Trains across Britain missed stops 160 times a day, BBC reports

[theironroad]

It’s not just about how many people are inconvenienced. The extent of the inconvenience needs to be taken into account. Those 10 people might be inconvenienced by having to wait an hour for their next service, whereas the 200 might be only subject to a minor delay of perhaps 10 minutes.

...and that is usually taken into account when train service managers decide which trains will skip or turn back short.

 

[pdeaves]

But that is my point! All of them!! I understand at some times you can't please everyone but lots of times everyone can be, but the railways always see it as "either or" never, we could do this and please everyone! Of course you can't everytime, but the attitude is always you can't everytime!

If you can find a way to stop a train AND make up lost time AND provide the service frequency demanded during serious perturbation (say, when there's a fatality), please let the assembled masses know! Until then, there are trade-offs. You consider everyone and make a decision on the best overall course of action at that moment. The next day/week/month/whatever it may become apparent that another action may, possibly, have been better and that is fed into the plan. But, at the moment of crisis, the controllers can only use what is in front of them.

 

[Stew998]

Agreed.

I don't expect 100% of trains to run, I don't expect 100% of trains that do run to be on time throughout their journey, I appreciate that things will go wrong from time to time.

Maybe, in the context of the total number of station stops in an average day (hundreds of thousands?), a hundred and sixty isn't a huge number. As has been pointed out, there are some additional stops made at short notice too.

However these things need to be measured - I've no problem with the BBC reporting it - a lot of the comments on this thread are attacking the BBC for daring to raise this story rather than explaining why a hundred and sixty isn't an unreasonable amount.

And maybe it isn't an unreasonable amount. If these are generally stops on services with "metro" frequencies then that's maybe less significant than @Deafdoggie 's example of a Cornish station that doesn't get as frequent a service (so will be a bigger impact upon potential passengers than an urban route where there's "only" ten minutes to wait for the next service).

But I think it's an interesting thing to discuss - we have threads about much more insignificant things. Like regulation to accommodate late trains, ensuring that connections are met at junctions by delaying services to meet a late running trains, there are discussions to have about whether it's better to significantly inconvenience a small number of people for the sake of improving things for a much larger number of people.

There are other options for dealing with delays - some of which are less easy to do nowadays than in the Good Old Days (e.g. maybe thirty years ago you could terminate a service part way along a route and reverse, but with "rationalised" track layouts and busier lines it's maybe harder to arrange that).

There are trade-offs re tight turnarounds at termini (to provide a better frequency), chopping services into much shorter routes (which inconveniences a small number of long distance passengers to provide a more robust service for a bigger number of short distance passengers), Guards (using @Alteran Ancient 's example of their removal meaning unstaffed stations being skipped)... I think it's a worthwhile discussion to have. Maybe, in having it, "non enthusiasts" will understand the railway better and appreciate that most skipped stops are skipped for the Greater Good. But burying heads in sand and blaming the messenger for daring to bring up bad news seems quite a 1980s approach.

I quite agree, speaking as a Southern commuter (and about to become a reluctant more regular Thameslink victim) this practice is well known to me, and clearly this region is more affected, no doubt due to its congested nature.

I understand the logic and necessity, but what is not acceptable and is guaranteed to wind up regular commuters and confuse the inexperienced, is the poor handling of the situation and lack of announcements. Some people exist to be wound up but most will understand given an adequate announcement and a brief explanation - as with so many customer relations issues.

 

[JN114]

Thus proving it was quick and easy to arrange in one phone call. One call the railway were unable (or unwilling) to make, because it is simply easier to miss the stop out, and pay out delay repay

None of which adds up. It’s completely at odds with every single other instance of the 0935 being cancelled that I’ve directly dealt with. Even if XC didn’t ask us, the station staff at Penzance would be asking us if we hadn’t already spotted it and offered the option to XC. Cross Country can sometimes be reluctant/slow to do road transport but they’re well aware of their obligations; and they shouldn’t be leaving customers to their own devices like that.

 

[JN114]

For example, the lengthy and complex GWR service from Brighton etc to Worcester was extended to Great Malvern, principally as an Orcats Raid on the Worcester-Malvern flow. So the 0859 from Brighton winds through innumerable junctions and delay points to get to Malvern at 1430, 5.5 hours later, and is just given a 20-minute turnround before departing back at 1450 for Weymouth, arriving there 1912. Here the normal recovery mode for the outward service being late by more than a few minutes is not to skip stops, but to turn short at Worcester. Now there are all the excuses about "service agreed with the DfT" etc, but nobody told GWR to do a 20 minute turnround at the end of a 5.5 hour journey.

With due deference to the honourable member; where do they suggest a longer turnaround at Malvern be done, given the constraints of the layout there?

 

[Deafdoggie]

None of which adds up. It’s completely at odds with every single other instance of the 0935 being cancelled that I’ve directly dealt with. Even if XC didn’t ask us, the station staff at Penzance would be asking us if we hadn’t already spotted it and offered the option to XC. Cross Country can sometimes be reluctant/slow to do road transport but they’re well aware of their obligations; and they shouldn’t be leaving customers to their own devices like that.

Well it is exactly what happened. The GWR staff were polite, but basically, it was "Make your own arrangements" The taxi company (the same one took us back to the station a few days later), explained it happens a lot. Noone seems sure why the trains don't all call at Hayle in the first place, but cancellations adversely affect it more, but no extra provision is always made.

 

[Deafdoggie]

If you can find a way to stop a train AND make up lost time AND provide the service frequency demanded during serious perturbation (say, when there's a fatality), please let the assembled masses know! Until then, there are trade-offs. You consider everyone and make a decision on the best overall course of action at that moment. The next day/week/month/whatever it may become apparent that another action may, possibly, have been better and that is fed into the plan. But, at the moment of crisis, the controllers can only use what is in front of them.

As per my previous posts, I understand that it is not always possible, but it is sometimes perfectly possible to make alternative arrangements, yet is still not done.

 

[AlterEgo]

Cross Country can sometimes be reluctant/slow to do road transport but they’re well aware of their obligations; and they shouldn’t be leaving customers to their own devices like that.

Generally XC would (in my time there) authorise road transport where there was a delay of 2 hours or more, or the cancelled/delayed train was the final one of the day.

Normally in the situation @Deafdoggie describes they would simply advise catching the next train, which in his case would result in a delay of 1h15min.

It seems most likely that someone at XC Control forgot to request a special stop at Hayle on the GWR train.

 

[infobleep]

Other than the fact that skip stopping results in large fines for the TOC. They don't just do it for their benefit, they also do it for the benefit of passengers on later workings whose train will now be on time.

When there is only 1 fast service an hour and maybe a slow one, I do which they would make more effort for passengers trying to connect with it, when its starting short.

Allowing it to leave on time when your alternative train turns up 1-2 minutes later, isn't great.

I am aware it may delay other trains running later but during the peak trains are regularly delayed to passenger numbers and I don't see them telling passengers they no longer are allowed to board as this train must leave on time.

 

[infobleep]

What is this 'simple solution' ?



What to you propose as a 'consideration' ? Someone has to suffer. The choice is the majority or the minority. The consideration is towards the majority.

Isn't the railway meant to be inclusive and welcoming of minority groups.

EDIT: There was suppose to be a grin and laughing emoji there but they got removed.

 

[AM9]

As per my previous posts, I understand that it is not always possible, but it is sometimes perfectly possible to make alternative arrangements,

Unless one is at the points of control, (e.g. Network Rail and every TOC involved), such and assumption of what is perfectly possible cannot be made.

 

[infobleep]

That isn't the attitude, no. Whichever decision a Control takes will mean that one group (almost always, by volume, the larger group) of passengers affected will be dealt with first.

It is basically impossible to avoid "collateral" during disruption. That isn't to say there aren't occasions where some passengers have been "forgotten about", but even where they have, it's usually because resources are concentrated somewhere else.

I've heard of passengers suck at Haslemere at night with no one answering the phones via the help point and no information at the station.

At night I don't think I've ever had a successful use of the help point.

Then there was Chilworth. Train cancelled and next one in two hours. Used help point and it went to a National Rail Enquires call centre. They were trying to find out what to do but it was take quite some time. In the end someone else offered to give them a lift.

The only reason problems like that are not more common is because more train aren't skipping stops.

 

[ComUtoR]

Funny

But interesting point tbh. Something I don't see happen is that skip stops account for specific passengers onboard. If I had a Visually impaired passenger who was getting off a specific stop, generally I wouldn't know. Same with someone who had booked assistance or needs a station with step free access. Typically I just get the stop order. I make an announcement and then carry on.

 

[AlterEgo]

Isn't the railway meant to be inclusive and welcoming of minority groups.

There's a difference between "a minority" i.e. three people waiting an hour at Lichfield Trent Valley, and a protected minority under the Equality Act...

 

[WelshBluebird]

It is basically impossible to avoid "collateral" during disruption. That isn't to say there aren't occasions where some passengers have been "forgotten about", but even where they have, it's usually because resources are concentrated somewhere else.

Sorry but I don't think that is at all acceptable. Unless it is physically impossible for a ToC to help (thinking of flooding, or bad snowfall etc) then I don't think there is any defense at all for a ToC to leave passengers stranded and "forgotten about".

 

[Deafdoggie]

Unless one is at the points of control, (e.g. Network Rail and every TOC involved), such and assumption of what is perfectly possible cannot be made.

So the staff at control are unable to make a phone call? That does explain a lot! I f the passengers can sort it in one call, It must be embarrassing for the "professionals" who can't!

 

[AlterEgo]

Sorry but I don't think that is at all acceptable. Unless it is physically impossible for a ToC to help (thinking of flooding, or bad snowfall etc) then I don't think there is any defense at all for a ToC to leave passengers stranded and "forgotten about".

By "forgotten about", I do mean actually forgotten about or not considered at all by an overworked controller. Not sure why I put the quote marks in there.

Still not acceptable though. Most TOC Control rooms are run on a very tight headcount.

 

[AlterEgo]

So the staff at control are unable to make a phone call? That does explain a lot! I f the passengers can sort it in one call, It must be embarrassing for the "professionals" who can't!

If you're referring to obtaining a taxi to Hayle, this would require more than one phone call on the part of a controller (at least one from the platform staff to take all the details, and at least one to a taxi company to book the cab); this would spend about 5 minutes of their time organising a single taxi.

As I referred to earlier, TOC resourcing is really tight. Some TOCs now don't even have a customer support controller.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Which is my point entirely! The passengers don't get a look-in! Although I am fairly sure XC could have asked for a stop on the GWR 10:00 in one call

But it still looks poor when customers can arrange it better then the train company

 

[theironroad]

Isn't the railway meant to be inclusive and welcoming of minority groups.

I hope that's not even supposed to be serious.

No passengers are being inconvenienced due to their race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, disability or any other protected characteristics.

A smaller group of all passengers are being inconvenienced in order that many more don't suffer disruption for the rest of the day, nothing to do with 'minorities' or equality issues.

 

[pdeaves]

Let us remember that 'skipping stops' (for whatever reason) is not the same issue as 'leaving passengers stranded'. Where services have to be altered on the day, alternatives are regularly provided. No, the system is not perfect. Yes, it goes wrong on occasion. But; 160 missed calls is not 160 trains full of people abandoned in the middle of nowhere left to their own devices.

 

[DuncanS]

Skip stopped 2 stations on my way to work this morning, its the Scotrail way.

 

[infobleep]

There's a difference between "a minority" i.e. three people waiting an hour at Lichfield Trent Valley, and a protected minority under the Equality Act...

My comment was meant to be jokey but the grin and laughing emojis got removed. I wasn't aware they were not supported.

 

[sbt]

So if 10 people are going to be inconvenienced or 200 who do you give more consideration to?

My anecdotal experience is that, on some routes, times etc. it's the same 10 passengers nearly every time.

On a London-bound Portsmouth Direct stopping service the 'station skips' chosen usually seem to come into force at Haselmere (occasionally Havant). It is then a question of if the next stop is Godalming, Guildford, Woking, Clapham Junction or Waterloo. Which is great if you want one of the two stations between Haselmere and Godalming. You could, of course, get one of the Waterloo-Haselmere trains when it turns round but if there is any disruption it will be turned round early and never get to Haselmere.

I am one of those '10 passengers' and I can tell you that, despite its location, Haselmere, after it has been locked up for the evening, is a desolate and, because it catches the wind for some reason, often cold, place to be stranded.

My old station of West Byfleet is another place where 'the 10 passengers' can (or could) be (or rather not be - we didn't get there) found. Waterloo-Woking stoppers used to be turned round with monotonous regularity. Four in a row was my record - that was an extra 2.5 hour wait, always being promised that the next one would run, on a, IIRC, 1hr 40min journey. After that I started getting Taxis, or, if the weather was nice, walking along the canal (which took around an hour) once the first one was turned round.

These days there is at least now a reasonable chance that the railway will spring for a Taxi or insert stops on a later train. But it is still an issue.

I didn't buy my ticket on the understanding that my journey would be 'sacrificed for the greater good'. I brought it on the understanding that I would be able to get home at a reasonable time and in reasonable comfort.

It's all very nice for those making the decisions to give me an opportunity to feel noble on a regular basis. Unfortunately I get no comfort from feeling noble when it am stuck on a draughty platform (again) at eight in the evening, with my stomach expecting food, with no knowledge of when I will get home - I just feel 'Here we <redacted> go again' and 'I'm hungry' (I'm often also tired and cold).

To my mind its not just how many stops are skipped, or how many passengers are impacted, that matter. For both it's also which ones and how often.

 

[Taunton]

Isn't the railway meant to be inclusive and welcoming of minority groups.

Very good!!!!!

 

[nr758123]

...and that is usually taken into account when train service managers decide which trains will skip or turn back short.

One would hope so. But when your hourly service been on the receiving end of skip-stopping or turning back short a few times then you begin to have doubts.

 

[bb21]

Agreed....

There are several issues here.

There are a number of more fundamental issues uncovered by subsequent discussion in this thread that the industry should be addressing. One is of information provision during times of disruption, especially last-minute alterations, and its communication to customers already onboard. Two is of general service recovery decision making, which can vary a great deal in quality (I use the term in a loose sense) for various reasons. Third is immediate customer care of those who are adversely affected by such intervention. Number four is the issue of long-term customer care of those who are repeatedly affected, and improvement plans. Finally there is the overarching issue of declining service performance (or at least the lack of improvement in performance) in most cases.

There may be other issues I have overlooked, but these are the five I can identify through a brief glance at the discussions which customers care about, and I think this is largely representative of views amongst wider audience. In a sense it achieved a good result stimulating discussions on this forum, but how much it managed to do so elsewhere I don't know, but I doubt so very much.

It doesn't stop the original article being a load of misleading graphs and figures. There is so much excellent alternative material the BBC could have gone for because service interventions is one of the most important art in managing the passenger railway network, and can have significant impact on a large number of customers. Shame the intelligence (or shall I say laziness) of many BBC journalists these days do not seem to extend beyond a quick write-up. A little bit of research or enquiry could have gone a long way to turning this into an excellent article.

 

[Jimini]

Happens to me a couple of times a month on the West Anglia stoppers between Broxbourne Jcn and Tottenham Hale (stops at Cheshunt / Waltham X etc. etc. dropped) to minimise the effect on the section as it's so busy I guess. There's also the extra hassle of the many level crossings down that way too.

Greater Anglia right on cue with tonight’s one

 

[sbt]

There are several issues here. <snip>

Well said.

 

[Antman]

This mornings 10.20 London Bridge to Tattenham Corner departed at 10.35 and was curtailed at Coulsdon Town, with just an 8 minute turnaround at Tattenham Corner there's no other way of getting it back on time.