SWR - Holden Report into performance

Bald Rick · 28 Sep 2018

Slightly surprised this hasn’t been posted before; I’ve done a search and can’t find it on the forum, but if it has been posted please feel free to report to mods and move / merge as necessary.

Michael Holden’s review into performance on SWR / NRs Wessex route was published a few weeks ago. It makes for interesting reading. Unfortunately I can’t cut and paste from the report due to “operational difficulties”, but the main reasons listed for the sustained deterioration in performance are:

A reduction in timetable resilience caused by:
* Increased dwell time from increased passenger loadings
* Impact of preofessional driving policies
* Shortage of drivers, particularly with increased diagram complexity
* Loss of expertise in control, partly caused by the move to Basingstoke ROC
* Increase in train lengths
* increase in TSRs / ESRs

Reduction in ability to recover service delays because of:
* loss of ability to control train crew resource, through physical separation of control service managers and resource managers
* shortfall in compliance of train crew knowledge (partly caused by with the Class 707s) including a reduction in knowledge of diversionary routes

A few other factors:
* Infrastructure being more intensively used, with insufficient time for maintenance
* Managerial distraction, both through the refranchise and the industrial dispute
* Inadequate performance management processes
* Reduction in flexibility at Waterloo post the works last year
* The industrial dispute
* Misalignment of incentives between NR the TOC.

There are several recommendations. Some of which will not be welcomed.

Personally I think the report is very good. Note that Holden was supported by two others in the production of the report; both have long experience in running the railway, and one of them is perhaps one of the best operators of his generation, having been a control manager in BR days and ‘been around the block’ a few times since.

The report can be downloaded via this link; there’s a button to click down the page.

https://www.southwesternrailway.com/other/about-us/independent-performance-review

RailUK Forums

The Planner · 28 Sep 2018

Mr Thompson of DB CRE fame? Good bloke! Sadly that report could well end up with most TOCs being copied and pasted in.

Wilts Wanderer · 28 Sep 2018

'Impact of professional driving policies'.

Is that something that First Group have changed, or the usual longer-term impact afflicting most TOCs?

Bald Rick · 28 Sep 2018

The Planner said:
Mr Thompson of DB CRE fame? Good bloke! Sadly that report could well end up with most TOCs being copied and pasted in.

Agree on both counts.

Wilts Wanderer said:
'Impact of professional driving policies'.

Is that something that First Group have changed, or the usual longer-term impact afflicting most TOCs?

The latter.

HH · 29 Sep 2018

So, some of the issues are just like those at GTR - the industrial dispute, which is also off the back of DfT policy; the inability to plan driver resource properly; the loss of expertise in Control due to NR moving to a new ROC.

There is also NR's "own goal" caused by the works at Waterloo, which actually exacerbated the effect of longer trains (and possibly if they had spent the time maintaining the track instead there would be less TSRs/ESRs).

However, passenger loadings, so-called professional driving, misalignment of incentives, increase in train lengths and the intensive use of infrastructure were problems that already existed and that exist across much of the railway; while they contribute to overall performance, they are not reasons for the decline under SWR.

hwl · 29 Sep 2018

HH said:
So, some of the issues are just like those at GTR - the industrial dispute, which is also off the back of DfT policy; the inability to plan driver resource properly; the loss of expertise in Control due to NR moving to a new ROC.

There is also NR's "own goal" caused by the works at Waterloo, which actually exacerbated the effect of longer trains (and possibly if they had spent the time maintaining the track instead there would be less TSRs/ESRs).

However, passenger loadings, so-called professional driving, misalignment of incentives, increase in train lengths and the intensive use of infrastructure were problems that already existed and that exist across much of the railway; while they contribute to overall performance, they are not reasons for the decline under SWR.

The report looked at long term declining performance for most this decade and not just SWR

SWR's train maintenance strategy also seem to be problematic. Expect to see the 159s getting a rusty spanner rather than a golden one this year! Short forms ultimately lead to dwell time problems.

The Planner · 29 Sep 2018

Logic should dictate though that substantial passenger growth = more punters getting on and off = longer dwell times. Everyone has quietly tried to ignore it though as it is one of the easiest ways to bust a timetable. Professional driving is another that is difficult to deal with, timings of old are now no longer achievable.

TEW · 29 Sep 2018

NR did try to point out as much in their response to SWRs new timetable proposals, but SWR just seemed to deny it was a problem.

swt_passenger · 29 Sep 2018

The report was also mentioned here, in the “SWR franchise could be under threat” discussion, but without generating much comment:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ld-be-under-threat.167506/page-5#post-3649823
It probably does deserve its own thread though.

LNW-GW Joint · 29 Sep 2018

The Planner said:
Logic should dictate though that substantial passenger growth = more punters getting on and off = longer dwell times. Everyone has quietly tried to ignore it though as it is one of the easiest ways to bust a timetable. Professional driving is another that is difficult to deal with, timings of old are now no longer achievable.

But hasn't the growth reversed, leading to revenue problems for SWR?
You can't have growth and contraction at the same time.

The Planner · 29 Sep 2018

It was more of a general comment.

TEW · 29 Sep 2018

LNW-GW Joint said:
But hasn't the growth reversed, leading to revenue problems for SWR?
You can't have growth and contraction at the same time.

Passenger numbers are still up significantly on 2004 levels, which is when the SWR timetable basically dates from.

pompeyfan · 29 Sep 2018

The annoying thing is that what the report said, most front line staff knew and could have told you over a coffee or something stronger.

How do we fix it? Throw money at the track layout and the maintenance of S&T (which is causing havoc today, again!). Another way round it would be to reduce the number of services and try and get passengers to change their travel patterns. After all, the Railway gets lambasted for not being flexible, perhaps the passengers in the peak should be a bit more flexible.

Edit: after actually scrolling through the report, it mentions that DCO is key to trying to make the timetable work. Whilst I agree ABDO release could help, assuming the train hasn’t had any adhesion issues, I can’t see guard dispatch being much slower than driver dispatch. Although the report does mention that every second counts.

jdxn · 29 Sep 2018

IT's interesting that the reports identifies that the move of SWR control to the ROC has left a greater disconnect within the SWR organisation. I wonder whether this will reduce the interest for TOCs to relocate a small part of their organisation to ROCs?

Jim Jehosofat · 29 Sep 2018

When did he become Sir Michael Holden?

kristiang85 · 29 Sep 2018

pompeyfan said:
Another way round it would be to reduce the number of services and try and get passengers to change their travel patterns. After all, the Railway gets lambasted for not being flexible, perhaps the passengers in the peak should be a bit more flexible.
.

So the solution to poor railway performance is the problem of the passengers already paying through the nose?

I'm lucky in that I have a job where they don't really care when I'm in the office, so I can easily avoid the most crowded times, but most people don't have that option. Reducing services will only increase overcrowding.

hwl · 29 Sep 2018

Jim Jehosofat said:
When did he become Sir Michael Holden?

Michael Holden Bt i.e. hereditary

pompeyfan · 29 Sep 2018

kristiang85 said:
So the solution to poor railway performance is the problem of the passengers already paying through the nose?

I'm lucky in that I have a job where they don't really care when I'm in the office, so I can easily avoid the most crowded times, but most people don't have that option. Reducing services will only increase overcrowding.

The official report confirms it though sadly. There physically isn’t the capacity on the Wessex route for the number of passengers wishing to travel. If someone so much as sneezes it has the potential to ruin a peak. Look at most mornings and the constant fast running due to congestion. Adding more trains into that mix won’t improbe anything.

Helvellyn · 29 Sep 2018

I recall Tim Shoveller once saying that in the peaks SWT were running the same number of trains on the Fast lines (i.e. two tracks) as Thameslink would through the core after the latter had several billion spent on it. That in part sums it up. In the peaks Waterloo is creaking and the infrastructure needs lots of TLC.

I think the issue with moving the WICC (Wessex Integrated Control Centre) from Waterloo to Basingstoke is that lots of people didn't want to move there because they lived off route and it would have added to their commute. Plus with the shifts some would have struggled to get in for a 06:00 start. The disconnect is that the ROC is off network. At Waterloo you could look out of the window and see a station full of trains or wander down into a chocker block concourse so the disruption maybe seemed more real?

Bald Rick · 30 Sep 2018

Helvellyn said:
I recall Tim Shoveller once saying that in the peaks SWT were running the same number of trains on the Fast lines (i.e. two tracks) as Thameslink would through the core after the latter had several billion spent on it. That in part sums it up. In the peaks Waterloo is creaking and the infrastructure needs lots of TLC.

Well yes, but that’s apples and oranges. It is only 24tph on the up fast from Surbiton / New Malden to Waterloo in one morning peak hour only. Roughly a third of the trains merge on to the Up Fast at Surbiton (at speed) and another third diverge to the Up Main Relief on the approaches to Waterloo, which means the throat of the station can work. None of the trains stop intermediately.

I did tell Tim that once as well. He smiled a knowing smile.

HH · 30 Sep 2018

LNW-GW Joint said:
But hasn't the growth reversed, leading to revenue problems for SWR?
You can't have growth and contraction at the same time.

Actually you can. Overall numbers could be down, while Tuesday AM Peak is up.

This is quite logical when you realise that season sales are falling while daily fares are increasing and that's why some days are a lot busier than others.

Bald Rick · 30 Sep 2018

HH said:
Actually you can. Overall numbers could be down, while Tuesday AM Peak is up.

This is quite logical when you realise that season sales are falling while daily fares are increasing and that's why some days are a lot busier than others.

There is evidence to suggest that although passenger numbers are reported to be going down, actually they’re not.

Season tickets are counted as 10 trips per week, regardless of how many are made. People who don’t travel every day are swapping to daily tickets, particularly in London with the advent of contactless payment. The figures correctly show a large reduction in season tickets, partly offset by an increase in daily tickets, but actually the numbers of bums on seats are the same.

Of course there are other factors at play, but the reduction in passenger numebrs isn’t quite what it seems.

infobleep · 30 Sep 2018

pompeyfan said:
The official report confirms it though sadly. There physically isn’t the capacity on the Wessex route for the number of passengers wishing to travel. If someone so much as sneezes it has the potential to ruin a peak. Look at most mornings and the constant fast running due to congestion. Adding more trains into that mix won’t improbe anything.

The problem is, now there is less passengers SWR are not generating the revenue.

It seems people often but not always need to work 9 to 5 or thereabouts. If they don't then they or their employers prefer them to.

One way to avoid making the trains rammed is to not use them and work from home. Do that though and the railway gets less income to function.

What the railway would like is for people to work different office hours to 9 to 5 and still use the trains every day.

However that doesn't seem to be what firms and staff would like to do.

infobleep · 30 Sep 2018

Bald Rick said:
There is evidence to suggest that although passenger numbers are reported to be going down, actually they’re not.

Season tickets are counted as 10 trips per week, regardless of how many are made. People who don’t travel every day are swapping to daily tickets, particularly in London with the advent of contactless payment. The figures correctly show a large reduction in season tickets, partly offset by an increase in daily tickets, but actually the numbers of bums on seats are the same.

Of course there are other factors at play, but the reduction in passenger numebrs isn’t quite what it seems.

So if bums on seats are the same, what caused the them to report the numbers tra ring are less?

If they really are not less does this mean the reporting tools used need to be modified to more accurately report the passenger numbers.

With the need for more maintenance times, would this mean they need to close the rail more at weekends?

I had been wondering that if they can't implement the new revised timetable in full, could they at least implement the Sunday afternoom changes as that surely wouldn't be an increase beyond what they do Monday to Saturday.

Od course they might need to increase engineering works on the Sunday but when there is no engineering works could they run a higher frequency

It doesn't deal with the weekday and Saturday frequency increases but would be better than nothing.

hwl · 30 Sep 2018

infobleep said:
So if bums on seats are the same, what caused the them to report the numbers tra ring are less?

If they really are not less does this mean the reporting tools used need to be modified to more accurately report the passenger numbers.

With the need for more maintenance times, would this mean they need to close the rail more at weekends?

I had been wondering that if they can't implement the new revised timetable in full, could they at least implement the Sunday afternoon changes as that surely wouldn't be an increase beyond what they do Monday to Saturday.

Of course they might need to increase engineering works on the Sunday but when there is no engineering works could they run a higher frequency

It doesn't deal with the weekday and Saturday frequency increases but would be better than nothing.

There is a lot of data in the London area (i.e. including TfL) to suggest that off peak is down with fewer shopping* / leisure journeys. The peaks (most days excluding Friday?) could still be getting busier despite overall falls.

The season ticket journey number assumptions need some revision as plenty of us suspect they over counted journeys for long time and when you get a fall in season ticket use the "fall" is exaggerated. Re-basing the multiplier should be high on the priority list. The current multiplier is 260 days (52 working weeks (M-F) which is bonkers). With most people doing the equivalent of 46 working (M-F) weeks 230 days would be better starting number with most actually around 220-224. Hence 260 days is at least an 11-16% over estimate. But most people are at work off main site or working from home some of the time so the actual number will be lower. (The most I made it into the office was 191 days in a year due to off site working).
There is of course an assumption that season ticket holders will use them at the weekend sometimes.

*See the shop closure rate in London and level of internet shopping in London compared to rest of the UK.

Edit to add:
Season ticket sales are actually surprisingly seasonal with most sold in the railways Q3&4. The Waterloo works falling in Q2 lead to a large fall in sales and a massive increase in refunds. Hence with SWR it would be worth waiting till the Waterloo works effect falls out of the annual figures for comparison soon...

Helvellyn · 30 Sep 2018

Bald Rick said:
Well yes, but that’s apples and oranges. It is only 24tph on the up fast from Surbiton / New Malden to Waterloo in one morning peak hour only. Roughly a third of the trains merge on to the Up Fast at Surbiton (at speed) and another third diverge to the Up Main Relief on the approaches to Waterloo, which means the throat of the station can work. None of the trains stop intermediately.

I did tell Tim that once as well. He smiled a knowing smile.

But you can make a comparison with the Thameslink core. You still need everything arriving at Surbiton on time (whether on the Up Slow or Up Fast) for the timetable to work. The fact it falls over so easily shows some of the issues. Yes, it is less frequent off peak but it can still be fragile.

I think the more general point was that for the money the South Western route makes the investment necessarily hasn't been there when so much of the fare box makes it into Treasury coffers.

I think there was a reason in the early 2000s that as part of the twenty year franchise pitch Stagecoach proposed gold-plated maintenance of the route from Surbiton inwards, a rebuilt Clapham Junction and a ten-car Windsor side service a decade sooner than eventually delivere!

Would I drive into London? Not for me but I think in the last couple of years we have had the Hindhead Tunnel open that removed a bottleneck on the A3 and now the completion of the M3 Smart Motorway upgrade from Fleet to the M25. Enough to tip a few from rail to road I think.

infobleep · 1 Oct 2018

Helvellyn said:
But you can make a comparison with the Thameslink core. You still need everything arriving at Surbiton on time (whether on the Up Slow or Up Fast) for the timetable to work. The fact it falls over so easily shows some of the issues. Yes, it is less frequent off peak but it can still be fragile.

I think the more general point was that for the money the South Western route makes the investment necessarily hasn't been there when so much of the fare box makes it into Treasury coffers.

I think there was a reason in the early 2000s that as part of the twenty year franchise pitch Stagecoach proposed gold-plated maintenance of the route from Surbiton inwards, a rebuilt Clapham Junction and a ten-car Windsor side service a decade sooner than eventually delivere!

Would I drive into London? Not for me but I think in the last couple of years we have had the Hindhead Tunnel open that removed a bottleneck on the A3 and now the completion of the M3 Smart Motorway upgrade from Fleet to the M25. Enough to tip a few from rail to road I think.

I agree about the amount of money made vers investment. The investment seems to have been on Thameslink. I'm not saying that didn't need it.

This morning there was more congestion, problems under investigation and slipper rails, not to mention delays without a reason on National Rail Enquiries and that's just what I saw.

This morning part of my journey involved going from Clapham Junction to Wimbledon and then picking up another train that runs via Sutton. That Tarun was only slightly delayed. The train I was on was 6 minutes late.

When I got on it didn't look to busy near the door so I sat down facing away from the door. When I got up suddenly there was a queue of people.

Had I been of that queue first and run I'd have made the train. As I wasn't I missed it as it was ales time to get up the stairs. Then you have everyone coming up the other stairs across the width of it, as the other stairs has no divider. Either variation is packed with people. Whether a krjer set of stairs would help. The train was probably too late to make a difference. This just proves I should have been more alert if I wanted to make that perticular train.

So I ended up going back and getting a train to New Malden where I picked up a bus as I decided that might now be faster, based on where I'm eventually heading. The next Sutton loop train was running with a delay. Just a shame the one I wished to board wasn't delayed enough.

Saturday has important engineering works but also a signalling issue. Then I heard there was a trolley on the lin Southampton way., if I've remembered correctly and yesterday morning a train gapped, so lost power, between Waterloo and Clapham Junction.

infobleep · 1 Oct 2018

So now have leaf fall will likely be upon us in a bigger way, will the leaf fall timetable be able to cope or will there be increased delays compared to now?

infobleep · 1 Oct 2018

More delays tonight with a broken down train earlier at Vauxhall. This lead to that train being cancelled. Before it was moved, other trains had to avoid Vauxhall but bar three, they still stopping at Clapham Junction and beyond. Three services skipped, Vauxhall, Clapham Junction, Earlsfield and Wimbledon.

With the enhanced timetable, that's being delayed, how would they cope in such circumstances. Would they just run the trains on the fast line anyway and let more be delayed?

Also there I was wondering recently if they are more likely to skip Wimbledon to Vauxhall on a tris heading towards Waterloo then one leaving. We'll tonight they did it leaving.

The trains were switched to the fast line thus delaying fast line trains. Some by about 8 minutes. When I got towards Woking on a Basingstoke train we were at a stand stuck behind the stopping service to Woking.

That was delayed awaiting a point at which it could cross the fast down to reach platform 3. National Rail Enquiries said the Alton train had arrived but it short went passed us. Then the Portsmouth Harbour train went passed.

Fortunately we then went passed that and with some running a few of us made that train.

That train was 6 minutes late leaving Guildford. This in turn added a further delay to the already slightly delayed Gatwick Airport service. At least that shouldn't delay anything at Redhill.

This highlights are tight everything is now.

Twotwo · 1 Oct 2018

Seems like the delay occurred due to awaiting a driver to take it empty to Wimbledon Park as the driver couldn't do it as its prob not in their route.

SWR - Holden Report into performance

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member