Class 484 replacing class 483 on the island line: progress updates

[berneyarms]

The December timetable pdf is now on the SWR site and the service remains hourly.

https://www.southwesternrailway.com/plan-my-journey/~/media/02c0ff4897bd4fec8b2cb8453f7e1c67.ashx

 

[Michaeco]

Did Shanklin to Ryde Pier Head on Sat and return. Shanklin Station fully staffed with booking office open. Trains all ran on time and were quite busy. Problem with 30 min interval service probably Brading, where BOTH footbridges are shut. Incidentally, how do we stop contractors putting paths, cables etc through/ over infrastructure that might be used in the future, such as on the south side of the out of use track at Ryde Esplanade?

 

[swt_passenger]

Did Shanklin to Ryde Pier Head on Sat and return. Shanklin Station fully staffed with booking office open. Trains all ran on time and were quite busy. Problem with 30 min interval service probably Brading, where BOTH footbridges are shut. Incidentally, how do we stop contractors putting paths, cables etc through/ over infrastructure that might be used in the future, such as on the south side of the out of use track at Ryde Esplanade?

Surely the temporary footbridge at Brading is only shut because the second platform isn’t in use? It was installed specially to be used while the old footbridge is repaired (a separate planning application).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Did Shanklin to Ryde Pier Head on Sat and return. Shanklin Station fully staffed with booking office open. Trains all ran on time and were quite busy. Problem with 30 min interval service probably Brading, where BOTH footbridges are shut. Incidentally, how do we stop contractors putting paths, cables etc through/ over infrastructure that might be used in the future, such as on the south side of the out of use track at Ryde Esplanade?

Is it not more likely the footbridges are closed because the other platform is not in use for the hourly service rather than the other way round?

 

[Michaeco]

depends which is the chicken and which is the egg!

 

[Gloster]

Pedants Anyways it wasn’t me who started with SWT, it was the post above mine from @Gloster and I just carried it on.

Just look at the time it was posted. Doesn’t invalidate the point, though.

 

[hermit]

One reason why SWR can say that the hourly service is ‘amply meeting demand’, at least insofar as mainland connections are concerned, is that Wightlink are running (at best) an hourly service, which the trains connect with. Even with an hourly train service, there are 4 trains (2 at weekends) that run up the pier with no catamaran to connect with.

Wightlink‘s refusal to restore a full pre-Covid timetable, meaning that we suffer 2 hour gaps in the middle of the day, and a last crossing from Portsmouth at the ridiculously early time of 2020, is causing real inconvenience. The island’s MP has called it unacceptable, and I agree, but there is no sign that things will change soon.

 

[47444]

Is 005 on the Island yet?

005 is not at Ryde Depot yet. Four car trains won’t happen until all five units are in service.

Where is 005?

 

[Smitham]

Where is 005?

Eastleigh I'd assume.

 

[D365]

Eastleigh I'd assume.

Correct.

 

[47444]

Correct.

Eastleigh I'd assume.

Thank you both

 

[norbitonflyer]

Even with an hourly train service, there are 4 trains (2 at weekends) that run up the pier with no catamaran to connect with.

Wightlink‘s refusal to restore a full pre-Covid timetable, meaning that we suffer 2 hour gaps in the middle of the day, and a last crossing from Portsmouth at the ridiculously early time of 2020, is causing real inconvenience.

On which point, can anyone explain why the National Rail website shows a 73 minute connection time at Portsmouth Harbour between the Waterloo trains and the ferry? My recollection is that 13 minutes is ample.

 

[Gloster]

On which point, can anyone explain why the National Rail website shows a 73 minute connection time at Portsmouth Harbour between the Waterloo trains and the ferry? My recollection is that 13 minutes is ample.

Presumably National Rail’s journey planner has a minimum connection time of 15 minutes (or 20, or 25...).

 

[norbitonflyer]

Presumably National Rail’s journey planner has a minimum connection time of 15 minutes (or 20, or 25...).

The published timetables (SWT's tables 17 and 24) do not show a non-standard connection time for Portsmouth Harbour, so one would assume the Journey Planner would apply the standard 5 minutes.

Indeed, given the ferry company presumably has a completely free hand in deciding the ferry times, why would it choose not to connect with the trains?

 

[Skymonster]

On which point, can anyone explain why the National Rail website shows a 73 minute connection time at Portsmouth Harbour between the Waterloo trains and the ferry? My recollection is that 13 minutes is ample.

Assuming you mean the fast cat and not the ferry, Wightlink require (recommend) a 15 minute checkin

 

[hermit]

On which point, can anyone explain why the National Rail website shows a 73 minute connection time at Portsmouth Harbour between the Waterloo trains and the ferry? My recollection is that 13 minutes is ample.

I have raised this before - at#1119 on the ’Island Upgrade‘ thread.

At some point during the Covid time the minimum connection time between train and ferry was increased to 20 minutes, with the ridiculous results mentioned above. An ordinary passenger checking journey planners will think that the journey to the island will take an hour longer than it really does. Certainly not a great way to attract visitors.

But the newly published Island Line timetable doesn’t follow this, and includes the traditional 10 minute or so connections. Which raises the question of which connection would be applied in the event of a Delay Repay claim involving a journey to the island.

It is true that Wightlink now ‘require’ passengers to meet a 15 minute checkin deadline, but this is not enforced in practice except when ferries are full and I do not believe it is the reason for the change in minimum connection time.

 

[Chris125]

Did Shanklin to Ryde Pier Head on Sat and return. Shanklin Station fully staffed with booking office open. Trains all ran on time and were quite busy. Problem with 30 min interval service probably Brading, where BOTH footbridges are shut.

The temporary footbridge should be fine, but I'm sceptical that the platform has been signed off for public use (the heritage-style lamps are pretty but seem rather dim by modern standards) and the foot crossing remains locked even to footpath users - that signage, partially obscured by the handrails, seems less than ideal...



Timekeeping seems the biggest issue though, the current timetable works... but only just, and that's without trains stopping at Smallbrook.

Incidentally, how do we stop contractors putting paths, cables etc through/ over infrastructure that might be used in the future, such as on the south side of the out of use track at Ryde Esplanade?

They removed the track to install a temporary signal in the four foot - supposedly something in the way led to a rethink, and they adapted an existing signal to become co-acting instead.

 

[D365]

It’s more relevant to the infrastructure thread, but the Brading P2 recommissioning is dependent on proper lighting being installed. And yes the foot crossing will need some work…

 

[hermit]

It’s more relevant to the infrastructure thread, but the Brading P2 recommissioning is dependent on proper lighting being installed. And yes the foot crossing will need some work…

I asked the IW Council Rights of Way department a fortnight ago why the crossing was still blocked. It is of course a public footpath - B69 from Brading to Yarbridge - independent of its use for railway purposes. The answer I got was that there was still work to do to make the path safe and passable, as it had been damaged and become overgrown. I was told the work would be completed within 2 weeks, ie about now.

 

[Chris125]

It’s more relevant to the infrastructure thread, but the Brading P2 recommissioning is dependent on proper lighting being installed. And yes the foot crossing will need some work…

Nice to have my suspicions confirmed, bit of a shambles really considering the extra time they had - they didn't even install the lamp posts correctly, they all need turning 90 degrees to match the alignment of the originals on the other platform; quite symbolic really of all the avoidable mistakes they've made.

 

[dorsetdesiro]

Ryde Esplanade doesn't appear to have platform lighting (other than inside the canopy) which lighting posts were removed years ago I assume the lighting levels are acceptable from the canopy, overspill from the pier and the bus stops outside.

However there is a redundant lighting column just left there for years which the recent upgrade failed to remove.

 

[hermit]

Delivered with my post today. Presumably only to addresses within a certain distance of the railway (I’m almost 2 miles away).

 

[Gloster]

Delivered with my post today. Presumably only to addresses within a certain distance of the railway (I’m almost 2 miles away).View attachment 105674

I got mine yesterday. I am fairly close to a railway, but not one that that needs 750 volts. They are probably just sent out to all addresses in the Ryde, Sandown and Shanklin postcode areas (PO33, 36 and 37).

 

[Peter Sarf]

Delivered with my post today. Presumably only to addresses within a certain distance of the railway (I’m almost 2 miles away).View attachment 105674

I did not know "trains take a bit longer to stop than road vehicles". I thought it was a lot longer ?.
EDIT :- Reading it the THIRD time I see I am blind.

 

[Chris125]

Ryde Esplanade doesn't appear to have platform lighting (other than inside the canopy) which lighting posts were removed years ago I assume the lighting levels are acceptable from the canopy, overspill from the pier and the bus stops outside.

I noticed that the other day, with such a curved platform and significant gap I'd have expected more.

 

[DelW]

I did not know "trains take a bit longer to stop than road vehicles". I thought it was a lot longer ?.

The notice says "... a lot longer ...", doesn't it?

 

[norbitonflyer]

But the newly published Island Line timetable doesn’t follow this, and includes the traditional 10 minute or so connections. Which raises the question of which connection would be applied in the event of a Delay Repay claim involving a journey to the island.

It is true that Wightlink now ‘require’ passengers to meet a 15 minute checkin deadline, but this is not enforced in practice except when ferries are full and I do not believe it is the reason for the change in minimum connection time.

Went for a "Ryde" today, and there was no problem at either end, even though my train to Portsmouth was delayed at Woking and arrived about six minutes late, halving the connection time. And in the return direction the advertised connection was only six minutes anyway.

From comments I heard, several locals seemed to be using them for the first time today, and I saw quite a few who almost missed their stop because the doors are no under passenger control. (Which is awkward if the baby buggy you are pushing is between you and the button, as two young mums I helped discovered)

Yes the doors are slow, but as in the old District Line days they respond to passenger-powered servo-assistance (i.e a gentle shove)

 

[D365]

Yes the doors are slow, but as in the old District Line days they respond to passenger-powered servo-assistance (i.e a gentle shove)

Or indeed, guard-assisted intervention.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The notice says "... a lot longer ...", doesn't it?

Apologies it does indeed. I read it twice yesterday and er miss read it . Twas a long day.

 

[DavidGrain]

Yes the doors are slow, but as in the old District Line days they respond to passenger-powered servo-assistance (i.e a gentle shove)

I like the term 'passenger-powered servo-assistance'. Reminds me of one of my first jobs which was in an oil company and we referred to manually operated pumps as 'hand-drolic'.