Making up lost time

bengley · 13 Feb 2019

I often make up time when I'm late. Sometimes it's down to the luck of getting a clear run and sometimes it's a combination of that, slack in the timetable and driving bang on the limit and braking reasonably hard (but within the limits of PDP and passenger comfort).

I left Lea Green 6 minutes late on a trip a few weeks ago and arrived at Manchester Victoria on time. Greens all the way and bang on the linespeed. A lot of drivers, moreso at my current TOC than my previous conpany, do tend to drive with a much more relaxed driving style than I'm used to, which can sometimes be borderline frustrating when they're late and you're following them...

RailUK Forums

Tomnick · 13 Feb 2019

What others have said, broadly!

I've started a journey (more than) 17 minutes late, and been pretty much on time by the end of the journey (against the WTT too, so no thanks to the effect of "padding" the public times). Sometimes there's a bit of slack in the timings themselves. Sometimes there's engineering allowances that aren't required. Sometimes there's a pathing allowance that isn't needed because the movment that I would've conflicted with at a junction is long gone by the time I get there. That all helps.

There is an opportunity to make back time by adjusting my driving style though, again as others have said. I know where I can shut off, coast and relax without losing time, sometimes over a distance of many miles, and where a gentle brake application will suffice for a station stop. Conversely, I know what I can use as a marker for a later and initially heavier brake application to pull back some time, but still giving myself plenty of room. I like the variety and find that it keeps me much more engaged with the job, and I enjoy the satisfaction of recovering lost time.

Tomnick · 13 Feb 2019

tsr said:
It does seem now that there is almost too little emphasis in certain quarters on the competency of a driver to maintain a reasonable speed between stations. I'm aware of several incidents in the last few months of trains losing 1 or 2 minutes and thereby causing ridiculous knock-on delays when they hit a busy part of the network, and when investigated, there is no real reason (signals, weather, speed restrictions, wheelslip/slide, etc.) to have had the delay. At the extreme end, I recall being on a train from East Grinstead a few years ago which lost in the region of 20 minutes (on a sub-60 minute journey) for no definable reason other than slow driving. I politely asked the driver on arrival, they looked at their watch - and went "oh *!?*, sorry mate, no idea how that happened..." - and I think that was entirely genuine!

I'd imagine - and hope - that questions would be asked, especially in the extreme case! The delay minutes have to go somewhere, and the driver managers are going to quickly come under a lot of pressure if delay minutes are piling up at their door...

CC 72100 · 13 Feb 2019

As others have said, times have indeed changed and any driver adopting a different style with late running will be doing so within the realms of the PDP and what is needed to keep the train safe.

For example the other week I took over a train that was 16 late and by the time I left it it was 10 late (30 miles or so). 2 minutes were made up by a section being timed for 12 minutes where if you get an all-green run it can be done in 10 (80% of the time) and another 4 minutes on the basis that the train was actually booked to be held outside the main station but was able to go straight in (a quirk of timetabling).

The only change in style was, on the approach to one speed change (90 down to 25), as opposed to shutting off about a mile and a half before so the speed is more like 75/77 when I get the AWS for the 25 speed board, keeping the power open and braking slightly harsher as a result. But the gain is so marginal, it would barely have contributed 20 seconds to the time made up.

As I was told "forget about the passengers". This may me misinterpreted by anyone with an axe to grind against railstaff, but the reality is that doing your job safely is the best customer service there is. Don't think about the pressure of trying to get a train on time, when you have a single yellow you're on Signaller's time and setting off the TPWS grids will cause far greater a delay than probably the entire original delay.

And as others have alluded to, it's not just the driving. Slick platform work also makes a huge difference. Again it's not about rushing safety critical tasks (that takes as long as is needed whatever the situation) but doing the simple stuff well. Making announcements in good time, being at the door panel ready for arrival, platform staff having already identified bikes and got them in the right place... not rocket science but often overlooked in favour of more complicated performance plans.

DelW · 13 Feb 2019

SWR regularly make up lost time on their trains. Unfortunately they do it by missing out a string of timetabled stops, leaving dozens or sometimes hundreds of passengers on those stations to cool their heels for half an hour or more until the next train - assuming that one stops...

I know why it's done, but it's still very annoying when you've arrived at a station in good time, to see your train belt through non-stop, and knowing you've got a long cold wait on the platform for the next one.

The Planner · 13 Feb 2019

There will always be some element of slack as SRTs are whole and half minutes and are rounded up or down. It is only a problem if each SRT is calculated seperately and not cumulatively.

Llama · 13 Feb 2019

Tomnick said:
I'd imagine - and hope - that questions would be asked, especially in the extreme case! The delay minutes have to go somewhere, and the driver managers are going to quickly come under a lot of pressure if delay minutes are piling up at their door...

A trainee under instruction can often cause delays, especially early in their practical handling hours. A margin for their errors/miscoordination/miscommunication/lack of judgement of speed/distance/gradient has to be built in to any instructions barked at them.

3rd rail land · 13 Feb 2019

Every since being late was changed from 5 minutes behind schedule to just 1 minute I have seen journey times between some stations increased. fFor example between Woking and Guildford on SWR it used to take just 6 minutes if the train missed out Worplesden but I have seen it scheduled to take 8 minutes now. Undoubtedly so that time can be made up in the event of late running.

cuccir · 13 Feb 2019

DelW said:
SWR regularly make up lost time on their trains. Unfortunately they do it by missing out a string of timetabled stops, leaving dozens or sometimes hundreds of passengers on those stations to cool their heels for half an hour or more until the next train - assuming that one stops...

Is it just preference of the managers of a particular TOC as to whether or not missing stops happens? Or is it associated with particular kinds of route? I don't think I've ever encountered stop-skipping, but via the forums it seems to be relatively common in some parts of the world.

tsr · 13 Feb 2019

Llama said:
A trainee under instruction can often cause delays, especially early in their practical handling hours. A margin for their errors/miscoordination/miscommunication/lack of judgement of speed/distance/gradient has to be built in to any instructions barked at them.

Always embarrassing for a DI when a trainee is quicker than them, though... :lol:

Mathew S · 13 Feb 2019

cuccir said:
Is it just preference of the managers of a particular TOC as to whether or not missing stops happens? Or is it associated with particular kinds of route? I don't think I've ever encountered stop-skipping, but via the forums it seems to be relatively common in some parts of the world.

It's becoming quite common on the Atherton line in Northern-land. Never used to be a thing, but seems to be being used to keep trains as close to time as possible arriving at Salford Crescent.

DelW · 13 Feb 2019

cuccir said:
Is it just preference of the managers of a particular TOC as to whether or not missing stops happens? Or is it associated with particular kinds of route? I don't think I've ever encountered stop-skipping, but via the forums it seems to be relatively common in some parts of the world.

On SWR, I think it's a product of short turn-round times at Waterloo, and (possibly) shortage of spare stock and/or staff, meaning that outgoing services will be delayed if the inbound is late.

To be fair, SWT did it as well, but it does seem to have become more common under SWR, possibly because service disruption seems to have become more frequent since they took over in August 2017.

My most recent was just last Thursday, a Haslemere to London service omitted Worplesdon, Woking and Clapham Junction. Fortunately for me it didn't affect me that time, but Worplesdon passengers would have had an extra 29 minute wait, while missing Woking and CLJ would have broken connections for those already on the train.

185143 · 13 Feb 2019

I've gone from 10 late off Man Vic and arrived early into Leeds. This was early on a bank holiday morning, the guard checked where we were all going-and we made some very hasty stops on the Calder Valley as a result!

1M16 this morning was 25 late off Edinburgh, but we arrived into Euston early.

DynamicSpirit · 13 Feb 2019

DelW said:
SWR regularly make up lost time on their trains. Unfortunately they do it by missing out a string of timetabled stops, leaving dozens or sometimes hundreds of passengers on those stations to cool their heels for half an hour or more until the next train - assuming that one stops...

I know why it's done, but it's still very annoying when you've arrived at a station in good time, to see your train belt through non-stop, and knowing you've got a long cold wait on the platform for the next one.

SouthEastern do that as well. And with a couple of variations: I've sometimes experienced late-running CHX-Lewisham-Woolwich line trains getting routed non-stop along the Bexleyheath line instead. It's also not uncommon that a late incoming train for Charing Cross will get terminated at London Bridge instead, so that it can be on time for its next scheduled service.

This is all understandable and sensible. Having said that, as a passenger, I could quibble about the information given when that happens. In my experience, if a train is going to miss stops, then the departure boards at Charing Cross will usually simply show the revised list of stops, without saying anything to draw attention to the fact that this is not the same list of stops that train would normally have. That of course will catch people out because most regulars are are just going read the headline on the departure board, that says 19:42 to Dartford or something - without bothering to read the entire list of stopping points. Ditto with trains starting at London Bridge - where the departure boards at Charing Cross will tend to just say 'Cancelled' without supplying the extra information that you can probably still catch that train if you just take the first available train to London Bridge. (After being caught out a couple of times, I've learned to look online at the London Bridge departure boards if I'm at Charing Cross and I see a 'cancelled' train!)

Silver Cobra · 13 Feb 2019

DelW said:
SWR regularly make up lost time on their trains. Unfortunately they do it by missing out a string of timetabled stops, leaving dozens or sometimes hundreds of passengers on those stations to cool their heels for half an hour or more until the next train - assuming that one stops...

DynamicSpirit said:
SouthEastern do that as well. And with a couple of variations: I've sometimes experienced late-running CHX-Lewisham-Woolwich line trains getting routed non-stop along the Bexleyheath line instead. It's also not uncommon that a late incoming train for Charing Cross will get terminated at London Bridge instead, so that it can be on time for its next scheduled service.

Add Thameslink to this list as well. Many a time when a service from Horsham to Peterborough is delayed south of the core, the service is run non-stop from either Finsbury Park or Stevenage to Peterborough to try to make up the lost time. The same also happens in the opposite direction if a service is very late arriving into Peterborough, running non-stop from there to Finsbury Park.

Master29 · 13 Feb 2019

Very common on trains from Penzance to Paddington to be late especially during busy mornings, sometimes around 10 minutes or so which is easily countered en route even without the working timetable being taken into account.

70014IronDuke · 13 Feb 2019

tom73 said:
Back in the 1950's and 60's, if a train had been delayed en route, the driver would ask his fireman to shovel some more coal on the fire and he'd floor it until his train was back on time.

Could you explain your use of the term "floor it" in relation to operating a steam locomotive, please?

tom73 said:
In this 21st Century, if a train leaves the origin station 17 minutes late, it will be 17 minutes if not more late at its destination. No attempt to make up lost time these days.

I'd suggest you make several rather wild assertions in both parts of your post. In the case of the second part, they demonstrably inaccurate, as a few checks on RTT of late running trains will reveal. But in any case, several real live drivers have put you rght in this thread on modern running conditions.

But to return to the point about steam (since his has evinced fewer responses) - I'm not at all convinced your assertion is correct.

What is true is that logs of trains running late and making up time through a sparkling performance were often published in the railway magazines. (These sometimes involved some liberal interpretation of speed limits, as mentioned up thread - although I doubt these usually involved any serious safety risks, it would be more passenger discomfort if a train took a 50 mph curve at 60 mph.)

But whether this was typical of all crews on late-running trains has to be open to debate. I certainly remember one run, on a down Midland express, where the logger complained that the crew of a Jubliee (I think it was 5647 Sturdee, on one of the accelerated Manchester trains in 1957 or 58) "made no effort whatsoever" to regain time. (I can't remember the exact words, but this was the essence of the complaint.)

Of course, even in this case, the crew, had they been informed of the moan, may have thrown their hands in the air and condemned the logger for ignorant and unjustified criticism - the loco may have been steaming badly through deferred boiler washout, the coal may have been poor quality, etc etc, but this was before the days of twitter and social media, and most human beings went about their lives anonymous to all but a few family, friends and work colleagues.

a_c_skinner · 13 Feb 2019

In those heady days before on train data recording I was on a Liverpool train (probably an 87 and Mk3a) that was rather late at Crewe and after an exciting and (at Weaver Jn) striking ride had made up nearly all its time by Runcorn. I cannot recall the numbers but it was striking.

It is also said in transpotting circles, at least when they stop rummaging in their duffle bags for their Thermos, that 125s not infrequently ran at 135mph on the GW main line if they were late. I've no idea if this is true of course.

Rail cannot win, if they pad the schedules the press accuses them of cheating, if they cannot keep up the press accuses them of incompetence.

bramling · 13 Feb 2019

70014IronDuke said:
Could you explain your use of the term "floor it" in relation to operating a steam locomotive, please?

I'd suggest you make several rather wild assertions in both parts of your post. In the case of the second part, they demonstrably inaccurate, as a few checks on RTT of late running trains will reveal. But in any case, several real live drivers have put you rght in this thread on modern running conditions.

But to return to the point about steam (since his has evinced fewer responses) - I'm not at all convinced your assertion is correct.

What is true is that logs of trains running late and making up time through a sparkling performance were often published in the railway magazines. (These sometimes involved some liberal interpretation of speed limits, as mentioned up thread - although I doubt these usually involved any serious safety risks, it would be more passenger discomfort if a train took a 50 mph curve at 60 mph.)

But whether this was typical of all crews on late-running trains has to be open to debate. I certainly remember one run, on a down Midland express, where the logger complained that the crew of a Jubliee (I think it was 5647 Sturdee, on one of the accelerated Manchester trains in 1957 or 58) "made no effort whatsoever" to regain time. (I can't remember the exact words, but this was the essence of the complaint.)

Of course, even in this case, the crew, had they been informed of the moan, may have thrown their hands in the air and condemned the logger for ignorant and unjustified criticism - the loco may have been steaming badly through deferred boiler washout, the coal may have been poor quality, etc etc, but this was before the days of twitter and social media, and most human beings went about their lives anonymous to all but a few family, friends and work colleagues.

I'd say a bigger problem on parts of today's railway is that signalmen often don't make any effort to make up time. On my local line if a train is 5 late and there's no prospect of this being recovered, in many cases it quite obviously goes to the bottom of the queue. There's absolutely nothing the driver can do if the train is running on reds and yellows.

It's much better from a passenger point of view to have two trains arrive 5 late than one arrive right time and another arrive 10 late.

70014IronDuke · 13 Feb 2019

bramling said:
I'd say a bigger problem on parts of today's railway is that signalmen often don't make any effort to make up time. On my local line if a train is 5 late and there's no prospect of this being recovered, in many cases it quite obviously goes to the bottom of the queue. There's absolutely nothing the driver can do if the train is running on reds and yellows.

It's much better from a passenger point of view to have two trains arrive 5 late than one arrive right time and another arrive 10 late.

Is it really a question of "can't be bothered" - or regulating instructions pertaining to the privatised railway because of delay attribution to the various TOCs? In other words, if company A train is 5 late and then clashes with company B's on-time train for a path - company B's train gets priority today with, perhaps, a total delay-minutes of 10.

Whereas, on the BR of old, the signalman would have used his nous, knowing that he could keep train A 5 late, and delay train B by (say) two mins to get a total of 7 delay minutes

DY444 · 13 Feb 2019

DanDaDriver said:
If you’re taking full power up to a single yellow you’re either a suburban driver or an idiot.

Or climbing the Lickey in a peak with 12 on

al78 · 13 Feb 2019

I don't think the assertion is true all the time. I was once on a Manchester to London service which was slowed down by a late running local stopper as far as Macclesfield. Once past the stopper, the service made up about half the lost time the rest of the way.

DynamicSpirit · 13 Feb 2019

a_c_skinner said:
Rail cannot win, if they pad the schedules the press accuses them of cheating, if they cannot keep up the press accuses them of incompetence.

I think it's a question of the amount of padding and whether it feels justified. I'm sure London-Alton used to just slightly more than an hour. Now it's more like an hour 20 minutes, with only one additional stop (West Byfleet) plus a 2nd additional stop (Clapham Junction) on some trains. Maybe there's a good reason for such a dramatic slow-down of the timetable, but from the perspective of a lay passenger it feels excessive - especially when the trains visibly very obviously regularly seem to move very slowly without an obvious reason in quite a few places between Alton and Brookwood. Similarly, the Woolwich line - new timetable a year or so ago with the trains very obviously being slowed down. That despite the new London Bridge station opening, which you'd have thought ought to have reduced delays and so reduced the need for timetable padding. Once again, maybe there's a good reason for the increased padding; but if there was, it was never communicated.

On the other hand, adding a few minutes padding/recovering time to an hour's journey feels very sensible, and not the kind of thing that anyone could reasonably complain about.

ComUtoR · 13 Feb 2019

bengley said:
I left Lea Green 6 minutes late on a trip a few weeks ago and arrived at Manchester Victoria on time. Greens all the way and bang on the linespeed. A lot of drivers, moreso at my current TOC than my previous conpany, do tend to drive with a much more relaxed driving style than I'm used to, which can sometimes be borderline frustrating when they're late and you're following them...

Considering I know your previous TOC I can certainly attest to that.

With your previous TOC it highlights the difference in the ability to make up time. When I'm on the 'Dark Side' there are places where its tight and you will lose a minute but others where you can push it a touch and make up a few minutes. Come back to my side of the water and your pushing it to the limit each time because you have no choice and tend to live on the limit anyway. Also, being Metro, you are start stop all day long and tend to get restrictive aspects everywhere. Even if you want to push it you still end up being held at a junction for a mainline.

When they flipped the stock from 319s to 700s you notice how much the 319s were holding the timetable back. 700s fly and actually hit linespeed. So where you couldn't previously you could get much more performance where you need to.

The other problem with Metro vs Mainline is that If I was 17 late then I'm insanely late. With an average trip of around 40 minutes. That is 50% of your total journey time. Even 6 minutes is a lot of time to get back. 6 minutes is potentially 3 stops :/

Tomnick · 13 Feb 2019

70014IronDuke said:
Is it really a question of "can't be bothered" - or regulating instructions pertaining to the privatised railway because of delay attribution to the various TOCs? In other words, if company A train is 5 late and then clashes with company B's on-time train for a path - company B's train gets priority today with, perhaps, a total delay-minutes of 10.

Whereas, on the BR of old, the signalman would have used his nous, knowing that he could keep train A 5 late, and delay train B by (say) two mins to get a total of 7 delay minutes

The principle of minimising overall delay still stands, which can and often does mean (e.g.) regulating a right-time stopper for a late-running express to go first. Where it seems to go wrong the most, in my experience, is where ARS is provided and the signalmen (possibly under management instruction) rely on that to regulate for them even though it appears to make terrible decisions when things are running out of course.

ForTheLoveOf · 13 Feb 2019

One thing I sometimes wonder - when drivers are cruising along (let's say it's a piece of straight and level track), just how much attention do they pay to sticking to the speed limit (i.e. not going below it)? Do you increase power if you're at 56 in a 60, say? Or would you leave it until you were at 50? I understand that most trains' "throttle" is in steps, so I'd imagine often there isn't a "step" that lines up with the speed limit.

DanDaDriver · 13 Feb 2019

70014IronDuke said:
But whether this was typical of all crews on late-running trains has to be open to debate. I certainly remember one run, on a down Midland express, where the logger complained that the crew of a Jubliee (I think it was 5647 Sturdee, on one of the accelerated Manchester trains in 1957 or 58) "made no effort whatsoever" to regain time. (I can't remember the exact words, but this was the essence of the complaint.)

Of course, even in this case, the crew, had they been informed of the moan, may have thrown their hands in the air and condemned the logger for ignorant and unjustified criticism - the loco may have been steaming badly through deferred boiler washout, the coal may have been poor quality, etc etc, but this was before the days of twitter and social media, and most human beings went about their lives anonymous to all but a few family, friends and work colleagues.

Not forgetting the attraction of loosing your path of you were on the cusp of overtime.

ComUtoR · 13 Feb 2019

ForTheLoveOf said:
One thing I sometimes wonder - when drivers are cruising along (let's say it's a piece of straight and level track), just how much attention do they pay to sticking to the speed limit (i.e. not going below it)? Do you increase power if you're at 56 in a 60, say?

Straight and level track - Hold it to linespeed, where possible. (signals, conditions, stopping pattern, ESR/TSRs etc)

If I was a 56 vs 60 but was running late, then yes, I'd be pushing towards linespeed every time. Watching the speedo is something you do all the time, just like in a car. However, there are a few places on my network where I deliberately drop it under linespeed and adapt my driving style for the gradient.

At one specific point I can drop it 5mph below linespeed and coast all the way between two stations. The unit will pick up 5mph, then drop back 5mph exactly where the linespeed drops anyway, pick back up to linespeed and then perfectly drop 10mph for the next change of linespeed.

The time between the stations is 7 minutes. Even if I pull it tight to the linespeed and hold it through each gradient and brake late into each change of speed it will still take 7 minutes ! This is partly because of your sectional timings between each station and because you are not timed to be run at full speed 100% of the time. One of our regulars (The Planner) has explained how sections timings work and how they are a set % of the maximum performance of units running between each Sectional timing point.

What also happens is that if I am early or pull it back to right time, when I approach the station I will 100% be held outside because of something coming out. Therefore, why rush

ForTheLoveOf · 13 Feb 2019

ComUtoR said:
Straight and level track - Hold it to linespeed, where possible. (signals, conditions, stopping pattern, ESR/TSRs etc)

If I was a 56 vs 60 but was running late, then yes, I'd be pushing towards linespeed every time. Watching the speedo is something you do all the time, just like in a car. However, there are a few places on my network where I deliberately drop it under linespeed and adapt my driving style for the gradient.

At one specific point I can drop it 5mph below linespeed and coast all the way between two stations. The unit will pick up 5mph, then drop back 5mph exactly where the linespeed drops anyway, pick back up to linespeed and then perfectly drop 10mph for the next change of linespeed.

The time between the stations is 7 minutes. Even if I pull it tight to the linespeed and hold it through each gradient and brake late into each change of speed it will still take 7 minutes ! This is partly because of your sectional timings between each station and because you are not timed to be run at full speed 100% of the time. One of our regulars (The Planner) has explained how sections timings work and how they are a set % of the maximum performance of units running between each Sectional timing point.

What also happens is that if I am early or pull it back to right time, when I approach the station I will 100% be held outside because of something coming out. Therefore, why rush

Thank you for the insight

Wombat · 13 Feb 2019

DelW said:
SWR regularly make up lost time on their trains. Unfortunately they do it by missing out a string of timetabled stops, leaving dozens or sometimes hundreds of passengers on those stations to cool their heels for half an hour or more until the next train - assuming that one stops...

While making a delay repay claim this evening, I noticed that a train I sometimes catch (17:54 Waterloo to Dorking) arrived early at Epsom on Monday. The interesting(?) thing is that it departed Worcester Park three minutes late at 18:20, and arrived at Epsom one minute early at 18:26. So it covered the distance in six minutes, where ten are allocated. I think that may be because there's sometimes a few minutes' wait outside Epsom, which was perhaps not required on this occasion.

On the subject of missing out stops, it's great for me when that happens (while also feeling sorry for the people left on the platform). I remember one of the old SWT management FAQs patiently answering a question of (paraphrasing) "This is fantastic, can you miss out those stops on all your trains?".

Making up lost time

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member