Island Line Upgrade updates

[hermit]

How can anyone possibly tell, this year of all years? Most visitors, especially those staying multiple nights, visit by car or coach so it would be hard to see a visible difference even in a normal year which this most certainly isn't. If this makes Island Line irrelevant then you could say the same of almost the entire rail network outside urban areas and the long distance mainlines.

What can be said with reasonable confidence is that the Rail Replacement Buses are carrying a fraction of the normal rail traffic this time of year - some may be using Southern Vectis but daytrips to Sandown Bay via the Catamaran probably aren't worth the bother right now, it's certainly put me off going the other way this summer.

The island is remarkably busy at the moment, but we will never know whether it might have been even busier, especially with day trippers, if the train service had been running. The faff factor involved in getting off the pier at present may have put people off, and will certainly not have impressed those who’ve experienced it.

As for why the rail replacement bus is lightly used, I‘ve suggested elsewhere that for local journeys people will probably have migrated to Southern Vectis’ routes 2 and 3, which are frequent and generally serve more convenient stops than the RRB. And for a high proportion of passengers journeys are free. But I think the time advantage of the train will draw them back when it starts running.

For those travelling to the mainland, the RRB carries the worry that, if it gets delayed in traffic (which is particularly heavy at present) they may miss the ferry, with a consequential wait of 1-2 hours. I am sure there are plenty of people like me who would normally use Island Line, who choose to minimise that risk by gritting their teeth and parking on the seafront or (gritting their teeth even more) parking at Pierhead. We will go back to the train when we can.

And there are certainly people, particularly from the Shanklin end of the line, who have reduced their trips to the mainland as being simply too much hassle at the moment.

 

[A0wen]

Wow. I've not seen such dismissive attitude since that Iraq PR minister in Sadam's day.

The tripling of time is for a project is certainly a project failing no matter how many change controls the poor sponsor has had to sign off.

If the lack of a train service on the island is indeed causing no issues as you claim then surely the justification and business case for the upgrade is deeply flawed and (a tiny proportion) of the budget would have been better spent on investing in the local bus network to decarbonise that.

I would respectfully suggest you've never worked on projects or managed them.

If you had you would know that any change be it time, cost or deliverable needs to be aporoved by the project owner - this is the standard in all large organisations. And a delay = change in timescale.

The island is remarkably busy at the moment, but we will never know whether it might have been even busier, especially with day trippers, if the train service had been running. The faff factor involved in getting off the pier at present may have put people off, and will certainly not have impressed those who’ve experienced it.

The capacity constraint is actually getting to the island from the mainland - and only 2 of the crossings feed into the railway, the fast cat to pier head and the hovercraft. Both appear to be running at or near capacity, so to suggest if the railway had been running there would have been more visitors is fallacious.

Typical “public sector” attitude…

Which as I've managed projects entirely in the private sector is both uninformed and a misplaced insult.

Doesn't matter where a project's being run in that sense. What does matter is whether the project sponsor has signed off on these changes and since they're ultimately responsible for the project all is well. The project team can't make chamges without the approval of the sponsor, that's basic project governance. Fortunately project sponsors are better informed and more au fait with running projects than most of the posters around here.

Covid has, I presume, been an additional problem, but it did not suddenly appear after work started. It had already been around for more than nine months, but it is unclear just what allowance was made for it.

Regarding the recent flooding south of Ryde. I would be interested to know why the project did not include appropriate ‘future proofing’, something that seems to be included in most projects nowadays.

Covid was pretty much impossible to plan around - it's affected resource availability, working practises, supply chains - basically everything this project would have needed and the rules / restrictions changed at very short notice. No project could have mitigated this - it's been suck it and see in pretty much all project fields.

On the second point it's not about "future proofing" - it's about risk assessment. The question would doubtless have been asked about the likelihood of flooding / washouts at key places and that risk assessment would have been based on historic information. You simply cannot mitigate all such risks - unless you have a limitless budget and open ended timescale - yet you're complaining about the current over-runs......

 

[Chris125]

While people talk nonsense on here it's worth noting that the project seems to have stepped up a gear this week; not only more units coming over and the second test through the tunnel, but guard and driver training does appear to be underway now with traincrew milling around St Johns and regular return runs during the day - at linespeed too?

It finally feels like the railway is coming out of its slumber.

 

[Skymonster]

Doesn't matter where a project's being run in that sense. What does matter is whether the project sponsor has signed off on these changes and since they're ultimately responsible for the project all is well. The project team can't make chamges without the approval of the sponsor, that's basic project governance. Fortunately project sponsors are better informed and more au fait with running projects than most of the posters around here.

The idea that the sponsor really had a choice to sign off (or not) on major changes such as the trains needing to have the software rewritten mid way through testing is laughable…. The trains didn’t work properly and VivaRail admitted as much. Therefore the sponsor had no other viable alternative - it was either accept the situation and suck up the delay or have no trains. Management of change is an intrinsic part of project management as you say, but it isn’t a mechanism to paper-over or justify inherent errors, omissions or mistakes.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

What are your credentials for stating it's a "shambolic mess" ? Unless you have some knowledge as to why this has been delayed then you are being insulting to the professionals who are having to deliver this project.

I’m sorry, but it is not insulting in the slightest to be unhappy about 100% of all train services on the island - a large island and county - being withdrawn completely for an advertised three months, and then for this time to be tripled. I think shambolic mess is kind.

Would you be happy losing all rail services in a twenty-five mile radius for nine months? I certainly wouldn’t be, particularly as I don’t drive, and the island isn’t very well connected as it is.

 

[Chris125]

Interestingly RTT appears to be showing paths for the training currently underway - in theory leaving St Johns for Shanklin every half hour from 8:51 to 17:21 all next week.

...in practice they appear to be running hourly and clocking off mid-late afternoon (so far at least), but this may be useful for anyone wanting to see them?

Realtime Trains | Departures from Ryde St Johns Road around 0910 on 30/08/2021

Train information at Ryde St Johns Road around 0910 on 30/08/2021. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[A0wen]

I’m sorry, but it is not insulting in the slightest to be unhappy about 100% of all train services on the island - a large island and county - being withdrawn completely for an advertised three months, and then for this time to be tripled. I think shambolic mess is kind.

Would you be happy losing all rail services in a twenty-five mile radius for nine months? I certainly wouldn’t be, particularly as I don’t drive, and the island isn’t very well connected as it is.

Let's put the faux outrage to one side for a moment and deal in some facts.

The IoW may be a "large" island, but in the scheme of things it's small. In area terms only one county is smaller - Rutland. In population terms it's home to 140,000 people - that's the whole island, Portsmouth (city only) is 233,000, Southampton about 250,000.

The rail line only serves about 40% of the island's population.

But your comment about the island being "poorly connected" is massively wide of the mark - Southern Vectis have a comprehensive bus network which covers the island with regular services operating 18 hours a day on key routes such as Newport - Cowes, Newport - East Cowes, Ryde - Newport via Sandown, Shanklin & Ventnor, Ryde - Newport via Wootton, Newport - Yarmouth / Freshwater - and that's 7 days a week.

So non drivers on the IoW are more than amply served.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Let's put the faux outrage to one side for a moment and deal in some facts.

The IoW may be a "large" island, but in the scheme of things it's small. In area terms only one county is smaller - Rutland. In population terms it's home to 140,000 people. The rail line only serves about 40% of the island's population. But your comment about the island being "poorly connected" is massively wide of the mark - Southern Vectis have a comprenhensive bus network which covers the island with regular services operating 18 hours a day on key routes such as Newport - Cowes, Newport - East Cowes, Ryde - Newport via Sandown, Shanklin & Ventnor, Ryde - Newport via Wootton, Newport - Yarmouth / Freshwater - and that's 7 days a week.

So non drivers on the IoW are more than amply served.

Alright, but let’s not pretend the delivery of the upgrade has been some great achievement when it’s overrunning horribly

 

[A0wen]

Alright, but let’s not pretend the delivery of the upgrade has been some great achievement when it’s overrunning horribly

Depends entirely on how the project had been planned. If it had assumed no problems and it was agreed by the project sponsor / stakeholders that problems encountered during the project would be handled as change control, then, as a professional project manager, I wouldn't share your view it's "overrunning horribly", instead it's been replanned in response to events, which is the correct thing to do and is completely in line with accepted project management methodologies, such as Prince2.

 

[Gloster]

And what about the poor b****y passengers who are thoroughly inconvenienced and have no idea when we are going to get our trains back. And the massive hit to revenue, both now and in the future, that somebody, i.e. the taxpayer, is going to have to pay extra subsidy for in the future.

 

[Dougal2345]

But your comment about the island being "poorly connected" is massively wide of the mark - Southern Vectis have a comprehensive bus network which covers the island with regular services operating 18 hours a day on key routes such as Newport - Cowes, Newport - East Cowes, Ryde - Newport via Sandown, Shanklin & Ventnor, Ryde - Newport via Wootton, Newport - Yarmouth / Freshwater - and that's 7 days a week.

So non drivers on the IoW are more than amply served.

If someone withdrew my rail service and replaced it with a bus indefinitely, even at the same frequency, I'd be fuming. I'm not that pleased when it happens on the occasional weekend.

Depends entirely on how the project had been planned. If it had assumed no problems and it was agreed by the project sponsor / stakeholders that problems encountered during the project would be handled as change control, then, as a professional project manager, I wouldn't share your view it's "overrunning horribly", instead it's been replanned in response to events, which is the correct thing to do and is completely in line with accepted project management methodologies, such as Prince2.

To be honest, I don't think anyone is the least bit interested in the minutiae of project management methodologies.

The IoW upgrade was planned for 3 months, and has taken 3 times that, and counting.

"Replanned in response to events?" Events that couldn't have been foreseen at the start? So are those events acts of God, or human failings?

God may have been a slightly unpleasant actor for the past couple of years (indeed He hasn't been that lovely ever since He was invented), but I don't think we can solely blame the Almighty for this almighty cock-up...

The planners seemed to work on a 'everything will go right' basis, ignoring two things - that there was a pandemic going on (even though they'd had nine months' warning), and that Vivarail's promises of fully working trains delivered by May just might not be kept (even though new rolling stock introductions seemingly never go to schedule, in recent years)... so they waded in, closed the line, and scrapped the stock, just before the summer season started...

 

[hwl]

Depends entirely on how the project had been planned. If it had assumed no problems and it was agreed by the project sponsor / stakeholders that problems encountered during the project would be handled as change control, then, as a professional project manager, I wouldn't share your view it's "overrunning horribly", instead it's been replanned in response to events, which is the correct thing to do and is completely in line with accepted project management methodologies, such as Prince2.

Which conveniently dodges the bullet of failing to scope properly in the first place for some problems items.

The public tend to include failure to scope properly in PM failures even if the "PM industry" don't, the external perception also matters.

(As someone who has PM qualifications...)

Civil engineering sector has a very relevant adage: "pay for ground investigation now or more later"

The IoW upgrade has been led by SWR who don't have NR extensive expertise on the relevant engineering or PM side.

 

[A0wen]

And what about the poor b****y passengers who are thoroughly inconvenienced and have no idea when we are going to get our trains back. And the massive hit to revenue, both now and in the future, that somebody, i.e. the taxpayer, is going to have to pay extra subsidy for in the future.

The Island Line runs at a humungous loss, if anything running a permanent RRB would save the taxpayer money. The farebox revenue doesn't even begin to cover it.

The planners seemed to work on a 'everything will go right' basis, ignoring two things - that there was a pandemic going on (even though they'd had nine months' warning), and that Vivarail's promises of fully working trains delivered by May just might not be kept (even though new rolling stock introductions seemingly never go to schedule, in recent years)... so they waded in, closed the line, and scrapped the stock, just before the summer season started...

Project planning isn't done in isolation by one or two people. It would have required the project sponsor and all stakeholders to sign it off along with the assumptions which went with that.

Covid has been impossible to plan around for projects of any type - because the impacts changed on a daily basis, be it who could work, how they could work, what materials there were etc.

The line carried penny numbers of tourists - the line being closed over the summer season has had a negligible impact - but such was the reliability of that rolling stock it was failing all the time and often there was often only 1 unit in service.

Even with a 2tph capacity the Island Line with the 483s were offering about 150 seats / hour. SVOC offer about double that (4 x double deck's per hour) between Ryde and Shanklin.

 

[hermit]

Even with a 2tph capacity the Island Line with the 483s were offering about 150 seats / hour. SVOC offer about double that (4 x double deck's per hour) between Ryde and Shanklin.

There is the difference that SVOCs routes 2 and 3 take 55 minutes to get from Shanklin to Ryde Esplanade; the trains will take 21 minutes for the same journey and take you up the pier as well.

 

[A0wen]

There is the difference that SVOCs routes 2 and 3 take 55 minutes to get from Shanklin to Ryde Esplanade; the trains will take 21 minutes for the same journey and take you up the pier as well.

Except that both Sandown and Shanklin station are poorly sited - at least a 10 min walk to the seafront at either, and up hill back, whereas the bus gets much closer.

So unless your destination is right by stations like Sandown or Shanklin (there's not alot at the former and a large Lidl and holiday park at the latter) then you also need to consider the onward jouney, which the bus usually doesn't have to.

 

[CBlue]

Except that both Sandown and Shanklin station are poorly sited - at least a 10 min walk to the seafront at either, and up hill back, whereas the bus gets much closer.

So unless your destination is right by stations like Sandown or Shanklin (there's not alot at the former and a large Lidl and holiday park at the latter) then you also need to consider the onward jouney, which the bus usually doesn't have to.

So the bus is cheaper to operate, better connections offered, goes where people actually want to go with little difference in journey time...sometimes it feels that the argument *for* the Island Line's existence is "because trains". Or am I missing something?

 

[Journeyman]

So the bus is cheaper to operate, better connections offered, goes where people actually want to go with little difference in journey time...sometimes it feels that the argument *for* the Island Line's existence is "because trains". Or am I missing something?

It has to be said that since the death of significant tourist use, which was only a few years after electrification, the business case for Island Line has been really bad. In all honesty, it wouldn't really be missed if it went. People would get used to living without it. It is, however, massively politically unacceptable to close railways these days. That's a different discussion entirely, though.

 

[Gloster]

Islandline’s only real justification nowadays is getting people to and from the FastCats: the buses could probably easily cope with everything else. A duplicate bus might be needed at times to cope with those few remaining busy cats, but most of the traffic would be able to use the 2 and 3, even though it is a busy route. The main problem is getting down the pier: it may not be much over a quarter-mile long, but that can be a very long quarter-mile to pedestrians, even the young and healthy, if it is wet, windy or cold. Unless you are going to expect everyone to arrive at the Pier Head by car, which has plenty of disadvantages (state of the pier, traffic congestion in the town, general environmental grounds, etc.) you need to have an alternative. Personally, I have long felt that a shuttle between the Pier Head and a Park and Ride in the St Johns Road or Smallbrook Junction areas would fulfil the main purpose of the line at a much lower cost.

 

[Dougal2345]

So the bus is cheaper to operate, better connections offered, goes where people actually want to go with little difference in journey time...sometimes it feels that the argument *for* the Island Line's existence is "because trains". Or am I missing something?

Cheaper to operate maybe, but not (according to posts earlier in this thread) cheaper to travel on.

55 minutes compared to 21 minutes is not "little difference in journey time", is it...?

"Because trains"...? I think if you ask anyone, even a non-enthusiast, whether a bus ride or a train ride is more pleasant, you know what answer you'll get.

So, with respect, yes I think you have missed some important things...

 

[Ianno87]

So the bus is cheaper to operate, better connections offered, goes where people actually want to go with little difference in journey time...sometimes it feels that the argument *for* the Island Line's existence is "because trains". Or am I missing something?

Another way of thinking about it - would the good people of this forum be so interested in the line if it were merely a pair of Class 150s shuttling back and forth all day?

Why does the forum find the Island Line so interesting but not, for example, the Barton-on-Humber branch?

 

[swt_passenger]

Another way of thinking about it - would the good people of this forum be so interested in the line if it were merely a pair of Class 150s shuttling back and forth all day?

Why does the forum find the Island Line so interesting but not, for example, the Barton-on-Humber branch?

It is odd. Thinking back to the start of the renewal process I got the impression people were quite disappointed that the third rail wasn’t going to be ripped up in favour of some complicated trial technology…

 

[CBlue]

Cheaper to operate maybe, but not (according to posts earlier in this thread) cheaper to travel on.

The bus service is completely commercial and therefore has to cover running costs. Does the Island line cover its running costs through fares?

55 minutes compared to 21 minutes is not "little difference in journey time", is it...?

And as posted in the quote below, the bus seemingly offers better connections alongside with stopping far, far closer to where most passengers actually need to travel - barring ferry connections on the pier which could easily be covered by something much cheaper than heavy rail.

Except that both Sandown and Shanklin station are poorly sited - at least a 10 min walk to the seafront at either, and up hill back, whereas the bus gets much closer.

So unless your destination is right by stations like Sandown or Shanklin (there's not alot at the former and a large Lidl and holiday park at the latter) then you also need to consider the onward jouney, which the bus usually doesn't have to.

"Because trains"...? I think if you ask anyone, even a non-enthusiast, whether a bus ride or a train ride is more pleasant, you know what answer you'll get.

So, with respect, yes I think you have missed some important things...

That can be debateable in some cases. Admittedly my local line is run with early 1980s EMU stock which probably came to the end of its design life some five years ago now. Meanwhile my local bus service is run with posh six year old 'deckers complete with big comfy leather seats. Even taking into account road conditions and journey times they offer the local train service a good run for its money in terms of passenger environment.

My point is very much from an outside view, and perhaps quite a black and white one as a result. I don't dispute that the Island line has some advantages but from a pure cost/benefit POV, I'm surprised it's still running in its current form.

 

[Roast Veg]

Why does the forum find the Island Line so interesting but not, for example, the Barton-on-Humber branch?

I plan on visiting the Barton line as a tourist in the rather near future...

 

[Ianno87]

I plan on visiting the Barton line as a tourist in the rather near future...

I literally did on Saturday*, hence why it sprung to mind!

But there's no thread "What shall we do about the Barton-on-Humber branch?" with endless pontificating on rolling stock, service patterns, etc.

*Walked across the Humber Bridge from Hessle, then visited the cafe in the south side viewing area - highly recommended!

 

[A0wen]

Cheaper to operate maybe, but not (according to posts earlier in this thread) cheaper to travel on.

55 minutes compared to 21 minutes is not "little difference in journey time", is it...?

"Because trains"...? I think if you ask anyone, even a non-enthusiast, whether a bus ride or a train ride is more pleasant, you know what answer you'll get.

So, with respect, yes I think you have missed some important things...

The price difference is less than 50p on a single from Ryde - Shanklin £4.10 vs £4.50 adult anytime. Plus ENCTS passes are valid on the bus, not the train.

As I pointed out on timings it's only a fair comparision if you are starting right by the station - since Shanklin and Sandown in particular are poorly sited the time difference is less than you claim.

I think the standard of the Island's buses - most under 10 years old, most with decent seating, predominantly double decks meaning good views of the countryside is very favourable when compared to antique, pre war design rolling stock which was being used. The usage figures tend to endorse that..

 

[Dougal2345]

The price difference is less than 50p on a single from Ryde - Shanklin £4.10 vs £4.50 adult anytime. Plus ENCTS passes are valid on the bus, not the train.

And for a day return? Can I use my Network Railcard on the Vectis bus?

As I pointed out on timings it's only a fair comparision if you are starting right by the station - since Shanklin and Sandown in particular are poorly sited the time difference is less than you claim.

Are we sure that all users of Shanklin and Sandown want to head to the beach? What about those in housing near the station, who perhaps travel into Ryde or Portsmouth for work? Maybe those stations are ideally sited for the locals?

I think the standard of the Island's buses - most under 10 years old, most with decent seating, predominantly double decks meaning good views of the countryside is very favourable when compared to antique, pre war design rolling stock which was being used. The usage figures tend to endorse that..

That can be debateable in some cases. Admittedly my local line is run with early 1980s EMU stock which probably came to the end of its design life some five years ago now. Meanwhile my local bus service is run with posh six year old 'deckers complete with big comfy leather seats. Even taking into account road conditions and journey times they offer the local train service a good run for its money in terms of passenger environment.

It's certainly true that the old stock was not the last word in comfort, but hopefully the new will be a big improvement. But I for one find bus travel incredibly fatiguing; no matter how comfy and modern the bus is, it can't stop you being thrown forward and back as it accelerates and decelerates at each stop, or from side to side as the drivers joyfully attack the roundabouts. And there'll always be something rattling deafeningly when the bus is idling, and using your smartphone is that much more difficult with every bump in the road sliding your fingers off course. And there's always that sinking feeling when you realise you've got an 'aggressive' driver...

Why does the forum find the Island Line so interesting but not, for example, the Barton-on-Humber branch?
But there's no thread "What shall we do about the Barton-on-Humber branch?" with endless pontificating on rolling stock, service patterns, etc.

Well for me, it's because I live on the south coast and enjoy a day trip to the Island and a ride on the Line once or twice a year. I haven't bothered this year so the Island's economy has suffered the loss of my meagre spending

Obviously the Island Line has a certain charm of its own (I'm sure the more militant 'hard headed realists' on the forum are now chuntering along the lines of 'charm butters no parsnips') and there always seems something peculiarly horrible about trying to close a line that's been electrified, especially when the replacement transport proposed is diesel and runs through shopping streets.

But if the Barton-on-Humber branch were to be closed for improvements that take three times longer than scheduled, I feel sure there would be a thread on here...

 

[Journeyman]

The bus service is completely commercial and therefore has to cover running costs. Does the Island line cover its running costs through fares?

Not even close. Operating costs are four times revenue.

 

[Dougal2345]

The bus service is completely commercial and therefore has to cover running costs. Does the Island line cover its running costs through fares?

Not even close. Operating costs are four times revenue.

Not completely commercial - it does receive subsidy for ENTCS (pensioner free travel) which, according to some old figures on Wiki, covers almost half of all journeys. So no small amount!

Of course this scheme abstracts passengers away from the rail service too, so the government is paying a private bus company to take passengers away from a rail service it also subsidises.

Southern Vectis is a monopoly operator on the Island, and has engaged in anti-competitive practices over the years to drive out all other competition - except for the railway.

 

[Goldfish62]

Not completely commercial - it does receive subsidy for ENTCS (pensioner free travel) which, according to some old figures on Wiki, covers almost half of all journeys. So no small amount!

Of course this scheme abstracts passengers away from the rail service too, so the government is paying a private bus company to take passengers away from a rail service it also subsidises.

Payment for ENCTS is not a subsidy. It's a payment to make up the shortfall in revenue (not that it does make up for it satisfactorily) in return for the legal requirement to be accept ENCTS passes without charge.

 

[Dougal2345]

The price difference is less than 50p on a single from Ryde - Shanklin £4.10 vs £4.50 adult anytime. Plus ENCTS passes are valid on the bus, not the train.

And for a day return? Can I use my Network Railcard on the Vectis bus?

Just to follow up on this, from what I can find on the Vectis site, unless I've missed something there is no such thing as a Day Return on the bus.

So an anytime day return on the train - £4.90, on the bus (2 singles) - £9.00!

For a leisure traveller coming across to Ryde from Portsmouth on a Saturday, who would most probably have a railcard - £3.10 (from Esplanade, £4.15 from the Pier Head) - bus, £9.00!

If they have a through ticket from some other mainland station, I'd guess the amount extra to travel on to Shanklin gets ever smaller - but the bus - £9.00!

So I think it's fair to say that the price difference is substantial...

(happy to be corrected if I have missed something regarding the bus price...)