Running early and not stopping (07:12 Taunton to Paddington, 23 Jan 2017)

[whole diary]

[John R]

The 0712 TAU^» (Taunton - next trains) to PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) departed 36 late this morning and is running non-stop to Bristol to make up time and achieve it's booked 0830 departure time from BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains).  Fair enough, but a 30 minute dash means it's just arrived into BRI 5 mins early and 11 minutes before it's booked departure time.  In the meantime, NLS passengers have seen it run through ahead of time. 

Is there no flexibility to reinstate stops en route, particularly when the following service is late, and will have inadequate capacity to sweep up all those aiming for the 0712?  It's a difficult one to justify to waiting passengers that their train is not stopping to make up time when it has just run through early.  It's not the first time this has happened either.

 

[ChrisB]

How would you get the stop order to the driver?

[grahame]

How would you get the stop order to the driver?

Aren't the train cabs radio connected to the signallers these days?   And the signallers to control?

[bobm]

Are the radios allowed to be used for anything other than "safety critical" communications - ie an All Stop order?

[ChrisB]

Not sure NR^» (Network Rail - home page) would be too happy about that, if their safety-critical signallers are asked to pass on operational instructions!

Stop orders usually passed by station staff...but if running non-stop....

[JayMac]

Once the decision was made to run non-stop it wouldn't have been possible to amend it.

There would certainly not be any communication with the driver via GSM-R^▸ (Global System for Mobile communications - Railway.).

[eightf48544]

Another example of the fragmented railway and the disconnect between the wheel and rail.

In BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) days control could contact the signalman to stop the train and pass any message to the driver.

Is there a signal at the end of NLS station which could have been kept at Danger the driver would then have to contact the signalman and could be told that the stops had been reinstated.?

Also isn't GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) in contact with the guard who could also contact the driver?

[bobm]

I thought about whether they could bring the train to a controlled halt but by the time they have done that and the driver has contacted the signaller I suspect the train would be running late again.

[JayMac]

Lesser evil and greater good to run non-stop to Bristol.

Not forgetting the performance statistics of having only part cancellation at intermediate stations, and an on time arrival at final destination.

Cold comfort though for John R and countless other folk from Bridgwater, Highbridge, Weston-super-Mare, Worle, Nailsea and Yatton.

[Adelante_CCT]

Still got held up at Ealing and arrived Pad 10 minutes late.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Cold comfort though for John R and countless other folk from Bridgwater, Highbridge, Weston-super-Mare, Worle, Nailsea and Yatton.

... not necessarily in that particular order.  And not forgetting 'countless other folk' from Weston Milton, either.   

[TaplowGreen]

Not forgetting the performance statistics of having only part cancellation at intermediate stations, and an on time arrival at final destination.

.............nail hit on head.

[Chris from Nailsea]

The text message I received from GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) at 07:37 this morning stated:

NLS to BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains) on your route:
08:13 - cancelled - this train being late from the depot.

 

[Chris from Nailsea]

Once the decision was made to run non-stop it wouldn't have been possible to amend it.

There would certainly not be any communication with the driver via GSM-R^▸ (Global System for Mobile communications - Railway.).

Agreed - but why that is so, I find incomprehensible. 

Is there a signal at the end of NLS station which could have been kept at Danger the driver would then have to contact the signalman and could be told that the stops had been reinstated?

Yes - there are such signals, beyond the ends of both the 'up' and 'down' platforms.

(We don't enjoy the luxury of 'relief lines' down here, eightf48544  )

[IndustryInsider]

Once the decision was made to run non-stop it wouldn't have been possible to amend it.

There would certainly not be any communication with the driver via GSM-R^▸ (Global System for Mobile communications - Railway.).

Agreed - but why that is so, I find incomprehensible. 

It probably would have been possible to amend it.  Control would contact the TM^‡(resolve) by mobile who would then be able to inform the driver.  However, in reality, control working out that the train would in fact get there in time for the NLS stop, getting permission from NR^» (Network Rail - home page) to reinstate the stop, phoning the TM and the TM contacting the driver, would take too much time to do.  However, Control could do better when it comes to predicting how much time a train will recover en-route and such situations arise out of their decisions being overly cautious sometimes.

As regards the performance figures comments, as BNM said, removing those calls (accepting the NLS one could've been retained), meant an on time departure of a popular train from Bristol, Bath, Chippenham, Swindon, Didcot and Reading, and also meant there was no risk of the next working of that set (11:00 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains)) also being delayed as a knock on.  It's fair to say that most of the time these decisions aren't purely made with the thoughts of punctuality statistics solely in mind!