Delays are inevitable on a railway. Nobody should expect trains to run on time all of the time. Sensible people will acknowledge that train companies are often not responsible for a delay.
Today’s incident at Euston was a good example – LNWR are clearly not responsible for trespassers climbing on top of trains etc. But I think there should be an expectation for train companies to manage the aftermath of such incidents better.
So here are my principles for better delay management.
1) Train companies should plan for delays. There should be set alternative timetables in order to restore normality as quickly and efficiently as possible. Running trains according to their original calling pattern, because that’s what the train would have done if it had run on time 90 minutes ago is no good to anyone.
I would suggest that in most cases of delay, running some trains all stops on commuter lines is sensible. With congestion on the lines, it is much more sensible to use that ‘delay’ time at a station, rather than sit behind the trains in front, crawling along according to a series of service patterns which no longer fit together.
2) There should be clear, precise and detailed communication from control to website staff, train staff and station staff so that the information given out is consistent and accurate.
3) There should be a well thought through way of communicating such information to passengers.
Passengers have a right to make an informed decision about how they continue with their journey. Information should be given to them as quickly as can be managed without compromising accuracy. They may wish to change to a different TOC/route/mode of transport - so letting them know about potential delays/terminations further up the line is vital so they can make an informed decision.
In stations, this means that staff in customer facing roles should be available as much as possible. It would also be wise to have a whiteboard in the station lobby giving the most up to date information about the quickest way to reach various destinations. This is far more useful than relying on tannoy announcements which are too easy to miss.
On trains, if a train is to change its calling pattern or to terminate early, passengers should be informed as soon as that decision is made – not just directly before the terminating station. Information about onward travel must be accurate and up-to-date.
On screens and online – information should be as detailed as possible and consistent. Having 2 pages of ‘Cancelled’ is useless information. Passengers want to know how to get to their destination.
4) If trains are to terminate early, they should do so, wherever possible, at stations which give the best options for onward travel (by rail or otherwise). e.g. A train should not terminate at Bletchley if it is possible for it to continue as far as Milton Keynes – which provides far better links for onward travel (Though I do understand that practicalities regarding trains reversing also come into this decision).
Today’s incident at Euston was a good example – LNWR are clearly not responsible for trespassers climbing on top of trains etc. But I think there should be an expectation for train companies to manage the aftermath of such incidents better.
So here are my principles for better delay management.
1) Train companies should plan for delays. There should be set alternative timetables in order to restore normality as quickly and efficiently as possible. Running trains according to their original calling pattern, because that’s what the train would have done if it had run on time 90 minutes ago is no good to anyone.
I would suggest that in most cases of delay, running some trains all stops on commuter lines is sensible. With congestion on the lines, it is much more sensible to use that ‘delay’ time at a station, rather than sit behind the trains in front, crawling along according to a series of service patterns which no longer fit together.
2) There should be clear, precise and detailed communication from control to website staff, train staff and station staff so that the information given out is consistent and accurate.
3) There should be a well thought through way of communicating such information to passengers.
Passengers have a right to make an informed decision about how they continue with their journey. Information should be given to them as quickly as can be managed without compromising accuracy. They may wish to change to a different TOC/route/mode of transport - so letting them know about potential delays/terminations further up the line is vital so they can make an informed decision.
In stations, this means that staff in customer facing roles should be available as much as possible. It would also be wise to have a whiteboard in the station lobby giving the most up to date information about the quickest way to reach various destinations. This is far more useful than relying on tannoy announcements which are too easy to miss.
On trains, if a train is to change its calling pattern or to terminate early, passengers should be informed as soon as that decision is made – not just directly before the terminating station. Information about onward travel must be accurate and up-to-date.
On screens and online – information should be as detailed as possible and consistent. Having 2 pages of ‘Cancelled’ is useless information. Passengers want to know how to get to their destination.
4) If trains are to terminate early, they should do so, wherever possible, at stations which give the best options for onward travel (by rail or otherwise). e.g. A train should not terminate at Bletchley if it is possible for it to continue as far as Milton Keynes – which provides far better links for onward travel (Though I do understand that practicalities regarding trains reversing also come into this decision).