Late running stoppers

[whole diary]

[stuving]

I think the headcodes are scrambled because the FOC^▸ (Freight Operating Company)'s are still worried about commercial sensitivities - on my internal systems it always shows correctly as 4M99, which can be a bit confusing when I
also often refer to realtimetrains, railcam and opentraintimes!

That does sound odd as a reason, not least because it clearly ain't foolin' no-one.

I'd imagined that some part of the computerised stuff needs to distinguish the permanent template path from the one invoked on a given day to run a train. So a new identity is generated each time, but all the systems that can only handle one path ID have to choose which one to keep.

That makes sense to me - not that that's of any relevance, of course. I can also just about believe that the FOCs applied pressure to have that one appear in the data feeds, even if it wasn't the initial reason for having it.

[bobm]

That is the reason but I would have thought they would be more concerned about the origin and destination of the train - which are clearly visible.

[grahame]

That is the reason but I would have thought they would be more concerned about the origin and destination of the train - which are clearly visible.

The origin and destinations of trains on line has killed the mystery that was available for mystery excursions too - a penalty of the information age!

[PhilWakely]

That is the reason but I would have thought they would be more concerned about the origin and destination of the train - which are clearly visible.

The origin and destinations of trains on line has killed the mystery that was available for mystery excursions too - a penalty of the information age!

I'm sure it is possibly to suppress details of some trains (eg the Royal Train and some Flying Scotsman trips), so if such mystery excursions still exist, these could be also ? ? 

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Back to the main issue here.  2 points…

1   A “headway” of 3 minutes is misleading.  I don’t know what the exact length of 455R (4M99) is, or the distance to/from the signals involved, but if you calculate the time between the loco arriving at Reading West J, and the time the rear of the train clears the overlap of the next signal down the line, and then add on the time for 1D35 to get to Reading West J from a standing start from the signal it’s been waiting at, I think you’ll be left with something a lot less than 3 minutes 

2   Back in the 1980’s I was at BRB^‡(resolve) HQ^▸ (Headquarters) (in 222 Marylebone Road, a fine building to work in).  We had many dealings with a department called Operational Research, who were developing mathematical modelling. (At this time the only computers were mainframes in large cupboards with lots of little water pipes to cool the components).  Anyway, one project that was done was the modelling of a busy junction in the SE Division where late running and regulation were causing problems.  The modelling allowed sensitivity analysis eg the effect of 1 train arriving 30 seconds late, and the time taken for the timetable to return to plan.  This informed tweaking of the timetable to minimise late running and the effects of late running, and also produced guidelines for regulation.   

I wonder if NR^» (Network Rail - home page) do anything similar to-day?

[eightf48544]

I think you will find find nobody does Operational Research or systems Analysis any more it's straight to designing the website. Hence the many rubbish systems.  You can't beat GIGO.

[IndustryInsider]

In terms of software, NR^» (Network Rail - home page)/TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s use systems like this, which can prove a timetable is robust and can be set to see what impact individual delays can have on other services. 

http://www.trapezegroup.com/pdf/solution_sheets/rail-simulations-solutions-sheet.pdf

Sometimes there are just too many trains and too many potential conflicts.  Freight trains through Reading West junction have also got to be pathed through Oxford Road Junction and Southcote Junction - all three being within a few miles of each other and all three being very busy.  The layout at West Junction is now SO much better than it was though, so whilst not perfect there are far fewer delays.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

I have only limited experience of timetable planning (using PROTIM), but I don’t think we ever accepted the notion that there were too many trains and that delays were inevitable.  Paths could be moved and/or retimed and recovery time added etc.

Maybe the May and December timetable changes will be an improvement.  Good that NR^» (Network Rail - home page)/TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)’s have a package like Trapeze – I just hope it actually gets used to simulate train running around Southcote, Oxford Road and Reading West Junctions, and that some time and effort is put in to minimising the probability of Freights arriving late (ie less than 3 minutes) in the first place, and then to minimising the knock on delays when they do. 

Industry Insider, I accept that the remodelling of Reading is a big improvement, but the delays saved west of Reading are mainly on the ML’s and not the RL’s

[Adelante_CCT]

Maybe the May and December timetable changes will be an improvement.

Looks as if your wish has come true. From May it is routed round Reading West curve two minutes earlier than at present. 4M99

[IndustryInsider]

Another signal on the relief line between Tilehurst and Pangbourne would help in my opinion.  4-aspects would mean a slow accelerating freight train would allow trains behind to get moving much quicker - currently a train a Tilehurst has to wait until the one in front has got beyond Pangbourne before it gets a green signal.  If it departs on a single yellow, sighting of the next signal at Purley isn't great,so drivers understandably crawl along to find that signal has usually long cleared to green. 

A very inefficient use of capacity, and a shame given the improvements in signal spacing between Reading and Tilehurst.