• 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!

New South Western franchise: Awarded to First/MTR

Status
Not open for further replies.

Morgsie

Member
Joined
3 Jun 2011
Messages
370
Location
Stoke-On-Trent
I have been on a service from Waterloo to Poole that splits at Southampton Central with the front 5 running straight to Brockenhurst and Bournemouth whereas the rear 5 stops at all stations to Poole apart from Beulieu Rd. This service is the 15:35 from Waterloo and it splits at 16.50 at Southampton Central. There are other services like this which split on the SWML.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

SpacePhoenix

Established Member
Joined
18 Mar 2014
Messages
5,492
I have been on a service from Waterloo to Poole that splits at Southampton Central with the front 5 running straight to Brockenhurst and Bournemouth whereas the rear 5 stops at all stations to Poole apart from Beulieu Rd. This service is the 15:35 from Waterloo and it splits at 16.50 at Southampton Central. There are other services like this which split on the SWML.

The all stations stopper part of that sounds like it could be better suited for a 450 unless there aren't many people getting on or off
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,556
Given that at most (given that it is one side of the doors to first class) in a 12 coach train it would add 12 seats then, as I said before, it is less clear cut as to whether it would make much difference to the passengers on those services. This is because it would increase the number of seats by 1.5% but wouldn't make any change to the standing capacity of the train.

To put that in perspective that is an extra 450 in service for every 67 lots of 450 that run. Chances are there are still enough 8 coach trains formed of 450's in the peaks (although maybe not the high peaks) that would mean that the same overall capacity (if not more) could be provided between London and Woking without removing the Guard's office.
How about turning them into standing areas. Then you'd get more than 12 people. Would that be useful on the 7.32 Woking to Waterloo service?
 
Last edited:

TT-ONR-NRN

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
10,413
Location
Farnham
What's really annoying is when you see a 10 car 444 doing the stopping service to Haslemere, and a 4 car 450 doing the Weymouth fast! Which I did see the other day. :|
 

southern442

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
2,186
Location
Surrey
What's really annoying is when you see a 10 car 444 doing the stopping service to Haslemere, and a 4 car 450 doing the Weymouth fast! Which I did see the other day. :|

It does seem rather annoying when SWT use them on stoppers, I've seen them work Alton trains as well, and then the train after is a 450 to Poole.
 

30909

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2012
Messages
293
I know it's all down to diagramming but not just when 2x444 but also 3x450 do Haslemere and Alton off peak ,I wonder if these "branches" are used as dynamic sidings as there no where else to "park" the stock?
 

Dougal2345

Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
547
It does seem rather annoying when SWT use them on stoppers, I've seen them work Alton trains as well, and then the train after is a 450 to Poole.
I've always found it slightly vexing that the xx:05 weekday stoppers eastbound from Bournemouth are almost always 444s, except for the busiest time, the 18.05, which is always a crowded 450...
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,556
I've been a Fratton based guard for a number of years and my railmiles account clearly shows that I do more miles on 450s than by 444s by quite some margin. That will probably change when the 442s come on stream but I use the guards office every time I work a train and the idea of removing it is ridiculous not least because it provides a secure location for storage of my operational and retail equipment whilst also providing easy access to me for passengers who may require assistance of any kind. I can see a case for removing them on 450s once their long distance work declines in 2019 but until then they are invaluable.

On some of the occsions I traveled on the 17.23 and the18.23 Waterloo to Basingstoke services I see the guards in the cabs. I'm sure that isn't always the case though and there are three guards offices so they could be in any of those.
 

joncombe

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2016
Messages
765
Joining/Splitting en route presents a huge logistical headache, so if there are enough units to avoid doing so, then it should be avoided.

As Matt says, each additional coupling/uncoupling action means one extra thing that could potentially go wrong. Don't mess with it unnecessarily if not needed.

It does cause problems on the Weymouth line. For example you board a 5 car 444 at Weymouth going to Christchurch. Christchurch has a short platform which can only takes 5 carriages. Another 444 is attached to the *front* of the train at Bournemouth. So now anyone wanting to get off at Christchurch who boarded west of Bournemouth has to move into the other unit in order to get off. I think the same is true of a few other stations (Hinton Admiral?). I don't know why they can't open the doors on the *rear* 5 carriages at Christchurch rather than force people to move (there isn't a level crossing nearby that would be blocked).

It catches a lot of passengers out especially those who got on say the front carriage at Weymouth and assume therefore they must be in the right part of the train. Guards do usually make announcements but they are not always clear that people getting on before Bournemouth *will* have to move.

There was also a train (though I think it stopped last year or so) early on a Saturday that left Waterloo as 2 444s both bound for Weymouth with the trains splitting at Southampton and the front part running skipping the smaller stops whilst the rear unit stopped at all or most of the local stations. It was very odd seeing the train on the departure screens with a destination of "Weymouth & Weymouth". Not sure how the on-train announcer would cope with that I imagine it might have said something like "Passengers for Weymouth must travel in the front 5 carriages of the train whilst customers for Weymouth must travel in the rear 5"!
 
Last edited:

joncombe

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2016
Messages
765
SWT regularly split/join trains at Salisbury. Not just for the Bristol sections but trains going west will often have the rear 3 removed at Salisbury and coming up the train from the west will come to a stand and then move forward to join a waiting unit on the front.

There is (at least) one train that runs as 3*159 from Waterloo (or possibly 2*159 and 1*158) with one portion terminating at Salisbury, another for Bristol and another for Exeter.
 

Wookiee

Member
Joined
25 Feb 2015
Messages
221
There was also a train (though I think it stopped last year or so) early on a Saturday that left Waterloo as 2 444s both bound for Weymouth with the trains splitting at Southampton and the front part running skipping the smaller stops whilst the rear unit stopped at all or most of the local stations. It was very odd seeing the train on the departure screens with a destination of "Weymouth & Weymouth". Not sure how the on-train announcer would cope with that I imagine it might have said something like "Passengers for Weymouth must travel in the front 5 carriages of the train whilst customers for Weymouth must travel in the rear 5"!

I think the preferred method of dealing with those scenarios is to give the stopping part of the train a nominal destination, rather than the actual one. Somewhere like Upwey, maybe. I'm sure one of the Bournemouth stoppers that split from a Weymouth fast used to be described as terminating at Pokesdown while the two portions were still joined.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,282
I have been on a service from Waterloo to Poole that splits at Southampton Central with the front 5 running straight to Brockenhurst and Bournemouth whereas the rear 5 stops at all stations to Poole apart from Beulieu Rd. This service is the 15:35 from Waterloo and it splits at 16.50 at Southampton Central. There are other services like this which split on the SWML.

SWT have a lot of services that split on route, another two are the 07:14 and 07:25 departures from Woking which split at Guildford. The latter then joins a service from Portsmouth to return to London.

I'm fairly sure they also do it at Waterloo to split 12 coach trains that have come in during the peaks to then run them as shorter services heading back out again.

This discussion comes up from time to time with several people saying it causes problems and can't be done successfully in mainline busy timetables, yet SWT do it a lot (OK, maybe not a lot, but over several services and enough that many people can give examples of when it happens without repeating the services) all day every day and rarely have significant problems.
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,841
What's really annoying is when you see a 10 car 444 doing the stopping service to Haslemere, and a 4 car 450 doing the Weymouth fast! Which I did see the other day. :|

The only booked 10-car 444 on a Waterloo-Haslemere stopping service is the 1415, and 1539 return. When it arrives at Waterloo it forms the 1700 Portsmouth Harbour service. Obviously it needs to be a 10-car 444 for that. A 450 to Weymouth isn't ideal (the 1405 I guess), but it's far better than a 4-car 450 works the 1405 Weymouth than the 1700 Portsmouth Harbour.



On some of the occsions I traveled on the 17.23 and the18.23 Waterloo to Basingstoke services I see the guards in the cabs. I'm sure that isn't always the case though and there are three guards offices so they could be in any of those.


On busy peak time services it is normal for guards to operate from the cabs, it makes much more sense when the train is so busy that it would be difficult to operate the doors due to the number of people standing.



It does cause problems on the Weymouth line. For example you board a 5 car 444 at Weymouth going to Christchurch. Christchurch has a short platform which can only takes 5 carriages. Another 444 is attached to the *front* of the train at Bournemouth. So now anyone wanting to get off at Christchurch who boarded west of Bournemouth has to move into the other unit in order to get off. I think the same is true of a few other stations (Hinton Admiral?). I don't know why they can't open the doors on the *rear* 5 carriages at Christchurch rather than force people to move (there isn't a level crossing nearby that would be blocked).

It catches a lot of passengers out especially those who got on say the front carriage at Weymouth and assume therefore they must be in the right part of the train. Guards do usually make announcements but they are not always clear that people getting on before Bournemouth *will* have to move.

The SDO system only works to open the front x coaches, there is no way of opening the rear x coaches with the current system.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
This discussion comes up from time to time with several people saying it causes problems and can't be done successfully in mainline busy timetables, yet SWT do it a lot (OK, maybe not a lot, but over several services and enough that many people can give examples of when it happens without repeating the services) all day every day and rarely have significant problems.

It is not a given that it will cause problems, but there are plenty of coupling issues from time to time resulting in various delays, especially in the peaks when taking a platform out at Waterloo, so if it can be avoided without causing other problems, best to do so.
 

greaterwest

Established Member
Joined
23 Nov 2014
Messages
1,423
What's really annoying is when you see a 10 car 444 doing the stopping service to Haslemere, and a 4 car 450 doing the Weymouth fast! Which I did see the other day. :|

There is a booked 2x444 Haslemere stopper as it goes onwards to form an evening peak service.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W37653/2017/07/13

There are no booked 4 car Weymouth fasts as far as I know but SWT are still a unit down (444 002 after a severe incident at Woking earlier this year) so rogue formations are still around, most often 9 vice 10 car trains.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,282
It is not a given that it will cause problems, but there are plenty of coupling issues from time to time resulting in various delays, especially in the peaks when taking a platform out at Waterloo, so if it can be avoided without causing other problems, best to do so.

I don't disagree with what you have said. However, given the number of services that do it on a daily basis, it's not as big an issue as some think it is (i.e. it shouldn't be done ever).

Yes it should be avoided, but given the lack spare paths it allows services to run that otherwise wouldn't (i.e. Waterloo to Bristol) or allows less units to run more services or provide capacity where it's needed (i.e. more capacity between London and Guildford without having to have extra stock).

Should it happen on every service, no. Does using it generally provide passengers with a better service than not doing so, yes. Should it be more widely used, in some cases. Does it have risks, yes.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
Please don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating their total withdrawal. They have their places within the franchise, and are certainly the best option in some cases under the current operating constraints.
 

Muzer

Established Member
Joined
3 Feb 2012
Messages
2,773
There's one or two Waterloo-Basingstoke stopper diagrams in the peaks that are booked for a single 444! I guess they try to schedule the largest number of seats for the longer-distance services, to prevent people having to stand for very long, which could mean 450s on a route that off-peak has 444s. That's my theory anyway...
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,265
There's one or two Waterloo-Basingstoke stopper diagrams in the peaks that are booked for a single 444! I guess they try to schedule the largest number of seats for the longer-distance services, to prevent people having to stand for very long, which could mean 450s on a route that off-peak has 444s. That's my theory anyway...

That's exactly what they do. There have been a number of SWT press releases over recent years explaining how such and such a service will be changed from one type of Desiro to the other to increase capacity, basically along these lines:

Min 4.450 > 5.444 > 8.450 > 10.444 > 12.450 Max
 

ChiefPlanner

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
7,768
Location
Herts
There's one or two Waterloo-Basingstoke stopper diagrams in the peaks that are booked for a single 444! I guess they try to schedule the largest number of seats for the longer-distance services, to prevent people having to stand for very long, which could mean 450s on a route that off-peak has 444s. That's my theory anyway...

Which would be in accordance with the franchise agreement , noted the other week coming back from Portsmouth around 1600 , a 444 , how busy the train was from Guildord , virtually 100% loading - and a bonus - one of those odd workings that skips Woking and goes via the New Line. "Reverse" commuting clearly.
 

Matt Taylor

Established Member
Joined
31 Aug 2008
Messages
2,339
Location
Portsmouth
On busy peak time services it is normal for guards to operate from the cabs, it makes much more sense when the train is so busy that it would be difficult to operate the doors due to the number of people standing.

I can't speak for other guards but from a safety perspective there's a huge advantage in working from a cab on peak time services as the droplight gives me a view down the platform train interface as the train pulls away, with Surbiton platform three being a perfect example due to the curve of the platform and the way that people crowd across the width of the platform as they queue to exit via the stairs.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,556
I can't speak for other guards but from a safety perspective there's a huge advantage in working from a cab on peak time services as the droplight gives me a view down the platform train interface as the train pulls away, with Surbiton platform three being a perfect example due to the curve of the platform and the way that people crowd across the width of the platform as they queue to exit via the stairs.
Interesting. Thanks for your reply and to TEW as well.

It gets even more intense with numbers if teHampton Court service arrives late but at the same time as the Basingstoke service.
 
Last edited:

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
1,995
Much rumors from various people about the desiro fleet having guards offices removed, the 444s finally losing the buffet and 450s having some kind of first class move, possibly similar in configuration as the 458s ie each end or perhaps just one end like a 444. The last one is the mostly wibbly of the rumours I have heard.

Plus the power points at all seats. Probably usb over 3pin.
The removal of the buffets makes sense, it would provide something like 12 to 16 seats (3 or 4 rows of four seats (24 to 32 seats on a 10 coach train).

Removing the guard offices would add something 4 seats, so less clear cut (8 or 12 per 10 or 12 coach trains).

I'm not sure that changing first class in the 450's would bring much benefit, during the rush hour the first class seats can be fairly well used and so a reduction could cause problems. However I also don't think that it would add many standard class seats even if there was a change. In terms of passenger use it being at the end rather than the middle would be more of an annoyance as the 450's appear to be more likely to turn to either way around than the 444's.
I'll be controversial! First/MTR say they will offer 30% more seats into Waterloo in the peaks than today; by December 2020 they will offer 52,000 extra seats each day across the morning and evening peaks.

That is a lot of capacity. Now there isn't really capacity to add more trains, and a lot of trains are at maximum length. Some of this capacity will come from the delivery of a 10-car railway on suburban services by next December. But I think the new train fleet in service by 2020 will have less seats (and more standing room). Now if I recall I don't believe First Class seating counts towards seating capacity a franchise offers...

We know First Class will be gone on the Reading Line by December 2020. Why? Because the new Bombardier units are going to work the Reading services (replacing the 458/5s that will be back to Reading by December 2018) and they are Standard Class only. My hunch is that First/MTR won't even reinstate it on the 458/5 units, so it will be gone on the Windsor side within fifteen months.

We know that 18 442 units are being refurbished for the Portsmouth fast services. InterCity units, looking like new inside, and addressng the hatred of 3+2 seating on that line (for fast services anyway). They will have First Class.

We know that the 45 444 units will be operating the services to Weymouth (suspected cut to one an hour due to new Portsmouth-Weymouth train), Poole (if second Weymouth gets cut back to there as pre-2007), Southampton (if current semi-fast Poole get cuts back to there) and possibly Portsmouth via Eastleigh (which is effectively a semi-fast Mainline service). The 444s have First Class.

So here is my controversial bit - 127 450 units lose their 24 First Class seats, plus the Guards Office - the centre part of that coach goes from 4 Standard Class seats to having 40 Standard Class seats - net increase of 36. Over 127 units that is a net increase of 4,572 Standard Class seats. Oh but wait, we have 28 former High Capacity 450s that seat 18 fewer Standard Class passengers than the remaining units. Add those missing seats in - further net gain of 504 seats. So just reconfiguring the 450 fleet could delivery 5,076 extra seats.

Controversial bit two - remove the buffet and Guards office from the 444 fleet would add 12 seats per unit. With 45 units that is a net gain of 540 seats. So we are up to 5,616 extra seats gained.

The 442 fleet will add a huge chunk of extra seats. We don't know how First/MTR will configure them but based on the current layout they seat 318 Standard Class passengers. So with 18 units that is a net gain of 5,724 seats.

The internal staff site First/MTR have put up has an answer to a question from someone saying that the diesel fleet will see seating capacity increase 5% - suggests a refurb and possible EMT style high density layout. A 3-car 159 has 172 Standard Class seats (ignoring tip-ups). A 5% increase would add 8 seats - so the MS and DMS could go from 72 to 76 seats by reducing the number of seats around tables from 10 bays to two! Controversial but more seats. With 30 3-car units that is another 240 seats.

Now I know not all units are in service, and I've not included the 158s, but even the above delivers 11,580 extra seats. Roughly a third of what First/MTR have promised. I actually think the 442s will have a higher seat count than today (think FGW HST TS - 84 seats compared to 74 in 442 DTS).

So in short, my guesses are:
  • First Class only on 442s, 444s and 158/159s.
  • More seating on all remaining unit types - 442s, 444s, 450s and 158/159s.
  • Everything that can be maximim length into Waterloo will be - 10-car on metro and Windsor services will still over a net seat increase on 455/456/458 fleet, plus more 10-car 442 or 444 services and 12-car 450 services (though not many left to strengthen).

I know lots will say rubbish to the above, and the only proof I have for removing first Class is that new suburban units will be working to Reading (and 458/5 units will be gone by Dec-20 - they were the SWT units to work to Reading from Dec-18) but First have form here. Look at what they agreed with the DfT on GWR - big reduction in HST First Class capacity, 166 First Class capacity halved and 165 made Standard Class only. Yes, First Class brings in money but saying you are adding X thousand seats sounds better. Plus they can hike First Class fares to manage capacity on the remaining services that have it.

But if the rumour about First Class moving on the 450s is true you could do move it to non-toilet end of the current coach and reduce it from 24 seats to 16 and still offer more Standard Class seats than today. Even doing that would still provide 2,790 extra Standard Class seats through smaller First Class, no Guards office and re-instated seats on former High Capacity units.

Guess more will become clear in the Autumn once First/MTR have taken over but I'm convinced more Standard Class seats and fewer First Class seats are coming on the "old" fleets.
 

3141

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2012
Messages
1,771
Location
Whitchurch, Hampshire
That's an interesting piece of work. It's unfortunate that First/MTR haven't been specific about how they will achieve the extra seats. You've calculated 11,580 extra seats. They've said "52,000 extra seats across the morning and evening peaks" (I'm quoting from how you've put in in your post). If "across" means both in and out, morning and evening, you've identified how over 46,000 seats might be found. The rest might come from the internal layout of the Aventras and the extra passenger space from not having intermediate cabs - they'd save four intermediate cabs on 10 cars of 455/456. As you say, we'll find out more, gradually, I expect, after they take over.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,265
I firmly believe some of the headline capacity increase percentage figure for the new franchise includes that already announced by SWT as being provided by the 707s and the resultant internal cascades, as part of the CP5 HLOS requirements.
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
1,995
I firmly believe some of the headline capacity increase percentage figure for the new franchise includes that already announced by SWT as being provided by the 707s and the resultant internal cascades, as part of the CP5 HLOS requirements.
I don't disagree - but First/MTR will be delivering this two batches.

Dec-18 - 10-car suburban railway on most peak Metro services (i.e. platforms 1-6) with 455+455+456; 10-car suburban railway on most Windsor side services with 707+707; and 10-car Reading services with 458/5+458/5. Strengthening of Mainline services formed of Desiro to have virtually everything in the peaks as 10-car 444 or 12-car 450.

The above was the SWT plan that was already in the works. The change that First/MTR will bring is that Fast Portsmouth services will be 10-car 442 by Dec-18. However, I think that displaced 450 and 444 units from the 442s coming back will be used up by a mix of the revised service plans along the Hampshire/Dorset coast and revised Mainline services (Southampton/Poole/Weymouth) PLUS fleet wide refurbishment of the 450 and 444 fleet (172 units in total).

The next step change, when then the total extra capacity First/MTR refer to will be delivered is Dec-20. This is when the new Bombardier trains will be in service and the 455, 456, 458/5 and 707 fleets will be gone. My hunch is a full timetable recast of the suburban Metro and Windsor Line services to take advantage of the new common fleet, possibly better acceleration between stations, 4 tph to Reading, etc, etc. On the Mainline they will ahve completed the fleet refurbishments so they can diagram more 444/450 units back in service.

In my earlier pos the seating capacity changes (extra seats, loss of First Class) assumed all units in service and all units hitting Waterloo in the peaks. That obviously won't happen, so the extra seats if all this happened wouldnt be as high. But I still stand by my hunch that something like this will help deliver a big chunk of the extra capacity. The 750 new coaches that Bombardier are building are replacing 742 coaches, a net increase of 8. And I seriously believe these will have less seats than the trains they replace. So suburban seating could actually be cut - hence 30% more capacity overall (seating + standing) but the 52,000 extra seats could be heavily weighted towards outer suburban and long distance services - i.e. there will be a seating increase on Suburban services by Dec-18, but possibly fewer seats on these services by Dec-20, albeit possibly still more than today. (if that makes sense!)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top