Odd (and I think stupid) routing through Swindon station

[The Planner]

Is there no "sense checking" of the data coming into ARS from Train Planning by the signalling centre staff?

There will be some, but if ARS is fed with cack we will get the delay minutes and its "lessons learnt". It can be a right pain to set up too, the amount of extra TIPLOCs and detail required is more than many think, even worse when associations are required as you are dependent on the TOC providing spot on diagrams.

 

[GW43125]

Is there no "sense checking" of the data coming into ARS from Train Planning by the signalling centre staff?

There are so many schedules it's impossible to check then all.

Back in the day when signallers were allowed to use their own judgment, if they saw something odd and they wanted to change it, they would. Can't do that now with computers and ARS.

 

[Nippy]

Well you can if you want to, but I'm buggered if I'm checking the 600+ arrivals into Padd every day.
If I see something that could ge done better in time, I will. I will also email ops planning to suggest it as well for the future.

 

[MotorcycleAlan]

Maybe someone thought: I will give the guys on RailUKforums something to chew over for a few days on a quiet news day?

 

[LAX54]

Yes I was probably over reacting at the time and some suggestions in the thread now do appear plausible. However given the train was late into Bath (albeit by only 5 minutes ish) I still personally think if it was possible to run straight through it should have done, although some of the lateness may also have come from slowing down at Chippenham to allow a Swindon-bound Melksham branch train to clear off the junction.

The platforms appeared to have timetabled trains on their departure screens (though they were too far away from sight to make out specific services) so the lines being out of action I think is unlikely.

It looks like, from previous posts, that it was an ARS routing, now the Signalman could have taken it out of ARS and run it manually, BUT had there been any type of delay for whatever reason by the Signalman doing this, would have gone down as a Signaller delay, and end up on a Performance Improvement Plan, and a note on his file, so if its planned (even in error) to go via a seemingly odd route, thats the way it will go !

 

[MichaelAMW]

It looks like, from previous posts, that it was an ARS routing, now the Signalman could have taken it out of ARS and run it manually, BUT had there been any type of delay for whatever reason by the Signalman doing this, would have gone down as a Signaller delay, and end up on a Performance Improvement Plan, and a note on his file, so if its planned (even in error) to go via a seemingly odd route, thats the way it will go !

And where, I ask with a sense of frustration, does that leave the professionalism, experience and knowledge of the signaller, if s/he is essentially afraid to use a bit of initiative for fear of fingers being wagged?

 

[455driver]

And where, I ask with a sense of frustration, does that leave the professionalism, experience and knowledge of the signaller, if s/he is essentially afraid to use a bit of initiative for fear of fingers being wagged?

Blame O codes, the signallers are more peed off about them than we could ever be!

If its in the ARSe then its an ARSe problem and it will get coded as such, if the signaller intervenes then its the signallers fault even if it reduces overall delay, delay attribution is probably the worst thing that happened to the railway.

 

[Tomnick]

And where, I ask with a sense of frustration, does that leave the professionalism, experience and knowledge of the signaller, if s/he is essentially afraid to use a bit of initiative for fear of fingers being wagged?

As with any regulating decision, I don't think any Signalman would have fingers wagged at them if they could justify their decision! If it was a terrible decision and loads of delay resulted - well, isn't that a 'plan' is all about? Regulating decisions should be part of the job, after all.

On the other hand, if the workload was such that the Signalman had more important things to worry about than a relatively minor schedule error, then it was probably the right choice to let ARS do its thing. I think it's far more likely, though, that ARS went ahead and did its thing before anyone could stop it in this case (and, especially with flashing yellows - ? - across to the Up side at Swindon, trying to intervene afterwards would just make things worse).

 

[D1009]

As with any regulating decision, I don't think any Signalman would have fingers wagged at them if they could justify their decision! If it was a terrible decision and loads of delay resulted - well, isn't that a 'plan' is all about? Regulating decisions should be part of the job, after all.

On the other hand, if the workload was such that the Signalman had more important things to worry about than a relatively minor schedule error, then it was probably the right choice to let ARS do its thing. I think it's far more likely, though, that ARS went ahead and did its thing before anyone could stop it in this case (and, especially with flashing yellows - ? - across to the Up side at Swindon, trying to intervene afterwards would just make things worse).

As a former train planner, I'm with you! The other side of the argument is that train planners have to deal with far more schedules than signallers, and this has only relatively recently (as in 25 yrs ago) become a problem where ARS is involved. It looks as though someone in MK made a simple mistake, and although in this case it didn't cause any real delay, there is the potential for more serious problems as ARS enables ROCs to employ fewer signallers to be justified to keep the job going.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

It looks as though someone in MK made a simple mistake, and although in this case it didn't cause any real delay, there is the potential for more serious problems as ARS enables ROCs to employ fewer signallers to be justified to keep the job going.

I suspect in this case the mistake originated in the GW planning office and MK failed to identify it (not unreasonable given the vast quantity of weekend timetable rewrites currently taking place.) It does illustrate the problem with ARS though, everything has to be perfect and the smallest data issue can translate into a real delay.

 

[Deepgreen]

If this is traceable to a small error, has anyone actually reported the issue to the proper people? If so, is it to be corrected or is it too complex to dare touch? Do drivers and/or signallers feel it is worth their time to report these things?

 

[The Planner]

If someone reports it and it can be fixed there is no reason why it wouldn't be. If it delayed the train by enough to cause a TRUST incident (ie: 3 minutes or more) then it would be attributed to its root cause and wherever that lies should be investigated and rectified.

 

[Darbs]

It is not always possible to foresee and alter the decision that ARS will make for every train. It is sometimes a data error, sometimes we may be dealing with something on another part of the worktation. It may even be due to a line bloackage. So many reasons. I work the Swindon desk and I can say that you can't check every path for every train throughout the shift! We do report anomalies to the planners and we certainly don't do routing like that just for fun!

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Given the train was not planned to actually stop at Swindon, what would ARS do if the platform field was just blank, rather than showing a number?

 

[CheeseOnToast]

Suspect it depends on the individual ARS system and location but I know some places ARS will effectively kick the schedule out and the signaller will manually have to intervene and signal the train, especially where there are multiple routings possible. It's the same if it comes across an impossible routing between locations A and B in the schedule.

 

[GW43125]

Given the train was not planned to actually stop at Swindon, what would ARS do if the platform field was just blank, rather than showing a number?

this is based on my observations from simsig, so may be wrong, but I assume that the ARS schedule wouldn't validate in the first place and as such not route it.

 

[Darbs]

If there's no path in ARS it won't call any route!

 

[LordCreed]

Turns out the default route for trains through Swindon is the Up Main:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O82836/2017/03/22/advanced

This schedule had the platform allocation missed off when the VSTP schedule was created, and the train came to a stand with no platform alongside it...

 

[Nippy]

Except VSTP normally won't be in ARS. Let's just say this one has been split 50/50.....

 

[RailAleFan]

Hopefully not too off-topic for this thread but in the case of odd routings through stations or elsewhere for that matter, is it standard practice to send trains through loops or across ladders that are ordinarily not used just to keep the infrastructure moving and to avoid anything seizing up?

It would make sense as I found out the expensive way when my mains water stop-valve under the kitchen sink seized up and the plumber who replaced it advised me to give it a half turn and back every couple of months...

 

[Juniper Driver]

So my simple question is, why on earth might the signalman have decided to do this?

They've got it in for us?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Hopefully not too off-topic for this thread but in the case of odd routings through stations or elsewhere for that matter, is it standard practice to send trains through loops or across ladders that are ordinarily not used just to keep the infrastructure moving and to avoid anything seizing up?

It would make sense as I found out the expensive way when my mains water stop-valve under the kitchen sink seized up and the plumber who replaced it advised me to give it a half turn and back every couple of months...

I cannot speak for its practice, but moves from the Down Main (?) into platform 1, and from platform 1 onto the Down Main (again ?) are booked daily at Swindon I believe, though not on the same service.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Hopefully not too off-topic for this thread but in the case of odd routings through stations or elsewhere for that matter, is it standard practice to send trains through loops or across ladders that are ordinarily not used just to keep the infrastructure moving and to avoid anything seizing up?

It would make sense as I found out the expensive way when my mains water stop-valve under the kitchen sink seized up and the plumber who replaced it advised me to give it a half turn and back every couple of months...

I know of at least one example of where this is the case, yes. Will be achieved with non pssenger moves wherever possible.

 

[455driver]

Hopefully not too off-topic for this thread but in the case of odd routings through stations or elsewhere for that matter, is it standard practice to send trains through loops or across ladders that are ordinarily not used just to keep the infrastructure moving and to avoid anything seizing up?

Yes, normally this is integrated into the timetable so it wont delay the train.

It would make sense as I found out the expensive way when my mains water stop-valve under the kitchen sink seized up and the plumber who replaced it advised me to give it a half turn and back every couple of months...

Thats why I always turn any valves back half a turn instead of leaving them fully open (radiator valves etc), it helps prevent siezures.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

They've got it in for us?

As the late & great Kenneth Williams once said.

Infamy,Infamy they've all got it in for me. See what happens when you press SG button once too often!

 

[Juniper Driver]

As the late & great Kenneth Williams once said.

Infamy,Infamy they've all got it in for me. See what happens when you press SG button once too often!

Classic Kenneth.

 

[Darbs]

Ha ha! Yes you keep pressing that SG button! It's a shame the SMS message function from the box to the train is not available!

 

[Darbs]

They've got it in for us?

Only a few of you lol!!!

 

[reddragon]

A bit like sat-navs on cars, if you follow them blindly, you could end up in a muddy track, a river or on the tracks!

Roll on autonomous cars . . . life-jackets anyone?