Thanks for that, Bobm, That explains why the up service I caught from Didcot was showing as on time and then turned up 5 mins late.

Just going back to dispatching from Reading, I was chatting to a DM there a few days ago and he was quick to acknowledge that they had to be much sharper now. In the bad old days, many small platform delays were masked by the regular "WLC" (waiting line clear), something which happens only infrequently now.

Amongst all the discussion about the technical bits, its probably worth asking the question: "Well, is it working?".

In other words, with the viaduct now open, what effect is it and the other alterations having on timekeeping and operations.

I was once a Duty Manager at Reading, and did a few shifts as lead dispatch on the old platform 4 in the afternoons and on 5/8 in the morning peak, so have a measure of experience. Having spent a modicum of time watching what now goes on from the transfer deck, my first impression is that the new layout is already making a huge difference.

I spent 40 minutes there this evening in the early peak. It was good to see the departure screens showing everything on time. I noticed several fast services arriving early - for example, a down Cotswold service was 4 early into platform 9, and it was great to see up services sweeping down off the viaduct and actually waiting time at platforms 10/11. I watched a down Bristol service pulling into platform 12 and, before it had stopped, the Penzance service was entering platform 7, two minutes early. Unfortunately, the Penzance service was held for two minutes whilst waiting for a Cross Country from the South to enter platform 3!

Saw a smart bit of operating when the 16.10 XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) service to the North from P8 was given a single yellow onto the DM, as an on time XC arrival from the North took the crossovers on the viaduct to the festival line en route to platform 3. This service cleared the cross overs and the northbound service was given a clear road well before it got near the signal protecting the crossovers. The 1612 down Swansea service had arrived early in P9 and waited for the 16.10 XC to clear the section - its starting signal cleared a few seconds before 1612 and the service was on the move 40 seconds later. All in all, nice work.

One issue I have noticed is that most (?) down Bristol trains are routed through platform 12, meaning they cross from the mains to the reliefs at Kennet and back to the mains at Tilehurst. They often lose a few minutes on the approach to Reading. I think the reason for the routing is to avoid a clash with services off the up Westbury, routed through P8, and along the down main before crossing to the up main at Kennet.

My impression is that the new layout has already made a huge difference to operations, and that the introduction of the feeders and the full festival lines at Easter will eliminate some of the obvious problems that still remain. The Bristol services will presumably then be routed through P8/9, so eliminating another source of delay.

Two observations about performance in general:

First, I have noticed up trains losing time between Swindon and Didcot - is there a problem there?

Second, (touch wood), FGW^▸ (First Great Western) seems to have had a pretty good run, performance wise, in January. No doubt Taplow Green can correct me!!!!

The ex FG Andrew Haines has been Chief Exec of the CAA^» (Civil Aviation Authority - about) since 2009.

I recall an incident a few years ago when working as a Duty Manager at Reading. There was serious disruption (its not a new thing), and as we packed a lot of very late people onto a train for Newbury, one businessman said to me: "I'm 40 minutes late for an appointment at which I was going to close a contract for ^10m. Are you going to compensate me?"

To which I replied "I'm sorry sir, but we don't do consequential loss. Oh, and by the way, when I was a salesman, I would always make sure I got there an hour early if I was intending to close a deal." The doors closed and I never saw him again.

But seriously, ^10m consequential loss for a 40 minute delay on a ^10 train ticket. Imagine the can of worms..............

NR^» (Network Rail - home page) has announced today that it has awarded a ^33m contract to Taylor Woodrow for this work to start in December 2014. No completion date given!

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Doubling-of-the-railway-lines-between-Bristol-stations-is-given-the-green-light-21aa.aspx

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-29752056

"Chiltern Railways has revealed plans for a passenger service to run on the Cowley branch in Oxfordshire.

The line, currently only used for freight, would see two new stations on the route at Oxford Science Park and Oxford Business Park.

The train operator said the plans would bring "significant economic benefits" to local businesses and "improve connectivity" among local communities.

If plans are approved the passenger service would operate from 2020.

Chiltern Railways is running a charter train for business leaders and stakeholders on 5 November to show how the service would work."

NR^» (Network Rail - home page) has come up with a solution to the problem of flooding at Cowley Bridge:

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Proposed-solution-to-flooding-at-Cowley-and-Stafford-bridges-in-Exeter-2193.aspx

It plans to remove three weirs from the River Exe.

Ingenious!

This work is down to Crossrail and has been subcontracted to Balfour Beatty, who operate from the sidings at Langley. GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) is paying for electrification from Maidenhead (exclusive) westwards.

All lifts are fitted with alarm buttons. These activate a phone call, usually first of all to a local number, and if there is no answer within a set period, then to a number at FGW^▸ (First Great Western) Control. A separate telephone line is provided for each lift, and the lift must be taken out of service if the line fails (or, as happened to me, is cut off because some accountant could not identify what the line was for so had it disconnected!). The numbers called must not have answerphones on them, so there can be no chance of the trapped person being asked to leave a message. In practice, the first number dialled will be to a staff office on the station - the station control room if there is one - so that a member of staff can attend the lift and, at least, offer reassurance. Some senior members of staff are able to open the doors to release anyone who is trapped. I certainly did this on a number of occasions. On others, I called the fire brigade, who are well versed in lift rescues. After the rescue, the lift would be put out of use until inspected by a lift engineer.

FGW has the front line responsibility for monitoring lifts. Maintenance of them is down to NR^» (Network Rail - home page). If FGW find a lift fault, it is reported to Network Rail. It in turn has a contract with the manufacturers for maintenance. Manufacturers have 24 hour engineering cover and the contract with NR used to specify a 2 hour response - don't know what it is now. So anyone trapped in a lift at an unstaffed station should find themselves talking to FGW Control, who will report the problem to NR, who will immediately call out a lift engineer, who should attend within two hours. There is also the fallback of asking the on call station manager to attend, but I can imagine this not going down too well with some managers.

One other thought: New lifts all have the capability of having CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision) installed within the car. If lifts are to be left operational whilst the station is unstaffed, I would have thought that CCTV would be fitted and connected through to FGW Control. Not only would this be useful in deterring abuse of the lift, but it would also help with an entrapment, in that the Control staff could see what was going on in the lift and call for the emergency services if needed.

I have also heard that lifts are to be installed at Goring and, noting the limited staffing hours there, can only assume that they are to be remotely monitored, although how this will be achieved in reality, I do not know (yet).

4  Manchester Piccadilly

"Even for those travelling to Charlbury, the bus entered Charlbury at 1800 (five ways junction) but it was a further 25min due to the diversion before it arrived at the station. This is a ridiculous application of the rules, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) should allow some leniency in dropping off passengers who would prefer before embracing on a long diversion."

FGW don't make the rules on where buses can stop. They would have to apply to the traffic commissioners to stop off anywhere but the stations served by the rail replacement service. Such applications are not usually dealt with quickly.

A few years ago, I organised the bus service between Oxford and Didcot when the line was closed for a week because of flooding. The buses had to come into Oxford from the North side, via the Banbury road, because the Botley road was flooded. Many of the passengers wanted to get off the buses in Oxford centre, instead of being carried beyond the centre to the station. After the first day, my contact at the bus company I was using to organise the service got permission from the Traffic Commissioners to drop off incoming passengers in the centre of Oxford. We could not get permission to pick up there on services to Didcot.

We did well to get authority within 24 hours. Getting it within a couple of hours would be nigh on impossible, imo.

We can criticise FGW for many things, but its helpful, I think, to know the boundaries of its control.

Broken windows were once a regular event at Reading, particularly during school holidays - one a day was the going rate. Knocking out an outer skin was about a ten minute job - a broken window kit is kept at every staffed station and dispatchers were trained to do it, by observing more experienced staff. The trick was to lever out the broken outer skin (with a big screwdriver) without damaging the inner skin. If the inner skin was damaged, the coach had to be locked out of use. The tape is applied around the edge of the window to stop loose pieces of glass flying out when the train is travelling at speed, with obvious potential repercussions.

Post Ufton Nervet, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) replaced all of the windows in HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) with laminated glass. This didn't shatter, so was much safer for those inside the train. It was also virtually impossible to remove with a broken window kit (actually, a hammer and a big screwdriver), and the rules had to be changed to say that broken laminated windows would just be taped over and left for the depot to replace that evening.

Which is why I was surprised to see a window being removed. It must have been very badly damaged, and to remove the outer skin of a laminated window in 10 minutes is very good going.

I would guess that one effect of the reduction in the number of windows being knocked out is that the number of dispatchers who have ever had to do the job will also be very much reduced. Possibly not a problem at major stations, but certainly an issue elsewhere.

6 Derby

Paddington, then!

8 Paddington (H&C) platform?