• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

End of SWT Franchise?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Feathers44

Member
Joined
12 Aug 2014
Messages
350
I'm in two minds over the franchise.
And for Guildford (EP) & Dorking services, as now, except Epsom, (Possibly) Worcester Park, Raynes Park, Wimbledon, Clapham, Vauxhall & Waterloo.

For those of us uninitiated in the ways of the railway, how would that work without the 'semi-fasts' bumping into the signals at the back of the TfL stoppers and stopping anyway? Is there enough head room without cutting trains?

(I do remember from childhood the days when Wimbledon platform 5 had some trains that only stopped at CJ and Waterloo but it seems such a long time ago.)

From a purely selfish nerd point of view, I quite enjoy the idea of a greater variation of stock passing at the bottom of the garden.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,525
4tph East Putney - Waterloo would be a very useful capacity enhancement in the peaks (Especially Clapham Jn -Waterloo) and would avoid any conflicts with the District line (and any level crossing issues further out on the Windsor lines)

If you had the spare capacity on the Windsor side at Waterloo to run 4 tph of extra services, wouldn't you want to run them as 10 car trains to somewhere further away than East Putney?
 

glbotu

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2012
Messages
644
Location
Oxford
If you had the spare capacity on the Windsor side at Waterloo to run 4 tph of extra services, wouldn't you want to run them as 10 car trains to somewhere further away than East Putney?

So, this, I guess makes more sense.

The capacity issue on the Windsor lines is a major constraint at level crossings. Basically, there are some on both the Hounslow Loop and via Richmond. East of Barnes, however, these problems don't exist, so in theory, East Putney - Waterloo could add additional Clapham Junction - Waterloo services without too many problems (other than the huge cost of re-building Point Pleasant Junction).

I'm not sure if that's the problem that needs solving though, especially as Clapham Junction - Waterloo passengers will use SWML services as they don't stop at Queenstown Road.

This leaves East Putney, Wandsworth Town and Queenstown Road passengers as your primary market. While Putney is one of the primary passenger generators, would a 4 tph service be enough to tempt people away from the Main station, given they have a shot of a "fast" through service to Waterloo from a better connected railway station (that's just had an expensive upgrade).
 

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
You don't need to rebuild Point Pleasant junction, you just need to install a set of points on the UWS & reinstate the overbridge at East Putney, job done.

Doing that could open up the East Putney to not only SWT services, but TfL WLL services as well as a slightly reduced tube, that would be covered by the TfL/LOROL service.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,413
I'm not sure if that's the problem that needs solving though, especially as Clapham Junction - Waterloo passengers will use SWML services as they don't stop at Queenstown Road.

This leaves East Putney, Wandsworth Town and Queenstown Road passengers as your primary market. While Putney is one of the primary passenger generators, would a 4 tph service be enough to tempt people away from the Main station, given they have a shot of a "fast" through service to Waterloo from a better connected railway station (that's just had an expensive upgrade).

My original thinking was PIXC buster.

You quite often won't be able to get on the first SWML Clapham - Waterloo service in the am peak as they are often pretty full and lots of other are trying to do the same so it can be the 2nd or 3rd train. Running more trains on the Windsor side encourages people to head there by default.

At 4tph a virtually guaranteed seat from East Putney might sound quite attractive to some! As the passenger loadings would be lower than the other services it should be much quicker to load/unload. It might also tempt some district line user who currently go via Wimbledon but never get a seat too?
 

glbotu

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2012
Messages
644
Location
Oxford
You don't need to rebuild Point Pleasant junction, you just need to install a set of points on the UWS & reinstate the overbridge at East Putney, job done.


But re-building the overbridge and reinstate the points on the UWS is rebuilding Point Pleasant Junction. It's not a quick slap-dash-bang construction, it's re-building a bridge which has major structural integrity issues. Those don't come cheap. It's finding access roads in and around the area to do this. I don't think you quite get how much would be involved in this.

Doing that could open up the East Putney to not only SWT services, but TfL WLL services as well as a slightly reduced tube, that would be covered by the TfL/LOROL service.


You're now fouling the Windsor Lines the other way for the WLL. To get trains from the WLL to the DWS, you need to foul UWS, UWF and DWF.
It's also not just a slightly reduced tube. By crossing at-grade, your capacity is reduced by more than just the extra trains.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
My original thinking was PIXC buster.

You quite often won't be able to get on the first SWML Clapham - Waterloo service in the am peak as they are often pretty full and lots of other are trying to do the same so it can be the 2nd or 3rd train. Running more trains on the Windsor side encourages people to head there by default.

So, sure, but I don't think the numbers are good enough.

At 4tph a virtually guaranteed seat from East Putney might sound quite attractive to some! As the passenger loadings would be lower than the other services it should be much quicker to load/unload. It might also tempt some district line user who currently go via Wimbledon but never get a seat too?

But how useful is this outside the peak. It surely wouldn't make any sort of financial sense if it's just for an extra 4 trains between 8am and 9am, so it has to warrant a regular service.

You certainly don't get PIXC outside the morning/evening peaks.
 
Last edited:

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
But re-building the overbridge and reinstate the points on the UWS is rebuilding Point Pleasant Junction. It's not a quick slap-dash-bang construction, it's re-building a bridge which has major structural integrity issues. Those don't come cheap. It's finding access roads in and around the area to do this. I don't think you quite get how much would be involved in this.




You're now fowling the Windsor Lines the other way for the WLL. To get trains from the WLL to the DWS, you need to foul UWS, UWF and DWF.
It's also not just a slightly reduced tube. By crossing at-grade, your capacity is reduced by more than just the extra trains.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


So, sure, but I don't think the numbers are good enough.



But how useful is this outside the peak. It surely wouldn't make any sort of financial sense if it's just for an extra 4 trains between 8am and 9am, so it has to warrant a regular service.

You certainly don't get PIXC outside the morning/evening peaks.

As someone who's got over 30 years experience of working on the South Western, I think I have a more than reasonable idea of what's involved. ;)
 

Goldfish62

Established Member
Joined
14 Feb 2010
Messages
10,134
If you had the spare capacity on the Windsor side at Waterloo to run 4 tph of extra services, wouldn't you want to run them as 10 car trains to somewhere further away than East Putney?

There's capacity for at least an extra 3tph in the AM peak - the much delayed extra 2 Readings 0624 and 0654 Rdg to Waterloo/1755 and 1935 from Wloo) and one Hounslow in the AM peak which will be introduced once the 458/5 converisons are complete.
 

glbotu

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2012
Messages
644
Location
Oxford
There's capacity for at least an extra 3tph in the AM peak - the much delayed extra 2 Readings 0624 and 0654 Rdg to Waterloo/1755 and 1935 from Wloo) and one Hounslow in the AM peak which will be introduced once the 458/5 converisons are complete.

Is that based on Barnes - Waterloo capacity or the level crossing issues?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As someone who's got over 30 years experience of working on the South Western, I think I have a more than reasonable idea of what's involved. ;)

I mean I'm looking at this more from a planning perspective. I'm not questioning your knowledge of the loadings etc. (I agree that the trains are too full, I've done the Putney - Waterloo commute myself). I'm just rather sceptical that re-opening the second half of Point Pleasant Junction would make sense from a planning perspective.

To be honest, I don't see why the lines are paired as they are. It seems to me that they would be far more useful paired by use rather than by direction, with the Southern-most pair being for "via Richmond" and the Northern-most pair for "via Hounslow". I get that there would now be problems due to Linford Street Junction (Eurostar flyover) forcing it down to 3 tracks between Queenstown Road and Nine Elms, but as far as I can recall, it's always been paired by direction.
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
98,168
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
They are also pretty full in the other direction in the peaks as well - Bracknell, Staines and Richmond are big destinations, and not a small number of people go all the way to Reading.

In that direction 12-car operation would solve the problem, but that's a lot of platforms to extend. (Do I recall they are going to 10?)

Also the Junipers are probably better than the Desiros because they are (or at least appear) wider, making use of the centre seat of 3 more practical.
 
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
448
They are also pretty full in the other direction in the peaks as well - Bracknell, Staines and Richmond are big destinations, and not a small number of people go all the way to Reading.

In that direction 12-car operation would solve the problem, but that's a lot of platforms to extend. (Do I recall they are going to 10?)

Also the Junipers are probably better than the Desiros because they are (or at least appear) wider, making use of the centre seat of 3 more practical.

Feltham is also quite popular, being the first/last station in zone 6 people from outside the zonal system drive to/from Feltham as the fare differential is quite big. Also Feltham still seems to attract some airport traffic despite the withdrawl of the dedicated bus service. All this in additional to the sizable population.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,525
...Also the Junipers are probably better than the Desiros because they are (or at least appear) wider, making use of the centre seat of 3 more practical.

Academic though as the 458/5s are changed to 2+2 throughout. The 5 car 458/5 has no more seats than a 4 car 458/0, the capacity increase is all about standees.
 
Last edited:

RichardN

Member
Joined
29 Nov 2013
Messages
430
I often wonder if it would make sense to move the Haslemere stoppers to run as semi fast down the new line calling at Guildford, London Road, Effingham Junction, then all stops to Surbiton, then fast to Waterloo.

If they could be timed to be a couple of minutes behind a via Leatherhead service, at Effingham Junction, passengers could change there to maintain a service via Cobham.

Advantages

(1) My Witley to Surbiton commute would be simplified. This obviously is the most import consideration.
(2) 1st class accomodation would be added to the wealthy communities of Cobham and Oxshott, which would be good from a revenue perspective.
(3) Removes services from the flat junction at Woking.

Disadvantages.

(1) Fewer services to Clandon etc, though they could change at Effingham for a simple connection.
(2) Slightly slower journeys from Witley and Milford to Waterloo.
 

SWT_USER

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
873
Location
Ashford Middx
I definitely think there should be a half hourly fast train from Brentford to Waterloo as this would benefit me. Ridiculous that it was ever withdrawn.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,957
I definitely think there should be a half hourly fast train from Brentford to Waterloo as this would benefit me. Ridiculous that it was ever withdrawn.

There simply isn't a path for a semi-fast train via Brentford and Hounslow between the 4tph stopping service without it catching up, especially given that the loop trains need to wait time at Hounslow for a robust timetable. So the choice that has been made is a 4tph stopping service and whatever freight paths are required.
 

SWT_USER

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
873
Location
Ashford Middx
There simply isn't a path for a semi-fast train via Brentford and Hounslow between the 4tph stopping service without it catching up, especially given that the loop trains need to wait time at Hounslow for a robust timetable. So the choice that has been made is a 4tph stopping service and whatever freight paths are required.

I wrote that with tounge firmly in cheek. They do manage to fit 3 London bound fast trains in the evening peak though.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,525
There's capacity for at least an extra 3tph in the AM peak - the much delayed extra 2 Readings 0624 and 0654 Rdg to Waterloo/1755 and 1935 from Wloo) and one Hounslow in the AM peak which will be introduced once the 458/5 converisons are complete.

I was assuming they'd already be running anyway, and that any hypothetical 'East Putney shorts' would be in addition to the other various extras forecast already in the SW route study.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,705
How many trains ran on the Windsor lines and SWML when they use to use the East Putney flyover?
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,983
I often wonder if it would make sense to move the Haslemere stoppers to run as semi fast down the new line calling at Guildford, London Road, Effingham Junction, then all stops to Surbiton, then fast to Waterloo.

If they could be timed to be a couple of minutes behind a via Leatherhead service, at Effingham Junction, passengers could change there to maintain a service via Cobham.

Advantages

(1) My Witley to Surbiton commute would be simplified. This obviously is the most import consideration.
(2) 1st class accomodation would be added to the wealthy communities of Cobham and Oxshott, which would be good from a revenue perspective.
(3) Removes services from the flat junction at Woking.

Disadvantages.

(1) Fewer services to Clandon etc, though they could change at Effingham for a simple connection.
(2) Slightly slower journeys from Witley and Milford to Waterloo.


That's not as far flung an idea as you may think...
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,705
What would happen to passengers leaving from Worpolesden and those who wish to go to Clapham Junction? Currently the very fast services outside of peak rush hour don't stop at either station.

Currently when one boards a 17min past or 47 min past the next fastest connecting train to Clapham Junction only arrives a few minutes before the 02 or 32, due to it stopping at more stations.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,356
I often wonder if it would make sense to move the Haslemere stoppers to run as semi fast down the new line calling at Guildford, London Road, Effingham Junction, then all stops to Surbiton, then fast to Waterloo.

If they could be timed to be a couple of minutes behind a via Leatherhead service, at Effingham Junction, passengers could change there to maintain a service via Cobham.

Advantages

(1) My Witley to Surbiton commute would be simplified. This obviously is the most import consideration.
(2) 1st class accomodation would be added to the wealthy communities of Cobham and Oxshott, which would be good from a revenue perspective.
(3) Removes services from the flat junction at Woking.

Disadvantages.

(1) Fewer services to Clandon etc, though they could change at Effingham for a simple connection.
(2) Slightly slower journeys from Witley and Milford to Waterloo.

Disadvantages
(3) My commute would get more complicated and longer due to having to wait about 25 minutes at Woking in the evening to catch a stopping train heading towards Basingstoke. This obviously is the most important consideration!!! (joking aside there are a number of people who I recognize who make such a change). This theoretically could be overcome by providing a better interchange between the two Farnborough stations*, but is fairly unlikely to happen.

*bearing in mind that not too far into the future there could be three trains an hour between Guildford & Farnborough and (in the peaks) 4 trains per hour which run a stopping service between Farnborough & Basingstoke (where 2 don't stop at Woking) which could make it the more attractive route if the connection didn't involve a 15-20 minute walk.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,705
I realised the other day that the 7.36 Guildford to Waterloo stopping services stops additionally at New Malden but still timetables to depart Clapham Junction at 8.28.

Given that most other stopping services also depart Clapham Junction at 8 or 28 minutes past but don't stop at New Malden, could an additional stop be added to all the services?

I was thinking perhaps the 36/37min past could stop at New Malden and the 06/07 stop at either Raynes Park or Berrylands.

Any reason why that wouldn't work or even why it's not done now?
 

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
No, you have a Hampton Court, 3' behind the Newliner and when the "Court" gets cancelled then it has rather unnecessarily has to call at all stations, when it only really needs to call at Berrylands, as you have a Shepperton behind that.

Too many trains, not enough track and the result is now super slow journeys.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,705
So does the Shepperton service not run around 8.20 then? In other words is their a service not running that requires the 7.36 to call additionally at New Malden?
 

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
You get departures from Waterloo at xx:57, xx:12, xx:27 & xx:42, all of them call at ALL shacks. And they're almost invariably late and delay the following Woking or Guildford service (basically they're a RPITA!).

You get departures from Shepperton at xx:10 & xx:40, departures from Kingston at xx:03, xx:18, xx:33 & xx:48 and during the peaks some extras from/to Shepperton via Richmond.

There's more than enough calls at New Malden with these and the Hampton Court services, it's just the timetabling is wee wee poor and the Shepperton follows the Hampton Court by just a very few minutes and they regularly get delayed because the up Woking stopper is delayed by the up Basingstoke & Altons.

The end result is that the mainline trains end up doing an lovely 36 mph amble up the up main slow following those, if you miss the Hampton Court to New Malden, go to Wimbledon & back or even use your Oyster card and catch the bus to Kingston from Surbiton.

I really don't see why the passengers on the mainline & Cobham line should suffer any further deterioration of journey time than what they already have and that's an increase of about 10-15%, just to benefit a few on the Kingston loop.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,705
You get departures from Waterloo at xx:57, xx:12, xx:27 & xx:42, all of them call at ALL shacks. And they're almost invariably late and delay the following Woking or Guildford service (basically they're a RPITA!).

You get departures from Shepperton at xx:10 & xx:40, departures from Kingston at xx:03, xx:18, xx:33 & xx:48 and during the peaks some extras from/to Shepperton via Richmond.

There's more than enough calls at New Malden with these and the Hampton Court services, it's just the timetabling is wee wee poor and the Shepperton follows the Hampton Court by just a very few minutes and they regularly get delayed because the up Woking stopper is delayed by the up Basingstoke & Altons.

The end result is that the mainline trains end up doing an lovely 36 mph amble up the up main slow following those, if you miss the Hampton Court to New Malden, go to Wimbledon & back or even use your Oyster card and catch the bus to Kingston from Surbiton.

I really don't see why the passengers on the mainline & Cobham line should suffer any further deterioration of journey time than what they already have and that's an increase of about 10-15%, just to benefit a few on the Kingston loop.
I fully take your point and I don't actually need to go to New Malden. Saying that there are times when it would be helpful to get to Berrylands but the stopping service leaves 10 minutes from the Cobham line one or 20 minutes after if you like. Its just as quick to walk in that time.

However my point was more theoretical than it actually affecting me personally. Just that I saw the 7.36 call additionally at New Malden and still be booked to depart from Clapham Junction the same time as those that miss out New Malden. Unless there is another train cancelled somewhere and it's covering it, it suggests there is currently time for trains to call at New Malden.

Whether Cobham trains should call at these stations is another debate in my opinion. After all by skipping new Malden they are not currently timetabling the train to depart from Clapham Junction any earlier, so what's the harm in stopping there or other places where the trains don't currently stop? Unless there is a train behind which needs the path but if that was the case I'd have a donated the train to depart Clapham Junction 26 minutes past rather than 28 minutes past.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
a.) transfer the calls to other services
or maybe
b.) close the station because it is too awkward to call there

Hmmm, that's a hard one...
Loads of people living in Guildford towards Worplesden use it because getting into Guildford is a PITA and parking in Guildford is expensive.

All it needs is am accident on the A3 and Guildford's one way system is screwed because those trying to get into the A3 end up blocking the roads for those trying to get anywhere else.

Not an easy choice, given the other services, outside of peak rush hour at least, are meant to be fast so skip Worplesden and Clapham Junction.

They would also have to extend the Woking stoppers to Guildford or you'd only have 2 trains an hour to Woking. Perhaps that's all people think Woking needs. They could run a shuttle using Woking's platform 6.

They could even run it 7 minutes before the fast train leaves, like they do on Sundays. In the opposite direction from Woking they could rub it just 3. I bytes after the fast train leaves, again just like on Sundays. [Not being serious by the way].

In fact these shuttles could call at Worpolesden. Southern run shuttles between Brighton and Hove after all.

One slight flaw is the lack of rolling stock, which no doubt puts pay to that idea or anything similar.
 
Last edited:

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
Worplesdon (correct spelling!) is so quiet during the off peak that you could get away with it becoming a peak hours only station.

It would benefit being closed completely and moved about a mile south towards Guildford and put on or very near Salt Box Road, which would then serve Jacobs Well, Stoughton, Bellfields & Slyfield Industrial Estate as well as Worplesdon, because it would actually be nearer to it than its current location.
 

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
9,312
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
Not sure which thread to put this into without creating a new one. But SWT's 159103 has finally returned to Salisbury Depot within the past week, It has received a Newer Revised livery, New Seat Covers, New Carpet and New Disabled Bog but that's it. Basically a C6 and no new talked about seats or plug sockets.
 

387star

On Moderation
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
6,657
Not sure which thread to put this into without creating a new one. But SWT's 159103 has finally returned to Salisbury Depot within the past week, It has received a Newer Revised livery, New Seat Covers, New Carpet and New Disabled Bog but that's it. Basically a C6 and no new talked about seats or plug sockets.

Preferred the old livery :cry:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/colin...RzH-bcGRNR-ejfWMY-82n4GJ-6yVE2F-anNjWs-ehQtWV


photolist-p4pUEj-vR6BM6-q5NzPP-9xkPt9-ejfWPf-dKWcPP-oFnhtc-oDkHog-ppep9x-rUbzSu-rRUiiW-rU8rcc-rMTWnM-75b8Uu-9AyZni-tuNHSn-a9XoYF-o5218a-a99ZrJ-oYDKV4-oFnihg-8bAVEz-8fdo63-eWMLzg-ca7Xqd-epeL9p-8vYjdK-8vYhKn-8vYiy8-aWmj3z-on7FbG-k9XKDZ-pbErNF-pbB1qW-k9XUTa-5bxNGL-dmPbXu-on7WjX-oDzHNN-on81hL-ejB5Fv-9jJ2ZR-8idntF-bcGRzH-bcGRNR-ejfWMY-82n4GJ-6yVE2F-anNjWs-ehQtWV
[/IMG]
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top