Who decides what trains are cancelled or not?

[whole diary]

[Mookiemoo]

Okay - todays situation on the cotswolds line

1751 leaves PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) at 1815 - 6 minutes ahead of the 1821

The 1821 has been tracking us up - so we have two HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s on a line within five to ten minutes of each other all the the way up the cotswolds causing god knows what disruption for the up trains.

Now, this train is due to terminate and turn round at WOS^» (Worcester Shrub Hill - next trains) - thereby blocking the platform for the 1821 going through to Hereford - so there is the suggestion we have to go into sidings, let the 1821 through and then we pull in afterwards.

Except 1821 is now 20 late so that may change

BUT they have cancelled the 1921

Surely common sense would have them cancelling the 1751 (which was cancelled then re-instated) and letting the 1821 and 1921 run through as normal

Or is that too much like common sense

[Timmer]

That would be control in Swindon.

[Btline]

You have to admit though, that the Cotswold Line can be very dodgy. I can understand them not knowing whether to cancel a train that is actually on its way or not! 

But: I see that there are 2 trains in an hour in that peak hour going to the Cotswold Line.

Why not make the later one the "halts" trains so it gets further behind the earlier one, not closer?

The first one could be made into a faster service for the same reason.

Of course, putting double track down would help....... 

[Mookiemoo]

You have to admit though, that the Cotswold Line can be very dodgy. I can understand them not knowing whether to cancel a train that is actually on its way or not! 

But: I see that there are 2 trains in an hour in that peak hour going to the Cotswold Line.

Why not make the later one the "halts" trains so it gets further behind the earlier one, not closer?

The first one could be made into a faster service for the same reason.

Of course, putting double track down would help....... 

The problem you have is the 1721, 1821 and the 1921 are the traditional peak trains

The 1751 was squeezed in in 2004 I think

It is the one that causes problems even on a normal day

It leaves half way between the 1721 and 1821 but when it arrives at WOS^» (Worcester Shrub Hill - next trains) it is only ever 10 minutes or so ahead the 1821

It is quite often terminated at oxford as it is so late it would just cause absolute chaos!

If they cancelled the 1721 and ran the XX21 services, I suspect the evening peak would run a lot smoother

But that wouldnt keep the oxford passenger group happy who were the ones who were fundamental in this service being introduced

[willc]

Why did both trains run? Presumably because the train sets were at Paddington, with the appropriate crews available and FGW^▸ (First Great Western) control wanted to get them out of there and doing something useful, like shifting the crowds trying to get home to Reading and Oxford amid the disruption.

And what do you mean by halts, Btline? I never understand in your posts whether you actually mean the real halts (Combe, Finstock, Ascott-under-Wychwood, which aren't served by either of these trains anyway, plus - sort of - Shipton) or every station between Oxford and Worcester, as it sometimes appears.

On normal nights, the 17.51 leaves Oxford with 100-140 passengers on board, with about half going to Hanborough and Charlbury. On average, about two dozen are left beyond Moreton-in-Marsh. Are you seriously suggesting turfing out the majority of the passengers at Oxford and running it fast to Evesham or Worcester, for the sake of two dozen people?

Even when you have made this decision, would you like to be the guard who tries to tell people that they have to get off? The time it would take to get angry passengers off (and I'm speaking from experience of seeing this happen at Oxford), who are already running late, would only make the delay to both trains worse.

Yes, double track would help, but any improvement in that area is at least two years away. So, until then, when things go wrong before Oxford, they will not get any better beyond it, but given the choice, passengers will always prefer to get home by staying on the late-running train they are already on, than be told to get off and wait for an even later one.

And Mookiemoo, don't blame the 17.51 (PS it is hardly ever terminated at Oxford). Until December, it did cause problems, because it never left Oxford at 18.46, but since then, I can assure you that the villain of the piece is the 17.21 from Paddington.

As soon as the 17.21 is more than five minutes late out of Oxford (which happens a lot), it guarantees chaos in its wake. It is due to pass the 17.06 from Great Malvern at Shipton, so this then gets held up at Ascott. When the 17.06 is delayed, it then holds up the 17.51 at Oxford. Further along the line, a delayed 17.21 then holds up the 18.50 from Worcester at Evesham, which in turn holds up the 17.51 at Moreton-in-Marsh, so that the 18.21 from London is then hard on its heels and gets held at Moreton or Evesham, or both.

If you don't believe me, you can see my posts on the Charlbury commuter blog, which illustrate this precise scenario unfolding on a number of occasions this year and also how all tends to be well on the rare occasions when the 17.21 actually is on time.

[Btline]

Why did both trains run? Presumably because the train sets were at Paddington, with the appropriate crews available and FGW^▸ (First Great Western) control wanted to get them out of there and doing something useful, like shifting the crowds trying to get home to Reading and Oxford amid the disruption.

And what do you mean by halts, Btline? I never understand in your posts whether you actually mean the real halts (Combe, Finstock, Ascott-under-Wychwood, which aren't served by either of these trains anyway, plus - sort of - Shipton) or every station between Oxford and Worcester, as it sometimes appears.

On normal nights, the 17.51 leaves Oxford with 100-140 passengers on board, with about half going to Hanborough and Charlbury. On average, about two dozen are left beyond Moreton-in-Marsh. Are you seriously suggesting turfing out the majority of the passengers at Oxford and running it fast to Evesham or Worcester, for the sake of two dozen people?

Even when you have made this decision, would you like to be the guard who tries to tell people that they have to get off? The time it would take to get angry passengers off (and I'm speaking from experience of seeing this happen at Oxford), who are already running late, would only make the delay to both trains worse.

Yes, double track would help, but any improvement in that area is at least two years away. So, until then, when things go wrong before Oxford, they will not get any better beyond it, but given the choice, passengers will always prefer to get home by staying on the late-running train they are already on, than be told to get off and wait for an even later one.

And Mookiemoo, don't blame the 17.51 (PS it is hardly ever terminated at Oxford). Until December, it did cause problems, because it never left Oxford at 18.46, but since then, I can assure you that the villain of the piece is the 17.21 from Paddington.

As soon as the 17.21 is more than five minutes late out of Oxford (which happens a lot), it guarantees chaos in its wake. It is due to pass the 17.06 from Great Malvern at Shipton, so this then gets held up at Ascott. When the 17.06 is delayed, it then holds up the 17.51 at Oxford. Further along the line, a delayed 17.21 then holds up the 18.50 from Worcester at Evesham, which in turn holds up the 17.51 at Moreton-in-Marsh, so that the 18.21 from London is then hard on its heels and gets held at Moreton or Evesham, or both.

If you don't believe me, you can see my posts on the Charlbury commuter blog, which illustrate this precise scenario unfolding on a number of occasions this year and also how all tends to be well on the rare occasions when the 17.21 actually is on time.

Right!

1. What I mean by the halts, are the halts (Coombe, Finstock, Ascott and Shipton). That is because they are request stops. all of the other stops may be village stations, but they are still stations.

2. What's this about me saying for a train skipping loads of stops beyond Oxford? I merely suggested that one train ran faster than the other so that they do not end up being 10 mins together like they do at the moment. Very sorry!! You could also terminate one at Oxford if the service is underused beyond Oxford. Again, I do not know!

3. Cancelling trains is not good.

4. Any references I make to stopping trains early- I mean in the timetable, not the guard onboard. Again, I do not now what the passenger levels are like- I will not know best. I am trying to make some suggestions that could help the line!! Sorry!!

5. One of the trains could be stopped at Morton or Evesham if the demand is not there beyond (esp if another train is behind it and in front of it)

Hope this clarifies!!!!

Regards,

Btline

[willc]

Btline,

Apologies if I got the wrong end of the stick, I took your remarks to refer to the situation on Monday evening.

Be that as it may, the halts train doesn't enter the equation here, being long gone before the 17.21, 17.51, 18.21 sequence from London nears Oxford.

And you can't run one of these trains faster than the others because of the pathing constraints on the single line at this time of the day. Slotting them through while two trains head in the opposite direction means there is no scope for doing anything different, indeed the timing of the 17.51 is already heavily manipulated, with a booked eight-minute wait at Oxford and padding added en route since December. The key here is for FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to focus on why the 17.21 is so often late out of Oxford.

While the current incarnation of the 17.51 only dates back to 2004, Thames Trains always ran a service in between the two Hereford trains - remember their stops at Pershore, Honeybourne or Hanborough are all recent developments - so that these three stations, plus Shipton, got an early evening service back from London.

Between 2002-4, a two-car Turbo left London at about 17.15, then Oxford at 18.23 as the halts train (17 minutes behind the first Hereford service) under a special exemption from the franchise requirement of a departure from Oxford at about 5.30pm. The exemption was scrapped by the SRA^» (Strategic Rail Authority - about) the December after FGW took over. One thing this  period proved was there is no demand for a halts train at this time of day. The number of people getting off at the halts dwindled - I was never entirely sure how some of those I saw using the morning train into Oxford got back to Combe, Finstock and Ascott. They reappeared once the departure went back to 17.25.

There may be an argument to be had over whether the 17.51 should turn back at Moreton-in-Marsh, reviving a traditional practice on the route, but drop it completely beyond Oxford and you are looking at 100+ extra people a day to fit on the Hereford trains, plus working in extra Hanborough and Shipton stops, which would only lengthen timings to Worcester and beyond.

[Lee]

Between 2002-4, a two-car Turbo left London at about 17.15, then Oxford at 18.23 as the halts train (17 minutes behind the first Hereford service) under a special exemption from the franchise requirement of a departure from Oxford at about 5.30pm. The exemption was scrapped by the SRA^» (Strategic Rail Authority - about) the December after FGW^▸ (First Great Western) took over. One thing this  period proved was there is no demand for a halts train at this time of day. The number of people getting off at the halts dwindled - I was never entirely sure how some of those I saw using the morning train into Oxford got back to Combe, Finstock and Ascott. They reappeared once the departure went back to 17.25.

Different market and area, I know, but I wish the powers that be would see similar sense on the TransWilts line....

[Steve Bray]

Personally I think the 1751 should terminate at Moreton.

Because of its dwell time at Oxford etc, its only running around 17 minutes ahead of the 1821 by Moreton, and that stands at Moreton for several minutes in order to let the 1751 clear the stretch to Evesham.

Terminate the 1751 at Moreton, and then the 1821 could then run around 14 minutes after it (as it wouldn't have to wait those few minutes at Moreton ; not really a hardship for a few dozen pax. The return working at 9pm from Worcester is used by even fewer pax - there's very little Eastbound demand from Worcester to London after 7pm.

Still its probably in the Franchise Spec, but by running these trains at 30 minute intervals, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) are creating more problems for themselves because the single track doens't offer the flexibility.

[Btline]

Btline,

Apologies if I got the wrong end of the stick, I took your remarks to refer to the situation on Monday evening.

Be that as it may, the halts train doesn't enter the equation here, being long gone before the 17.21, 17.51, 18.21 sequence from London nears Oxford.

And you can't run one of these trains faster than the others because of the pathing constraints on the single line at this time of the day. Slotting them through while two trains head in the opposite direction means there is no scope for doing anything different, indeed the timing of the 17.51 is already heavily manipulated, with a booked eight-minute wait at Oxford and padding added en route since December. The key here is for FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to focus on why the 17.21 is so often late out of Oxford.

While the current incarnation of the 17.51 only dates back to 2004, Thames Trains always ran a service in between the two Hereford trains - remember their stops at Pershore, Honeybourne or Hanborough are all recent developments - so that these three stations, plus Shipton, got an early evening service back from London.

Between 2002-4, a two-car Turbo left London at about 17.15, then Oxford at 18.23 as the halts train (17 minutes behind the first Hereford service) under a special exemption from the franchise requirement of a departure from Oxford at about 5.30pm. The exemption was scrapped by the SRA^» (Strategic Rail Authority - about) the December after FGW took over. One thing this  period proved was there is no demand for a halts train at this time of day. The number of people getting off at the halts dwindled - I was never entirely sure how some of those I saw using the morning train into Oxford got back to Combe, Finstock and Ascott. They reappeared once the departure went back to 17.25.

There may be an argument to be had over whether the 17.51 should turn back at Moreton-in-Marsh, reviving a traditional practice on the route, but drop it completely beyond Oxford and you are looking at 100+ extra people a day to fit on the Hereford trains, plus working in extra Hanborough and Shipton stops, which would only lengthen timings to Worcester and beyond.

No problem. I was having a rant- 

My suggestion was actually imagining double track!

By the way, I think that NR^» (Network Rail - home page) are wrong to redouble a Northern section of the CL (what AHaines/NR have been "discussing"). They should redouble FIRST: Wolvercote to Ascott.

This is because trains often pass between Wolvercote and Oxford, and nearish Ascott. The only other place of crossing is at Evesham. Therefore, the most beneficial stretch to do is this one. The SECOND section, should be from Evesham to Honeybourne and Pershore- ie make the loop longer, but still timetable trains to cross at Evesham, while eliminating unecessary dwells (which are up to 1/2 hour!!).

All new/reconstructed platforms (at Pershore, Honeybourne, Charbury and Hanborough) should be HST^▸ (High Speed Train) length, except Ascott, Coombe and Finstock which should be a bit bigger than a 3 car Thames Turbo length (with HST marker put in, just in case). Shipton should have extensions to HST length- I think it gets HSTs stopping.

Of course, if NR are willing, HST length platforms at all stations would be welcome!

Let's exterminate SDO^▸ (Selective Door Opening)- it has been nothing but disaster!

To complete the picture, the final sections of double track should then be filled in (with less urgency).

Then...... faster, more frequent services (at least hourly off peak)! More reliable services! More seats each day. More Firstminutefares! 

And no more delays at Morton on the way back!