Thameslink Services/Timetable from May 20th 2018

[jon0844]

I would say having priority is a rather significant reason.

 

[Failed Unit]

Was the train that skipped stops a service due to stop or a fast that didn't have stops added? At WGC, signallers will sometimes fail to move trains from the fast to slow. Sometimes it's too late to issue paperwork at Stevenage.

We all saw the mess between May and July when it was a case of crossing fingers to see if a train would stop.

And you say nobody mentioned a failing 700, yet it was in the top text you quoted! Assuming it happened near the fatality, it clearly wasn't on the Hertford Loop so didn't block the only usable line like the LNER train did.

It was suppose to stop and the 700 at the top of the text if you read it is stated near the fatality. Not at Cufley. I know you defend GTR to the death but I know someone on the failed train at Cufley so whether you like or not a GTR managed train made things worse.

Anyway this is distracting from the thread. I will leave it here.

 

[43074]

So the ECML is closed and four tracks gone for 3 or 4 hours. How would you have managed things?

Obviously I don't have the full facts to hand, but by all accounts the response of other operators was significantly better than GTRs. Maybe attempt to restart some of these from King's Cross when the railway had reopened, possibly filling gaps in the service by using units not used in the off peak? Maybe turn late running services heading towards Horsham etc short of destination at Three Bridges and similar to aim for right time presentation at the core heading back North, at least there are alternative Southern services in that area? Without full information I don't know exactly what I would have done, regardless the ability of GTR control to cope with disruption, on both sides of the river, is poor at times, shown by persistent skip stopping and long gaps in the service.

 

[bramling]

Really? They managed "quite well" to run one train towards Peterborough in five hours!!!

Every other company has been able to run trains north from mid-morning, but GTR cancels virtually their entire service.



Don't make me laugh. GTR couldn't learn how to add 1 + 1.

I’d say the issue is more that it took literally ages to recover.

Seeing the service was screwed I took the car today, which from what I’m hearing was a wise choice. The board for my station was showing numerous services cancelled or “delayed” - yet looking simply at OTT showed the delayed ones simply weren’t running and weren’t going to run.

We still had people turning up late for work into the evening, all cursing Great Northern!

But this shouldn’t be a surprise - the setup barely copes with a 20-minute sit down somewhere, so no surprise it melts down when something big happens.

 

[MML]

Not as bad as the disruption on the GN but possibly a similar knock on event, 1558 Brighton to Bedford was short formed with an 8-car replacing a 12-car leaving the core during the peak.
Let's just say it was cosy
Full marks to the driver who was very apologetic.
But it does yet again show they need half a dozen more FLU to cope with peak flows and any unexpected disruption.

 

[87015]

I would say having priority is a rather significant reason.

Is that right -What happened to the priority regulation policy they were crowing about all over the place? The one Modern Railways jubilantly reported in it's usual comic fashion that anything 90 seconds late wouldn't be permitted thorough the core?

 

[Failed Unit]

Is that right -What happened to the priority regulation policy they were crowing about all over the place? The one Modern Railways jubilantly reported in it's usual comic fashion that anything 90 seconds late wouldn't be permitted thorough the core?

I forgot about that. GTR have all the class 9 trains so they should have priority over the IC operators.

One thing is clear and related to this thread. GTR simply don’t have a plan B for disruption. The apologists will blame network rail of course but why can’t they run 1tph via the loop to Peterborough and turn the other?

These things will keep happening, it could be a tree, it could be a hull trains service on fire at Welwyn North. But GTR should have a plan for loss of the mainline between Stevenage and Alexander palace. It is worrying they don’t.

 

[jon0844]

The only plan was 313s along the loop. Other trains terminated at WGC and Alexandra Palace and turned.

Class 9 trains are indeed like class 1 but when disrupted it seems the priority was given to the IC operators by what you said happened. Did GTR organise that?

Aren't there just 3 or 4 class 9 trains per hour? A tiny number of overall services running in the morning peak.

 

[Aictos]

To add some balance I notice that this is conveniently not mentioned. Yes a LNER train broke down but so did a “impossible to fail” class 700



Source GTR. If you must throw stones at another operator make sure your own house is in order.

Where have they "thrown" stones at LNER? All they have done is explain that one of their trains broke down and gave some detail into what had happened with it but also pointed out that LNER also suffered a train failure - LNER would have done exactly the same so I fail to see how your point is relevant.

LNER, HT and GC seemed to manage. They may have priority on the paths but certainly did better than GTR in terms of keeping customers moving and informed.

You might have missed the information that was being put out on social media but there was information being put out to GTR passengers explaining what was happening and what alternative transport was available.

It wasn't like they didn't do anything to keep people informed.

 

[bramling]

The only plan was 313s along the loop. Other trains terminated at WGC and Alexandra Palace and turned.

Class 9 trains are indeed like class 1 but when disrupted it seems the priority was given to the IC operators by what you said happened. Did GTR organise that?

Aren't there just 3 or 4 class 9 trains per hour? A tiny number of overall services running in the morning peak.

To give the class 9 trains priority they kind of need to be running first - it seems today many GN core services seemed to evaporate into thin air!

The final plan has what will presumably be 8 class 9 trains per hour, each way. I’d suggest that will be at least 16 such trains on the panel at any one time, which I’d say is more than a tiny number.

One way or other, a cool 12 hours to recover from a fatality is not a good outcome by any measure.

 

[Aictos]

The only plan was 313s along the loop. Other trains terminated at WGC and Alexandra Palace and turned.

Class 9 trains are indeed like class 1 but when disrupted it seems the priority was given to the IC operators by what you said happened. Did GTR organise that?

Indeed it has always been the case that IC services diverted via Hertford take the highest priority followed by the fast GTRs then the semi fast GTRs then finally in last place a stopper service which has always been in place for years.

So no GTR would not have arranged that but they would have used the disruption plan which states what they're meant to do and would have discussed this with their counterparts at LNER, HT, GC and Network Rail indeed there was a incident room at Kings Cross PSB which was designed for incidents like this not sure if it's still in use though.

It was suppose to stop and the 700 at the top of the text if you read it is stated near the fatality. Not at Cufley. I know you defend GTR to the death but I know someone on the failed train at Cufley so whether you like or not a GTR managed train made things worse.

Anyway this is distracting from the thread. I will leave it here.

And the LNER didn't make things worse by failing at Palmers Green?

As to saying it was not at Cuffley but near the fatality at Potters Bar, GTR said it was near Cuffley and seeing as Cuffley and Potters Bar are on two different lines I doubt GTR would confuse the two.

Besides what you have said makes no sense as in one sentence you state not at Cuffley then in another say I know someone on the failed train at Cuffley so what is it?

 

[jon0844]

I doubt many people were on any of the 9xxx trains going north so I'd terminate at FPK and send people by tube to King's Cross and put them on a LNER train to Peterborough. Then from there people could travel south on trains that were running and turning at Stevenage or WGC (or wherever) or get staff to bung them in a cab.

Seems like a good way to reduce a few paths on the slower loop lines. It also gives a chance of the service running on time back to Horsham or Brighton if the driver is starting there.

I fail to see how this makes me an apologist. And any train near the fatality must have been on the ECML unless they're saying how the crow flies. If so, that's terrible but my money is on the 700 being somewhere near Potters Bar on the same route.

If I'm wrong I apologise.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I’ve always thought it to be a lost opportunity. There are a number of logical extensions, some of which I’ve posted elsewhere.

My idea has always been for the line to be resignalled at higher capacity so that the same LO services as today could run, but with a stable increase in longer-distance services around those.

Always always always thought this service should be operated by ThamesLink and bumped up to 2tph between Clapham Junction and Watford Junction. Perhaps operated by 707s once they are freed up from their current duties at South Western Railway.

I've started a thread regarding this on the Speculative page if you want to check it out?

 

[jon0844]

No, it seems 9S09 did come to a stand temporarily at Cuffley. I assume this is a different 700 then. Was a pan issue apparently.

 

[Failed Unit]

No, it seems 9S09 did come to a stand temporarily at Cuffley. I assume this is a different 700 then. Was a pan issue apparently.

It is nice that you have now taken the time to look up to find out a class 700 did indeed fail on the loop. Your first reaction to my post was.
1. The failed train did not happen on the loop.
2. The Cambridge- London service that skip stopped Welwyn garden city the 0757ish that was due to stop at 0852 was never planned to stop in the first place.

Defend GTR as they can’t possibly be in the wrong then look up what actually happened.

It appears 2x class 700s and one LNER broke down. (The later I never disputed just highlighting that GTR also had a failed train so don’t focus the entire spotlight on LNER)

It is also amazing the “class 403” seems to think GTR did a good job at keep passengers informed while sat at the computer. How can they tell they when they are not using the service? Us at WGC that morning will totally disagree. Although GTR didn’t cause the issue communication at the station was poor. Exactly the same as it was after the May 2018 timetable change where you watch trains scheduled to, show on the departure boards and then sit on the fast line, empty. Class 403 will preach that according to his social media feed acceptance was arranged on local buses. This again isn’t what really happened as people had to pay to use said bus services.

If GTR taking most of the day to recover from this is a good performance then I fear for the railway. But this is an operator that still hasn’t implemented the May 2018 timetables in full. They are only collecting a management contract fee not trying to provide a public transportation service knowing they are untouchable by DFT

GN had a rotten day of travel today. But I wonder how many people from Redhill did because of an incident the other side of the Thames. The May 2018 timetable as we know has no resilience. GTR need a plan B. Other operators such a ScotRail have a prearranged response to issues. Both in terms of routes used and how frequent the service should be. I have not seen this from GTR yet. I really feel sorry for the hardworking railway staff that do their best for this inept company. I know they try their best but until they get a decent owner which wants to provide a public service their hard work and dedication will always be wasted. The current owners focus isn’t on moving passengers from A-b.

 

[jon0844]

The text you'd quoted yourself said a 700 near the fatality, hence why I assumed it had to be on the ECML. Now it's clear they were two separate incidents so you yourself were misleading.

And I asked about the WGC train. I gave a possible reason based on what was obviously guesswork without train times, head codes or actually being there.

 

[Failed Unit]

The text you'd quoted yourself said a 700 near the fatality, hence why I assumed it had to be on the ECML. Now it's clear they were two separate incidents so you yourself were misleading.

And I asked about the WGC train. I gave a possible reason based on what was obviously guesswork without train times, head codes or actually being there.

I quoted 2 pieces of text. One from HWL which mentions the failed 700 near the incident. The 2nd from GTR mentioned a failed 700 on the loop. I interpreted this as 2 different failures of which the one on the loop caused the most disruption.

Apologies if that was not clear.

But my point was that the poster only mentions the northbound LNER service, as if the south failure didn’t contribute to the issues. I have never said that the LNER failure didn’t make things worse. Just highlighting A GTR train impacted the large number of trains going South. A large queue formed at Stevenage luckily the mainline partially reopened

 

[westcoaster]

As a side note, the issues on the GN side were exactly the same time as the issues at Gatwick. Both sides running on a two track railway at the same time. Some trains coming down were delayed by an hour due to going via the loop, they were then stacked up via Gatwick losing another half hour.see here for an example http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/G73017/2019/01/14/advanced
From what I heard the issue at cuffley was due to too many pans and power draw in that section.

 

[sefton]

Can you explain how you came by that maths?

As I can see the last train from St Pancras to Peterborough was the 11:45 St Pancras to Peterborough with the next service being the 14:45 St Pancras to Peterborough which is a 3 hour gap not a 5 hour gap.

With a normal service from St Pancras to Peterborough starting with the 16:15 St Pancras to Peterborough which was a 90 minute gap from the 14:45 St Pancras to Peterborough.

So I can't see how GTR managed to run just the one train in 5 hours...

Between the 11.45 and 16.15 scheduled services, four and half hours, GTR ran one train to Peterborough.

By any measure that is an utter failure, particularly when other operators were running trains over the same route north.

 

[westcoaster]

Between the 11.45 and 16.15 scheduled services, four and half hours, GTR ran one train to Peterborough.

By any measure that is an utter failure, particularly when other operators were running trains over the same route north.

Easier to step up trains at kings cross. As an example take the train I posted above. It arrived at Horsham 100 minutes late. How they come back from that is impossible you have two options.
1 run the train back late, in excess of an hour, to encounter more delay at Gatwick. (Other issues will be displaced crews, crews out of hours).
2. Pull a complete circuit and hold the train in sidings untill it's next booked trip, with a fresh driver.

Other things you have to consider is sometimes the toc's are not permitted by NR to enter new route/regions due to late running or major infrastructure issues.

 

[Failed Unit]

As a side note, the issues on the GN side were exactly the same time as the issues at Gatwick. Both sides running on a two track railway at the same time. Some trains coming down were delayed by an hour due to going via the loop, they were then stacked up via Gatwick losing another half hour.see here for an example http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/G73017/2019/01/14/advanced
From what I heard the issue at cuffley was due to too many pans and power draw in that section.

We will never know who made what decisions. But my understanding of what should have happened north of the Thames was the Cambridge to London (stopping) service should have ran to WGC and terminated. This would provide a half hourly service between WGC and Cambridge. Passengers for London change at Stevenage. (Including us from WGC). Reality everything was diverted which probably caused the overload. If that was really the plan B it was credible. Why it was not implemented we will never know.

 

[westcoaster]

We will never know who made what decisions. But my understanding of what should have happened north of the Thames was the Cambridge to London (stopping) service should have ran to WGC and terminated. This would provide a half hourly service between WGC and Cambridge. Passengers for London change at Stevenage. (Including us from WGC). Reality everything was diverted which probably caused the overload. If that was really the plan B it was credible. Why it was not implemented we will never know.

But you need to look at what the crew do, no good turning at WGC if the driver is needed at Finsbury park to run a 9Sxx back to Cambridge.

 

[Failed Unit]

But you need to look at what the crew do, no good turning at WGC if the driver is needed at Finsbury park to run a 9Sxx back to Cambridge.

I will need to look when I get back, but isn’t wgc signalled both directions? We have the sidings on the east of the station using the same infrastructure as platform 1. I am sure I have seen freight trains heading north from these sidings. However it is possible that this is only for freight operations. I have also seen ECS get to the carriage sidings from platform 1 and trains on driver training runs head north from platform 1. Again both with no passengers.

I agree with your driver issues, but surely diagrams are shot anyway so GTR will be revising these. Typically you get 20 minutes at Finsbury Park. So the delay would exceed this for the driver going round the loop.

 

[Aictos]

Between the 11.45 and 16.15 scheduled services, four and half hours, GTR ran one train to Peterborough.

By any measure that is an utter failure, particularly when other operators were running trains over the same route north.

I disagree because GTR managed to run the 14:45 which means that there was a 3 hour gap between the 11:45 and the 14:45 this meant that the delay clock restarted at 14:45.

Once this happened, it meant that the delay clock restarted with a 90 minute gap between the 14:45 and the 16:15 when a full service resumed.

Therefore your maths is out.

 

[sefton]

I disagree because GTR managed to run the 14:45 which means that there was a 3 hour gap between the 11:45 and the 14:45 this meant that the delay clock restarted at 14:45.

Once this happened, it meant that the delay clock restarted with a 90 minute gap between the 14:45 and the 16:15 when a full service resumed.

Therefore your maths is out.

However you try to spin it, cancelling 87.5% of your trains and only managing to run one out of eight over a four and a half hour period, when other operators were able to run effectively a full service is pretty pathetic.

 

[ijmad]

When Watton-at-Stone to Stevenage is bustituted, will the ability to run trains to Stevenage via the loop during disruption be retained?

 

[ijmad]

When Watton-at-Stone to Stevenage is bustituted, will the ability to run trains to Stevenage via the loop during disruption be retained?

Answered my own question, it seems to be based on the diagrams in the Stevenage Platform 5 thread.

 

[Aictos]

However you try to spin it, cancelling 87.5% of your trains and only managing to run one out of eight over a four and a half hour period, when other operators were able to run effectively a full service is pretty pathetic.

I'm not spinning anything just pointing out you're wrong.

 

[Verulamius]

How many services ran in the peak evening service? Cancellations during the day would be more acceptable if this resulted in peak services running.

 

[Aictos]

How many services ran in the peak evening service? Cancellations during the day would be more acceptable if this resulted in peak services running.

According to RTT it looked like everything that was timetabled to run actually did with a normal service from London St Pancras to Peterborough from 16:15 onwards which to me is more or less the start of the evening peak.