• 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!

Portsmouth Harbour-Cardiff Central GWR

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
Would you be prepared to pay increased taxes to cover the costs?
You are excluding the option to reallocate or transfer costs, eg if thought say TPE had excess fleet, could you move some.

I realise, non-standard or different equipment needs familiarisation (which has short term training cost), but I think there is a valid argument for saying some changes should be possible without extra tax, especially as most Operators are running a version of pre-pandemic planned fleet rather than what is now optimal for their current passenger flows.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
3,950
You are excluding the option to reallocate or transfer costs, eg if thought say TPE had excess fleet, could you move some.

I realise, non-standard or different equipment needs familiarisation (which has short term training cost), but I think there is a valid argument for saying some changes should be possible without extra tax, especially as most Operators are running a version of pre-pandemic planned fleet rather than what is now optimal for their current passenger flows.

Yes, but if you look at posts elsewhere on this forum you will see the government is after cuts from the railways not additional expenditure.
 

RedPostJunc

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2021
Messages
125
Location
Andover
Massive lack of available rolling stock again today Portsmouth-Cardiff line

Following are all 2car
1F03, 1F05, 1F09, 1F12, 1F14, 1F18, 1F19, 1F21, .......

And if you go on GWR website, will not find any warnings of short forms or potentially crowded trains, because it has become the norm
1F18 was running to time until arrival at Westbury at 1410¾, but left 12 minutes late at 1424¾. It arrived at Bristol Temple Meads 14 minutes late (1450 booked, 1504¾ actual), where the service to Cardiff Central was cancelled, due to late arrival of an inbound service (YI). The unit (158748) then formed VST ECS 5F18 1457 Bristol Temple Meads to Cardiff Central, passengers beyond Bristol Temple Meads had to wait for the late running 2U20 1050 Penzance to Cardiff Central.

Does anyone know what caused the delay at Westbury?
 

FGW_DID

Established Member
Joined
23 Jun 2011
Messages
2,730
Location
81E
Massive lack of available rolling stock again today Portsmouth-Cardiff line

Following are all 2car
1F03, 1F05, 1F09, 1F12, 1F14, 1F18, 1F19, 1F21, .......

And if you go on GWR website, will not find any warnings of short forms or potentially crowded trains, because it has become the norm

Not surprising, as most of those trains are on the same diagrams so if its uncovered at the start, unless strengthened, it will be uncovered all day. A long list in reality may only be a couple of units missing.

1F03 & 1F12 & 1F19 (should all be 2x 158)
1F05 & 1F14 & 1F21 (should all be 2x 158)
1F09 & 1F18 (both should be 2x 158)

Does anyone know what caused the delay at Westbury?

Awaiting Traincrew (Guard).
 
Last edited:

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
Not surprising, as most of those trains are on the same diagrams so if its uncovered at the start, unless strengthened, it will be uncovered all day. A long list in reality may only be a couple of units missing.

1F03 & 1F12 & 1F19 (should all be 2x 158)
1F05 & 1F14 & 1F21 (should all be 2x 158)
1F09 & 1F18 (both should be 2x 158)

So effectively you are saying they were three 158s short at start of day, and none became available by mid morning.

3 of 8 diagrams running half length trains suggests some serious resource collapse

Sort of comes over as you think not covering diagrams is not a surprise, which is slightly worrying if low expectations have become ingrained, perhaps you didn't mean it like that, al though I appreciate you trying to explain what was intended.
 
Last edited:

Anonymous10

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2019
Messages
2,080
Location
wales
Salisbury. I pass them regularly on my wedged Turbo.....


Yes. Yes. Yes.
Unfortunately they'll be south western trains / railway (I get them confused) and as such aren't available to gwr unless a agreement was made to do so. That would also assume they're not in Salisbury tmd for maintenance as that's where their class 158 and 159 fleet are based.
 

baza585

Member
Joined
1 Aug 2010
Messages
641
Those aren’t spare, they are simply stabled between the AM and PM peak workings.
I realise that but I do question whether with reduced commuting loads they are all required for WoE services. My mate who commutes three days aweek on that route suggests loadings are well down and standees are a rarity these days. Sadly that is not true of Pompey -Cardiff for much of its long journey.

And that's before I start on the Romsey sixes which are an utter waste of 158s. 165s or even 150s would be very adequate.

I know the argument is that it gives Salisbury an uniform fleet but SPM and other depots seem to cope with more than one unit type. Feels like the passenger experience is getting ignored by the rail industry because it might take a bit of flexibility to make things better.

Sorry rant over but after another 2 car sardine experience yesterday I am totally fed up and the rail industry is about to lose another loyal customer.
 

Mike Machin

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2017
Messages
215
Yes, but if you look at posts elsewhere on this forum you will see the government is after cuts from the railways not additional expenditure.
That’s the crux of the problem. However, the present situation has become utterly untenable and it simply isn’t possible to indefinitely allow the present situation continues, with the lucky passengers rammed onto trains unable to move without space to even sit on the floors and with the more athletic younger travellers climbing into the overhead luggage space while the unfortunate ones are simply left behind in the rain on forlorn windswept stations.
Unfortunately they'll be south western trains / railway (I get them confused) and as such aren't available to gwr unless a agreement was made to do so. That would also assume they're not in Salisbury tmd for maintenance as that's where their class 158 and 159 fleet are based.
This highlights the whole problem of Britain’s broken fragmented railway. In BR days resources were re-allocated between depots, routes and regions at the drop of a hat to ensure the very best use of the available assets. Spare stock such as the 175s and SWR 158/159s would all have been moved around long ago to where they could have provided the maximum benefit.
 

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
3,950
This highlights the whole problem of Britain’s broken fragmented railway. In BR days resources were re-allocated between depots, routes and regions at the drop of a hat to ensure the very best use of the available assets. Spare stock such as the 175s and SWR 158/159s would all have been moved around long ago to where they could have provided the maximum benefit.

But as pointed out the 158/159s aren’t spare!
 

Mike Machin

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2017
Messages
215
But as pointed out the 158/159s aren’t spare!
Not ‘spare’ as such, but in BR days any suitable stock that wasn’t actually in use could be pressed into service where needed.

For example, when I was a youngster the Cardiff to Portsmouth trains were rostered for a Class 35 and 7 Mk1s, (from the portsmouth end, BSK, SK, SK, RMB, SO, CK, BSK).

However, if the intended stock or loco wasn’t available, wherever possible something would be cobbled together, a motley collection of MK1s and locomotive substitutions including Class 31s, 33s, 37s and 47s. To a certain extent, when the scheduled stock wasn’t available, most available stock would become ‘common user’ to avoid inconveniencing the passengers.

It was the same on most routes, I can remember travelling on a hastily-organised substitute set of MK1s and a Class 73 stepping-in for a 4-REP and TC formation at Bournemouth Central one summer afternoon. It was a few minutes late and we were missing a buffet car, but it was much better than expecting everyone to be inconvenienced by trying to squeeze onto the following service.

Lastly, I remember seriously heavy snow on the mid/late 1980s resulting in diesel loco haulage of 4-EPBs on suburban services on the Eastern section - with even Class 56s drafted in! Services were disrupted, but we still got home. Today, a couple of flakes and the service would be suspended.

The fragmentation of the network has stripped the railway of the capacity to be flexible and innovative when things go wrong. That’s why customers are fed up, seeing perfectly good assets sitting around while they pay ridiculous amounts of money for a non-existent service.

Back to the topic of this thread, something needs to be done soon as it is now beyond a joke.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
GWR has announced that the line will be cut for 4 days in February

Saturday 10th, Sunday 11th, Sat 17th, Sun 18th Feb buses replace trains Bath Spa to Westbury.

Between these dates Monday 12th - Fri 16th Feb, replacement buses will operate Southampton - Portsmouth

Unclear to me why it was thought wise to have 9 consecutive days of replacement buses, but on two different parts of the line, with 2 changes of locations during the 9 days.


My local station (which is on the line) has no posters about the forthcoming rail replacement buses, which I think really ought to be advertised to allow customers to plan alternatives. Wonder why GWR can't use some of the empty poster frames to display this.
 

chipbury

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2021
Messages
63
Location
Bath
Is the Bath/Westbury closure to remedy the speed restriction on the Limpley Stoke B3108 overbridge?
 

moley

Member
Joined
12 Jun 2011
Messages
270
GWR has announced that the line will be cut for 4 days in February

Saturday 10th, Sunday 11th, Sat 17th, Sun 18th Feb buses replace trains Bath Spa to Westbury.

Between these dates Monday 12th - Fri 16th Feb, replacement buses will operate Southampton - Portsmouth

Unclear to me why it was thought wise to have 9 consecutive days of replacement buses, but on two different parts of the line, with 2 changes of locations during the 9 days.


My local station (which is on the line) has no posters about the forthcoming rail replacement buses, which I think really ought to be advertised to allow customers to plan alternatives. Wonder why GWR can't use some of the empty poster frames to display this.
Two weekend closures between Bath and Westbury and an entirely separate closure Southampton/Eastleigh to Portsmouth during the week (school half term). Assuming later work is in the Fareham area given extent of closures.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
Two weekend closures between Bath and Westbury and an entirely separate closure Southampton/Eastleigh to Portsmouth during the week (school half term). Assuming later work is in the Fareham area given extent of closures.
Clearly two separate parts of the line, but does this mean the southern part of the line is now doing weekday closures, but middle part of line is still on old style full weekend closures.

More a question of why 9 days of closures in two different styles, do they need same buses for both, or same equipment or engineering staff.

So if both picked school half term week, why not overlap them rather than mess up line over 9 days. Unless there is a genuine reason just feels like no one in charge coordinated this and couldn't make up mind between weekday and weekend working
 

spyinthesky

Member
Joined
17 Aug 2021
Messages
282
Location
Bulford
Would you be prepared to pay increased taxes to cover the costs?
I don’t think that I would want to pay more taxes to enable someone else to be able to be guaranteed a seat.
I do expect to be able to sit on a train for the fare I am expected to pay.
I would rather be delayed than stood on a journey and would rather be compensated for such.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,725
Location
Somerset
I don’t think that I would want to pay more taxes to enable someone else to be able to be guaranteed a seat.
I do expect to be able to sit on a train for the fare I am expected to pay.
I would rather be delayed than stood on a journey and would rather be compensated for such.
So you expect subsidy so that you get a seat (otherwise the fare you are expected to pay would be higher), but aren’t prepared to extend that to anyone else?
 

spyinthesky

Member
Joined
17 Aug 2021
Messages
282
Location
Bulford
So you expect subsidy so that you get a seat (otherwise the fare you are expected to pay would be higher), but aren’t prepared to extend that to anyone else?
I pay my taxes and happily pay my fares.
I would not like to pay more taxes to fund the wasteful rail industry which is not providing the seats.
It certainly isn’t me at fault for others not getting a seat so yes I expect a subsidy for which my taxes are paid.
As a light user of the railway I suspect I get less for my money than most for the amount I pay.
 

robert thomas

Member
Joined
2 Jun 2019
Messages
274
Location
Neath
I pay my taxes and happily pay my fares.
I would not like to pay more taxes to fund the wasteful rail industry which is not providing the seats.
It certainly isn’t me at fault for others not getting a seat so yes I expect a subsidy for which my taxes are paid.
As a light user of the railway I suspect I get less for my money than most for the amount I pay.
A ticket does not guarantee a seat and never has done
 

Mike Machin

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2017
Messages
215
A ticket does not guarantee a seat and never has done
Absolutely, but there’s a world of difference between not being able to get a seat on a particularly busy day compared with rocking-up most days and knowing that a seat will probably only be available as an unexpected bonus.

The two routes I used when I regularly travelled by train were Cross-Country and GWR from Southampton or Winchester. With the odds of getting a seat on an ancient, dirty diesel train being virtually impossible, I now use my electric car which is quicker door-to-door, has effective air conditioning, is clean and I am guaranteed a seat. I will consider using the train again when these basic 21st Century travel requirements can be met.
 

jayah

On Moderation
Joined
18 Apr 2011
Messages
1,889
And this is why most of my leisure travel is not done on the railway.
I always avoid the Portsmouth to Cardiff.
As will be the case for many other people. The rolling stock has already been paid for and built (in many cases at the taxpayers expense) only to be exported, stored or scrapped.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,834
BR also had the freedom to hike the fares to sort out any capacity issues.
GWR have hiked the advance purchase fares on the route over the last few years, and removed cheaper off-peak options.
 

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
3,950
As will be the case for many other people. The rolling stock has already been paid for and built (in many cases at the taxpayers expense) only to be exported, stored or scrapped.

Not quite correct, for capex costs I see your point but not for opex costs.

Further overhauls, including expensive engine half life overhauls for GWR power cars (opex costs) haven’t been paid for in advance, the dft declined to fund these costs and that has inevitably lead to the fleets decline and planned withdrawals.

Just because something has been paid for in terms of costs of building doesn’t mean it’s free to use for ever, there are considerable operational costs.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
Two weekend closures between Bath and Westbury and an entirely separate closure Southampton/Eastleigh to Portsmouth during the week (school half term). Assuming later work is in the Fareham area given extent of closures.

Network Rail has given some details of the work in Southampton-Portsmouth area Mon 12 - Friday 16 Feb


Haven't managed to find anything on the Bath-Westbury closure 2 days before and 2 days after. Or anything to explain the strange mix of weekday and weekend closures of the line. I can only assume Network Rail can't decide if working weekdays or weekends is better.

Presumably there is a reason why doing it as 2 blocks of 2 and 5 days between was deemed better than 4 continuous days and 5 continuous days, would have thought it was less efficient suspending work then restarting, but maybe others can explain why.
 

moley

Member
Joined
12 Jun 2011
Messages
270
Network Rail has given some details of the work in Southampton-Portsmouth area Mon 12 - Friday 16 Feb


Haven't managed to find anything on the Bath-Westbury closure 2 days before and 2 days after. Or anything to explain the strange mix of weekday and weekend closures of the line. I can only assume Network Rail can't decide if working weekdays or weekends is better.

Presumably there is a reason why doing it as 2 blocks of 2 and 5 days between was deemed better than 4 continuous days and 5 continuous days, would have thought it was less efficient suspending work then restarting, but maybe others can explain why.
The works are taking place in the Trowbridge area. There are details on GWR's website.

Aren't they being done by two separate divisions of NR maintenance, namely Wessex and West? So likely that there was no co-ordination here.

The Fareham-Southampton closure is mid-week as there is a high flow of school children on the route. This follows two previous half term closures of the Portsmouth Direct so as not to have to find replacement bus services for schools. Wessex have started to have a preference for 5 day mid-week closures as weekend leisure travel has recovered so much better than mid-week commuting. A SWR manager said that when they close a route M-F, commuters plan to work from home. Close it at weekends, with no alternative and people don't travel.

I'm assuming that for the GWR closures, the leisure routes are more London-Bristol via Bath and London-Exeter and therefore you inconvenience less people by having two weekend closures. Also, given the distance some busses are pulled in from, is there even enough spare buses/drivers to have closures Portsmouth-Southampton and Warminster-Bath - that's if people are even willing to put up with two busses and two trains to do, say, Portsmouth-Bristol.

One final thought, if both were closed at the same time, GWR would have no depot to service the Turbos trapped between the two blocks. Presumably GWR could diagram 158s between Warminster and Southampton/Westbury & Weymouth and ask SWR to look after them from Salisbury for the week, but at the time the engineering work was being planned, 158s weren't expected to be present on these routes much.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
Aren't they being done by two separate divisions of NR maintenance, namely Wessex and West? So likely that there was no co-ordination here.
Probably what has happened, same line, about 30 miles apart, one needing 4 days engineering, other 5 days.

Didn't coordinate and between them managed to disrupt and suspend 9 consecutive days on the line.

However I will disagree about the Trowbridge area not being busy at weekends, even if Fareham area apparently is. Actually I would go further as Avon valley is popular leisure destination at weekends, don't forget Cotswold Area of Outstanding Beauty (AONB) reaches to Bradford on Avon Station. Lots of people do one way walks expecting weekend trains to get them back from places like Avoncliffe.

Lots of school children use the local trains between various stations between Freshford and Frome so the argument being used about needing to be half term applies to both closures.
 

Top