Virgin Trains December timetable change - later arrivals at Euston

[All Line Rover]

From the December timetable change the vast majority of Virgin Trains arrivals at London Euston are timed to arrive 1 minute later than at present. Is this simply a crafty, underhanded way of increasing PPM, or is there a better reason for it?

With regards to the 'express' services, the 07:00 Manchester to Euston remains at 2h, but the 07:00 Liverpool to Euston has increased from 2h 03m to 2h 04m (and IIRC this service used to be scheduled to take 2h), the 07:30 Birmingham to Euston has increased from 1h 12m to 1h 13m, and the 07:51 Birmingham International to Euston has increased from 1h 08m to 1h 09m.

 

[dk1]

From the December timetable change the vast majority of Virgin Trains arrivals at London Euston are timed to arrive 1 minute later than at present. Is this simply a crafty, underhanded way of increasing PPM, or is there a better reason for it?

With regards to the 'express' services, the 07:00 Manchester to Euston remains at 2h, but the 07:00 Liverpool to Euston has increased from 2h 03m to 2h 04m (and IIRC this service used to be scheduled to take 2h), the 07:30 Birmingham to Euston has increased from 1h 12m to 1h 13m, and the 07:51 Birmingham International to Euston has increased from 1h 08m to 10h 09m.

Arrivals VHF where originally:-

08.58 - 07.00 Manchester
09.01 - 07.00 Liverpool
09.04 - 04.28 Glasgow

All slipping a little bit but still very good. These gave little or no breathing space.

 

[The Planner]

It is down to the existing TSR at Norton Bridge and Watford being made into PSR, they add one minute in total to the journey times. Engineering allowance doesn't apply when they aren't a TSR. In the case of the Manchester and Brum trains it would add ½ minute to the journey but you cannot terminate a train on the ½ minute so those do have time chucked in, but that happens wholesale over the network.

 

[All Line Rover]

Ah, interesting. Thank you. Do you know why the same has not occurred in the reverse direction?

 

[The Planner]

The TSRs are only in the up direction, simple as.

 

[dvboy]

Can someone explain what TSR and PSR are please?

 

[Nym]

Tempoary Speed Restriction and Perminant Speed Restriction

 

[Darren R]

.... but you cannot terminate a train on the ½ minute....

You learn something new everyday! Just out of idle curiosity, why can't trains terminate on the half minute?

 

[The Planner]

It is a good question and more of a legacy thing that just seems to be accepted, I'll try and find out.

 

[Muzer]

For someone who isn't quite aware on the details of problems/etc. on most lines, why was there a TSR? What warranted it to be put in in the first place, and why has it now become a PSR? I would have thought most TSRs would be, er, temporary, and if it's not a temporary reason, why wasn't it already in place?

 

[The Planner]

In the case of Norton Bridge it is the fixed diamonds, notoriously difficult to maintain and if they start to crack then they need replacement, which on a route like that is not a cheap and easy thing to do as they are canted and on a curve I think. The TSR lowers the stress on them so they last longer between heavier maintenance. Watford is similar with some of the S&C. You are not meant to have a TSR on for more than 6 months (cue a list of places where this hasn't occured....)

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It's a strange thing that 90mph was achieved southbound through Norton Bridge for as many years as I can remember, but now the best they can do is 50mph (or is it 60).
The main difference in recent years is the amount of northbound traffic towards Stoke across the diamond.
Luckily it is all due to be replaced when the Norton Bridge flyover goes in, and the Watford crossovers go in the blockade next August.

 

[TEW]

You are not meant to have a TSR on for more than 6 months (cue a list of places where this hasn't occured....)

There's one at Gwinear Road level crossing between Camborne and St Erth which has been in place for over 4 years now, and isn't going to be removed any time soon. It's in place because tractors taking a tight turn immediately after the level crossing were getting stuck and fouling the crossing, and it's an AHB crossing. I'm not aware of any plans to convert the crossing to another type, so the TSR looks set to stay in place.

 

[306024]

You learn something new everyday! Just out of idle curiosity, why can't trains terminate on the half minute?

To the best of my knowledge technically trains can terminate on the half minute. However the passenger timetable will round this up to the next whole minute, and the software used by most TOCs for diagramming will do likewise. Therefore trains are usually rounded up in the schedule to be consistent.

 

[The Planner]

Not the case for us in the WTT, we always add the {} at the end of the schedule if required, TPS wont do it.

 

[306024]

Yes should have said rounded up manually, using {} as you say.

 

[Hellfire]

I travel up to London every Tuesday on the 0656 Preston to Euston Pendolino which originates at Glasgow.

When I first began making this trip two years ago the service was timed into Euston at 0904. A year ago that changed to 0906 and, in the last few weeks, it has changed again with an arrival time scheduled for 0907.

The time from Preston has remained 0656 throughout.

I appreciate three minutes is neither here or there in the scheme of things but I just wondered what was changing to make this service progressively later. Are they just building slack into the timetable to avoid penalties of some kind?

 

[The Planner]

The 0906 to 0907 change will be down to TSR being made into PSR at Norton Bridge and Watford, you can't use engineering allowance in those cases so it has to be added to the timetable.

 

[dk1]

It was also very rare that this service arrived at 09.04. Came in a flight of fast Pendos at 08.58 & 09.01 from Manchester & Liverpool respectively. Always seemed to be on time until around 08.45 then gradually lose a few minutes.

 

[mister-sparky]

Train companies always pad out timetables more than they need to. Saves paying out on compensation for late running. It's disgraceful and should be banned. Journey times would be so much quicker if trains didn't have to wait around at stations because they arrive "early".

 

[yorkie]

Train companies always pad out timetables more than they need to. Saves paying out on compensation for late running. It's disgraceful and should be banned. Journey times would be so much quicker if trains didn't have to wait around at stations because they arrive "early".

How would you ban it? Would you make this train depart Glasgow later? What if another train was already running in the optimum path for a section of the journey? Do passengers want an unreliable service?

 

[snail]

Train companies always pad out timetables more than they need to. Saves paying out on compensation for late running. It's disgraceful and should be banned. Journey times would be so much quicker if trains didn't have to wait around at stations because they arrive "early".

Your argument has an absence of logic. If they are making allowances for late running how can they arrive early?

 

[The Planner]

Train companies always pad out timetables more than they need to. Saves paying out on compensation for late running. It's disgraceful and should be banned. Journey times would be so much quicker if trains didn't have to wait around at stations because they arrive "early".

I will trot out my stock answer of "don't confuse the PTT with the WTT...."

 

[IrishDave]

The change from 0904 to 0906 was a ripple effect of the changes to the London Midland 1Uxx Euston-Crewe via the Trent Valley services in December 2012. In particular, 1U20 0652 Crewe-Euston (which was added in Dec 2012) would have been only a minute or so in front of 1R18 0700 Manchester Picc-Euston, so the latter had 1½ minutes pathing time added to it between Stone and Colwich. That pushed its arrival into Euston back from 0858 to 0900, and rippled through the 0901 from Liverpool (which became 0903) and 0904 from Glasgow (which become 0906).

However, while the extra minute was indeed added to the Liverpool (now 0904) and Glasgow (now 0907) arrivals in Dec 2013, the Manchester remains an 0900 arrival - perhaps because it only has to pass through Watford and not Norton Bridge, they got away with reducing the allowances somewhere else and keeping the magic 2-hour timing?

 

[Hellfire]

The 0906 to 0907 change will be down to TSR being made into PSR at Norton Bridge and Watford, you can't use engineering allowance in those cases so it has to be added to the timetable.

For the ignorant, like me, please explain TSR and PSR.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

For the ignorant, like me, please explain TSR and PSR.

Ignore that. Just realised I've been moved to this thread and the answer has been given.

 

[dk1]

However, while the extra minute was indeed added to the Liverpool (now 0904) and Glasgow (now 0907) arrivals in Dec 2013, the Manchester remains an 0900 arrival - perhaps because it only has to pass through Watford and not Norton Bridge, they got away with reducing the allowances somewhere else and keeping the magic 2-hour timing?

Although for the first 3 years of VHF this train ran sub-2 hours as was booked to arrive at 08.58 in the public timetable.

 

[IrishDave]

Although for the first 3 years of VHF this train ran sub-2 hours as was booked to arrive at 08.58 in the public timetable.

I explained the change from 0858 to 0900 in the paragraph before the one you quoted - the new 1U20 0652 Crewe-Euston conflicted at Colwich with the 0858 arrival, so the latter was moved to 0900.

 

[dk1]

I explained the change from 0858 to 0900 in the paragraph before the one you quoted - the new 1U20 0652 Crewe-Euston conflicted at Colwich with the 0858 arrival, so the latter was moved to 0900.

Oh sorry. However if I was out to do with VT I would Have fought to keep the headline Manchester schedule even if it meant losing out elsewhere. It is the biggest revenue cash cow & thus the most important stream after all.

 

[calc7]

Oh sorry. However if I was out to do with VT I would Have fought to keep the headline Manchester schedule even if it meant losing out elsewhere. It is the biggest revenue cash cow & thus the most important stream after all.

Indeed - even if 0900 arrival is a necessity a 0701 or 0702 departure would be preferable.