Looking at this it looks like the 'standard' diagrams will involve 40 min layovers at Waterloo for the Direct services, e.g. look at the 4-450/12-450/5-444 repeating pattern during the middle of the day for the Haslemere terminators. Looks like things change as we approach the peak though, around mid afternoon.
-
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!
Class 442s - Now at the end of the road and to be withdrawn permanently
- Thread starter richa2002
- Start date
- Status
Looking at this it looks like the 'standard' diagrams will involve 40 min layovers at Waterloo for the Direct services, e.g. look at the 4-450/12-450/5-444 repeating pattern during the middle of the day for the Haslemere terminators. Looks like things change as we approach the peak though, around mid afternoon.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
There's never been enough 442s for them to cover all the fast diagrams. I'm sure 99% of passengers will not care whether they have a 442 or 444, it is the 2+2 seating that has been much asked for. They are aiming for the 442s and 442s to be a similar product to the customer. I'm not surprised that there are some remaining 450s, the promised timetable recast has not happened and there are clearly insufficient 442s yet.
HamworthyGoods
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 3,938
Nobody has ever said the Portsmouth fasts will exclusively be 442s, this has never been the case and never announced as such by SWR, where did you hear this from? There has always been planned to be a mix of 442s and 444s on the Portsmouth fasts the plan for the returbs is to have the 442s and 444s as similar as possible interior wise so I don’t see why that is ‘bad enough’? Also until a timetable recast there is still an amount of inter-working between fasts and slows (on which 442s aren’t suited), however the amount of interworking is drastically reduced, with more work to be done for Dec 19.
The 450 circuit remains for now as there is a need to cover one AM peak working up from Pompey and one PM peak back (with a round trip in between) for capacity reasons as the Pompey Direct is only running with 5tph not 6tph as per the original plans. Why is it disgraceful to provide sufficient seats for passengers until all the extra services run.
Its never been claimed by anyone other than certain people on various forums there will be NO 450s on Pompey fasts. What has been stated as fact is the 442s are being leased to run on the Pompey fasts, save the handful of maintenance trips to Bournemouth this is the case, the intention has always been to use them to reduce drastically the amount of 450s on class 1 services. Note for example the 18.00 class 1 ex Waterloo is 450s but the 18.15 class 1 ex Waterloo is 444s it’s not just about the xx00/xx30.
Last edited:
HamworthyGoods
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 3,938
You just beat me to it!
Unfortunately when the marketing team say “18 additional 5 car trains for Portsmouth fast services...” this does imply all because otherwise you should say “for some Portsmouth fast services”.
Additionally SWR staff on their forum did confirm no 450s on fast services from the big December 2018 change. They now tend to be more vague on such matters.
Additionally SWR staff on their forum did confirm no 450s on fast services from the big December 2018 change. They now tend to be more vague on such matters.
I would suggest that unless it said "all" the was always going to be some other stock at times. Note the inclusion of "additional".
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,433
Unfortunately when TT-ONR-NRN suggested it himself back in early 2018, I think it passed most people by, so no one put him right at the time. It is clearly impossible with only 16 units (8 trains) in service each day, what with peak extras to cover as well.
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-and-redeployment.127422/page-66#post-3275945
(But having 16 units in service is also quite an assumption, as that would be quite a high utilisation factor for relatively old stock, it might only be 14; and as they’re still to be re-tractioned it will be quite some time before maximum availability can be planned for anyway.)
cactustwirly
Established Member
Why is that a bad thing? The 442s were never going to replace all the 444s, but supplement them by replacing the 450s on the fast services.
Matt Taylor
Established Member
Just as a pedant can I point out that the 1815 is a Class 2 but labelled as a Class 1 to avoid a headcode clash with the 2G57 1903 stopper to Guildford, therefore the 1815 becomes 1G57 because it runs via Cobham.
I think there will be difficulties in running three ten cars from the 19th largely due to to crew resources, the guards training really hasn't gone as fast as SWR would have liked. There's been a 442 at Fratton for seven months but so far I don't even have a date for my training course for example.
theironroad
Established Member
How many guards have been trained?
I believe there are probably more than enough drivers considering there will be a lack of stock.
HamworthyGoods
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 3,938
There’s actually very few guards you need to run the 3x10 cars starting in May, one is a peak hour only diagram. Whilst awkward to roster it’s very likely it could be done with a single digit number of guards.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,298
The fact training has been so slow is entirely down to SWR’s incompetence. The entire franchise has been shambolic: fleet reliability, train refurbishment, training etc etc.
theironroad
Established Member
What's the reason behind a 10-442 sitting in Clapham yd from 0831 to 1810? Couldn't it used to partially replace another 450 diagram?
HamworthyGoods
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 3,938
For resilience. If a 442 fails during the day the spare sets are at Bournemouth. This allows the 10 car to be pinched from Clapham Yard and an replacement 10 be bought up from Bournemouth ready for the evening peak.
HamworthyGoods
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 3,938
Continuation of the previous; delayed re-formed 458s into traffic due to corrosion on the ex Gatwick vehicles, training issues of crew on 707s. Isn’t this sadly standard across the industry at the moment?
theironroad
Established Member
Thanks.
theironroad
Established Member
Certainly delays of introduction of new stock and issues around driver training have plagued, gtr, northern, ScotRail , cal sleeper among others.
HamworthyGoods
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 3,938
The 18.15 has always been a class 1 but semi-fast, operating under SSWT’s and more latterly SWR’s Portsmouth Fast service group; pre Dec 04 it called Clapham, Guildford, Godalming, Haslemere and all, was for many years 12 CIG-BEP-CIG formation similar to what used to be the 06.49 ex Portsmouth Harbour in the mornings which always did Liphook and Liss stops.
The running via the new line causing it to be a class 1 is a red-herring, when it went via (But not calling at) Woking pre ‘04 change it still has a class 1 headcode despite the same calling pattern.
Semi-fast trains are always awkard, headcodes allow for fast or slow, old southern 2 digit headcodes allowed for fast, semi-fast or slow (81, 82 or 83)...
I've noticed that the fashion for running long or short trains off-peak has varied a fair bit through the years.
In the early-mid 80s when I first travelled the trains the hourly Portsmouith fasts (81) were all 12CIG-BEP-CIG (or CIG-BIG-CIG initially) with only one train in the main daytime period, the 0748 out of Waterloo, being eight cars. Likewise, the majority of the semi-fasts (82), with only perhaps two exceptions each way, were eight car.
Off-peak length reduction seemed to come in around 1986 or so; at this time, more services split off peak so you had more eight-cars on the fasts during the middle of the day and more four-cars on the semi-fast. An efficient way of doing this was often to split a 12-car fast at either Waterloo or Portsmouth, with the front 8 forming the next fast back and the rear 4 the next semi-fast. This meant that only one shunt to the sidings was necessary, the incoming (usually 8 car) semi-fast that would be replaced by the rear 4 from the fast.
This pattern continued through the NSE years into the early SWT years and was still the tendency as late as 1997 when most off-peaks out of Waterloo were either 4CIG/VEP or 5WES. The sole exception IIRC were the Portsmouth semi-fasts which ran as 4CIG/4BEP formations at this time. I also remember that the Direct had more 5WES off peak than peak - these would be split from and combined with other WES units on the Weymouth line in the peaks.
Another interesting feature of this time, notably the 1997 SWT timetable, was the tendency to put a lot of CIGs on such lines as Alton and Basingstoke slow off-peak, using units needed for fasts in the peaks. In the peak, these lines reverted to VEPs (typically 8VEP) for capacity reasons - but perhaps this off-peak usage of the higher-comfort CIGs also acted as a way to encourage off-peak travel on the Alton and Basingstoke lines?
Back to the long vs short thing, long off peaks once again started becoming the fashion perhaps around the year 2000, though there were still a good number of short ones. Late 2004 produced a very interesting and unpredictable mix on the direct, with 444s and 450s being introduced but some CIGs and VEPs still around - with all types having very varying lengths - and even things like VEPs on fasts. So you never knew just what you would get!
Last edited:
The company remain positive that 3 x 10 car will be in service with a 4th 10 car for training runs. ASLEF on the other hand aren’t happy with them.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,433
Maybe they want an “old technology” payment...
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,298
Maybe they want an “old technology” payment...
Legacy Fleet Payment
ASLEF may be moaning but I bet most of their drivers are itching to get back in the cab !
Surprisingly it’s not financially motivated. Their representatives don’t believe the units are safe for public operation yet due a long list of issues.
On another note one took a jolly up the direct earlier this evening running as 5Q60 for those that are interested.
Positioning to the Clapham Depot?
- Status