Poor Delay Management (Or how to lose friends and alienate people)

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).

Would it be possible to flesh out how the recent incident was handled differently from these principles? Or did LNWR literally get ‘everything wrong’ in relation to them?

Albion91 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Good thing you don't work in train planning as you seem to be suggesting that there needs to be way more padding, so you'd have to reduce service frequencies.

Besides, services can be amended VSTP by control when things go tango uniform.

Albion91 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Actually, it is good for people. The south WCML has traditionally worked on the basis of "run everything even if it's late" in order to ensure as much capacity as possible can be operated. The mess is then sorted between the peaks with some cancellations. This won't be possible with all the through services from May, but it will, by us seat-liking local passengers, be missed.

But that aside, the WCML does have one very specific contingency plan - the 2 track timetable. There are a few versions of this, depending on how long the 2-track section is, but the full whack is:

- Cancel one of the three VTWC Manchesters (via Stoke), put the lost stops in the other one
- Cancel one of the three VTWC Birminghams, put the lost stops across the other two
- Cancel the Tring stoppers (and if applicable the Watford shuttles)
- Put the Apsley and Kings Langley stops onto 1tph MKC local service
- Bushey served by LO only, one presumes a blind eye is turned to double backs from WFJ
- Truncate the Southern to Watford Jn bays
- Cancel the Chester/Holyhead between Euston and Crewe. In the days when the Liverpool omitted Crewe, this was added back in.

This all works quite well.

Albion91 said:

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.

Click to expand...

I do think this kind of thing is handled quite badly. Staff and passengers alike rely on RTT etc. I think easyJet have this one right, with control adding detailed information about issues to each service.

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.

Click to expand...

The "notes" bit on the PIS is ideal for this, and it is often used this way.

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.

Click to expand...

Some staff keep it quiet so they don't have to face the wrath of unhappy passengers who may actually pose a physical threat to them.

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.

Click to expand...

It's usual these days to set the PIS to only show trains that are running in severe disruption. This was done at Euston this evening, I saw a picture of the completely blank departure board from a friend.

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).

Click to expand...

Bletchley is a traincrew changeover point. The only reason trains would terminate there out of course was that there were no onward traincrew to take it north. Indeed, MKC actually has more terminating capacity, Bletchley only has one reversible platform to/from the south (5) - possibly also 6 but I can't remember.

Plan for delays. Do you mean having shelves full of contingency plans for every conceivable incident, at every possible time of day? The same incident at 10.00 may need a totally different approach to if it had occurred at 14.00.

Every major incident such as this requires a bespoke response. There are generic contingency plans, but they can only provide a broad guideline as to how to minimise disruption and restore the service to plan.

Regarding terminating at Bletchley, by the way, do be aware that there are 2 or 3 early evening trains that actually terminate there normally. Like the morning ones that start there, they are Tring stoppers that are "off to bed" and do so in service because they might as well.

Dr Hoo said:

Would it be possible to flesh out how the recent incident was handled differently from these principles? Or did LNWR literally get ‘everything wrong’ in relation to them?

Click to expand...

Mostly poor communication. I was informed by a member of ticket office staff (who was 'blinds down' in the ticket office in Berkhamsted) to get on a particular train which would stop at Leighton Buzzard. I checked with the guard as I got on - he also said it would stop at Leighton Buzzard. It then went straight through to Bletchley - announcing to the unwitting passengers that it was terminating there - despite the fact it had been advertised on the Berkhamsted PIS boards half an hour prior.

I can't understand the rush to get to Bletchley - there wasn't a service to connect to - nothing else had left Euston. It was the only train running North - why not run all stops? It then terminated at Bletchley, spilling out hundreds of passengers just one station short of a major transport hub.

A similar situation occurred to me a few weeks back where an incident (train failure perhaps?) had occurred near Long Buckby at around midday. I travelled North towards Birmingham at about 1pm, and yet was not informed of the incident until after we had passed Milton Keynes, meaning I didn't have the option to change onto a Virgin. We got caught up in the delays and then terminated at Birmingham International.

I get that operational decisions have to be made - I just think they could be communicated much more effectively to passengers.

Harbornite said:

Good thing you don't work in train planning as you seem to be suggesting that there needs to be way more padding, so you'd have to reduce service frequencies.

Besides, services can be amended VSTP by control when things go tango uniform.

Click to expand...

No I'm not suggesting there needs to be a lot more padding - i'm suggesting that sticking to the timetable when everything has been cancelled for an hour and half seems bizarre.

306024 said:

Plan for delays. Do you mean having shelves full of contingency plans for every conceivable incident, at every possible time of day? The same incident at 10.00 may need a totally different approach to if it had occurred at 14.00.

Every major incident such as this requires a bespoke response. There are generic contingency plans, but they can only provide a broad guideline as to how to minimise disruption and restore the service to plan.

Click to expand...

But surely some broadbrush contingency planning would be useful. e.g. A few pre-set plans for restoring service from total shutdown during peak hours on WCML. Tonight seemed to be complete chaos and staff didn't know what was happening. This suggests that if there is a plan, they are unaware of it.

Bletchleyite said:

Actually, it is good for people. The south WCML has traditionally worked on the basis of "run everything even if it's late" in order to ensure as much capacity as possible can be operated. The mess is then sorted between the peaks with some cancellations. This won't be possible with all the through services from May, but it will, by us seat-liking local passengers, be missed.

Click to expand...

But this doesn't work if they cancel some trains and run others. I understand why the South WCML has lots of different calling patterns - but it works on the basis of a normal day. In events like tonight, people just want to be on a train which will stop at their station - even if it does take an extra fifteen minutes to drop other people off on the way.

Bletchleyite said:

Some staff keep it quiet so they don't have to face the wrath of unhappy passengers who may actually pose a physical threat to them.

Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong - safety first, and if this is the reason, I understand it. But it's a sad situation if the possible threat of violence to train staff prevents passengers from receiving important information about their journey.

Bletchleyite said:

It's usual these days to set the PIS to only show trains that are running in severe disruption. This was done at Euston this evening, I saw a picture of the completely blank departure board from a friend.

Click to expand...

But not at other stations - I don't know if PIS boards are centrally controlled or station by station - but again, some uniformity in communication would be great.

Bletchleyite said:

Bletchley is a traincrew changeover point. The only reason trains would terminate there out of course was that there were no onward traincrew to take it north. Indeed, MKC actually has more terminating capacity, Bletchley only has one reversible platform to/from the south (5) - possibly also 6 but I can't remember.

Click to expand...

I must admit, I don't know much about the ins and outs of train crew changeovers. But it seems to me that it would be better for the train crew to take it to MKC and then get the traincrew taxied back to Bletchley than expect hundreds of passengers to find their own way onwards? Perhaps it was impossible - but it just seemed a bizarre decision!

Can’t speak for the WCML but the GEML has many such contingency plans, I’d be astonished if the WCML didn’t have similar. But at the end of the day this all involves moving humans around to carry them out. Controlling that is not an easy job, as anyone who has done it will tell you.

Albion91 said:

But surely some broadbrush contingency planning would be useful. e.g. A few pre-set plans for restoring service from total shutdown during peak hours on WCML. Tonight seemed to be complete chaos and staff didn't know what was happening. This suggests that if there is a plan, they are unaware of it.

Click to expand...

How does that work though when you have no idea what resources you will have to recover the service?

Edit - Obviously there are contingency theories, but it is impossible to formulate exact plans to plug in and play.

Albion91 said:

But this doesn't work if they cancel some trains and run others. I understand why the South WCML has lots of different calling patterns - but it works on the basis of a normal day. In events like tonight, people just want to be on a train which will stop at their station - even if it does take an extra fifteen minutes to drop other people off on the way.

Click to expand...

But then you get everyone trying to get on the first train, with predictable consequences.

Besides are you suggesting that all trains leaving Euston should stop at all stations on the WCML?

Having all trains call at every station wouldn't work. Everyone would head for that first train, regardless of where they were going to, and it would become totally wedged. Once it got to a certain point in the journey it would be carting fresh air around.

I happened to be passing through Euston yesterday evening (I wasn't travelling from there myself but needed to pick up a suitcase from the Excess Baggage Company). The concourse was heaving and the departure board blank.

Albion91 said:

I can't understand the rush to get to Bletchley - there wasn't a service to connect to - nothing else had left Euston. It was the only train running North - why not run all stops? It then terminated at Bletchley, spilling out hundreds of passengers just one station short of a major transport hub.

Click to expand...

Quite probably to do with crew hours and needing to get a unit out of Euston and out of the way for while. This side of planning appears quite alien to many passengers.
Given the normal LNWR service levels lots train crew wouldn't have had that much working time left when recovery started

Bald Rick said:

But then you get everyone trying to get on the first train, with predictable consequences.

Besides are you suggesting that all trains leaving Euston should stop at all stations on the WCML?

Click to expand...

I suspect that all Albion91 is suggesting (correct me if I’m wrong Albion91!) is that if a stopper is cancelled then the next service should, if practicable, have extra stop orders put in place if the alternative would be to have passengers for the less frequently-served stations waiting an unreasonably long time.

LM were better than LNR at this.

BucksBones said:

I suspect that all Albion91 is suggesting (correct me if I’m wrong Albion91!) is that if a stopper is cancelled then the next service should, if practicable, have extra stop orders put in place if the alternative would be to have passengers for the less frequently-served stations waiting an unreasonably long time.

LM were better than LNR at this.

Click to expand...

But that then leads to over crowding on the first few trains out and even slower recovery. Passenger numbers have increased over the years so this isn't practical any more, most TOC have now realised this, most passengers haven't.

hwl said:

But that then leads to over crowding on the first few train out and even slower recovery. Passenger numbers have increased over the years so this isn't practical any more, most TOC have now realised this.

Click to expand...

I take your point in general but in this example I wouldn’t have thought adding Apsley, Kings Langley and Cheddington calls is going to add significantly to passenger numbers. There’s no need to serve Harrow and Wealdstone or Bushey because they have other services they can use.

Albion91 said:

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).

Click to expand...

I don't want to start an argument ( and i missed yesterday thankfully) but the real world is simply not as black and white, nor as simple to fix as posters here seem to think. There are a couple of points I agree with and a couple I don't. Using your numbering:

1) Alternative timetables

How service recovers depends on when and where the issues occur and what kind of issue occurs. Those factors are almost infinite. How many alternative timetables are you going to plan? How much spare resource do you think there is to do this? Personally I think @Bletchleyite sets out what the WMCL south emergency timetable is. However that was completely academic yesterday as Euston could not be accessed.

I agree that more trains should run all stations in the event of disruption. However, what we as passengers don't have sight of is the full diagramming information or staff rostering. There is little point running all stops to Northampton if the guard or driver runs out of hours at Tring with his or her replacement stuck at Blethcley! That helps no one. There is little point running all stops to MK if the back working is express to Euston meaning it is cancelled barbecue it is so late leaving another train load of people stuck at MK. There is a balance to be struck.

Personally i think LNWR and LM before them didn't use additional stops often enough as there can be long service gaps once the emergency timetable described above is put into effect. If possible i would pull any express service and only run the all stop trains but that is based entirely on what works for me not any larger plan.

2) Clear Communication

Agreed. This should be better. I know why it isnt at times having seen how these incidents are dealt with in control but it needs fixing. One person should be nominated communication manager for the incident and only comms issued by that person should be sent outwards. That said there are long lines of communication to get the message to people on the ground with several people in the chain. If one person in that chain is called away to deal with more pressing duties the communication will be delayed or could be missed.

3 Communication routes

Agreed - however these are often fast moving, evolving and confused situations involving NR, several different train co companies and often the BTP, fire brigade, ambulance service who will often not be in the same place.

On the stations there should be standing orders to clear all boards and only show the agreed comms message and trains that will certainly run. I have no issue with whiteboards being used other than they are fairly small and need to be updated. The best way is to use the tannoy and social media and to get staff out on the floor talking to people. The problem is there are a number of people who don't know how to behave and vent their frustrations on staff members who are powerless to fix the issue.

The problem with alternative routing information, often overlooked here, is that disruption is fluid. It isnt a single point with a defined restoration time scale attached. it sint as easy as signal failure> page 49832726 of the Haynes Railway Operational manual > confirmed fix time 56 minutes.

In relativity what happens is Fault reported> fault team sent out > fault team have to look for fault > fault team find fault > try to fix > fails > more men and tools needed> bodge up in place to run trains > fails > further faulting reporting > wash and repeat. What information do you send out to customers? At each stage the response is different and the next stage then contradicts the previous. Add to that the complexity in getting ticket acceptance in place and then communicating that out to the staff of another TOC/TOC's.

it isnt as easy as many here think. Same for the calling pattern. At times of perturbed working this kind of thing can change on what looks like a whim but is really control trying to fix knock on issues. Again it is the fluid nature of the issue that causes these decisions. It was described to me as trying to complete a 3d jigsaw, blindfolded, with several different people giving you conflicting instructions how to put the pieces together! That said there should be standing orders that guards DO communicate that information as soon as they can.

4 Terminating points

Agreed in principle however the issue is often the need to get the train back south in a suitable path to offer a service to passengers who by now will have be stranded for some considerable time. We also don't know the state of the alternative terminating points. With standing orders being such that trains should be held in platforms as far as practicable during times of disruption i have seen all 6 platforms at MKC full with parked trains. it is hard to accommodate trains from the south without a platform to offer them.

We also, as set out above, have to consider staff availability.

Albion91 said:

I can't understand the rush to get to Bletchley - there wasn't a service to connect to - nothing else had left Euston. It was the only train running North - why not run all stops? It then terminated at Bletchley, spilling out hundreds of passengers just one station short of a major transport hub.

Click to expand...

On the basis that If I am going to Milton Keynes ( as many are at that time of day) Bletchley is a damn sight close to homer than Euston and a lot cheaper in a cab!

Bletchleyite said:

Indeed, MKC actually has more terminating capacity, Bletchley only has one reversible platform to/from the south (5) - possibly also 6 but I can't remember.

Click to expand...

4 can also be used. The Southern often terminates here when it is very late. I have even seen a 4 car 350 terminate in platform 6 when things have really gone up the spout!

Certainly have never seen this before!



That said I didn't actually have too bad a delay - I looked on Opentraintimes to find whichever train was supposed to be heading to Birmingham, and just loitered around on the platform. Once services started to run again, the driver/guard soon appeared. I was only about 15 minutes delayed.

On the way out of Euston we were overtaken by a nearly empty Northampton stopper, I don't know why nobody was on it as they called it first.

oversteer said:

Certainly have never seen this before!

View attachment 60142

That said I didn't actually have too bad a delay - I looked on Opentraintimes to find whichever train was supposed to be heading to Birmingham, and just loitered around on the platform. Once services started to run again, the driver/guard soon appeared. I was only about 15 minutes delayed.

On the way out of Euston we were overtaken by a nearly empty Northampton stopper, I don't know why nobody was on it as they called it first.

Click to expand...

You can see almost that between 00:33:30 and 01:33:30 every night! (OK, one train on there).

I've seen it like that at 01:35:00 once. Fortunately the train hadn't gone yet and I correctly guessed the platform! (It's allegedly usual practice for that train to run a couple of minutes late in order to mop up the stragglers).

FWIW, the worst disruption I ever saw on the South WCML was caused by the severe snow of somewhere-around-2008. Because there was hardly any in MK I was one of about 3 people who made it to the office on what seemed like a normal service - but (with hardly any Tube service and no bus service at all in London that day) demand went through the floor and resourcing the service became difficult - so the service was recast to 1tph 12-car all stations, which was more than adequate for the demand. I can't recall what VT were running.

This was in Silverlink days so a much simpler service with nothing crossing Northampton, though.

oversteer said:

Certainly have never seen this before!

Click to expand...

I have. I think it is a good idea to blank off any pointless info and only show what is going to run when it is known it is going to run. It also cuts out all the points less auto announcements!

Whilst it's difficult to have a set of revised timetables for every possible circumstance, it is possible to simply plan a "thinned out" timetable across general areas. Eg, signalling failure causing considerable delays through Runcorn, you could implement your planned thinned out timetable, which could for instance say that Birmingham Liverpools will drop to 1tph calling Winsford/Hartford/Acton Bridge/South Parkway with the other 1tph terminating Crewe to form back workings. Virgin would run 1tph through but prepared to divert via Earlestown (removing the Runcorn call) as individual circumstances dictate.

That way you stand a better chance of recovering the service as you have more flexibility with what to do with units and crews, plus it gives the passengers some confidence in what their service is likely to be.

Out of interest,
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/P66448/2019/03/07/advanced
I was on this train, and it wasn't cancelled, just left late. Where can I see its actual timings?

Albion91 said:

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.

Click to expand...

That already does happen, I regularly read that Contengency Plan 6A is in use for services, and so on. There are generally plans, timetables and diagrams for most common issues, such as the MML being blocked between Leicester and Loughborough for example.

Albion91 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Usually you tend to find most situations are dynamic and won't stay fixed for ages. Even when that information is communicated I've still had people get on my 90min late train "because my seat is on here" despite it terminating short due to a broken window and ruptured fuel pipe and subsequently getting overtaken by the next service which I'd sensibly transferred almost all of my passengers onto.

Albion91 said:

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.

Click to expand...

A huge number of stations have been destaffed, on some routes I work you can go 80 miles or more between staffed stations. Most people tend to rely on their apps these days, a lot of which aren't controlled by the TOC they're using. I've lost track the number of times I've been advising people to be told "but my app says".

Albion91 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Generally those decisions seem to be communicated to the front line as soon as they're made for my TOC. But don't forget in some cases they could be dealing with multiple trains at the same time all tying up the lines to and from control.

Albion91 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Knowing what is and isn't cancelled is not useless, especially in the world of advanced purchase tickets valid on one train only in which we have dug ourselves.

Albion91 said:

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).

Click to expand...

All TOCs have a list of appropriate stations at which they can terminate trains, depending on the circumstances of the reason why they train has to terminate short this can even extend as far as disused/closed stations in certain circumstances.

bunnahabhain said:

Knowing what is and isn't cancelled is not useless, especially in the world of advanced purchase tickets valid on one train only in which we have dug ourselves.

Click to expand...

A screen full of "cancelled" so you can't see what is running is useless. If you set it to not show cancelled trains, you can see if yours is cancelled by whether it appears or not. But typically if things have got this bad restrictions have long since been lifted.

On an emergency timetable didn't LM just run 2tph (12 cars) Euston to NMP, all shacks, and cancel everything else?

gordonthemoron said:

On an emergency timetable didn't LM just run 2tph (12 cars) Euston to NMP, all shacks, and cancel everything else?

Click to expand...

I've only ever known that be done once (and it was 1tph) in the snows of 2008 which was Silverlink. In more normal times that wouldn't have even nearly enough capacity.

More common is to split the service at Northampton, so everything leaves north from there on time.