Should trains be allowed to run early and should they be held for delayed trains which call at more stations?

[theking]

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/lumo-incident-at-peterborough-17-04.230537/page-4#post-5620655

If the LUMO was looped into P1 to allow the late running train behind it to overtake, why do it at Peterborough? LUMO not booked to stop, but LNER was. Seems unusual move from the signalling side of things.

Why hold it at all? it was 3 early with no stops let it run, why waste time of the passengers on the lumo and introduce risk of an incident like this happening by platforming it over points for a late train.

I imagine it was being held for 1Y16 which didn't depart until 27 when the lumo would have been clear of platform 3 at least 8 minutes before that.

Route control and the signallers love doing this, if a train is late why delay ontime trains.

 

[Starmill]

Why hold it at all? it was 3 early with no stops let it run, why waste time of the passengers on the lumo and introduce risk of an incident like this happening by platforming it over points for a late train.

Route control and the signallers love doing this, if a train is late why delay ontime trains.

Are you certain the booked route was actually available?

 

[Trainfan344]

Railways are very complex. If you let this run early, it risks getting to Kings Cross too early for its booked platform and has to wait. You could put it on another platform but then that complicates mattrers as more trains can't use their booked platform.

 

[theking]

Railways are very complex. If you let this run early, it risks getting to Kings Cross too early for its booked platform and has to wait. You could put it on another platform but then that complicates mattrers as more trains can't use their booked platform.

The LNER it was held for got to KX at 11:19, 27 minutes late the LUMO was booked to arrive KX at 11:16 so the lumo would have been forced to run late for a pointless regulating decision.

 

[TheBigD]

The LNER it was held for got to KX at 11:19, 27 minutes late the LUMO was booked to arrive KX at 11:16 so the lumo would have been forced to run late for a pointless regulating decision.

Looking at realtraintimes for next Sunday, the lumo service is booked to use platform 1 after the 1116 to Kings Lynn leaves platform 1 at 1112. Running Lumo early just means it will sit outside Kings Cross until its booked time.

Running trains early often causes issues.

 

[trebor79]

Railways are very complex. If you let this run early, it risks getting to Kings Cross too early for its booked platform and has to wait. You could put it on another platform but then that complicates mattrers as more trains can't use their booked platform.

The Lumo wasn't running early. The conjecture is that it was routed onto the slow to allow a late running service to overtake. Which does seem a bit daft when the Lumo is non stop stop to KGX and wouldn't cause any further delay to the service behind. You just end up with 2 late running trains.

 

[theking]

Looking at realtraintimes for next Sunday, the lumo service is booked to use platform 1 after the 1116 to Kings Lynn leaves platform 1 at 1112. Running Lumo early just means it will sit outside Kings Cross until its booked time.

The Lumo was running 3 early not 20 or something ridiculous like that even if it was slowed down to run in it's booked path why should it and it's passengers have their time wasted because a signaller wants to hold them and routes a train that's 22 minutes late infront.

What sense does it make to have a train running 22 late and then the lumo running at least 10 late behind that.

And now look what happened, an operational incident that didn't need to happen if it wasn't for pointless regulation by the signallers

Running trains early often causes issues.

Yet they dont have a problem signalling freight sometimes hours early.

 

[TheBigD]

The Lumo was running 3 early not 20 or something ridiculous like that even if it was slowed down to run in it's booked path why should it and it's passengers have their time wasted because a signaller wants to hold them and routes a train that's 27 minutes late infront.

What sense does it make to have a train running 27 late and then the lumo running at least 10 late behind that.

And now looked what happened, an operational incident that didn't need to happen if it wasn't for pointless regulation by the signallers



Yet they dont have a problem signalling freight sometimes hours early.

The Lumo was running 3 early not 20 or something ridiculous like that even if it was slowed down to run in it's booked path why should it and it's passengers have their time wasted because a signaller wants to hold them and routes a train that's 22 minutes late infront.

What sense does it make to have a train running 22 late and then the lumo running at least 10 late behind that.

And now looked what happened, an operational incident that didn't need to happen if it wasn't for pointless regulation by the signallers



Yet they dont have a problem signalling freight sometimes hours early.

The lumo was 3 early. It also has a further 7 minutes of pathing time between P'boro and London. It may or may not have been the signallers decision, or the Train Running Controller's decision, or even a TOC request for regulation. I don't know the reason but there will be one.

And if a freight is running hours early, that won't be the signallers decision, almost certainly a Train Running Controller's decision or a FOC request. Indeed we have specific instructions not to run freight early unless authorised.

 

[gazr]

The Lumo was running 3 early not 20 or something ridiculous like that even if it was slowed down to run in it's booked path why should it and it's passengers have their time wasted because a signaller wants to hold them and routes a train that's 22 minutes late infront.

What sense does it make to have a train running 22 late and then the lumo running at least 10 late behind that.

And now look what happened, an operational incident that didn't need to happen if it wasn't for pointless regulation by the signallers



Yet they dont have a problem signalling freight sometimes hours early.

What I don't understand, is if the train was being 'regulated' for the LNER to pass, which would have been several minutes, why route it through P1 where the main entrance is? Someone above mentioned it was set to go through to Fletton Jn and wait, but why not loop it more safely at Connington? (unless this loop is OOU?). End of the day, driver should be going a safe speed for whatever the signallers throw at them, I guess.

 

[TheBigD]

What I don't understand, is if the train was being 'regulated' for the LNER to pass, which would have been several minutes, why route it through P1 where the main entrance is? Someone above mentioned it was set to go through to Fletton Jn and wait, but why not loop it more safely at Connington? (unless this loop is OOU?). End of the day, driver should be going a safe speed for whatever the signallers throw at them, I guess.

Is Connington loop available for passenger use? Some loops are, some aren't.
I spent 5.5 years in tha late 1990's/early 2000s commuting P'boro to London and never once got the loop in the book.

 

[30907]

The LNER it was held for got to KX at 11:19, 27 minutes late the LUMO was booked to arrive KX at 11:16 so the lumo would have been forced to run late for a pointless regulating decision.

The LNER was +20 at the time a decision was taken, and could have been expected to have preceded 1P83 1015 ex Peterborough GN at St Neots and arrive KGX 1112 still +20, with the Lumo right time at 1116 because of its pathing time and 1P83 following.
So a logical regulating decision, minimising overall delay, though arguably it would have been better to turn the Lumo Slow line at Stoke.

 

[Falcon1200]

And if a freight is running hours early, that won't be the signallers decision, almost certainly a Train Running Controller's decision or a FOC request. Indeed we have specific instructions not to run freight early unless authorised.

I once authorised a freight to run exactly 60 minutes early on the basis that everything else on the route also ran hourly, so it would cause no delay; Only for the freight to run slowly and end up only 55 minutes early, thus delaying passenger trains. Those delays were of course attributed to me.

To answer the question in the OP, I would say trains should only run early if it can be guaranteed that they will thereby incur no delay to themselves or to any other train, which on most routes is impossible, both to assess at (usually) short notice, and to achieve.