EMR Leicester missed connections

[peteb]

Just got off the 1802 St Pancras to Sheffield at Leicester, aiming for the 1918 towards Birmingham New Street, which has a 9 minute connection. We arrived at 1921 platform 2 due to a train stopped at Wellingborough and having to use the goods line from Sharnbrook.

As we arrived it looked like there could be a cross-platform connection, as the Birmingham train was on platform 1, obviously held up by our arrival.

Despite seeing several people dashing across the platform the EMR station staff gave the right away and the train left. Thus stranding Wigston, Narborough and Hinckley passengers for over an hour!

What's the booked connection time at Leicester, and should they have held the Birmingham train for a minute to allow passengers to board?

 

[rg177]

It looks like that train is due into Birmingham at 2015 and then only has seven minutes before forming the 2022 to Cambridge - so that may explain the keenness to keep it as close to time as possible.

Not that that's any consolation to those who missed it at Leicester!

 

[Andy Pacer]

What's the booked connection time at Leicester and should they have held the Birmingham train for a minute to allow passengers to board?

5 minutes connection time.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

@peteb. Likely you'll be able to make a valid 15-29 minute Delay Repay claim (from EMR) assuming that the 1950 departure from Leicester arrives into Birmingham New Street on time (if that's where you're actually headed). Might, however, be an hour's Delay Repay due for anyone heading to the smaller intermediate stations which are not served by the 1950 departure.

 

[peteb]

@peteb. Likely you'll be able to make a valid 15-29 minute Delay Repay claim (from EMR) assuming that the 1950 departure from Leicester arrives into Birmingham New Street on time (if that's where you're actually headed). Might, however, be an hour's Delay Repay due for anyone heading to the smaller intermediate stations which are not served by the 1950 departure.

Thanks for that advice!

5 minutes connection time.

Thanks Andy

It looks like that train is due into Birmingham at 2015 and then only has seven minutes before forming the 2022 to Cambridge - so that may explain the keenness to keep it as close to time as possible.

Not that that's any consolation to those who missed it at Leicester!

Ah ok. Caught the 1950 which ran more or less to time, with a great friendly train crew!

 

[Mugby]

EMR very often hold the Matlock train at Derby for connections off an incoming train from London but, of course, it's the same company and also letting the Matlock go would most likely delay a late running Sheffield train even more.
Not holding an XC service at Leicester is probably more a case of the 'Nothing to do with us, it's a different company' approach!

On a separate note, I often travel by EMR service from Leicester to Derby and I've noticed that timekeeping from London seems very poor, there are often late arrivals, not by a great deal, usually about 5-10 minutes but it is irritating and I often wonder why it's such a regular occurrence.

 

[Travelmonkey]

It's so frustrating to miss a tight connection I know I've missed a few EMR connections at Nottingham due to a late XC arrival,

 

[Llandudno]

EMR very often hold the Matlock train at Derby for connections off an incoming train from London but, of course, it's the same company and also letting the Matlock go would most likely delay a late running Sheffield train even more.
Not holding an XC service at Leicester is probably more a case of the 'Nothing to do with us, it's a different company' approach!

On a separate note, I often travel by EMR service from Leicester to Derby and I've noticed that timekeeping from London seems very poor, there are often late arrivals, not by a great deal, usually about 5-10 minutes but it is irritating and I often wonder why it's such a regular occurrence.

Not always, sometimes the Matlock is sent first and then held just prior to Duffield to let the ‘connecting’ express go past!

 

[peteb]

EMR very often hold the Matlock train at Derby for connections off an incoming train from London but, of course, it's the same company and also letting the Matlock go would most likely delay a late running Sheffield train even more.
Not holding an XC service at Leicester is probably more a case of the 'Nothing to do with us, it's a different company' approach!

On a separate note, I often travel by EMR service from Leicester to Derby and I've noticed that timekeeping from London seems very poor, there are often late arrivals, not by a great deal, usually about 5-10 minutes but it is irritating and I often wonder why it's such a regular occurrence.

Yesterday it seemed to be either a problem on the fast lines between Sharnbrook and Wellingborough, or a failed Corby bound train at Wellingborough which we overtook on the slow lines.

Several London bound services were delayed a little later which suggests maybe a track or signal issue south of Wellingborough.

 

[baz962]

Yesterday it seemed to be either a problem on the fast lines between Sharnbrook and Wellingborough, or a failed Corby bound train at Wellingborough which we overtook on the slow lines.

Several London bound services were delayed a little later which suggests maybe a track or signal issue south of Wellingborough.

Possible that the trains going North were late and then late back.

 

[peteb]

Possible that the trains going North were late and then late back.

True but two I saw leaving Leicester bound for London were more or less on time but from RTT lost 20 mins or so after Kettering.

 

[baz962]

Well I know that one train that was routed on the slow from sharnbrook got to Nottingham late and left a couple late and had a medical emergency and was held at Leicester and then was following a Thameslink near London. Not aware of any signalling issues yesterday , but you never know.

 

[DannyMich2018]

I used to work in Kettering and on Fridays used to use usually 18.26 to Leicester. This got here about 18.47 so half hour wait for 19.18 Birmingham service which on a weekday unusually used to leave from platform 4 (most stopping Birmingham service use 1) the other service doesn't connect at Leicester as it leaves just after the northbound service. Of course both Sheffield service run non stop south of Leicester so any slow running signal checks etc can affect performance.

 

[Mugby]

Today I went to get the 1150 EMR service from Derby to Sheffield, it was late, it rolled in from London at 1202. The Matlock train had departed from the adjacent platform at 1156. There wasn't another Matlock for two hours!

 

[Llandudno]

Today I went to get the 1150 EMR service from Derby to Sheffield, it was late, it rolled in from London at 1202. The Matlock train had departed from the adjacent platform at 1156. There wasn't another Matlock for two hours!

You couldn’t make this up! And to make matters worse both trains are operated by EMR!

The 2 hourly service to Matlock on Sundays until early afternoon is totally inadequate on a route carrying many passengers to/from the Peak District. Indeed there was a standing load at lunchtime on a Derby bound train from Matlock! (no football at Derby/Nottingham either!)

Mind you I don’t think TfW are much better on Friday 24 May, the 1932 Ex Shrewsbury (2031 ex Chester) was running about 10 minutes late into Llandudno Junction and the last train to Llandudno was sent out five minutes before the connecting Chester train arrived!

 

[RailWonderer]

Sloppy timekeeping is not new for EMR, I've been using them for years for trips to the Peak District and timings just slip. Sometimes just a few minutes sometimes nearly half an hour.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Today I went to get the 1150 EMR service from Derby to Sheffield, it was late, it rolled in from London at 1202. The Matlock train had departed from the adjacent platform at 1156. There wasn't another Matlock for two hours!

How long might it have been considered reasonable to hold yesterday's 1156 Derby -> Matlock departure?

The "connecting" train from London St. Pancras was due in at Derby at 1145 but indeed only arrived at 1202.

 

[Llandudno]

How long might it have been considered reasonable to hold yesterday's 1156 Derby -> Matlock departure?

The "connecting" train from London St. Pancras was due in at Derby at 1145 but indeed only arrived at 1202.

10 minutes would have been ample as usually cross-platform interchange…

There is usually a bit of recovery time at Matlock for the return trip.

 

[800001]

10 minutes would have been ample as usually cross-platform interchange…

There is usually a bit of recovery time at Matlock for the return trip.

If that was held for 10 minutes, is there any busy connection at Matlock that people who were already on the Matlock train could miss? (I’m not familiar with area)

All well and good delaying a train for people from London train, but what about people already on train.

Now obviously we wouldn’t need to hold trains if EMR services were punctual.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

If that was held for 10 minutes, is there any busy connection at Matlock that people who were already on the Matlock train could miss? (I’m not familiar with area)

After leaving the main line, the last seven miles into Matlock are essentially at the end of a single track branch line. The 1156 departure from Derby arrives Matlock at 1228 and then returns from Matlock at 1237 for Derby / Nottingham.

 

[800001]

After leaving the main line, the last seven miles into Matlock are essentially at the end of a single track branch line. The 1156 departure from Derby arrives Matlock at 1228 and then returns from Matlock at 1237 for Derby / Nottingham.

Sorry spelling mistake on my message, is there any bus connections at Matlock that people on the local train would connect in to? Ie would they miss it if train was held?

 

[Llandudno]

Sorry spelling mistake on my message, is there any bus connections at Matlock that people on the local train would connect in to? Ie would they miss it if train was held?

There is no attempt to coordinate train and bus connections at Matlock, or anywhere else in the Peak District for that matter, similar to public transport provision in Snowdonia.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Be fair to say that if the Derby -> Matlock train were to depart more than a few minutes late, if would likely also be delayed on its return working to Derby/Nottingham?

 

[1D54]

Does the above not apply to what often seems to me to be half the entire network, as maddening as it is i can't see anything changing no matter what plans may be in the pipeline from the incoming government, but that is for another thread.

 

[Andy Pacer]

Today I went to get the 1150 EMR service from Derby to Sheffield, it was late, it rolled in from London at 1202. The Matlock train had departed from the adjacent platform at 1156. There wasn't another Matlock for two hours!

I was under the impression the Matlock is usually held to allow the Sheffield to go ahead and not get stuck behind it at Duffield and Belper.

 

[geoffk]

Something for GBR (if that's what they're going to be called) - a policy on holding connections. Continental railways generally seem able to do it but trains often have longer waits at major stations.

 

[Llandudno]

I was under the impression the Matlock is usually held to allow the Sheffield to go ahead and not get stuck behind it at Duffield and Belper.

Remarkably the Matlock leaves Derby on time and often waits a few hundred metres north of Derby station to let the ‘connecting’ Sheffield bound train pass….

 

[Andy Pacer]

Remarkably the Matlock leaves Derby on time and often waits a few hundred metres north of Derby station to let the ‘connecting’ Sheffield bound train pass….

Thanks, I'd seen it happen many times but had it in my mind that the primary reason for holding in the station sometimes wasn't for customer connections.

 

[43066]

Sloppy timekeeping is not new for EMR, I've been using them for years for trips to the Peak District and timings just slip. Sometimes just a few minutes sometimes nearly half an hour.

Timings never “just slip”, there will always be a reason why, and a fair bit of analysis goes on behind the scenes to identify the causes and try and improve performance. EMR’s long distance services are subject to delay contagion from other operators due to the extremely capacity constrained nature of the MML from Thameslinks at the southern end and XC’s at the northern end. Then there are the usual speed restrictions and other operational issues.

Something for GBR (if that's what they're going to be called) - a policy on holding connections. Continental railways generally seem able to do it but trains often have longer waits at major stations.

This is often mentioned, but it isn’t clear that it’s an apples with apples comparison. Are those continental railways necessarily as intensively used as ours? As soon as you start giving unduly generous dwells to protect connections you increase journey times and reduce capacity.

There may be instances where it makes sense (possibly the Matlock one, to be fair), and indeed there are plenty of examples where trains are held for connections, but I doubt it would ever be sensible or practical as a general policy on the UK railway.

 

[Spartacus]

Timings never “just slip”, there will always be a reason why, and a fair bit of analysis goes on behind the scenes to identify the causes and try and improve performance. EMR’s long distance services are subject to delay contagion from other operators due to the extremely capacity constrained nature of the MML from Thameslinks at the southern end and XC’s at the northern end. Then there are the usual speed restrictions and other operational issues.

Exactly this, the Southern end of the MML is VERY congested with GTR services and EMR services using the same lines, and freight thrown in there too for good measure. It's a particular issue with the Thameslink Core, delays from the South Coast can cause issues in South Yorkshire or beyond

This is often mentioned, but it isn’t clear that it’s an apples with apples comparison. Are those continental railways necessarily as intensively used as ours? As soon as you start giving unduly generous dwells to protect connections you increase journey times and reduce capacity.

There may be instances where it makes sense (possibly the Matlock one, to be fair), and indeed there are plenty of examples where trains are held for connections, but I doubt it would ever be sensible or practical as a general policy on the UK railway.

There's quite specific regulation policies in places in areas of the MML, how late a train must be before another one should be given preference. In the Matlock case 17 minutes is plenty late enough. You start holding trains for ones miles away and you could be holding them for nothing if something happens with the train you're holding it for.

And what if that train was held for 10 minutes? If it only had 13 people on it then holding them all for 10 minutes each would be a total personal delay of greater than two hours. Not to mention any delays that might have occurred to any other services, like the oil train heading North.