A case of poor regulation?

Mugby · 20 Jul 2019

I got the 1430 XC HST service from Derby to Birmingham (and Penzance) this afternoon.

It was 10 mins late arriving at Derby and some faffing around in the platform meant it was 14 late departing. Both the 1437 to Cardiff and the 1442 to Crewe were held, side by side, on the Down Slows beyond the station to let it pass which was good to see. However, all signals from Stenson to Clay Mills were single yellows because a freight had been allowed of the Sheet Stores line ahead of it and needed to be put on the Down Loop at Clay Mills Jcn. (15mph crossover) This cost the HST another 6 minutes. Approaching Birmingham about 16/17 mins late it was announced that the stops at Cheltenham Spa and Bristol Parkway would be omitted and any pax wanting those points should get off at BHM and get the following service (from Manchester) This must have allowed the HST to recover some time because (according to RTT) it departed from Bristol TM only 4 mins late.

The freight from Stenson was a trainload of concrete sleepers and could easily have been held at the end of the branch - and most likely would have been if the HST had been closer to schedule.

My question is; was it a case of poor judgement by the EMCC at Derby to allow a freight which would have been moving slowly towards Clay Mills ahead of the HST? Also, are such matters down to a spontaneous decision or are any guidelines laid down for signallers?

It was of no consequence to me but I would have been annoyed if I'd been travelling to Cheltenham or BPW, perhaps in a reserved seat, to be told to get off at Birmingham and join what was probably an already crowded Voyager!

RailUK Forums

JN114 · 20 Jul 2019

Too many factors to establish whether it was actually poor regulation or just unfortunate for you and your fellow passengers. General rule of thumb is no amount of open data will ever enlighten the narrow view of someone affected by a regulation decision in the heat of the moment. There’s a huge picture in play and your train is only a tiny pixel on that image.

Signallers have guidelines to follow but they’re also allowed to make decisions; the objective being reducing overall delay. NR train running controllers and TOC service controllers/managers may well have had their two penneth as well - Indeed from overhearing half the conversation when XC contact our train running controllers in Western route control they’ll have plenty to say about what they want to happen. Thankfully they don’t always get their way...

At the end of the day there’s always a winner and loser out of a regulation decision. You won 2 of them:- vs the on time Cardiff and the on time Crewe (the former of which would have lost 10+ minutes waiting for you) - XC pulling the Cheltenham and Bristol Parkway stops isn’t a nice move; and anecdotally I don’t see it happen very often; but with tight pathing down into Cornwall it’s important the train hits Plymouth around the right time otherwise it likely won’t get further.

Parham Wood · 20 Jul 2019

So what happened to passengers wanting to get the train at Cheltenham and Bristol Parkway particularly if they wanted to go to Cornwall? How delayed were they as a result?

yorkie · 20 Jul 2019

Parham Wood said:
So what happened to passengers wanting to get the train at Cheltenham and Bristol Parkway particularly if they wanted to go to Cornwall? How delayed were they as a result?

Bristol Parkway passengers would probably have made it by taking the Weymouth and changing at BRI.

As for Cheltenham... the delay into Penzance would have been 54 mins.

Parham Wood · 20 Jul 2019

Thanks. Still not a good advert for rail though although probably better than driving today.

LAX54 · 21 Jul 2019

Looking at the bigger picture, the cause of the delay was, at Derby a toilet fault, then a unit failure of 144003/02 elsewhere which caused 173 mins delay and, 31 trains delayed as a result, so not just a Signaller regulating decision, (the freight was in fact right time Stenson, and 8 late passing Burton)

Tomnick · 21 Jul 2019

swills said:
(the freight was in fact right time Stenson, and 8 late passing Burton)

On that alone, it’d appear that the freight was run from Stenson with an adequate margin, so a good regulating move on a busy railway that just didn’t quite work out for some reason?

221129 · 21 Jul 2019

Parham Wood said:
Thanks. Still not a good advert for rail though although probably better than driving today.

The alternative would have been a cancellation along the route due to drivers hours. Hence the run fast. The train failed to call at Cheltenham, Bristol Parkway, Taunton and Tiverton.

dk1 · 21 Jul 2019

Parham Wood said:
Thanks. Still not a good advert for rail though although probably better than driving today.

Anything is better than driving where I am concerned. Rail every time.

Belperpete · 21 Jul 2019

If the freight had been held, that would have meant it would also be running off-path, causing conflicts and delays to other trains further along its journey. Whereas allowing it to run on time would only mean that an already-delayed HST might be delayed a bit more. I can see why a signaller might have made that call. I can also see why, if XC control were so desperate for the HST to make up time that they start cancelling important stops, that they might then have asked for the freight to be looped to allow the HST to pass. I am speculating of course. It is easy to criticise with the benefit of hindsight, but a signaller can only make decisions based on the information that he has at that time.

Incidentally, does the Derby area have Automatic Route Setting (ARS) yet? I know it was planned, but not sure if it has been implemented yet.

As an aside, it is easy to write off that freight as just a load of sleepers, but they may have been critical to a relaying project somewhere. If the freight were put off-path, and were then subsequently delayed every time it conflicted with a passenger service, it might never reach its destination (e.g. if the driver reached his hours). Rescheduling the relaying could not only cost a lot of money, but cause a lot of extra disruption to services.

Dren Ahmeti · 21 Jul 2019

Freight might look like an easy thing to regulate, yet sometimes it’s a higher priority than most passenger services!

Whether it’s to get materials to a T3 worksite with a short possession time, or time-constrained goods for a port, freights aren’t always the best to regulate, and most regulation policies dictate to keep them moving wherever possible - if you stop a long/heavy freight, you’ll never get them started again.

One big issue at the old Reading PSB that used to cause hundreds of delay minutes was when a stone train from Westbury way came up towards Didcot from the B&H, and *had* to have a clear run over Southcote, Oxford Road and Reading West junctions (crossing the DM+UM on the flat!), otherwise they’d never get started again on the pretty hefty gradient out of the Reading West Curve.

northernchris · 21 Jul 2019

JN114 said:
At the end of the day there’s always a winner and loser out of a regulation decision. You won 2 of them:- vs the on time Cardiff and the on time Crewe (the former of which would have lost 10+ minutes waiting for you) - XC pulling the Cheltenham and Bristol Parkway stops isn’t a nice move; and anecdotally I don’t see it happen very often; but with tight pathing down into Cornwall it’s important the train hits Plymouth around the right time otherwise it likely won’t get further.

Is there a guideline for how long services should be held for? Last week I was on the TPE stopper from Huddersfield to Leeds which was delayed at Dewsbury for a late running express which was at Huddersfield when the stopper should have left Dewsbury. This caused a 10 minute delay but was then let out 2 minutes ahead of the next express, which then caused that to arrive Leeds late, which in turn delayed the Northern service to York. Had the stopper been allowed out on time, it would have caused another 2-3 minute delay to the already late express but would have kept another 3 trains on time

Highlandspring · 21 Jul 2019

Regulating is something which people who've never had to do it think is really easy....

43055 · 21 Jul 2019

Mugby said:
I got the 1430 XC HST service from Derby to Birmingham (and Penzance) this afternoon.

It was 10 mins late arriving at Derby and some faffing around in the platform meant it was 14 late departing. Both the 1437 to Cardiff and the 1442 to Crewe were held, side by side, on the Down Slows beyond the station to let it pass which was good to see. However, all signals from Stenson to Clay Mills were single yellows because a freight had been allowed of the Sheet Stores line ahead of it and needed to be put on the Down Loop at Clay Mills Jcn. (15mph crossover) This cost the HST another 6 minutes. Approaching Birmingham about 16/17 mins late it was announced that the stops at Cheltenham Spa and Bristol Parkway would be omitted and any pax wanting those points should get off at BHM and get the following service (from Manchester) This must have allowed the HST to recover some time because (according to RTT) it departed from Bristol TM only 4 mins late.

The freight from Stenson was a trainload of concrete sleepers and could easily have been held at the end of the branch - and most likely would have been if the HST had been closer to schedule.

My question is; was it a case of poor judgement by the EMCC at Derby to allow a freight which would have been moving slowly towards Clay Mills ahead of the HST? Also, are such matters down to a spontaneous decision or are any guidelines laid down for signallers?

It was of no consequence to me but I would have been annoyed if I'd been travelling to Cheltenham or BPW, perhaps in a reserved seat, to be told to get off at Birmingham and join what was probably an already crowded Voyager!

Stenson and Derby are on different workstations at the EMCC. It may be a case that the train was not presented in time at the workstation?

Belperpete said:
Incidentally, does the Derby area have Automatic Route Setting (ARS) yet? I know it was planned, but not sure if it has been implemented yet.

I think it is implemented in some form or another. I've noticed on the reversing 170 services that the signal gets pulled off before the train has stopped.

northernchris said:
Is there a guideline for how long services should be held for? Last week I was on the TPE stopper from Huddersfield to Leeds which was delayed at Dewsbury for a late running express which was at Huddersfield when the stopper should have left Dewsbury. This caused a 10 minute delay but was then let out 2 minutes ahead of the next express, which then caused that to arrive Leeds late, which in turn delayed the Northern service to York. Had the stopper been allowed out on time, it would have caused another 2-3 minute delay to the already late express but would have kept another 3 trains on time

Ive been held for 10 mins on a Nottingham - Birmingham outside Derby for a late running Reading service. Generally the rule in this case at Derby is if the Plymouth/Reading service is due around the same time then they will go first and the 170 will follow.

Bikeman78 · 21 Jul 2019

221129 said:
The alternative would have been a cancellation along the route due to drivers hours. Hence the run fast. The train failed to call at Cheltenham, Bristol Parkway, Taunton and Tiverton.

The latter two are strange, given that the train was only four minutes late from Temple Meads.

headshot119 · 21 Jul 2019

Highlandspring said:
Regulating is something which people who've never had to do it think is really easy....

And something which people do can take immense satisfaction from when it goes well, but can really kick you when it all goes wrong despite best endeavors.

Tom Quinne · 21 Jul 2019

headshot119 said:
And something which people do can take immense satisfaction from when it goes well, but can really kick you when it all goes wrong despite best endeavors.

Sad I know but when a bit of a move goes right it does make you smile.

Tom Quinne · 21 Jul 2019

Highlandspring said:
Regulating is something which people who've never had to do it think is really easy....

I’m biting my tongue here lol

Highlandspring · 21 Jul 2019

Tom Quinne said:
Sad I know but when a bit of a move goes right it does make you smile.

Yes it's a good feeling when something turns out exactly as you'd hoped. Especially if several people beforehand have told you they wouldn't have tried it...

Tom Quinne · 21 Jul 2019

“Just let ARS do it” is a favourite, but I didn’t come into this job to watch a compute play Trains (badly) all day.

Surreytraveller · 21 Jul 2019

Generally, an on-time train will trump a late runner. The XC obviously had a recovery option if it got to Plymouth only 4 minutes late. If the XC had been given priority over the freight, then that recovery would have been over-kill, the freight would have been late as would umpteen trains that would have conflicted with it.
Its normally better in the bigger scheme of things to screw over a late runner so that nothing else gets affected, get the late runner really late then you have your excuse to run it fast and cut as many corners out as you can to get it back to schedule.

221129 · 21 Jul 2019

Surreytraveller said:
Generally, an on-time train will trump a late runner. The XC obviously had a recovery option if it got to Plymouth only 4 minutes late. If the XC had been given priority over the freight, then that recovery would have been over-kill, the freight would have been late as would umpteen trains that would have conflicted with it.
Its normally better in the bigger scheme of things to screw over a late runner so that nothing else gets affected, get the late runner really late then you have your excuse to run it fast and cut as many corners out as you can to get it back to schedule.

The recovery was removing 4 stops...

yorkie · 21 Jul 2019

Mugby said:
...My question is; was it a case of poor judgement by the EMCC at Derby to allow a freight which would have been moving slowly towards Clay Mills ahead of the HST? ...

It might have been, but to answer that you'd have to consider when the freight train would be allowed out, and if that would delay any other services. For example, this clearly was not good....

northernchris said:
Is there a guideline for how long services should be held for? Last week I was on the TPE stopper from Huddersfield to Leeds which was delayed at Dewsbury for a late running express which was at Huddersfield when the stopper should have left Dewsbury. This caused a 10 minute delay but was then let out 2 minutes ahead of the next express, which then caused that to arrive Leeds late, which in turn delayed the Northern service to York. Had the stopper been allowed out on time, it would have caused another 2-3 minute delay to the already late express but would have kept another 3 trains on time

... as they'd have been best off letting the slower train go first in that instance, due to the delays it caused later on.

Surreytraveller said:
Generally, an on-time train will trump a late runner.

This is not a policy I am keen on. Whatever causes the less overall delay should be the winner.

Surreytraveller said:
The XC obviously had a recovery option if it got to Plymouth only 4 minutes late. If the XC had been given priority over the freight, then that recovery would have been over-kill, the freight would have been late as would umpteen trains that would have conflicted with it.

Have you actually analysed this, or is this a guess?

Highlandspring said:
Regulating is something which people who've never had to do it think is really easy....

I don't think anyone is saying it is easy.

Also, any decisions that do turn out to be a poor may actually be due to policies in place, rather than the individual staff who carry out the actions, so it's not necessarily about blaming the individual.[/QUOTE]

Bikeman78 · 21 Jul 2019

Tom Quinne said:
“Just let ARS do it” is a favourite, but I didn’t come into this job to watch a compute play Trains (badly) all day.

ARS is a nightmare in Cardiff. It doesn't cope with disruption at all well. Is it any better elsewhere?

Surreytraveller · 21 Jul 2019

yorkie said:
This is not a policy I am keen on. Whatever causes the less overall delay should be the winner.

That is the general consensus. Keep the late runner out of the way of the right-timers, then kill it to get it back

yorkie said:
Have you actually analysed this, or is this a guess?

Best guess. I'm not familiar with the route. Quite often its better to delay a late runner a little bit more to get the recovery right. You have to manage any recovery according to train crew requirements and maintenance of the stock if you're going to displace that

Tom Quinne · 21 Jul 2019

Bikeman78 said:
ARS is a nightmare in Cardiff. It doesn't cope with disruption at all well. Is it any better elsewhere?

Depends on the situation, if the bobby is working the desk then it’s not a problem...

Highlandspring · 21 Jul 2019

Bikeman78 said:
ARS is a nightmare in Cardiff. It doesn't cope with disruption at all well. Is it any better elsewhere?

The Cardiff Main Line, Valleys and Vale of Glamorgan workstations are GETS MCS and the other workstations are WestCADs so they'll be using Hitachi's TREsa SARS (Signaller's Assistant Route Setting) rather than Resonate's ARS. The latter system is not too bad but the former makes some real howlers. Or at least it does in the locations where I'm familiar with its use.

edwin_m · 21 Jul 2019

Highlandspring said:
The Cardiff Main Line, Valleys and Vale of Glamorgan workstations are GETS MCS and the other workstations are WestCADs so they'll be using Hitachi's TREsa SARS (Signaller's Assistant Route Setting) rather than Resonate's ARS. The latter system is not too bad but the former makes some real howlers. Or at least it does in the locations where I'm familiar with its use.

Garbage In Garbage Out tends to apply to these systems. They are programmed to work only within various location-specfic rules and parameters that reflect the operators' understanding of what they wanted at time of programming. This may or may not have been correct at the time and may or may not have been updated to reflect later changes.

Full disclosure: I worked for a while on the support team for the BR Research ARS system that later passed to Resonate.

Tom Quinne · 21 Jul 2019

Highlandspring said:
The Cardiff Main Line, Valleys and Vale of Glamorgan workstations are GETS MCS and the other workstations are WestCADs so they'll be using Hitachi's TREsa SARS (Signaller's Assistant Route Setting) rather than Resonate's ARS. The latter system is not too bad but the former makes some real howlers. Or at least it does in the locations where I'm familiar with its use.

Resonates IECC Scaleable is the dogs bits in my experience, at least for the overall signaller experience compared to MCS - personally I cant stand WestCad.

ARS is okay for slow workstations, but for complex locations you end up using collars to inhibit it rather than for their intended function. I tend to switch out trains I need to carefully route, and forward set the route for ARS trains.

sheff1 · 21 Jul 2019

On the same route yesterday, the 0854 off Sheffield to Penzance was cancelled north of Derby. At Sheffield the large number of people seeking to travel on the train (many with luggage which suggested holiday destinations in Devon/Cornwall) were being advised to catch the 0900 St Pancras train and change at Derby where the Penzance train would be waiting. They were also told staff would be there at Derby to direct them to the correct train.

As the 0900 rolled into Derby at 0930, I just glimpsed the tail lamps of the Penzance train leaving. There may be good reason why the train could not be held but, in that case, why were people being told differently at Sheffield ? Also there was no obvious sign of any staff at Derby tasked with assisting the bemused arrivals from the north who were left looking bleakly at departure screens with no Penzance trains displayed.

A case of poor regulation?

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Forum Staff

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

On Moderation

Established Member

On Moderation

On Moderation

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

On Moderation

On Moderation

Established Member

Veteran Member

On Moderation

Established Member