SWR new services

[Goldfish62]

So it’s acceptable To change timetables to run what are already full services at two thirds of the train length. Because of someone else’s cock up/failing/act of god/divine intervention. They have chosen to maintain the timetable change without the stock to do it. And crow over it. And passengers, as ever, suffer. They still collect the revenue and deliver a much worse service. How is that reasonable for us ?

I'm no expert, but from what I understand the issues preventing the 442s from entering service were discovered at very short notice so I don't see what else they could have done. SWT went through periods of temporary stock shortages and ran planned short formations until the issues were resolved. I don't see that this is any different.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I'm no expert, but from what I understand the issues preventing the 442s from entering service were discovered at very short notice so I don't see what else they could have done. SWT went through periods of temporary stock shortages and ran planned short formations until the issues were resolved. I don't see that this is any different.

Indeed remember when all the 4CIGs were withdrawn over night due to a major issue

 

[Goldfish62]

Indeed remember when all the 4CIGs were withdrawn over night due to a major issue

Quite. Another one was when an attempt was made to speed up the 458/5 conversion programme. SWT went too far there and after a public outcry had to reinstate some services.

 

[WindsorJoe]

The new timetable has been very interesting. On my travels home to Windsor and Eton Riverside Ive witnessed the following. Monday to Friday, the Usual 10 car 707 and 458s and now 4 or 8 car 455s and 450s so it can be one of four stock types, 4,8 or 10 carriages long. Toilets or no toilets. I might have to start playing a game of South Western Railway rolling stock bingo at this rate.

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

The new timetable has been very interesting. On my travels home to Windsor and Eton Riverside Ive witnessed the following. Monday to Friday, the Usual 10 car 707 and 458s and now 4 or 8 car 455s and 450s so it can be one of four stock types, 4,8 or 10 carriages long. Toilets or no toilets. I might have to start playing a game of South Western Railway rolling stock bingo at this rate.

The reason there has been some unusual stock on that line is probably because the Class 442 introduction has been delayed, so SWR have to use other stock to provide the additional services as part of the May timetable change. But when the 442s enter service, there shouldn't be much 455s or 450s on the Windsor line.

Welcome to RailUK Forums as well.

 

[swt_passenger]

The reason there has been some unusual stock on that line is probably because the Class 442 introduction has been delayed, so SWR have to use other stock to provide the additional services as part of the May timetable change. But when the 442s enter service, there shouldn't be much 455s or 450s on the Windsor line.

Welcome to RailUK Forums as well.

There are a very few booked 455 turns to Windsor even without the current 442 issues, 0702, 1923 and 2153 departures from Windsor. No booked 450s as said.

 

[TEW]

The booked 455 turns to Windsor are new too. Prior to May they were all diagrammed 458 or 707, 455s were a little unusual but not exactly rare to Windsor but much more common now.

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

Slightly off topic, but just out of curiosity, are there any Waterloo to Basingstoke stopping services booked as 444s?

 

[swt_passenger]

Slightly off topic, but just out of curiosity, are there any Waterloo to Basingstoke stopping services booked as 444s?

Can’t find any down services, but the weekday 1624 up train is shown as a 10.444 in the working notices.

 

[infobleep]

I hadn't realised until the other day, that the 18:45 Waterloo to Portsmouth no longer stops at West Byfleet due to their now being an 18:48 to Poole and there being no time to stop there any more, what with another train directly behind. Alas due to the 442 issue the 18:48 hasn't run yet. Hopefully it won't be much longer.

However the train does stop at Worplesdon instead and so still gets into Guildford at the same time.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I hadn't realised until the other day, that the 18:45 Waterloo to Portsmouth no longer stops at West Byfleet due to their now being an 18:48 to Poole and there being no time to stop there any more, what with another train directly behind. Alas due to the 442 issue the 18:48 hasn't run yet. Hopefully it won't be much longer.

The 18.55 Alton stops at West Byfleet instead and was lengthened from 8 to 12 cars at the same time.

 

[infobleep]

The 18.55 Alton stops at West Byfleet instead and was lengthened from 8 to 12 cars at the same time.

Thanks for that. It seems someone on Twitter may not have been aware of this service. I was aware of it but it didn't dawn on me it was an additional stop. Shame it can't stop at Surbtion as well but I digress for selfish reasons.

 

[SWT_USER]

Delays today because, according to journey check:
Earlier today, a train arrived London Waterloo station earlier than scheduled. This caused reduced capacity at Waterloo.
London Waterloo station is operating at its full capacity, especially during morning peak hours. Particularly on busy routes, where trains need to run to a very tight schedule, such incidents can cause knock-on delays that continue for hours afterwards. These knock-on delays often affect both the route with the issue and any connecting routes.
In order to bring the services back to normal, we will be forced to alter some of the services. We expect the service alterations and delays by up to 15 minutes to continue until 12:00

I am a little surprised that a single early arrival disrupts services for half a day, unless this is the Windsor steam train? In which case NR shouldn't be allowing it to run in the peak hours if it's causing this level of disruption.

 

[swt_passenger]

Delays today because, according to journey check:
Earlier today, a train arrived London Waterloo station earlier than scheduled. This caused reduced capacity at Waterloo.
London Waterloo station is operating at its full capacity, especially during morning peak hours. Particularly on busy routes, where trains need to run to a very tight schedule, such incidents can cause knock-on delays that continue for hours afterwards. These knock-on delays often affect both the route with the issue and any connecting routes.
In order to bring the services back to normal, we will be forced to alter some of the services. We expect the service alterations and delays by up to 15 minutes to continue until 12:00

I am a little surprised that a single early arrival disrupts services for half a day, unless this is the Windsor steam train? In which case NR shouldn't be allowing it to run in the peak hours if it's causing this level of disruption.

A separate thread started about this, and as you surmised it apparently was a case of the steam ECS disrupting operations by locking up the throat:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/severe-delays-“because-a-train-arrived-too-early”.184095/

 

[pompeyfan]

The steam Windsor service was meant to be held by the signaller on the Windsor reversible near Queenstown road, but was instead allowed to proceed unchecked to international junction, where it snarled everything up, added to that the 442 was offered the wrong platform at Waterloo which took a few minutes to put back and reset.

 

[SWT_USER]

Is the general idea that the steam stock is supposed to arrive well before the morning peak, to avoid any possible conflicts?

A separate thread started about this, and as you surmised it apparently was a case of the steam ECS disrupting operations by locking up the throat:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/severe-delays-“because-a-train-arrived-too-early”.184095/

Thanks, I have just noticed that and will comment there instead.

 

[infobleep]

...and at 0900 Journeycheck is down to 11 short formed 8 vice 10 services, and they look very like only 2 diagrams if you match up the arrivals and departures.

But there’s nothing shown for after the evening peak yet, so maybe more will be added to the list later? It will be useful to see if the same pattern continues, which is what you’d expect?

Today they didn't list short fornations on Journey Check, if they were planned by the start of the day. However it's good to know my memory wasn't failing me, when I was sure they had listed them in recent times on other days.

I was told as the 17:30 Waterloo to Portsmouth will be 8 carriages for the foreseeable future, it won't be shown on Journey Check as a short formation.

Whilst we'll never reach 100% consistency, it would be good if they could try and show all the short formations every day, rather than just some days.

I fully admit it wouldn't have changed my travel plans today but I wasn't boarding the train at Waterloo.

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

Are 158s still used on the Lymington Pier Branch, as on Wikipedia, the class 450 page had been edited by someone, removing the fact that 450s are shared with 158s and now only 450s operate the Lymington branch?

 

[pompeyfan]

It’s been 450 only since at least December.

 

[swt_passenger]

Are 158s still used on the Lymington Pier Branch, as on Wikipedia, the class 450 page had been edited by someone, removing the fact that 450s are shared with 158s and now only 450s operate the Lymington branch?

Definitely not used, ever. They finished before last Christmas as we discussed in another thread at the time, in fact reports from staff were that the 158s finished earlier than the timetable change.

Here you go, it was back in October when I noticed the writing was on the wall:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/lymington-flyer-to-be-a-450-at-last-spare-158-use.170535/
Then in a quick reply TEW reckoned the 158s were already rarely used at that time.

It was part of my reasoning (over in the refurb thread) about there having been a gradual reduction in DMU use in third rail areas over about 3 years now.

 

[swt_passenger]

Following up a previous discussion from around May, now that there are normally no 158/159 services at all “south of” the Bournemouth main line, (except the Saturday service to Corfe castle), has a final decision been made about Fratton depot traction knowledge?

 

[pompeyfan]

Following up a previous discussion from around May, now that there are normally no 158/159 services at all “south of” the Bournemouth main line, (except the Saturday service to Corfe castle), has a final decision been made about Fratton depot traction knowledge?

Speculation is that Fratton will lose all its diesel traction work. Currently 2 jobs, one is the morning turn that starts at Totton but it’s a taxi to Southampton, and the other I believe is the 1835 from Southampton to Romsey and return.

 

[swt_passenger]

Speculation is that Fratton will lose all its diesel traction work. Currently 2 jobs, one is the morning turn that starts at Totton but it’s a taxi to Southampton, and the other I believe is the 1835 from Southampton to Romsey and return.

That Totton starter is looking more and more odd. AFAICT it’s main purpose is to provide the earliest call for passengers wanting a through service to Redbridge or Millbrook. For Totton to Southampton itself it could just as easily be a call in the ex Poole service that follows a few minutes later. As the ECS comes down from Salisbury anyway, then wouldn’t it be much easier for it to provide a normal “Romsey 6” starting from Salisbury...

 

[pompeyfan]

Agreed it would make more sense to start a Poole or Weymouth train a few minutes earlier and call it at Totton, Redbridge and Millbrook, then run a ‘6’ as usual.

 

[swt_passenger]

Agreed it would make more sense to start a Poole or Weymouth train a few minutes earlier and call it at Totton, Redbridge and Millbrook, then run a ‘6’ as usual.

When the big timetable change occurs perhaps it could be a call in the new Bournemouth <> Portsmouth service, supposedly all shacks west of Southampton isn’t it?

PS
Just found the original draft SWR Dec 2018 timetable, table 158A, and that did show the first up direction ‘rounder’ into Southampton (SOU) was to be started back at Romsey, and would have taken the timings of the present Totton starter from SOU onwards.

 

[SWT_USER]

Slightly off topic but probably not worth its own thread - anyone know what the purpose of this run was yesterday?

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Q41115/2019/07/13/advanced

 

[Dren Ahmeti]

Slightly off topic but probably not worth its own thread - anyone know what the purpose of this run was yesterday?

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Q41115/2019/07/13/advanced

Filming run for something or other iirc...

 

[Bigfoot]

Filming run for something or other iirc...

SWR TV advert filming.

 

[Adsy125]

Do we know if the new timetable has been submitted to Network Rail yet? I thought that for large changes like this it would need to be with them by now to review, like the GWR new timetable is.

 

[700007]

SWR TV advert filming.

Is that also why specifically 450111 was used for this (haven seen airtime before and has SWR branding inside and out)?