Re: Omitted stops

"Peter Masson" <peter.masson1@privacy.com> wrote in message
news:qoWdnbXz1N-RPDrXnZ2dnUVZ8m2dnZ2d@bt.com...

>  As you say, the decision to run the train fast to Newbury and Bedwyn
> would seem to have been completely unjustified. Some action, by Network
> rail or FGW Control, would seem to have been necessary to enable the
> return working to start on time (and a delay to the return working would,
> at least, have reacted on the 1954 Exeter to Paddington). This suggests
> that the most intelligent move would have been to run the delayed 1942
> fast to Newbury, and normal stops afterwards. It might just have been
> possible to retain the stops at the two busier stations at Theale and
> Thatcham.

Your knowledge is, as ever, encyclopaedic!

Indeed, the only problem, had the always almost empty 21.06 been delayed,
might have been a trivial knock-on delay to the up HST on the approach to
Reading.. but so what! - All trains are liable to be delayed on the approach
to Reading - and that HST is then allowed 29 minutes to Paddington (when it
only needs 22!) - what else is recovery time there for?

> As to action you can take to try to get more intelligent decisions made in
> future, first tray to find out if it was a Network Rail or FGW decision,
> then write concise letters, explaining what was wrong from a passenger's
> point of view, to FGW and Network Rail management, to Passenger Focus, and
> to your MP (who probably has the best chance of getting things into the in
> tray of senior management).

Actually, the MP idea is spot on! - Richard Benyon did run a very
high-profile, and well-informed, campaign a year or two ago when FGW were in
dire straits over the Newbury line..  He claims responsibility for many of
the improvements FGW implemented to rush-hour and late night services..

> One of the problems with the Public Performance Measure and delay minutes
> statistics is that they give equal weight to the 1942 Reading to Newbury,
> which as you say should carry over 100 passengers, and the return working
> (2106 from Bedwyn) which in that direction and that time of the evening is
> probably not much more than empty stock.

In fact, the Performance Regime does give different weightings to delays at
different monitoring points.. but, ironically, in this case I'd guess it
gives a higher weighting to a delay at Reading (on what is, as you say, an
almost empty inward working) than it does to a delay at Bedwyn on the busier
outward working.. but, of course, the figures aren't in the public domain so
I don't know.. But this shouldn't be a consideration to those implementing
out-of-course regulation - the objective of Train Regulation - enshrined in
Condition H11 in the Track Access Conditions - is to minimise overall delay
to passengers (and time-sensitive goods) and to avoid undue discrimination..
not to minimise compensation payments in one direction or the other!

I appreciate your comments, as always..

--
Walter Mann
[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]