Train punctuality.
The infrastructure company is launching a performance management model aimed at improving railway operations. PHILIP HAIGH considers the many challenges it must face and overcome
A string of accidents 20 years ago brought railway safety into sharp focus and prompted the considerable effort that has propelled Britain to the top of the safety table.
Key to this rise was developing a risk model that gathers information about a range of precursors, in order to predict where risks are increasing and take action before they translate into the reality of an accident.
Network Rail is now developing a similar model for railway operations, as it attempts to arrest sliding punctuality. The increased emphasis on performance came with Andrew Haines’ appointment as chief executive last summer, and then November’s enforcement order from the Office of Rail and Road.
In its 71-page response to ORR, NR outlines how it expects its performance model to work. But it also admits: “While many common issues have been identified, the reasons for the progressive decline in punctuality are not fully understood. In some areas, the industry is not able to identify what has materially changed since times when higher levels of punctuality were attained.”
It’s candid in saying: “The rail industry has promised to halt the slide in performance in the past seven years, but failed to deliver this or indeed, any improvement.” It contends that times have now changed.
Those common themes include timetables becoming less resilient, NR placing less emphasis on operational capability and competence, and a general failure to realise the challenge of delivering timetables during major enhancements to infrastructure and fleets.
Control Period 6 (CP6), which started earlier this month, brings less funding for infrastructure enhancements. But it will still involve around 7,000 new vehicles being put into service, with recent experience ( RAIL 875) showing that it’s far from easy.
Meanwhile, there’s still pressure to add more trains to the timetable, because that’s what many recent franchise agreements call for as operators try to raise more money to pay the premiums the Department for Transport demands. Elsewhere, there are more passengers, which means station dwell times increase (whether allowed for in the timetable or not). And longer trains take more time to cross junctions.
Many of these extra services have come from existing fleets and crews, with each being expected to work more services in a day, resulting in tighter diagrams less able to withstand delays. If a driver, for example, only has a few minutes between one train and the next, then there’s little opportunity to absorb delays.
It’s therefore no surprise that NR’s analysis reveals that ‘turnaround’ reactionary delay has increased at several hotspots around the country - London, Bristol, Cardiff, Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Glasgow, Edinburgh, along East Coast stations, and in East Anglia and along the Brighton Main Line. Delays have fallen at Birmingham and London Bridge because more trains are now running through these stations, rather than terminating and restarting.
NR admits that centralising timetabling in Milton Keynes resulted in local knowledge being lost, and that the switch separated those planning the timetable from those delivering it. The track owner has also experienced a high turnover of local operations managers (LOMs) who are key to keeping the railway running on a daily basis.
Against this backdrop of failure, NR is launching its performance management model which, it says, will be “a framework of policies, processes and measures used by industry to ensure it meets its performance objectives for customers, funders and stakeholders”.
NR continues: “The performance management system design must consider the whole rail system in order to improve that system’s outcome for the benefit of our customers. Every element of industry must play its part in enabling and delivering train performance improvement.
“The PMS design must provide a structure for highlighting and resolving considerable challenges in system trade