Not a bad month

June was a bit of a disaster for all concerned - Network Rail, London Midland (and Virgin) and of course the passengers.  You name it we had it - Lightning strikes on lineside equipment, overheating rails, multiple track/signal failures, train breakdowns and lots, lots more.

With no idea about whether or not July would be as bad (or even worse...), I figured that I'd keep a log of travel delays through the month.

There were 20 working days (Mon-Fri) in July, and I travleld into London for 17 of them.  Of the 34 individual journeys, 11 of them were delayed.

5 of the journeys were delayed by 5 minutes or more. 

The worst delay was 48 minutes, but the fault can't be laid at anyone's door for that one.  On Wednesday 13th the late afternoon/evening service was disrupted by someone being hit by a train.  A sad event, and one that we shouldn't dwell on.

The next big delay occurred a week later on Wednesday 20th.  I was on an early afternoon train home that was held up by overhead line damage and a failed train at Leighton Buzzard.  Network Rail and the TOC (think it was Virgin Trains)?

The third longest delay occurred the following Monday, the 25th.  I was in a rush to get home so jumped on the 1713 planning to get off at Leighton Buzzard, changing onto the Southern service for Bletchley.  Unfortunately the London Midland train was late leaving Euston and lost more time getting to Leighton so I missed the connection.  This was another awful "person being hit by a train" incident, so let's not go there in terms of finger pointing...

The fourth (and final) incident worth mentioning occurred on Wednesday 6th.  There was a fault at Harrow and the 0700 from Bletchley was kept on the slow line.  As we headed south it became apparent that there was a signal/points problem at Hemel so we couldn't switch to the fast line there either.  I reckon Network Rail were responsible for the 14 minute delay that morning :-(

Throughout the month I also kept a note of the significant incidents recorded by London Midland on email and on Twitter.  Overall, by my reckoning we had:

• 6 x signalling equipment problems (general) 
• 2 x points failure
• 2 x problems linked to vandalism
• 2 x person hit by a train
• 1 x train failure
• 1 x overhead line damage
• 1 x train crew issue
• 1 x 'Speed restrictions' (no other info given)

I also recorded that for 16 of the journeys made, we arrived early at either Euston or Bletchley by up to 3 minutes.  More proof that 'timetable flab' exists me thinks...


How was your travel in July?  Did you think it was better than June?  



   

Overcrowding? Us?

Last week the Office of the Rail Regulator released their report for 2009 (see National Rail Trends Yearbook 2009).  The press picked up and reported on some of the highlights.  Two operators were given a special mention - First Great Western and our own dear London Midland...


In 2008 the % of London Midland services which ran in excess of capacity during the peak period was 4.8%.  In 2009 that figure had increased to 5.9%.


After reading an article on this in my own newspaper I posted up the London Midland figures on Twitter.  This generated the following response:

 

I think that's a pretty fair reply.  It's good to hear that the numbers are improving but even better to be told that they recognise that they still need to do better.

So no complaints about London Midland, but what about their trade body, the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC)?  The ATOC Media Centre carries the following press release:

Complaints drop to record low levels 08/10/2010


In repsonse to ORR figures on overcrowding and customer complaints, a spokesperson for the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) said:


“These figures show that, overall, overcrowding fell last year and that passenger complaints across the country have recently dropped to their lowest level on record.’’


“Train companies are in the business of keeping their customers happy and dislike having to put passengers onto trains which are overcrowded. The figures highlight the importance of sustained and targeted investment to ease overcrowding on the railways.”

I don't know which claim I find funnier - the one about passenger complaint numbers dropping (do they not read Twitter?) or the statement that train companies are in the business of keeping their customers happy!!

Then there's the "repsonse" spelling mistake.  Amateur communicators like me can be excused errors like this, but paid PR professionals...?


. 

Our rails in their hands

This post is prompted by a pair of newspaper articles about Network Rail in today's Sunday Telegraph.  Neither are complimentary.

As rail passengers and taxpayers, we have a major stake in how the organisation which is responsible for our national railway infrastructure is run, and these articles highlight a number of serious issues and concerns.


Who is at the wheel of Network Rail?

The first piece is by Andrew Gilligan and is in the main body of the paper. I read it and came away with the conclusion that the senior leadership of this body isn't "fit for purpose".  Too much money, distorted performance & safety statistics, and a cavalier disregard for the interests of the travelling public.


Network Rail emerges from the ashes of Railtrack

The second piece is in the Telegraph's Business section, and is written by Andrew Cave.  It is a more sober, detailed analysis written around the theme of the appointment of David Higgins as CEO, but it is nonetheless still highly critical of this public-funded body's operation to date (it mentions for example that Mr Higgins' predecessor had a company Aston Martin on top of his £1.2 million a year salary/bonus/pension package).

(Nb: The paper and online versions of the Andrew Cave article have different titles, introductions and dates but the main body of content is identical)
The financial services industry has come in for a lot of grief over the last 2-3 years, much of it undoubtedly justified.  My personal view though is that greed, incompetence and the mismanagement of a public service is a far worse offence.

What do you think?


. 

Service improved? 4

London Midland have a page on their website titled Improving our services where they describe the steps they are taking to address a number of problem areas.

This is the fourth in a series of blog postings which covers an aspect of the service that London Midland say they are working on.



More punctual

Under this heading London Midland say that their priorities are to run their trains on time, safely, reliably and consistently.  The claim that they have "already made progress since the start of the year" and "aim to get back on target as soon as possible".

So what do we think?

It is ironic that this heading has come up in the week that has seen serious disruptions to the London Midland commuter services to and from Euston.  The worst incident was on the evening of Thursday 23rd when a series of signal/points failures and then a bomb hoax at Watford Junction station caused some trains to run in excess of an hour late and (at one point in the evening) a complete suspension of the service.  I think for the purposes of this piece it is probably better to look at a normal week.

The stats that London Midland produce do indicate an improvement in reliability (see ...and statistics).  How has that improvement been achieved though?  I'd suggest that it's by omitting one very important item from their list of priorities - journey time.

We live in a time when we are so obsessed with getting from one place to another as quickly as possible that we are prepared to spend billions on high-speed rail lines and yet we completely ignore the possibility of reducing journey times for a short-distance journeys.  

On our line vast amounts were spent on the West Coast Mainline upgrade work a few years ago and millions have been spent on buying newer, faster trains yet I don't believe we have seen any reduction in journey times.  If anything, the time to get from A to B with London Midland is now longer as trains seem to be making more stops and fewer commuter services have access to the fast line.   Then there are the instances where trains can run faster but they end up spending longer at intermediate stops, slowing down or even stopping in order to keep to the timetable (see Timetable flab).


With the previous three subjects dealt with in this series I've summed up my view by the award of a tick, a cross or a question mark.  With this one I have a real problem.  The definition of punctual is "acting or arriving exactly at the time appointed"  so strictly London Midland have achieved that.  I believe that they have done so though only by a complete lack of ambition in their timetable.

I really can't face giving this one a green tick but a red cross probably isn't appropriate either.  It's therefore got to be another yellow question mark  :-(


What do you reckon?  Do you feel that the service between your home station and London Euston is more reliable?  Is London Midland meeting your expectations in this area?  Are you getting to the office or back home consistently on time?   



Following the same order as used by London Midland, the next one in this series will be Better information.

Service improved? 1

London Midland have a page on their website titled Improving our services where they describe the steps they are taking to address a number of problem areas. 

I figured that it might be interesting to pick one of the aspects that London Midland are working on each week or so, providing my own views on how they are doing.

London Midland have New Trains as their first subject, so I thought that I'd give that one a go too...

New Trains

London Midland say that they have already delivered on this one, having invested £190 million in 37 four-carriage sets for the longer distance services.  I assume that these are the 350/2 Desiros that we have seen arriving on the route into London Euston since 2008 (the earlier and arguably more comfortable 350/1s having been introduced by Silverlink from 2004).

An earlier posting (350 v 321) compared the Desiro 350s with the old 321 trains and there's little point in repeating the same detail here.  There's no doubt that we are better off than we were, but I don't think that the 350s are perfect.  In my view the problems are:

1. London Midland themselves have admitted to reliability problems.  On the Public Performance Measure stats poster for the period 27/6-24/7 they say "We also suffered a number of train faults both on our Euston route and around Birmingham, some of which were caused by the particularly warm weather".  I don't recall the weather being unseasonally warm, but the key point here is that they are admitting that they have issues with rolling-stock.
2. While we are better off overall having air-conditioning on the trains, there is a serious problem when the ventilation system doesn't work.  The guys that fix these things do appear to have reduced the frequency, but there are still occasions when there is no 'air-con' working in individual carriages.  When that happens in the summer, with no windows to open there are only two options - sit and swelter or move to another part of the train (where you will probably end up standing).
3. The seating layout of the 350/2 trains (the ones with the green upholstery) is generally five across.  The alleyways are narrow making it awkward to walk from one part of the train to another on a busy train, and three normal-sized adults will not fit onto a bench of three.
4. There is insufficient provision for bikes and luggage. 

Having said all of the above, I personally think that London Midland are justified in claiming that they have delivered on their commitment to provide New Trains so I'm going to give them a green tick for this one.

What do you think?








(The next posting in this series will be regarding More Seats)  

Timetable flab?

Do the railway companies deliberately build slack time into their timetables? Does 'timetable flab' exist?  If so, why do they do this?


Does 'timetable flab' exist?

OK, I'll start by saying that my 'evidence' is limited only to my observations over one month, but I reckon that this provides weight to the argument that slack time is built into the timetables for at least some trains.

Through July I've kept a log of outward and homeward journeys, noting the trains taken and arrival times at the destination.

For the last few weeks I've had no regular homeward train but I have taken the 07:00 from Bletchley to Euston on 21 occasions (every working day except Wed 21st).  
The official timetable for this morning commuter train is as follows:

0608   Rugby 
0618   Long Buckby
0633   Northampton (arr)
0637   Northampton (dep)
0649   Wolverton
0655   Milton Keynes
0700   Bletchley
0707   Leighton Buzzard
0743   London Euston

The actual arrival times in July for London Euston were:

Arrival    Days
0737         x6
0738         x4
0739         x7
0740         x1
0741         x0
0742         x0
0743         x1
0744         x2

(The 07:43 arrival was on Thu 18th when there was a signalling problem in the Berkhamsted area. One of the 07:44 arrivals was on Wed 7th when the switch onto the fast line at Ledburn Junction was affected by a late running Virgin train. The other 07:44 arrival was on Tue 13th when we were again delayed by a signalling problem.)

It surely can't be a coincidence that the 07:00 managed to get into London Euston ahead of schedule on 18 out of 21 days, averaging an 07:39 arrival instead of the scheduled 07:43.  

Network Rail and London Midland appear to have theor own operational schedule for this train which is different from the one they publish for passengers.  Once we cross over onto the fast line at Ledburn Junction we charge down south (probably with a Virgin train or two following us at a similar speed).  Then, a mile or two from Euston we slow right down, sometimes to not much more than walking pace.  We usually see a London Midland train pass us on its way north, and then we speed up again (my guess is we have to wait for that other train to clear the platforms). 

Immediately after we pull onto platform 11 at Euston we are chased off the train.  Before we've even had a chance to get off there's usually an automatic announcement telling us that the train is out of service, and we sometimes get the lights turned off while we are still picking up bags etc.  The station and train staff then make sure everyone is off and the doors are locked.  I haven't seen the train actually leave but I reckon that it pulls out before the scheduled 07:43 arrival time, probably to allow a following train onto the same platform.

Further evidence that this train has extra time built into it's schedule comes from a comparison with northbound trains with the reverse of the same station stops.  The trains which leave at 13 minutes past the hour and the 18:49 20:13, 21:13 which do Euston-Leighton Buzzard-Bletchley Euston are scheduled to do the same distance in 36-40 minutes.   Why should the southbound journey require 43?


So what's going on?  

I guess that there are several possibilities...

London Midland could be being pessimistic because they think that helps us.  "We probably can get you to London earlier but there's a risk we won't make it and we wouldn't like to let you down"? That could be ture, but I doubt it.

Maybe when London Midland and Network Rail last sat down to do a major timetable revision (the 07:00 has been around for a while) they expecting a slower journey down to London.  Perhaps they've missed the fact that the journey south isn't as problematic or unreliable as they feared.  Possible I guess, but difficult to believe.

That leaves us with a third option which is one that gets mentioned by the cynics whenever the railway companies claim service improvements.

Have London Midland built in a stack of slack time in the timetable to protect themselves should delays occur? The benefit for them manipulating the timetable for the 07:00 would presumably be: 

• The 07:00 can arrive 5-6 minutes after it's normal arrival time without missing the scheduled ETA. 
• There can be a delay of 15-16 minutes before the train is reported as officially late for the performance statistics reported by the Office of the Rail Regulation (the figures for delayed trains include only those that are 10 minutes or more behind schedule - see ... and statistics). 
• We can be 35-36 minutes late before London Midland have to pay compensation (0-29 compensation = zero, for 30-59 minutes they will give an annual season ticket holder from Bletchley £4 in rail vouchers and for more than an hour it's £7)

I guess there's two ways to look at this...  One way would be to ask if it really matters.  Day after day we get into London less than 40 minutes after leaving Bletchley so why complain?  I guess that those of us of a suspicious nature just wonder whether we are we being taken for a ride (I'm sorry for the terrible pun!)  


What do you think?      

... and statistics

For a while at Bletchley we've had the London Midland performance poster for the period 7 Mar - 31 Mar up in the station building, but this week the edition for the four weeks ending 26 June 2010 has appeared.  For anyone who is unfamiliar with these stats, the latest edition along with an archive going back to 2007 is available at Performance : London Mdland.

So what are the highlights for May-June?  London Midland have said that:

1. 92% of our trains arrived within 5 minutes of the scheduled time
2. Overall passenger satisfaction was 86%

I found these figures interesting and wanted to know more.  I've still to study the detail (so more to follow on eustontrains.co.uk), but I figured that others may want to do their own research so here's where the source data can be found:

• The punctuality stats are reported through the Office of Rail Regulation.  Anyone wanting to see the detail should visit National Rail Trends
• The passenger satisfaction stats are produced by Passenger Focus ("an independent public body set up by the Government to protect the interests of passengers").  The detailed stats quoted by London Midland, along with an explanation as to how the fieldwork was done, can be found at National Passenger Survey - Spring 2010 - London Midland