Hull Trains cancellations due to chronic shortage of available rolling stock

[A Challenge]

Thameslink services are now operating on the Great Northern side.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Why would u go to st Pancras for a gtr train to Peterborough???

For a Thameslink service through the new Canal Tunnels, surely?

 

[Haywain]

Why would u go to st Pancras for a gtr train to Peterborough???

Because that's where they go from...

 

[Hadders]

Because that's where they go from...

On Mondays to Fridays but not weekends...

 

[westv]

Second Monday in a row with no wifi on the morning service to London.

 

[Bungle965]

Second Monday in a row with no wifi on the morning service to London.

Be thankful you even have a train!
Sam

 

[Bungle965]

Oh good, people being shipped onto buses isn't just confined to weekend then.

7:27 London Kings Cross to Hull due 10:06 will be cancelled.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Additional Information
Hull, Brough & Doncaster Customers are advised to travel on the LNER 0730 service from London Kings Cross to Doncaster arrive 0910. Then transfer onto a bus at 0910 to Hull and Brough.
Howden & Selby Customers are advised to travel on the LNER 0730 service from London Kings Cross to Doncaster arrive 0910. Then transfer into taxis from Doncaster at 0910 to Howden and Selby.
Retford Customers are advised to travel on the LNER 0730 service from London Kings Cross to Newark arrive 0845. Then transfer into taxis at 0845 to Retford.
Grantham Customers are advised to travel on the LNER 0733 service from London Kings Cross to Grantham arrive 0840.

Sam

 

[rjchapma]

Be thankful you even have a train!
Sam

3rd day in a row that they have announced a full service, and at the last minute reality hits again and there are cancelled services. As a passenger it just looks incompetent. Whats thr cause of today's cancellations ?

 

[robbeech]

3rd day in a row that they have announced a full service, and at the last minute reality hits again and there are cancelled services. As a passenger it just looks incompetent. Whats thr cause of today's cancellations ?

They haven’t mended the trains.
It’s exactly the same as every day this has happened for the past 3 months I’m afraid.
They cannot bring themselves to admit it do rather than let customers know where they stand they keep selling tickets then cancel last minute. In many industries this behaviour would have been flagged and action would have been taken.

I know of a concert promoter that did a similar thing with rescheduling a gig that was cancelled knowing it couldn’t happen and cancelling again the day before / on the day. He did that 3 times. He ended up in prison. HT however will just get away with it.

 

[DaiGog]

But that one return trip would have had hundreds of passengers on it. It would have had a good amount more that delayed their journey from the 1033 or 1348 as they were also cancelled. It may have had a few other passengers from the 1709 that they started short or the 1912 that was cancelled but this is unlikely to be significant.
To then turn the last southbound (that wasn’t cancelled) round at Peterborough as it was running 70L and get people home 3 hours late just really grates on passengers. Given the suggestion above that the signal box closes after the Hull Trains service I find that difficult as there is a train from York that arrives in Bull after midnight.

The boxes don't close immediately after the last northbound HT service passes, but there is not much room for manouevre if it's late. Therefore there is a bigger tendency to 'cut and run' if there is risk of more than a minor delay to that service.

 

[DaiGog]

I love that this is somehow the best thing someoe looking exclusively to defend Hull Trains can actually think of to say.

As 'Polarbear' said above, it's not defence, just a statement of fact in response to an earlier comment / question.

 

[DaiGog]

3rd day in a row that they have announced a full service, and at the last minute reality hits again and there are cancelled services. As a passenger it just looks incompetent. Whats thr cause of today's cancellations ?

One unit short due to a fault, which has taken all weekend to bottom out.

 

[rjchapma]

One unit short due to a fault, which has taken all weekend to bottom out.

I thought they ran with 1 spare to cover for problems like that.? Todays diagram looks to be for 2 units only.

If one unit is in long term repair, then running a 2 train diagram would make sense, untill all units are working as it allows for unepexted faults to be quickly covered .

 

[Polarbear]

I thought they ran with 1 spare to cover for problems like that.? Todays diagram looks to be for 2 units only.

If one unit is in long term repair, then running a 2 train diagram would make sense, untill all units are working as it allows for unepexted faults to be quickly covered .

Normally, that's the case - three diagrams with one spare. Unfortunately, HT only have three units available at present, so if any of the remaining units are failed for any reason (and we're talking 180's here which are notably prone to it), then the service gets reduced.

This is probably why HT are having such a rough time of it. The full service can be operated with three trains, but only if they are all working. Reliability is, shall we say, poor, at the moment and each time one of the three fails, that's the full service down the pan.

The trouble is, what do you do? Do you attempt to operate a full service with three trains, in the hope that all three will work, or do you operate a two-train timetable, which may be a bit more robust, but potentially have a working train sitting idle. Seems to me that without the fourth train as a back up, HT are damned if they do, or damned if they don't.

 

[rjchapma]

The trouble is, what do you do? Do you attempt to operate a full service with three trains, in the hope that all three will work, or do you operate a two-train timetable, which may be a bit more robust, but potentially have a working train sitting idle. Seems to me that without the fourth train as a back up, HT are damned if they do, or damned if they don't.

It's my view that if properly a properly adjusted timetable was in place (that means cancelled trains are removed from all booking systems etc) then they'd be better off running a reliable service all be it reduced. I know however other's preference might be different to mine.

I know plans for a/some HSTs are being looked at, but it seems to be taking an age to get through all the appropriate hoops. The additional HST unit(s) would remove the dilemma you highlight.

 

[robbeech]

The boxes don't close immediately after the last northbound HT service passes, but there is not much room for manouevre if it's late. Therefore there is a bigger tendency to 'cut and run' if there is risk of more than a minor delay to that service.

There’s over an hour. It makes little sense in my opinion to turn it at Peterborough in this situation. Even if they had to terminate the north bound at Doncaster it would have got passengers on what was already the last south bound of the day to London and it would have got London passengers at least to Doncaster.
As it stood, everyone going south was turfed off at Peterborough, where they were further delayed by 90 minutes. And the train would have been almost empty on the way north as most passengers won’t have made it.
I cannot see any benefit to doing this.

 

[DaiGog]

Normally, that's the case - three diagrams with one spare. Unfortunately, HT only have three units available at present, so if any of the remaining units are failed for any reason (and we're talking 180's here which are notably prone to it), then the service gets reduced.

This is probably why HT are having such a rough time of it. The full service can be operated with three trains, but only if they are all working. Reliability is, shall we say, poor, at the moment and each time one of the three fails, that's the full service down the pan.

The trouble is, what do you do? Do you attempt to operate a full service with three trains, in the hope that all three will work, or do you operate a two-train timetable, which may be a bit more robust, but potentially have a working train sitting idle. Seems to me that without the fourth train as a back up, HT are damned if they do, or damned if they don't.

There are four 180s in the fleet, of which three are required to run a full service. The fourth is usually on planned maintenance exams, so other than a few days in each cycle (and only then when there is no unit on 'unplanned' maintenance), there is no spare unit so cancellations inevitably occur. The HST project is still underway, although with some hurdles yet to be cleared.

 

[DaiGog]

There’s over an hour. It makes little sense in my opinion to turn it at Peterborough in this situation. Even if they had to terminate the north bound at Doncaster it would have got passengers on what was already the last south bound of the day to London and it would have got London passengers at least to Doncaster.
As it stood, everyone going south was turfed off at Peterborough, where they were further delayed by 90 minutes. And the train would have been almost empty on the way north as most passengers won’t have made it.
I cannot see any benefit to doing this.

When the southbound (1709 ex Hull) arrives at KGX, the driver requires a break roughly equal to the time the unit is booked to stand at KGX before it returns north (I'm not sure of the exact duration required for their break). Therefore if the southbound is late, the northbound is also late unless two drivers can be rostered on - which does happen occasionally, but not as a rule. If the southbound is likely to encounter further delay between PBO and KGX (and likewise the northbound on its way back) then the case for turning it short is stronger.

Leaving a unit at Doncaster overnight off the last northbound doesn't help passengers either, especially when you shove them onto a bus at a time approaching midnight, having delayed them at KGX to begin with. Chances are that you then can't fuel the unit or clean it. Then there's the early services in the morning, one of which would likely have to start at Doncaster - assuming it has enough fuel for a return trip - which again doesn't help the passengers. Whatever they do, some passengers are going to be inconvenienced so they have to look at the bigger picture. Operationally, if you then add crewing into the equation, late finishes can mean inability to start the next day's shift at the booked time if things are tight, which could cause bigger problems depending on the situation (for example if the next day is a Friday, with heavy loadings and no ticket acceptance likely to be granted).

 

[robbeech]

But people on the southbound would be 70L instead of 180L
People northbound to Grantham, Retford and Doncaster might be 90L if you allow an extra 20 minutes for pathing due to late running. 90L wouldn’t necessarily be too late for the boxes but if it was they’d have all that time to organise buses for the remaining passengers. The 2030 isn’t usually that busy after Doncaster but can be full and standing from London to Retford/Doncaster. At least passengers for there will get a train, all be it 90L, rather than a train and a bus once again making them over 200L into Doncaster let alone Hull.

 

[robbeech]

So, it was discussed here that the train that had been off was reinstated and then failed with another MINOR unrelated fault. Yet 5 days and this minor fault doesn't seem to have been fixed? Are we sure its not just that they didn't fix the train last time?

 

[HullRailMan]

So, it was discussed here that the train that had been off was reinstated and then failed with another MINOR unrelated fault. Yet 5 days and this minor fault doesn't seem to have been fixed? Are we sure its not just that they didn't fix the train last time?

I guess it would be safe to say that is a MAJOR unrelated fault as it still won’t be in service tomorrow.

 

[robbeech]

I’ve openly offered to give £10 to charity for each day they run a full service starting this week up to Christmas if they give £10 for each day they don’t.
They didn’t respond.

 

[Whistler40145]

I wonder when was the last time Hull Trains 180s received overhauls?

 

[HullRailMan]

I’ve openly offered to give £10 to charity for each day they run a full service starting this week up to Christmas if they give £10 for each day they don’t.
They didn’t respond.

Why would they? Its a stupid thing to say.

 

[Polarbear]

I’ve openly offered to give £10 to charity for each day they run a full service starting this week up to Christmas if they give £10 for each day they don’t.
They didn’t respond.

I’m not surprised that they didn’t respond. It’s not as if the cancellations are being done deliberately, or out of malice.

 

[rjchapma]

Why would they? Its a stupid thing to say.

Im not so sure. If they had any degree of confidence in their service being back to normal as per announcements then they'd agree. Even if they did miss the target once a donation to charity would be no bad thing.

If they ignore the offer as they did it shows they have no confidence in themselves . If yhats the case why announce that things are expected to be back to normal tomorrow.

 

[rjchapma]

I’m not surprised that they didn’t respond. It’s not as if the cancellations are being done deliberately, or out of malice.

Thats not the point, why announce that they expect things to back to normal and 6 days later they have failed to meet the expectation they set

 

[robbeech]

Why would they? Its a stupid thing to say.

I’d suggest constantly saying ‘this service is scheduled to run as normal’ and ‘we plan to operate a full service tomorrow’ Every single day and then letting everyone down again is several orders of magnitude more stupid. I wasn’t expecting a response of any kind.

If they have a fault on Thursday and say it’ll be fixed for Friday and it isn’t then it’s disappointing. People can however accept that repairs can overrun and the extra day may be required and services should be up and running the following day (in this case Saturday) . But as we are now 5 days after and no sign of a return to full service people feel it’s incredibly rude, offensive and patronising to have even had the nerve to suggest that a full service would have been in operation Friday when it hasn’t been fixed the following Wednesday.

 

[HullRailMan]

I’d suggest constantly saying ‘this service is scheduled to run as normal’ and ‘we plan to operate a full service tomorrow’ Every single day and then letting everyone down again is several orders of magnitude more stupid. I wasn’t expecting a response of any kind.

If they have a fault on Thursday and say it’ll be fixed for Friday and it isn’t then it’s disappointing. People can however accept that repairs can overrun and the extra day may be required and services should be up and running the following day (in this case Saturday) . But as we are now 5 days after and no sign of a return to full service people feel it’s incredibly rude, offensive and patronising to have even had the nerve to suggest that a full service would have been in operation Friday when it hasn’t been fixed the following Wednesday.

Not sure that cancelling a train could be considered offensive in any way.
To me it’s a simple choice. Are HT unreliable at the moment? Yes. Do people have a choice of how to travel? Yes. If you don’t like the company or feel you can’t rely on the service, take your business elsewhere. Unlike a poorly performing franchise, they won’t get bailed out.

 

[robbeech]

People do have a choice when they purchase tickets in good faith. They don’t have as much of a choice when they’re let down day after day by the operator failing to provide an acceptable service.

And I think people are offended by the attitude of HT when they naively claim that the service will be back to normal the following day for several days in a row.