GWR Dec 19 timetable

[GW43125]

Why is this? Lack of train crew?

I seem to recall reading that one of the via Parkways becomes a third Cardiff in the peaks. (Yep, in post 2)
Taking out the 4th (they're only supposed to be 5car anyway aren't they) presumably frees a unit to double something up.

 

[Clarence Yard]

It’s because both the DfT and NR feeling nervous about the new timetable. The crew (and stock) are there to run the enhanced timetable and not introducing it at once isn’t at all helpful to the diagrammers.

Also, as at Friday, NR at MK are still not happy with the new timetable structure. Some want it canned.

 

[jimm]

The flip side is that they'll have to amend unit and train crew diagrams twice in quick succession. It's unlikely those extra Bristol trains will be self contained.

Given the sheer volume of short-term alterations to crew and rolling stock alterations that GWR has had to handle over the past decade or so now for things like rebuilding Reading, electrifications, resignalling and Crossrail, I'm sure making the necessary adjustments to add those duties won't prove all that taxing in the context of a settled timetable without lots of engineering work going on - and GWR had done all its recruitment of the traincrew that would be required on the basis that the new timetable would be in place last December, so they're not struggling in that regard.

 

[tiptoptaff]

and GWR had done all its recruitment of the traincrew that would be required on the basis that the new timetable would be in place last December, so they're not struggling in that regard.

It hadn't. A massive game of catch up is going on alongside the future planning

 

[jimm]

It hadn't. A massive game of catch up is going on alongside the future planning

So did you miss the line just above in Clarence Yard's post

The crew (and stock) are there to run the enhanced timetable

GWR had a record number of drivers on its books by the middle of last year - higher than at any point since the current operation came together as FGW in 2006 - as was noted on this forum at the time, when the need to get all of them trained at the same time as IET training, 387 training and Turbo training at Bristol etc was taking place was a key factor in GWR's issues with running its services at the time.

If GWR is still short of drivers, as you seen to be suggesting, could you explain where all the Jouneycheck notice about cancellations due to lack of train crew have gone these days? Notices that were ten a penny early last year.

 

[tiptoptaff]

I didn't say they were short, but if you asked us to resource an enhanced service tomorrow, we couldn't deliver it.
My job is getting that service covered. We manage. We couldn't expand overnight.

 

[Bikeman78]

It’s because both the DfT and NR feeling nervous about the new timetable. The crew (and stock) are there to run the enhanced timetable and not introducing it at once isn’t at all helpful to the diagrammers.

Also, as at Friday, NR at MK are still not happy with the new timetable structure. Some want it canned.

Oh dear. After all the time and money invested, it's a bit late to be having second thoughts.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

The flip side is that they'll have to amend unit and train crew diagrams twice in quick succession. It's unlikely those extra Bristol trains will be self contained.

They’ll be accommodated from Day One I suspect, but the diagrams in question (crew and unit) will be put on the shelf until they’re required.

 

[adrock1976]

Regarding the times of the Bristol Temple Meads - Paddington eastbound departures, was there any specific reason as to why they cannot be an even 15 minute frequency? However, westbound from Paddington, they are an even 15 minute frequency.

Note I am not being a fusspot, but having it in one direction but not the other seems strange. Also, it may or may not encourage people to leave cars at home and use public transport.

 

[DPQ]

Regarding the times of the Bristol Temple Meads - Paddington eastbound departures, was there any specific reason as to why they cannot be an even 15 minute frequency? However, westbound from Paddington, they are an even 15 minute frequency.

Note I am not being a fusspot, but having it in one direction but not the other seems strange. Also, it may or may not encourage people to leave cars at home and use public transport.

My guess would be they are timed to arrive Paddington at even 15 minute intervals.

 

[VT 390]

My guess would be they are timed to arrive Paddington at even 15 minute intervals.

But as 2 will be faster than the other 2 would it not make sense to have the fast Bristol's leave a few minutes before the slower ones, this way people who turn up for Bristol will most likely get the faster ones leaving more space for passengers going to places like Bath, Chippenham and Swindon on the slower ones, the reverse could happen in the opposite direction?

 

[nw1]

Going back to this thread... I wonder if they could squeeze 20 trains an hour in during the peaks (i.e. 3 minute intervals out of Paddington)? I can see this could be possible, by moving the 07/37 forward one minute to 06/36, moving the HEx forward 1 minute (09/24/39/54), moving the 'Oxfords' back by one minute (to 21/51), and then a new 12/27/42/57 set of paths would become available. It would mean almost all trains having to go fast from Paddington to at least Reading, except the 06/21/36/51 set which could perhaps go fast to Maidenhead then switch to the slow lines as they are followed by an HEx and therefore have a six minute gap in Reading-bound trains behind them, enough time presumably to do this.

Would, for example, permit both a maintenance of the 'fast to Maidenhead then all stations' DIdcot services and perhaps allow peak fast additionals to Oxford and/or Newbury.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Going back to this thread... I wonder if they could squeeze 20 trains an hour in during the peaks (i.e. 3 minute intervals out of Paddington)? I can see this could be possible, by moving the 07/37 forward one minute to 06/36, moving the HEx forward 1 minute (09/24/39/54), moving the 'Oxfords' back by one minute (to 21/51), and then a new 12/27/42/57 set of paths would become available. It would mean almost all trains having to go fast from Paddington to at least Reading, except the 06/21/36/51 set which could perhaps go fast to Maidenhead then switch to the slow lines as they are followed by an HEx and therefore have a six minute gap in Reading-bound trains behind them, enough time presumably to do this.

Would, for example, permit increase in peak frequency to Oxford, which at the moment has no fast peak additionals out of London.

The use of round hour times is attractive for premium, "flagship" services such as the Heathrow Express. '09/24/39/54' doesn't have the same ring to it and certainly isn't as memorable.

 

[Esker-pades]

Question:
Which services will stop at Slough?

The use of round hour times is attractive for premium, "flagship" services such as the Heathrow Express. '09/24/39/54' doesn't have the same ring to it and certainly isn't as memorable.

So what? If it creates new paths on a crowded mainline, it's a perfectly reasonable sacrifice. If it even is a sacrifice.

 

[nw1]

But as 2 will be faster than the other 2 would it not make sense to have the fast Bristol's leave a few minutes before the slower ones, this way people who turn up for Bristol will most likely get the faster ones leaving more space for passengers going to places like Bath, Chippenham and Swindon on the slower ones, the reverse could happen in the opposite direction?

Would agree here, the 00/15/30/45 departures for Bristol out of Paddington would encourage non-savvy passengers to take the slower via-Bath services (not realising they are overtaken), while having 15/18/45/48 (Parkway/Bath/Parkway/Bath) would make it clear that you have two classes of Bristol services, the first designed for Bristol passengers and the second designed for Reading/Swindon/Chippenham/Bath passengers (both from London and towards Bristol), the latter leaving straight after the first.

 

[nw1]

Question:
Which services will stop at Slough?



So what? If it creates new paths on a crowded mainline, it's a perfectly reasonable sacrifice. If it even is a sacrifice.

Indeed. Eurostar is a good example of a flagship service which for operational reasons (presumably) doesn't use round-hour times. Same goes for the WCML; London-Birmingham uses the 03/23/43 slots and Liverpool is xx07. Out of Paddington, Plymouth is xx03 and South Wales will be xx18/xx48; all examples I'd argue of key inter-city services.

 

[II]

Question:
Which services will stop at Slough?

As now, the Oxford and North Cotswold Line trains will stop at Slough - presumably omitting it during the peaks as they do now.

Would agree here, the 00/15/30/45 departures for Bristol out of Paddington would encourage non-savvy passengers to take the slower via-Bath services (not realising they are overtaken), while having 15/18/45/48 (Parkway/Bath/Parkway/Bath) would make it clear that you have two classes of Bristol services, the first designed for Bristol passengers and the second designed for Reading/Swindon/Chippenham/Bath passengers (both from London and towards Bristol), the latter leaving straight after the first.

Many different options could be available, but of course it's not quite as simple as just altering the times from Paddington as that then affects the dwell time incoming units have at Paddington, as well as the pathing of them further down the line. You then need to consider patterns and how that might then affect other services to provide (for example) Didcot with a sensible spread of departure times from Paddington as well as a train per hour to Bristol and a train per hour to South Wales - ideally the Cardiff one, so the Swansea journey times can be reduced by the maximum amount.

Then there's the time they present themselves at Bristol, platform availability there and occupation time, as it stands there will typically be two 19 minutes, one 23 and one 30 minute turnround at Bristol each hour, which is probably just about spot on in terms of providing enough slack for a bit of late running, and minimising platform occupation. Then you need to consider rostering the crew giving suitable break time for staff at Paddington and Bristol, but also maximising their efficiency.

Also, advertising four trains to Bristol per hour at even intervals is good for marketing.

So, to sum up, lots of other things to consider!

 

[father_jack]

I didn't say they were short, but if you asked us to resource an enhanced service tomorrow, we couldn't deliver it.
My job is getting that service covered. We manage. We couldn't expand overnight.

Quite correct, always loads of overtime going and things usually get covered but that wouldn't work with the increase in booked trains. I see a Westbury west diagram curtailed today, no driver.

 

[tiptoptaff]

Quite correct, always loads of overtime going and things usually get covered but that wouldn't work with the increase in booked trains. I see a Westbury west diagram curtailed today, no driver.

Night shunts is a common one to lose, not many people want to do nights.

 

[cle]

Heathrow Express enables the Slough calls, and vice versa - which are important now and will become even more so.

How will that pathing be managed if HEx leaves the fast lines - and that buffering which is created by dropping off at Hayes is removed?

And could a Bristol or Wales service ever be pathed to regularly call at Slough again? There is also OOC to consider, so I doubt it.

 

[Ianno87]

Heathrow Express enables the Slough calls, and vice versa - which are important now and will become even more so.

How will that pathing be managed if HEx leaves the fast lines - and that buffering which is created by dropping off at Hayes is removed?

And could a Bristol or Wales service ever be pathed to regularly call at Slough again? There is also OOC to consider, so I doubt it.

Fast paths replacing HEx would only be needed for capacity in the peak, when there are no calls on the Main Lines at Slough anyway.

 

[nw1]

Heathrow Express enables the Slough calls, and vice versa - which are important now and will become even more so.

How will that pathing be managed if HEx leaves the fast lines - and that buffering which is created by dropping off at Hayes is removed?

And could a Bristol or Wales service ever be pathed to regularly call at Slough again? There is also OOC to consider, so I doubt it.

Presumably in the new pattern the xx07 (Bedwyn) and xx37 (Newbury, or Exeter 'semi-fast', though this latter one might have difficulties due to having to avoid being caught up by the following Plymouth) could safely call at Slough as they are followed by a HEx? Would give an almost-even-interval 15 minute service too. Peak time it's obviously more difficult though presumably there would be faster Crossrails in the mix at peaks with only limited calls between central London and Slough.

 

[Class 170101]

Same goes for the WCML; London-Birmingham uses the 03/23/43 slots and Liverpool is xx07.

Thats because Manchester uses xx00/xx20/xx40 and Glasgow uses xx30. Note thye second Glasgow is xx57.

 

[Ianno87]

Going back to this thread... I wonder if they could squeeze 20 trains an hour in during the peaks (i.e. 3 minute intervals out of Paddington)? I can see this could be possible, by moving the 07/37 forward one minute to 06/36, moving the HEx forward 1 minute (09/24/39/54), moving the 'Oxfords' back by one minute (to 21/51), and then a new 12/27/42/57 set of paths would become available. It would mean almost all trains having to go fast from Paddington to at least Reading, except the 06/21/36/51 set which could perhaps go fast to Maidenhead then switch to the slow lines as they are followed by an HEx and therefore have a six minute gap in Reading-bound trains behind them, enough time presumably to do this.

Would, for example, permit both a maintenance of the 'fast to Maidenhead then all stations' DIdcot services and perhaps allow peak fast additionals to Oxford and/or Newbury.

It is permissible from Paddington to have 10/25/40/55 departures followed by 12/27/42/57 as 2 minutes headways are permitted behind EMUs... but this must become 2.5 minutes at Ladbroke Grove.

The main constraint with 20tph is that the flow of outward (or inward) trains has no breaks in it...so no gaps either cross to arrive in Platform 1 or depart from a high platform to the Down Main. So 19tph is the practical maximum.

 

[TheWalrus]

Off-Peak planned to be:
00 - Bristol TM (via Bath)
03 - Plymouth or Penzance
07 - Bedwyn
15 - Bristol TM (via Parkway)
18 - Cardiff Central
20 - Oxford
30 - Bristol TM (via Bath)
33 - Cheltenham
37 - Alternate hours Exeter/Plymouth/Paignton semi-fast (IET) or Newbury fast via Reading (387)
45 - Bristol TM (via Parkway)
48 - Swansea
50 - Oxford/North Cotswolds Line

Some changes in the peaks mean generally the xx:15s run as a third train to South Wales (first stop Bristol Parkway) and the xx:45 past doesn't run but there's an extra service service to Bristol just ahead of the xx:00 Bristol's which is first stop Chippenham. Lots of other little tweaks in the peaks as well. Around twenty-five trains a day in each direction will omit Reading!

Shame there’s no semi-fast Didcot or Oxford service. Or are they running on the relief lines?

 

[JonathanH]

Presumably in the new pattern the xx07 (Bedwyn) and xx37 (Newbury, or Exeter 'semi-fast', though this latter one might have difficulties due to having to avoid being caught up by the following Plymouth) could safely call at Slough as they are followed by a HEx? Would give an almost-even-interval 15 minute service too. Peak time it's obviously more difficult though presumably there would be faster Crossrails in the mix at peaks with only limited calls between central London and Slough.

If you were going to offer anywhere a stop on the fast line in these services wouldn't you allow Twyford or Maidehead a stop rather than every fifteen minutes at Slough?

 

[II]

Shame there’s no semi-fast Didcot or Oxford service. Or are they running on the relief lines?

They continue to run to Didcot, off-peak, on the relief lines calling Ealing, Hayes, West Drayton, Slough, Maidenhead and then all stations to Didcot - so potentially a few minutes quicker as three less stops than currently.

Peak time sees (mostly) 12-car 387 services similar to now, every 30-minutes running PAD-DID on the main line to Maidenhead East, with a first stop at Maidenhead - including a 17:18 equivalent which is the odd one out as currently Turbo operated through to Oxford.

 

[TheWalrus]

They continue to run to Didcot, off-peak, on the relief lines calling Ealing, Hayes, West Drayton, Slough, Maidenhead and then all stations to Didcot - so potentially a few minutes quicker as three less stops than currently.

Peak time sees (mostly) 12-car 387 services similar to now, every 30-minutes running PAD-DID on the main line to Maidenhead East, with a first stop at Maidenhead - including a 17:18 equivalent which is the odd one out as currently Turbo operated through to Oxford.

Ok so slightly better than it was then. Is it still slower than changing at Reading?

 

[II]

Still slower than changing at Reading, as the fast trains to Reading are faster as well at 22-23 minutes as opposed to 25 minutes.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Does anyone know what's happening with the weekend morning London-Bristol-Penzance services?

I personally wouldn't happy at these being withdrawn as it would mean more passengers pushed onto other already busy Devon & Cornwall-bound trains.

Plus it would mean the end of direct trains to the South West from Didcot, Swindon, Chippenham and Bath which therefore would mean no 10-coach service from Bristol to the South West, which would also be a reduction of over 600 seats!