Ianmel1969
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jan 2011
- Messages
- 80
Yesterday, 1st Feb my 1311 Portsmouth Harbour to Victoria train on the wonderful Southern Railways was cancelled due to a 'planning error'. Just wondering what the heck that is supposed to be?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Train cancelled due to 'planning error'
- Thread starter Ianmel1969
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Cheshire Scot
Established Member
Just a guess, but perhaps no crew booked for the job and although that would potentially be a Rostering error, Planning might be more easily understood.
MP393
Member
TI attribution code given for that cancellation which is indeed a Rostering issue/error
As someone guilty of such errors in the past it's probably a clerical error.
Easily done - but very much best avoided.
Cheshire Scot
Established Member
Years ago a colleague in Train Planning went to catch his train home forgetting he had taken that train off in the timetable change which took effect that very day!
Javelin_55
Member
This was 1J37 and it was cancelled due to no driver.
There's so much of this going round at the moment, certainly at GTR. Lots of drivers being uncovered at the same time and running an interim timetable with unusual workings means trains are often cancelled or amended at short notice, depending on if there are any spare drivers knocking about in the mess room (spoiler alert: not usually)
There's so much of this going round at the moment, certainly at GTR. Lots of drivers being uncovered at the same time and running an interim timetable with unusual workings means trains are often cancelled or amended at short notice, depending on if there are any spare drivers knocking about in the mess room (spoiler alert: not usually)
Class 466
Established Member
- Joined
- 5 Mar 2010
- Messages
- 1,433
TI is a train crew rostering error which for some reason RTT lists as a planning error when it’s more a lack of available train crew.
My favourite was the unit diagrammer who was doing a major project at Lime Street (big engineering job) and ended up with just one train uncovered. The 1850 Lime Street-Allerton EDMU.
So he asked the timing section for an Allerton-Lime Street EDMU to work it . . .
Not sure he ever lived it down.
The perils of short term (STP) timetables is that this can happen from time to time and stock and crew diagrams don't quite align. Or some 3rd supplement and alteration didn't get carried across in time to one system.
And even then, the issue is normally found out only moments before departure time.
And even then, the issue is normally found out only moments before departure time.
Last edited:
Rob Gibson
Member
This is Southerns long-standing driver shortage, no driver rostered because none is available. Could be seen as a long term planning error in not having enough drivers employed but also a grey area over how much Rest Day working can be relied on.
Spartacus
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,947
Yeah, one of those things at the moment that everyone's struggling to to some extent, unable to cover a combination of sickness, granted leave, and being unable to get staff in and trained quick enough due to covid restrictions. On my desk there's two thirds off sick for a variety of reasons, with other shifts being covered by a combination of relief and RDW, but inevitably there's been the off uncovered shift.
So it is a planning error, then? The delay attribution specifically describes a rostering mistake, not a general absence of crew.
Falcon1200
Established Member
And a Controller colleague also went to catch his train home which he himself had cancelled it during his shift; He'd totally forgotten and when he asked station staff where the train was, the reply was 'some b*stard in Control cancelled it' !
Surely one of the perks of such jobs is ensuring that the your going home train is protected from all danger of cancellation?
And is your preferred unit type where possible.Surely one of the perks of such jobs is ensuring that the your going home train is protected from all danger of cancellation?
Falcon1200
Established Member
Surely one of the perks of such jobs is ensuring that the your going home train is protected from all danger of cancellation?
You would like to think so, but even Controllers are human (allegedly)......
Then it shouldn’t have been coded as a planning roster error - it should have been coded as cancelled due to a shortage of train crew.
The “planning error” reason is normally due to a train existing on a CIS or public system that was never intended to run or didn’t have a crew diagram attached.
Spartacus
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,947
No. Being unable to roster for a planned 'event', such as leave or notified sickness, (or some berk introducing a timetable for which you don't have enough drivers), goes down as rostering. Shortage of traincrew would be for unplanned short notice absences, such as ringing in sick, or needing emergency leave on the day. It doesn't necessarily mean it's rosters fault as such, just that it's a rostering issue.
Rob Gibson
Member
Hoping up to the last moment that someone can be found to cover the duty, we don’t know how often they are found.
We'll have to disagree then. You plan a service for X number of trains with Y number of crew. If Y = less then X, I would suggest that is a "shortage of train crew" which is what most TOCs use.
A planning error is like trying to run a train through a possession or amending a timetable and removing services, yet still having a train showing on public system which was never intended to run. Or a stock diagram with a completely non-existant (note not uncovered) train crew diagram.
Spartacus
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,947
Shortage of traincrew would be attributed to the driver or guard involved, which it isn't in the case in a planned absence.
Those latter instances would likely go down as TA, diagramming issue, or as a separate Q coded train planning issue
In fairness the DAPR's a bit vague for rostering but that's what I've always used, from both sides of it as both a planner and TDA.
Wh have had it when on a Bank Holiday when we are running a normal Monday to Friday service and operator b is running a Saturday service. We end up cancelling a train as the driver is booked to travel passenger from one depot to another using operator b's train and it's not running due to a Saturday service.
It is said that a Deputy Chief Controller (Crewe) led his party (Buxton bound) onto an EMU at Piccadilly on one occasion.
It was pointed out to him that it would have to be going a hell of a lick at Stockport to get all the way up the hill . . .
AlbertBeale
Established Member
My favourite was the unit diagrammer who was doing a major project at Lime Street (big engineering job) and ended up with just one train uncovered. The 1850 Lime Street-Allerton EDMU.
So he asked the timing section for an Allerton-Lime Street EDMU to work it . . .
Not sure he ever lived it down.
Sounds like a good joke - if only I knew enough rail jargon to understand it.....
My guess is that it was impossible to run as the line was closed due to the engineering work. The time would have been in days perhaps.?!
Electro diesel multiple unit.
I'm still not laughing.
LA50041
Established Member
- Joined
- 20 Feb 2017
- Messages
- 2,162
I think essentially there was an uncovered Empty Coaching Stock (ECS) movement from Liverpool to Allerton Depot and the diagrammer requested an ECS from Allerton to form the ECS
TheSel
Member
Not just confined to the rail industry.
Back in the 1970's, a Crosville driver had a duty that worked an afternoon schools trip, then ran empty to the nearest town to work service back to the depot. The bus - an elderly Bristol - broke down on the 'empty' leg, and as there were no phone boxes (remember them?) around, he decided to wait for the next bus back to the depot. Only after it failed to arrive did he work out he was waiting for himself coming back!
A bit of confusion going on here so heres an explanation:
The underlying plan doesn't work - the traincrew are booked to do two things at once, there is no unit diagram for a service etc. Detailed examination would reveal this when the plan is finalised.
Shortage of, or error by, a driver or guard.
Failure to assign the available traincrew to the diagrams produced, failure to identify a train or diagram which is uncovered (thus preventing arrangements being made to cover it), assigning traincrew to a diagram who are not available (eg Driver shown to be working when they are on annual leave).
| TA | Train-crew/loco/stock/unit diagram issues |
The underlying plan doesn't work - the traincrew are booked to do two things at once, there is no unit diagram for a service etc. Detailed examination would reveal this when the plan is finalised.
| TG | Driver |
| TH | (Senior) Conductor/Train Manager |
Shortage of, or error by, a driver or guard.
| TI | Train-crew rostering problem |
Failure to assign the available traincrew to the diagrams produced, failure to identify a train or diagram which is uncovered (thus preventing arrangements being made to cover it), assigning traincrew to a diagram who are not available (eg Driver shown to be working when they are on annual leave).
- Status