Speed of trains between stations

[southern442]

Wasn't really sure where to put this, although it is something less technical and more to do with passenger experience I suppose?

For me, the speed at which trains travel can have a big effect on my satisfaction with the journey being taken. One example would be the TfL Rail/GWR suburban services out of Paddington, that get up to quite a fast speed in between stops, notably Hayes to Southall, Ealing to Acton and other stretches that really aren't that far but still an impressive speed is reached. There are a few stretches of the London Underground that also achieve this too. Another example is the RER in the Paris suburbs. As well as ensuring journey times aren't too long, it really makes me feel like I'm getting there quicker even if that is not strictly the case.

Contrast this with the opposite, for example parts of the Southeastern and Southern suburban networks (SWR aren't too bad), the Subsurface Tube lines, and the worst offender which would be London Overground. The trains just seem to plod their way along at a very low coasting speed on many parts of the network, and it ends up with me hating certain journeys, for example not using the North London Line as much as I perhaps could.

Again, I don't really know what the best ways of discussing this or remedying the problem are, but does anyone else have a similar reaction to the journey they are taking based on how fast/slow the train seems to travel between stops?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

For me, I feel "psychologically better" if I have to be somewhere and my train is fast and getting me there rather than stopping all shacks or running under cautionary aspects. Makes the journey smoother and quicker

A good example of when I used to see friends in York. Much rather get a faster train than one that makes stops along the way. But going to work on a commuter train; oh gawd, it can drag on forever sometimes. But perhaps that's also a going to work "thing" rather than travelling for leisure

 

[MarkyT]

The worst thing psychologically is stopping for no obvious reason (to the normal passenger) in the middle of nowhere between stations, as at Tisbury for instance. That's why frequently used passing loops on single lines should ideally be at stations unless they can be dynamic and several miles long; a few minutes extra wait at a platform for a late runner in the opposite direction is hardly noticeable for the average punter, and if something then goes more catastrophically wrong and the late runner doesn't appear at all then detraining everyone is far more practical.

 

[Metal_gee_man]

You realise when you either see POV cab videos or Simulator runs how stupid and fickle some speed limits are, a 15 mph reduction on a straight piece of track through a station here, 20 mph less there or where the track curvature whilst not excessive might result in a 40 or 50 mph speed drop just to avoid extra wear on rolling stock or rails.
I accept points and junctions must be protected and busy movement areas must be safety first but there are some absolute crazy speed limits for what feels like the sake of it!
I guess some limits are for the sake of network rail and some for safety

 

[CW2]

Speed restrictions through stations (and other locations) are something of a dark art. There is always a good reason somewhere why a particular speed limit has been applied. Sometimes it isn't immediately apparent, for example it may be linked to the time the driver takes to sight a particular signal on a curved section of track. Concentrating on achieving the highest line speed for non-stop services can have the perverse effect of totally bunging up the location for all stopping services. For example, if the main through speed is 50 mph and the diverging speed is 20 mph, any diverging train will be brought almost to a stand by signals, because of the "approach control" rules. However, if you can get the speeds of main route and diverging route to within 10 mph (e.g. main 40 mph, diverging 30 mph) then no approach control is necessary. Thus dropping the non-stop speed by 10 mph (and raising the diverging speed by 10 mph) results in a much better flowing junction.

 

[ComUtoR]

Again, I don't really know what the best ways of discussing this or remedying the problem.

I think it comes down to perception Vs reality. How 'fast' is fast and how 'slow' is slow ?

On the Tube you aren't going that far between stops but the acceleration is pretty quick. Whereas on National rail you get stations a few miles apart so you have plenty of time to reach a decent speed. However, acceleration is much slower. I don't know much about the Tube but how 'fast' are they actually going between stops; especially in central London ?

You mention Southeastern and Southern. Do you have any specific examples ? I know for a fact that even on their Metro services, many get to 60mph between stations.

The maximum speed the train can achieve is limited by linespeed. To remedy that would entail years and years of infrastructure improvements. The Planners, PWay, and Signalling and Track experts on the forum will no doubt tell you how complicated and extensive it is to increase line speeds.

 

[AM9]

I think it comes down to perception Vs reality. How 'fast' is fast and how 'slow' is slow ?

On the Tube you aren't going that far between stops but the acceleration is pretty quick. Whereas on National rail you get stations a few miles apart so you have plenty of time to reach a decent speed. However, acceleration is much slower. I don't know much about the Tube but how 'fast' are they actually going between stops; especially in central London ?

You mention Southeastern and Southern. Do you have any specific examples ? I know for a fact that even on their Metro services, many get to 60mph between stations.

The maximum speed the train can achieve is limited by linespeed. To remedy that would entail years and years of infrastructure improvements. The Planners, PWay, and Signalling and Track experts on the forum will no doubt tell you how complicated and extensive it is to increase line speeds.

I think that much of the deep tube goes around 40mph max and as low as 25mph* in central London where the stations are closer. There are a few stretches where higher speeds might be reached, especially as most of the newer stock (probably all except the 73 stock) can run at around 60mph. The JLE has some faster running and parts of the Vic., - mainly because when the Vic was planned there was a ruling curvature of 20 chains. I imagine that the JLE is at least as good as that as well.
The central London SSLs are crippled by the traffic and multiple junctions on the Circle line, but once the S stock gets away, it cruises at 60mph, where track and station intervals permit, particularly the Met fast lines.
* a fit courier on a bike can do 25mph, and that doesn't involve stopping at stations (or traffic lights )!

 

[jfisher21]

London Bridge - Dartford via Woolwich seems dead slow from Deptford!

 

[southern442]

London Bridge - Dartford via Woolwich seems dead slow from Deptford!

This is a good example, and contrast it with the Hayes line which gets up to a decent speed. I'm sure there are a multitude of factors at play, but for me personally certain routes can be a far more attractive option if you speed up quickly, get up to a high speed, and slow back down quickly.

 

[30907]

This is a good example, and contrast it with the Hayes line which gets up to a decent speed. I'm sure there are a multitude of factors at play, but for me personally certain routes can be a far more attractive option if you speed up quickly, get up to a high speed, and slow back down quickly.

Using the public timetable:
Deptford to Plumstead 5 miles 6 intermediate stops 18min
Lewisham to Elmers End 5 miles 5 intermediate stops 16min.
I used to reckon 1.5min per stop on the suburban lines, but that was when station stops were booked 20 seconds, so the 2min is almost certainly accounted for by the extra stop.
Looking at the map, I imagine there's a speed restriction immediately East of Greenwich too.