are speed limits treated as targets

[Trains1]

are speed limits treated as targets. i was thinking earlier are train drivers taught to treat speed limits as targets as when I go on a train and use the GPS speedometer on my phone it pretty much always matches the line speed

thanks

 

[Starmill]

Target is probably not the right word. Train drivers are expected to rely on their knowledge to run their train as close to right time as possible, not simply drive as fast as they think is safe.

They should therefore avoid any excessive early running especially if using diesel traction. They should also look to recover any minutes where the infrastructure would allow this. Both are part of the mix of professional judgement.

 

[uww11x]

Each company has a driving policy. So no, not targets.

 

[BrummieBobby]

As an aside, are timetables amended to reflect known Infrastructure defects?

For example, are trains timetabled a greater amount of time to travel through sections containing permanent speed restrictions, equipment restricted via RT3187 etc?

 

[driver9000]

As an aside, are timetables amended to reflect known Infrastructure defects?

For example, are trains timetabled a greater amount of time to travel through sections containing permanent speed restrictions, equipment restricted via RT3187 etc?

Yes timetables can be built containing pathing and engineering allowances.

 

[43066]

are speed limits treated as targets. i was thinking earlier are train drivers taught to treat speed limits as targets as when I go on a train and use the GPS speedometer on my phone it pretty much always matches the line speed

thanks

They aren’t targets. More they’re generally considered the default speed to drive at, when there’s no reason not to.

Train drivers are expected to rely on their knowledge to run their train as close to right time as possible, not simply drive as fast as they think is safe.

I can sort see where you were going with this, but I’d actually say it’s the other way around. The main requirement is to drive at a speed that’s safe for the situation, which may or may not be line speed. Being on time, or not, will always be secondary to that.

They should therefore avoid any excessive early running especially if using diesel traction. They should also look to recover any minutes where the infrastructure would allow this.

I don’t recognise either of these points. It’s true that you’ll often recover minutes naturally just by driving to line speed due to pathing allowances etc., but you don’t ever set out to do this. If you brake late for a station because you’re running late, and slide through it, woe betide you.

 

[driver9000]

are speed limits treated as targets. i was thinking earlier are train drivers taught to treat speed limits as targets as when I go on a train and use the GPS speedometer on my phone it pretty much always matches the line speed

thanks

Trains are timed to run at certain speeds which is either their maximum speed or the line speed to maintain timings. Unless there's a reason not to (for example cautionary aspects, TSR or ESR) I will drive at line speed.

 

[Egg Centric]

I assume on "congested" line even if the train is running early it should still be run as fast as (legally, safely and smoothly) possible generally to "get out of the way" of other stuff? Am particularly thinking about freight on lines that alternate between dual line and passing loops?

IE if a DB Cargo train is booked to arrive in the Down Loop at Claypole at 15:50, it's 15:25, and it's just passed Grantham it isn't going to make friends and influence people by sauntering there at 30mph.

 

[Bletchleyite]

i have noticed that Northern vs Avanti West Coast

If you mean in terms of acceleration, that's less policy and more train performance as against what that train is designed to do. 390s are fairly slow off the mark because of their high top speed. 331s have a lower top speed but accelerate almost as quickly as a decent car.

It's not unusual to see a 350 vs 390 "race" (not really a race, staff are too professional for that, but the image of one) on the south WCML. The 350 gets away first, but then the 390 overtakes it a while later when the 350 has reached its top speed.

 

[Trains1]

I assume on "congested" line even if the train is running early it should still be run as fast as (legally, safely and smoothly) possible generally to "get out of the way" of other stuff? Am particularly thinking about freight on lines that alternate between dual line and passing loops?

IE if a DB Cargo train is booked to arrive in the Down Loop at Claypole at 15:50, it's 15:25, and it's just passed Grantham it isn't going to make friends and influence people by sauntering there at 30mph.

a bit of a side note can't imagine it being fun (for want of a better word) for a freight driver to be stuck behind a stopping passenger train

 

[The Planner]

Yes timetables can be built containing pathing and engineering allowances.

Pathing is to keep trains apart, engineering allowance for post engineering work TSRs, not long standing items. They are atfributed differently.

 

[Bald Rick]

are speed limits treated as targets. i was thinking earlier are train drivers taught to treat speed limits as targets as when I go on a train and use the GPS speedometer on my phone it pretty much always matches the line speed

thanks

evidently not from my train this morning. Our driver was consistently driving well under the limit, on green signals, and managed to lose a chunk of time and delay thousands of passengers (on our train and those behind) as a result.

Reported for investigation, obviously.

 

[43066]

I assume on "congested" line even if the train is running early it should still be run as fast as (legally, safely and smoothly) possible generally to "get out of the way" of other stuff? Am particularly thinking about freight on lines that alternate between dual line and passing loops?

Depends on the individual.

I favour (and teach!) your suggested approach and will drive at line speed where safe to do so. I have colleagues who will run at 100mph max on 125mph infrastructure, even when on greens, “because we will catch X up.”.

My answer is “Well you won’t always, X might be cancelled!”. It also isn’t much help for a driver following who is clipping along at line speed and encounters unnecessary restrictive aspects, nor for signallers who are trying to recover delay.

They will never be pulled up for doing this, but personally I prefer to drive to line speed to thread my train through the network, and then drive defensively as and when I encounter restrictive aspects.

evidently not from my train this morning. Our driver was consistently driving well under the limit, on green signals, and managed to lose a chunk of time and delay thousands of passnegers (on our train and thise behind) as a result.

Reported for investigation, obviously.

GTR do seem to be very, very cautious given the performance of their trains (from cab rides with them they do take power very gingerly, and I certainly seem to outbrake them when approaching stations).

Reporting “for investigation” (to whom?) isn’t likely to lead to anything being said to that driver, however.

 

[Bald Rick]

Reporting a driver for it (to whom?) isn’t likely to lead to anything being said to that driver, however.

Well that depends on who you know

But that is a valid point, how often are drivers picked up for minor time loss with no obvious reason? Not in a bad way, but spoken to in an encouraging manner to use the capabilities of the rolling stock, in a safe way.

GTR do seem to be very, very cautious given the performance of their trains.

To be fair, most TL drivers are superb, in my opinion. Especially the one who takes over half the trains through the core

 

[Tomnick]

I don’t recognise either of these points. It’s true that you’ll often recover minutes naturally just by driving to line speed due to pathing allowances etc., but you don’t ever set out to do this. If you brake late for a station because you’re running late, and slide through it, woe betide you.

I look at it the other way around.

If I'm running to time, I know there's places where I can coast for much longer distances, often well below linespeed, without being late at any intermediate timing point. Approaching Manchester (from either side, but especially from the east with generally falling gradients for miles after miles) is probably the best example, with a decent chunk of engineering allowance to play with. Might as well brake earlier and lighter too, for the same reason.

So, when I'm running late, I *am* driving differently. Not braking late, just braking *later* than I would if I had that extra time to play with. Normal braking instead of really relaxed braking. Although I'm not averse to pushing it a bit further if I'm confident that it's a good rail and good brakes (but still with a decent margin for error!). No pressure to do so, just enjoying the challenge somewhat, and keeping my skills sharp too.

I assume on "congested" line even if the train is running early it should still be run as fast as (legally, safely and smoothly) possible generally to "get out of the way" of other stuff? Am particularly thinking about freight on lines that alternate between dual line and passing loops?

IE if a DB Cargo train is booked to arrive in the Down Loop at Claypole at 15:50, it's 15:25, and it's just passed Grantham it isn't going to make friends and influence people by sauntering there at 30mph.

On passenger trains, or I guess freight trains that are a minute or two early but obviously in their booked path, not really. There's rarely any point in rushing. An ECS (or freight train) that's obviously been "given a run", well early and clearly ahead of booked path, absolutely, don't hang around because there's every chance that they've taken advantage of a relatively tight margin to keep you moving.

 

[bramling]

Depends on the individual.

I favour (and teach!) your suggested approach and will drive at line speed where safe to do so. I have colleagues who will run at 100mph max on 125mph infrastructure, even when on greens, “because we will catch X up.”.

My answer is “Well you won’t always, X might be cancelled!”. It also isn’t much help for a driver following who is clipping along at line speed and encounters unnecessary restrictive aspects, nor for signallers who are trying to recover delay.

They will never be pulled up for doing this, but personally I prefer to drive to line speed to thread my train through the network, and then drive defensively as and when I encounter restrictive aspects.

I think your view on this is best! I’m never convinced that trying to be “clever” with signals is particularly helpful, as it can lead to over-thinking things, and quite possibly not always getting the judgement right.

Much better to, as you say, just react to what’s being displayed and drive accordingly.

LU is terrible for this in terms of people doing all manner of things, often without a good understanding of how the signalling actually works in a given location. So you can have signal engineers put a lot of work into designing things in such a way as to meet the required level of capacity, and drivers then essentially driving a coach and horses through what has been carefully designed. The Piccadilly Line is now terrible for this.

 

[Starmill]

I don’t recognise either of these points. It’s true that you’ll often recover minutes naturally just by driving to line speed due to pathing allowances etc., but you don’t ever set out to do this. If you brake late for a station because you’re running late, and slide through it, woe betide you.

To be fair if you've only ever driven a passenger unit, like most drivers, there's probably never been any actual opportunity to run early, not while in regular commercial service anyway, so it's not all that important for standards. The only time I know it definitely came up was when there were lots of SRTs that couldn't be updated to reflect a meaningful distance of just-raised permitted speeds. But there are more occasions with locomotive-hauled sets that the timing load will be well out of whack to the actual set characteristics that show up on the day, so more occasions where wasted fuel would be measurable if consistent early running were observed.

An ECS (or freight train) that's obviously been "given a run", well early and clearly ahead of booked path, absolutely, don't hang around because there's every chance that they've taken advantage of a relatively tight margin to keep you moving.

There's often a good case to ask for a very early departure for a non-passenger service. It's probably better if that's actually communicated rather than left to best guesses about other movements but obviously practical reality is different.

 

[Egg Centric]

On passenger trains, or I guess freight trains that are a minute or two early but obviously in their booked path, not really. There's rarely any point in rushing. An ECS (or freight train) that's obviously been "given a run", well early and clearly ahead of booked path, absolutely, don't hang around because there's every chance that they've taken advantage of a relatively tight margin to keep you moving.

How do you know there's nothing late behind you? (This isn't a rhetorical question btw, even though it reads like one - I'm assuming there is actually a proper way of knowing rather than looking at traksy!)

 

[Starmill]

So, when I'm running late, I *am* driving differently. Not braking late, just braking *later* than I would if I had that extra time to play with. Normal braking instead of really relaxed braking. Although I'm not averse to pushing it a bit further if I'm confident that it's a good rail and good brakes (but still with a decent margin for error!). No pressure to do so, just enjoying the challenge somewhat, and keeping my skills sharp too.

I wonder if those in the old days who had to learn on the particulars of vacuum-breaked stock had little choice but to keep it "sharper" in this way.

 

[Egg Centric]

Especially the one who takes over half the trains through the core

You're naughty but I like you

 

[Lurcheroo]

I was taught in ‘school’ that speeds are “both a limit and a target” until you have a reason not to be targeting that speed (I.e restrictive aspects of low adhesion).

I’m my driver training I’ve been taught section times and where to coast when running on time so that you save fuel and still arrive at stations in good time and also then where to keep the power on and speed up when late and claw back a few minutes.

 

[43066]

Well that depends on who you know

It doesn’t matter if you know the King of England himself. I guarantee Thameslink won’t be telling their drivers to brake later for stations. They don’t need to add to their driver shortage by making more of them unproductive.

But that is a valid point, how often are drivers picked up for minor time loss with no obvious reason? Not in a bad way, but spoken to in an encouraging manner to use the capabilities of the rolling stock, in a safe way.

You might be asked “Why did you lose time here”, but “driving to conditions” will be the answer that goes in if you can’t remember. Most of the “official” reasons are disseminated via NR so, at least in my experience, I tend not to be asked.

One thing you’re not generally encouraged to do is lean on the brakes etc. I agree it can lead to some pretty windy driving, but that’s a product of how risk averse we are these days as an industry. Unfortunately the other side of that is people braking late, slipping through stations, or forgetting to stop entirely, which also happens with monotonous regularity.

I look at it the other way around.

If I'm running to time, I know there's places where I can coast for much longer distances, often well below linespeed, without being late at any intermediate timing point. Approaching Manchester (from either side, but especially from the east with generally falling gradients for miles after miles) is probably the best example, with a decent chunk of engineering allowance to play with. Might as well brake earlier and lighter too, for the same reason.

So, when I'm running late, I *am* driving differently. Not braking late, just braking *later* than I would if I had that extra time to play with. Normal braking instead of really relaxed braking. Although I'm not averse to pushing it a bit further if I'm confident that it's a good rail and good brakes (but still with a decent margin for error!). No pressure to do so, just enjoying the challenge somewhat, and keeping my skills sharp too.

Goes to show how we all have slightly different approaches. There are places I coast for a long way as part of normal route knowledge. I wouldn’t say my general approach is that different to yours, based on your description. I don’t drive below the PSR for long periods, though.

To be fair if you've only ever driven a passenger unit, like most drivers, there's probably never been any actual opportunity to run early, not while in regular commercial service anyway, so it's not all that important for standards. The only time I know it definitely came up was when there were lots of SRTs that couldn't be updated to reflect a meaningful distance of just-raised permitted speeds. But there are more occasions with locomotive-hauled sets that the timing load will be well out of whack to the actual set characteristics that show up on the day, so more occasions where wasted fuel would be measurable if consistent early running were observed.

Units and HSTs for me. Certainly no experience of loco hauled, other than (unofficially) on a heritage railway .

That said SRTs and “wasted fuel” figures don’t come up in my experience, certainly at the driver level. Perhaps they do at some of the smaller operators?

 

[Tomnick]

There's often a good case to ask for a very early departure for a non-passenger service. It's probably better if that's actually communicated rather than left to best guesses about other movements but obviously practical reality is different.

Not so much a train that's left origin early as a result of a conscious decision or specific request, but rather one that's been allowed to run early en-route on a more spontaneous basis. I used to try and keep freight moving as a signaller if I knew that I could get it at least to the next available regulating point.

How do you know there's nothing late behind you? (This isn't a rhetorical question btw, even though it reads like one - I'm assuming there is actually a proper way of knowing rather than looking at traksy!)

On reflection, this only really works in the context that I was thinking of when I wrote that, in our case where we're the fastest trains on the route approaching a major junction. A bit different in the Claypole example, where a RT freight booked into the loop could have a late-running express (that should've been well in front) rapidly bearing down behind.

Goes to show how we all have slightly different approaches. There are places I coast for a long way as part of normal route knowledge. I wouldn’t say my general approach is that different to yours, based on your description. I don’t drive below the PSR for long periods, though

Sounds like a very similar approach. I don't routinely drive below linespeed other than where it drops as a result of coasting. The only exception really is coming off the Pennines where there's often little point powering up to linespeed as the gradient will soon get you there anyway. We've one job where you stop at Chinley and then have so much time in hand that you can just trundle away up to about 30mph on half power, and then shut off and you'll hit the magic 70mph right at the bottom of the hill if you've judged it right, all without losing time.

(My absolute favourite remains the regular early morning ECS opportunity to coast for 31 miles, at speeds as low as 20mph in places, all the way from Edale to Eccles!)

 

[Sheridan]

That said SRTs and “wasted fuel” figures don’t come up in my experience, certainly at the driver level. Perhaps they do at some of the smaller operators?

I once got a look inside a DB cab (possibly a 66?) and I think there was a notice that said ‘Are you driving in accordance with the SPAD prevention and fuel saving rules?’ And below it also detailed the amount of fuel used in a certain power notch for a certain time versus a lower notch.

As you say, hard to imagine anything similar being relevant for passenger operators.

 

[Starmill]

That said SRTs and “wasted fuel” figures don’t come up in my experience, certainly at the driver level. Perhaps they do at some of the smaller operators?

It's probably only going to make a really big difference when it comes to bulk and containers. Half of your wagons could be missing their load completely, say, due to disruption the previous day or the ship hasn't arrived on time, but you're still setting off right time.

Not so much a train that's left origin early as a result of a conscious decision or specific request, but rather one that's been allowed to run early en-route on a more spontaneous basis. I used to try and keep freight moving as a signaller if I knew that I could get it at least to the next available regulating point.

Ah, yes of course. If you stopped the train to ask them to run early to x you'd lose the advantage of doing so I guess!

 

[43066]

Sounds like a very similar approach. I don't routinely drive below linespeed other than where it drops as a result of coasting. The only exception really is coming off the Pennines where there's often little point powering up to linespeed as the gradient will soon get you there anyway. We've one job where you stop at Chinley and then have so much time in hand that you can just trundle away up to about 30mph on half power, and then shut off and you'll hit the magic 70mph right at the bottom of the hill if you've judged it right, all without losing time.

Does the south end of Bradway tunnel towards Chesterfield count as coming off the Pennines? That always seems a long old drop. Generally take it to 80ish, then let it creep up towards 90 before braking back down.

(My absolute favourite remains the regular early morning ECS opportunity to coast for 31 miles, at speeds as low as 20mph in places, all the way from Edale to Eccles!)

That’s impressive. We can supposedly do Elstree all the way back in without taking power, which I can believe, albeit I don’t have the patience to try it, and generally hope to cover it as quickly as possible, as I’m almost home by that point!

It's probably only going to make a really big difference when it comes to bulk and containers. Half of your wagons could be missing their load completely, say, due to disruption the previous day or the ship hasn't arrived on time, but you're still setting off right time.

Thanks. That seems reasonable for freight, where I gather some of their trains run fairly close to the bone in terms of making a profit. Although, if the driver’s technique is what makes the difference, surely they’ve already tipped some way into the realms of unviability. Do they reward drivers for driving efficiently, for example? I’ve never heard of that happening.

That’s very much not the approach taken in the passenger sector, as you will already appreciate.

LU is terrible for this in terms of people doing all manner of things, often without a good understanding of how the signalling actually works in a given location. So you can have signal engineers put a lot of work into designing things in such a way as to meet the required level of capacity, and drivers then essentially driving a coach and horses through what has been carefully designed. The Piccadilly Line is now terrible for this.

That’s not good to read. There is no excuse for drivers not knowing how signalling works, is there?

Then again, on my rules course, I was told there’s no such thing as approach controlled signalling. The mind boggles!

 

[BrummieBobby]

Then again, on my rules course, I was told there’s no such thing as approach controlled signalling. The mind boggles!

I have heard drivers say this before now, to the extent that some have seemingly been surprised when they have visited the box and we have explained that certain signals are absolutely approach controlled.

 

[bramling]

I have heard drivers say this before now, to the extent that some have seemingly been surprised when they have visited the box and we have explained that certain signals are absolutely approach controlled.

I guess this is an example of where misinterpretation has become supposed fact. Probably started as “don’t ever anticipate a signal clearing”, then “drive on the basis that approach controlled signals don’t exist”, and eventually becoming “approach controlled signals don’t exist”.

The first of those three things doesn’t really equal the other two.

 

[Egg Centric]

(My absolute favourite remains the regular early morning ECS opportunity to coast for 31 miles, at speeds as low as 20mph in places, all the way from Edale to Eccles!)

This sounds beautiful, you lucky sod! While I am in no sense whatsoever a train driver playing on a simulator has changed my car driving to be far more into using gravity when in a car and it's not inconveniencing anyone else - both to speed up and to slow down. I have motor car equivalents of the same, but obviously not of anything like that kind of length. Whether I can "get away" with them very much depends on traffic though, I won't hold someone up for my fun.

Here is a brilliant example where. if I haven't anyone behind (or in front actually - there's some right bloody dawdlers on this hill sometimes as it "looks" like a 40 but is a national and perfectly safe at that) - heading downhill I can be leaving the 30mph limit, get up to about 50-55mph, and then decelerate back to the 30mph, by gravity and engine braking alone.

 

[baz962]

Personally I drive depending on the time within the diagram all other things considered. Some jobs have around 46 minutes to get to the first stop and other diagrams have 50 minutes. On the 50 minute ones I can drive at 100- 105 max and still be a minute early. If coming back , especially on the last trains I check and see if the train I'm normally behind is cancelled. Happened to me last week and knowing I was staying on the fast lines too I drove lines speed back and got into London around 12 early.