London to Norwich - 90 min timings

Status
Not open for further replies.

86246

Member
Joined
18 Sep 2013
Messages
269
Interesting. 1P56 has been taken out of the way Diss is on the up platform.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Railperf

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2017
Messages
2,238
Emergency measures after a freight train let across on to the up at Haughley...
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,772
Location
East Midlands
Doesn't this prove that 'Norwich in 90', while an admirable enough ideal is simply unworkable with the high frequency of trains at the London-end?
Not a lot of leeway if other things are running late.
I have never been a proponent of Ni90. But then I am none of the following: a Politician, an Estate Agent, a Housing Developer or any part of the Norwich Business Community.
And no leeway at all, but that is pretty much the case on many parts of our 2-track main lines.
 

Railperf

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2017
Messages
2,238
Well they did manage to shunt 1P56 on to the up platform at Diss to avoid having to follow that - but that move has delayed that train by a further 7 or mins..and subsequently blocking 1P67 on the up...which has finally arrived in Diss - itself now 8 mins late.
Craziness!!! If i was a passenger on those other trains i would be pretty cheesed off by now!
 

hexagon789

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
10,722
Location
Glasgow
I have never been a proponent of Ni90. But then I am none of the following: a Politician, an Estate Agent, a Housing Developer or any part of the Norwich Business Community.
And no leeway at all, but that is pretty much the case on many parts of our 2-track main lines.

Very true, but in this case isn't it rather a vanity project? 90 min journey times can be advertised but not necessarily kept, at least not at a level similar to normal on time performance.

It'll be interesting to see how timekeeping is on these services in the long run and whether it is worse than other services.
 

JonathanH

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
6,175
1P69 2030 Norwich to Liverpool Street held at Trowse - people connecting to Great Yarmouth on 9P92 being directed to the front of the train to make the connection into the 2036 - presumably they will have to hold the Great Yarmouth train for 1P56 that we overtook at Diss anyway.

Norwich in 95, not 90 tonight is creditable given the delays to other trains but at a cost to many more people making other journeys.
 

Railperf

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2017
Messages
2,238
50% on time today for this one! But as i pointed out earlier - the Edinburgh to Kings Cross 4hr flyer has been 5 mins late every day for the last week and today! These rounded down numbers sound good for PR ..difficult to achieve in practice.
 

86246

Member
Joined
18 Sep 2013
Messages
269
Well they did manage to shunt 1P56 on to the up platform at Diss to avoid having to follow that - but that move has delayed that train by a further 7 or mins..and subsequently blocking 1P67 on the up...which has finally arrived in Diss - itself now 8 mins late.
Craziness!!! If i was a passenger on those other trains i would be pretty cheesed off by now!

Further delaying one train introducing a delay to another. Surely this is because it is the first day and they won't continue doing that sort of move ?
 

Railperf

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2017
Messages
2,238
Further delaying one train introducing a delay to another. Surely this is because it is the first day and they won't continue doing that sort of move ?
It was still late..so what was the point?
 
Joined
21 Nov 2010
Messages
196
Certainly big news across the East counties tonight with this story dominating the first 11 minutes of Look East.
 

Alfie1014

Member
Joined
27 Jun 2012
Messages
833
Location
Essex
Saw the 09:00 up from the 09:05 Clacton which now sits at Shenfield to let the Norwich overtake and then travelled down on the 11:00. No doubt a quick, record breaking run to Ips in 51.5 mins, but couldn’t help noticing how few normal passengers there were on it. How did the 17:00 and 19:00 load I wonder? Certainly lots of complaints on Twitter about the evening peak changes making other journeys worse and lack of comms about them. No new pocket timetables on display, though some were available at Liv St if you asked!
 

700007

Established Member
Joined
6 May 2017
Messages
1,146
Location
Near a bunch of sheds that aren't 66s.
Will be interesting to see how this keeps on and will look at monitoring the Right Time Railway site over the course of the coming months. I might try book myself a ticket on it as well at one point. The issue here isn't even the stock for the most of it, it is just trying to run too quick on congested and century old infrastructure that can't handle it. The closer you get to London, the more chances something can and will go wrong. However I will obviously continue supporting such a plan but appropriate measures should be taken to make sure it is sustainable to do Norwich in 90.

Re additional stops, would the long term plan be to implement an Ipswich stop like on the 1700 out of London Liverpool Street, or implement a Colchester stop instead?
 

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
9,209
Location
St Albans
Very true, but in this case isn't it rather a vanity project? 90 min journey times can be advertised but not necessarily kept, at least not at a level similar to normal on time performance.

It'll be interesting to see how timekeeping is on these services in the long run and whether it is worse than other services.
If it requires everybody on the railway to either get out of the way, rush around or stand by and wait, every weekday, GA will get a few fleas in their ears. The concept is not viable as a reliable service with the existing infrastructure, - even with better trains because (inconvenient as it may seem), there are thousands of other 'ordinary' passengers expecting to make their journeys without frequent delays to let the important train through. The railway is a public transport operation, not a stage for one signature express.
So now the fanfares have died down, this sop to Norwich politicians and other East Anglian mouthpieces can be operated as just another fast service. If the journeys of (say) 5000 passengers on outer suburban services are going to be regularly degraded for the benefit of 400 'ish Norwich travellers, GA's ppm will suffer and the delay repay claims will make a farce of the whole thing.
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
1,422
The railway is a public transport operation, not a stage for one signature express.
It can be both - but maybe not in this case.

Which reminds me: have they transferred the old "The East Anglian" name to these services or are they happy to risk them becoming known as the NINnies?
 

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
9,209
Location
St Albans
It can be both - but maybe not in this case.

Which reminds me: have they transferred the old "The East Anglian" name to these services or are they happy to risk them becoming known as the NINnies?
ninnies? mmm, - is that a Freudian slip?
 

dk1

Established Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
9,145
Location
East Anglia
It can be both - but maybe not in this case.

Which reminds me: have they transferred the old "The East Anglian" name to these services or are they happy to risk them becoming known as the NINnies?
No they haven't & the EA footnote at the timetable column Head has been dropped from the 0740/1700 too.
 

dk1

Established Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
9,145
Location
East Anglia
I would imagine catering will continue on the 0900/1100 fast services as the 0903/1130 being 321s cannot have catering & the booked staff would otherwise sit spare or assist on alternative trains either side.
 
Last edited:

hexagon789

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
10,722
Location
Glasgow
If it requires everybody on the railway to either get out of the way, rush around or stand by and wait, every weekday, GA will get a few fleas in their ears. The concept is not viable as a reliable service with the existing infrastructure, - even with better trains because (inconvenient as it may seem), there are thousands of other 'ordinary' passengers expecting to make their journeys without frequent delays to let the important train through. The railway is a public transport operation, not a stage for one signature express.
So now the fanfares have died down, this sop to Norwich politicians and other East Anglian mouthpieces can be operated as just another fast service. If the journeys of (say) 5000 passengers on outer suburban services are going to be regularly degraded for the benefit of 400 'ish Norwich travellers, GA's ppm will suffer and the delay repay claims will make a farce of the whole thing.

I think they would do better to either retain the limited stops but add in recovery margins or add in stops and recovery margins.

Does the "fast" service actually benefit any passengers other than potentially giving them a quicker journey.
 

30907

Established Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
10,278
Location
Airedale
If it requires everybody on the railway to either get out of the way, rush around or stand by and wait, every weekday, GA will get a few fleas in their ears.
So now the fanfares have died down, this sop to Norwich politicians and other East Anglian mouthpieces can be operated as just another fast service. If the journeys of (say) 5000 passengers on outer suburban services are going to be regularly degraded for the benefit of 400 'ish Norwich travellers, GA's ppm will suffer and the delay repay claims will make a farce of the whole thing.

To get the figures nearer reality:
1. a number of evening trains have had stops altered; the total number of trains and stops is the same, causing people to adjust their journeys by some minutes - whether it was well publicised I cannot say.
2. one train each way (net difference in the evening) has additional standing time of 3 minutes in a platform loop, giving an increased journey time for maybe 500 passengers.
3. yesterday evening a delayed (already +14) commuter train was looped at Colchester, and any passengers for Manningtree (only) were further delayed by
4 minutes. Perfectly good regulating for a non- stopping train IMO.
4. yesterday two (I suspect lightly loaded?) trains were delayed at Diss - not a good decision from my armchair perspective.

So those 5000 passengers are maybe
2-300 delayed, perhaps unnecessarily, by #4
10-20 by #3
680 (for argument's sake) delayed by the permanent changes.
leaving 4000 who are "regularly degraded" by having to travel a few minutes earlier or later.
 

Owen

On Moderation
Joined
30 Oct 2017
Messages
215
Location
Northern Ireland & East Anglia for University.
I think they would do better to either retain the limited stops but add in recovery margins or add in stops and recovery margins.

Does the "fast" service actually benefit any passengers other than potentially giving them a quicker journey.

Nobody wants anymore stops. The train already stops in a few places as it is.

Places on down the line such as Chelmsford and Colchester already have a few trains for hour, with 321 etc.

So why are you suggesting that the already lengthy Norwich service be extended by adding in yet more stops?

Do you realise that an equivalent ECML service is less than 1 hour 15 minutes? You are proposing a 2 hour+ service?

Norwich needs a fast service just like any other town in Britain. I’m not sure why you and others want to discriminate against it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top