Change in policy on prioritisation of services

[whole diary]

[John R]

In the past, if the 0800 BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains) - PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) (HST^▸ (High Speed Train)) has been delayed and behind the 0813 BRI to SWI^» (Swindon - next trains) (75mph stock), then the latter would be looped at Bathampton.  However, twice in the last week, despite the 0800 being right behind at Bath Spa, the local unit has been given priority resulting in further delays to the HST.

Today's a good example. Held outside Bath, so clearly right behind the stopper, we then got checked soon after Bathampton and all the way from Wootton Bassett into SWI (the latter being made worse by then being held for a service from South Wales. Result - another 9 minutes of delay between Bath and SWI.

Both myself and a colleague waiting at Bath were told, we don't hold the stopper any more, which seemed to indicate there may have been a change in policy. I appreciate that it's always a judgment call, but choosing between delaying a local service terminating at Swindon for around 4 minutes (which doesn't turn around quickly) or adding a further 9 minutes delay to a London bound HST, it feels the wrong decision.

(By the way I am trying to be objective here. Whenever I have to wait at Bedminster for a southbound XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) service to pass, I'm absolutely fine with it - it's the right call to make.)

BRI - Bristol Temple Meads, SWI - Swindon 

[eightf48544]

Not quite sure of your timings. if the 08:00 BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains) to Padd is behind the 08:13 stopper to Swindon then presumably it's already 13 plus minutes late. Looping the stopper at Bathampton would seem a no brainer who knows the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) might make up a few minutes with the help of padding into Padd, and I'm sure there's padding in the Stoppers timings.

[grahame]

The 08:13 is scheduled to arrive into Swindon at 09:04 and leave again at 09:38 toward Cheltenham, so would have good time even if looped at Bathampton.   However, the following HST^▸ (High Speed Train) (08:30 off Bristol) is due to arrive into Swindon at 09:10, and if the 08:13 was looped / held back, and then made its (75mph) progress in front of the 08:30, it would potentially be worse for the 08:30 even if better for the 08:00.    It's probably pretty finely balanced in the maths of delay minutes!

[John R]

Grahame - a very good point, although yesterday the 0830 was late as well, so there wouldn't have been a conflict.  Even if it had been on time, it would probably have only caught the 0813 up as it got to Swindon.

Ignoring the 0830, the maths seems to be, either:-

i) loop the local, with time lost in the loop circa 5 mins, or
ii) let it go, with the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) likely to lose around 9 mins (as yesterday)

My contention is that it's better to delay a 3 coach local that's terminating 2 stops down the line than cause further delay to an HST that still has 100 miles to go. That seems to have been the situation until recently, but now it's changed.

[eightf48544]

one further point are there any connections off the stopper where 5 late would cause problems? if not i agree with you John R loop the stopper.

[John R]

No, there aren't any connections.