overshadows the planned journey time - e.g. a 15 minute journey delayed by an hour.

 

[Dave1987]

The problem is even when passengers are told the reason for the delay they often think its just an excuse and really the TOCs fault and they somehow deliberately delayed the train. On GEML during the peak the line is so congested that any slight small delay causes big reactionary delays. Passengers want as many services to run as possible, the problem with that is there will be delays because of congestion!

P.s I've noticed the latest hot complaint on twitter is that the timetable is padded and journey times are longer to make less trains late. How naive people are!

 

[transmanche]

Likewise passengers would be more understanding if "a fault with the doors" was used rather than "a train fault", because then it sounds more like a genuine reason rather than an excuse, which is what many see it as.

^ This.

There are many standard explanations which mean nothing to the passenger ('passenger action', 'unit failure', 'operating difficulties') but where you can use a suitable explanatory phrase it will help them to understand - and even help to get them 'on side'.

For example; even 'signalling problem' might be too generic ("they should maintain them better", etc); so if the signalling problem is caused by cable theft, then say so ("oh well, there's not much they can do about that"). Or instead of 'door failure'; if the problem was caused by a passenger holding a door open - then say so.

 

[W230]

Perhaps if TOCs also explained what was causing these delays, passengers would be more understanding - or some would at least.

Agreed. A passenger holding the doors open on a 377 led to a late leaving train as the doors being held then wouldn't shut (the last set on a 12-car). This eventually led to the driver having to come all the way down to the end of the train to try and get them to close.

I was amazed that the announcements gave the reason for delay as "a problem on board a train". Why not just say what it was - the TOC ended up taking the blame on behalf of the passenger!

 

[Dave1987]

Wonder what people would say if they were told:

"The signal failure has occurred because relay 'xxxx' at relay station near signal number 'xxx' has burnt out and needs replacing"

Wonder if that is precise enough

 

[W230]

"The signal failure has occurred because relay 'xxxx' at relay station near signal number 'xxx' has burnt out and needs replacing"

They'd retort "But how did it burn out and why? And who will pay with their job?!"

 

[transmanche]

Wonder if that is precise enough

As stated upthread, no-one expects that level of technical detail.

 

[Dave1987]

As stated upthread, no-one expects that level of technical detail.

I was joking. But in all seriousness it is hard for TOCs to judge the level of detail to give to passengers, some people just want to know how long the delay will be. Others want to know the exact ins and outs of what has gone wrong. Where are they supposed to strike a balance?

 

[Royston Vasey]

They'd retort "But how did it burn out and why? And who will pay with their job?!"

And then tweet that there's a fire on their train!

 

[transmanche]

Where are they supposed to strike a balance?

I gave some examples in post #10.

 

[Panda]

Communication has to be helpful and useful. We can all see that the train is running slow or that it's being held at a red signal (and if it's stopped and there isn't a red signal around, that is a good time to let people know). The information should be enough to allow me to decide if I need to take an alternative route, if I should change my plans, if I should let people know or if I should just stay put.

The problem I have with the way that train companies do their announcements is that they do it in a way that it completely loses its value. It's just background noise. London Underground drivers are told to communicate with customers and then we end up hearing about every red signal they encounter - it's not particularly useful and all it means is that we might actually miss something that's important because of all the "noise".

 

[Dave1987]

I gave some examples in post #10.

Last year a 321 failed at Chelmsford because an passenger forced the doors open again while they were closing, this knackered the closing mechanism and the train was failed. Passengers were told that the train fault was due to a passenger forcing the doors. I believe the comments on twitter said it was the fault of the company for not making the mechanism robust enough. The TOCs simply cannot win at all.

 

[transmanche]

I believe the comments on twitter said it was the fault of the company for not making the mechanism robust enough. The TOCs simply cannot win at all.

Yeah, so some people will always grumble - but that's not all of them. The majority who didn't tweet anything may well have been satisfied with that explanation.

 

[455driver]

Just KISS it, Keep It Simple Stupid, keep it to a level where the reason for the delay is given but dont get too technical.

What annoys me more than anything is when the Guard, TM, conductor (or whatever posh title they have this week) makes it sound like its the railways fault when it isnt, an example was when, at Reading, a dopey bint and her kids got on a train which was first stop Exeter st davids (summer saturday train to Newquay) when she wanted the Southampton train, the fact she headed straight for the TM immediately after the train had left Reading and before any announcements had been made left me sceptical as to the "accidentaly got on the wrong train" bit but I suppose she could have asked another passenger after she had sat down, so the TM arranged for the train to make an additional stop at Westbury to drop her off (why not one of the earlier stations and just use the local door is beyond me) and then announced the reason for the delay as "congestion earlier in the journey" , no it was because of "passenger problems"!

 

[button_boxer]

The TM arranged for the train to make an additional stop at Westbury to drop her off (why not one of the earlier stations and just use the local door is beyond me)

Maybe Westbury was where she was trying to get to in the first place.

 

[30909]

So I book a table at a restaurant for 7pm as I have tickets for a show at 9pm. When I arrive at the restaurant, my table isn't ready and we don't get to sit down until 7:30pm. The service is slow and as such, we don't get out of the restaurant until 9pm thus missing part of the show that has already started.

What you're saying is that this is my fault and I should have booked a table for 6pm ? Despite the booking being for 7pm which should have left us plenty of time ?

Ah ha! Reel them in!
Let’s continue this hypothetical situation, you made the reservation with one of several possible venues doubtless a wider selection than rail routes to your destination? You were not issued with a timetable nor did you establish if the table allocated to you would be occupied before your reservation time? You ordered from a menu, did that have on it the expected interval from order to service, did you establish if the ordered item could be prepared and presented in sufficient time for you to make the other fixed point in your schedule? This is I suggest is a spurious comparison as unlike rail travel you were not given the same level of detailed information when you made your “contract” for a meal as you are with travel, timetable, route, restrictions, seat reservation and you were free to leave the restaurant and seek sustenance elsewhere. So on this glorious summer’s day we get hot under the collar!

 

[455driver]

Maybe Westbury was where she was trying to get to in the first place.

I was in the buffet when she raced in and asked "is this the train to Southampton" so I doubt it, you never know though there are some devious people out there!

 

[Chrisgr31]

Personally I would rather not get delayed on my daily commute, however if I am on East Coast, West Coast or Cross Country I am quite happy to be delayed as long as its more than half an hour as then delay repay kicks in and its a decent amount!

 

[whhistle]

10 minutes.

That is when delays should be announced on stations.
On trains, any delay over 10 mins, then every 15 mins from then on.

A new "Darwin" system in use on the WCML (Virgin side of things) has a list of suitable "excuses" which are not jargon but at the right standard (in my opinion).

 

[Muzer]

5 minutes in SWTland is when they're announced on stations...

 

[sheff1]

I love the automated nonsense at some stations:

* 'the 1514 train to xxx is running 6 minutes late, TOC XXX apologise for the delay'

* 30 seconds later - 'the 1514 train to xxx is running 9 minutes late, TOC XXX apologise for the delay'

* a minute passes then - 'the 1514 train to xxx is running 7 minutes late, TOC XXX apologise for the delay'

* another minute - 'the 1514 train to xxx is running 10 minutes late, TOC XXX apologise for the delay'

This continues until the train actually arrives and the delay is usually none of the figures given in the earlier announcements !

Miight as well say ' As you can see the 1514 train is late, we have no real idea how late it may be, but we hope it will arrive at some point in the not too distant future'

 

[Mojo]

I find the most annoying thing during a delay is when you are in a station awaiting departure and different train which is going the same way ''overtakes'' and departs first from a different platform.

 

[transmanche]

I find the most annoying thing during a delay is when you are in a station awaiting departure and different train which is going the same way ''overtakes'' and departs first from a different platform.

The 'Edgware Road shuffle'...