Search results

If you're claiming both Traksy and RTT was affected, there may have been an issue with the open data feeds.

While it's stupid politics that NRs Priv does not allow this in the first place, I've never met a Guard/TM who would have refused to sell me a priv rate ticket for my 'online only' card. I'm sure there are the odd ones out there, but the general rail staff camaraderie does seem to be at play...

So tell us what should be part of an ESG remit? If you don't take all of those issues described by @The Planner (quoted) into account when making these decisions you'll end up with a timetable change that TOCs may not be ready for, a timetable with (potentially) major unknown performance risks...

You can talk about passenger demand all you want but you're gonna struggle getting a path over the Welwyn Viaduct on a weekday anywhere close to peak time...

It's not... There are works happening all the time all over the country, both proactive and reactive You're blaming the wrong people, biggest problem is £££, and guess where the £££ comes from?

No idea - hence my point. If TfW did offer advances for a service they planned to cancel due to agreement with NR, that's a whole seperate issue.

This probably comes down to the charter operator needing to confirm they'll use the path, and if they didn't tfw would run their service. Saves cancelling and then re-instating (and the arguments around which is best)

Yes the train is WTT. But today's service was cancelled with code: 'PD - Not planned to operate'. You see it with many services, both passenger and freight with, where it is pre-agreed that the service won't operate on that particular day. Why put a note in a printed timetable where the train...

The TfW train was never planned to run today. There was nothing to remove.

The services removed are part of the WTT, but were cancelled 'PD - not planned to operate' today. Can't say I'm familiar with how far in advance this is done but I'd imagine well in advance to not interfere with journey planners etc.

And access rights would have been agreed and sold with this in mind. This isn't NR pulling anything from under TfW's feet. 1712258509 The train wasn't cancelled, it didn't exist to begin with.

The specific usage of Class 9 headcodes is detailed in the Timetable Planning Rules for the relevant route as well.

Not always a convincing argument for those in the bean counter's office

Safety Digest only, so makes me think it's another COSS or Lookout driven incident.

Of course :D. I was just describing 'normal' working for ease of explanation

In this situation yes, but you can't have more than one train in the same block at any one time (whether that be under TCB, AB, or TB/RETB)

Could a 9F's driving wheels be modified to cope with current check rails? Failing that would the GCR ever run a 9F at speed with their facilities on a demo run?

The ORR quote this paragraph of the Railway Safety Regulations 1999: CDL is therefore defined as doors which are locked centrally (and cannot be operated locally, which is self explanatory imo). I can pull the emergency release on a 350 and shimmy the door open but that doesn't mean they...

LSL would be under no obligation to provide a loco / crew for thunderbirding duties. If a unit failed and could not be rectified by the driver/fitter then it could cause many issues depending on location. Would probably be worth Varamis paying for a Tightlock/Dellner barrier wagon to be stabled...

NRM posted on Social Media today that the Scotsman has been taken off public display 'due to the process of finding a new custodian'. Anyone have any insight as to who or why? One would imagine inspections need to take place if a new custodian takes her on.