Marston Vale line suspension over - FULL services start running 19/02/24

[Silverlinky]

137 was the one involved in the collision, minor damage but needs an suspension air bag replacement.
139 arrived with wheelsets worn down to the minimum and needs a change
141 has been out of service with an alternator fault since it arrived

 

[westcoaster]

137 out on training runs, just seen it leaving Bedford

 

[DarloRich]

139 arrived with wheelsets worn down to the minimum and needs a change
141 has been out of service with an alternator fault since it arrived

Ah! The old runt of the litter trick! Quick, swap that faulty alternator with the one out of 141. It is leaving tomorrow................

 

[09matpal]

LNWR have published an update.

We have also confirmed the limited timetable which will run on the line when services return. These timetables will initially operate on weekdays only. We will add additional departures and reintroduce the Saturday service as more drivers complete training on the Class 150s.

We will communicate the exact date in November that services will recommence once it has been confirmed.

They seem confident about starting in November, no exact date but in November.

Inital timetable shared as well, Monday to Friday 2 trains from each direction in the morning and evening.

 

[DarloRich]

Looks like i will be getting the arriva to work for the time being.

Useless timetable for getting to work. No london arrival before 10! No MK arrival before 9.

Just close it down.

EDIT: A year with no service. 4 years of crap service. Thats what they come up with!

 

[WolvertonWorks]

Haha! Happened at Berry Lane (between Aspley Guise and Ridgmont) and not much damage to unit reported..

Made the local online site today: https://www.mkfm.com/news/local-new...ston-vale-line-in-village-near-milton-keynes/

"Marston Vale Community Rail Partnership say the driver of the car drove off without reporting the accident and are now appealing for witnesses.

In a post on social media yesterday (19/10), the partnership has asked witnesses to contact British Transport Police with any information"

 

[DelW]

Useless timetable for getting to work. No london arrival before 10! No MK arrival before 9.

Going via Bedford, there's a 10 minute connection onto EMR arriving St Pancras at 08:51, or an 18 minute connection onto Thameslink arriving City Thameslink at 09:26. Might be more expensive that way though.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It seems obvious that this timetable is based around getting the school trains back up, which are (or were) the biggest traffic source.

 

[Roast Veg]

It seems obvious that this timetable is based around getting the school trains back up, which are (or were) the biggest traffic source.

They're also near guaranteed to return, unlike discretionary travellers.

 

[70014IronDuke]

It seems obvious that this timetable is based around getting the school trains back up, which are (or were) the biggest traffic source.

Which is, at least superficially, eminently sensible.

(Indeed, my heart leaps for @DarloRich that he may soon delight in some sort of local train service. )

But what I don't understand is, surely this inititial temporarty timetable couldn't be made more 'staff and rolling-stock heavy'? These four return services will require two working units and four separate crews.

I presume that the crews will have other duties (surely?), but the two units will each be in revenue earning service for about 90 minute in the mornings and again in the afternoon-evenings. Hardly high utilisation of stock, it is?

Or have I got something wrong here?

EDIT: Apologies - yes I have. The afternoon service will only need one unit and one crew, as it's more spaced out than the two morning turns.

Still not exactly high utilisation though.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Which is, at least superficially, eminently sensible.

(Indeed, my heart leaps for @DarloRich that he may soon delight in some sort of local train service. )

But what I don't understand is, surely this inititial temporarty timetable couldn't be made more 'staff and rolling-stock heavy'? These four return services will require two working units and four separate crews.

I presume that the crews will have other duties (surely?), but the two units will each be in revenue earning service for about 90 minute in the mornings and again in the afternoon-evenings. Hardly high utilisation of stock, it is?

Or have I got something wrong here?

Oh dear. Did the 230s not manage longer in service each day despite their problems ?.

 

[Stephen42]

Which is, at least superficially, eminently sensible.

(Indeed, my heart leaps for @DarloRich that he may soon delight in some sort of local train service. )

But what I don't understand is, surely this inititial temporarty timetable couldn't be made more 'staff and rolling-stock heavy'? These four return services will require two working units and four separate crews.

I presume that the crews will have other duties (surely?), but the two units will each be in revenue earning service for about 90 minute in the mornings and again in the afternoon-evenings. Hardly high utilisation of stock, it is?

Or have I got something wrong here?

The evening return services follow on so one unit and likely one set of crew doing all the evening ones.

They only have 3 Class 150s, probably only 2 can be assumed available each day. I'd be surprised if all training can be done in passenger service giving a trade off between time to fully train everyone and the intensity of the initial timetable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am very surprised it was a two unit timetable and not a single diagram more like what operated during COVID, which was surprisingly useful.

 

[Pumbaa]

As per one of the previous updates from the website, the service is beginning with 14 Drivers. Given normal spare ratios are 3:1, that’s about the bare minimum (2 required for the morning, 1 afternoon). These being all the drivers who remain who signed both the line and 150s previously.

One factor not listed is engineering support is still being built up, and can only support a limited 12hr window of train running, as that training programme continues. Coupled with the need to continue crew training using 2 units for 8.5 hours a day, the service listed is pretty much all that can be delivered.

What will be interesting though is how many step ups they try and make to the service before it’s back to 100%.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

As per one of the previous updates from the website, the service is beginning with 14 Drivers. Given normal spare ratios are 3:1, that’s about the bare minimum (2 required for the morning, 1 afternoon). These being all the drivers who remain who signed both the line and 150s previously.

One factor not listed is engineering support is still being built up, and can only support a limited 12hr window of train running, as that training programme continues. Coupled with the need to continue crew training using 2 units for 8.5 hours a day, the service listed is pretty much all that can be delivered.

What will be interesting though is how many step ups they try and make to the service before it’s back to 100%.

Is that 3 spares for each driver actually used?

 

[The exile]

Which is, at least superficially, eminently sensible.

(Indeed, my heart leaps for @DarloRich that he may soon delight in some sort of local train service. )

But what I don't understand is, surely this inititial temporarty timetable couldn't be made more 'staff and rolling-stock heavy'? These four return services will require two working units and four separate crews.

I presume that the crews will have other duties (surely?), but the two units will each be in revenue earning service for about 90 minute in the mornings and again in the afternoon-evenings. Hardly high utilisation of stock, it is?

Or have I got something wrong here?

EDIT: Apologies - yes I have. The afternoon service will only need one unit and one crew, as it's more spaced out than the two morning turns.

Still not exactly high utilisation though.

Possibly the rest of the day is spent with training runs?

 

[jamieh27]

The evening return services follow on so one unit and likely one set of crew doing all the evening ones.

They only have 3 Class 150s, probably only 2 can be assumed available each day. I'd be surprised if all training can be done in passenger service giving a trade off between time to fully train everyone and the intensity of the initial timetable.

Possibly depending on the frequency I think its 1 train an hour.

 

[DarloRich]

LNWR should just close this down. They don't want to run a service. Build a bus way.

I am very surprised it was a two unit timetable and not a single diagram more like what operated during COVID, which was surprisingly useful.

absolutely!

Going via Bedford, there's a 10 minute connection onto EMR arriving St Pancras at 08:51, or an 18 minute connection onto Thameslink arriving City Thameslink at 09:26. Might be more expensive that way though.

no one from my end of the line is going down to Bedford for a train to London. They are going to carry on driving to Belthley or MKC and so more revenue is lost.

It seems obvious that this timetable is based around getting the school trains back up, which are (or were) the biggest traffic source.

there should be business hour trains as well.

They're also near guaranteed to return, unlike discretionary travellers.

well they sure as $hit is $hit aint going to be back without trains!

Which is, at least superficially, eminently sensible.

(Indeed, my heart leaps for @DarloRich that he may soon delight in some sort of local train service

it is a completely unusable timetable for anyone over the age of 15 and with a job to get to. You know, the ones paying the big, full price, season tickets!

As per one of the previous updates from the website, the service is beginning with 14 Drivers. Given normal spare ratios are 3:1, that’s about the bare minimum (2 required for the morning, 1 afternoon). These being all the drivers who remain who signed both the line and 150s previously.

One factor not listed is engineering support is still being built up, and can only support a limited 12hr window of train running, as that training programme continues. Coupled with the need to continue crew training using 2 units for 8.5 hours a day, the service listed is pretty much all that can be delivered.

What will be interesting though is how many step ups they try and make to the service before it’s back to 100%.

that is all fine - why cant I have a train that gets me to work before 9 am? That doesn't seem much to ask for after all this bloody time

 

[duffield]

LNWR should just close this down. They don't want to run a service. Build a bus way.

...

I assume you're not serious, particularly given the use of this line for freight and - pretty soon - EWR from Oxford to Bedford?.

Anyhow, it isn't theirs to close. It's part of our national infrastructure and they are just its temporary custodians.

 

[Sunil_P]

Spotted the 230s at Reading sidings back on the 5th of this month.

 

[DarloRich]

I assume you're not serious, particularly given the use of this line for freight and - pretty soon - EWR from Oxford to Bedford?.

Only partially. The LNWR service offering/provision has been awful for 4 years. We have had no trains for nearly a year and the paltry timetable they cobble together is useless for anyone over the age of 15.

You cant get to MK before 9 am which makes it impractical for most workers. You cant get to Euston before 10. 1545/1745 departures are no use for working people either. Lets not forget they cant get you to Euston before 10 so leaving at 1630 for the last connection at Bletchley isn't feasible.

it needs two more runs ( and earlier arrival into Bletchley and a train at 1645) adding to the timetable to allow sensible usage. That doesn't seem an outrageous demand ESPECIALLY after the utter nonsense we have experienced on this line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You cant get to MK before 9 am which makes it impractical for most workers. You cant get to Euston before 10. 1545/1745 departures are no use for working people either. Lets not forget they cant get you to Euston before 10 so leaving at 1630 for the last connection at Bletchley isn't feasible.

As in the old timetable my preferred Bletchley-Euston train was the 0711, I've seen the Marston Vale train arrive to connect with this many times. The number of people connecting to Euston was low single figures if any, each day. Very few London commuters from the prosperous villages along the line won't have a car, so they'll drive to stations with a better service, be that Bletchley/Leighton or somewhere on Thameslink (probably Flitwick).

Few will also go to MKC via Bletchley using the Marston Vale (which is why I so often propose a Denbigh West Curve which would make it actually useful - and Network Rail do now seem to be taking this seriously!).

Thus they've timed it for the greatest potential demand, which makes a lot of sense. Though I don't get the two-unit timetable, and had expected one diagram.

 

[DelW]

Only partially. The LNWR service offering/provision has been awful for 4 years. We have had no trains for nearly a year and the paltry timetable they cobble together is useless for anyone over the age of 15.

This isn't the permanent timetable though - it seems to be an initial "soft launch" while staff training is continuing. The statement quoted in post #754 says:

We have also confirmed the limited timetable which will run on the line when services return. These timetables will initially operate on weekdays only. We will add additional departures and reintroduce the Saturday service as more drivers complete training on the Class 150s.

The initial limited timetables - published below - have been designed to enable us to provide services during the busier morning and afternoon peak periods for our customers while continuing to train drivers along the route at other times of the day. Rail replacement buses will continue to operate when train services are not running.

(my emphasis).

While I can understand the frustration after so long with either a poor service or nothing at all, it's surely better to introduce a service which caters for at least some passengers as soon as possible, rather than waiting even longer for training to be completed, and only re-introducing trains when the full timetable can be delivered.

 

[Roast Veg]

there should be business hour trains as well.

well they sure as $hit is $hit aint going to be back without trains!


it is a completely unusable timetable for anyone over the age of 15 and with a job to get to. You know, the ones paying the big, full price, season tickets!

I don't think I support the argument that those who pay the most should be first to receive a service. Like other posters I understand your vitriol, and I sincerely hope that the very next services on the line support business travel, but if the decision between your travel and that of the school kids had to be made, I think LNWR made the right call.

 

[DarloRich]

As in the old timetable my preferred Bletchley-Euston train was the 0711, I've seen the Marston Vale train arrive to connect with this many times. The number of people connecting to Euston was low single figures if any, each day. Very few London commuters from the prosperous villages along the line won't have a car, so they'll drive to stations with a better service, be that Bletchley/Leighton or somewhere on Thameslink (probably Flitwick).

Few will also go to MKC via Bletchley using the Marston Vale (which is why I so often propose a Denbigh West Curve which would make it actually useful - and Network Rail do now seem to be taking this seriously!).

Thus they've timed it for the greatest potential demand, which makes a lot of sense. Though I don't get the two-unit timetable, and had expected one diagram.

This isn't the permanent timetable though - it seems to be an initial "soft launch" while staff training is continuing.

I don't think I support the argument that those who pay the most should be first to receive a service. Like other posters I understand your vitriol, and I sincerely hope that the very next services on the line support business travel, but if the decision between your travel and that of the school kids had to be made, I think LNWR made the right call.

All I want is to get the train to and from work - that doesn't seem like to big an "ask"! However, it is clear LNWR don't want my money ( and would rather run a service for the herberts, most of whom don't pay!) so Arriva will get it for the foreseeable.

It is so frustrating and makes me very sad and quite angry that after 4 years of a total bin fire of a service and nearly a year since our last train ran THIS nonsense is what they come up with: service that is unusable for anyone of working age!

I should just be like LNWR and everyone else and simply not give a $hit about this line. It isn't worth it . Just close it. No one except me seems to care.

PS and STILL no dates for the introduction of even this paltry service!

PPS - I don't want a full service, I don't want a Pullman, I don't want gold plated, i don't want meals or free coffees or a lounge. I don't want much I just want a train to and from work

 

[bluenoxid]

Without the RRB timetable, it’s tough to understand the context but I’ll take a guess that running at those times allows them to release vehicles to deliver school runs, which will cut the costs of the rail replacement service by opening up more feasible suppliers of vehicles and drivers.

 

[DelW]

It is so frustrating and makes me very sad and quite angry that after 4 years of a total bin fire of a service and nearly a year since our last train ran THIS nonsense is what they come up with: service that is unusable for anyone of working age!

I should just be like LNWR and everyone else and simply not give a $hit about this line. It isn't worth it . Just close it. No one except me seems to care.

You're full of rage and fury, and your diatribes explain why you feel that way, but you really aren't listening at all are you?

Following the collapse of Vivarail, which was largely a result of unexpected problems with their trains, LNR had to find alternative trains which met the unusual requirements of the route. They have now procured three suitable units, have repainted and repaired them, and are now training their staff to operate them. How is that "... not giv[ing] a $hit about this line"?

There is a lot of training to do, since 150s haven't been on the line for years. That is the way of the modern world, "get on with it and learn on the job" is not acceptable as a safe way of working any more. LNR could have parked the units in the yard until all of that training is completed, but instead they will introduce a limited service as soon as enough staff have finished the course. Introduction of the limited timetable gives *some* benefits earlier. You're not one of the ones who will benefit, but why shouldn't those others get their trains back asap just because you can't?

We know that none of this is anywhere near ideal. But from the starting point of the Vivarail collapse, it's probably as good as was possible, and it certainly doesn't seem that no-one cares.

 

[DarloRich]

You're full of rage and fury, and your diatribes explain why you feel that way, but you really aren't listening at all are you?

no - I listen to every word, I simply don't agree and am not prepared to offer LNWR any more "benefit of the doubt".

Following the collapse of Vivarail, which was largely a result of unexpected problems with their trains, LNR had to find alternative trains which met the unusual requirements of the route. They have now procured three suitable units, have repainted and repaired them, and are now training their staff to operate them. How is that "... not giv[ing] a $hit about this line

LNWR have not communicated any options considered and rejected to deliver a service earlier. There were, IMO, plenty available and I believe more could ( and for my point of view should) have been done to deliver a service before now. They wont even say if they asked DfT to support any alternatives!

it is worth noting a usable service is still not being offered. LNWR still wont even say WHEN a usable service will be offered. A year without a service and 4 years of terrible service and you wonder why I and others are fed up!

it wouldn't be so bad if LNWR said "we can only manage 2 return trips a day right now because of X,Y,Z but we will add 2 peak hours trains in January and a full timetable in March" (Say) but we haven't got that. We haven't even got a date when the chocolate fireguard timetable will start!

Would you be happy with this and all that has gone before on your line? Would you? REALLY?

There is a lot of training to do, since 150s haven't been on the line for years. That is the way of the modern world, "get on with it and learn on the job" is not acceptable as a safe way of working any more. LNR could have parked the units in the yard until all of that training is completed, but instead they will introduce a limited service as soon as enough staff have finished the course. Introduction of the limited timetable gives *some* benefits earlier.

I know there is lots of training to do - that is not the issue. It is the choice they have taken as to how they wish to deploy those staff that are trained that I disagree with.

LNWR haven't explained to the public why trains that allow business users to travel are not, yet, possible.

( there are also questions being asked by passengers why training couldn't have been done in Manchester or Leeds on these trains - I may know why this isn't really feasible, at least route learning wise, but normal people do not!)

You're not one of the ones who will benefit, but why shouldn't those others get their trains back asap just because you can't?

Why cant we ALL benefit? Like I keep saying we need a train that lets you travel for work. Does that seem outrageous? if so, why do you disagree? I don't think I am expecting much.

Finally, we cant get to MK before 9 or Euston before 10. Do YOU think that is acceptable?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Finally, we cant get to MK before 9 or Euston before 10. Do YOU think that is acceptable?

You can using the replacement bus service, which is not withdrawn, or using service buses, or walking/cycling to Bletchley station from Fenny, or whatever.

This usage was very low, so reinstating the school trains first cannot be criticised. You might not like it, but it 100% makes sense.

 

[DarloRich]

You can using the replacement bus service, which is not withdrawn, or using service buses, or walking/cycling to Bletchley station from Fenny, or whatever.

I just get the bus to work and can walk to Bletchley. I couldn't from my friends in Apsley. ( he now drives and wont be back on the train) As for the RRB.....................................

This usage was very low, so reinstating the school trains first cannot be criticised. You might not like it, but it 100% makes sense.

I repeat: why cant everyone benefit? I have no problem with running the schools trains but why cant a train pair run so that one arrives at Bletchley at c.8am

PS: Hopefully in deciding to run these trains LNWR will, you know, make the herberts pay for a ticket!