Train delayed to enable customer connections

[dk1]

Seen this at Ipswich before. the 0819 Harwich International to Cambridge was held for 5 minutes to allow the late running (due to a late running Norwich to London Liverpool Street service) Felixstowe to Ipswich service to arrive (0819, 5 late) and allow everyone to make their connection. Brilliant communication, the guard on the service from Felixstowe even announced the held train as it arrived into Ipswich, so people knew the connection wasn't missed!

We do our best to maintain connections here in the wonderful world of Greater Anglia

 

[father_jack]

---

---

---

At Taunton were they Bridgwater and Highbridge people and the 1418 stopper cancelled ???

Edit- looked it up and the connection gen was dud. The previous working was on time. And the 1418 ran.

2U18 13:18 Taunton to Cardiff Central due 15:19 is being delayed between Taunton and Bridgwater and is now expected to be 15 minutes late.

This is due to a fire next to the track earlier today

 

[saismee]

We do our best to maintain connections here in the wonderful world of Greater Anglia

Likely one of the benefits of being mostly separated from other operators! With >96% (IIRC) punctuality, better customer service ends up as a higher priority than desperately trying to run every service on time (looking at GN mostly here).

 

[BrianW]

Taunton and points West, GWR are very good at holding their own services to allow connections. Multiple times I've seen Plymouth-Penzance services held to allow a connection off the London train and some very pro-active messaging so that people don't panic and run.

Sadly connections with XC and SWR aren't managed the same way.

I appreciate that 'holding' trains to enable connections can be problematic regarding 'knock on' effects, including crew times.

I think the key aspects are penalties for delays, and competition with rival companies prioritised over customer service.

I have myself been exasperated at Exeter SD by seeing a train for Central depart as my GWR train pulled in

We do our best to maintain connections here in the wonderful world of Greater Anglia

Thank you; travelling in your world next week

 

[dk1]

Thank you; travelling in your world next week

Hope your week is a pleasant one mate and that we deliver for you.

Likely one of the benefits of being mostly separated from other operators! With >96% (IIRC) punctuality, better customer service ends up as a higher priority than desperately trying to run every service on time (looking at GN mostly here).

Not always possible obviously but we do try. Our services that operate with conductors often excel in reassuring passengers that connections will be held for them and advise of which platform to head for in a quick but safe manner.

 

[saismee]

Not always possible obviously but we do try.

Most of my journeys have been very smooth with GA and the trying does show all around, even in disruption (stuck on 9P19 at Beaulieu Park in an OHLE fault springs to mind, you should know).

Our services that operate with conductors often excel in reassuring passengers that connections will be held for them and advise of which platform to head for in a quick but safe manner.

Certainly. I've had nothing but good communication from Greater Anglia and all the guards are very friendly. A fair few of them don't bother to check my tickets anymore and just give me a hello! I have a few questions about some things I've noticed with 2R05 which don't really deserve a whole thread, could I PM them to you?

 

[dk1]

Most of my journeys have been very smooth with GA and the trying does show all around, even in disruption (stuck on 9P19 at Beaulieu Park in an OHLE fault springs to mind, you should know).


Certainly. I've had nothing but good communication from Greater Anglia and all the guards are very friendly. A fair few of them don't bother to check my tickets anymore and just give me a hello! I have a few questions about some things I've noticed with 2R05 which don't really deserve a whole thread, could I PM them to you?

Yes, I’ll help if I can.

Remember being held at Beaulieu Park a few weeks ago for that. I was heading to a work medical in Shoreditch.

 

[LickeyIncliner]

We do our best to maintain connections here in the wonderful world of Greater Anglia

Much appreciated when in that part of the world!

 

[YorkRailFan]

(except Barnstaple that they usually hold).

I have experienced GWR holding not only Barnstaple but also Exmouth services at St. David's when there's a late running service from Paddington. Particularly over the summer with many tourists heading to Exmouth with a connection at St David's.

 

[dk1]

Newton Abbot is another station that has frequently held connections over the years for Torbay. Impressively GWR waits a late running XC service that often has a good number of intending passengers for the branch.

 

[trainophile]

I imagine the decision is easier in somewhere like Newton Abbot southbound as people on that service are unlikely to be requiring a further connection so minimal knock-on effects.

@dk1 I wish the hourly ex-Great Yarmouth trains ran a few minutes earlier than **17, as six minutes connection onto the (usually already pretty full) Liverpool EMR at Norwich is quite stressful. The timing is just about adequate but getting a seat is another matter.

Also I wish they changed the external carriage destination display at Norwich sooner than half a minute before departure. Speaking as one who stupidly sat on a Lowestoft train thinking it was the Sheringham one, finally asking another passenger, to be put right just as the Sheringham pulled out. My own fault, confusing platforms 5 and 6, but having sat on the train on P6 for 20 minutes, looking at the train on P5 which still showed "Norwich" on the side, there wasn't much of a clue! I did Tweet them about this but I don't think it has been taken up.

Sorry, I digress.

 

[dk1]

I imagine the decision is easier in somewhere like Newton Abbot southbound as people on that service are unlikely to be requiring a further connection so minimal knock-on effects.

@dk1 I wish the hourly ex-Great Yarmouth trains ran a few minutes earlier than **17, as six minutes connection onto the (usually already pretty full) Liverpool EMR at Norwich is quite stressful. The timing is just about adequate but getting a seat is another matter.

Also I wish they changed the external carriage destination display at Norwich sooner than half a minute before departure. Speaking as one who stupidly sat on a Lowestoft train thinking it was the Sheringham one, finally asking another passenger, to be put right just as the Sheringham pulled out. My own fault, confusing platforms 5 and 6, but having sat on the train on P6 for 20 minutes, looking at the train on P5 which still showed "Norwich" on the side, there wasn't much of a clue! I did Tweet them about this but I don't think it has been taken up.

Sorry, I digress.

The PIS displays are only active from when the driver opens up the leading cab. If the incoming driver knows the outgoing headcode like myself and many others do then they’ll input it but that’s over & above and not part of our duties.

Departing Yarmouth earlier is awkward as some services are normally due in at XX:12 if they depart Norwich at XX:40. Also they’d have to wait for the XX:45 Sheringham to depart anyway.

 

[Grecian 1998]

'Good customer service' is usually taken to mean whatever personally benefits the person referring to it. As has been said many times elsewhere, holding a train for connections is not good customer service if it means the delay to the connecting service causes other people later on to miss their connections. It seems like good customer service to the people who benefit, but is lousy customer service to those affected later on. Similar to the way that allowing people to carry as much luggage as they want is great customer service for them, but poor customer service for anyone who finds it difficult to get off a train due to the luggage piled in front of the door / in the aisles.

To take Devon and Cornwall as examples, holding Looe, Newquay, Gunnislake or Paignton trains for westbound mainline connections from GWR Paddington or XC services is probably good customer service more often than not. The first three have an hourly or worse service and some layover time at the terminus. Looe and Newquay probably have very few internal passengers (there can't be many people wanting to travel from Par to Newquay and vice versa) so it makes sense to wait. The Paignton branch has double track and generally reasonable layovers at Paignton. Additionally there will again be a sizeable number of people transferring, although equally there will be plenty of people typically travelling from Exeter - Torbay.

In comparison, holding Falmouth or St Ives services would typically be poor customer service. Both lines have half hourly frequencies over single lines with tight layovers, and will have plenty of passengers travelling internally. Holding services will mess up the timetable, and lead to the risk that the return workings may miss connections with eastbound services (and it's far harder to justify holding mainline services running into London terminals which have a very precise path into the terminal). If one train is missed, it won't be that long to the next one.

Similarly, holding the hourly Barnstaple or Okehampton services at Exeter St Davids is risky due to the single line sections and intensively used loops at Crediton and Eggesford (albeit the latter seems to take a very long time in any event). Holding Waterloo services for more than a minute or two (due to the dwell time at Exeter Central) would also be risky unless the westbound service is running late and won't clear Pinhoe on time. That line can be particularly prone to the domino effect where one late train will delay every other train until the timetable thins out in the late evening.

As soon as one train is significantly late, you have to make a decision which will make some people very unhappy. Those who benefit probably won't say anything; those who don't benefit will be vocal. Can't really be avoided.

 

[Parallel]

In comparison, holding Falmouth or St Ives services would typically be poor customer service. Both lines have half hourly frequencies over single lines with tight layovers, and will have plenty of passengers travelling internally. Holding services will mess up the timetable, and lead to the risk that the return workings may miss connections with eastbound services (and it's far harder to justify holding mainline services running into London terminals which have a very precise path into the terminal). If one train is missed, it won't be that long to the next one.

From memory, I think there are signs at St Erth saying that St Ives connections cannot be held, which is at least going to help manage customer expectations, but it’s likely they would only see the sign whilst waiting for the train they’ve just missed…

 

[Horizon22]

This isn’t unheard of, certainly on branches when the wider impact is minimal to non-existent. GWR are very good at this, certainly within Devon and Cornwall although there are naturally limits.

As @Bald Rick alludes to earlier, normally the delay reason as sent by the controller is towards the initial reason the first train was late.

 

[Purple Train]

'Good customer service' is usually taken to mean whatever personally benefits the person referring to it. As has been said many times elsewhere, holding a train for connections is not good customer service if it means the delay to the connecting service causes other people later on to miss their connections. It seems like good customer service to the people who benefit, but is lousy customer service to those affected later on. Similar to the way that allowing people to carry as much luggage as they want is great customer service for them, but poor customer service for anyone who finds it difficult to get off a train due to the luggage piled in front of the door / in the aisles.

To take Devon and Cornwall as examples, holding Looe, Newquay, Gunnislake or Paignton trains for westbound mainline connections from GWR Paddington or XC services is probably good customer service more often than not. The first three have an hourly or worse service and some layover time at the terminus. Looe and Newquay probably have very few internal passengers (there can't be many people wanting to travel from Par to Newquay and vice versa) so it makes sense to wait. The Paignton branch has double track and generally reasonable layovers at Paignton. Additionally there will again be a sizeable number of people transferring, although equally there will be plenty of people typically travelling from Exeter - Torbay.

In comparison, holding Falmouth or St Ives services would typically be poor customer service. Both lines have half hourly frequencies over single lines with tight layovers, and will have plenty of passengers travelling internally. Holding services will mess up the timetable, and lead to the risk that the return workings may miss connections with eastbound services (and it's far harder to justify holding mainline services running into London terminals which have a very precise path into the terminal). If one train is missed, it won't be that long to the next one.

Similarly, holding the hourly Barnstaple or Okehampton services at Exeter St Davids is risky due to the single line sections and intensively used loops at Crediton and Eggesford (albeit the latter seems to take a very long time in any event). Holding Waterloo services for more than a minute or two (due to the dwell time at Exeter C would also be risky unless the westbound service is running late and won't clear Pinhoe on time. That line can be particularly prone to the domino effect where one late train will delay every other train until the timetable thins out in the late evening.

As soon as one train is significantly late, you have to make a decision which will make some people very unhappy. Those who benefit probably won't say anything; those who don't benefit will be vocal. Can't really be avoided.

A good post in general, but I disagree about your Looe example - there is next to no layover at Looe, and I think the connections at Liskeard are timed quite tightly (certainly with the layout there).

As @Bald Rick alludes to earlier, normally the delay reason as sent by the controller is towards the initial reason the first train was late.

Slightly off-topic I know, but a quick question - when no delay reason shows up on the likes of National Rail Enquiries, is an internal delay reason still input? The reason I ask is because my train home from Plymouth last weekend was delayed by 24 minutes and no reason showed up on NRE or on information boards, and I wonder how convoluted the initial issue could be made to be? (I managed to track the train that delayed the train that delayed my train, so to speak, but not the reason; though, that being said, the specifics of my case would probably need to be packed off to a new thread in Trip Planning & Reports.)

 

[BayPaul]

'Good customer service' is usually taken to mean whatever personally benefits the person referring to it. As has been said many times elsewhere, holding a train for connections is not good customer service if it means the delay to the connecting service causes other people later on to miss their connections. It seems like good customer service to the people who benefit, but is lousy customer service to those affected later on. Similar to the way that allowing people to carry as much luggage as they want is great customer service for them, but poor customer service for anyone who finds it difficult to get off a train due to the luggage piled in front of the door / in the aisles.

To take Devon and Cornwall as examples, holding Looe, Newquay, Gunnislake or Paignton trains for westbound mainline connections from GWR Paddington or XC services is probably good customer service more often than not. The first three have an hourly or worse service and some layover time at the terminus. Looe and Newquay probably have very few internal passengers (there can't be many people wanting to travel from Par to Newquay and vice versa) so it makes sense to wait. The Paignton branch has double track and generally reasonable layovers at Paignton. Additionally there will again be a sizeable number of people transferring, although equally there will be plenty of people typically travelling from Exeter - Torbay.

In comparison, holding Falmouth or St Ives services would typically be poor customer service. Both lines have half hourly frequencies over single lines with tight layovers, and will have plenty of passengers travelling internally. Holding services will mess up the timetable, and lead to the risk that the return workings may miss connections with eastbound services (and it's far harder to justify holding mainline services running into London terminals which have a very precise path into the terminal). If one train is missed, it won't be that long to the next one.

Similarly, holding the hourly Barnstaple or Okehampton services at Exeter St Davids is risky due to the single line sections and intensively used loops at Crediton and Eggesford (albeit the latter seems to take a very long time in any event). Holding Waterloo services for more than a minute or two (due to the dwell time at Exeter C would also be risky unless the westbound service is running late and won't clear Pinhoe on time. That line can be particularly prone to the domino effect where one late train will delay every other train until the timetable thins out in the late evening.

As soon as one train is significantly late, you have to make a decision which will make some people very unhappy. Those who benefit probably won't say anything; those who don't benefit will be vocal. Can't really be avoided.

I'm just imagining my feelings if I missed my connection due to a train that was 'delayed to enable customer connections'! I think your summary is just right, hold if you can without inconvenience, but otherwise run to time.

Even better customer service is providing good information. I once pulled late into Plymouth, having been told by the guard over the PA that the Cornwall train had been held, and was on the adjacent platform. Unfortunately the signaller put us on a different platform, which led to half a train load of confused passengers waiting around for a bit, then watching their train depart without them!

 

[Horizon22]

A good post in general, but I disagree about your Looe example - there is next to no layover at Looe, and I think the connections at Liskeard are timed quite tightly (certainly with the layout there).

Slightly off-topic I know, but a quick question - when no delay reason shows up on the likes of National Rail Enquiries, is an internal delay reason still input? The reason I ask is because my train home from Plymouth last weekend was delayed by 24 minutes and no reason showed up on NRE or on information boards, and I wonder how convoluted the initial issue could be made to be? (I managed to track the train that delayed the train that delayed my train, so to speak, but not the reason; though, that being said, the specifics of my case would probably need to be packed off to a new thread in Trip Planning & Reports.)

Yes internally attribution will always be done via TRUST. Whether that makes its way to individual trains (both in reason and length of delay) is normally a manual process by an information controller. There are some ways of setting it so that if delays occur between A-B and trains are running in that area it will automatically apply the reason but that still needs setting up. All of this is reliant on resourcing and workload pressure.

For times where trains are “Delayed” that normally means a) it hasn’t left origin or b) the train has not moved in 3 minutes. Often this will still show after a delay has been input. This can be overridden but it is fiddly and often, guesswork.

 

[Grecian 1998]

A good post in general, but I disagree about your Looe example - there is next to no layover at Looe, and I think the connections at Liskeard are timed quite tightly (certainly with the layout there).

A fair point about Looe - my memory was clearly playing tricks on me.

Once Newquay goes hourly and it's established if there is a demand for direct trains from there to / from St Austell and Truro (I suspect Falmouth is too long and indirect), Newquay may also change to a route where holding connections becomes too problematic.

 

[WAB]

I'm not sure what the official process for negotiating all this is.

Customer Support Controller TOC A to Customer Support Controller TOC B: "Can you hold 1A23 at Derby, pretty please "

 

[janb]

It happens at Lancaster on the Northern services to Barrow. Although I suspect it is often to do with consequences of Train Crew displacement.

That and if a 1Sxx or 9Sxx is anywhere in the vicinity then the 2Cxx is not getting put out in front of it anyway.

 

[BRcrosslane]

I was in Doncaster this afternoon & an announcement came that the 4:21pm to Sheffield from Scarborough run by Northern was delayed due to the train departing late to enable customer connections.

This is one I haven’t heard of before, has anyone else?

Yes, Occassionally happens a Crewe near where I live.

 

[Pinus contorta]

That and if a 1Sxx or 9Sxx is anywhere in the vicinity then the 2Cxx is not getting put out in front of it anyway.

Well yes. But I thought that was obvious.

 

[Howardh]

The Oxenholme to Windermere shuttle must be held up frequently to allow pax from the main line to access? If so, is there a time limit on how long they can stand waiting? There's nothing else on that line so the only issue would be pax waiting at Windermere for their service back?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

The Oxenholme to Windermere shuttle must be held up frequently to allow pax from the main line to access? If so, is there a time limit on how long they can stand waiting? There's nothing else on that line so the only issue would be pax waiting at Windermere for their service back?

Some services between Oxenholme Lake District and Windermere do originate from or head off towards Lancaster / Manchester Airport, so, operationally, it's not completely stand-alone.

 

[Bayum]

I was on the 1602 LNER York to Kings X on Friday. Guard announced over the tannoy that we would be waiting for the non-stop service to arrive to allow passengers to move to the dropping service to connect to various stations. Bit of a pain when you look at the timetable and notice that from Edinburgh there are two trains either side of the non-stop service that call at the stations the stopper called at ‍♂️

 

[Howardh]

Some services between Oxenholme Lake District and Windermere do originate from or head off towards Lancaster / Manchester Airport, so, operationally, it's not completely stand-alone.

Yes, that's true as my return in the evening goes direct to Bolton and beyond! But during the day there are only a few services (mainly due to being single track?) and there shouldn't be any issues in holding them up for a short while?

 

[Horizon22]

Customer Support Controller TOC A to Customer Support Controller TOC B: "Can you hold 1A23 at Derby, pretty please "

More likely to be customer service controller A asking train service controller A to ask the Train Running Controller for NR to ask the train service controller at B.

Or customer controller A asking customer service controller B who then asks train service controller B who then needs to confirm with train running controller at NR.

 

[MatthewHutton]

Holding trains for connections is good and should happen more.

 

[Howardh]

Holding trains for connections is good and should happen more.

I suppose it all depends on the frequency of the following train! Totally understandable to hold trains on the Furness & Cumbria lines which would wait at Barrow, as happened to me a couple of years ago!