The Art of Railway Timetabling (or How to Plan a Timetable) 17 February 2022
The Art of Railway Timetabling (or How to Plan a Timetable)
Speaker: Stephen Newman, Operational Planning Project Manager – Eastern Region
Date: 17 February 2022
This was a virtual only meeting and everyone was welcomed. Our speaker, Stephen Newman, was introduced, all others were muted and questions were invited using the chat facility. Stephen briefly introduced himself and explained how the presentation would be structured.
Network Rail oversees the timetabling which is nationally important. Stephen is based in The Quadrant at Milton Keynes and was doing the presentation from his office using Zoom although NR generally uses Teams for virtual meetings. He explained the teams working there with their respective responsibilities which include Working Timetables (WTT) and long term planning, as well as short term plans, for example because of engineering works, sports events etc. The task includes freight as well as passenger workings, and working closely with the regions, and Stephen displayed a flow chart showing the team structure with numbers of staff involved in each aspect.
Stephen’s own experience started with studying Transport Management at Aston University followed by six years in rail consultancy before joining NR in 2006 with the last 12 years working on timetable development, so he has plenty of experience as well as being involved in training new staff members. He shared a number of highlights from his own career – not least that he has never yet been taken to a timetable dispute panel although he has come close, as well as some of the less proud moments before going on to explain what is involved.
There are a number of things to be taken into account when planning a timetable - described as the ‘tools of the trade’ with essential considerations and rules to be followed in the process, from Network Code D, Timetable Planning Rules through to the Rule Book and Unit Diagrams. There is a lot of collaboration with operators including meetings, conversations, cups of tea (!), to help work through the many complications and it is much more contractual than some might expect.
Network Code Part D covers the contractual framework including the schedule of dates for timetable development with codes setting out what has to be done by when. This is regulated by the ORR (Office of Road and Rail). There was a short interlude to regular workings because of Covid which involved emergency planning from Day 1 and several weeks of working from home. It was very much a collaborative effort with communication essential and getting information downstream for journey planners. Stephen then went on to talk about the Timetable Planning Rules (TPR) which are published four times a year. The building blocks of the timetable involve each type of train, sectional running times and headways, station dwell times etc all of which has to be taken into consideration, and with a separate TPR for each route. Why does the TPR need to change – it could be for new rolling stock, improved infrastructure, resignalling, new services, changes to performance for example. All of these require consultation and negotiation over changes, with no response being taken as acceptance of the proposals. Site visits can be varied from a signal box to timing runs and performance data from trains and GPS as well as ‘right time railway feedback’. All these are valuable data and either reassure or highlight issues to be resolved. Stephen expanded on all these aspects and provided some interesting examples as illustration. The process can take some time and at this point they are looking for agreement. The simple flow chart showed how the process works to establish a new rule.
The next part of the process is Database Preparation with all parties expected to let Stephen know what they would like about 1 year in advance of the next new timetable. There are International Freight Paths essential to the database as part of European Freight Corridor 2 stretching from the North Sea to the Mediterranean. This is placed first in the timetable so that a good reliable path is always available and is one of the train slots that must be honoured. Prior timetables (PTT) are used as a base for the new version which is issued to the operators who then have to bid for any changes. Changes take time to be coded in – a skilled job, and the graphs have to be drawn. Stephen described the process in more detail with operator bids, which is fascinating in itself starting with basic checks, and queries going back if it does not look right. The content of an access proposal was detailed and explained covering all relevant information about the type of train, connections eg connecting with shipping services, platform requirements etc. Wherever possible NR will accommodate these requirements which is why it is important that operators provide the necessary information.
We are nearly at the point of planning trains now but first there is a check to see that all the data is in, then more checks and a possession check, to make sure it all works. Next came an explanation of the Engineering Access Statement with two types of engineering works – disruptive and non-disruptive. Large blockades of the network take a lot of planning and consultation is required. Non-disruptive possessions might sound simpler but still take careful planning with safety an essential criterion. We received an explanation of how this works and examples of access statements and block graphs as illustration.
It is now possible to start planning trains for which there are two methods. Validate a line or route for all trains and all locations on that route; or validate changes only where only the train or part of the route requires alteration; a typical timetable will be a combination of the two.
After a short refreshment break Stephen showed a number of graphs of increasing density and complexity showing how the pathways are plotted and checked. The London Kings Cross to Doncaster was one example used with one change at Retford. In this case the change can be considered in isolation – if it works, it can be validated, if not, other changes may be required to make it work. With hundreds of trains involved Stephen showed how it works going through each train on the graph. It is skilled job and it is easy (apparently) once you have learned how, to see if it does not work. Validation comes next to see if the path will work, checking it against the TPR. Is there sufficient headway between trains, do the junction margins work, are the station workings compatible etc? Further examples as illustration helped to show how this works and what the planners are looking for, and how adding or changing a service affects the basic timetable.
It becomes more complicated when two operators are asking for a similar pathway – is it possible to accommodate both? If conditions are suitable, then this can be done although NR can invoke some flexibility as long as there are grounds to do so. If it is not possible, and there are sound reasons where this might be the case, there is a set order in which trains are accommodated starting with firm rights and moving down to strategic capacity. If trains have equal rights then NR must make a decision and apply the Decision Criteria prescribed, and these were listed for us. Fortunately, this is not required very often as it can become very contractual. There is no set rule but reasons for any decision are required. Further specific examples of station workings were used here and Stephen described his own experience on site in a signal box with a printed copy of one of his timetables enjoying the satisfaction of ticking off each train as it moved in and out as planned.
The next step is D26 to D22 (the code D mentioned earlier) with NR publishing the New Working Timetable. Each change is logged together with the reason, for operators to either accept or reject. There is a 20 working day time period to do this and a set procedure for any disputes with the findings publicly available on the ADRC website. Once accepted the timetable is what Stephen described as ‘locked down’ with any issues subsequently raised being harder to resolve the later the query is made. Then there is ‘go live’ preparation and it is time to start all over again.
Stephen finished with a summary of the whole presentation, the time it takes to learn the basic job – longer to become good and confident, and that you still learn something new every day. There is the part you see ie trains moving, public timetables, public information screens, and the work going on behind the scenes.
Although the presentation ended slightly later than planned there was still time for some questions which ranged from conflict detections and how this is managed - now helped by new software; passenger numbers and overcrowding issues with back up evidence before considering any changes; costs of travel; Royal Train workings – not Stephen’s field and security clearance required; automation; where does the passenger fit in; vulnerability to hacking; pathways for steam charters; how will the transition to GBR affect the team at Milton Keynes? Stephen answered all the questions put to him very ably. Some could not be covered due to running out of time as Stephen had to catch a train home. He still gives new trainees an exercise in paper and pen planning and getting specialists to practice by drawing a graph by hand.
The vote of thanks was given by Branch Chair Andy Davies, a really interesting evening with excellent explanations and illustrative graphs providing a much better understanding of the work involved.