The other day after another morning hearing on social media about trains being cancelled and delayed (on that day it was the Eastern Line having problems) Next City just happened to tweet this post from their archives about the issue of unreliability.
It isn’t groundbreaking to find that public transportation users would prefer their bus and train service to keep to a reliable schedule. More significant than that, though, is the idea that unreliable service trumps other factors, including commute length, when riders consider ditching public transit altogether.
A November study from researchers at the University of California, Berkeley found that inconsistent service — whether it’s lateness, inaccurate arrival info or mid-travel delays — is the number-one factor that encourages people to stop using public transit. Chief among the issues that fall under the “reliability” umbrella are long gaps between transfers and wait times exceeding 10 minutes.
Focusing on San Francisco, researchers asked what factors public transit users considered most important, finding that most would rather see their buses or trains arrive more frequently than become less crowded or offer fewer seats.
Notably, riders tended to stress that only delays perceived to be the fault of a given transportation agency would compel them to give up on transit. So, if a connecting train doesn’t show at the right time, it’s more of a deal-breaker than, say, delays due to emergencies or, in the case of buses, traffic jams.
This means that transit agencies, if they want to retain riders, should consider running buses and trains more frequently, even if it means making the vehicles or train cars smaller. Also, communication never hurts. Few things are more grating than getting stuck in a subway tunnel without knowing the reason — letting passengers know that a problem is out of the driver’s hands will make them less inclined to misplace the blame.
There’s more on it in this article that was linked in the post.
What this helps to highlight is just how important it is that services are reliable. If they’re not – like Auckland’s train services have been lately – the end result is going to be less people using them. The delays are primarily being caused by the old clapped out diesel trains breaking down as a result of maintenance being scaled back due to their pending retirement. It’s not the only reason though as there have also been issues with freight trains and staff shortages which can partly be blamed on events like the Cricket World Cup which required more and later services to be run.
In one piece of hopefully good news, it seems Auckland Transport are realising this with the Herald reporting that they’re trying to speed up the roll out of the new electric trains in a bid to sort out the issues that stem from the old trains.
Auckland Transport is trying to accelerate its rollout of electric trains, after continuing disruptions from diesel breakdowns.
Although August remains the official target for completing the rollout by extending electric trains to the western line, the organisation’s board was told yesterday of efforts to bring the date forward.
Public transport group manager Mark Lambert said that would allow an earlier retirement of much of the increasingly troublesome diesel fleet, although 10 multiple-unit ADL trains would be kept and eventually refurbished for shuttle duties between Pukekohe and Papakura.
….
Mr Lambert said there had been a high rate of diesel train breakdowns in January and February, which tended to cause greater disruption than previously, because of a higher frequency of services on the rail network.
“When it happens it has a bigger impact because of higher frequency,” he said.
Train punctuality was poor in February (below) and I expect it will be even worse in March given what we’ve been seeing.
As reliability also impacts on patronage heavily it’s probably also been a factor in the massive growth that’s been seen over the 18 months or so.
Getting the EMU’s rolled out sooner – assuming it’s possible – should be a big boost not only for reliability but also for capacity which in many places is extremely stretched. Let’s hope AT can do this before they lose too many customers.
Processing...
Penny Hulse was interviewed on bFM yesterday and she believes the trains are fine, and are reliable. I liked everything else she had to say in the interview but on this point I think she is sorely out of touch.
Reading elsewhere, and from a knowledgeable source, there have been more electric breakdowns around Auckland of late than diesel ones.
Good to hear problems are at least acknowledged, and efforts being made to respond with train capacity. I hope AT don’t ignore that last little footnote, “communication never hurts”, as I don’t really hear of much effort in that space. Recent steps, for example the “where’s my bus” app, head in the right direction but are only half baked and therefore even more frustrating.
Crazy not to buy Rotem. Here in Wellington on time arrivals and customer satisfaction have never been higher.
There were teething issues in Wellington too. Everyone needs to take a short breath here, let’s wait till we’ve got the whole new fleet running before we pass judgement.
Yeah don’t forget Wellington has had over 70, (more like 80) years operational experience with electric train services. We’ve had just on 11 months of operations.
Look in Papers Past for electric train issues in Wellington in the ’30s and you’ll see yards and yards of column inches dedicated to newspaper articles documenting failure after failure after failure of the “new” electric trains.
Many far far worse than anything we’ve had so far with our EMUs.
Took Wellingtons electrification YEARS to settle down.
I’m sure the electrics will settle down sooner than that up here as CAF are not some Kamakuza brand of EMU maker – they know what they’re doing and they supply their products all over the world.
At this stage I’m prepared to sheet a large chunk of the cause of these EMU issues to rushed training/driver inexperience and KR signalling and electrification issues over “dodgy EMUs”
Which is the implied subtext all those going on about electrics being more unreliable than diesels.
In general the incumbent train operator has shown a complete disregard for customer engagement or satisfaction, hence the ongoing lack of communication with the customers whenever faults arise.
I truly hope that AT contract a better train operator than this one. As the current one has shown that, like the bulk of the diesel hauled trains – they’re well past their use by date.
+1 on the operator attitude being a significant part of the communications problem. Worth acknowledging that the split of track and train operators creates real barriers to good passenger Comms as well.
An interesting question becomes how AT should secure better next time, across KR, AT customer facing staff and the train operator. An interesting post for ATB would be any examples from round the world where this is achieved in a split, privatised rail setup.
Anyone know of good references?
Well the rail passenger service is the one part of the system that really ought to be run directly by AT, in my view. They own the machines and stations, they can’t be used for anything else, and it is the flagship heart of the entire system. Customers don’t get the point in having someone between them and those responsible for the quality of the service.
Increasingly they are even getting sections of track that are not being shared with freighters too; the branch lines, the CRL. Reducing the number of players from 3 to 2 looks likely could be a good win.
Disintermediation.
Is a law change required for a public body to run a transit service directly? I seem to recall we have some crazy ‘free-market’ law around …?
I agree Patrick that AT should run their train services (and probably all the RTN bus services too for that matter).
They should form a “Auckland PT” CCO or subsidiary that does this. I don’t see much value add that the likes of Transdev actually deliver and it seems to me that the layers of management make it very inefficient and costly to organise and run.
The only one they might not run to start with is the LRT trains because the PPP for that is probably a BOOT (Build, Own, Operate, Transfer) PPP ala Vector Stadium and Skypath.
I find when services come to early it puts people off too, when I lived near Rosebank rd the buses are generally every 30 mins (221/222 mixed) and the bus either came 5 min early or 5 min late, I got there 5 mins early and watched my bus go past from the other side of the road 5 mins before schedule… This was a regular occurrence, and every time I was like oh ill come 10 mins early… it came late… really bad luck I guess. But when I complained I was told buses are allowed to be within 5 mins early or late…
Surely buses should aim for the scheduled time at all times rather than just “major stops”? Trains too… the whole “bold stops are exact and non-bold stops vary 5 minutes” on the timetable, is ridiculous. But IMO an early service is worse than a late, people showing up in the last few minutes (but in time) will potentially have to wait 30+ mins, an hour or even 2 hours (remote services) which is far worse than the train or bus running behind 1 or 2 minutes to keep at schedule.
Out of curiosity, would you like the scheduled time at the last stop to be similarly calculated or set at a late time that the bus will always arrive before?
The last stop isn’t particularly important as nobody boards, but the second to last? Sure it should arrive near schedule, either on or a little after but not before, unless it waits there of cause. But if the bus constantly reaches the last stop early perhaps the timetable for that bus should be revised.
I agree, personally, but a time needs to be set for the bus to arrive at so that people travelling to that point know when they will arrive there.
I think (although right now a diesel is causing issues in Pukekohe) right now the Electrics are beginning to cause more issues than the diesels. We already had the melt down last year which grounded the fleet and the Tuesday disaster was (yet again) the EMU 6 car sets playing up.
If we are to go to full electrics then they better work out the issues with the 6 car sets or it will not be pretty (especially as we have had the EMUs in revenue service for a year now)
You’re also relying on AT acting like they have a brain in their heads. The CWC Semi saw thousands of people encouraged to take PT in order to get TO the game, but getting back into town only to find there were no additional bus services to the suburbs or even Night Riders scheduled was like a really bad joke. It took an hour to ring through and get a taxi. Next time I’ll drive, at least I know the journey home won’t cost me $40.
The delays are primarily being caused by the old clapped out diesel trains breaking down as a result of maintenance being scaled back due to their pending retirement. It’s not the only reason though as there have also been issues with freight trains and staff shortages which can partly be blamed on events like the Cricket World Cup which required more and later services to be run.
There’s always a “reason”. Reason is another word for excuse. Allowing people to fall back on reasons creates and sustains an environment where non-reliability is seen as acceptable. We get 22% lateness and 6% complete failure of services.
The Germans and the Japanese have the same constraints, but they don’t let these reasons get in the way of running reliable services. We run unreliable services because rapid transit simply isn’t important enough to those making the decisions.
I agree with you George. The reasons are not justified……they are poor excuses
AT should ask Auckland Council to;
– stop hosting all future concerts and events like Worldcup (which attract huge crowds) as AT trains cannot cope with increased loadings.
– Close the Port of Auckland as freight trains on the line are not compatible with commuter trains.
– all train services should stop at 10 pm, so that AT can get some sleep before a 6 am start.
Wake up AT, this is the business you are in…….so get on top of the faults and breakdowns.
I cannot imagine the cost of keeping 10 old diesel trains to maintain a 20 minute service between Pukekohe and Papakura.
Is At proposing to keep a railway public transport museum?
I am sure Glenbrook Railway could run this service with less rolling stock, which is probably in better condition that AT’s rolling stock.
Bring back STEAM!
I’m not sure if you’re serious or just being ironic. Do you think that countries with reliable transit services don’t have large events or freight services? Germany ran the FIFA Football World Cup and handles huge volumes of rail freight with one of the largest ports in the world.
Both of these can be managed with planning and investment. Running adequate services both before and after a large event, and having sufficient third and fourth line that freight services can be run independently of passenger services.
Hiring, training, and retaining sufficient drivers isn’t easy, but it must be done otherwise we might as well give up. And continuing the full maintenance of diesels until they are no longer in use.
If hiring sufficient drivers is so hard, we do we keep buying trains that need drivers. Vancouver has had driverless trains for years.
Apart from any technical reasons, the key issue is the relatively free public access to the tracks, hence the proliferation of screens plus danger and warning signs to cover off HSE Act obligations. Only restricted access lines lend themselves to driverless trains. We don’t even have the human version of cattle stops at level crossings, but the greater problem is lack of fencing. All doable of course, but at significant cost.
Can drivers actually stop the train in time, or do you just end up with people who are horribly scarred emotionally from hitting a person/car?
“Hiring, training, and retaining sufficient drivers isn’t easy”. . . Why? I am sure a 30% wage increase would make it very easy. Such an increase would reduce the cost of hiring and training so not cost as much as it first looks. The problem is that there is no financial penalty for cancelling services, so no incentive to solve the problem.
Sorry? Finish at 10PM? Most train services end around 10PM-10:30PM on Mon-Thurs. This should be extended to Midnight to cover evening workers. 12am-5am is a reasonable time for maintenance work etc. Quite frankly I think its dumb they expect me to get a 90 minute bus rather than a 30 minute train to get home and I will be driving if that’s still the case after the new network rollout, I already pay more for PT so why should I have to suffer a slower service because some geniuses think people don’t end their shift between 10 and midnight and stop trains at 10?
I think the sarcasm here went over a few heads. Agree with you AT need to get their act together and realise that constant stuff ups and excuses are not ok. They should be aiming for 100% reliability.
+100
I have mixed feelings about rolling out more electrics at this point. While there have been a number of cancellations due to diesel fleet issues over the last few months I would say these have usually been far easier to deal with from a network management point of view. By this I mean the issues have either been identified before the units leave the depot or when issues arise on the network such as door or motor issues a decisions can usually be made quickly whether or not to pull the unit out of service and 9 times out of 10 its simply a case of unloading passengers and sending the crook unit back to Westfield depot usually without holding up too many other services.
When issues occur with the electrics (usually ETCS, traction or door related) it is often not a case of simply off loading passengers and quickly sending the unit back to the Wiri depot instead what we are seeing is trains being stuck for 20 minutes+ while crews get on the phone to CAF technicians and spend time trying to figure out how to resolve the issues and effectively destroying the morning or afternoon peaks at the same time as trains start too stack up behind. While hopefully CAF will eventually be able to resolve some of these issues in the mean time I think a big issue is that onboard crews are unable to quickly identify issues and trouble shoot on their own and its taking far too long for problems to be resolved or units withdrawn from service before they cause major delays. While I am not sure how much training drivers and train managers get in trouble shooting/ isolating common problems, based on what Ive witnessed I am thinking they don’t get enough and until this problem is resolved I have s feeling rolling out more electric will not improve those statistics all that much
This is not new information. I did a uni project in 2002 about real time information for Christchurch buses. Lots of literature back then saying that reliability is the most important factor in peoples’ decision to use the bus (conscious and probably unconscious; reliable means ‘it’s easy’. Unreliable: “it’s too hard/annoying”). Interesting study that said people overestimate their wait time by 100% if the bus is late (they think they’ve been waiting 10 minutes when it’s only five. People had wrist watches in the old days (like the nineties) so this is independent of ‘access to the time’). Like many things I guess, just because researchers have known it for eons, doesn’t mean practitioners understand all of the issues.
Back then, the Christchurch bus policy was that drivers were technically allowed to leave a stop one minute early, and aim for no more than five minutes late (so a ‘reliable’ window of six minutes).
AT seem to have really dropped the ball.
The focus of AT at the moment appears to be on unaffordable big ticket projects that may or may not happen in 20 years time. AT need to re-focus on the their core objective which is to get the current transport system working at optimal levels. Once that is achieved then we can move forward.
The numbers presented above are abysmal
As mentioned above the EMUs are worse that the diesels.
What really stirs the anger is Transdev’s refusal to communicate.
Well clearly it’s ETCS, or rather the interface between ETCS and the automated safety systems on the EMUs:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11427188
Frustrating but not unexpected. Automated system are clever but not simple, a fact routinely ignored by the boosters for driverless road vehicles.
Get it sorted Siemens.
Electrify to Pukekohe. Ditch the diesels. Full ETCS across Auckland, including all freight. Remove the human element as much as possible.
ETCS is KR’s baby, and as I said above KR signalling issues is the main reasons why EMUs have problems (not the only one mind but the the bulk of them), I don’t think its all Siemens fault, they’re more the canary down the mine than anything else.
And its more KR’s and the “committee” that manages changes to ETCS thats dragging the chain.
ETCS is perfectly normal in Europe and CAF well knows it. But seems KR haven’t implemented the same level of ETCS in their freight/diesel locos that AT have in the EMUs, so you have a mixed mode ETCS system, and thats a big part of the problem right there. As it complicates the hell out of the safety design when you have mixed ETCS level trains on the same ETCS controlled track.
ETCS is not normal for heavily signalled metro lines and we are the guinea pigs for this experiment and its a hard road to hoe from here on in. It is used on intercity routes in Europe with far less signalling and far fewer red signals.
When Transdev “communicate” the message is so vague and bland (to cover their arse) that they might as well have stayed silent.
Anyway I’m sure Transdev are a dead duck as they stand. They probably know they’re out of the running and are just going through the motions in all senses of the word.
Auckland Transport needs to quickly come to grips with the key underlying expectation of their AT Metro brand – 99.95% service reliability and efficiency. Auckland has made an unusual step of deploying very early in the development of its transport infrastructure, a move to a metro-style system.
Globally, PT operators such as Tokyo, Shanghai and Dubai, that have taken on the Metro moniker, have done so with the full awareness and understanding of the increased service level expectation from their customers that comes with the brand. Those operators understand and appreciate that such a level of service does not come from upgraded service patterns and frequency scheduling alone but via the frontline people who operate the service daily.
Until such time as real effort/focus is placed on enabling and empowering people to provide at frontline, service reliability and efficiency that can daily achieve a 98-99% threshold, AT will not deliver on their Metro brand promise and customers will continue to vote with their feet.
Time at intermediate points is just as important as either end. This means many more bus lanes to be instigated/started now. Full buses at intermediate points new o be addressed NOW. The contractor must bear responsibility for not picking up waiting passengers on their route and not just be slapped on the wrist with a wet bus ticket when they fail. This is the appropriate time to make the penalties associated with failure relate to fair treatment for the fare payer. There are very few examples of this hybrid management working, we need to turn our backs on the Chicago School of business and look to the Swiss & ZVV example. Ppp’s are not necessarily the way to go.
I catch the trains 4 days a week to Pukekohe. In the last 8 days two trains completely canceled due to 1 train fault and 1 signal fault. The train was late three times so out of 8 trains two no shows and three lates. In the train fault the diesel caught fire going across the points of the double tracks and blocked traffic both ways. Going south we passed three stacked up freight trains and 2 passenger trains one of which was stuck across Ponga Rd (cars were trying to get around the barriers). March madness I can’t think of a better way to turn new customers off of using your service.