What’s going on with Thameslink?

[Horizon22]

Indeed. What I'm saying is, its not only GTR, other companies don't shower themselves in competence dealing with incidents either

Because it is incredibly difficult, if not impossible some times to “shower themselves in competence”, whatever your definition of that is. Spend a day or two in a control room during a fatality.

This is not to defend some of GTR’s deficiencies but an understanding that some times things will be out of their control and it’s a long time since I’ve seen that many unrelated incidents affect one operator in one day.

 

[Minstral25]

Because it is incredibly difficult, if not impossible some times to “shower themselves in competence”, whatever your definition of that is. Spend a day or two in a control room during a fatality.

Agree entirely it is very difficult.

Having toured GTR's Three Bridges Control room when a crisis happened I have seen a lot of staff working extremely hard to get the service back up.

My one negative take away was there did not seem to be enough staff for all the rapid decisions needed in that moment. The flip side is that when Thameslink/Southern is working well any extra staff would be sitting around doing very little. Currently more staff would probably be justified with number of issues happening daily.

 

[Horizon22]

Agree entirely it is very difficult.

Having toured GTR's Three Bridges Control room when a crisis happened I have seen a lot of staff working extremely hard to get the service back up.

My one negative take away was there did not seem to be enough staff for all the rapid decisions needed in that moment. The flip side is that when Thameslink/Southern is working well any extra staff would be sitting around doing very little. Currently more staff would probably be justified with number of issues happening daily.

It’s the perennial problem - senior leaders understandably aren’t too keen on seeing a lot of people or fairly decent wages doing not much 80% of the time, but that 20% of the time when workload increases 4 or 5x times you’d need extra support. There’s no easy (or cheap!) way around this.

The structure and layout of your control team / room can also play a part; as I said earlier GTR’s extensive network with key routes through an intensive core and across multiple NR routes cannot help matters either.

It also takes time to train up new staff if you wanted them on a temporary basis, by which point disruption may have eased. I doubt the DfT would fund extra resources at this time either.

 

[Envy123]

Well TL were utterly atrocious last night - massive delays across the network, trains stuck at Stevenage, Knebworth, Sandy etc. for up to 2 hours. The remaining Peterborough - Horsham trains of course all gave up and were cancelled even when trains could take the slow line. No replacement buses in sight either. Had no choice but to wait for about 90 minutes on an LNER 800 just to get to Peterborough, and an inflated taxi down back home.

All because of a bit of hay on the wires between Arlesey and Biggleswade...

View attachment 118977

Hopefully I won't be dependant on them for getting to work for much longer.

Partly why I moved to Peterborough - so I could use the more reliable LNER services. Honestly sick and tired of GTR at this point.

 

[43066]

Tlk is brilliant for me hardly ever use the tube these days but there needs to be a substantial improvement in how they deal with disruption.

I use GTR like the tube, from London Bridge through the core, (so can take anything other than the Sutton loopers and the S’oaks) and rely on a far more limited range of SE services to get me into London Bridge.

It’s notable that GTR still manages to cause me more issues than SE!

 

[bramling]

Because it is incredibly difficult, if not impossible some times to “shower themselves in competence”, whatever your definition of that is. Spend a day or two in a control room during a fatality.

This is not to defend some of GTR’s deficiencies but an understanding that some times things will be out of their control and it’s a long time since I’ve seen that many unrelated incidents affect one operator in one day.

It’s possibly worth a reminder that when this was all being discussed a few years ago, a certain (serial Thameslink Programme defender) poster told us all that the Great Northern network is “simple”.

Well, if it’s so simple then how come it’s proving almost impossible to recover things when stuff goes wrong? Reality is it’s a fiddly set of lines which is indeed simple when it’s running a March 2020 lockdown style service, but anything but simple when stuffed full with more trains than can be ideally handled. The moment stuff leaves booked paths the pack of cards tumbles quite quickly as everything no longer neatly fits together.

GTR’s control, whilst they do make occasional outwardly dubious decisions (especially in relation to removing stops), isn’t the problem here. They’re trying to manage something drawn up by people with crayons, which is simply too prone to disruption and too difficult to recover when disruption happens. It doesn’t help that we were told there would be all sorts of things done to make it all work, and in reality all this has come to nought, indeed even the crewing arrangements seem particularly awkward and not conducive to flexibility.

I can guarantee that the entire population of my town would have the 2017 service back in a flash, complete with the 365s to go with it. Ironically, the extra capacity provided by Thameslink probably isn’t even needed now.

The level of delusion shown by the “simple” comment told us all we needed to know about how the Thameslink Programme was going to work in practice, and now here we have - to go along with the hospitals with no patients - the station with no viable train service!

 

[WizCastro197]

Should be pleased that sounds like a signaller doing a bit of smart regulating to get your train round a stopping service on the Slows. Used to happen all the time but rare these days as signallers get beaten up if they show a bit of initiative and it doesn't work.

Yes But it didn't work. Part of it did and it would've been more useful if the train had remained on the fast line to Selhurst and as JonathanH Said that the allocation to Platform 4 was puzzling as it was occupied and platform 1 was free.

Side note, is there a crossover onto the Fast line immediately after Purley? In a Northbound Direction. Because if there is then it would be interesting for Reigate Services to switch onto Fast line there and not at Selhurst.

 

[OliverH68]

Yes. The 9R should call at New Cross Gate instead of Norwood Junction, as from September the 1Ps are calling at Norwood Junction anyway. They should also be extended to and from Horsham, as they stop at Purley and the 9Js should be the ones terminating at Gatwick.

I also think the 9Js should stop additionally at Purley as well as we lose 2tph to London from September, yet stations south of Purley face no change (with the 2J Caterhams now being curtailed to East Croydon).

 

[MikeWM]

Reality is it’s a fiddly set of lines which is indeed simple when it’s running a March 2020 lockdown style service, but anything but simple when stuffed full with more trains than can be ideally handled. The moment stuff leaves booked paths the pack of cards tumbles quite quickly as everything no longer neatly fits together.

The only silver lining for those of us on the outskirts of GN-land is that the Cambridge stoppers didn't end up going through the core.

If they had, goodness only knows how much worse the effect would have been on the Cambridge fasts, given the long stretch between Hitchin and Cambridge with no passing loops (except for the occasional 'wrong-way' move you see at Royston, but that has a large time penalty too, and obviously isn't always possible to do).

 

[Surreytraveller]

Argh then that definitely makes its possible to switch the 9Rs to NXG without a TT rewrite. I don't mind where the 9Rs go to on the South side beyond Earlswood but i would have curtailed them to Luton on the North side now EMR serve Bedford with the Corby service twice an hour. I'd also say that integration of TLk with ECML is having significant downside to users on both sides of the river whenever there is disruption and should be re thought. The Peterboroughs should have been kept self contained to GN and the 9Js run no further than WGC.

Anyhow what needs to be done is to have a contingency plan that can deal with disruption far better than now as it feels like the controllers are managing on the hoof - yes i know every incident is different - to provide the best service they can for the passengers. It would also be useful to share the high level principles of that plan with passengers. ie do i goto KX or Finsbury Pk for a Peterborough service.

And of course, calling at New Cross Gate not only allows those in the south to get to East London easier, it also provides a better service into London Bridge for those starting at London Overground stations by changing at New Cross Gate

 

[Fred26]

It’s possibly worth a reminder that when this was all being discussed a few years ago, a certain (serial Thameslink Programme defender) poster told us all that the Great Northern network is “simple”.

Well, if it’s so simple then how come it’s proving almost impossible to recover things when stuff goes wrong? Reality is it’s a fiddly set of lines which is indeed simple when it’s running a March 2020 lockdown style service, but anything but simple when stuffed full with more trains than can be ideally handled. The moment stuff leaves booked paths the pack of cards tumbles quite quickly as everything no longer neatly fits together.

GTR’s control, whilst they do make occasional outwardly dubious decisions (especially in relation to removing stops), isn’t the problem here. They’re trying to manage something drawn up by people with crayons, which is simply too prone to disruption and too difficult to recover when disruption happens. It doesn’t help that we were told there would be all sorts of things done to make it all work, and in reality all this has come to nought, indeed even the crewing arrangements seem particularly awkward and not conducive to flexibility.

I can guarantee that the entire population of my town would have the 2017 service back in a flash, complete with the 365s to go with it. Ironically, the extra capacity provided by Thameslink probably isn’t even needed now.

The level of delusion shown by the “simple” comment told us all we needed to know about how the Thameslink Programme was going to work in practice, and now here we have - to go along with the hospitals with no patients - the station with no viable train service!

I certainly wouldn't go back to a 2017 timetable.
The current timetable needs reworking, but it is still better than what there was before.
I remember the days of a four car 317 turning up and people not being able to board. That was a regular occurrence, even off-peak. That doesn't happen now. At least you know now that the train will either be a 12 or 8 car, both can take far more passengers than the previous stock.
FCC was far better run than GTR, but they were a long way from perfect. Even when the service ran well, the trains were very busy, even off peak. FCC managed to run a more reliable service mainly by running half the timetable GTR do. As we saw during COVID, when the timetable is halved, it's relatively easy to run to time.
The GN timetable was very slim. It had needed expanding for many years. In a way it's unfortunate that the expanded timetable conicided with the TL programme, but I suppose it couldn't have happened without the TL programme.

Practically everyone knew that adding GN to TL would be a mess, you don't have to be Mystic Meg to have seen that. TL ran a poor service day-in-day-out. It was more unusual if TL ran a good service.
Adding GN to that and complicating the network further was only going to make matters worse.
Having said that, GN as part of TL is here to stay. Capacity was needed at Kings Cross and that is still the case. There's no going back. Neither are the 365s coming back.
(I like the 700s, though the seats are atrocious.)

There needs to be more resilience and better reaction to disruption from Control.
I think TL can work, even given how poor it was pre-May 2018, but there needs to be a lot of money spent on infrastructure and that isn't going to happen.
Regardless, it can still be better than it is.

 

[Minstral25]

I also think the 9Js should stop additionally at Purley as well as we lose 2tph to London from September, yet stations south of Purley face no change (with the 2J Caterhams now being curtailed to East Croydon).

Bit difficult as most of the day 9J's use the fast lines crossing to the slows at Stoats Nest and would be in the way of the other fast trains. 9R's come up the slow lines so are on the right side for Purley platforms.

I certainly wouldn't go back to a 2017 timetable.
The current timetable needs reworking, but it is still better than what there was before.
I remember the days of a four car 317 turning up and people not being able to board. That was a regular occurrence, even off-peak. That doesn't happen now. At least you know now that the train will either be a 12 or 8 car, both can take far more passengers than the previous stock.
FCC was far better run than GTR, but they were a long way from perfect. Even when the service ran well, the trains were very busy, even off peak. FCC managed to run a more reliable service mainly by running half the timetable GTR do. As we saw during COVID, when the timetable is halved, it's relatively easy to run to time.
The GN timetable was very slim. It had needed expanding for many years. In a way it's unfortunate that the expanded timetable conicided with the TL programme, but I suppose it couldn't have happened without the TL programme.

Practically everyone knew that adding GN to TL would be a mess, you don't have to be Mystic Meg to have seen that. TL ran a poor service day-in-day-out. It was more unusual if TL ran a good service.
Adding GN to that and complicating the network further was only going to make matters worse.
Having said that, GN as part of TL is here to stay. Capacity was needed at Kings Cross and that is still the case. There's no going back. Neither are the 365s coming back.
(I like the 700s, though the seats are atrocious.)

There needs to be more resilience and better reaction to disruption from Control.
I think TL can work, even given how poor it was pre-May 2018, but there needs to be a lot of money spent on infrastructure and that isn't going to happen.
Regardless, it can still be better than it is.

TL were generally good but agree the 2017 timetables was pants. The current one when it works is much better. South of London on Redhill line the 700's replaced 377's on London Bridge routes (we only got 3 Thameslinks per day) which was a massive downgrade, the benefit was going through the core which opened up a lot of faster journeys.

TL needs contingencies and there is none in the core. GN is lucky there are spare space's at Kings Cross to fit turn rounds, there is nothing from the south and hence all services get cancelled when something happens in the North. Timetable could be improved but building some contingency turn backs near the core would be a massive benefit

 

[infobleep]

I've been doing St Pancras to Denmark Hill for 10 years now and i thought by 2019 it had settled pretty well (after the initial May 2018 chaos) and was the best i'd ever known it. 4tph (albeit 2 from BFR) all day certainly helped, a cancelation meaning a 15 delay feels fart better than a half hour one.

But the half hour one smells better.

 

[SE%Traveller]

But the half hour one smells better.

Ha! indeed! corrected...

 

[Failed Unit]

It’s possibly worth a reminder that when this was all being discussed a few years ago, a certain (serial Thameslink Programme defender) poster told us all that the Great Northern network is “simple”.

Well, if it’s so simple then how come it’s proving almost impossible to recover things when stuff goes wrong? Reality is it’s a fiddly set of lines which is indeed simple when it’s running a March 2020 lockdown style service, but anything but simple when stuffed full with more trains than can be ideally handled. The moment stuff leaves booked paths the pack of cards tumbles quite quickly as everything no longer neatly fits together.

GTR’s control, whilst they do make occasional outwardly dubious decisions (especially in relation to removing stops), isn’t the problem here. They’re trying to manage something drawn up by people with crayons, which is simply too prone to disruption and too difficult to recover when disruption happens. It doesn’t help that we were told there would be all sorts of things done to make it all work, and in reality all this has come to nought, indeed even the crewing arrangements seem particularly awkward and not conducive to flexibility.

I can guarantee that the entire population of my town would have the 2017 service back in a flash, complete with the 365s to go with it. Ironically, the extra capacity provided by Thameslink probably isn’t even needed now.

The level of delusion shown by the “simple” comment told us all we needed to know about how the Thameslink Programme was going to work in practice, and now here we have - to go along with the hospitals with no patients - the station with no viable train service!

I must admit, looking purely at the GN side yesterday, it did amaze me how long things were up the creak.

The Moorgate service did generally work well (until the afternoon and the Hatfield incident)

It is Easy for me to say in my armchair. The points failure did cause a lot of problems with the London - Cambridge service with a lot of trains trapped at Kings Cross. But once the line did re-open they could have sent some ECS to Letchworth, Royston or WGC to restart the service (again I am sure they have good reasons why they didn't so easy for me to say). One train that did make it to WGC was the 1152 WGC (1057 ex Cambridge). It was showing as on-time at WGC. Asked platform staff some rang control no-one knew if / when it was going to run so I used the Moorgate. The 1152 did leave, from Platform 4 (so the train was in the sidings) but even that simple question of will it / won't it go couldn't be answered.

In the evening, I think it was the 1556 WGC - Moorgate that hit the issue at Hatfield. Then trains started stacking up at WGC. This blocked the platform for anything going north. In my armchair (or stuck on a train) you were thinking why don't they move the empty 717s into the sidings to get some platform space back. They did eventually start running fast line only and non-stop to Finsbury Park. However I don't think it is possible to get from platforms 1, 3 & 4 onto the fast line so they were needing to use the ladder crossing. Not sure how much of a problem that really is most of the time as most WGC services stop at Hatfield, but it certainly didn't help last night.

I hoped that a self contained service link Kings Cross - Cambridge is, would have taken less then 3 hours after the fault was fixed to recover, but I am not sure if it ever recovered at all that day (although the tree on the wires didn't help)

 

[zwk500]

Side note, is there a crossover onto the Fast line immediately after Purley? In a Northbound Direction. Because if there is then it would be interesting for Reigate Services to switch onto Fast line there and not at Selhurst.

At Purley there is a Slow-Fast crossover in the Northbound direction but it's a low-speed turnout in a reasonably high-speed section of the fast line. Switching at Selhurst is much less disruptive to the surrounding traffic due to the lower speeds around the area and stops at East Croydon.
Stoat's Nest Junction is the other place it's good to switch lines.

 

[Magdalia]

The only silver lining for those of us on the outskirts of GN-land is that the Cambridge stoppers didn't end up going through the core.

If they had, goodness only knows how much worse the effect would have been on the Cambridge fasts, given the long stretch between Hitchin and Cambridge with no passing loops (except for the occasional 'wrong-way' move you see at Royston, but that has a large time penalty too, and obviously isn't always possible to do).

The Cambridge stoppers are the most critical trains on the GN network. As you say, there is no way to pass them between Hitchin and Cambridge, apart from wrong line moves at Royston.

But more importantly, they are the trains that call at Welwyn North, the only station on the two track section. A train stopping at Welwyn North occupies the 2 track section for about 4 minutes, compared to about 2 minutes for a non-stopping train. This means that they effectively take a double path through the 2 track section. Any delays to the Cambridge stoppers quickly lead to queues of trains waiting to get onto the 2 track section. In the evening peak, a minor delay to a train stopping at Welwyn North quickly leads to trains backed up on the down fast all the way to Hatfield, and punctuality down the toilet until the end of the peak. That's why, in FCC days, all of the evening peak down stoppers were always either empty from Hornsey or on long turnrounds at Kings Cross, to minimise the risk of a late start.

I remember the days of a four car 317 turning up and people not being able to board. That was a regular occurrence, even off-peak. That doesn't happen now. At least you know now that the train will either be a 12 or 8 car, both can take far more passengers than the previous stock.

The 4 car trains were because of short platforms at Meldreth, Shepreth and Foxton, plus interworking of the Cambridge and Peterborough stoppers. The platforms at Meldreth, Shepreth and Foxton are sorted now.

FCC was far better run than GTR, but they were a long way from perfect. Even when the service ran well, the trains were very busy, even off peak. FCC managed to run a more reliable service mainly by running half the timetable GTR do. As we saw during COVID, when the timetable is halved, it's relatively easy to run to time.
The GN timetable was very slim. It had needed expanding for many years. In a way it's unfortunate that the expanded timetable conicided with the TL programme, but I suppose it couldn't have happened without the TL programme.

Comparing the 2017 off peak timetable with now, the only additional trains are the Cambridge-Brightons, but nearly everything is longer trains, so there are many more seats.

FCC inherited a very overcrowded railway from WAGN. They had 6 of the top 10 in the league table of most overcrowded trains. It was a long battle but eventually they got the additional units (the class 321s from Silverlink) and the platform extensions to run 12 car trains across the branch. Where they did not respond so quickly was additional capacity at weekends: anyone else remember the 4 car 2051 and 2151 to Kings Lynn on Saturday nights!? But over the whole period of the franchise FCC made a big positive difference.

Where FCC really scored was the visibility of the senior management. In disruptions, like those in recent weeks, they would be on the concourse, supporting the front line staff and communicating directly with customers. Yes, FCC weren't perfect, but they did give a lasting impression that they were trying very hard to run a decent service for the travelling public.

 

[MikeWM]

FCC inherited a very overcrowded railway from WAGN. They had 6 of the top 10 in the league table of most overcrowded trains. It was a long battle but eventually they got the additional units (the class 321s from Silverlink) and the platform extensions to run 12 car trains across the branch. Where they did not respond so quickly was additional capacity at weekends: anyone else remember the 4 car 2051 and 2151 to Kings Lynn on Saturday nights!? But over the whole period of the franchise FCC made a big positive difference.

I clearly recall the last Lynn of the night, leaving KGX around 2315 (it moved about a bit), which I got most Saturdays between about 2008 and 2016. That seemed to get busier week after week, until 4 cars was woefully inadequate. Fortunately they eventually extended it to 8, can't quite remember when, I posted here in 2016 about it being 8-car so must have been some time before that.

The other notable difference is that FCC were quite fastidious in my experience about running last trains - as they ought to be. I may have been rather late home from time to time, but I always got home on all those hundreds of Saturday nights. Conversely, GN don't seem to care much at all, as I've mentioned on here numerous times over the past few years, and I wouldn't trust getting the last Lynn every Saturday now, as I'd likely end up stranded multiple times a year.

 

[Fred26]

The Cambridge stoppers are the most critical trains on the GN network. As you say, there is no way to pass them between Hitchin and Cambridge, apart from wrong line moves at Royston.

But more importantly, they are the trains that call at Welwyn North, the only station on the two track section. A train stopping at Welwyn North occupies the 2 track section for about 4 minutes, compared to about 2 minutes for a non-stopping train. This means that they effectively take a double path through the 2 track section. Any delays to the Cambridge stoppers quickly lead to queues of trains waiting to get onto the 2 track section. In the evening peak, a minor delay to a train stopping at Welwyn North quickly leads to trains backed up on the down fast all the way to Hatfield, and punctuality down the toilet until the end of the peak. That's why, in FCC days, all of the evening peak down stoppers were always either empty from Hornsey or on long turnrounds at Kings Cross, to minimise the risk of a late start.



The 4 car trains were because of short platforms at Meldreth, Shepreth and Foxton, plus interworking of the Cambridge and Peterborough stoppers. The platforms at Meldreth, Shepreth and Foxton are sorted now.



Comparing the 2017 off peak timetable with now, the only additional trains are the Cambridge-Brightons, but nearly everything is longer trains, so there are many more seats.

FCC inherited a very overcrowded railway from WAGN. They had 6 of the top 10 in the league table of most overcrowded trains. It was a long battle but eventually they got the additional units (the class 321s from Silverlink) and the platform extensions to run 12 car trains across the branch. Where they did not respond so quickly was additional capacity at weekends: anyone else remember the 4 car 2051 and 2151 to Kings Lynn on Saturday nights!? But over the whole period of the franchise FCC made a big positive difference.

Where FCC really scored was the visibility of the senior management. In disruptions, like those in recent weeks, they would be on the concourse, supporting the front line staff and communicating directly with customers. Yes, FCC weren't perfect, but they did give a lasting impression that they were trying very hard to run a decent service for the travelling public.

Four-car trains weren't just used on the Cambridge stoppers. They could and did turn on all routes.

By the end of FCC, the peak timetable and carriage provision was excellent. Though some stock was tired and a bit of a hodge-podge of different classes.
Off-peak was a different matter. FCC didn't improve the off-peak service at all, nor did they improve the weekends (aside from a few extra stoppers early/late on Sundays.)
Off-peak is now much improved, but the Peterborough service is still poor. Most of the time poor is being generous, too.

 

[bramling]

Four-car trains weren't just used on the Cambridge stoppers. They could and did turn on all routes.

By the end of FCC, the peak timetable and carriage provision was excellent. Though some stock was tired and a bit of a hodge-podge of different classes.
Off-peak was a different matter. FCC didn't improve the off-peak service at all, nor did they improve the weekends (aside from a few extra stoppers early/late on Sundays.)
Off-peak is now much improved, but the Peterborough service is still poor. Most of the time poor is being generous, too.

4-car trains is a bit of an irrelevance, by 2017 they were rare on the fast services, and could have been designed out of the stopping services one way or another, had there been a desire to do so. The 2017 timetable would have been absolutely fine off-peak if solid 8-car provision had been resourced. We didn’t need Thameslink on that score.

Alternatively, a 50/50 split between core and King’s Cross workings would have delivered a more workable compromise.

I’d very much echo the view expressed here that thank goodness the 2Cxx services haven’t, and now seek unlikely to, been put through the core. The Welwyn-Sevenoaks services seem to be problematic enough, and they don’t touch the numerous pinch points north of Welwyn.

 

[Failed Unit]

I’d very much echo the view expressed here that thank goodness the 2Cxx services haven’t, and now seek unlikely to, been put through the core. The Welwyn-Sevenoaks services seem to be problematic enough, and they don’t touch the numerous pinch points north of Welwyn.

The demonstrate perfectly the issue of they need everything to run perfectly.

My experience is that the Cambridge - London service is late at WGC (maybe a couple of minutes) the following Moorgate is also late then the Sevenoaks is following it on yellow signals. It has improved with the re-routing at Alexander Palace is now on platform 1 and the Sevenoaks stays on platform 2, but the section between Alexander Palace and Finsbury Park causes issues in both directions. Generally I have found the Sevenoaks is back on time going South by Blackfriars and never recovers going North. It has long turn arounds at WGC, but even the shunt seems to cause delays if the slot is missed. Not sure what to do with this service. It needs a bigger gap between the Moorgate and the Sevenoaks, Not sure if leaving at x.05 and x.35 from WGC would help, when ultimately the Moorgate needs to depart on time for it to stand a chance.

Back in the 2010s the non-stop WGC - Finsbury Park did relieve some pressure on the slow lines, but I suspect that capacity is gone from the fasts.

 

[Minstral25]

At Purley there is a Slow-Fast crossover in the Northbound direction but it's a low-speed turnout in a reasonably high-speed section of the fast line. Switching at Selhurst is much less disruptive to the surrounding traffic due to the lower speeds around the area and stops at East Croydon.
Stoat's Nest Junction is the other place it's good to switch lines.

It would also get in way of platforming at East Croydon as other trains use fast platforms at same time.

 

[baz962]

Just found out something quite naughty. The cancellation due to lack of train crew is sometimes a downright lie. Talking to a GN driver that is a friend of mine. He has turned up to work to drive a train and been told it's cancelled due to shortage of train crew , on several occasions. So it was cancelled due to lack of train crew, even though it had train crew.

 

[DavyCrocket]

Just found out something quite naughty. The cancellation due to lack of train crew is sometimes a downright lie. Talking to a GN driver that is a friend of mine. He has turned up to work to drive a train and been told it's cancelled due to shortage of train crew , on several occasions. So it was cancelled due to lack of train crew, even though it had train crew.

This is straight out of the Southern playbook. They did this a lot during the conductor axing dispute.

 

[43066]

Just found out something quite naughty. The cancellation due to lack of train crew is sometimes a downright lie. Talking to a GN driver that is a friend of mine. He has turned up to work to drive a train and been told it's cancelled due to shortage of train crew , on several occasions. So it was cancelled due to lack of train crew, even though it had train crew.

GTR has been doing that for years, to be fair.

 

[zwk500]

Just found out something quite naughty. The cancellation due to lack of train crew is sometimes a downright lie. Talking to a GN driver that is a friend of mine. He has turned up to work to drive a train and been told it's cancelled due to shortage of train crew , on several occasions. So it was cancelled due to lack of train crew, even though it had train crew.

Is it not the case that the original delay (often some hours before) was down to lack of train crew, and as the subsequent disruption gets coded to the root cause the automated system picks up on the delay code and control are busier trying to get trains moving than to correct the PIS.

 

[baz962]

Is it not the case that the original delay (often some hours before) was down to lack of train crew, and as the subsequent disruption gets coded to the root cause the automated system picks up on the delay code and control are busier trying to get trains moving than to correct the PIS.

As he told me. He was booked to drive and wasn't showing as off or sick. This is his first train in the morning with no reason for it to be cancelled.

 

[Joliver]

Just found out something quite naughty. The cancellation due to lack of train crew is sometimes a downright lie. Talking to a GN driver that is a friend of mine. He has turned up to work to drive a train and been told it's cancelled due to shortage of train crew , on several occasions. So it was cancelled due to lack of train crew, even though it had train crew.

Funnily enough a GN friend of mine has said the same to me. Even more worrying is that he's had whole diagrams cancelled.

I drive for a different TOC but live in GN/TLk land and use these services to get to work at times. I've frankly given up and use the car now.

 

[Bald Rick]

Just found out something quite naughty. The cancellation due to lack of train crew is sometimes a downright lie. Talking to a GN driver that is a friend of mine. He has turned up to work to drive a train and been told it's cancelled due to shortage of train crew , on several occasions. So it was cancelled due to lack of train crew, even though it had train crew.

The TOC are not incentivised at any level to cancel a train of their own ‘cause’. It will cost them money, both to NR and DfT.

what is most likely to be the case here is that somewhere further along the rolling stock diagram there isn’t a driver available, and so the train is cancelled now to avoid it being stuck at, say, Finsbury Park with no driver to take it forward. Of course ‘your’ driver wouldn’t necessarily know that.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The TOC are not incentivised at any level to cancel a train of their own ‘cause’. It will cost them money, both to NR and DfT.

How does it cost them money in the new world of ERMAs and NRCs?