Firstly, I'm going to note the professionalism with which the on-train staff were handling the situation / disruption last night. Good information, honesty in saying things like "we don't know when we'll get to Reading" but sufficient backup information behind it to give knowledgable customers some data with which to make a guess themselves. And although there were some people getting a bit fraught (the bloke across from me explaining the situation in a disticncly less professional way to his "darling" on the phone, who was - I think - DEMANDING to know when he would be home), the [few] staff I came across were doing an excellent job.
Now ... a handful of questions / thoughts crop up, and I'm sure the railway industry looks at things like these. I'm starting a separate thread because I'm looking at the longer term issues of planning for these eventualities and asking in general, rather that looking at specifics of 20th and 21st December 2012, which are
[here]a) on routing
"Customer Advice: Chiltern Railways, Cross Country, South West Trains, Virgin Trains and London Underground services are conveying passengers via any reasonable route until further notice. Arrangements have been made for First Great Western rail tickets to be accepted for these journeys."
Why on earth can't we have a passenger transport system where, if I'm going from "a" to "b", my ticket's always going to be accepted via any reasonable route?
b) on queuing
We left Paddington at 17:27 (the 17:15 to Carmarthen) last night, then queued ... it took us 20 minutes to even get to Acton Main Line.
What's to be gained by having a long queue of trains waiting to get past a bottleneck? Would it not be better to cull even more from the timetable early on and leave a resonably clear run at least out to Ealing or so - the same number of trains (from a shorter queue) can still get through, so the capacity that's available is still fully used, and the delays to individual trains would be dramatically reduced. Rather than 85 minutes to Reading it could have been 55 minutes - less frustrating, less wasting of people's valuable time ....
c) on contingency planning
Very interesting indeed to reasd "Plan 3" which is how to run London - Reading as a 2 track railway. Why is it based on what runs from existing services (which will leave intermittent gaps) rather than a recast into an best service over the lines effected? Where the lines have a reasonably frequent service, is there much point in labelling something as the "17:43" when it leaves at 18:49 - that just stresses to customers how late thay are (and they may not really be that late, as they may have caught an "earlier" train!)
why not ...
Fast train to Reading every 20 minutes. Slower train right behind. Fast trains run to the South West, Weston-super-mare, and Swansea. Extras from Reading to ... [etc] Slower trains ensure hourly call at every station, with all slower trains calling at key ranch junctions and allowing for intermediate journeys to be made.
Of course, it would be really nice to have a system on which major changes to running were so rare that these questions were academic, but we ain't got that at the moment. And it DOES effect the passenger; we see a noticeable change in activity on this forum at times of disruption - yesterday was the busiest since late November, and I can guess why!