Merseyrail semi-fast running antics.

[TheSel]

May as well just not stop anywhere, they'll never be late then!

They've tried not stopping at termini a few times. Didn't end well!

 

[Justin Smith]

Merseyrail don't seem to run their network for the benefit of passengers.

As soon as trains become 5+ minutes late, semi-fast running kicks in to protect their difficult to maintain timetable.

My experience today takes the biscuit. The train to Chester didn't stop at Hooton despite being only 3 minutes late. Remember that there are only 2 trains per hour on Sundays. Pathetic.

I agree with you. Missing out stops should only be a very very rare occurrence, almost never, particularly when there are only two trains an hour.

 

[jamesst]

I agree with you. Missing out stops should only be a very very rare occurrence, almost never, particularly when there are only two trains an hour.

But as has been stated on a service with minimal turnaround and no recovery time do you miss stops on one trip inconveniencing one set of passengers or keep calling everywhere thus delaying far more passengers and getting in the way of other services?
Without a timetable recast it's the only option.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But as has been stated on a service with minimal turnaround and no recovery time do you miss stops on one trip inconveniencing one set of passengers or keep calling everywhere thus delaying far more passengers and getting in the way of other services?
Without a timetable recast it's the only option.

It's not the only option. You can do what mostly happened pre-2000ish, if one gets late enough that turnaround time won't put it back on time you pull it out and put it back in missing a round trip (so an outright cancellation). The advantage of semi fast running is that you still carry Liverpool-Chester passengers, for example, whereas if you cancel you carry nobody.

 

[TheSel]

Merseyrail state their policy on semi-fast running on their website.

Here and Here

... both of which seem to have the same text [quoted below]

If Merseyrail services are affected by a disruptive event, it is important that a normal timetable is restored as soon as possible to minimise the effect on passenger’s journeys.

On some occasions Merseyrail trains will run as semi-fast services to help restore a disrupted timetable.

This means that trains will run directly between two appointed stations, not stopping at stations in-between.

Careful consideration is always taken when deciding if a service should run as a semi-fast service and services are only altered when the change will benefit the majority of passengers.

If a service is to run as a semi-fast service, announcements will be made on the train, on the platform via the station public address system and digital screens will advise of the change.

 

[Haywain]

It's not the only option. You can do what mostly happened pre-2000ish, if one gets late enough that turnaround time won't put it back on time you pull it out and put it back in missing a round trip (so an outright cancellation). The advantage of semi fast running is that you still carry Liverpool-Chester passengers, for example, whereas if you cancel you carry nobody.

Either way, a bunch of stations miss out on a train. With the semi-fast running they only lose out in one direction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Either way, a bunch of stations miss out on a train. With the semi-fast running they only lose out in one direction.

Indeed, and the larger flows are still provided for as well, meaning the following train isn't as overcrowded.

 

[SouthStand]

If you have a situation where interventions are having to be made when a service is only running a few minutes late, then the timetable and/or train/crew diagrams just aren’t robust enough.

Absolutely correct. It’s not difficult to see the problem.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely correct. It’s not difficult to see the problem.

While the leaf-fall timetable is better, the big difficulty with the Wirral Line is that you can only have layover at one end, and the big difficulty with Chester is that you can only have a maximum of about 13 minutes' layover because there's only one platform used for the service. Thus with both of those things (while obviously Ormskirk only has one platform it does have layover at both ends and is incredibly slackly timed*) it is far more vulnerable to problems than some of the other lines.

* In the 1980s it was 25 minutes end to end, it's now a quite shocking 36 - part of this may be an artificial slowdown because you can't have two units at Ormskirk at the same time, though, so once you have an extra unit in the diagrams you have to slow things down so the layover doesn't exceed 13-14 minutes ish. OK, Maghull North has been added but it was still well over 30 before that.

 

[The exile]

Ideally on any Metro- style service, turnarounds should be around the service interval (preferably service interval + a few minutes) - but if there’s only one electric platform at Chester that’s obviously not possible.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ideally on any Metro- style service, turnarounds should be around the service interval (preferably service interval + a few minutes) - but if there’s only one electric platform at Chester that’s obviously not possible.

It also affects Ormskirk and Hunts Cross. And previously Kirkby, though Headbolt fortunately was built with two platforms for Merseyrail so the layovers there can be (and are I think) longer than 15 minutes. Do all the other termini have 2 platforms minimum? I think they do?

 

[TheSel]

It also affects Ormskirk and Hunts Cross. And previously Kirkby, though Headbolt fortunately was built with two platforms for Merseyrail so the layovers there can be (and are I think) longer than 15 minutes. Do all the other termini have 2 platforms minimum? I think they do?

Ellesmere Port has two platforms, but only one is electrified, which is what limits things there. My photo of 777020 taken there (attached below) illustrates this.

 

[Horizon22]

Surely with this train, it makes sense to go non stop from Liverpool to Hooton, then all stops to Chester, as passengers for stations between Liverpool and Hooton can get the Ellesmere Port train, whereas passengers for Capenhurst, Bache, and Chester have no alternative other than waiting the half hour.

Yes seems reasonable, especially as it was only 3 minutes late at that point.

Service decisions can be a mixture of:

• Run fast/non-stop
• Terminate short/Start forward
• Divert
• Cancel and reform
• Unit swaps (where available)

Ideally you don't hammer the same passengers every time but depending on the infrastructure/service/crew available and the nature of the late-running that is not always possible.
Also where a reduced (and tight) timetable is in operation, controllers pretty much have their hands tied on what they can do. It's either let everything run late or lead to 30 minute gaps (less in reality due to the late running anyway) in service and/or cancellations. This might also be true - not in Merseyrail's case - where only 2 out of 4 lines are available for engineering reasons so running fast may not be suitable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ellesmere Port has two platforms, but only one is electrified, which is what limits things there. My photo of 777020 taken there (attached below) illustrates this.

Thanks. Though with only 2tph layovers can be up to 29 minutes, so there isn't quite the same issue there.

 

[Haywain]

Ellesmere Port has two platforms, but only one is electrified, which is what limits things there.

The track layout also limits things, with only that platform being able to be used for reversal.

 

[jamesst]

The track layout also limits things, with only that platform being able to be used for reversal.

Ellesmere Port could (&has when there's engineering work/flooding on the Chester line) easily take a 15min frequency, the biggest issue on that line is the long signal sections between Ellesmere Port and Hooton.

 

[Bikeman78]

They CAN make up time on the Southport line. Late last year I was on a train that left Liverpool Central 11 minutes late, did not miss any stations, and regained over 7 minutes of lateness by Southport. (Public timetable - one minute less according to WTT.)

That's good news. To be fair, a fast crew could make up time to Southport on a 507 too. The Chester line is too tight though.

If you look at the Chester turnarounds, they are miniscule. They're probably trying to get away with running fewer units (and drivers) on a Sunday.

They are miniscule seven days a week. If control are running trains fast more than once or twice per week, then the timetable is too tight. I spent the last couple of years of class 317s racking up thousands of miles to Cambridge. I can only recall one occasion that they skipped stops, on a train that was 30 late. All the trains had 15 minutes or more at both ends, so minor delays were not a problem. All the other routes on Merseyrail are pretty robust, so it seems odd that they persist in winging it on the Chester line. An extra diagram would solve the problem.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

Missing out Hooton while skip stopping is almost unheard of. It's one of the busiest stations on the line and an important interchange.

Tempting though it might be to have diagrams where trains run alternately to Chester & Ellesmere Port, wouldn't that lead to very long waits for passengers changing at Hooton in the off peaks? It's a cold place at night and can't even get the door of the P2 waiting room to open at the moment

In the olden days, trains used to run through from Chester/Ellesmere Port to West Kirby/New Brighton. The arguments against that was that disruption on one line would cause disruption on another. Not sure what the answer is.

 

[barbette165]

Running the train fast to Chester allowed it to get back on time for its next journey ensuring no follow on delays.

The only 30 minute delay that the skipping stops created was for those passengers joining the train at skipped stations and wanting to travel to Capenhurst, Bache or Chester.

Stations to Hooton, if the train had continued to stop at all stations, and neither gained nor lost any time, it would have arrived at Hooton at about 13:56 instead of 13:42. The following Ellesmere Port train arrived at 14:00, so an additional 4 minute delay was added by forcing passengers to change onto the later train.

Passengers to Capenhurst and Bache should be advised to stay on the train into Chester and then alight on the return journey. The delayed train, if stopping, would have stopped at Capenhurst at 14:01 and Bache at 14:06. The return journey actually stopped at Bache at 14:03 and Capenhurst at 14:08. So Capenhurst passengers would have been delayed by an additional 7 minutes, but Bache passengers actually arrived 3 minutes earlier!

 

[Horizon22]

Running the train fast to Chester allowed it to get back on time for its next journey ensuring no follow on delays.

The only 30 minute delay that the skipping stops created was for those passengers joining the train at skipped stations and wanting to travel to Capenhurst, Bache or Chester.

Stations to Hooton, if the train had continued to stop at all stations, and neither gained nor lost any time, it would have arrived at Hooton at about 13:56 instead of 13:42. The following Ellesmere Port train arrived at 14:00, so an additional 4 minute delay was added by forcing passengers to change onto the later train.

Passengers to Capenhurst and Bache should be advised to stay on the train into Chester and then alight on the return journey. The delayed train, if stopping, would have stopped at Capenhurst at 14:01 and Bache at 14:06. The return journey actually stopped at Bache at 14:03 and Capenhurst at 14:08. So Capenhurst passengers would have been delayed by an additional 7 minutes, but Bache passengers actually arrived 3 minutes earlier!

I don't think anyone is necessarily challenging the decision to run fast, more the decision to not add Hooton as an intermediate.

 

[jamesst]

I don't think anyone is necessarily challenging the decision to run fast, more the decision to not add Hooton as an intermediate.

If a Chester service comes out the loop 7+ mins late it'll generally be sent semi fast Birkenhead Central to Hooton.
Once you get to around the 12/13min late mark it'll generally be either Liverpool Central to Hooton or Birkenhead Central to Chester.
20mins + could be Liverpool Central to Chester direct or it'll be turned back at Hooton and 30+ Rock Ferry.

This all depending of course for the reason behind the delay and potential knock on effects on other services, there's a lot to take into account.

 

[bramling]

I don't think anyone is necessarily challenging the decision to run fast, more the decision to not add Hooton as an intermediate.

Must admit I’m always pretty sceptical of stops being missed. We see it on GN quite regularly, and half the time the train just ends up stuck behind a stopping service so makes up precisely nothing.

I also remember an occasion on Southeastern a few years ago, where a train lost a few minutes somewhere between Charing Cross and Ashford, and a decision was made for it to run non-stop Canterbury West to Ramsgate. Again, it got stuck behind something, and even sat in the platform at Minster with people on the platform pressing the door open buttons. Fortunately it didn’t affect me, but to be totally honest if I’d have been going for a day out and wanting to alight at Minster, I’d have been damn tempted to use an egress device, rather than have an hour wasted entirely due to shoddy operating.

 

[Bikeman78]

If a Chester service comes out the loop 7+ mins late it'll generally be sent semi fast Birkenhead Central to Hooton.
Once you get to around the 12/13min late mark it'll generally be either Liverpool Central to Hooton or Birkenhead Central to Chester.
20mins + could be Liverpool Central to Chester direct or it'll be turned back at Hooton and 30+ Rock Ferry.

This all depending of course for the reason behind the delay and potential knock on effects on other services, there's a lot to take into account.

I get the impression that Merseyrail control had a pretty tough time in 2024. I got booted off a Chester train at Hooton because it was 15 late, The next train was cancelled. The terminated train didn't go back right time because it delayed the train from Ellesmere Port whilst shunting. But the latter was then allowed to go first having run reversible through the southbound platform.

Must admit I’m always pretty sceptical of stops being missed. We see it on GN quite regularly, and half the time the train just ends up stuck behind a stopping service so makes up precisely nothing.

I also remember an occasion on Southeastern a few years ago, where a train lost a few minutes somewhere between Charing Cross and Ashford, and a decision was made for it to run non-stop Canterbury West to Ramsgate. Again, it got stuck behind something, and even sat in the platform at Minster with people on the platform pressing the door open buttons. Fortunately it didn’t affect me, but to be totally honest if I’d have been going for a day out and wanting to alight at Minster, I’d have been damn tempted to use an egress device, rather than have an hour wasted entirely due to shoddy operating.

Similar thing happened to me on SWR. They ran a train non stop from Barnes to Waterloo because it was eight minutes late. It had 15 minutes turn round at Waterloo. It stopped in the platform at Clapham Junction for two minutes because because the signaller routed a freight across the junction. From the tone of his voice, the guard sounded utterly embarrassed by the situation.

 

[Justin Smith]

I don't think anyone is necessarily challenging the decision to run fast, more the decision to not add Hooton as an intermediate.

I am.
What happens if someone had an important appointment or a connection to make and needed to catch that train ?
Basically the whole timetable is too tight, there should be layover time at the ends of all journeys for just this eventuality.

 

[Horizon22]

I am.
What happens if someone had an important appointment or a connection to make and needed to catch that train ?
Basically the whole timetable is too tight, there should be layover time at the ends of all journeys for just this eventuality.

And what about the hundreds of other people who might be inconvenienced if the train ran late all day?

Controllers on the day have to react to what they have in front of them; of course the timetable is too tight, but incidents happen and the service needs to be recovered.

 

[amahy]

Similar thing happened to me on SWR. They ran a train non stop from Barnes to Waterloo because it was eight minutes late. It had 15 minutes turn round at Waterloo. It stopped in the platform at Clapham Junction for two minutes because because the signaller routed a freight across the junction. From the tone of his voice, the guard sounded utterly embarrassed by the situation.

The most embarrassing thing for this must be where Wigan bound Leeds - Wigan trains running 20 minutes late run limited stop when they have a 55 minute turnaround. If trains have such a long turnaround, what’s the point in stressing about trying to make up time when they will always make it up on the turnaround anyway?

 

[Horizon22]

I get the impression that Merseyrail control had a pretty tough time in 2024. I got booted off a Chester train at Hooton because it was 15 late, The next train was cancelled. The terminated train didn't go back right time because it delayed the train from Ellesmere Port whilst shunting. But the latter was then allowed to go first having run reversible through the southbound platform.


Similar thing happened to me on SWR. They ran a train non stop from Barnes to Waterloo because it was eight minutes late. It had 15 minutes turn round at Waterloo. It stopped in the platform at Clapham Junction for two minutes because because the signaller routed a freight across the junction. From the tone of his voice, the guard sounded utterly embarrassed by the situation.

You can ever only do things with good intentions; sometimes the unexpected happens or there was an unforseen risk and decisions are reliant on a lot of actors working in harmony and this of course can never always be the case. In your specific example a train might be 8 minutes late at Barnes, but could have easily lost more time on route due to being out of sequence / lost path. Sometimes decisions are taken which might appear nonsensical if you do not have all the caveats and full picture; even train crew think this sometimes.

If we could all do things with perfect hindsight, that would be great! Quite different to being in a busy control room with decisions having to be made with just a few seconds decision time.

 

[Falcon1200]

The most embarrassing thing for this must be where Wigan bound Leeds - Wigan trains running 20 minutes late run limited stop when they have a 55 minute turnaround. If trains have such a long turnaround, what’s the point in stressing about trying to make up time when they will always make it up on the turnaround anyway?

Does that long turnround apply to set, Driver and Guard, and if so in the latter two cases, are there no rostered breaks involved? And should a train continue to run late, with no effort made to reduce its delay, what is the impact on other services around it?

 

[Birkonian]

Lengthening the turnaround times would result in less capacity. Presumably you'd be the first person to complain about that if they did this?

I just want trains to run to timetable so that I can plan my trip. Skipping stations when Sunday is already a reduced service is rubbish for customers.

 

[Pacef8]

Just to reiterate what was said about the new trams . “They are faster in acceleration and will take minutes of the chester service” someone was obviously not telling the truth.

Plus one now delayed again.