Virgin Trains' shambolic reservation policy

[yorkie]

Virgin Trains are apparently terminating some London Euston to Glasgow trains at Preston, and starting trains from Preston to Glasgow...

...except these are actually through trains that change headcode/service ID en-route!

For example the 1330 from London to Glasgow 'terminated' at Preston at 1658, and immediately formed the 1641 (which was supposed to have been the 1430 from London) from Preston, but nothing was mentioned to any passengers that this was happening.

I realised this was going to happen and asked staff at Preston if this was true; I was confirmed this was the case. I asked if reservations on the train would be for the 1541 or the 1641. I was told there would be no reservations.

I have absolutely no issue with a policy of suspending seat reservations; I think it is a good idea during disruption but passengers should be informed of this.

Staff declined to make any announcement at Preston regarding seat reservation situation and staff on the train made no mention of this either.

Once the train pulled in, it became clear that the reservations were all wrong for the advertised departure and were for the previous service (ie. the 1541 from Preston, which departed at 1549!); so people boarding the train at Preston looking for their reserved seats discovered the electronic reservations did not match the reservations stated on their tickets. People already on the train would not have expected to move either (and understandably so!).

From the point of view of anyone who was on board the train before Preston, they are on the 1330 from Euston running 80 minutes late. Yet the Train Manager announced that this is the "slightly delayed" 1641 from Preston. I do not believe the TM would knowingly make such an announcement when most passengers were 80 minutes late, and must not realise yet what has actually happened to this train.

In my opinion the train should either not change service part way through the journey, or they should say seat reservations are suspended and this should be clearly stated at stations and on the train, with the reservation system displaying blank screens.

I believe Virgin are putting their passengers and frontline staff in a position of conflict, which is unfair and unreasonable and very easily avoided.

 

[py_megapixel]

I would suggest that the electronic displays say something like "RESERVATIONS ON THIS TRAIN SUSPENDED" rather than simply going blank.

When you say that they declined to make an announcement, do you mean that you asked them to and they wouldn't't, or that they just didn't? If the former, what reason did they give?

This whole business of changing headcode halfway through is far too confusing. I have not travelled on VT recently but from your description it sounds like it is just yet another complication for passengers.

How about a service where the coach letters reverse on route, so that coach A becomes coach K and so on?

 

[bramling]

I would suggest that the electronic displays say something like "RESERVATIONS ON THIS TRAIN SUSPENDED" rather than simply going blank.

When you say that they declined to make an announcement, do you mean that you asked them to and they wouldn't't, or that they just didn't? If the former, what reason did they give?

This whole business of changing headcode halfway through is far too confusing. I have not travelled on VT recently but from your description it sounds like it is just yet another complication for passengers.

Unfortunately it's a pretty standard method of service recovery. Most likely the train was booked a crew change at Preston, so the crew for the later service were simply told to take the train and make it theirs. The original service was then effectively cancelled, albeit the passengers didn't know any different as they were able to remain on the train.

The fuss seems to boil down to the passengers not being adequately informed of the situation.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Whereas on the 1315 Birmingham NS to Glasgow (ex Euston) - a 5-car 221 no less and wedged as far as Carlisle - the reservation system was only functioning in coaches B, C and E, and very little help forthcoming from the on-board crew. Indeed we saw the guard once and the rubbish guy five times between Birmingham and Glasgow!

If this is the standard of the sainted ‘Virgin Trains Experience’ then roll on the Firstgroup takeover. Based on my experience with GWR they have a much better idea how to run an intercity railway. Perhaps Virgin should just stick to planes.

 

[yorkie]

I would suggest that the electronic displays say something like "RESERVATIONS ON THIS TRAIN SUSPENDED" rather than simply going blank.

Yes agreed

When you say that they declined to make an announcement, do you mean that you asked them to and they wouldn't't, or that they just didn't? If the former, what reason did they give?

I asked staff on the platform and they didn't give a reason. No sign of any on board staff.

This whole business of changing headcode halfway through is far too confusing. I have not travelled on VT recently but from your description it sounds like it is just yet another complication for passengers.

Agreed.

Unfortunately it's a pretty standard method of service recovery.

It makes no difference to service recovery; the 1230 became the 1330; the 1330 became the 1430 and so on.

Most likely the train was booked a crew change at Preston, so the crew for the later service were simply told to take the train and make it theirs. The original service was then effectively cancelled, albeit the passengers didn't know any different as they were able to remain on the train.

You could just as easily tell the staff they are taking the delayed train that was scheduled to depart an hour earlier, which is what LNER would do.

Indeed we saw the guard once and the rubbish guy five times between Birmingham and Glasgow!

Not seen any Guard on any of the three Virgin services I've taken today, which is in line with my expectations of course (though I expect to see a friendly ticket inspector on my onward service from Glasgow though )

 

[bramling]

It makes no difference to service recovery; the 1230 became the 1330; the 1330 became the 1430 and so on.

Yes it does, because (assuming there's a crew change) it helps get the crews in the right place.

You could just as easily tell the staff they are taking the delayed train that was scheduled to depart an hour earlier, which is what LNER would do.

Which is an excellent way to lose track of where your crews are, as now you have a train running about with the "wrong" crew on it. Is it really worth it just to avoid a few messed-up seat reservations?

 

[Clip]

This can't be true because in the WCML franchise announcement thread we are being told that Virgin are amazing and they can do nothing wrong.

 

[ainsworth74]

Which is an excellent way to lose track of where your crews are, as now you have a train running about with the "wrong" crew on it. Is it really worth it just to avoid a few messed-up seat reservations?

Well it must be possible as I can never recall LNER doing something like described in this thread as part of their service recovery plan.

 

[ainsworth74]

This can't be true because in the WCML franchise announcement thread we are being told that Virgin are amazing and they can do nothing wrong.

Shocking display of fake news isn't it?

 

[Clip]

Shocking display of fake news isn't it?

They wont arrive awesome thats for sure

 

[bramling]

Well it must be possible as I can never recall LNER doing something like described in this thread as part of their service recovery plan.

Anything's possible, but that doesn't make it a good idea. If you have a mismatch between a train and what crew should be on it then as a minimum it will mean extra communications are required. Is that a good idea when the service is disrupted?

 

[Ianno87]

Whereas on the 1315 Birmingham NS to Glasgow (ex Euston) - a 5-car 221 no less and wedged as far as Carlisle - the reservation system was only functioning in coaches B, C and E, and very little help forthcoming from the on-board crew. Indeed we saw the guard once and the rubbish guy five times between Birmingham and Glasgow!

If this is the standard of the sainted ‘Virgin Trains Experience’ then roll on the Firstgroup takeover. Based on my experience with GWR they have a much better idea how to run an intercity railway. Perhaps Virgin should just stick to planes.

If it really was "wedged", how on earth did the rubbish guy get through 5 times....?

 

[bb21]

Anything's possible, but that doesn't make it a good idea. If you have a mismatch between a train and what crew should be on it then as a minimum it will mean extra communications are required. Is that a good idea when the service is disrupted?

Agreed. Unnecessarily putting crews on the wrong service is a recipe for disaster and rather stupid. It is another layer of complication which is just not needed.

In this case the cause of the problem is the poor communication about the suspension of seat reservations whether it be between control and crew, or between crew and passengers, not the service recovery. With disruption to this extent, ticket restrictions would have been relaxed, so whether the service is one an hour earlier or later doesn't matter, as long as people are going to the right destination.

 

[bb21]

Well it must be possible as I can never recall LNER doing something like described in this thread as part of their service recovery plan.

All depends on how crew diagrams are structured, and where stock needs to finish at the end of the day. It isn't really possible to comment without knowing the intricacies of East Coast and West Coast operations, but the controllers' hands are often tied, as these trains go extensive distances so there may not be a huge amount of flexibility in swaps and changes.

 

[Tomnick]

It also makes sense (to me at least) to try to have trains running into Scotland roughly in their booked path, even if that’s a hastily-entered VSTP (as these were?), rather than everything turning up mega late (and probably ending up at the bottom of the regulating pile!) with the wrong crews and forming different back workings to what’s booked. I don’t disagree that it needs to be made clear that reservations are in the bin in that case though.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

If it really was "wedged", how on earth did the rubbish guy get through 5 times....?

He appeared to be exceptionally limber! It surprised a few people around us when he was squeezing through as the train was at a stand outside Preston.

 

[Starmill]

It also makes sense (to me at least) to try to have trains running into Scotland roughly in their booked path, even if that’s a hastily-entered VSTP (as these were?), rather than everything turning up mega late (and probably ending up at the bottom of the regulating pile!) with the wrong crews and forming different back workings to what’s booked. I don’t disagree that it needs to be made clear that reservations are in the bin in that case though.

Almost no trains were arriving in Scotland 'in their booked path' as you put it, because the journey time between Preston and Carlisle was extended by around 25 minutes due to an emergency speed restriction.

 

[Starmill]

Which is an excellent way to lose track of where your crews are, as now you have a train running about with the "wrong" crew on it.

If you have a mismatch between a train and what crew should be on it then as a minimum it will mean extra communications are required. Is that a good idea when the service is disrupted?

Presumably a rather large proportion of their trains on Friday had a different crew on them to what was planned, given journey times were significantly extended in at least two places, affecting trains in both directions, but by quite varying amounts of time for each train which passes through the affected areas? A significant number of trains arrived in Scotland 90 minutes late or so.

Presumably they have some way to manage this, and don't go 'oh well we have kept some train crew on their booked train so that's easy'.

Some services from London Euston to Blackpool North were sent to Glasgow Central instead.

 

[bramling]

Presumably a rather large proportion of their trains on Friday had a different crew on them to what was planned, given journey times were significantly extended in at least two places, affecting trains in both directions, but by quite varying amounts of time for each train which passes through the affected areas? A significant number of trains arrived in Scotland 90 minutes late or so.

Presumably they have some way to manage this, and don't go 'oh well we have kept some train crew on their booked train so that's easy'.

Some services from London Euston to Blackpool North were sent to Glasgow Central instead.

What happens to the individual trains doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things, except towards the end of the day when consideration will be being given to getting the stock balance right for the next day, or perhaps if there’s a particular train which *really* needs to be somewhere. Other than that trains can generally run about as and when, unfazed by things like PNBs, driving hours, driver needing to be somewhere to pick up next train, driver needing to finish in a particular place (normally their own depot), route knowledge, et cetera. It is for these reasons that crewing issues ultimately heavily dictate what happens when a service is disrupted - hence why two identically late services might need to be recovered in different ways.

However, the individual service will generally match the crew that’s supposed to be on it, otherwise the whole organisation of the service falls apart. Remember a railway is run by a collaboration of people, so people can’t just “do their own thing” on a wider scale as if this happens then *everyone* has to be kept in the loop. The only routine exception might be if a spare crew get put on a train, which is of course one way of getting out of trouble. The way VT seem to have done things is exactly as one would expect.

Obviously when things get really bad an emergency timetable might be considered, in which case all train and crew diagrams are essentially wiped clean and the service is made up from a completely clean sheet. This will happen when the booked train and crew arrangements are so badly disrupted that they fall apart.

The principles of managing and recovering a disrupted service are pretty much standard, although of course there’s normally more than one way of achieving a given result. The more intense the operation, the more important it is that everyone works in the same way, as when working under pressure any member of operating staff needs to be able to look at what’s in front of them and be able to work out what’s what. The more elaborate arrangements are made, the more difficult this becomes.

 

[Starmill]

What happens to the individual trains doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things

Oh good, so I'm glad you agree that it makes very little difference in practice as to whether the train is running 60 minutes late or replaced with another 'on time' 1Zxx service.

I don't really see how any of the rest of your long rambling post is relevant here, except to make yourself sound good of course.

Of course, if a clear policy for seat reservations were published and then stuck to by the company, this sort of issue would be far less likely to arise. I doubt they'll do that though. Telling people that their seat reservations aren't going to be honoured might also result in the company having to pay out compensation, which they don't want to do.

 

[bramling]

Almost no trains were arriving in Scotland 'in their booked path' as you put it, because the journey time between Preston and Carlisle was extended by around 25 minutes due to an emergency speed restriction.

So, what do you think is better...

1) a service and its crew going north 20 minutes late

or

2) a service and its crew going north 80 minutes late?

Bearing in mind that the driver may well have a PNB required to be taken within a certain time, or another train to pick up at a certain time, or be booked to finish at a certain place/time.

If you go for option 2 you have a much greater chance of one or more of these issues arising, which ultimately means more intervention will be required.

In the original case, the train may not have gone north from Preston exactly on path, but no doubt still arrived at Glasgow less late than if everything had been left alone and it had arrived bearing its original reporting number and original booked driver. This would have increased the chance of the corresponding southbound service running on time and on path, so Tomnick’s point stands.

Controllers and train crew supervisors make these decisions on a constant basis to keep the service moving. The best way to achieve that is to endeavour to get the service as close as possible to how it’s meant to run, both in terms of what the passenger sees (the timetable) and what is required behind the scenes to run it (the train crews and rolling stock).

The other way to get a late train back on path is to turn it short of the booked destination (again if the crew arrangements allow this - not a readily feasible option if the driver is booked to finish at the train’s booked destination, for example). Would people have preferred that option instead?!

Some people thrive on all this, but it’s very much a black art.

 

[yorkie]

So, what do you think is better...

1) a service and its crew going north 20 minutes late

or

2) a service and its crew going north 80 minutes late?

The same physical train and same actual crew will be doing the same thing regardless; so th question is whether it's better to tell passengers they are no longer on the train they thought they were on, it not. It makes no operational difference.

That said i wouldn't be too fussed if they communicated it clearly to customers and made the reservation situation clear and sensible.

But I do reject your idea that what they did had any operational benefit; LNER do things differently and they are just as competent as Virgin at service recovery, if not more so.

 

[bramling]

The same physical train and same actual crew will be doing the same thing regardless; so th question is whether it's better to tell passengers they are no longer on the train they thought they were on, it not. It makes no operational difference.

The passengers would have to be told if, for example, there was a difference in stopping pattern as a result of the change - although they might get round this by adding an additional stop.

But the point remains that the railway runs with a timetable, rolling stock diagrams, and train crew diagrams. If you try to do something clever, what happens if there's a shift change in the control and someone else takes over and either doesn't get told about the special arrangement, or forgets? By doing it the way they did this risk doesn't arise. As I said elsewhere, a black art, and a highly complex one - and something which even people in the industry don't always readily grasp why things are done in a particular way. Needless to say it's rather frustrating when someone puts in a lot of effort to get a load of services back on time, and someone moans about one little trivial detail which didn't go so well.

But I do reject your idea that what they did had any operational benefit; LNER do things differently and they are just as competent as Virgin at service recovery, if not more so.

Perhaps you might provide an example of a situation where LNER have handled a similar situation differently, as this would make for interesting comparison?

 

[trebor79]

Anything's possible, but that doesn't make it a good idea. If you have a mismatch between a train and what crew should be on it then as a minimum it will mean extra communications are required. Is that a good idea when the service is disrupted?

But the Virgin method ends with a mismatch bewteen the train and the diagram, which must lead to similar issue with trains being on the wrong diagram to get where they need to be for exams etc?
The cynic in me suspects that changing the headcode is a way of minimising delay minutes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That said i wouldn't be too fussed if they communicated it clearly to customers and made the reservation situation clear and sensible.

This to me is the fundamental.

All trains on which reservations are provided should have clear stickers, visible from all locations in the coach, stating the following:

===

SEAT RESERVATIONS

Seat reservations apply only where they are indicated on the overhead displays / by a ticket placed in the seat.

If seat reservations are not indicated please take any available seat. If you have a reservation and are unable to find an available seat or seats please find the Guard to obtain assistance. The Guard will assist you to find a seat, or advise you on how to obtain compensation if a seat is unavailable.

Do not remove reservation tickets; doing so is an offence against the Railway Byelaws and could result in prosecution.

===

That way everybody knows where they are and there can be no arguments.

 

[bramling]

But the Virgin method ends with a mismatch bewteen the train and the diagram, which must lead to similar issue with trains being on the wrong diagram to get where they need to before exams etc?

Yes you're absolutely right, however during service disruption this is the lesser of two evils. A train heading for the wrong depot at the end of the day won't immediately sit the service down, whereas a train turning up at a crew relief point and there being no driver to take it forward is ultimately worse because you're then at the whim of events. Drivers are generally stroppier than trains in having stricter parameters to work to!

If luck is on your side the reforming may well work out that the train is on a path which ends up at the same depot anyway, if not and it's urgently needed to finish at a particular location then that's one more thing to add to control's workload - they will endeavour to achieve it by the end of the day. A set swap at somewhere like Euston would be one ready way of achieving that outcome.

So in essence having the wrong train on a diagram isn't a problem (so long as stock type matches up et cetera) - that might not be a problem at all, and if it is it can be sorted out later. Having the wrong driver is much more of an immediate problem.

All this is exactly where controllers earn their money!

The cynic in me suspects that changing the headcode is a way of minimising delay minutes.

There could be some spin-off benefits, but surely reducing overall delay minutes is a good thing if it's helping to put the service back right, as it means more people's trains will be closer to where they're meant to be?

 

[Master29]

But the point remains that the railway runs with a timetable, rolling stock diagrams, and train crew diagrams. If you try to do something clever, what happens if there's a shift change in the control and someone else takes over and either doesn't get told about the special arrangement, or forgets? By doing it the way they did this risk doesn't arise. As I said elsewhere, a black art, and a highly complex one - and something which even people in the industry don't always readily grasp why things are done in a particular way. Needless to say it's rather frustrating when someone puts in a lot of effort to get a load of services back on time, and someone moans about one little trivial detail which didn't go so well.

Your answer almost sounds Sir Humphrey Applebyesque from Yes Minister/Prime Minister as it certainly sounds a complex system.

realtime trains states a problem with the electrified lines as being the reason for the lateness, not that this helps much

 

[ScotsRail]

Two trips on Virgin on Saturday -

trip 1 - no reservations, every single seat showing as available, and the train crew didn't know until we'd started moving and they came in and started checking tickets. Where the issue was pointed out to them.

trip 2 - my reserved seat in A26, as printed on my ticket, had been assigned to someone else and was showing as reserved from a totally different station. Luckily they hadn't turned up or were sat elsewhere.

 

[43094]

Without going into the specifics of the thread above, two different, yet inter-connected strands here:

1a) What’s required to run a service for passengers (a crew plus a train, as a minimum), and:
1b) The operational decisions required to best get these where they need to be to convey passengers, particularly, but not exclusively, towards the end of shift (crew) or day (crew and train), and:
2) How to juggle the above to provide the most effective service to passengers - Controllers will be linking this into points 1a and 1b above, and putting themselves ‘into the passengers shoes’ as best they can.

I do have to also agree with the points ‘Bramling’ makes above, especially that it is a ‘black art’. Only a significantly low percentage of the factors considered will be visible to the passenger - but by definition, the end result(s) will be visible - combining that is a significant challenge, especially when single-manned and/or when circumstances shift repeatedly and without warning.

 

[harz99]

So this is still happening then!

By this I mean not using the simple expedient of telling the Guard/Train Manager that the working they are on/taking on has been REFORMED from an earlier delayed service, along with an instruction to turn the reservation system off and announce at each stop, that seat reservations are not in place and for pax to take any available seat in the class they are ticketed for.

I haven't travelled regularly on WCML for over 10 years, but had the exact same problem as Yorkie a decade or more ago when very bad weather had delayed the train i was on from Glasgow to the extent it was reformed twice en route, after the second time and being ostensibly spot on time for the 2nd later service there were near riots at Wigan when boarding pax found "their" seats occupied by already weary travellers, the TM who took the train on at Preston being totally unaware of its history to that point, until I told him.

Much is being said about operational reasons etc. and very little thought being given to the effects on travelling pax, who if you are a member of staff, are ultimately the reason why you're employed in whatever role you undertake...