The WTT in its new form

[43106]

Some of you may have noticed that the Working Timetable (WTT) is now in the form of an array of XL Spreadsheets. At the same time, they've done a few changes, such as changing the letter coding that appears in the middle of a timing and they seem to have omitted showing the arrival time at stations. I've had a look at the NR WTT site, and I can't find an explanatory table anywhere. Contacting NR is a waste as they rarely respond to complaints and comments. Can anyone out there help me with this? Thanks in advance.

 

[The Planner]

Some of you may have noticed that the Working Timetable (WTT) is now in the form of an array of XL Spreadsheets. At the same time, they've done a few changes, such as changing the letter coding that appears in the middle of a timing and they seem to have omitted showing the arrival time at stations. I've had a look at the NR WTT site, and I can't find an explanatory table anywhere. Contacting NR is a waste as they rarely respond to complaints and comments. Can anyone out there help me with this? Thanks in advance.

Its in Appendix G of the National Timetable Planning Rules (nationalYYp.pdf) in the zip file you can download from the Information for Operator section of the NR website.

Appendix G – Explanation of Working Timetable References
For Passenger Operators -
Abbreviations used for Days of the Week

M	Monday
T	Tuesday
W	Wednesday
TH	Thursday
F	Friday
S	Saturday
For the above:-
(I)	The addition of the letter “O” indicates that the train will run on that day or those days only. The addition of the letter “X” indicates that the train will not run on that day or those days indicated.
(ii)
SUN	Sunday

Arrival Time References

a b c d e f g h j k n

arrives 1 minute earlier. arrives 1½ minutes earlier. arrives 2 minutes earlier. arrives 2½ minutes earlier. arrives 3 minutes earlier. arrives 3½ minutes earlier. arrives 4 minutes earlier. arrives 4½ minutes earlier. arrives 5 minutes earlier. arrives 5½ or more minutes earlier (see explanatory note in column). see explanatory note in column.

Abbreviations used to identify earlier departure times which are advertised in the National Rail
Timetable.

p q r

advertised 1-1½ minutes earlier departure. advertised 2-2½ minutes earlier departure. advertised 3-3½ minutes earlier departure.

Abbreviations used to identify later arrival times which are advertised in the National Rail
Timetable.

v w y z ‡

advertised 1 minute later arrival. advertised 2 minutes later arrival. advertised 3 minutes later arrival advertised 4 minutes later arrival. advertised time in National Rail Timetable.

C	Stops to change train crew.
D (D) ECS +	Other than in timing load - Stops to set down/detach. Driver Only Operation applies. Also “+” when placed intra-time - Empty coaching stock. When not placed intra-time - Must only convey vehicles authorised to run 100mph or more.
@ EMU K/k L	when placed intra time at Colchester DOO London side of Colchester onlyElectric Multiple UnitSee explanatory note.Stops to change Locomotive.
N	Stop not advertised.
NA	Train not advertised.
NPCCS	Non passenger carrying coaching stock.
OP	Stops for other operating reasons.
P	Push pull operated train.
PR	Propelling between points shown.
Q	Runs when required.
R	Stops when required.
RM	Stops for reversing movement, or driver to change ends.
RR	Stops to run round.
S t U	Stops for railway personnel only. Stops for tablet, staff or token purposes. Stops to take up/attach.
VB	Vacuum braked train.
X	Points at which; (a) Trains run from one running line to another, or (b) Trains cross on single lines.
[5]	Indicates the number of minutes allowed for temporary speed restrictions and engineering work.
(5) <5> ||	Indicates the number of minutes given for pathing requirements. Indicates the number of minutes given for performance allowance. Light Locomotive.

* (In arrival and departure times) Stops and shunts for other trains ahead or to pass only.
* (In departure time only) Traffic and/or shunts for other trains to pass.

• § Ø → ←

Air-conditioned. Public address system applies on day coaches. Indicates headcode is changed en route. See explanatory note. (May be supplemented by reference letter n). For continuation of train timings see subsequent column. Train timings continued from previous column.

 

[30907]

Those notes seem no different from long-standing practice, in many cases back to the 1950s! @43106 what has changed?

 

[43106]

Those notes seem no different from long-standing practice, in many cases back to the 1950s! @43106 what has changed?

From what I can see, quite a bit. The original WTT could be read easily - the layout was clear. However, the current WTT looks cheap, the coding has changed and some of the detail is missing. As an example, on YH03 (Mon-Fri), there are no arrival times for trains stopping northbound at Northallerton, whereas they are quoted on YH02 at, say, Newark, Retford and Grantham. I suspect the info provided by The Planner is only applicable to the original style of WTT, as there is no a, b, c, d etc in the middle of the Northallerton times showing the earlier arrival time. Also, some timings are shown in bold and some in 'unbold' - I don't understand why.

 

[greatkingrat]

YH02 only shows freight trains, none of which stop at Northallerton, so there is no reason there would be separate arr/dep times. The passenger trains are shown in YA04 which does have both arrival and departure times for trains stopping at Northallerton.

 

[43106]

YH02 only shows freight trains, none of which stop at Northallerton, so there is no reason there would be separate arr/dep times. The passenger trains are shown in YA04 which does have both arrival and departure times for trains stopping at Northallerton.

I stand corrected - I got my A's confused with H's. However, I maintain my assertion that YA03 does not show the arrival times for passenger trains at Northallerton, either northbound or southbound. The same can be said for Thirsk. Have NR simply omitted the "arr" rows for these two stations?

 

[30907]

From what I can see, quite a bit.

Perhaps the document posted by @The Planner hasn't kept pace with the rest?

 

[The Planner]

Perhaps the document posted by @The Planner hasn't kept pace with the rest?

Quite possibly, I have just copied and pasted.

 

[ainsworth74]

Is anyone able to link to or attach an example of this so we can all see what's going on?

 

[bluriniho]

As someone who has produced and worked with WTTs, the Excel format works better as it's easier to search and manipulate. However, it's just not been done very well and not reviewed / quality assured at all.

For example:

• T/TF/TB activity codes applied at stops/origin/destination rather than the more traditional time lettering, meaning data is missing where only a departure time is shown
• Random bold applied at some locations (including passing times), but not consistently (e.g. not at all mandatory timings points)
• Stopping times at other locations not bolded so they don't stand out
• No arrowing applied so some tables are confusing to use (e.g. Northampton loop)
• Use of incorrect sorting points - e.g. on YH01 a load of extra trains have been sorted onto the end of the WTT
• No platform data included that I can see
• Inclusion of trains where there is only 1 stop on a station bank (e.g. Leicester - Nuneaton trains on the Rugby - Watford WTT)
• Blank rows not removed, meaning extra scrolling required
• Only partial timing loads shown (e.g. E rather than DMU(E), or just trailing weights for freight rather actual timing load))

 

[43106]

Is anyone able to link to or attach an example of this so we can all see what's going on?

Yes, I've attached the YA03 WTT. I don't think I've trodden on NR's toes by doing so, as all WTT's are freely available from the NR web-site.

 

[ainsworth74]

Yes, I've attached the YA03 WTT. I don't think I've trodden on NR's toes by doing so, as all WTT's are freely available from the NR web-site.

Thank you

 

[43106]

I've done a bit more digging around, and all arrival times at Morpeth and Alnmouth on YA04 are missing as well, both northbound and southbound. However, there are arrival times shown for Newcastle, Berwick-u-Tweed and Durham. I suspect that data checking within NR isn't really up to scratch! I remember that when the WTT data came out in December, I spotted a few errors (some of which have been repeated in last months releases) and I told NR about it. NR have done nothing.

 

[Johnny Lewis]

As Network Rail happily handed over production of the National Rail timetable lock, stock and barrel to Fabrik, I think it's fair to say that there's unlikely to be anyone left at Milton Keynes who actually knows how to produce a coherent timetable. There's a bit more to it than pressing a button and expecting a pretty and accurate timetable output! (And I used to work for N.R., having responsibility for both the N.R.T. and the W.T.T.s, both passenger and freight, so I do know what I'm talking about).

 

[43106]

As Network Rail happily handed over production of the National Rail timetable lock, stock and barrel to Fabrik, I think it's fair to say that there's unlikely to be anyone left at Milton Keynes who actually knows how to produce a coherent timetable. There's a bit more to it than pressing a button and expecting a pretty and accurate timetable output! (And I used to work for N.R., having responsibility for both the N.R.T. and the W.T.T.s, both passenger and freight, so I do know what I'm talking about).f

By the looks of it, Fabrik deal with the NRT (a.k.a. the PTT). Do they produce the WTT as well? The change in the NRT as well as the PTT becoming a collection of spreadsheets at the same time can't be a coincidence.

 

[30907]

Yes, I've attached the YA03 WTT. I don't think I've trodden on NR's toes by doing so, as all WTT's are freely available from the NR web-site.

Thanks. Codes such as TB are not in The Planner's document which confirms my suspicions that it is out of date.

 

[ainsworth74]

As Network Rail happily handed over production of the National Rail timetable lock, stock and barrel to Fabrik, I think it's fair to say that there's unlikely to be anyone left at Milton Keynes who actually knows how to produce a coherent timetable. There's a bit more to it than pressing a button and expecting a pretty and accurate timetable output! (And I used to work for N.R., having responsibility for both the N.R.T. and the W.T.T.s, both passenger and freight, so I do know what I'm talking about).

It does strike me as slightly barmy that an organisation whose main job in the provision and operation of railway infrastructure (for which timetables are, arguably, one of the key ingredients) has divested itself of the ability to produce its own timetables and is reliant on a third-party which produces a product of questionable accuracy and indeed utility.

 

[zwk500]

It does strike me as slightly barmy that an organisation whose main job in the provision and operation of railway infrastructure (for which timetables are, arguably, one of the key ingredients) has divested itself of the ability to produce its own timetables and is reliant on a third-party which produces a product of questionable accuracy and indeed utility.

The relevance of a printed/formatted WTT is declining every day tbh. That looks like a pretty raw export from TPS and I'd imagine that part of the 'modernisations' have been to streamline the production of the WTT. The loss of certain parts of information like platforms and arrival times may well be down to which options are selected for the TIPLOCs in the infrastructure screen, as the WTT options are AIUI not normally considered by that team when creating TIPLOCs.

 

[Confused52]

My local line is NW6003 and that is in WTT section CE04. It does not contain Warrington West but does include Sankey for Penketh. The issue with that is that in the Timetable Planning Rules (TPR) the two stations are identified identically and timings should be shown for stopping trains. The significance is that the TPR clearly is not used to drive the content of the WTT, which is what is used to be for - I recall that the full set give the formatting rules as The Planner said. So there may be a new version of the TPR that is not being made available. Either way they are making the WTT not worth having - which I suspect is the point of the exercise, we will soon have to carry a database of Common Interface Files (CIF) with us.

 

[zwk500]

My local line is NW6003 and that is in WTT section CE04. It does not contain Warrington West but does include Sankey for Penketh. The issue with that is that in the Timetable Planning Rules (TPR) the two stations are identified identically and timings should be shown for stopping trains. The significance is that the TPR clearly is not used to drive the content of the WTT, which is what is used to be for - I recall that the full set give the formatting rules as The Planner said. So there may be a new version of the TPR that is not being made available. Either way they are making the WTT not worth having - which I suspect is the point of the exercise, we will soon have to carry a database of Common Interface Files (CIF) with us.

Quality is slipping everywhere - have a look at the PDF Sectional Appendices and new pages after changes. Mistakes all over the place.

Implementing changes in the TPRs to the WTT production requires somebody to sit there and either have a list of all changes or go through all the documents line by line, and then process those changes in the TPS infrastructure data so that when the report runs it publishes it correctly. Nobody will ever be able to justify the business cost for this. Maddeningly, you can very quickly make and edit WTTs in ATTUne, but it is a clunkier infrastructure and interface.

 

[Confused52]

The website for ATTUne suggests that the TPRs were converted into a language which can be imported into ATTUne. The performance in practice suggests that it was an old version of TPR and that the code for conversion to WTT of which the article boasts does not fully work. The site says Network Rail are using the product but doesn't say they are using it for WTT. If they fixed it they would have to re-import and convert the TPRs for the whole network at every revision of ATTUne to do the job properly. It looks like a work in progress that may never happen. It looks like the WTT is in-house but not properly supported so will fade away.

 

[The Planner]

The website for ATTUne suggests that the TPRs were converted into a language which can be imported into ATTUne. The performance in practice suggests that it was an old version of TPR and that the code for conversion to WTT of which the article boasts does not fully work. The site says Network Rail are using the product but doesn't say they are using it for WTT. If they fixed it they would have to re-import and convert the TPRs for the whole network at every revision of ATTUne to do the job properly. It looks like a work in progress that may never happen. It looks like the WTT is in-house but not properly supported so will fade away.

ATTUne is used more for strategic advance planning, and a timetable can be quality checked against the TPRs using it where it will flag non compliances.

 

[zwk500]

The website for ATTUne suggests that the TPRs were converted into a language which can be imported into ATTUne. The performance in practice suggests that it was an old version of TPR and that the code for conversion to WTT of which the article boasts does not fully work. The site says Network Rail are using the product but doesn't say they are using it for WTT. If they fixed it they would have to re-import and convert the TPRs for the whole network at every revision of ATTUne to do the job properly. It looks like a work in progress that may never happen. It looks like the WTT is in-house but not properly supported so will fade away.

ATTUne is definitely not used to produce the official 'printed' WTT, but it can produce that output if you ask it to (and handy it was too for stuff we did in ATTUne). The TPRs were largely manually coded in logic statements, originally by NR staff but there were a lot of problems with accuracy and time so AIUI the job was transferred back to Bellvedi (the developers). The interface and logic was not easy to get to grips with, and the way the TPRs are written does not always line up neatly with how ATTUne expects the rule.

 

[ayubdaud]

My local line is NW6003 and that is in WTT section CE04. It does not contain Warrington West but does include Sankey for Penketh. The issue with that is that in the Timetable Planning Rules (TPR) the two stations are identified identically and timings should be shown for stopping trains. The significance is that the TPR clearly is not used to drive the content of the WTT, which is what is used to be for - I recall that the full set give the formatting rules as The Planner said. So there may be a new version of the TPR that is not being made available. Either way they are making the WTT not worth having - which I suspect is the point of the exercise, we will soon have to carry a database of Common Interface Files (CIF) with us.

Definitely seems like an old base since it still shows Castlefield junction. The Stockport one CM02 still shows Stockport Viaduct when that location was replace by the specific shunt signals a few years back. Planners used to get asked which locations needed to be on the WTTs, but guess that does not happen anymore.

 

[43106]

In view of the errors I've found on a number of WTTs (mostly YA04 and GC01), I've sent e-mails to Network Rail (at [email protected]) and to Fabrik (both on 16th June) informing them of some of these errors. To date, I have received no response from either of them. Is there anyone in either of these organisations who are in some position to elicit an answer from them?

 

[BrianB]

In view of the errors I've found on a number of WTTs (mostly YA04 and GC01), I've sent e-mails to Network Rail (at [email protected]) and to Fabrik (both on 16th June) informing them of some of these errors. To date, I have received no response from either of them. Is there anyone in either of these organisations who are in some position to elicit an answer from them?

I am the creator/editor of the NRT, within Fabrik, on behalf of Network Rail. That product is independent of the WTT for which Fabrik have no brief nor responsibility as the two are unconnected. I will look into why you have not received a reply from Fabrik, however it would simply repeat what I just said. I cannot comment re Network Rail's lack of response

Can you please say which email addresses were used, as no record can be found. PM me if you prefer not to share your email here

 

[43106]

Can you please say which email addresses were used, as no record can be found. PM me if you prefer not to share your email here

I sent the Fabrik e-mail to [email protected] which I obtained from the Fabrik web-site (it was the only e-mail address I could see). the initial line on my e-mail was...

"This is probably the wrong area of Fabrik to direct my queries, but I cannot find any other e-mail address within Fabrik, so I would be obliged if you would forward this to the correct area."

Is that enough info? I only queried Fabrik about the WTT, not the NRT, or PTT as I call it. I've sent you a PM, which is called a 'conversation'. Click on the envelope icon to the right of your handle.