|
Ollie
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: November 07, 2007, 22:01:57 » |
|
Not a definite answer so don't take for granted, but trains were being cautioned through Burnham due to reported trespassers, this is a possible cause of your delay.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
oooooo
|
|
« Reply #31 on: November 07, 2007, 22:02:06 » |
|
2N44 14:30 Paddington to Oxford was delayed after trains were put on stop due to Thames Valley Police being in pursuit of a male on the line at Burnham. Stopage was brief but caused a small backlog of delays... There you go, FGW▸ staff being helpful again  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
johoare
|
|
« Reply #32 on: November 07, 2007, 22:05:10 » |
|
OK thanks for that Ollie and oooooo.. That explains it. But shouldn't the driver and/or FGW▸ customer services have been told about this?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
oooooo
|
|
« Reply #33 on: November 07, 2007, 22:09:19 » |
|
The driver should of known as appears trains were initially stopped by an emergency broadcast. This sort of information would take a while to filter through to customer services so unlikely they would of known at the precise time it happened.....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
johoare
|
|
« Reply #34 on: November 07, 2007, 22:11:03 » |
|
So the driver should have told us? Oh well.. A little bit of information always helps.....  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
oooooo
|
|
« Reply #35 on: November 07, 2007, 22:12:19 » |
|
Well yeah, I think he *should* of...!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
johoare
|
|
« Reply #36 on: November 07, 2007, 22:17:47 » |
|
But the driver chose not to? Do the drivers like to withold information? I know they have to suffer the late trains the same as the passengers (bored of being a customer now, I'm gonna be a passenger again), so I have every sympathy with them but I really would have thought the driver would have told us. I know it was only 10 minutes. But that was ten minutes where my child was on his own wondering why he was on his own! I guess we'll never know... Oh well, at least my child now has a plan as to what to do if no-one picks him up! That can only be positive!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
johoare
|
|
« Reply #37 on: November 08, 2007, 10:33:42 » |
|
21 minutes late today. We crawled all the way from Iver to Southall before finally being told, just before we speeded up again that it was due to track problems. I do suspect that someone somewhere may have know this fact before they let us all get on the train. A bit of information would go a long way in this instance. If I'd have known, I'd have brought some coffee and breakfast and got a later train because I was very hungry! On the plus side, I did get to read lots of my book this morning.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
devon_metro
|
|
« Reply #38 on: November 08, 2007, 16:31:06 » |
|
Looks like you got delayed around Airport Junction. You probably followed a late running train.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
martyjon
|
|
« Reply #39 on: November 08, 2007, 19:27:28 » |
|
21 minutes late today. We crawled all the way from Iver to Southall before finally being told, just before we speeded up again that it was due to track problems. I do suspect that someone somewhere may have know this fact before they let us all get on the train. A bit of information would go a long way in this instance. If I'd have known, I'd have brought some coffee and breakfast and got a later train because I was very hungry! On the plus side, I did get to read lots of my book this morning.
Well you could have knocked me over with a feather with that news. The screen I was looking at, the National Rail Live Paddington Arrivals page showed the service ran to time, didn't even lose time at Maidenhead this morning and arrived on time at Paddington as did the other service I regularly monitor, the 07:10 BRI» - PAD» . Late posting because I was called out to Newport last night and stood down at about 00:30 so by the time I got packed up and home it was 02:00 but I was still up at 06:00 but tired so I must have been seeing things this morning with regards to the punctuality of the 08:51 from Maidenhead. Avin a early nite ternite. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
johoare
|
|
« Reply #40 on: November 08, 2007, 20:29:21 » |
|
It does worry me that the screen that you were looking at is the same one that FGW▸ uses for it's statistics!! Perhaps no one (apart from the passengers and driver) knew that it was late today?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jim
|
|
« Reply #41 on: November 08, 2007, 21:56:14 » |
|
21 minutes late today. We crawled all the way from Iver to Southall before finally being told, just before we speeded up again that it was due to track problems. I do suspect that someone somewhere may have know this fact before they let us all get on the train. A bit of information would go a long way in this instance. If I'd have known, I'd have brought some coffee and breakfast and got a later train because I was very hungry! On the plus side, I did get to read lots of my book this morning.
Well you could have knocked me over with a feather with that news. The screen I was looking at, the National Rail Live Paddington Arrivals page showed the service ran to time, didn't even lose time at Maidenhead this morning and arrived on time at Paddington as did the other service I regularly monitor, the 07:10 BRI» - PAD» . Late posting because I was called out to Newport last night and stood down at about 00:30 so by the time I got packed up and home it was 02:00 but I was still up at 06:00 but tired so I must have been seeing things this morning with regards to the punctuality of the 08:51 from Maidenhead. Avin a early nite ternite. the 0710 is heading for it's first(?) 5/5 this week? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Cheers Jim AG's most famous quote "It'll be better next week" |
|
|
|
johoare
|
|
« Reply #42 on: November 09, 2007, 08:52:07 » |
|
Well the 07.10 made it into Paddington early from what I can see.. The 8.51 however was cancelled today! So thats a 60% punctuality rate this week. An improvement on last weeks 40% though.. And things were looking so good at the start of the week!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
martyjon
|
|
« Reply #43 on: November 09, 2007, 09:34:20 » |
|
When I interrogated the Service Incidents page on the FGW▸ website this morning it was showing ;-
07:52 Oxford to London Paddington due 09:12
This train will be started from Reading.It will no longer call at: Oxford, Radley, Didcot Parkway, Cholsey, Goring & Streatley, Pangbourne and Tilehurst.This is due to a train fault.
A look at the Paddington Live Arrivals page did indeed show this service as a Reading to Paddington service with the familiar word so frequently used by FGW CANCELLED showing against the stations from Oxford (inclusive) to Reading (exclusive) with the departure time from Reading as scheduled.
A refresh of this page at 08:30 showed the frequency of the use of the word CANCELLED had increased with the cancellation of the service throughout.
A quick shuffty back to the Service Incidents page confirmed this as below ;-
07:52 Oxford to London Paddington due 09:12
This train has been cancelled.This is due to a train fault.
Does make one think that after putting out a morning e-mail message imparting as part of that message ;-
First Great Western is pleased to report no problems affecting peak services this morning.
that FGW should be more cautious in future as past performances have revealed.
Brings to mind something of counting chicks before they are running around in the backyard.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
johoare
|
|
« Reply #44 on: November 09, 2007, 11:36:47 » |
|
Yes I agree. I saw on the National Rail website this morning that it had been cancelled from Oxford to Reading "because of a train fault". Being a canny commuter I knew that it was never going to run at all, so decided to work at home rather than get to work at least half hour late on the next train (which is really slow).. And I was right, soon enough it was cancelled totally.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
