Island Line Class 484 Reliability

[Bletchleyite]

I appreciate we’re talking fast cat and Island Line here, but its a real shame these can’t emulate what Hovertravel / Hoverbus does in Portsmouth / Southsea. H1 is timed to arrive at Clarence Pier around ten to fifteen minutes before the hovercraft departs, which is ample, and then waits until a few minutes after the inbound hovercraft arrives to take passengers into Portsmouth. Its a pretty slick operation that I’ve always found works well. That it can’t be emulated on the Island with fast cat / hovercraft / Island Line is a real shame…

The old 20-40 timetable used to do exactly that. 10-15 minutes to saunter across in either direction and grab a Costa on the way.

 

[pompeyfan]

Are there any places where speed is reduced compared to the past?

Pig leg crossing didn’t help, but I’d imagine Brading itself (well, the foot crossing there, and the slow speed approach) as well as the TPWS grids at Pier Head and Shanklin have contributed to the slower running.

 

[hermit]

The old 20-40 timetable used to do exactly that. 10-15 minutes to saunter across in either direction and grab a Costa on the way.

That’s not so. The connections with the ‘20’ train were always tight, and there was never time get a coffee. If the cat was at all late, we were into the ‘empty train disappearing down the pier’ scenario.
The ‘40’ train gave you time for several coffees, but was in practice useless for the purpose of ferry connections.

 

[weeklycommuter]

The 40 minute Island Line timetable is now showing on Real Time Trains daily Sunday 2 June 2024 onwards.

 

[Chris125]

Notwithstanding the whole issue of where the loop is, the top priority needs to be looking at why it now seems impossible to match past journey times.

There's no simple answer, Island Line was a forgotten time-warp largely untouched since privatisation - it's seen 30+ years of change introduced almost overnight alongside a significant turnover of staff which has inevitably slowed things down and made operations more conservative, from driving policies to speed limits, data recorders and door chimes. It all adds up.

 

[weeklycommuter]

The old 20-40 timetable used to do exactly that. 10-15 minutes to saunter across in either direction and grab a Costa on the way.

That’s not so. The connections with the ‘20’ train were always tight, and there was never time get a coffee. If the cat was at all late, we were into the ‘empty train disappearing down the pier’ scenario.
The ‘40’ train gave you time for several coffees, but was in practice useless for the purpose of ferry connections.

In 2019 train arrivals and departures at Ryde Pier Head each hour were arrive xx02 depart xx07 arrive xx42 depart xx49.
The second train each hour in theory enabled departing Wightlink passengers to join the regular hourly around xx45 fastcat to Portsmouth Harbour but it was a very tight connection and may not have worked with the extra time needed to join the fastcat with the new ticket gates. The second train also picked up Wightlink passengers arriving on this regular hourly fastcat. The first train each hour would enable departing Wightlink passengers to join the summer weekend additional xx15 fastcat to Portsmouth Harbour but Wightlink passengers arriving on this fastcat would have had to wait half an hour for the second train departing at xx49.
With the 40 minute timetable just announced the trains arriving at xx34 and departing at xx47 in even hours will provide a connection for arriving and departing fastcat passengers on the even hour regular xx45 fastcats while in odd hours the train arriving at xx18 departing at xx26 will provide a fastcat connection for departing Wightlink passengers and the train arriving at xx57 and departing at xx03 will provide a fastcat connection for arriving Wightlink passengers. Wightlink passengers departing on the summer weekend additional xx15 fastcat to Portsmouth Harbour can connect with even hour xx15 fastcats with the train arriving at xx57 but they will have a 40 minute wait after arriving at xx34 for odd hour xx15 fastcats. Wightlink passengers arriving on the summer weekend additional xx15 fastcat from Portsmouth Harbour can connect to the xx26 train in odd hours but will have a half an hour wait for the xx47 train in even hours. In terms of fastcat connections this 40 minute timetable is no worse overall than the 2019 40/20 timetable and is in some ways better.

 

[Nogoohwell]

It feels like the right answer to this problem is to run three trains an hour, every 20 minutes. Bit am i missing something?
It seems to solve all issues of slow running and give ample connection choices to the ferrys.
Running more services has to be cheaper than a massive engineering fix to speed up the trains and the route.

 

[D6130]

It feels like the right answer to this problem is to run three trains an hour, every 20 minutes. Bit am i missing something?
It seems to solve all issues of slow running and give ample connection choices to the ferrys.
Running more services has to be cheaper than a massive engineering fix to speed up the trains and the route.

The problem is that there aren't enough units to run three trains an hour.

 

[pompeyfan]

The problem is that there aren't enough units to run three trains an hour.

Or crew

Realistically how do you speed up journey times? I see 3 possible options, but which is the most feasible and cost efficient?

Improved acceleration by increasing traction power to the 3rd rail

Increase line speed where safe to do so (may need CWR and new ballast, as well as increased traction current)

Reduce dwell times by converting the stock and method of operation to DOO via in cab screens with a fully trained guard on each train (would require fundamental unit rebuilt, PTI testing etc, and I’m not completely convinced the time saving would be significant enough)

 

[Peter Sarf]

Or crew

Realistically how do you speed up journey times? I see 3 possible options, but which is the most feasible and cost efficient?

Improved acceleration by increasing traction power to the 3rd rail

Increase line speed where safe to do so (may need CWR and new ballast, as well as increased traction current)

Reduce dwell times by converting the stock and method of operation to DOO via in cab screens with a fully trained guard on each train (would require fundamental unit rebuilt, PTI testing etc, and I’m not completely convinced the time saving would be significant enough)

I think frequency trumps everything usually. But is there enough surviving demand to allow the growth of a new better frequency let alone the resources ?. Currently it feels like the line is dying in an expensive manner - as in no one bit the bullet and gave up on it before recent spending on 484s and other upgrades.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

The problem is that there aren't enough units to run three trains an hour.

Can the passing loops cope with 3 an hour?

If I recall correctly, the previous 20/40 pattern was to do with the positioning of the loops and the 30/30 pattern doesn't quite work because the new loop is in the wrong place?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Can the passing loops cope with 3 an hour?

Yes. That service was operated in high summer in the 80s and 90s.

If I recall correctly, the previous 20/40 pattern was to do with the positioning of the loops

The loops are placed to allow 3tph, but that wasn't justified so a 20-40 split was run - effectively a 3tph service with one diagram missing. With an hourly ferry (2tph was designed around 2 ferries per hour which only operates at high peak now), 20-40 probably works quite well if you have the 20 gap either side of the ferry arriving and departing.

and the 30/30 pattern doesn't quite work because the new loop is in the wrong place?

Correct. It's not quite in the middle.

 

[Chris125]

It feels like the right answer to this problem is to run three trains an hour, every 20 minutes. Bit am i missing something?
It seems to solve all issues of slow running and give ample connection choices to the ferrys.
Running more services has to be cheaper than a massive engineering fix to speed up the trains and the route.

If they couldn't make a 20min service work in the 90s, fat chance now - more traincrew, less reliable, money spent on the Brading loop would be wasted and there isn't the demand to justify it.

Take a journey and see how much time (and money) is wasted by the loop at Sandown and the double track through Ryde; singling the latter could even allow curves to be eased and, maybe one day, Smallbrook Junction removed if the steam railway ever extends to Ryde.

 

[Gloster]

Brading-Sandown was double-track until October 1988.

 

[D6130]

Brading-Sandown was double-track until October 1988.

I worked on that job as a guard. Had haulage by both 03 079 (in BR blue livery) and 03 179 (in Network SouthEast livery). The line was singled for two main reasons: Firstly the Up (Northbound) line was completely knackered, with some of the short 45 foot bullhead rail dating from the early 1900s, so it saved the cost of relaying....and secondly, three of the four regular signalmen at Brading and Sandown were retiring and it saved the cost of replacing them. Finances really were that tight in the late 1980s....plus ça change!

 

[cav1975]

I worked on that job as a guard. Had haulage by both 03 079 (in BR blue livery) and 03 179 (in Network SouthEast livery). The line was singled for two main reasons: Firstly the Up (Northbound) line was completely knackered, with some of the short 45 foot bullhead rail dating from the early 1900s, so it saved the cost of relaying....and secondly, three of the four regular signalmen at Brading and Sandown were retiring and it saved the cost of replacing them. Finances really were that tight in the late 1980s....plus ça change!

A lot of that bullhead track ended up being reused between Havenstreet & Smallbrook Junction. Most, or maybe all, has since been replaced by the steam railway.

Back on topic - could the TPWS be removed and replaced by train stops to speed up the service? Legally it would be allowed as Island Line is, like London Underground, exempt from many main line requirements.

 

[bramling]

It feels like the right answer to this problem is to run three trains an hour, every 20 minutes. Bit am i missing something?
It seems to solve all issues of slow running and give ample connection choices to the ferrys.
Running more services has to be cheaper than a massive engineering fix to speed up the trains and the route.

I don’t think this entirely solves the root of the current problem which is that the trains don’t seem to be able to do a round trip reliably within an hour - for whatever reason, and there seem to be a load of reasons which are all adding together rather than any one single issue.

Plus it seems doubtful anyone would pay for the resources to run 3tph. That’s six staff working at any one time not including relief cover.

 

[Chris125]

Back on topic - could the TPWS be removed and replaced by train stops to speed up the service? Legally it would be allowed as Island Line is, like London Underground, exempt from many main line requirements.

Now TPWS has been fitted it's here to stay, Network Rail are not going to go back to non-standard mechanical trainstops even if they proved there were no safety implications.

 

[weeklycommuter]

I don’t think this entirely solves the root of the current problem which is that the trains don’t seem to be able to do a round trip reliably within an hour - for whatever reason, and there seem to be a load of reasons which are all adding together rather than any one single issue.

Clearly this is the reason why they finally decided on a 40 minute interval two hour clockface timetable. It works operationally and provides a service which is not perfect but good enough both for connecting with the Wightlink fastcat at Ryde Pier Head and for travel between Island Line stations. It is the only public transport all the way to Ryde Pier Head to connect with the Wightlink fastcat as buses only go to Ryde Esplanade at the other end of the 680 metre long Ryde Pier. It also goes from Ryde to Shanklin in about 25 minutes while a bus from Ryde Esplanade takes twice as long. The 40 minute timetable also enables every train both ways to call at Smallbrook Junction, which is only accessible by train, when the Isle of Wight Steam Railway is running and this is the quickest and easiest way to get to the Isle of Wight Steam Railway by public transport.

Take a journey and see how much time (and money) is wasted by the loop at Sandown and the double track through Ryde; singling the latter could even allow curves to be eased and, maybe one day, Smallbrook Junction removed if the steam railway ever extends to Ryde.

Extending the Isle of Wight Steam Railway to Ryde St Johns Road was looked at but the costs of doing this were totally unaffordable for the Isle of Wight Steam Railway and I cannot see this ever being considered again when running steam trains on the existing Isle of Wight Steam Railway from Smallbrook Junction to Havenstreet and Wootton works well and Smallbrook Junction provides the connection to Island Line train services.

STEAM RAILWAY HALTS PLANS FOR RYDE ST JOHN'S RETURN

The Isle of Wight Steam Railway has confirmed that it has pulled out of plans to run historic locomotives to Ryde St John's train station, with regulatory concerns and costs making the project unsustainable. In a statement issued today (Wednesday), which comes days after a major announcement...

www.islandecho.co.uk

The Steam Railway was finally offered the opportunity to run its trains on the western track between its existing terminus at Smallbrook Junction and Ryde St John’s Road with trains being ‘topped and tailed’ (a locomotive at each end of the train). This was considered not to be practical or cost-effective by the Steam Railway. There are also other considerations which become relevant when heritage railway rolling stock moves onto the national network, potentially including the significant expense of installing additional safety equipment on locomotives and carriages to satisfy the requirements of the Office of Rail and Road.

The Steam Railway also explored the possibility of building its own station in the car park at Ryde St John’s Road but again this would also have proved both problematic and expensive.
Finally, South Western Railway advised the Isle of Wight Steam Railway of the costs which it would be required to pay to create the separation between the 2 railways and the associated infrastructure changes. These were significant and were neither financially acceptable nor sustainable. It was at this point when the Steam Railway withdrew from further discussions.

 

[bramling]

Clearly this is the reason why they finally decided on a 40 minute interval two hour clockface timetable. It works operationally and provides a service which is not perfect but good enough both for connecting with the Wightlink fastcat at Ryde Pier Head and for travel between Island Line stations. It is the only public transport all the way to Ryde Pier Head to connect with the Wightlink fastcat as buses only go to Ryde Esplanade at the other end of the 680 metre long Ryde Pier. It also goes from Ryde to Shanklin in about 25 minutes while a bus from Ryde Esplanade takes twice as long. The 40 minute timetable also enables every train both ways to call at Smallbrook Junction, which is only accessible by train, when the Isle of Wight Steam Railway is running and this is the quickest and easiest way to get to the Isle of Wight Steam Railway by public transport.

Extending the Isle of Wight Steam Railway to Ryde St Johns Road was looked at but the costs of doing this were totally unaffordable for the Isle of Wight Steam Railway and I cannot see this ever being considered again when running steam trains on the existing Isle of Wight Steam Railway from Smallbrook Junction to Havenstreet and Wootton works well and Smallbrook Junction provides the connection to Island Line train services.

I can see the operational rationale, however the new timetable frankly *looks* like a dog’s breakfast, and that is bound to act as a turn-off for people, especially with many people seemingly having already deserted the service due to its unreliability over recent years compared to the fairly decent bus alternatives.

Really the IL needs to decide if it is simply a means of taking people to/from the pier head, or whether it wishes to offer a decent means of catering for other local journeys as well. At the moment it doesn’t seem to be doing a good job on either of these fronts, which seems to be borne out by the generally poor ridership.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can see the operational rationale, however the new timetable frankly *looks* like a dog’s breakfast, and that is bound to act as a turn-off for people, especially with many people seemingly having already deserted the service due to its unreliability over recent years compared to the fairly decent bus alternatives.

For all I'm a big fan of clockface, its importance has diminished a little in these days when most people can simply pull out a smartphone and look when the next train is. Thus, like the Borderlands line, if this is the only way to make it work, then it's definitely the right thing to do.

The worst possible thing for a rail service is poor punctuality and reliability - the product on sale is effectively the timetable.

 

[Peter Sarf]

For all I'm a big fan of clockface, its importance has diminished a little in these days when most people can simply pull out a smartphone and look when the next train is. Thus, like the Borderlands line, if this is the only way to make it work, then it's definitely the right thing to do.

The worst possible thing for a rail service is poor punctuality and reliability - the product on sale is effectively the timetable.

This is very true and should never be underestimated. A realistic promise is worth far more than a wonderful aspiration.

 

[Gloster]

The point about Islandline is that it is an atypical service: passengers to and from the Cats are what it survives on and any other traffic is just a bit of jam on top. If you make the connections at Pier Head worse you will push a decisively large proportion of your passengers away and kick the floor out from under your feet. For the small amount of extra traffic you are competing with a frequent and regular interval bus service: if potential passengers have to do quadratic equations to work out when the next train is, they will choose the bus. It will be the same for most Cat passengers: get a bus to Ryde Interchange and walk along the pier.

 

[Towers]

The point about Islandline is that it is an atypical service: passengers to and from the Cats are what it survives on and any other traffic is just a bit of jam on top. If you make the connections at Pier Head worse you will push a decisively large proportion of your passengers away and kick the floor out from under your feet. For the small amount of extra traffic you are competing with a frequent and regular interval bus service: if potential passengers have to do quadratic equations to work out when the next train is, they will choose the bus. It will be the same for most Cat passengers: get a bus to Ryde Interchange and walk along the pier.

But all of that being said, clearly there is a political will on the island to keep it going, regardless of any profitability. Otherwise it’s surely reasonable to assume it would have been long gone. I wonder if that gives a sense that traffic levels and ferry connections don’t matter quite as much as they ought to?

 

[Chris125]

Extending the Isle of Wight Steam Railway to Ryde St Johns Road was looked at but the costs of doing this were totally unaffordable for the Isle of Wight Steam Railway and I cannot see this ever being considered again when running steam trains on the existing Isle of Wight Steam Railway from Smallbrook Junction to Havenstreet and Wootton works well and Smallbrook Junction provides the connection to Island Line train services.

Perhaps, but the IWSR's 2019 statement implied that SWR and their plans for the upgrade (retaining infrastructure for 3tph?) were partly to blame and :

"our ambition remains to return steam hauled train to Ryde... but it is unlikely to be within the term of the current South Western Railway franchise”.

Ryde St John's Road latest news - Isle of Wight Steam Railway

The Isle of Wight Steam Railway has held a long term ambition to return steam hauled trains to Ryde St John’s Road as stated in its Strategic Vision document.

iwsteamrailway.co.uk

 

[weeklycommuter]

The point about Islandline is that it is an atypical service: passengers to and from the Cats are what it survives on and any other traffic is just a bit of jam on top. If you make the connections at Pier Head worse you will push a decisively large proportion of your passengers away and kick the floor out from under your feet. For the small amount of extra traffic you are competing with a frequent and regular interval bus service: if potential passengers have to do quadratic equations to work out when the next train is, they will choose the bus. It will be the same for most Cat passengers: get a bus to Ryde Interchange and walk along the pier.

What would an ideal Island Line train connection at Ryde Pier Head be? With the 40 minute timetable, to pick up passengers arriving on the regular fastcat departing Ryde Pier Head at x45 and arriving a few minutes before this the Island Line trains will depart at xx47 in even hours and arrive at xx57 departing six minutes later in odd hours. If the 30 minute timetable were achieved as promised the Island Line trains could still only be at Ryde Pier Head for four minutes so to ensure arriving and departing fastcat passengers all connected the trains would need to arrive and depart a few minutes after each fastcat. For instance train arrives xx21 departs xx25 to pick up arriving xx15 fastcat passengers and drop off departing xx45 fastcat passengers and train arrives xx51 departs xx55 to pick up arriving xx45 fastcat passengers and drop off departing xx15 fastcat passengers. Timetabling a train waiting only four minutes at Ryde Pier Head to connect with both arriving and departing fastcat passengers has led to passengers missing connections as it leaves a very short time for train passengers to board the fastcat and for fastcat passengers to get to the platform and board the train. For the same Island line train to reliably drop off and pick up passengers for the same fastcat it would need to be at Ryde Pier Head for around 13 minutes like the arrive xx34 depart xx47 train in even hours in the 40 minute timetable. A 30 minute timetable could be operated with every xx45 and xx15 fastcat having this connection with trains at Ryde Pier Head for 13 minutes using three trains passing at Sandown and at Ryde St Johns Road. The 90 minute interval between successive departures from Ryde Pier Head for each of the three trains enables the long turn around times at Ryde Pier Head. However this would require the use of three trains. The other consideration is that the additional xx15 fastcats only operate on Saturday and Sunday mid July to the end of August and summer bank holidays.

 

[Peter Sarf]

In my book what is simple is that the more frequent a service is then the less important clever connection timings get.

 

[TomatoKetchup]

The point about Islandline is that it is an atypical service: passengers to and from the Cats are what it survives on and any other traffic is just a bit of jam on top. If you make the connections at Pier Head worse you will push a decisively large proportion of your passengers away and kick the floor out from under your feet. For the small amount of extra traffic you are competing with a frequent and regular interval bus service: if potential passengers have to do quadratic equations to work out when the next train is, they will choose the bus. It will be the same for most Cat passengers: get a bus to Ryde Interchange and walk along the pier.

Personally, it's not rocket science to look up when a train is coming. Either people have timetables or just check on Google Maps nowadays. They changed the timetables so that FastCat passengers have time for the transfer in case it gets delayed, as it's pretty typical of WightLink, and also if the trains are late for some reason. They basically, want to avoid tight turnarounds and connections, nothing much different. Looking at the timetable, the HoverCraft is also well timed, so there is an alternative if people do not want to stand around at Ryde Pier Head.

I don’t think this entirely solves the root of the current problem which is that the trains don’t seem to be able to do a round trip reliably within an hour - for whatever reason, and there seem to be a load of reasons which are all adding together rather than any one single issue.

Plus it seems doubtful anyone would pay for the resources to run 3tph. That’s six staff working at any one time not including relief cover.

I'm no expert, but six is not a lot of staff for a railway. Even if you had to consider people taking holidays, you can have 10 staff to run the railway (which is not a lot). Considering there are over 3,500 tube drivers for just 272 stations in London, the proportions seem right for IOW. If the Island Line is frequent, success should come automatically, and connections for the FastCat should be no issue, as the next train is not a long wait. I'm confused to why SWR decided to buy 5 Class 484 trains, and are struggling to run 3 of them. Maybe 3 tph is too much for early morning or evening, but atleast during peak times, they can operate 3tph. Especially during the summer, the trains get rammed packed at Ryde Pier, and more at Smallbrook Jcn. Considering some parts of the tube operate every 20mins in places where there are least passengers (yes Central Line Woodford Loop), it shouldn't be a difficult thing to ask for on the Island Line too. Yes the spare 484s are in the need of maintenance, but it's a waste of £26m for refurbishing this line, if passengers are worse off compared to the old 483s running service, no wonder passenger numbers are declining. SWR should prioritise keeping the 484s in good condition, as they are only a few years old, there should be no excuse to why they can't run. The government didn't fund the refurbishment of the line so over 3/5 sometimes 4/5 of the fleet of trains sit in a shed. Take example from the rest of the world like Switzerland, they have so many single track railway lines to the most remote places, yet have a very frequent service.

 

[hermit]

As a frequent user, my initial reaction on seeing the new timetable was that it was even less fit for purpose than the current one. And it remains very frustrating that the originally promised half-hourly service to Pierhead cannot be delivered, particularly as the margin between success and failure in this regard seems to be down to a few minutes.

However, on reflection, there are good points to it. The 10 minute connection at Pierhead from half the catamaran arrivals is only a few minutes longer than the existing connection but should make a lot of difference to reliability - if the cat is late it is usually by only a few minutes, so we (and the elderly and those with luggage) will have a much better chance of making it. And if the cat is running even later and still misses the connection, there is the major improvement that there is at most 40 minutes to wait for the next train, rather than the present 60 minutes.

Of course, the longer waits involved in connecting with alternate cats are not so welcome. I suspect a lot of people going to Esplanade for Ryde itself or the buses will not wait but will walk down the pier (weather permitting) resulting in a loss of patronage (and a limited amount of revenue). But those going further down the line will probably find it worth waiting 26 minutes for the train.

For most of my journeys I am in the happy position of being able to be flexible as to which cat to go for, so will be able to choose crossings that don’t have the long wait at Pierhead. But others, such as commuters with fixed hours, will not have this luxury - for them the new timetable may be much less efficient.

The timetable has been presented as being for the summer only, to make connections for visitors more reliable. Until a better solution can be found, it seems to me to be a reasonable response to the difficulties.

 

[bramling]

As a frequent user, my initial reaction on seeing the new timetable was that it was even less fit for purpose than the current one. And it remains very frustrating that the originally promised half-hourly service to Pierhead cannot be delivered, particularly as the margin between success and failure in this regard seems to be down to a few minutes.

However, on reflection, there are good points to it. The 10 minute connection at Pierhead from half the catamaran arrivals is only a few minutes longer than the existing connection but should make a lot of difference to reliability - if the cat is late it is usually by only a few minutes, so we (and the elderly and those with luggage) will have a much better chance of making it. And if the cat is running even later and still misses the connection, there is the major improvement that there is at most 40 minutes to wait for the next train, rather than the present 60 minutes.

Of course, the longer waits involved in connecting with alternate cats are not so welcome. I suspect a lot of people going to Esplanade for Ryde itself or the buses will not wait but will walk down the pier (weather permitting) resulting in a loss of patronage (and a limited amount of revenue). But those going further down the line will probably find it worth waiting 26 minutes for the train.

For most of my journeys I am in the happy position of being able to be flexible as to which cat to go for, so will be able to choose crossings that don’t have the long wait at Pierhead. But others, such as commuters with fixed hours, will not have this luxury - for them the new timetable may be much less efficient.

The timetable has been presented as being for the summer only, to make connections for visitors more reliable. Until a better solution can be found, it seems to me to be a reasonable response to the difficulties.

I agree it’s a reasonable response, but as a lasting thing it’s a total mess, and not a good outcome after having spent a fortune investing in the line.