Headcodes

[MattRobinson]

Currently, the railway uses just two headcode classes for passenger trains: 1&2 (although there are some exceptions). With today's railway running predominantly passenger trains, is it more time to reallocate these classes?

It seems ridiculous that the likes of east coast and FTPE run under class one headcodes; and I believe that Northern expresses from Leeds to Sheffield also run as class one.

If classes for passenger traffic became 1,2&3, then expresses like East Coast and Virgin trains could run under class one; TPE and Northern semi-fast services could run under class two; and all stations stopping services could become class three.

At the moment, we seem to be working to a system inherited from the Railway Clearing House, devised when much more freight (and many more varieties of freight) were on our railways.

Thoughts?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Lewisham2221]

Currently, the railway uses just two headcode classes for passenger trains: 1&2 (although there are some exceptions). With today's railway running predominantly passenger trains, is it more time to reallocate these classes?

It seems ridiculous that the likes of east coast and FTPE run under class one headcodes; and I believe that Northern expresses from Leeds to Sheffield also run as class one.

If classes for passenger traffic became 1,2&3, then expresses like East Coast and Virgin trains could run under class one; TPE and Northern semi-fast services could run under class two; and all stations stopping services could become class three.

At the moment, we seem to be working to a system inherited from the Railway Clearing House, devised when much more freight (and many more varieties of freight) were on our railways.

Thoughts?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

I think I'd be inclined to agree, if for no other reason than it seeming incredibly odd for the EMT Crewe-Derby service to use a class 1 headcode. That said, I'd also be interested to know how much difference, from an operational point of view, it actually makes nowadays, especially for passenger traffic.

 

[Tomnick]

I really don't understand why the Derby - Crewe trains run as class 1s now - there's barely any class 2 traffic along the route, and then only briefly! Generally though, I don't think it makes so much difference - the booked path and stopping pattern are far more important when making regulating decisions, and the fact that plenty of trains run all-stations for a while (in the outer suburbs, for example) then run fast to the terminus means that you can't rely on the first character alone. The information conveyed by the combination of the four characters is far more useful!

As a measure of priority, the sequential numbering of the classes isn't always too useful. A Class 4 or even 6 freight can often run immediately in front of a stopping passenger without delaying it. We have some Class 4s booked to run as little as seven minutes ahead of the following Class 1 for twenty-odd miles to the next regulating point: despite the fact that the passenger can run at up to 90mph in places, and there's a six or seven minute AB section to get them both through, the fact that the passenger has two station stops means that it just about works out. Perhaps the slowest passengers would be better off running as 9s, with that in mind? Would certainly be easier than trying to shift them all around!

 

[87015]

We have to use class 1 if the train doesn't stop at a single station regardless of the general 'status' of said service. This came out of fail-to-call mitigation demands...

Class 9s seem ro be getting more common, just needs the TOC to decide how and when to use it - there are no special measures requried.

 

[heart-of-wessex]

This one gets me, on Sundays the Waterloo - Woking via Hounslow runs under 1Sxx!

http://www.opentraintimes.com/schedule/W95342/2013-03-10

Stops at every station in sight, in my eyes that's a Class 2

 

[Qwerty133]

We have to use class 1 if the train doesn't stop at a single station regardless of the general 'status' of said service. This came out of fail-to-call mitigation demands...

Class 9s seem ro be getting more common, just needs the TOC to decide how and when to use it - there are no special measures requried.

Matlock branch trains are class 2 and most don't stop at spondon.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think I'd be inclined to agree, if for no other reason than it seeming incredibly odd for the EMT Crewe-Derby service to use a class 1 headcode. That said, I'd also be interested to know how much difference, from an operational point of view, it actually makes nowadays, especially for passenger traffic.

How can a service ran by a dogbox be classed as 'express passenger' as i don't count 60mph as express

 

[Tomnick]

Dogboxes are 75mph, so not sure where you've pulled the figure of 60mph from. I'm guessing 87015 was referring to a specific station (with a history of fail to calls?) rather than any station that a service doesn't stop at. Both Matlock and Crewes should, in my opinion, be Class 2s - but not because of their 75mph top speed.

 

[87015]

Dogboxes are 75mph, so not sure where you've pulled the figure of 60mph from. I'm guessing 87015 was referring to a specific station (with a history of fail to calls?) rather than any station that a service doesn't stop at. Both Matlock and Crewes should, in my opinion, be Class 2s - but not because of their 75mph top speed.

Sorry, wasn't actually very clear - and not talking about EMT at all! - at another TOC, any service which skips any station - not specific one(s) - has to be coded as a class 1. Then when we use Class 9s for a diversionary route, there is no differential made between what which would usually be class 1 / class 2 if on booked route - All much of a nonsense!!

 

[Qwerty133]

Dogboxes are 75mph, so not sure where you've pulled the figure of 60mph from. I'm guessing 87015 was referring to a specific station (with a history of fail to calls?) rather than any station that a service doesn't stop at. Both Matlock and Crewes should, in my opinion, be Class 2s - but not because of their 75mph top speed.

The 60mph figure is what I have heard drivers say on a number occasions of what they often reach before not being to accelerate further.

 

[Tomnick]

Sorry, wasn't actually very clear - and not talking about EMT at all! - at another TOC, any service which skips any station - not specific one(s) - has to be coded as a class 1. Then when we use Class 9s for a diversionary route, there is no differential made between what which would usually be class 1 / class 2 if on booked route - All much of a nonsense!!

Ah, ok, thanks for clarifying! Sounds like a nonsense indeed. I've never heard of 9s being used for a diversionary route - ours (EMT and XC) seem to stick with their original headcodes as far as possible when the service is amended (including diversions), with 'Z' as a last resort!

Qwerty chap - 70mph is readily achievable between stations over most of the route - and I've confirmed that by asking a Driver directly, not by eavesdropping on others' conversations!

 

[Top Cat]

Another oddity is SWT's Waterloo - Dorking services which have 1Dxx headcodes.

 

[causton]

I was about to post an example of how FCC would be screwed with all the semi-fast KGX-PBO/CBG trains having 2xxx headcodes, but then noticed this is a 2xxx headcode and it isn't even a public train (and I never knew about it before!)]


http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/L01424/2013/03/08/advanced

 

[Bald Rick]

About every 5 years or so some bright spark fom HQ launches a project to reshape / reallocate reporting numbers. Then after about the third paper on the subject is written, the proposal reaches those who actually have to use the things in the signalbox, or write the timetable. And the realities of any proposed change get raised, and it gets a bit difficult. About a month later the project is quietly swept under the carpet.

Nevertheless, I think we will be having another go at this in the next year or so, to be implemented after the transition to traffic management technology in control centres.

 

[David Goddard]

I have often thought that the present system needs an overhaul, predominantly to provide more differentiation between the types of service operated on our network, and reduce the likelihood of duplication as the network continues to get more and more busy.

I do not suppose there is that much need to split other freights into so many categories, with the current five groups being far too many.
The recycling of 9 from unfitted freight to Eurostars is a good example of a sensible reform that has already been made, and it must be time to take this further.

I would think that a logical reform would be something like:

1 - Express Passenger- essentially anything operates as a fast service on its particular, predominantly at speeds above 90mph.
Would clearly include all HST, Voyager, Pendolino etc, plus the likes of Waterloo-Weymouth, Victoria-Brighton or Edinburgh-Falkirk-Glasgow.
2- Semi fast Passenger- Inter regional services under 90mph through key locations, outer suburbans from major cities or longer distance rural trains.
Liverpool-Norwich, London-Newbury or Birmingham-Pwllheli would fall into this group.
3- Stopping Passenger- Local or Inner Suburban services making regular stops at most stations.
These include Dorridge-Stourbridge, Waterloo-Shepperton or Ipswich-Felixstowe.
4- As current 3- Freight train which can run at more than 75 mph, parcels train, or empty coaching stock train if specially authorised
5- Empty Coaching Stock, unless authorised to carry code 4.
6- Freight train limited to 75mph
7- Freight train limited to 50mph
8- Any working with special conditions - as with present X character- ie Royal Train, Out of Gauge, also nuclear traffic.
Could also be used for the PPMs on the Stourbridge branch.
9- As now, Eurostar, and LO Cl378 workings.
0- As now, light engines

 

[Tomnick]

I think the current differentiation between the freight speeds works well - in particular, it's useful to have a 55 or 60mph freight under a different class to a 75mph one - and is far more useful than any attempt to differentiate between passenger classes. 1s and 2s tend to be more 'routine' (and often to a standard hourly pattern) anyway, so you quickly learn what goes where, what stops where and what order it should happen in! Why 'waste' a whole class (8) on something that 'X' works perfectly well for currently (and lose the information carried by the first character of such a train)?

 

[Harbon 1]

Having a freight limited to 50 will take up more paths, as some freights such as the Kingsbury tanks for instance have a max speed of 60 because of the loco, full and empty (most of the time). Limiting a service to a lower speed than it can run at on the limit of a class of train and the motive power seems a bit odd to me.

As for the Crewe - Derby line, I can understand why they run as class 1, as there is only one type of passenger service on that line, a stopper, it's only at Crewe and Derby that the classification seems odd, and with the line being semaphores pretty much all the way, it's not going to make that much difference, only a different number of bell rings.

 

[sd0733]

I was told by someone at EMT that the reason crewe-derby runs with class 1 headcode is due to right time arrivals at crewe, the signal protecting the level crossing at alsager stays at red for class 2 trains therefore meaning approaching the station at caution but for class 1 trains the barriers are lowered earlier and the signal clears to green therefore you can approach the station on green aspect.
May not be the case but that's what I was told.

 

[Tomnick]

Having a freight limited to 50 will take up more paths, as some freights such as the Kingsbury tanks for instance have a max speed of 60 because of the loco, full and empty (most of the time). Limiting a service to a lower speed than it can run at on the limit of a class of train and the motive power seems a bit odd to me.

It wouldn't (and doesn't) work like that - the train would still be able to run at 60mph, and would therefore fall under the proposed class 6 (as most freights would - not much runs as 7 or 8 nowadays). It's no different to a freight currently able to run at, say, 55mph, which would run as a class 6 even though it's not capable of 60mph.

As for the Crewe - Derby line, I can understand why they run as class 1, as there is only one type of passenger service on that line, a stopper, it's only at Crewe and Derby that the classification seems odd, and with the line being semaphores pretty much all the way, it's not going to make that much difference, only a different number of bell rings.

It's not the line itself, where there's very little regulating to be done, but rather at Derby, Stoke and (to a lesser extent) Crewe - these trains run on busy main lines, stopping at intermediate stations like Peartree (sometimes!) and Longport, so running as 2s would differentiate them from the faster long-distance stuff. It's worth noting that the only regular class 2 trains remaining at Derby now are the hourly Matlock trains!

I was told by someone at EMT that the reason crewe-derby runs with class 1 headcode is due to right time arrivals at crewe, the signal protecting the level crossing at alsager stays at red for class 2 trains therefore meaning approaching the station at caution but for class 1 trains the barriers are lowered earlier and the signal clears to green therefore you can approach the station on green aspect.
May not be the case but that's what I was told.

Sounds utterly ridiculous to me - I really can't understand why a class 1 train stopping at Alsager would be signalled any differently to a class 2 train doing the same. But yes, that's the only reason that I've heard for the change!

 

[NSEFAN]

Sounds utterly ridiculous to me - I really can't understand why a class 1 train stopping at Alsager would be signalled any differently to a class 2 train doing the same. But yes, that's the only reason that I've heard for the change!

Could it be something to do with the poor acceleration of a single 153 compared to a class 350 EMU?

 

[Tomnick]

But why should a stopping 153 running as a class 2 be signalled any differently to a stopping 153 running as a class 1? Either you keep the barriers raised (and signal at the end of the platform at Danger) until the train's in the platform, or you get them down in good time to give the train greens throughout - I still don't understand why the class of train should make any difference!

a different number of bell rings.

Just a point of pedantry that I forgot to mention earlier - the number of beats on the bell is the same for the 'is line clear' bell signal for both class 1 and class 2 trains (4 and 3-1 respectively) .

 

[NSEFAN]

Perhaps to remind the signaller that the train needs priority. Didn't a similar thing happen with some cross country services?

 

[Tomnick]

But there's no regulating involved here - it's entirely a question of when the barriers should be lowered and signals cleared, and (assuming consistent dwell times and no early running) I don't understand why one stopping train should be treated any differently to another!

 

[Harbon 1]

But there's no regulating involved here - it's entirely a question of when the barriers should be lowered and signals cleared, and (assuming consistent dwell times and no early running) I don't understand why one stopping train should be treated any differently to another!

An 'express' will be seen differently on different lines though. If there is only stopping pattern on a line, ie every station, then it should be classed as an express because there is no 'slower' train.

So, with a every stopping train being seen as the same as any other, should the Virgin services stopping at Tamworth and Litchfield be class 2?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Perhaps to remind the signaller that the train needs priority. Didn't a similar thing happen with some cross country services?

It did, when virgin ran XC, they were running as class 9

 

[Tomnick]

An 'express' will be seen differently on different lines though. If there is only stopping pattern on a line, ie every station, then it should be classed as an express because there is no 'slower' train.

But the Crewe train is the slowest passenger train along every part of its route - it doesn't matter what it's designated as along the North Staffs line (as it is, as you say, the only passenger service), but it's the chaps at Derby PSB and Stoke SCC, who have to regulate it around numerous fast trains (true class 1s) who might find the distinction useful!

So, with a every stopping train being seen as the same as any other, should the Virgin services stopping at Tamworth and Litchfield be class 2?

Who's so much as hinted at that? My comments about treating all stopping trains equally related solely to the operation of the.LC at Alsager, irrespective of the class of train.

 

[class303]

amazingly any Glasgow to Wemyss bay service that doesn't stop at stations like Hillington east and west etc runs under a 1Wxx headcode.

 

[455driver]

Class 1 and 2 can be used to differentiate different calling patterns/ routes-

To use a service quoted earlier-
1Dxx Waterloo to Dorking
2Dxx Waterloo to Guildford, both via Epsom and both identical calling patterns up to Leatherhead.

1Pxx fast train Waterloo to Portsmouth
2Pxx stopping train Waterloo to Portsmouth


Nobody is saying that a 1D is the same as a 1P or a 2D is the same as a 2P, its used to let the signalman know that there is a difference, the signalmans knowledge will tell him what the difference is, things are never, ever as black and white as some people would like but there is always a good reason why things are the way they are.

 

[Tomnick]

there is always a good reason why things are the way they are.

Inevitably correct - I'm still not sure why they were changed from 2Kxx to 1Kxx in this case though. The only reason I've come across so far doesn't seem a very good one to me!