Padding overkill

[whole diary]

[willc]

Just glanced at the May timetable for the Cotswold Line and there are a couple of notable changes - or even more added padding, to be blunt. It may aid reliability, but if this goes on we'll be back at steam age timings pretty soon.

The first Abergavenny/Hereford to London leaves earlier and runs about five minutes earlier than now as far as Charlbury, before being allowed 23 minutes to Oxford, inclusive of a Hanborough stop, before it runs in the existing times to London. The usual non-stop timing CBY-OXF^» (Oxford - next trains) is 12-13 minutes, and even an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) doesn't need that much of a timing allowance to call at Hanborough, so this train will be hanging around at Wolvercot junction, or held at the last signal outside Oxford waiting for the platform an awful lot of the time.

In the opposite direction, the 06.30 London-Worcester Turbo, which often causes delays to the second Aber/Hereford train by blocking the single line from Oxford to Ascott-under-Wychwood, will now leave at 6am, trundle to Oxford in 1hr 49mins (generous even for a stopper), leave four minutes earlier, then run non-stop to Kingham with the not exactly taxing timing of 28 minutes for just over 21 miles - this with a lightly-loaded three-car Turbo being driven flat out at 90mph to clear the single line. I predict much sitting around at Kingham waiting for departure time.

With all this slack in hand, surely this train ought to make a stop at Shipton, to see if there is any market for travel westbound at this time of the day? It's on the double track by then, so no danger of causing delays to any other trains.

[Mookiemoo]

its getting silly. Either trains are VERY late or you sit for ages somewhere

[Mookiemoo]

ps.

Where can u see the new ttable

[Lee]

ps.

Where can u see the new ttable

We've got a topic running on it in the link below.
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=2398.msg17936#msg17936

[IanL]

Agree, this is getting silly, at the Charlbury meeting with NR^» (Network Rail - home page) and FGW^▸ (First Great Western) one of the points made was that timings to Paddington are getting slower and slower.....even now it is 10min longer than when I started using the Cotswold Line in 2001.

Just checked, the new timetable shows the 0730 ish train as 1hr 27min from Charlbury to Paddington, this used to be under 1hr10min.

[eightf48544]

Just glanced at the May timetable for the Cotswold Line and there are a couple of notable changes - or even more added padding, to be blunt. It may aid reliability, but if this goes on we'll be back at steam age timings pretty soon.

In the opposite direction, the 06.30 London-Worcester Turbo, which often causes delays to the second Aber/Hereford train by blocking the single line from Oxford to Ascott-under-Wychwood, will now leave at 6am, trundle to Oxford in 1hr 49mins (generous even for a stopper), leave four minutes earlier, then run non-stop to Kingham with the not exactly taxing timing of 28 minutes for just over 21 miles - this with a lightly-loaded three-car Turbo being driven flat out at 90mph to clear the single line. I predict much sitting around at Kingham waiting for departure time.

With all this slack in hand, surely this train ought to make a stop at Shipton, to see if there is any market for travel westbound at this time of the day? It's on the double track by then, so no danger of causing delays to any other trains.

Re 06:30 London Worc 1:49 to Oxford  may not be too generous depending on the number of stops and the fact that it  presumably it runs relief line Padd to Didcot. Therefore the 28 minutes Oxford  to Whychwood may also not be too generous either. I assumme it's to allow the train to be 5 late leaving Oxford and still have a path onto the single line.

The trouble with such padding is that it leads to slack working. What's the incentive for station staff to despatch the train promptly and for the driver to drive briskly if they know they are going to hang around at various places awaiting time.

Whereas a crisp/tight timetable leads to brisk working and trains running more to time, as there is an incentive to get a move on. This can even be communicated to the passengers who can be chivied into alighting and joining quickly so the train can get away on time. 

The days of Reading station staff telling Gerry Fiennes the then Genral Manager WR that "we don't blow whistles at passengers from Newbury" when they are changing into the London train, are long gone.

[willc]

Therefore the 28 minutes Oxford  to Whychwood may also not be too generous either.

Trust me, this is ridiculously slack. This is a typical time allowance for a 125 making stops at Hanborough and Charlbury before Kingham. Some years ago, after a cancellation fiasco at Oxford (Thames Trains could do those quite well too), I rode on a Turbo which was first stop Kingham. We flew along flat out at 90mph most of the way and ran from Oxford start to stop well inside 20 minutes.

It could still be five late from Oxford, stop at Shipton and make it to Kingham inside the time being allowed from May.

[eightf48544]

See your point willc, agree 28 minutes is too long even if late off Oxford.

The other point about such slack timings especially on a single line like the Cotswold is that it restricts the number of trains that can be run. If trains can clear the single line in under 20 minutes then you can run 3 trains an hour 2 one way and one the other. If it's timed over twenty minutes you can't. But they have to be run briskly.

[Mookiemoo]

Then you get the silly situation we had last night.

1721 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) - HRF.  Got into Evesham at 1912 but not due to leave until 1922 - padded I suspect to allow for it or the up train to be late.

The up train in question got into Evesham at 1913 not due to leave until 1919.

So two full size HST^▸ (High Speed Train) sat for 10 minutes in Evesham to deal with padding!

[dog box]

This is the problem with busy single line sections, the answer is doubling the line again, which is being mooted at the moment

[Steve Bray]

The fastest train in the 1973 timetable from Hereford to Paddington was 1 minute faster than the fastest Hereford to Paddington train in the current timetable. So that just about sums things up. In 1973, the train did not call at Pershore, Honeybourne or Reading, but on the other hand I guess the maximum speed would have been 90 or 95mph, and not 125mph as it can be today.

The service 10 years ago was much faster between hereford and Paddington - 2 hrs 43 mins, compared with 3 hrs 4 mins this year.

[Lee]

An interesting post from The Ticket Collector (link below.)
http://www.theticketcollector.co.uk/wordpress/2008/04/11/so-just-what-is-on-time-when-it-comes-to-the-railway/

[willc]

How accurate are those timetable pdfs? And if they're not, why have they posted them on the website?

It appears the skipped stops by the Turbo at 6am may just be yet another error, as the CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) have picked up that the 17.51 from London to Worcester is shown taking four minutes to get six-and-a-half miles from Hanborough to Charlbury, but in fact it will lose its Hanborough stop, with the 18.21 to Hereford calling instead.

Nevertheless, that this train is moving back 30 minutes, from 6.30 to 6am, in the hope of ensuring it reaches Oxford in time to depart four minutes earlier than now, does beg the question of what's going on out there with these padded timings. It is running against the peak flow as well, for goodness sake!

Even if it does call at Hanborough and Charlbury, it is still allowed a minute more from Oxford to Kingham than the 21.48 from London, which does call at Shipton. Why not give a stop here at about 08.20 a go on a trial basis? If someone has business or wants a day out in Worcester, or further afield in the West Midlands or Herefordshire, the 17.06 from Great Malvern offers a handy return service with a call at Shipton at 18.30, but the first Worcester-bound train from Shipton is at - honest - 17.58! A long-standing mid-afternoon stop at Shipton by what is now the 13.51 ex-London was dropped last year.

While it can't compete with the one train a week in one direction Stockport-Stalybridge service, Shipton has got to be one of the strangest calling patterns around.

If one can trust the pdfs, from May there will be the following calls:
Weekdays to Oxford and London: 07.40 (halts train to OXF^» (Oxford - next trains)), 18.30 (06.02 to London appears to be dropped)
Weekdays from London and Oxford: 17.58 (return halts), 19.20, 23.14
Saturdays to Oxford and London: 07.13, 08.27, 15.28, 22.27.
Saturdays from London and Oxford: 15.15, 18.15, 21.12, 23.11.
I have no idea why there is no attempt to provide an 'evening out in Oxford' train on Saturdays, but they don't bother, even though the 17.07 ex-Malvern will stand for 13 minutes at Evesham until 17.56, just in case the 15.51 from London, due away at 17.48, is late. Up until the notorious December 2006 timetable, the Saturday trains here were better spread out and the other halts had trains too.
Sundays: Absolutely nothing, even though there are bound to be people heading back to London from the Wychwoods in the afternoon and evening. Never mind, they can do their bit for the environment by driving, or getting a lift to Charlbury instead.

[Btline]

I know that it would be dreadful, inconvenient etc. , but I still can't see why they do not run the Cotswold Line as a shuttle (180) every hour/two hours to connect with half hourly HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) at Oxford. Even with a connexion, journey times would be shorter due to less slack and improved reliability.

Does anybody know whether an hourly service would be possible using a shuttle?

This way ALL trains could be time-tabled to pass in the middle of the big loop, and avoid passing at Evesham. I think that at the moment they pass at Evesham near Ascott and near Wolvercote - asking for trouble.

Then, when the Cotswold Line gets redoubled, an standard hourly service (with other slower/faster services put in between) could run from London to Worcester Foregate Street and (some) beyond.

---------------------

And why are trains randomly missing out important stops (Charlbury, and to a lesser extent Shipton)?

---------------------

I call 4 mins between Worcester's stations slack!

[willc]

An hourly timetable could run now, with the existing track set-up, but it would require every single train to be bang on time, day in, day out, which isn't going to happen, sadly. You need Swiss-style top-notch infrastructure to achieve Swiss-style punctuality.

The Saturday timetable does largely conform to an hourly pattern, though with extended stops at Evesham to try to ensure it doesn't unravel due to delays.

I've said it before, so I'll say it again, no-one wants shuttles. They may appear reliable, but often aren't, especially over longer distances, and people do not like changing trains. A crude comparison of passenger numbers in pre-Turbo days up to 1992, with those since, with almost all trains through to/from London, is all you need to demonstrate this.

And connections would not be slick. To ensure robustness, trains from Worcester would be timed to arrive in Oxford not long after a London train had left, to allow for delays and ensure people were able to catch the next one - when they did try a five-minute connection a couple of years ago, at noon, it took a complaint from the CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) to stop them despatching the London service just as a slightly delayed train from Worcester arrived.

If a shuttle used the north bay platform at Oxford (and I'm not sure if an Adelante is allowed in there anyway), passengers from London would have to cross the line, not easy with luggage etc, so you again have to allow a long margin between arrival and departure (there is currently an eight-minute allowance between the 16.21 from London arriving and the 17.31 halts train departing - a through train would be at Hanborough in that time). And shunting trains out of and into platform 2 would be no less time-consuming. So journey times would be just the same, or longer.