SWR December 2022 Timetable Consultation

[davews]

Longcross has huge potential with the new housing estate but the current condition of the station and it being a not that short walk from the houses (no road access at all) must make it less attractive than it could be. Passenger numbers do seem to be increasing a bit but it is one or two per train at best from what I can see. Ironically when they miss stops on late running Longcross always seems to be the one they never seem to miss...

Yes, permanent scrapping of the 4tph and semi fast with extra stop at Vauxhall seems the wrong way to go. Surely Vauxhall has enough trains as it is?

 

[Goldfish62]

Longcross has huge potential with the new housing estate but the current condition of the station and it being a not that short walk from the houses (no road access at all) must make it less attractive than it could be. Passenger numbers do seem to be increasing a bit but it is one or two per train at best from what I can see. Ironically when they miss stops on late running Longcross always seems to be the one they never seem to miss...

Yes, permanent scrapping of the 4tph and semi fast with extra stop at Vauxhall seems the wrong way to go. Surely Vauxhall has enough trains as it is?

The problem with Longcross is that the housing was built and people had moved in well before the trains started stopping there, so there's high car dependency. Also the slightly odd situation where everything stops there during the day, but nothing after mid evening.

 

[DelW]

Exactly - the DfT want to get rid of the competition so they can keep the prices high.

Though since DfT is / GBR will be setting all fares, it isn't actually necessary to remove duplication of routes to achieve this, fares can simply be set equally high on both routes.

Of course that would do nothing for the government's trumpeted decarbonisation agenda, but hypocrisy is hardly a surprise from Johnson, Shapps and co.

Removing direct trains is hardly likely to encourage travellers to return to rail either.

 

[Goldfish62]

Removing direct trains is hardly likely to encourage travellers to return to rail either.

Exactly. The DfT has never understood that people don't like changing trains not only due to the inconvenience but also due to worry about a missed connection.

 

[DelW]

Exactly. The DfT has never understood that people don't like changing trains not only due to the inconvenience but also due to worry about a missed connection.

Another issue these days is with journey planners not showing connections. For many years under SWT, Guildford to Ascot trains gave a cross platform connection at Aldershot onto Waterloo to Alton trains. Because of the way they shared the tracks, this connection was effectively guaranteed outside of serious disruption. BUT, because the two trains were only stationary for less that the minimum connection time in the journey planner, that always showed a wait of at least half an hour for the following service, making the journey time uncompetitive with bus let alone car journeys.

I read in another thread that the same issue is affecting train to ferry connections at Portsmouth Harbour, with journey planners showing over an hour for a connection that is really only a few minutes (and is, or at least was, often held by Wightlink staff if the Waterloo train was only a few minutes down).

All this is sadly contributing to a statistic I've seen recently, that road traffic is at 90% - 110% of pre Covid levels, while train travel is barely above 50%.

 

[Bald Rick]

My view is no major timetable recast should be undertaken until its clear what the govt wants GBR to achieve.

Without a major recast, we’ll be running the current level of service for the foreseeable...

 

[43096]

Surely Vauxhall has enough trains as it is?

It does. It's just a constant chipping away at the Reading service that has been going on for years, and making the service less and less attractive. I can see SWR deservedly losing a chunk of business when Crossrail opens, as for many in the Wokingham/Bracknell area it may be better to drive to Maidenhead or Slough and get Crossrail, especially if you're heading to Canary Wharf - it's got to be better than over an hour on SWR's ever slower services and the Jubilee line.

 

[Goldfish62]

Without a major recast, we’ll be running the current level of service for the foreseeable...

Given the current service level is somewhat reduced as compared to the pre-Covid timetables, surely assuming we get back to some sort of normality soon without people having to self-isolate won't that mean that SWR has a surplus of staff? Or have staffing levels been reduced through natural wastage and no recruitment over the past 18 months?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Longcross has huge potential with the new housing estate but the current condition of the station and it being a not that short walk from the houses (no road access at all) must make it less attractive than it could be. Passenger numbers do seem to be increasing a bit but it is one or two per train at best from what I can see. Ironically when they miss stops on late running Longcross always seems to be the one they never seem to miss...

Yes, permanent scrapping of the 4tph and semi fast with extra stop at Vauxhall seems the wrong way to go. Surely Vauxhall has enough trains as it is?

Vauxhall is presumably about people wishing to connect to the Victoria line not giving Vauxhall more trains as such.

 

[Goldfish62]

Vauxhall is presumably about people wishing to connect to the Victoria line not giving Vauxhall more trains as such.

I assume the Vauxhall stops are to make up for the clockwise Hounslow loops in the off peak and the peak Reading extras, which all stopped at Vauxhall, not running.

 

[43096]

I assume the Vauxhall stops are to make up for the clockwise Hounslow loops in the off peak and the peak Reading extras, which all stopped at Vauxhall, not running.

Presumably those services are removed because there is no longer the demand, so there must be reduced demand to Vauxhall as well. If the Vauxhall stop is to cover the removed Hounslow services off peak, might just as well go the whole hog and make the Readings all stations as well. It's clearly where it's heading.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Without a major recast, we’ll be running the current level of service for the foreseeable...

and the only problem with that is its potentially overkill for traffic on offer but holding the current service with covid cancellations at least gives the flexibility to reinstate services if passenger traffic recovers. Im not naïve though its evident the peak hour we knew has been consigned to history but the current cost base can't be easily culled. There's not much low hanging fruit on rolling stock leases left and the majority that is will be replaced with even more expensive new stock leases. A voluntary severance scheme will find plenty of takers but its need to be the right people not just all the experienced oldies.

Given the lead in time for timetable recast looks to be around 2 years long this potentially could consign SWR with insufficient capacity. Also given the new remit for the industry has still not been fleshed out we should stick with what we have although I see sense of removing duplicated service groups.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

and the only problem with that is its potentially overkill for traffic on offer but holding the current service with covid cancellations at least gives the flexibility to reinstate services if passenger traffic recovers. Im not naïve though its evident the peak hour we knew has been consigned to history but the current cost base can't be easily culled. There's not much low hanging fruit on rolling stock leases left and the majority that is will be replaced with even more expensive new stock leases. A voluntary severance scheme will find plenty of takers but its need to be the right people not just all the experienced oldies.

Given the lead in time for timetable recast looks to be around 2 years long this potentially could consign SWR with insufficient capacity. Also given the new remit for the industry has still not been fleshed out we should stick with what we have although I see sense of removing duplicated service groups.

In some areas the Dec 22 proposal seems increase compared to the current service such as the xx39 Poole and xx50 Salisbury services from Waterloo re-instated.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

In some areas the Dec 22 proposal seems increase compared to the current service such as the xx39 Poole and xx50 Salisbury services from Waterloo re-instated.

There already in the current base timetable so could be reinstated but once you recast the rest of it in Dec 2022 its not straightforward to add services back in unless they build the 2022 timetable with Q paths that could be activated.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

There already in the current base timetable so could be reinstated but once you recast the rest of it in Dec 2022 its not straightforward to add services back in unless they build the 2022 timetable with Q paths that could be activated.

I’m not sure what you mean by the current base timetable, the reference is to the current (May 21) timetable and that is the timetable which would continue if the changes consulted do not go ahead.

The consultation document makes it quite clear that the Dec 2019 pre-Covid timetable is dead and never going to reappear.

 

[Goldfish62]

I’m not sure what you mean by the current base timetable, the reference is to the current (May 21) timetable and that is the timetable which would continue if the changes consulted do not go ahead.

Are you sure about that? It has a number of features that are surely temporary. On the Reading line for example the weekday timetable is worse than Saturdays, and apart from early morning also worse than Sundays. That surely would not perpetuate.

If the Dec 22 timetable doesn't go ahead I would expect as a minimum that the current anomalies area addressed and in fact I'll be surprised if they're not in December.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Are you sure about that? It has a number of features that are surely temporary. On the Reading line for example the weekday timetable is worse than Saturdays, and apart from early morning also worse than Sundays. That surely would not perpetuate.

If the Dec 22 timetable doesn't go ahead I would expect as a minimum that the current anomalies area addressed and in fact I'll be surprised if they're not in December.

Nothing showing in NR’s Dec 21 Timetable Process for any weekday Reading Line changes.

 

[evergreenadam]

I assume the Vauxhall stops are to make up for the clockwise Hounslow loops in the off peak and the peak Reading extras, which all stopped at Vauxhall, not running.

The through Camberley line trains during the peaks also stopped at Vauxhall and will continue to do so. I think the reason for stopping all Reading line trains at Vauxhall is a mixture of standardising stopping patterns throughout the day; improving access to a growing part of London with the nearby Nine Elms and Battersea Power Station developments; and making sure all trains provide a link to the frequent, fast tube link to the West End and Euston Road rail termini.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I’m not sure what you mean by the current base timetable, the reference is to the current (May 21) timetable and that is the timetable which would continue if the changes consulted do not go ahead.

The consultation document makes it quite clear that the Dec 2019 pre-Covid timetable is dead and never going to reappear.

The May 21 TT is removal of services from there current base 2019 timetable and im presuming unless they've formerly revoked there rights to the paths they remain available to SWR. However, if they implement the Dec 22 TT then spare paths could be utilised by other operators although i accept that's highly unlikely. So to my mind as a principle of the plan they should for instance plan the Hounslow Loop as every 15mins but leave every other one in as Q path so they can be activated if traffic demand recovers otherwise there ability to add additional services will be limited.

 

[Goldfish62]

Nothing showing in NR’s Dec 21 Timetable Process for any weekday Reading Line changes.

Perhaps everyone involved has just forgotten there are random gaps in the evening service...

 

[JonathanH]

Perhaps everyone involved has just forgotten there are random gaps in the evening service...

If people get used to it and remember there is a gap at a certain time then all well and good. It is only really then OCD that needs an even interval timetable. I assume there is an operational reason for the gap.

(Isn't there some history of this on the SW lines where for a fair while the penultimate, rather than last trains were removed from the timetable to save some money?)

 

[Goldfish62]

If people get used to it and remember there is a gap at a certain time then all well and good. It is only really then OCD that needs an even interval timetable. I assume there is an operational reason for the gap.

If people get used to it and remember there is a gap at a certain time then all well and good. It is only really then OCD that needs an even interval timetable. I assume there is an operational reason for the gap.

Well, I've certainly never come across anyone before who thinks that the taktfahrplan, that wholly grail of public transport planners everywhere (and successfully used as a basis for SWT's 2004 major timetable recast), is only of use people with OCD. What does everyone else do? Memorise the whole timetable, with its quirks, in their heads?

I wasn't actually referring to the random minutes difference here and there which have crept in "due to Covid", but the significant gaps which actually cause inconvenience. For example on Mon-Fri (but not weekends) there's an hour's gap from Waterloo mid-evening around when there was still still the tail end of the 4tph service in the Dec 2019. The long-established last train at 2350 on Mon-Fri is also missing. It's also missing on Fridays but is at least made up for by the FSa 0020 introduced in Dec 2019. Late evening trains from Reading are all over the place.

 

[AverageTD]

If people get used to it and remember there is a gap at a certain time then all well and good. It is only really then OCD that needs an even interval timetable. I assume there is an operational reason for the gap.

(Isn't there some history of this on the SW lines where for a fair while the penultimate, rather than last trains were removed from the timetable to save some money?)

I can't say I've got used to it, regardless of whether I'm taking a train at 9 in the morning or at midnight, I have 20 and 50 engrained into my head for Readings. For people who don't travel at a consistent time of day then a standard hourly timetable is useful. It doesn't help when anomalies are being introduced at every timetable change possible.

 

[AY1975]

Given that Claire Mann comes from TfL, which pretty much bends over backwards to try to ensure that absolutely everyone is given the opportunity to respond to consultations I'm surprised that individuals are specifically excluded from responding to this. But then I suspect the dead hand of the DfT at work.

If you look at the FAQs on page 41 it says they are only asking stakeholders to participate because the consultation is strategic in nature and relates to the service as a whole rather than specific trains, but suggests that stakeholders may wish to canvass opinion before responding to the consultation.

Best thing to do if you have concerns is to contact your councillor.

And/or your MP!

 

[WelshBluebird]

If people get used to it and remember there is a gap at a certain time then all well and good.

And that is exactly the problem. A lot of people won't remember. Or maybe someone isn't a regular traveller.

It is only really then OCD that needs an even interval timetable.

Non clockface timetables are a pain in the backside for people wanting to travel.
It has nothing to do with "OCD" and everything to do with making things easier for people travelling.
If I want to travel, its a hell of a lot easier to remember that there is a train every half an hour at say 12 minutes past the hour and 42 minutes past the hour and it is for me to remember that for some hours its 10 minutes past and for others its 16 minutes past etc etc.

I assume there is an operational reason for the gap.

Maybe so, but once again the railways have to remember that they operate for passengers to use them and not just for the sake of it, so things should be catered towards the passenger not just to the railways whim.

Now the above is somewhat OTT and yes, there are some legitimate operational reasons for gaps in service, but you absolutely should not downplay the effect those gaps have on passengers like you have done in your post. There is a very good reason why more recent timetabling changes have sought to plug those gaps or to rework timetables so the gaps between services is much more regular - because it is a hell of a lot better for passengers who ultimately are the paying customer.

 

[AY1975]

The through Camberley line trains during the peaks also stopped at Vauxhall and will continue to do so. I think the reason for stopping all Reading line trains at Vauxhall is a mixture of standardising stopping patterns throughout the day; improving access to a growing part of London with the nearby Nine Elms and Battersea Power Station developments; and making sure all trains provide a link to the frequent, fast tube link to the West End and Euston Road rail termini.

It doesn't appear to say whether Sunday Reading line trains will continue to call at Putney as now. It doesn't mention Putney as a calling point for Reading line trains, but it also doesn't mention removing the Putney call on Sunday Reading trains.

I seem to recall that in BR days Reading trains tended to call at Putney on Sundays for one timetable period every few years, then revert to non-stopping through Putney at the next timetable change. I could never understand why that was. IIRC Sunday calls at Putney on Reading line trains have been a permanent feature pretty much since the early days of privatisation in the late 1990s, though.

 

[evergreenadam]

Yes, the proposed Sunday services remain a mystery, but as we are reminded, this is a ‘strategic level’ consultation so such ‘details’ will not be considered.

 

[AY1975]

Reading - Salisbury gets
"Three trains per day in the evening after the PM peak (Mon-Thu), in each direction,
replacing London Waterloo to Salisbury services." But calls only at Andover heading back to Salisbury. Are they planning to axe the Sunday services to Reading?

I assume the calls at Grateley, Whitchurch & Overton will be inserted into the XX;20 services which carry on beyond Salisbury?

Good that the Salisbury stopper now calls at Clapham Junction heading away from London during offpeak hours.

According to the pocket timetable PDFs on the SWR website, at present there are no off-peak Waterloo-Salisbury stoppers on Mondays-Fridays (there are on Saturdays, though). Instead they run as Basingstoke-Salisbury locals, so to get from Waterloo to the likes of Overton, Whitchurch or Grateley you have to take the Exeter train and have a 30-minute wait at Basingstoke for the Salisbury stopper. On Sundays they run as Reading-Salisbury stoppers.

Alternatively if you don't mind a slower journey you can take the xx.12 Waterloo-Basingstoke stopper and have a 12-minute wait at Basingstoke.

The consultation document would appear to suggest that the Waterloo-Salisbury stoppers will be reinstated, which is good.

 

[Goldfish62]

The consultation document would appear to suggest that the Waterloo-Salisbury stoppers will be reinstated, which is good.

Oh great. Let's wait 16 months to get back what we always used to have.

 

[nw1]

It seems a bit hard to believe that they will continue to run the current reduced timetable until the end of next year; I'd imagine that demand would pick up certainly in the spring/summer next year enough to justify a return to something close to the standard 2004-onwards off-peak timetable. Maybe the peaks will be less busy due to enforced home working but the off-peak should surely return to close to the standard pattern of recent times?