Are timetables over-padded to avoid Delay Repay?

[GoneSouth]

Of course it’s not just the railways. I fly Luton to Geneva, regularly. It’s a 500 mile flight, and I have once done it in an hour (Take off to touch down). Allowing 5 minutes either end for taxiing, why do easyJet say it takes 1h40 minimum?

(I’m not expecting a answer, I post this to help others think it through!)

And I guess the same thing is done by Nat Ex coaches who presumably time everything for a normal working day but in school holidays for example there’s a lot less traffic on the road in rush hour so coaches arrive at their destinations earlier. This used to result in up to 30 extra minutes to enjoy the beauty of underground Digbeth… now this should have been a world heritage site

Oh sorry, I am just a punter looking at the timetable wondering why it takes twice as long when the Moon is up.....

Well just take everyone’s word for it, it’s not designed just to **** you off

 

[Horizon22]

It would have to be very specific to ensure it avoids Delay Repay. Yes some engineering / performance allowances are perhaps greater than usual, although often times they are very useful when you get various conflicts and congestion if something is just a minute off.

I note that the original post that spurred this discussion was about a train that appears to have quite clearly run non-stop on route which would be why the train made up so much time, which is a normal part of service recovery. The intermediate stations would therefore be able to claim Delay Repay. The larger stations (with more passengers) thus get a more on-time train which overall reduces Delay Repay to the TOC. You might see that as some sort of 'conspiracy' but ultimately more Delay Repay claims for more people would represent worse performance which ultimately you want as few people as possible to experience.

 

[The Planner]

It cant do it in that time, but due to how the signalling is there, timing are often incorrect. The timing points on the up are at Henley and then at The Lakes so in-between doesn't give any timings. If you look at Traksy you will see the very long section. So the only correct timings are likely to be Henley and then Whythal/Whitlock's End

Nope, if you weren't stopping you don't time at The Lakes. Mandatory timing points on the up are Bearley Jn, Henley, the block signal before Wood End and Whitlocks End. You time at the stations if you are stopping.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If there's any significant amount that you distribute throughout the timetable you run a very big risk of it eliminating white space and the possibility of running other services, or they'd have to run late, etc etc etc. At the end is the safest place for big lumps as there's very little chance of any kind of knock on like that, but what performance time there is tends to be quite minimal, an Edinburgh - KX (and vice versa) will typically only have a total of 3 minutes, and that's usually distributed in 1 minute allowances in three totally different places anyway.

Which rather misses the point, or rather confirms that the point is to tick a box and avoid a fine/DR payment rather than to ensure robust connections.

If we look at Avanti from Glasgow to Euston, say, the connections at intermediates are what need to be robust - some of them can be quite short and infrequent. Arrival at Euston doesn't matter as much as most people are finishing there or connecting to very frequent buses or Tubes, while people who are continuing across London have itineraries with very loose connections indeed.

Thus if you were designing for journey robustness, you would pad intermediately on that route.

By constant a LNR to Euston from Northampton needs a bit at Bletchley and Watford for connections but not really at other intermediates because there aren't really any connections, most people will be walking, cycling or getting in their car.

All it needs is a bit of common sense and a willingness to do things for passenger benefit rather than ease of operations, something the railway often fails at.

 

[TheEdge]

Oh sorry, I am just a punter looking at the timetable wondering why it takes twice as long when the Moon is up.....

Its just easier to leave that sort of time in where regular engineering work is needed. Norwich - Diss on the GEML has the same on the last two trains. No connections to worry about so leave the time.

And as I said upthread in Europe pretty much all intercity services have a 2/3 minute dwell time at every station, to provide exactly the same result.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

It's all self regulating anyway, the TOC will want the least amount of padding to get best value out of the asset (the train and driver / train staff) but needs padding to be reliable. Take many years ago when GNER took over the east coast mainline they re-worked the timetable to get more services out of the 225 sets. Trains are extremely expensive to have standing around in stations waiting but on the flip side it's expensive to have services running late constantly.

 

[Spartacus]

Which rather misses the point, or rather confirms that the point is to tick a box and avoid a fine/DR payment rather than to ensure robust connections.

If we look at Avanti from Glasgow to Euston, say, the connections at intermediates are what need to be robust - some of them can be quite short and infrequent. Arrival at Euston doesn't matter as much as most people are finishing there or connecting to very frequent buses or Tubes, while people who are continuing across London have itineraries with very loose connections indeed.

Thus if you were designing for journey robustness, you would pad intermediately on that route.

By constant a LNR to Euston from Northampton needs a bit at Bletchley and Watford for connections but not really at other intermediates because there aren't really any connections, most people will be walking, cycling or getting in their car.

All it needs is a bit of common sense and a willingness to do things for passenger benefit rather than ease of operations, something the railway often fails at.

If you want to build in plenty of performance time in schedules en-route you're going to have to find a place to put those trains when they arrive at the station throats 5-10 minutes early, or stand them in the platforms, which are often heavily used, for similar times, which will then get more moans about padding for padding's sake, and people thinking something's wrong because they're waiting there for ages.

 

[zwk500]

If you want to build in plenty of performance time in schedules en-route you're going to have to find a place to put those trains when they arrive at the station throats 5-10 minutes early, or stand them in the platforms, which are often heavily used, for similar times, which will then get more moans about padding for padding's sake, and people thinking something's wrong because they're waiting there for ages.

And will also cause issues as they're timed to arrive at the junction at the normal running speed, and instead get checked down by restrictive aspects so that they take longer to pass through the junction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you want to build in plenty of performance time in schedules en-route you're going to have to find a place to put those trains when they arrive at the station throats 5-10 minutes early, or stand them in the platforms, which are often heavily used, for similar times, which will then get more moans about padding for padding's sake,

Go to Switzerland. Look. See. Copy.

That is all.

Yes, it's a whole operational concept and it requires the infrastructure to be sized to the service, or the service to be sized to the infrastructure.

and people thinking something's wrong because they're waiting there for ages.

People would have less of an issue if it was communicated well and they'd experienced quality bidirectional connections as a result.

 

[se1lad]

If timetables were over-padded, trains would be arriving early all over the place. When was the last time somebody can remember their train being more than 3 minutes early?

In March 2021, I was on the last train from Liverpool Line Street to London Euston - we arrived in Euston 19 minutes early. Helped by the lack of passengers (I was the only person in First Class), and the last pick up station being Nuneaton. The train manager mentioned that the train was over 30 minutes early the previous week - as it had originally been timed to route via Northampton, but was then able to use the direct routing.

 

[The Planner]

In March 2021, I was on the last train from Liverpool Line Street to London Euston - we arrived in Euston 19 minutes early. Helped by the lack of passengers (I was the only person in First Class), and the last pick up station being Nuneaton. The train manager mentioned that the train was over 30 minutes early the previous week - as it had originally been timed to route via Northampton, but was then able to use the direct routing.

That is done for engineering opportunities and saves having to alter it every week or late notice.

 

[zwk500]

In March 2021, I was on the last train from Liverpool Line Street to London Euston - we arrived in Euston 19 minutes early. Helped by the lack of passengers (I was the only person in First Class), and the last pick up station being Nuneaton. The train manager mentioned that the train was over 30 minutes early the previous week - as it had originally been timed to route via Northampton, but was then able to use the direct routing.

The two-track timetable on the WMCL is a different beast entirely to over-padding.

 

[Bald Rick]

Go to Switzerland. Look. See. Copy.

That is all.

That will need a lot more platforms…

 

[Bletchleyite]

That will need a lot more platforms…

That does depend on to what extent you do it and where you do it.

 

[zwk500]

Thus if you were designing for journey robustness, you would pad intermediately on that route.

It already is, tbf. Have a poke at the TPRs section 5.5 (I think) on the NR network to see where the allowances are

By constant a LNR to Euston from Northampton needs a bit at Bletchley and Watford for connections but not really at other intermediates because there aren't really any connections, most people will be walking, cycling or getting in their car.

I'd argue more people connect at MK than Bletchley from Northampton, but that's splitting hairs a bit.

All it needs is a bit of common sense and a willingness to do things for passenger benefit rather than ease of operations, something the railway often fails at.

Also needs a sack of cash, to make all the changes to stations and track necessary to get the journey times to line up as the Swiss do.

 

[nedchester]

I think a certain amount of 'extra' time is needed in a timetable to allow resilience for the whole timetable.

In a scenario where the route is very busy with 30 second dwells at lots of stations having no performance time is unwise. All it needs is a ramp needing to load a wheelchair (2 mins?) and the domino effect goes right down the line. Additionally, putting a couple of minutes into the advertised times also helps especially when it's a station where passengers may be connecting into other services. Not talking more than 2/3 minutes though.

There are also issues with the SRT's (Sectional Running Times) between various points and for different traction that are often inaccurate and need updating.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Also needs a sack of cash, to make all the changes to stations and track necessary to get the journey times to line up as the Swiss do.

Or you reduce frequencies to create that padding, and run longer trains. Before you say "but but but" the December 2022 timetable will, sensibly, reduce south WCML frequencies to the half hourly base they had 20 years ago, and I'm fully in support of it. Spare paths are a virtue, not something to go hunting for a 2-car DMU to cram into them.

 

[zwk500]

Or you reduce frequencies to create that padding, and run longer trains. Before you say "but but but" the December 2022 timetable will, sensibly, reduce south WCML frequencies to the half hourly base they had 20 years ago, and I'm fully in support of it. Spare paths are a virtue, not something to go hunting for a 2-car DMU to cram into them.

Oh no, I'm totally with you that running less frequent but longer trains is better.

 

[BJames]

If timetables were over-padded, trains would be arriving early all over the place. When was the last time somebody can remember their train being more than 3 minutes early?

I think the upthread responses proved this actually happens a lot more than people realise (but mainly I guess on intercity routes rather than local?) For example - I can't remember the last time my London Overground into Liverpool Street was more than 1 early really, but regularly arrive 7-10 minutes early on EMR Intercity into St Pancras (often when travelling later in the day, or on Sundays). On the other side though, I have previously seen some London Overground services between Bush Hill Park and Enfield town have a 4 minute difference in the GBTT and WTT before - and this journey takes just 3 minutes anyway - surely this is over-padding.

I have been on a few Sunday services on the MML that have stood at Luton Airport Parkway for 9 minutes after being timed over 35 minutes between London and Luton, and then stood again at Bedford for another 10ish minutes. Great for timekeeping - but usually these services run really well so we do end up with a lot of stand time, and taking well over 2 hours to do the journey between London and Nottingham. I do think these are over-padded.

I don't think any of this is to avoid DR etc etc but just my own experiences.

 

[Falcon1200]

I have been on a few Sunday services on the MML that have stood at Luton Airport Parkway for 9 minutes after being timed over 35 minutes between London and Luton, and then stood again at Bedford for another 10ish minutes. Great for timekeeping - but usually these services run really well so we do end up with a lot of stand time, and taking well over 2 hours to do the journey between London and Nottingham. I do think these are over-padded.

Might it be that these trains are timed to run via the Slow Lines to allow for engineering work on the Fasts, but if that does not happen they use the Fasts and therefore make up time ?

 

[BJames]

Might it be that these trains are timed to run via the Slow Lines to allow for engineering work on the Fasts, but if that does not happen they use the Fasts and therefore make up time ?

Ah maybe - usually when the schedules are altered and don't think there are any examples of this at the moment so I can't double check

 

[Annetts key]

One reason why some trains may have longer than expected timings on approach to stations, at stations, or on the approach to junctions, is to allow for other trains to use the junction(s) or wait for a platform to become free.

Also for a change of train crew, or restocking the trolley or buffet/shop.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

Oh no, I'm totally with you that running less frequent but longer trains is better.

I disagree with this. I think the vast majority of passengers prefer more trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I disagree with this. I think the vast majority of passengers prefer more trains.

I would say that until you get into metro type frequencies (4tph and better) where a cancellation is of limited consequence, people would prefer a reliable, punctual service overall.

 

[Mowgli]

It’s something I achieve on a regular basis.

Although maybe less regular now what with all the ESRs on the main line

 

[dk1]

Although maybe less regular now what with all the ESRs on the main line

Oh I don’t know, the Stadlers still keep me waiting time everywhere. Not too many on the GEML but several across the Brecks & Fens. Even with those & Ely on Sunday I still got back ahead of time

 

[43066]

I have been on a few Sunday services on the MML that have stood at Luton Airport Parkway for 9 minutes after being timed over 35 minutes between London and Luton, and then stood again at Bedford for another 10ish minutes. Great for timekeeping - but usually these services run really well so we do end up with a lot of stand time, and taking well over 2 hours to do the journey between London and Nottingham. I do think these are over-padded.

That’s because they’re timed to be on the slows due to engineering work. Occasionally the possessions don’t start on time/finish early so they can remain on the fasts, hence arriving very early.

Might it be that these trains are timed to run via the Slow Lines to allow for engineering work on the Fasts, but if that does not happen they use the Fasts and therefore make up time ?

(Sorry missed this )

 

[Peter Wilde]

Of course it’s not just the railways. I fly Luton to Geneva, regularly. It’s a 500 mile flight, and I have once done it in an hour (Take off to touch down). Allowing 5 minutes either end for taxiing, why do easyJet say it takes 1h40 minimum?

(I’m not expecting a answer, I post this to help others think it through!)

There are probable reasons why airline timetables might need more padding. Planes might have a strong headwind one day, a strong tailwind another. And there are variations in the routes planes might be ordered to follow on different days, to take account of weather or to avoid other traffic. There is much variation in takeoff queue lengths as well.

Good to invite people to think, though.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Oh sorry, I am just a punter looking at the timetable wondering why it takes twice as long when the Moon is up....

The late evening services are timed to the slowest combination, which is single line working- running "wrong road" has a much lower speed limit. The alternative is that when the single line is used trains will end up 20 late.

You see the same thing out of Euston on a Saturday night. Only 2/4 lines are used, so everything is timed for the slow lines; when the fasts are used, trains can be 5+ early by Watford.

 

[Jimini]

The late evening services are timed to the slowest combination, which is single line working- running "wrong road" has a much lower speed limit. The alternative is that when the single line is used trains will end up 20 late.

You see the same thing out of Euston on a Saturday night. Only 2/4 lines are used, so everything is timed for the slow lines; when the fasts are used, trains can be 5+ early by Watford.

Not just Saturdays; the last proper fast trains have to clear Hanslope Junction by 2200 (I think) during the week as well. Everything else behind that is all two track railway timings. Before the emergency timetable (not sure what the score is at the moment), the 2139 to Coventry was timed normally (about an hour), then the 2230 and 2330 take ~1h45m by comparison.