Great Western Coffee Shop

1437 Paddington to Swansea presented itself on time at Westbury this afternoon, and is then held at Hawkeridge Junction for at least 5 minutes to let an on time Portsmouth Cardiff service (which was booked to follow it) in front. As this had four additional stops between Westbury and Bath Spa, the result is that the Swansea service arrived into Temple Meads over 20 minutes late, with presumably knock on consequences for the rest of its journey.

I can't think of any reason (other than incompetence?) why the Swansea service was held, as if given a clear road it wouldn't have held up the Portsmouth Cardiff service and was booked ahead of it anyway. The TM kept apologising for the delay and being held behind a stopping service, but it shouldn't have happened? Or have I missed something?

Or have I missed something?

Notworkrail pushes the buttons not FGW.

I wasn't implying it was FGW's fault. Agree the faut (if any) lay with the signallers. 

Perhaps the Swansea train had to stop to pick up a pilotman who knew the route via Bradford-on-Avon .... or for some other operational reason, and wasn't ready to go until after the Cardiff had set off.

If it was to pick up a Pilotman then it would be a FGW delay and Mr. Hopwood would have some harsh words to say to those involved

If it was the case that it was an FGW delay, then what it does show is the lack of discretion that signalmen now have to regulate trains. Even it means that a slightly late non stop train has to follow an ontime stopper.

Otherwise the Westbury signalman should be in for a very uncomfortable interview. 

If is the operative word.  We don't know, we're just guessing, and there could be a good explanation that we've not come up with.

I remember, a number of years ago, picking up some customers from a very late flight indeed at Bristol Airport, and giving the a list back to Melksham, dropping the off at their B&B at about 1 in the morning.  The Landlady was furious - 'you should have let me know you were going to be this late when you booked and I wouldn't have accepted the booking'.   But actually they had been sat on the delayed plane on the runway in Dublin for many hours, no way to het in touch, and I hadn't known where they were staying until they came out of arrivals - at which point the landlady was probably already tucked up, furious at an apparent no-show, in bed, and we decided not to add a further delay while we found a phone box, called directory enquiries ....

Object lesson to me ... now we've got the shoe on the other foot .. to trust to the reasons given for delays often being sensible ones that may not be obvious, but can usually be put down to something other than a professonal not doing his / her job properly.

No, I can confirm no pilotman boarded. We were at the very front and there was no train related reason for the stop. My initial query left the door open for an explanation as I was curious and hoping it wasn't just a cock up.   

I believe the Portsmouth - Cardiff service mentioned was the one I travelled on.  There were certainly no delays affecting our service - the whole journey ran to time.

My thought for allowing the stopping service through was that it was due on Platform 9 at Temple Meads at 16:41.  The Weston - Severn Beach service was also booked into Platform 9 at 16:53.  Given the length of time it takes to load the Cardiff service (due to passenger volume), perhaps a delay on the Pompey-Cardiff train would have caused a knock-on effect to the SVB service.  But then a simple platform alteration could've solved this ...  ??? ::)

this explanation means they prioritised the severn beach service over a fast service, still not correct in many eyes

I agree, but assuming my reason is the correct one, holding the SVB service before Temple Meads may cause problems on other intercity services.  For example, the XC service from Penzance to Manchester is also timed to arrive at 16:53 into Temple Meads.

Another observation I made was that this XC service arrived into Platform 7, instead of its usual Platform 3.  The duty station manager and service delivery manager were floating around P9 with clipboards, looking like they were rushed off their feet.

The WSM - SVB is due into Temple Meads at 1649 ahead of the 1653 XC arrival. If the Weston is running a little late it is possible for the XC to overtake it at Bedminster. So a local can be held outside Temple Meads without detriment to a following intercity.

It seems to no longer be the case that intercity services get priority under local services.  Anyone that's been on XC into Birmingham should seen this as it usually invloved a 20 mph from King's Norton all the way into New Street behind a Cross City stopper.

Perhaps, but that is generally accounted for by the timetable. As I understand things this example we are discussing is a local and an express service running out of course for no readily apparent reason. It's always something of a stagger into New Street anyway given that the line-speeds on the cross-city line are fairly low and traffic is so dense.

Was under the impression that if a train was late even by 1 min, it would get regulated for a slow on time service. The Trust delays would go to that 1min late train as REG-ONTIME (Regulated for ontime service).

Otherwise any subsequent delays would get dumped on that signaller for not following policy.

Now any sensible person would have thought, hmm....
Train A goes at 125mph doesn't stop for miles and is 1 late.
Train B goes at 70mph and stops every bl**dy where. Lets put Train A in front.
But no everyone knows that sensible, logic and railway don't go together.

Anyways thats how I was always told it worked.

I'm sorry I find that very hard to believe.  I've arrived at EXD right-time on a stopper, and consequently been held for a late running PAD-PNZ to through, causing a delay to my train, so this cannot be a "normal" policy.

Delaying a fast service, causing more delay minutes is going to cost more money than correctly regulating and letting the fast service go, unless NR now think it is acceptable to charge FGW more delay minutes this way making themselves more money??!  I'm sure if this the case, on analysis of the delay, FGW will be kicking off more than any of the passengers!

Well like I said, thats how I was always told it worked.
FGW would dump the delay mins back at NR in this case.

THat is the way I've had it explained to me too.

SDS Pad is right in so much that the basic principal is that should a train be delayed, then another train on time won't be delayed by it as a result, but fortunately common sense does still apply with train regulation and the principal is not always rigidly enforced.

For example, a Bournemouth bound XC service at Oxford which is expected to depart at 12:38 rather that 12:16 would usually run in front of the 12:37 stopper from Oxford.  Yes, the 12:37 would be delayed by around 4 minutes as a result, but as it dwells at Didcot for 10 minutes it easily recovers that time.  Delaying the Bournemouth service even further would mean it affects other services more further along the route (some of which might also be FGW services), so it makes sense to give it a clear run.  Also, the passenger benefits as if you're intending to change onto the Didcot service at Oxford, you're not faced with a 30-minute wait.  Situations as explained by Donkey Guard also apply - especially later in the evening when it might be a last connection of the day, and expensive taxis would need to be provided otherwise.

In the case of the Swansea train that started this thread off, it would appear that it might have been more sensible to hold the stopper at Westbury for a few minutes, but in the case of diverted trains the usual precedents may not have been made over time and as such a 'mistake' was made.

The odd thing was, that the Swansea train was held for at least 5 minutes to let the stopper through. It need not have held up the stopper at all as it was running to time, and was booked ahead of it. That's the piece of the jigsaw that just seemed crazy.     

Very late in the day for this thread to wonder ... but could it have been stopped initially because of a conflicting movement coming from Trowbridge into Westbury, and / or another train ahead which had already gone towards Trowbridge, but not cleared the section?

Certainly not the former,as we would have seen it pass. The latter is possible, although I checked the OLDB and nothing appeared to be obviously ahead IIRC. As you imply, it's probably too late in the day now for us to find out what happened. 

In my experience the xx:37 is almost always let out in front of the BMH train, in some cases it will stand on the platform for five minutes awaiting a right time departure while the Bomo service is sat outside the station, infuriating for me as I know a 25 minute late departure from New Street can be recovered.
Here's a situation from the other week: twenty odd minute late departure from Birmingham, reasonable run along the WCML to Coventry and onto the branch to Leamington, I phone control to see if we could be pathed in front of the xx:00 Reading terminator (that has more pathing time and runs via SOL) and this was done. Cracking run through Banbury, only to be held outside OXF for the local, Swindon B routed us onto the Up Main at Didcot and a full pelt run to RDG, only to be held outside the station for seven minutes, what should trundle along the Up Relief and enter the station in front of us but the NCL-RDG terminator. We then get held on the platform for a further seven minutes for a set of empties going to the shed on the triangle and subsequently followed the Poole local from Basingstoke, terminating at Southampton for a right time back working.

Last night I has a right time presentation at OXF at 21:14 only to be told the 21:07 was still on the platform!

Sure was - I was there watching them mucking about....

Sounds like things have changed at Oxford in the last couple of years. Back in the day we used to have an xx16 southbound XC service and an xx21 local service to London. The xx21 service was the one that gave the hourly connection at Didcot into a Bristol service, but that connection was only a 5 minute one.

What almost invariably seemed to happen was that the xx16 XC service would be running a few minutes late and be prioritized over the xx21 local, which meant that by the time the Turbo had been extricated from the carriage sidings after waiting for the XC train the xx21 was generally a good 6 - 7 minutes late. This probably wasn't a huge problem in terms of that train "making charter" at Paddington for the puncuality figures, but was a royal pain in the backside for those of us heading west who were then faced with an extra change at Swindon as well as a 15 minute wait both there and at Didcot.

It would help if the permissive passenger working was used more often now that it's been reinstated.  The stopper could then pull out of the sidings and sit in the platform behind the XC service and depart about 2 minutes earlier as a result.

The normal patten at Oxford now is fasts at 01 and 31, stoppers at 07 and 37 with xc at 16 and 46.

The stoppers have up to 10 mins layover at Didcot to allow the xc to go in front up the relief.

Understood, thanks for that. Things work much better at Oxford now, at least from the point of view of travelling to Bristol or South Wales!

I was just using an example that happened to me many, many times a few years ago when those were the timings to illustrate that it's not always as straightforward as an on-time local getting precedence over a slightly delayed long-distance service.

As far as im aware the route can not be cleared into the station from the sidings while the station starting signal is set. So therefore would require the starting signal to be at red while the stopper comes into the platform, which could delay the XC service even more.

Hmmm, I'm not at all sure that's the case, but there are all sorts of quirks with specific signals and interlocking, so I'll ask one of the signallers at Oxford when I'm next up that way for clarification.

Yes there is! Just thinking about it, down here in Devon i'm sure i've seen it done before some places, but not at others. With so many different signals and interlockings, etc its difficult to tell.

While waiting at Oxford this evening, I observed pretty much exactly what Insider suggested above being implemented by the signaller to the letter.

The 18.15 XC to Bournemouth was about 40 late, so the 18.43 Reading service was right on its tail - and no doubt late itself only because of being held outside the station at each stop. Once the Bournemouth train left, the Reading working was brought into the platform and then sat waiting for the signal to clear for its departure. As this was going on, the signaller brought the Turbo for the 19.01 stopper (this is right, the 19.07 is the fast) to Paddington into the platform, which then drew forward once the Voyager had moved off. The stopper left maybe two minutes late.

As all this was done with the starting signal on red, I can't tell you whether the move can be made with the starter showing amber or green for the train already in the platform. But no more delay was incurred due to the circumstances in which the XC set found itself anyway.

Good to hear.  It can literally save minutes as the signal sections south of Oxford are nice and close until Kennington Junction so the route ahead clears very quickly for the train behind - a positive benefit that the proposed south-facing bay platform would also get if it gets the funding.