|
|
Post by graeme186 on Feb 23, 2011 14:08:52 GMT
Many of you will know that an emergency speed restriction in the Neasden area yesterday (22/02) resulted in what seemed to be approximately 40% of trains reversed south to north via Neasden Depot for most if not the whole day.
On my way home, I stopped off at Harrow for 45mins or so to watch proceedings and what caught my attention again as has done hundreds of times before during the evening peak during my 30 years of Met commuting was the instances of trains having arrived empty down the fast from the depot and then departing north with hardly any passengers on them at all.
Is there scope for consideration to be given to the following, particularly during the evening peak:
- more attention given to not clearing the starter at Harrow for a train that has originated empty from the depot until a train (normally packed to the gunnels) that has originated from Aldgate / Baker Street and with a different destination point has arrived at Harrow, even if it means the depot originator having a few minutes late start?
- trains originating from the depot and booked to run fast to Harrow making an extra stop at Wembley Park (Pfm 1)? This would be particularly helpful for WAT/AME/CHE Met passengers who have been forced onto the Jubilee Line by the Met disruption only to arrive at Wembley Park and find every train arriving on platform 2 is destined for Uxbridge (as per WTT). The next thing to happen of course is to get on an Uxbridge only to watch your empty WAT/AME/CHE train pass you on the fast and to have departed Harrow by the time you've arrived.
Thoughts welcome!
|
|
|
|
Post by manorborn on Feb 23, 2011 16:58:10 GMT
As another long standing Met commuter, may I heartily concur. Joined up thinking, I believe, is the expression. Or to put it another way, run the trains with the passengers in mind, not the schedules.
And if otherwise fast trains are to stop at Wembley Park, then the staff there need to know well in advance so they can inform people who then have to cross the bridge.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Feb 23, 2011 18:03:06 GMT
I would have thought that trains were start in passenger service from Wembley when heading North. If not, they should do.
It is better that trains for the depot tip out at Harrow as this is a crew change point and there are staff available to help detrain.
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Feb 23, 2011 22:24:18 GMT
As the controller on duty both on Monday and Tuesday evenings (which both suffered from the speed restriction), I can hopefully answer your questions.
A bit of background first. The speed restriction was imposed after a damaged rail was found on a set of points on the approach to Neasden southbound.
Whilst relatively short in length, the limit imposed - 5mph - would mean the full service would have quickly "bunched." For this reason during the evening peaks at least, I made the decision to remove all Baker Street reversing trains at Harrow, and reverse them via Neasden depot.
The remaining service south of Harrow was a 4/6 minute service to Aldgate - meaning all stations south of Harrow were being served with a fairly "decent" service despite the removal of the Baker Street trains. This gave around 12-15 trains per hour through the restriction, which to be honest is the maximum such a restriction can handle.
North of Harrow, the full booked service operated.
The Baker Street trains, upon exit from Neasden depot, all picked up their booked workings to Watford/Amersham/Uxbridge etc. In order to maintain a reliable service to those termini and their respective branches, it was not always possible to hold each train back to provide an empty train for an ex-city train. Some trains did indeed provide a connection, but platform capacity at Harrow means this could not always be done.
Met passengers were, unfortunately, diverted towards the Jubilee line as an alternative. However, given that there was a 4/6 minute service arriving at Baker Street/Finchley Road from the city, the best advice would have been to keep people on the Met to Harrow and change there. I think the direction to the Jubilee resulted from the general "alternative route" suggestion that may have been given out, rather than advising people of the frequency of service from the city.
Given the timekeeping we experienced on the northbound - most trains were on time - the empty train that may have overtaken you would, on any other day, have been ahead of you from Baker Street and also left Harrow before you arrived. Once again, this is as a result of the timetable order in which things more often than not had to run in order that the service north of Harrow was not compromised.
We have to keep in mind that there are people heading back into London just as much as those who are trying to leave. Holding a train at Harrow, making a connection (which in itself often delays both trains as confusion normally reigns - with people swapping back and forth from each train as they can't decide whether to take the less crowded train or take the train that is leaving first, albeit crowded) will mean both trains leave late, and will subsequently arrive at the terminus late.
Just to answer / comment on Metman's post above.
Trains ex depot did enter service at Wembley. Those booked to stop at Wembley Park platform 1 did so.
Harrow is chosen as the detrainment point as cross-platform interchange can be achieved and also a train being emptied can be bypassed by other trains which are staying in service. Keeps everything moving ;D
I am not trying to wash my hands of it all by the way. As some here will know, I will take the suggestions and feedback with me. I tend to have a fair amount of involvement in plans of this sort "when things go wrong." Input from people here is often "kinder" and slightly more informed than the general complaints received from the outside world! This forum is viewed by other senior members of staff as well. We can always learn lessons, and if a future scenario of this sort arises, we may try and do things differently.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Feb 23, 2011 23:00:02 GMT
See, I know stuff. I would not like to be in your shoes (especially if you are a size 8 or less!!) as what you just described sounds like a total nightmare! I was going into town at 3 on Tuesday and we crawled over the points at Neasden. There was a big shudder as we got through Neasden and for a moment I thought the back of the train had derailed! I think the fifth car PCM just reset which pulled up the whole train slightly. I came back from Baker Street at about 7 and there were plenty of trains from plat 2 (nothing from the bays as you stated) but there was a choice of train for sure. My journey took about 5 mins longer than it would have done which you have to agree is a pretty good effort.  |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Feb 24, 2011 0:33:16 GMT
I would not like to be in your shoes (especially if you are a size 8 or less!!) as what you just described sounds like a total nightmare! Size 11. I don't think the rugged Metropolitan Railway employs staff with small feet ;D ;D. It's a bit like those egg-sizing machines. Those with more petite feet are sent through the door to the "other railway." The door is of a green colour  ;D To be honest, I wouldn't call this type of scenario a nightmare. The solution more or less writes itself and then it's simply a case of trying to watch the finer details that people will notice - and unfortunately as graeme186 has pointed out, sometimes it's not always in the interests of everyone. I am glad you had a positive experience from the disruption. There were frequent services, but it does illustrate that those Baker Street reversers obviously mean a lot more to the Met than a 5 minute city service would provide. That is quite interesting given what I know about December's timetable |
|
|
|
Post by graeme186 on Feb 24, 2011 23:24:18 GMT
Thank you very much indeed MetControl for advising the detail of the train service contingency arrangements that you put in place during your late shift on Tuesday evening in response to the 5mph ESR on the SB at Neasden.
Please don't think in anyway I was offering any criticism in respect of those arrangements. IAs I've said before, I appreciate the difficulties and challenges that go with your responsibilities. As I mentioned, I watched proceedings at both Baker Street and Harrow and even intervals were maintained south of Harrow and as you say, the booked service operated north of Harrow.
One of my points was really about whether the train service contingency plans for disruption during any evening peak involving trains reversing south to north via the Depot could call for all trains booked to run down the fast to Harrow to call at Wembley Park Pfm 1 even if they're not booked to.
Re my other point, I fully accept your explanation about platform capacity at Harrow and about the potential implication of Neasden Depot originating trains being held at Harrow to connect with a train originating from the City/Baker St. However, I just wonder whether occasionally, a little more thought might go into considering the potential benefits to customers of slightly delaying some of these depot originating trains. An example from Tues night involved T427 the 1657 Ald-Wat and T410 the 1724 Bak-Wat. The former was about 4L. As soon as it left Pfm 3, in came T410 empty from the depot. The starter was off and no more than a dozen customers could have got on this train. Infact, by my watch, it left 1 minute early! Not long after, an Ald-Uxb train came in loaded with passengers for the Watford Line.
Re your remark about possible initiatives being considered for the Dec 11 timetable, I sincerely hope I'm wrong but I have wondered, particularly in light of the planned cancellation arrangements put in place earlier this year and the arrangements applied during the Pfm 1 and 4 extension works at Bak St last year whether we might find that there is a very slight reduction in peak hour services between Harrow and Baker Street with the trains concerned terminating /starting at Harrow. We shall see!
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Feb 25, 2011 10:27:39 GMT
Please don't think in anyway I was offering any criticism in respect of those arrangements. IAs I've said before, I appreciate the difficulties and challenges that go with your responsibilities. Not a problem. As I said we do listen to comments etc. and in particular I like to hear them from here rather than from the public via my manager. It's much nicer to hear it from here I think what may be needed in future events, is maybe a closer look at what is happening in the Harrow area in terms of routing on the northbound. Don't get me wrong, I am in no way criticising the Harrow signallers. They were busy enough routing trains on the southbound, and ensuring we had no gaps on the local lines in that direction. It is a very busy cabin indeed at the best of times. For the northbound they were merely running as per timetable, but maybe in future we will offer more guidance from our (bigger picture) view and arrange a few more connections where possible. The Harrow signaller cannot clearly see trains approaching them on the northbound from any great distance, so arranging connections is slightly trickier than on the southbound. Re your remark about possible initiatives being considered for the Dec 11 timetable, I sincerely hope I'm wrong but I have wondered, particularly in light of the planned cancellation arrangements put in place earlier this year and the arrangements applied during the Pfm 1 and 4 extension works at Bak St last year whether we might find that there is a very slight reduction in peak hour services between Harrow and Baker Street with the trains concerned terminating /starting at Harrow. We shall see! I cannot reveal too many details at this stage for obvious reasons. But what I will say is that there will not be a reduction in peak-hour services, and there will not be an increase in Harrow terminating trains. The problems we experienced earlier this year will be overcome. At present a lot of the issues that caused problems have already been worked out. |
|
;D
