GTR cancellations including not operating from Victoria until 10th Jan

[Nicholas Lewis]

Exactly. An argument against all this new electronic ticketing

Indeed and at £360m the industry can't exactly afford it at the moment.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Indeed and at £360m the industry can't exactly afford it at the moment.

One would of thought, if implementated correctly, it would make ticket acceptance easier

 

[Southern Dvr]

If only there was another regular service from Clapham to Shepherds Bush... 1tph from SN hardly makes that much difference.

You can see why the WLL services are lower down the list compared to the rest of the network!

Clapham to Shepherds Bush, is that the only stream for Westfield then? I seem to recall a fair few people from north of there using the services. Also, before it was curtailed at Clapham there was a reasonable flow from Croydon to Shepherds Bush that didn’t incorporate a cross from one side of Clapham Jnc to the other.

 

[jon0844]

One would of thought, if implementated correctly, it would make ticket acceptance easier

Indeed, it should be easy to temporarily give extended travel authority on any smartcard with a season loaded - and the user not having to do anything besides tap in and out as normal.

 

[Rob Gibson]

Would any of us really be thankful if evening service were withdrawn abruptly from our station without so much as a replacement bus?

No which is why available resources must be used to best effect, the tiny number of evening passengers south of Dorking either already drive to the station or have a car and can switch to Dorking station. Anyone without a car it’s only a few miles by taxi. Same as what happened to the small numbers of passengers affected by Beeching closure of many similar stations though in this case only temporarily.

 

[infobleep]

No which is why available resources must be used to best effect, the tiny number of evening passengers south of Dorking either already drive to the station or have a car and can switch to Dorking station. Anyone without a car it’s only a few miles by taxi. Same as what happened to the small numbers of passengers affected by Beeching closure of many similar stations though in this case only temporarily.

I thought with the Beeching closures they provided rail replacement buses. No idea if they ran as late and it's outside this discussion.

 

[Bald Rick]

I thought with the Beeching closures they provided rail replacement buses.

In a very few cases. Mostly not, though.

 

[RT4038]

In a very few cases. Mostly not, though.

I don't think that is quite right. In most cases, unless there was an adequate comparable bus route already in operation [probably about a third of the lines?], either the existing bus network/operation was modified/augmented to cover or an additional new service introduced. However, often these modifications/additional services only covered the main flows (times and route) of passengers (usually weekday peak hours) rather than mimicking the line of rail or timetable.

Of course so many of these lines carried so few passengers at the time of closure that even a replacement bus service carrying everybody [which is unlikely] would still have made a thumping loss, and gradually the replacement services were withdrawn and/or assimilated (partially or all) into the local bus network as existed at that time.

 

[Class 170101]

It gives very little really practical information, once again the traveller is treated as an inconvenience. I fail to understand how a rail company can justify removing all their services from their main London terminus with only a couple of days notice.

Its akin to the only supermarket in town simply removing 50% of its products including many of the main staples & expecting all their customers to accept it

If you watched Gregg Wallace Inside the Factory on the BBC you will find that some of the staples did disappear

DfT needs to call the Treasury's bluff. Just stop paying railway staff and see what happens

Not sure thats a good bluff to the Treasury, I think the Treasury would be delighted not to pay them, I think it was @Bald Rick that said elsewhere on this board the Treasury wanted to Furlough the railway staff when the pandemic began.

 

[Steve Harris]

Hence the ‘parent company’ qualifier.

And I just thought that a brand could be owned by a company and a company could be owned by a parent company. But I never knew a brand could bypass a company and just be owned by a parent company. Everyday is a school day.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think it was @Bald Rick that said elsewhere on this board the Treasury wanted to Furlough the railway staff when the pandemic began.

I’m not sure I did say that. Can’t remember to be honest!

 

[MontyP]

Ockley station in normal times sees less than 100 passengers a day, and over the last year it has been a quarter of that - 25 per day. I can't see any justification, at a time of national resource shortage, to make any provision there at all. Having had an hourly daytime service each way all this year, that's an average of less than one passenger per train.

Service stops early evening? I think in the current circumstances you will just have to accept it.

I think there would be uproar on this forum if it was proposed that all stations with fewer than 100 passengers per day had their service provision withdrawn. If I am reading the stats correctly, that would be over 500 stations i.e. 20% of the total stations in Britain.

 

[physics34]

That 'Dorking back road' is also useful to move stock around and train crew.

On the posts above mentality, most of the uckfield line would need one train a week.

 

[dastocks]

I think there would be uproar on this forum if it was proposed that all stations with fewer than 100 passengers per day had their service provision withdrawn. If I am reading the stats correctly, that would be over 500 stations i.e. 20% of the total stations in Britain.

The cost of providing the service has to be considered as well as the number of passengers served. There are plenty of lightly used stations on otherwise busy lines where the cost of an additional stop is fairly marginal and it would be daft not to provide a service even if there are occasions when no one boards or alights from a train; an example from my territory would be Balcombe, which is served by otherwise well loaded Brighton stopping services.

As far as I can tell the round trip from Dorking to Horsham and back takes about an hour. Of the three stations served Holmwood is fairly close to Dorking, and Warnham is fairly close to Horsham or Littlehaven. I follows from this that we're looking at the cost to serve the remaining station - Ockley - at a time when scarce resources could be earning worthwhile revenue elsewhere on the rail network. Given the current structure where the taxpayer funds operations in return for receiving fare income collected by the train operator I would have thought the DfT would be telling GTR to suspend these services.

 

[Surreytraveller]

The cost of providing the service has to be considered as well as the number of passengers served. There are plenty of lightly used stations on otherwise busy lines where the cost of an additional stop is fairly marginal and it would be daft not to provide a service even if there are occasions when no one boards or alights from a train; an example from my territory would be Balcombe, which is served by otherwise well loaded Brighton stopping services.

As far as I can tell the round trip from Dorking to Horsham and back takes about an hour. Of the three stations served Holmwood is fairly close to Dorking, and Warnham is fairly close to Horsham or Littlehaven. I follows from this that we're looking at the cost to serve the remaining station - Ockley - at a time when scarce resources could be earning worthwhile revenue elsewhere on the rail network. Given the current structure where the taxpayer funds operations in return for receiving fare income collected by the train operator I would have thought the DfT would be telling GTR to suspend these services.

Its not just serving Ockley, its providing a link from Sutton, Epsom and Dorking to Horsham.
Its not also that resources are scarce to provide the service, its the fact that planning resources are limited

 

[Rob Gibson]

The cost of providing the service has to be considered as well as the number of passengers served. There are plenty of lightly used stations on otherwise busy lines where the cost of an additional stop is fairly marginal and it would be daft not to provide a service even if there are occasions when no one boards or alights from a train; an example from my territory would be Balcombe, which is served by otherwise well loaded Brighton stopping services.

As far as I can tell the round trip from Dorking to Horsham and back takes about an hour. Of the three stations served Holmwood is fairly close to Dorking, and Warnham is fairly close to Horsham or Littlehaven. I follows from this that we're looking at the cost to serve the remaining station - Ockley - at a time when scarce resources could be earning worthwhile revenue elsewhere on the rail network. Given the current structure where the taxpayer funds operations in return for receiving fare income collected by the train operator I would have thought the DfT would be telling GTR to suspend these services.

As I said the 93 bus is far more convenient but doesn’t serve Ockley* and finishes early evening, Sunday 2 hourly service was introduced about 10 years ago. Dorking to Horsham about 50 minutes but that’s centre to centre saving a 10 minute walk each end. Very high car ownership in the area so buses are mainly used by children and pensioners!

*Neither does the station, it’s a spread out Village with 1 bus a week last time I checked so anyone wanting to go out really needs a car.

Ordinarily I’d say this line was being cross subsided by the Brighton main line so maybe DfT have seen a cost/revenue breakdown for each line or service group and think savings can be made. The line is used for planned diversion when the main line is closed south of Croydon but in recent years a Christmas diversion was twice blown by land slips at Ockley, lot of preventive work has now been done.

The service is largely operated out of Horsham so changing that would mean spending money on alternative stabling and crew relocation- easier to leave things as they are.

Early after privatisation SWT extended one of their Dorking trains nonstop to Horsham, lasted a year I think. Rural Surrey is characterised by busy roads and, outside peak hours, quiet trains, don’t think any frequency increases will change that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jan 2022 ==

Its not just serving Ockley, its providing a link from Sutton, Epsom and Dorking to Horsham.
Its not also that resources are scarce to provide the service, its the fact that planning resources are limited

Next is the 9 day blockade Three Bridges to Brighton at February half term, all planning should be complete or needs revising for fewer drivers so planning resources are probably concentrated on this.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

On the posts above mentality, most of the uckfield line would need one train a week.

Digressing this post slightly but it was utter nonsense the money spent extending the likes of Cowden, Hever and Ashurst platforms to 10 car years ago.

 

[JonathanH]

Digressing this post slightly but it was utter nonsense the money spent extending the likes of Cowden, Hever and Ashurst platforms to 10 car years ago.

What was the alternative? The trains needed to be 10 car north of East Croydon and splitting / dividing at Oxted wasn't an option. With no gangway connections the platforms had to be extended.

Looks like a waste of money now but no-one expected what happened in March 2020.

 

[infobleep]

What was the alternative? The trains needed to be 10 car north of East Croydon and splitting / dividing at Oxted wasn't an option. With no gangway connections the platforms had to be extended.

Looks like a waste of money now but no-one expected what happened in March 2020.

Why wasn't splitting an option? Also there are 4 car services from Reigate that run as 4 cars north of East Croydon.

 

[JonathanH]

Why wasn't splitting an option? Also their are 4 car services to Reigate that ryb as 4 cars north of East Croydon.

There isn't enough time at Oxted between East Grinstead services.

Uckfield line to be electrified?

The issue is that the trains wouldnt be able to recharge the batteries in a normal Hurst Green to London Bridge cycle. When Southern did the calculations for Marshlink a train had to run from Ashford to Brighton then a short turn to Seaford and back to recover then back to Ashford. This is with...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[zwk500]

Why wasn't splitting an option? Also there are 4 car services from Reigate that run as 4 cars north of East Croydon.

I don't think 377s and 171s can work in multiple, but either way 10 cars were required on the Uckfield Branch before Oxted. The only waste of money was building the platforms to 10x23m platform length rather than 12x20m, for future stock strategies.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

What was the alternative? The trains needed to be 10 car north of East Croydon and splitting / dividing at Oxted wasn't an option. With no gangway connections the platforms had to be extended.

Looks like a waste of money now but no-one expected what happened in March 2020.

The traffic was never at these stations before March 2020 and is never going to be there. You could have used SDO like plenty of other stations successfully do across the Southern network but i guess with non gangwayed stock isn't allowed.

 

[JonathanH]

i guess with non gangwayed stock isn't allowed

Indeed, that would seem to be the pertinent point. Clearly the traffic never justifies it but simplicity of operation does.

On Uckfield services, it is noticeable that even under the reduced timetable, the Uckfield trains run to East Croydon requiring an extra unit and traincrew relative to running a shuttle between Oxted and Uckfield.

 

[physics34]

Talking of wasting money they are putting a lift in at East Grinstead for 2 trains a day. Previously there was an emergency crossing where wheelchairs could be crossed between platforms (after getting a block from the signalman).

 

[Bald Rick]

What was the alternative?

The alternative was to put ticket prices back in line with the lines immediately east and west, which would have caused something like a third of the lines commuters to use those lines instead.

Not very popular politically, of course.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Why wasn't splitting an option? Also there are 4 car services from Reigate that run as 4 cars north of East Croydon.

You'd need another driver, somewhere to put the bit of train you've split off

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jan 2022 ==

Indeed, that would seem to be the pertinent point. Clearly the traffic never justifies it but simplicity of operation does.

On Uckfield services, it is noticeable that even under the reduced timetable, the Uckfield trains run to East Croydon requiring an extra unit and traincrew relative to running a shuttle between Oxted and Uckfield.

You say extra traincrew, but those crew would be passing from Norwood to Oxted anyway, so it doesn't really!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jan 2022 ==

The traffic was never at these stations before March 2020 and is never going to be there. You could have used SDO like plenty of other stations successfully do across the Southern network but i guess with non gangwayed stock isn't allowed.

The SDO on the 171s is very primitive. It involves the guard moving to the correct part of the train from where you want the doors to open forward of

 

[Minstral25]

Why wasn't splitting an option? Also there are 4 car services from Reigate that run as 4 cars north of East Croydon.

It is circumstance - Reigate desperate needs a 12 coach turn back facility to enable a proper length train at stations it calls at, even now off peak train can be standing only from Coulsdon South or Purley. (Peak, extra coaches added at Redhill from Gatwick)

 

[pompeyfan]

It would appear that the temporary timetable has resulted in lots of 313 diagrams being covered by 377s. Great news for passengers obviously (although if I was a conductor that enjoyed the operational side of the job, I’d be a bit miffed)

 

[JonathanH]

It would appear that the temporary timetable has resulted in lots of 313 diagrams being covered by 377s. Great news for passengers obviously (although if I was a conductor that enjoyed the operational side of the job, I’d be a bit miffed)

Once there is no need for 313s, there won't be a need for conductors so the operational side of that job is on borrowed time. (I assume that there are shortages of conductors as well as other traincrew leading to the reduced timetable so stands to reason that fewer 313s would be at work.)

 

[RichJF]

Talking of wasting money they are putting a lift in at East Grinstead for 2 trains a day. Previously there was an emergency crossing where wheelchairs could be crossed between platforms (after getting a block from the signalman).

That's been on the agenda for at least 4 years since the Thameslink programme introduction but kept getting rejected. It's being done as a result of the latest funding award which East Grinstead was included & is intended to future proof the station.

I got a letter from Network Rail as I live within 500m of the work site.