Freight given priority over passengers?

[neilmc]

Travelling from Stockport to Bristol yesterday afternoon and passed a freight with a couple of 86s at the head waiting on the southbound line from Crewe on the approach to Stafford.

Our XC train was held at Stafford and we waited and waited ... until the 86s passed through, before we were allowed to cross over to the Birmingham line approx 8 minutes late. This was easily made up at Birmingham as it happened but this was new to me, a passenger train allowed to run late because of a freight being pathed ahead of it.

 

[Trainfan344]

Another incident of this was reported in the railway magazine this month, where a service from Ipswich to Lowestoft was cancelled so that the flask train to sizewell could get a path.

 

[Failed Unit]

It happens all the time not just with frieght but also with slower passenger trains. The amount of time on East Coast an late XC services is let out ahead of on-time east coast services stopping at Darlington, Durham, Newcastle and Alnmouth when the East Coast service is only stopping at Darlington, Newcastle and Berwick-on-Tweed. You are not even allowed to overtake it at Durham! Net result 15 minute delay to the East Coast service for no reason.

 

[barrykas]

Another incident of this was reported in the railway magazine this month, where a service from Ipswich to Lowestoft was cancelled so that the flask train to sizewell could get a path.

Not entirely unusual...A pair of trains on the Southminster branch were marked up as ThX (if memory serves) in the NRT to allow the Bradwell power station flask train to run in their path.

 

[Tomnick]

It's not all as simple as it sounds. There's often a lot more to a regulating decision than the two trains directly involved - there might, for example, have been another passenger train approaching on the Up Slow behind the freight. Everyone's got half an eye on the TDA system too, of course, which can result in a tendency to run everything in the booked order as far as possible, even if that means delaying a R/T passenger for a late-running freight, rather than risk picking up an O-coded delay. For what it's worth, I don't generally agree with that course of action - we see such freights coming onto our line three or four minutes in front of Class 1 passengers, which ultimately results in a greater delay to both trains (as someone eventually has to put the freight away!). On the other hand, sometimes it's best to keep a R/T freight running and further delay a late passenger to avoid completely stuffing the innocent freight.

There's definitely an art to regulation, and - especially with a lot of experience being lost from the grade - folk, myself included, don't always get it right.

 

[TheEdge]

Another incident of this was reported in the railway magazine this month, where a service from Ipswich to Lowestoft was cancelled so that the flask train to sizewell could get a path.

In my understanding flask trains are not meant to be stopped unless entirely necessary so I guess if it was a situation that would have had the flasks sat in Ipswich for a while then maybe there is a reasons.

All just my own personal guess though.

 

[Twoonthebuzzer]

The Bridgwater flasks often get regulated at Bristol T.M. on its way down in the early hours. Can be sat on the through road for upto an hour sometimes if running early.

 

[306024]

There's definitely an art to regulation, and - especially with a lot of experience being lost from the grade - folk, myself included, don't always get it right.

I was once sitting next to a signalman in Liverpool St IECC who found someone had allowed a freight to run up road from Harwich that would have to cross to the North London Line at Stratford around 18.30. This is impossible without causing delay to a number of trains, but to watch the skill he employed to minimise delay to all the surrounding trains was really impressive. Experience was everything, and I wonder what would have happened if ARS had been allowed to work unhindered.

The Felixstowe branch is one area where freight can take priority. In extreme, a backlog of freight caused, say, by an overnight problem on the WCML can cause a passenger cancellation on the branch later that afternoon.

A lot of work has been done to make freight running times more accurate, and I'm sure there is more to do. However sometimes bad planning (usually short notice stuff that hasn't had time to be properly validated) gives the signaller an impossible situation.

 

[The Planner]

A lot of work has been done to make freight running times more accurate, and I'm sure there is more to do. However sometimes bad planning (usually short notice stuff that hasn't had time to be properly validated) gives the signaller an impossible situation.

Bad planning destroys any work done to make times more accurate and there is a lot more work to be done, as mentioned. Don't get me started on STP freight....

 

[richw]

Having read this thread I was wondering if certain types of freight get priority? Dangerous goods etc, as cant be good for these to be waiting for long in some of the parts of the country.

 

[Tomnick]

Unless Control specifically request something (usually because there's a problem somewhere rather than anything to do with the nature of the goods), they're all treated the same as far as regulating is concerned.

As for STP freight paths - I'd certainly tend to agree that it leaves a lot to be desired sometimes! Examples from the last couple of weeks include an STP freight (cl 6) that was booked to be overtaken by a WTT intermodal, and one that was booked to go inside for a passenger then come out on a tight margin in front of another - the path was so unworkable that it managed to stuff the first passenger for about 10' and in the process destroy its own margin in front of the second!

 

[The Crab]

Many years ago on a Liverpool - Euston express, we were brought to a halt on the fast line out in the sticks. I stuck my head out of the window to see why we were being stopped and I remember being being outraged to see an 81 or 85 come up on the slow line and cross over to the fast in front of us. What was this train? A coal train of 16T mineral wagons! Bloody cheek!

Only time I saw an AC electric on such a train.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

It happens all the time not just with frieght but also with slower passenger trains. The amount of time on East Coast an late XC services is let out ahead of on-time east coast services stopping at Darlington, Durham, Newcastle and Alnmouth when the East Coast service is only stopping at Darlington, Newcastle and Berwick-on-Tweed. You are not even allowed to overtake it at Durham! Net result 15 minute delay to the East Coast service for no reason.

Yet at the same time late running EC services are allowed regularly to be put in front of on time TPE services causing Tpe to be delayed by 10-15 mins as a result. The knock on of this is TPE passengers miss their connections at Darlington for bishop auckland, Newcastle for Hexham and Morpeth, or Middlesbrough for Whitby and Hartlepool. Indeed I have been stopped at long lands junction on many occasions where the main line signal has been pulled off yet the EC which also due to stop at Northallerton has not yet reached Thirsk, some 7 miles behind. In that time we could have been in, dropped off and gone. Instead theres potentially 12 passengers on my train that end up missing the Whitby train.

Yesterday I was due to leave Newcastle 20:05. Hit the TRS button at 20:02. 20:04 late running XC pulls in, it leaves 20:07. TPE still awaiting departure. 20:09 late running EC rolls in we get the road, now 5min late. Routed bi di line past Tyne yard, 25mph. late running EC passes us on main line. Stopped at signal for north bound xc before getting main line at Birtley.

Net result, TPE now 13 late. Where is the fairness in that? To add insult, arrived Leeds the xc which initially held us up is sitting in the platform at Leeds awaiting train crew.

TPE could have easily been let out on time and routed slows Northallerton to Thirsk without incurring delay to other trains and kept TPE delay to minimal. Yet will anything be done to stop this from happening again? NO!!! Because delay attribution is a big money spinning merry go round for the train companies!!! Makes the end of year financial figures look far better than providing a great service every day!!!

I wonder what would have happened if ARS had been allowed to work unhindered.

Some signal boxes sadly have a reputation for being over-reliant on ARS. Not work fail know ARS can be a pain when services need regulating which is why some recent signalling schemes have deliberately not fitted ARS as human interaction has proven to regulate services better. Pompeii fratton is one recent job that springs to mind, however with the large regional control centres being introduced, no doubt ARS will be expanded.

 

[The Planner]

ARS has been switched on in Rugby and Stoke, Watford has got it too I think now. Most routes will have it fitted, the signaller can still switch it off though

 

[Cherry_Picker]

I can only speak from a drivers point of view, but I drive over ARS fitted routes and it is evident that the system struggles to adapt when a few trains get out of position or there is some very short term planning involved.

Auto Route Setting Equipment would be a better acronym at times if you know what I mean. I'm sure one day we will reach a point where the software is better at regulating than an experienced human who knows what he (or she) is doing but not yet. Being able to think three moves ahead and prevent problems for getting out of hand is a skill we don't seem to value any more, mostly because of the "computer says no" mentality where technology is always perceived to be superior.

 

[Tomnick]

Yet at the same time late running EC services are allowed regularly to be put in front of on time TPE services causing Tpe to be delayed by 10-15 mins as a result. The knock on of this is TPE passengers miss their connections at Darlington for bishop auckland, Newcastle for Hexham and Morpeth, or Middlesbrough for Whitby and Hartlepool. Indeed I have been stopped at long lands junction on many occasions where the main line signal has been pulled off yet the EC which also due to stop at Northallerton has not yet reached Thirsk, some 7 miles behind. In that time we could have been in, dropped off and gone. Instead theres potentially 12 passengers on my train that end up missing the Whitby train.

Yesterday I was due to leave Newcastle 20:05. Hit the TRS button at 20:02. 20:04 late running XC pulls in, it leaves 20:07. TPE still awaiting departure. 20:09 late running EC rolls in we get the road, now 5min late. Routed bi di line past Tyne yard, 25mph. late running EC passes us on main line. Stopped at signal for north bound xc before getting main line at Birtley.

Net result, TPE now 13 late. Where is the fairness in that? To add insult, arrived Leeds the xc which initially held us up is sitting in the platform at Leeds awaiting train crew.

TPE could have easily been let out on time and routed slows Northallerton to Thirsk without incurring delay to other trains and kept TPE delay to minimal. Yet will anything be done to stop this from happening again? NO!!! Because delay attribution is a big money spinning merry go round for the train companies!!! Makes the end of year financial figures look far better than providing a great service every day!!!

Sounds depressingly familiar. Just looked it up, and the delay went down (unsurprisingly) to being regulated for the two late trains. Incidentally the EC train picked up five minutes delay at Dunbar, no doubt waiting for the XC train to come out of the platform loop, then was delayed further by being stuck behind it (as it called at Berwick, Alnmouth and Durham in addition to the EC's stops). I'm sure the EC train could have been run ahead with only a couple of minutes extra delay to the XC train.

Part (most?) of the problem is that there's no real incentive to the Signalman to regulate things to minimise the overall delay (other than a bit of pride in doing a good job - but you generally get no thanks for it). In this case, all the delays were ultimately stuck onto the late-running XC train (itself delayed by something to do with vandalism), which is the usual story even if there was a margin (albeit a tight one) to run your train first, right time. One other example: late-running freight comes onto our line three minutes in front of a R/T passenger. The (heavy) freight's just getting away from a 10mph PSR around a tight curve, so by the time it gets into the first loop (which is a slow process anyway, as it has to be checked at three signals on the way in) and clear, the passenger's picked up a ten minute delay. The freight, in turn, is further delayed by a similar amount, whereas it could have been held (with nothing behind it!) for just four or five minutes to let the passenger run first (and keep right time). The delay to both trains went to the late-running freight (delayed at origin) - I really don't understand why FOCs (and TOCs) don't dispute delay minutes in these circumstances!

 

[The Planner]

There is no incentive for you as you know that you'll be O coded if you regulate and it doesn't quite work. Then I presume it is coffee and biscuits with the LOM or SSM if it happens too often.

 

[Tomnick]

I've never had a problem putting a late-running freight away for a following passenger, but equally I know that I'd have got away with it if I'd run the freight and stuffed the passenger in the process. O-codes only seem to start flying around (here at least) if an early-runner's involved!

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Out of curiosity, what is an O code?

 

[Tomnick]

Each delay incident is allocated a two-character code to broadly indicate what it's been allocated to: OB and OC codes are the ones that we fear the most, indicating wrong regulation or other signalling error (not exact wording!) respectively.

 

[GB]

They are part of a TDA code. The main ones as far as signallers are concerend (for the purpose of regualtions/times) is OB and OC. One means wrong regulation and the other signaller error.

I think a passenger drivers equivalent is TG.

 

[Tomnick]

TG is indeed (passenger?) Driver, TH is Guard.

 

[Sidious]

York gets it wrong regularly. I know that there is an issue with TPEx 185's running to a 100mph diagram when there is an XC or EC train running to a 125mph diagram behind them, but if a following train is already late, then why should the on time TPE suffer as a result?

I have sat for ~8-10 minutes on occasions late away from York awaiting a late EC or XC service.

At least the signaller could give the TPEx right away, and then loop it onto the slow at Thirsk, so the delay is minimised, but this would probably involve the late train running on double yellows behind it.

It used to happen with south facing trains out of York, which were held at red, and when the dispatch staff pressed the TRTS button, this would set the route and clear the signal without any signaller involvement. This was taken out when the fourth line was installed.

 

[Tomnick]

It used to happen with south facing trains out of York, which were held at red, and when the dispatch staff pressed the TRTS button, this would set the route and clear the signal without any signaller involvement. This was taken out when the fourth line was installed.

ARS? Still there (and not limited to Up trains leaving York!), and no doubt much of the regulating that you mention is down to ARS.

 

[Sidious]

ARS? Still there (and not limited to Up trains leaving York!), and no doubt much of the regulating that you mention is down to ARS.

If that's the case, there has been a marked improvement in not dispatching the wrong train first.

 

[Tomnick]

Not sure! It can, of course, be turned off or overridden by the Signalman, but that does rely on him spotting that it's about to do something daft. On the other hand, the ARS might have been re-educated!

 

[gimmea50anyday]

York gets it wrong regularly. I know that there is an issue with TPEx 185's running to a 100mph diagram when there is an XC or EC train running to a 125mph diagram behind them

I'm convinced the signallers still think our trains run at just 90mph. But we haven't use 158's for at least 5 years!!!!

Seriously tho the acceleration of a 185 is pretty impressive and will easily keep up with a 220 while leaving the heavier 221's for dust, especially once second gear kicks in and assuming it is running on all 3 engines? as for a hst? Well a 185 will run from York to Northallerton quicker than a hst can despite the hst's higher speed. Often a Newcastle bound TPE service is biting the heels of the preceding Inverness or Aberdeen services with drivers mentioning they are often running on double yellows until tollerton before the hst finally gets up to speed!