Constant severe overcrowding on SWT caused by missing carriages

Status
Not open for further replies.

GodAtum

On Moderation
Joined
11 Dec 2009
Messages
2,440
The 1800 and 1834 from Guildford - Waterloo used to be 10 cars. there was always just enough room for everyone. Now they are halved causing constant severe overcrowding in what should be a pleasant journey. Does anyone know if SWT are planning to give back the missing carriages?

Even 1st class is full, and the guard cannot do anything as there is nowhere else for people to move.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
25,130
2P60 (1800) and 2P62 (1834) are both diagrammed as 5.444 from Portsmouth Harbour since Dec 2015 so it doesn't seem temporary.

2P62 also seems to have been a 5.444 in the previous Dec 2014 timetable.
 
Last edited:

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,582
The carriages are presumably at that time being used services out of Waterloo. Didn't you have a thread about this a month or two ago?

Anyway, once the Class 707 fleet starts to be delivered there will be a pretty major shake up of allocations I'd have thought, as they will be 30 five car units coming in with no loss of any other units. It'll release a whole load of 450s for SWML use the 458/5s move onto Reading duties.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,582
I think for SWT the forum-mandatory modifications are restoration of the 1st class compartments and the snugg.:lol:

Alternatively, retraction with AC motors and fit a 444-eqsque interior, upgrading the coupler, control system and cab to be Desiro-compatible <D

(how does the OP know both services are overcrowded every day?)
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
14,799
Location
West of Andover
The carriages are presumably at that time being used services out of Waterloo. Didn't you have a thread about this a month or two ago?

Anyway, once the Class 707 fleet starts to be delivered there will be a pretty major shake up of allocations I'd have thought, as they will be 30 five car units coming in with no loss of any other units. It'll release a whole load of 450s for SWML use the 458/5s move onto Reading duties.

Although come 707 introduction, releasing more 450s, I'm sure a pair of 450s in place of a single 444 will increase seating, and also moaning about 450s appearing on an outer suburban service in lieu of the 444s ;)
 

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
Not helped either by the damage inflicted by a duff juice rail on Monday night.

Perhaps if you used a modicum of common sense, you'd use either the service before or after if you know that those trains are 5 car formations.
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,418
2P60, 1645 Portsmouth Harbour-London Waterloo was always pretty busy service from Guildford onwards as a 10-car 444. I did think it would lead to overcrowding when I saw it had been reduced to a 5-car. It now joins with another 444 arriving from Poole to form the 1900 Waterloo-Portsmouth Harbour, rather than the whole train forming that service. The service before from Guildford, the 1747 has been reduced from a 12-car 450 to 8-car 450 too, but shouldn't have too big an issue on that train.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
12,194
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Not helped either by the damage inflicted by a duff juice rail on Monday night.

Perhaps if you used a modicum of common sense, you'd use either the service before or after if you know that those trains are 5 car formations.

Or if time to spare could take a Waterloo via Effingham train. Recently had carriage to myself almost all the way to Waterloo at that time.
 

hassaanhc

Established Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
2,200
Location
Southall
Or if time to spare could take a Waterloo via Effingham train. Recently had carriage to myself almost all the way to Waterloo at that time.

The issue here appears to be not wanting to use fasts that aren't a 444, let alone a stopper! :lol: similar happens on the Windsor lines to/from Richmond and Twickenham, where the difference in times is less than 10 minutes rather than the 15-30 minutes here.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
8,020
Or if time to spare could take a Waterloo via Effingham train. Recently had carriage to myself almost all the way to Waterloo at that time.

There are a lot of people for whom that is not an option, not that the routing of trains shows it, as there are significant numbers of people who head west from Woking having got off a train from Guildford. (The opposite is also true).
 

GodAtum

On Moderation
Joined
11 Dec 2009
Messages
2,440
There is also an issue with bike space. Many people park their bikes in the vestible at the ends of the carriages which on a 444 is a very tight space.
 

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
There is also an issue with bike space. Many people park their bikes in the vestible at the ends of the carriages which on a 444 is a very tight space.

Bike spaces are clearly marked. They are strictly prohibited behind the drivers cab because the doors which secure the leading driving cab are linked to the emergency plungers in the cab and may open without warning and are an emergency exit for the driver.

And yes I will sling any cyclist out of there too, whether they like it or not.

Art.49 NRCoC.

Any Train Company may refuse to accept an item of luggage, an article, an animal or a cycle, even though it meets the requirements set out in Condition 47 and 48 and Appendix B, if, in the opinion of its staff:

(a) it may cause injury, inconvenience or a nuisance or it may cause damage to property;

(b) there is not enough room for it;

(c) the loading or unloading may cause delay to trains; or

(d) it is not carried or packaged in a suitable manner.

So in the case of putting it behind a cab, a & b apply, as for a vestibule, a,b & c apply.

Personally I'd like to see a complete ban between 0600 & 1000 and 1600 & 2000 for all cycles except folding ones. And a fare of £5 per single journey.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
8,020
Personally I'd like to see a complete ban between 0600 & 1000 and 1600 & 2000 for all cycles except folding ones. And a fare of £5 per single journey.

That will be fine as long as SWT guarantees that for normal daily usage that there are sufficient (number and quality as defined by ATOC's guidance on cycles at stations) cycle storage at all stations.

The problem when they extended the cycle ban out to Basingstoke was they didn't add any extra cycle parking, which was often insufficient prior to the ban.
 

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
That will be fine as long as SWT guarantees that for normal daily usage that there are sufficient (number and quality as defined by ATOC's guidance on cycles at stations) cycle storage at all stations.

The problem when they extended the cycle ban out to Basingstoke was they didn't add any extra cycle parking, which was often insufficient prior to the ban.

It's guidance, not obligatory. Guildford's commuters are lazy.

They've been given a secure compound for which they have to pay to use, most won't, so they use the ones on the former mail dock and the ones outside the crew block which took 3 valuable parking spaces from the staff car park.

There can be a considerable number of spaces in the bike racks (all of which have CCTV) and yet they will constantly chain their bikes to the railings and in the staff/traincrew walking route rather than go the extra 10m to the big bike racks outside the crew block!

Locking a bike to the railings on the walking route gets the bike lock cut with a Dremel disc cutter/saw/bolt cutter and the bike put into secure storage with a penalty of £20, they then of course also have to pay for a new lock. There's also a considerable number of spaces on the up side under the passimeter bridge, but again they're too lazy to go there, yet there's at least another 20 spaces there during
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
8,020
It's guidance, not obligatory. Guildford's commuters are lazy.

They've been given a secure compound for which they have to pay to use, most won't, so they use the ones on the former mail dock and the ones outside the crew block which took 3 valuable parking spaces from the staff car park.

There can be a considerable number of spaces in the bike racks (all of which have CCTV) and yet they will constantly chain their bikes to the railings and in the staff/traincrew walking route rather than go the extra 10m to the big bike racks outside the crew block!

Locking a bike to the railings on the walking route gets the bike lock cut with a Dremel disc cutter/saw/bolt cutter and the bike put into secure storage with a penalty of £20, they then of course also have to pay for a new lock. There's also a considerable number of spaces on the up side under the passimeter bridge, but again they're too lazy to go there, yet there's at least another 20 spaces there during

I want thinking of Guildford station. I was thinking of my home station where the buck racks are too close to each other acording to the guidance, that means that since of the possible spaces aren't used, but that is so people can still access their bikes to unlock them.

It gives the impression that there are spare spacers when practically there are not.

Also I was thinking of during the early days of the cycle ban where places like Farnborough Main had insufficient cycle parking and Southampton Airport Parkway had at best what could have been described as "token cycle parking" which was always full.

The point I was making was that BEFORE any new restrictions came into force that SWT would need to ensure that there was adequate numbers of spaces (bikes chained to railings count as occupying a proper space) of an adequate quality (I.e. all the spaces are usable), with premium (paid for spaces) not counting towards the total number (but then nor do cycles stored there).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
P.S. can you provide details of how to apply for the secure cycle parking at Guildford as I don't seem to be able to find details online, which probably doesn't help people to use it.
 
Last edited:

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,582

Paul180

Member
Joined
3 Jan 2010
Messages
168
Location
Do you mind I am from Surrey
Bike spaces are clearly marked. They are strictly prohibited behind the drivers cab because the doors which secure the leading driving cab are linked to the emergency plungers in the cab and may open without warning and are an emergency exit for the driver.

And yes I will sling any cyclist out of there too, whether they like it or not.

Art.49 NRCoC.

Any Train Company may refuse to accept an item of luggage, an article, an animal or a cycle, even though it meets the requirements set out in Condition 47 and 48 and Appendix B, if, in the opinion of its staff:

(a) it may cause injury, inconvenience or a nuisance or it may cause damage to property;

(b) there is not enough room for it;

(c) the loading or unloading may cause delay to trains; or

(d) it is not carried or packaged in a suitable manner.

So in the case of putting it behind a cab, a & b apply, as for a vestibule, a,b & c apply.

Personally I'd like to see a complete ban between 0600 & 1000 and 1600 & 2000 for all cycles except folding ones. And a fare of £5 per single journey.
Bike spaces are clearly marked. They are strictly prohibited behind the drivers cab because the doors which secure the leading driving cab are linked to the emergency plungers in the cab and may open without warning and are an emergency exit for the driver.

What about Rail Gourmet person who has put there trolley next to the cab door just lik on the train I am on at the moment?
 

theironroad

Established Member
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
3,632
Location
London
Bike spaces are clearly marked. They are strictly prohibited behind the drivers cab because the doors which secure the leading driving cab are linked to the emergency plungers in the cab and may open without warning and are an emergency exit for the driver.

What about Rail Gourmet person who has put there trolley next to the cab door just lik on the train I am on at the moment?

Generally the rail gourmet staff are OK and the trolley is mostly in the door area, and with most of them not their too long. Most people don't put bikex behind the door, but the odd one or two have and fully blocked the cab door and will be asked to move it.
 

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
Generally the rail gourmet staff are OK and the trolley is mostly in the door area, and with most of them not their too long. Most people don't put bikex behind the door, but the odd one or two have and fully blocked the cab door and will be asked to move it.

And those that refuse will find their bike forcefully removed and dumped unceremoniously on the platform (done that) or the train doesn't move (done that too).

Quite simple really, you don't block my doors and actually you're committing an offence by blocking any door with a green egress handle on it, as that's an emergency exit and I'm quite sure that any lawyer would have an absolute field day with claims in the event of an incident or accident where people are injured due to a cyclist blocking one.Sue the cyclist?
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
12,194
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
And those that refuse will find their bike forcefully removed and dumped unceremoniously on the platform (done that) or the train doesn't move (done that too).

Quite simple really, you don't block my doors and actually you're committing an offence by blocking any door with a green egress handle on it, as that's an emergency exit and I'm quite sure that any lawyer would have an absolute field day with claims in the event of an incident or accident where people are injured due to a cyclist blocking one.Sue the cyclist?

Not disagreeing with the gist of this, however on many routes served by trains which don't have designated cycle areas (eg 317s, 365s) the official guidance is for cycles to be stored in doorways, which of course have egress handles.

It's not ideal that I can potentially turn up at my local station, ask where to store my cycle and be told "in the doorways", then when I turn up at Waterloo do the same thing and potentially get told off.
 

Paul180

Member
Joined
3 Jan 2010
Messages
168
Location
Do you mind I am from Surrey
Not disagreeing with the gist of this, however on many routes served by trains which don't have designated cycle areas (eg 317s, 365s) the official guidance is for cycles to be stored in doorways, which of course have egress handles.

It's not ideal that I can potentially turn up at my local station, ask where to store my cycle and be told "in the doorways", then when I turn up at Waterloo do the same thing and potentially get told off.

I am pretty sure that all SWT stock has designated cycle areas.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
12,194
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
I am pretty sure that all SWT stock has designated cycle areas.

All well and good, however the passengers just sees it as 'the railway' and 'this train'.

And, of course, on a DOO train (which unfortunately may well turn out to be the way of the future) you might as well say anything goes. The driver has little idea nor care what's going on behind him. (Except when a problem person or people choose to make a nuisance right behind the cab - it grates how people have up to 250m of train yet *have* to position themselves and make a racket right behind the driver's cab, those doors are on most trains surprisingly thin and poor fitting).
 

SpacePhoenix

Established Member
Joined
18 Mar 2014
Messages
5,492
And those that refuse will find their bike forcefully removed and dumped unceremoniously on the platform (done that) or the train doesn't move (done that too).

Quite simple really, you don't block my doors and actually you're committing an offence by blocking any door with a green egress handle on it, as that's an emergency exit and I'm quite sure that any lawyer would have an absolute field day with claims in the event of an incident or accident where people are injured due to a cyclist blocking one.Sue the cyclist?

What sort of % of the passenger doors on a typical unit will have the green egress handles? I wouldn't be surprised if some units have them at every passenger door
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
8,020
What sort of % of the passenger doors on a typical unit will have the green egress handles? I wouldn't be surprised if some units have them at every passenger door

As far as I am aware all of SWT's trains have them at every door.

Which leads to a interesting dilemma, if having a cycle in a doorway (emergency exit) is always a safety issue that means that cyclists should not block the doors or a oassageway to the soors until the train is stopped at the station (or AR least traveling slowly). However when getting on/off at stations it is best to get cycles off first (or at least nit the last person off anyway), yet to do so would mean that they would have to block the emergency exit.

Also, IIRC the metro (red) trains at SWT only have cycle/pram areas within doorways and as such are bit like the Desros which have cycle storage areas away from the doors.
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,418
455s and 456s have designated flexible spaces which can be used for cycles or pushchairs, which don't block the doors. They are located next to the wheelchair space. In both driving vehicles of a 455 and one drivimg vehicle of a 456.
 

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
And with a relatively few exceptions, most cyclists ignore the big white sign on the side of the units telling them where the storage space is and just plonk it in any doorway or as recently appeared on a couple of trains (one SW, one SN), they park their bikes on a SEAT! <(

I even found two in the toilets to avoid detection during the peak periods, they were needless to say ejected... <D
 

Dr_Paul

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2013
Messages
1,002
Personally I'd like to see a complete ban between 0600 & 1000 and 1600 & 2000 for all cycles except folding ones. And a fare of £5 per single journey.

A good point. The last time I took my bike on the train was a year or so back on an up Reading service from Richmond to Clapham Junction, 458 stock, at about 17.00. The train was crowded, I couldn't get my bike in the official back spaces so I stood in the least crowded vestibule I could find. In short, I was a right nuisance, and I've not taken my bike on the train since.

Bikes are barred from down services from Waterloo in the evening rush hour (as they are up with up services in the morning rush hour), but up services are getting pretty stuffed these days at rush hour, and sometimes even outwith rush hour and at weekends, and bikes do take up a lot of space and are awkward to manoeuvre about. Also, other passengers may get grease on their clothing from the bike chain if the train is crowded.

A £5 bike charge might be a good idea, but it's only fair that there must be some way that if someone pays it, his or her bike will be found a suitable space.
 

HarleyDavidson

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2014
Messages
2,529
Perhaps they should consult with Nederlandse Spoorwegen to see how they do it and administer the costs etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top