Sheffield signalling query

[Dood75]

I am intrigued to know if anyone can clear up the following query concerning signalling in Sheffield Station:-

I have just left Sheffield on the 1C71 1600 Sheffield-London service departing from platform 5. 1V62 Edinburgh-Plymouth due 1556 off platform 6 arrived 4 late at bang on 1600 and by the time everyone got off and loaded back up, it departed approx 1604. During this time, 1C71 set off at a crawl to Sheffield 82 signal and was held until 1V62 had departed and we followed that out. My question is why would the on time 1600 departure I was on be held and delayed to then add to an already delayed service, thus causing 2 trains to be running late? Seems a tad odd to me

Cheers

 

[ALEMASTER]

Signalling works in mysterious ways.. assume the default logic is keeping trains in the right order to minimise impact further down the line.

 

[43055]

I am intrigued to know if anyone can clear up the following query concerning signalling in Sheffield Station:-

I have just left Sheffield on the 1C71 1600 Sheffield-London service departing from platform 5. 1V62 Edinburgh-Plymouth due 1556 off platform 6 arrived 4 late at bang on 1600 and by the time everyone got off and loaded back up, it departed approx 1604. During this time, 1C71 set off at a crawl to Sheffield 82 signal and was held until 1V62 had departed and we followed that out. My question is why would the on time 1600 departure I was on be held and delayed to then add to an already delayed service, thus causing 2 trains to be running late? Seems a tad odd to me

Cheers

I believe this is fairly common for EMR to be regulated for late running Cross Country services probably to give them as good as run possible to try and get them back to time at for getting across Birmingham. 1V62 did make it back to time in the Bristol area. If any later then this would of also affected the Cardiff service from Derby.

 

[class 9]

The ARS (automatic route setting) on Sheffield workstations at York ROC generally signal trains in timetable order.

 

[Dood75]

Many thanks to all for the replies..at least some reasoning to the situation now...

Cheers
Dood

 

[dangerousdids2]

Perhaps the use the same dispatch system as train sim world!

 

[johnnychips]

Also, the XC often doesn’t stop at Chesterfield while the EMR always does, so it makes sense to let the XC go first.

 

[trentvalley]

Would it not be best for the XC to over take the EMR at Chesterfield?

 

[JD2168]

I suppose as well the EMR service can catch up time for an on time arrival at St Pancras on the non stop section from Leicester. The Cross Country service does not stop at Chesterfield & can struggle to keep to time until Bristol.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Would it not be best for the XC to over take the EMR at Chesterfield?

Is that actually possible? (Not saying it isn't).

 

[midland1]

Would it not be best for the XC to over take the EMR at Chesterfield?

Could be done, but XC would have to cross to the up slow at Tapton Jn. then cross back at Clay Cross North Jn. could just end up delaying both trains more.

 

[YorksLad12]

I am intrigued to know if anyone can clear up the following query concerning signalling in Sheffield Station:-

I have just left Sheffield on the 1C71 1600 Sheffield-London service departing from platform 5. 1V62 Edinburgh-Plymouth due 1556 off platform 6 arrived 4 late at bang on 1600 and by the time everyone got off and loaded back up, it departed approx 1604. During this time, 1C71 set off at a crawl to Sheffield 82 signal and was held until 1V62 had departed and we followed that out. My question is why would the on time 1600 departure I was on be held and delayed to then add to an already delayed service, thus causing 2 trains to be running late? Seems a tad odd to me

Cheers

This happens at Leeds sometimes. A delayed xx11 XC to Sheffield via Wakefield will depart at the same time as an on-time xx15 LNER to London, also via Wakefield. The LNER set will then stop at the next signal (Leeds West End) until it's clear to follow the XC service. My guess was that LNER could claim that they left Leeds on time, for whatever monitoring reasons. They'd easily make up the time en route.

 

[Kneedown]

I suppose as well the EMR service can catch up time for an on time arrival at St Pancras on the non stop section from Leicester.

Unfortunately, if you're more than a few mins late by Harpenden, you'll be up the backside of a Thameslink until at least West Hampstead.

 

[LCC106]

I suppose letting the EMR service have a right time departure that then frees the platform for other services despite making the EMR late by Chesterfield.

 

[lineclear]

It's useful to have a train waiting at a signal out of the station, as it can move as soon as it gets the signal. If it waits in the station, once it gets the signal it has to go through the dispatch procedure, causing additional delay.

 

[GardenRail]

I am intrigued to know if anyone can clear up the following query concerning signalling in Sheffield Station:-

I have just left Sheffield on the 1C71 1600 Sheffield-London service departing from platform 5. 1V62 Edinburgh-Plymouth due 1556 off platform 6 arrived 4 late at bang on 1600 and by the time everyone got off and loaded back up, it departed approx 1604. During this time, 1C71 set off at a crawl to Sheffield 82 signal and was held until 1V62 had departed and we followed that out. My question is why would the on time 1600 departure I was on be held and delayed to then add to an already delayed service, thus causing 2 trains to be running late? Seems a tad odd to me

Cheers

You didn't get ran to S82. That's a GPL facing the station on the UP Main.

I presume you actually mean, you got ran out of 5, into B Tunnel S84. This is regular practice as Signallers give priority to to the Cross Country. It's a long standing Regulating Policy which Signallers don't get much of a say in.

Running them into B Tunnel also frees up platform 5 for another service from the North depending on the London's length.

This way of working has been standard in at least the 20 years I have signalled Sheffield.

Could be done, but XC would have to cross to the up slow at Tapton Jn. then cross back at Clay Cross North Jn. could just end up delaying both trains more.

Indeed. And it's approach control to make that move too, so could cause more delay....

Is that actually possible? (Not saying it isn't).

It's possible. Just not ideal.

The ARS (automatic route setting) on Sheffield workstations at York ROC generally signal trains in timetable order.

That's it's general principle. Though it's not clever enough to divert a train, like in this case, to B Tunnel. ARS (actually SARS in Sheffield) is programmed to signal trains into C Tunnel out of 5, anything other, is Signaller intervention.

 

[yorkie]

I am intrigued to know if anyone can clear up the following query concerning signalling in Sheffield Station:-

I have just left Sheffield on the 1C71 1600 Sheffield-London service departing from platform 5. 1V62 Edinburgh-Plymouth due 1556 off platform 6 arrived 4 late at bang on 1600 and by the time everyone got off and loaded back up, it departed approx 1604. During this time, 1C71 set off at a crawl to Sheffield 82 signal and was held until 1V62 had departed and we followed that out. My question is why would the on time 1600 departure I was on be held and delayed to then add to an already delayed service, thus causing 2 trains to be running late? Seems a tad odd to me

Cheers

If both trains call at Chesterfield, then on in my opinion either they should enable the connection to be made or simply let EMR out first.

If the XC does not call at Chesterfield, then holding EMR makes complete sense.

Unfortunately it can be the case that trains are rushed out of platforms bang on time, or even early, even if people are trying to make a connection, only for that train to be held at the next signal, or a signal not far along, and for the train to be held.

People who are fans of the UK way of doing things cam be very keen to defend this practice, but you won't see it happen somewhere that does a much better job than we do, e.g. Switzerland.

 

[GardenRail]

If both trains call at Chesterfield then on my opinion either they should enable the connection to be made or simply let EMR out first.

If the XC does not call at Chesterfield, then holding EMR makes complete sense.

Unfortunately it can be the case that trains are rushed out out platforms bang on time, or even early, even if people are trying to make a connection, only for that train to be held at the next signal, or a signal not far along, and for the train to be held.

People who are fans of the UK way of doing things cam be very keen to defend this practice, but you won't see it happen somewhere that does a much better job than we do, e.g. Switzerland.

We don't rush them out of the platform. It clears a platform. And it's a Regulation Policy agreed by the TOCs and NR that this is done by the Signallers.

 

[yorkie]

We don't rush them out of the platform. It clears a platform.

I'm not going to get into a debate on semantics

And it's a Regulation Policy agreed by the TOCs and NR that this is done by the Signallers.

Yes the policy in the UK is very different to that in places where public transport usage is much higher (such as where I am as I type this!); we will have to agree to disagree on who gets it right

 

[greatkingrat]

There isn't a valid connection at Sheffield between those two trains even if everything is on time so that's a bit of a red herring.

 

[yorkie]

There isn't a valid connection at Sheffield between those two trains even if everything is on time so that's a bit of a red herring.

In general there is a valid connection from the XC departures at xx56 onto the following EMR, or certainly traditionally was.

In typical UK style, it misses being a valid connection by just one minute in this hour, but the connection does exist an hour later. I've checked and both trains do call at Chesterfield in this particular hour, so in the case of this particular connection it doesn't matter (providing communication is effective).

But the point still stands at other times and/or at other locations.

 

[YorksLad12]

In general there is a valid connection from the XC departures at xx56 onto the following EMR, or certainly traditionally was.

In typical UK style, it misses being a valid connection by just one minute in this hour, but the connection does exist an hour later. I've checked and both trains do call at Chesterfield in this particular hour, so in the case of this particular connection it doesn't matter (providing communication is effective).

But the point still stands at other times and/or at other locations.

Is it not from the arrival time (xx54)? I've been on that service earlier in the day where a conductor-guard has apologised if we're running late and told passengers to wait for the next connection - I can't recall if they've ever said "stay on and change at Chesterfield" though, as I'd always be getting off at Sheffield.

 

[yorkie]

Is it not from the arrival time (xx54)? I've been on that service earlier in the day where a conductor-guard has apologised if we're running late and told passengers to wait for the next connection - I can't recall if they've ever said "stay on and change at Chesterfield" though, as I'd always be getting off at Sheffield.

It is indeed; the reason the connection doesn't work at Sheffield in that particular hour is because the EMR departs a minute earlier than the following hour; I've not checked all the other hours, but my advice to anyone making a journey such as Leeds to Leicester etc, would be to change at Chesterfield (if the XC calls; not all do).

 

[louis97]

This way of working has been standard in at least the 20 years I have signalled Sheffield.

It needs an update really, the service pattern on the Midland Mainline has changed. The trains departing on the hour from Sheffield have no scope to recover the time lost, with minimum allowances and minimum dwell times everywhere. In addition they have the ex Corby going immediately behind at Wellingborough.

In the OPs example the London train should have gone first without a doubt, I acknowledge that the regulation policy takes priority however! I have spotted a timetable clash at Wellingborough in the London train actually! Kind of ironic given this timetable has early stages of a project looking at issues in the Kettering area, one step at a time I guess!

 

[sheff1]

There isn't a valid connection at Sheffield between those two trains even if everything is on time so that's a bit of a red herring.

But there is a valid connection between them at both Chesterfield and Derby which will be made if the XC is given priority. I had always assumed that it was for this reason the usual procedure is as per the OP.

 

[43066]

In addition they have the ex Corby going immediately behind at Wellingborough.

A healthy Meridian can generally make up a few minutes between Leicester and London. The ex Corby is generally regulated behind the ex Sheffield, even if it’s several minutes late. If it gets too ridiculous the 360 will be allowed to proceed to Bedford and can be overtaken there.

Another issue at the moment, that doesn’t exactly help with making up time, is a longstanding 75mph TSR on the up fast at Sharnbrook junction.

 

[louis97]

A healthy Meridian can generally make up a few minutes between Leicester and London. The ex Corby is generally regulated behind the ex Sheffield, even if it’s several minutes late. If it gets too ridiculous the 360 will be allowed to proceed to Bedford and can be overtaken there.

Another issue at the moment, that doesn’t exactly help with making up time, is a longstanding 75mph TSR on the up fast at Sharnbrook junction.

I don't doubt any of that, I've experienced it myself on many occasions. However any potential delay imported onto the Midland Mainline that can be avoided is a good thing. Those few minutes that you can be recovered between Leicester and London should be used to recovery small primary delay, not reactionary delay imported from elsewhere.

 

[Dood75]

Thanks again to all the additional posts..certainly makes for interesting reading

 

[ANDYS]

Dood75

AFAIK the fact your service was an on time departure (even though you only got one signal) means only one service was late departing, the XC service. I assume the EMR service then just makes up the time as it heads south.

Andy S

 

[Killingworth]

I am intrigued to know if anyone can clear up the following query concerning signalling in Sheffield Station:-

I have just left Sheffield on the 1C71 1600 Sheffield-London service departing from platform 5. 1V62 Edinburgh-Plymouth due 1556 off platform 6 arrived 4 late at bang on 1600 and by the time everyone got off and loaded back up, it departed approx 1604. During this time, 1C71 set off at a crawl to Sheffield 82 signal and was held until 1V62 had departed and we followed that out. My question is why would the on time 1600 departure I was on be held and delayed to then add to an already delayed service, thus causing 2 trains to be running late? Seems a tad odd to me

Cheers

Frequently Northern's xx.14 services for Manchester leave Sheffield on time and are then held to wait for TPE'S xx11.