Train Regulation

[Cabview]

Does anyone know the system of train regulation used by Network Rail? From my experience as a driver, it seems they aim to delay as many as possible.

I've lost count of the number of times I've sat waiting for a late running service to precede me - causing delays to my service and the ones trailing behind it.

Having contacted Network Rail several times about this - basically, they are not interested. Can anyone give me a contact higher up their chain of command to complain to?

 

[Tomnick]

Regulation's a complicated business - almost an art form. One of the main principles is that as many trains as possible should achieve PPM, with an eye also on minimising the overall delay. It might make sense, then, to delay a right-time stopping train by a few minutes to let a late express run first as booked - thereby giving both trains a chance of making PPM rather than completely stuffing the express. There's also an element of the 'big picture' that drivers are notoriously bad at appreciating - it might be necessary, for example, to run a late freight and slightly delay an express, because the margins are even tighter behind the express and holding the freight on the branch for any amount of time would delay whatever's following it.

 

[High Dyke]

Tomnick is correct. Though the regulating policy may catch some NR staff out, even though they are trying to do their best given available information.

I appreciate that from a driver's point of view that NR staff are picking on them, but do they always know the full picture? As Cabview mentioned

I've lost count of the number of times I've sat waiting for a late running service to precede me - causing delays to my service and the ones trailing behind it.

How many times did your train arrive within the PPM target, when regulated?

Train regulation objective
In order to facilitate the achievement of the PPM (Public Performance Measure) of
the franchised passenger Train Operators and the established performance
measures for freight, other operators and Network Rail, Network Rail shall regulate the running of trains that are running out of course so as to achieve the best balance in the prevailing circumstances between:
 The most efficient use of the infrastructure available to the signaller at the point at which trains are to be regulated
 Minimisation of delay to the trains concerned
 Minimisation of delay to passengers or freight conveyed on the trains concerned
 Maintaining connections between railway passenger services where these
have been agreed between Network Rail and the relevant Train Operators
 Priorities or other requirements determined from time to time by Operations Control and communicated to the signaller
 Avoiding undue discrimination between Train Operators

The interests of safety and security are paramount at all times.

The Train Regulation Policy is not the be all and end all IMO, but it does help.

 

[Cabview]

Thanks for the input so far.

Just to illustrate what happens when Network Rail pursues its obsession with trying to get late-running trains back on time, described below is the actual event that caused me to formally complain to Network Rail.

On 22/06/2013, I was the driver of 2A29, the 13.19 all-stopper service from Wolverhampton to Walsall. My train was held for 10 mins at Wolverhampton to allow the late-running Cross Country service to Paignton to proceed ahead of me. One late-running train becomes two.

Because my train is running late, the next service behind me, 1L93 - the Liverpool to Birmingham Service also runs late. So now we have three trains running late.

Because IL93 doesn't arrive into New St until 13.56, instead of 13.47, there isn't now enough turn around time, so this train - now 1F46 - doesn't leave New St. on its journey back to Liverpool until 14.05 instead of 14.01. That's now four late-running trains.

Following behind 1L93 was 1G33, the Shrewsbury to Birmingham service. 1G33 arrives into New Street at 14.02 instead of 13.55 and is supposed to depart back to Shrewsbury at 14.05. This doesn't happen. So now we have five late-running trains.

One late-running Cross Country train has effectively delayed 4 other trains. The ironic aspect about all this is that, with the Cross Country service to Paignton running 10 mins late, if my train had been allowed to depart on time, it would have arrived into New St before the Cross Country service had caught up with it – there being only 8 mins difference in the journey time!

Unfortunately, events similar to this happen on a regular basis in my neck of the woods.

Is it not time Network Rail carried out some sort of feasibility study into the most efficient way of dealing with delayed trains? Surely in this day and age, it must be possible to carry out a computer simulation of such situations and work out the optimum solution for efficient train workings?

Having just returned from a rail trip through France, Switzerland, Germany and Austria, I have seen how much better they do it!

 

[156441]

Got to agree with Cab View though sometimes it seems like the signallers are playing the 'that's what the train plan says so that's how it goes.'

Example. Running bang on time through Stockport and then fast to Picc.

Stockport box puts us on P3 and down the fast instead of booked 4 and Slows. Due to a late running EMT (4 late behind us).

Gets to Slade Lane and crossed over into the slow for P11 at Picc. Piccadilly box then promptly sit us at Mayfield while he runs the EMT round us to put him on 14.

Before it's suggested nothing came off 13/12/11/10 while we waited and we arrived 2 late so within PPM. However we could have been in 3 early and in my eye the EMT would have not lost anything as a result.

 

[Donny Dave]

At the other end of the scale, at Sheffield PSB, it appears that as far as regulating, anything goes!

I've been on serveral TPE services to Manchester, that for whatever reason, have been running late. On 3 occasions, the stopper has been let out of Sheffield before us, but has been held at either Heeley or the throat to let us past and onto the Hope Valley first (good sensible regulating).

However, on 1 occasion (because of the cable fairies), we were ~20 minutes late into Sheffield, so the stopper had long gone. But .... In the infinate wisdom of the signalmen, they held a late running freight (which was heading for 1 of the Buxton quarries IIRC) briefly to allow the stopper through Totley tunnel first, followed by the freight, followed by the TPE.

 

[Cabview]

Thanks for all your responses so far. To illustrate how Network Rail's obsession with getting one late-running train back on time leads to all sorts of unintended consequences, I give you the incident that prompted my original complaint.

On 22/06/2013, I was the driver of the 13.19 all-stopper service from Wolverhampton to Walsall. My train though was held for 10 mins at Wolverhampton to allow the late-running Cross Country service to Paignton to proceed ahead of me, so one late-running train now becomes two.

Because my train is running late, the next service behind me, a Liverpool to Birmingham Service, also runs late. So now three trains are running late.
This service arrives into New St at 13.56, instead of 13.47. There isn't now enough turn-around time, so leaves New Street on its journey back to Liverpool until 14.05 instead of 14.01. That's now four late-running trains.


Following behind the returning Liverpool service into New Street is the Shrewsbury to Birmingham service.The service arrives at 14.02 instead of 13.55 and is supposed to depart back to Shrewsbury at 14.05. This doesn't happen. So now there are five late-running trains. One late-running Cross Country train has effectively delayed 4 other trains!

Unfortunately, these types of compounded delays are a regular occurence in my neck of the woods.

The ironic aspect about all this is that, with the service to Paignton running 10 mins late, if my train had been allowed to depart on time, it would have arrived into New St before the Cross Country service had caught up with it – there being only 8 mins difference in the journey time!

It's about time Network Rail carried out some feasibility studies into the most efficient way of dealing with delayed trains. Surely in this day and age, it must be possible to carry out a computer simulation of such situations and work out the optimum solution for efficient train workings?

Having just returned from rail trip to Austria, via France, Switzerland and Germany, I've seen how railway systems can be managed efficiently!

 

[Tomnick]

I wondered when Sheffield would get a mention . Once things are running late, there's little incentive on the part of the signalman to put a lot of thought into regulation - unless a substantial chunk of delay could have been avoided and is disputed, it'll all be attributed to the late runner. On the other hand, sometimes the best laid plans can go spectacularly wrong...

 

[Trainfan344]

How about putting a stopping service to Colchester in front of a IC express booked non stop from liverpool street?

 

[Donny Dave]

I wondered when Sheffield would get a mention .

Couldn't disapoint you now, could I? :P

Sheffied, as I mentioned are capable of some very good regulating to keep things running, and at times, some incredably hard to believe regulatind decisions. Doncaster however ....

Normally try their best to keep things moving, and the signallers there have no qualms about holding an on time stopper for a few minutes if a late running (semi) fast can get ahead of it.

 

[Mugby]

On of the most astounding examples I experienced was a couple of years ago....and yes, it was Sheffield.

I was on an EMT HST from Derby to Leeds one saturday evening which was running about ten minutes late. At about 22.00 we were stopped at Dore, adjacent to the station to allow the Hope Valley stopper to Sheffield to proceed in front.

I was amazed that local stopper terminating at SHF was given preference over a class 1 express!

 

[rdeez]

Does anyone know the system of train regulation used by Network Rail? From my experience as a driver, it seems they aim to delay as many as possible.

I've lost count of the number of times I've sat waiting for a late running service to precede me - causing delays to my service and the ones trailing behind it.

Having contacted Network Rail several times about this - basically, they are not interested. Can anyone give me a contact higher up their chain of command to complain to?

I was recently waiting for a delayed XC service to Manchester at Birmingham. There's an LM service to Liverpool scheduled to depart just a few minutes after this one, and the XC service was delayed until about 5 minutes after the departure time of the LM service - the LM was held until after the XC had departed, presumably (as others have said) to avoid the XC being stuck behind the LM service as it calls at more stations between Bham and Stafford. This didn't go down particularly well with the LM conductor who shouted angrily "We're ready to depart!" to the NR platform staff, who shouted something (sadly inaudible!) back and threw his keys to the floor in anger!

Seems it's frustrating all round, but understandable in these circumstances. As a passenger I'd have been pretty peeved if my train was delayed even more stuck behind the slower service.

 

[yorkie]

. The ironic aspect about all this is that, with the Cross Country service to Paignton running 10 mins late, if my train had been allowed to depart on time, it would have arrived into New St before the Cross Country service had caught up with it – there being only 8 mins difference in the journey time!

Unfortunately, events similar to this happen on a regular basis ..

Indeed. I'm all for holding stoppers when an express is late when sensible (and so often Network Rail don't do this!) yet at other times they will, as you say, hold a stopper for a disproportionately long time.

I was once on a train from North Berwick held outside Drem for over 10 minutes for an HST to get in front! But Drem to Edinburgh is only about 10 minutes longer for a stopper anyway.

The worst culprits for regulation in my experience are Doncaster box. Some of the delays they've caused are unbelievable (including bringing a non-stop London to York service to a stand, in order for a tamper to overtake it and go in front! The guard made it clear what he thought of that decision!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On of the most astounding examples I experienced was a couple of years ago....and yes, it was Sheffield.

I was on an EMT HST from Derby to Leeds one saturday evening which was running about ten minutes late. At about 22.00 we were stopped at Dore, adjacent to the station to allow the Hope Valley stopper to Sheffield to proceed in front.

I was amazed that local stopper terminating at SHF was given preference over a class 1 express!

This nonsense is quite normal, I've experienced it too.

I've also known announcements made on XC services running just a few minutes late to change at Sheffield for Leicester. However Network Rail allowed the London train, which had loads of slack time and called at Chesterfield, to depart in front, thus delaying us further. I saw this happen and advised a family getting off to change there to stay on to Derby. They then made the connection, because the train that Network Rail had been so desperate to get away on time at Sheffield, had to wait so long at Derby that we had arrived before it was due to depart.

I know they have difficult decisions to make, and we all make mistakes, but sometimes, it just seems so obvious that the wrong decision has been made and it is hard for passengers and train crew alike to be understanding when it affects them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Doncaster however ....

Normally try their best to keep things moving.

Unless you are on a non-stop service, in which case they seem to give priority to stoppers! I am almost surprised these days when I actually get a clear run through Donny.

 

[Qwerty133]

as regular passenger on the Matlock branch, I can see the sense with the Sheffield decisions, as it gets both trains past ambergate junction quickest. if the xx:53 or xx:01 haven't past ambergate by around xx:58 there's always a good chance that the Matlock is held behind the xx:18/20 from derby.

 

[paulgreen32]

hi there i can only assume your not aware of how wolves psb work ? the local leaves between 19 and 30 or 49 and 01 every hour so you dont block the down stours with the next local

 

[GB]

How about putting a stopping service to Colchester in front of a IC express booked non stop from liverpool street?

Where abouts on the GEML was this done?

 

[Trainfan344]

Where abouts on the GEML was this done?

at Ilford we were delayed due to lineside equipment problems there and then put behind a stopper to Colchester, RTT times here: www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y11175/2013/09/07/advanced

 

[Darren R]

What is the policy as regards regulating non-passenger trains running early? Is a signaller at a location where he can regulate such a train expected to do so? Does he have to speak to the next signaller down the line to ask if it's okay to send it forward early? Or is it just 'send it forward then it's not my problem'?

I've noticed that Preston PSB (since everyone else is naming and shaming!) seem very keen to send them on their way no matter what, sometimes delaying other services in the process. Just a few weeks ago I was waiting at Blackburn for a train that was ten down - delayed behind a kettle running light engine that should have been half an hour behind the train it delayed! Similarly I was on a train delayed by being behind a steam-hauled ECS running over three hours early! Fortunately in both cases the delay was only small.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Well then, today the signallers must have been feeling ill on the GWML as, for the first time since the Heathrow branch was opened, the up HST I was on was not checked on the approach to Airport Junction and sailed through at 121mph...

 

[Tomnick]

What is the policy as regards regulating non-passenger trains running early? Is a signaller at a location where he can regulate such a train expected to do so? Does he have to speak to the next signaller down the line to ask if it's okay to send it forward early? Or is it just 'send it forward then it's not my problem'?

I've noticed that Preston PSB (since everyone else is naming and shaming!) seem very keen to send them on their way no matter what, sometimes delaying other services in the process. Just a few weeks ago I was waiting at Blackburn for a train that was ten down - delayed behind a kettle running light engine that should have been half an hour behind the train it delayed! Similarly I was on a train delayed by being behind a steam-hauled ECS running over three hours early! Fortunately in both cases the delay was only small.

Early runners are OK as long as (as you suggest) the next regulating location can deal with it and a margin exists to get it there without causing a delay. Lots of potential pitfalls though, such as relief unexpectedly not being forthcoming when a train arrives early at a relieving location. Any delay so caused will be attributed to the signalman or controller who made the decision to run it, unless something went wrong subsequently to cause a problem.

 

[Cabview]

Sorry about the two versions of the same story. The first one took so long to get posted up, I thought it must have got lost in transit, so sent in another... these delays are everywhere it seems! Thanks for all your comments by the way.

 

[greatkingrat]

at Ilford we were delayed due to lineside equipment problems there and then put behind a stopper to Colchester, RTT times here: www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y11175/2013/09/07/advanced

The signallers didn't "put you behind" a stopper. The Colchester stopper left Liverpool Street on time, 22 minutes before you, and in normal circumstances would have cleared the mainline before the Norwich service reached Colchester. The Ilford problems led to a queue of trains and meant you ended up catching the trains in front of you.

I don't think the signallers could realistically have handled this any differently.

 

[WessexEclectic]

Early runners are OK as long as (as you suggest) the next regulating location can deal with it and a margin exists to get it there without causing a delay. Lots of potential pitfalls though, such as relief unexpectedly not being forthcoming when a train arrives early at a relieving location. Any delay so caused will be attributed to the signalman or controller who made the decision to run it, unless something went wrong subsequently to cause a problem.

But say for example train 4O01 is run early by Box A to Box B. Box B then has a "signal failure" whilst 4O01 is in its area causing delays to other trains because 4O01 is 'in the way'. I take it that Box A is attributed the delay for running 4O01 early, even though Box A could have had no fore-knowledge of the subsequent signall failure?!!

 

[Tomnick]

But say for example train 4O01 is run early by Box A to Box B. Box B then has a "signal failure" whilst 4O01 is in its area causing delays to other trains because 4O01 is 'in the way'. I take it that Box A is attributed the delay for running 4O01 early, even though Box A could have had no fore-knowledge of the subsequent signall failure?!!

I've heard of that happening in the past, but I've seen it put in writing (on our area at least) that any such delays would, quite correctly in my opinion, be put to the signal failure rather than whoever made the decision to run the train early. Early running is sometimes the best way of making best use of the infrastructure (see High Dyke's post on the previous page!), particularly if a late runner looks like it might otherwise get in the way. You could equally find that you hold a train to time and a signal failure then occurs - if it had been run early, it'd be well out of the way and would thus reduce the delay dobbed to the failure.

One question of my own - is it right to further delay a late passenger (with PPM unachievable) rather than regulating, and delaying, a right time freight in its favour?

 

[221129]

One question of my own - is it right to further delay a late passenger (with PPM unachievable) rather than regulating, and delaying, a right time freight in its favour?

I would say it depends on what the Freight and the Passenger Train are. For example a Light Loco or Faster Freight out in front of a stopper or Semi fast would be Ok but a fully loaded stone train in front of an Express Probably not.

But I suppose it all depends on the headway between the two. If you have enough time to get the Stone to a loop for the Express to pass then I would personally do that to keep them both running and giving the best chance for them to not loose anymore time.

 

[Tomnick]

Let's say that it's a loaded stone train, running in its booked path approaching a loop that it's not booked to go into. There's a late-running 'regional' passenger behind it (that should already be in front). Obviously, the further away the passenger, the greater the margin available to keep the freight running. How much delay to the passenger is acceptable before the freight needs to be put away for it, delaying the freight and putting it at risk of missing its path at the next major junction?

 

[The Planner]

Further questions m'lud... is the stone a Class 6 and what is top speed of the passenger?

 

[PermitToTravel]

Sorry, please can someone explain to me why the regulation policy even mentions PPM? A train failing PPM is bad, but only because this train is late, and surely this is already mentioned (as minimisation of delay, and efficient use of infrastructure)? Is this just a case of minimising delay penalties rather than actual delay?

 

[Tomnick]

Let's say class 6 freight, mostly downhill but a bit of a faff to deal with at the next regulating location. 90mph passenger with two station stops. Anything less than a 15 minute margin risks a further delay to the passenger.

 

[The Planner]

Thinking about it, if the PPM has gone down the pan I would be looking at the next booked working for the passenger set. If there was a decent turnaround I'd run the freight as I'd bet you nail it for 2-3 minutes just getting it in the loop, probably another 3-4 waiting for the passenger to pass and then another 3 trying to get the trucks back up to speed. The delay to the passenger probably wouldn't put it into CaSL.