In the sense that given a clear run, they wouldn't need it? Maybe padding's the wrong word, but extra minutes added in to the schedule. Allowances might be a better word, as per cle's post above.Why is engineering time and pathing "padding"?
Not ‘half the speed’. Platform 9 and 10 are good for 95mph. Not 125 but not 65 either. The bigger drop will be to 85 at Swindon.
In theory, yes.Is there platform space for it to sit at Bristol Parkway for 6 minutes, if it runs 'early' and the allowances aren't used?
64 mins is pretty great, if it pans out that way!
That would be, I think, highly undesirable. The job of an engine driver is to run to time. As explained above, he would end up needlessly braking, incurring extra cost and pollution, and even if the 64 minutes were achievable, the onboard pax would get bored at Parkway while waiting time, thinking they were held up .Is there platform space for it to sit at Bristol Parkway for 6 minutes, if it runs 'early' and the allowances aren't used?
64 mins is pretty great, if it pans out that way!
The 68 minute schedules were still going until the late 1990s, in fact I think the 1700 from Paddington had such a schedule until the post Hatfield chaos. Interesting to note that the 1745 on your timetable took 1h54 to Cardiff. A few years ago I had a few 1h53 runs up the 0825 up from Cardiff. It usually departed Cardiff late but then got a clear run. It was also one of the few South Wales trains not booked to follow a train which stopped at Slough from Reading.The 1978 BR timetable has two up morning services non-stop Bristol Parkway to Paddington in 75 mins and 74 mins, and off-peak stopping at Reading only regularly 78 mins.
In the down direction, two services non-stop in 68 mins, off-peak with a Reading stop regularly 72 mins.
View attachment 67268
So better to run deliberately slower? Is that safe/advisable given other traffic? I'd think sitting in a station is better - plus negative PR for pax might balanced with the positive PR of an early arrival for those alighting at BPW.That would be, I think, highly undesirable. The job of an engine driver is to run to time. As explained above, he would end up needlessly braking, incurring extra cost and pollution, and even if the 64 minutes were achievable, the onboard pax would get bored at Parkway while waiting time, thinking they were held up .
You still have engineering time regardless. Allowance is the correct word!In the sense that given a clear run, they wouldn't need it? Maybe padding's the wrong word, but extra minutes added in to the schedule. Allowances might be a better word, as per cle's post above.