Thameslink Services/Timetable from May 20th 2018

[sefton]

And I don't think the driver on this train when they announced it was now a stopping service to Peterborough could sound more pissed off if they tried.

 

[Taunton]

Charles Horton, CEO, GTR:

"We always said that delivering the biggest timetable change in generations would be challenging – but we are sorry that we have not been able to deliver the service that passengers expect. Delayed approval of the timetable led to an unexpected need to substantially adjust our plans and resources. We fully understand that passengers want more certainty and are working very hard to bring greater consistency to the timetable as soon as possible. We will also be working with industry colleagues to establish a timetable that will progressively deliver improvement."

Still trying to stick it on Network Rail, Horton, aren't you. The key problem is you don't have the drivers in place to operate the service because you saved money on recruitment of extra drivers and training for the new routes. That's wholly your responsibility, and known about for years. I know you think you can obfusciate Grayling and (possibly) the BBC by pseudo-technical wiffle-waffle, but if you really think it wasn't anything to do with you then it won't get fixed, and this will just roll on and on.

 

[Dren Ahmeti]

Any news on tomorrow's cancellations ? Looking forward to the next spoiler.

It takes a lot of work for me to collate the cancellations before they’re officially annouced, I’ll try for tonight though!

 

[mmh]

And I don't think the driver on this train when they announced it was now a stopping service to Peterborough could sound more pissed off if they tried.

At least GTR is an equal opportunities employer - they piss their staff off just as competently as their passengers.

 

[mmh]

The south-east became dormitory towns last century - of one takes the GN route it’s one string of new or expanded towns - Hatfield, Welwyn GC, Stevenage, Sandy. St Neots, Huntingdon, Peterborough, Letchworth. There’s only so much which can be sustained, and now we have people commuting from places much further out - Newark, Bath, Rugby etc. It has to end somewhere.

I quite agree. I know someone who commutes to central London from Stafford, which to my mind is a sign of how ridiculous it gets when you to take it to extremes. It's why I'm unconvinced of the "need" for HS2, or the "need" for more services on the old WCML so more people can live in Milton Keynes and work in London - how about creating the jobs in Milton Keynes instead?

*If* London is comfortable with its population size increasing (although judging by the stressed behaviour of many Londoners when they encounter a challenging situation like a crowded train or blocked road I’d suggest maybe they’re not) then fine - but don’t inflict this on the rest of the south-east.

Absolutely spot on - or the rest of the country!

 

[Robert Symonds]

Thank you! Finally some sense and not constant complaints!

Personally I think all inner London stations should get 8-10tph so to reduce overcrowding and so that inner London travellers don’t have to wait too long for the train and parts of south London could have tube like frequencies, Medway, Redhill etc need to provide these services as dormitory towns, areas like Slade Green need the extra trains, there is a greater good to this

Rubbish.Medway doesn't need Thameslink.Start Thameslink at Dartford if you must and restore the Charing Cross service from Dartford to Medway.It makes far more sense.By all means stop at all stations, that does make sense now.

 

[Ianno87]

It’s a matter of your opinion that homes need to be built, and even if we did take that as a given they don’t have to be built in the congested south-east. Use market forces to allocate a scarce resource, just like everything else. In any case what’s the point in building homes for them to be immediately filled and the population size keeps rising - you’re then in the same position ten years down the line, just with a worse standard of living for everyone.

Market forces *are* allocating a scarce resource. That's why people priced out of London are moving to Hitchin, Hitchin to Peterborough, etc. etc.

In my view (and it is only a view) the basic problem is not population growth (and I'm not sure Brexit may have a dramatic effect on this anyway - it's still in the nation's interest to bring in oodles of talent from other contries), it's the wild and growing mismatch of the jobs market to housing stock.

Basic agglomoration theory means firms wishing to recruit skilled workers want to cluster in hubs like London, Cambridge, Milton Keynes, Oxford etc, for access to those workers (either as they already work there, or know they are the place to look for that employment). Cue huge demand for housing in those areas, whilst housing stock elsewhere lies empty (e.g. post industrial aras of the north, or South Wales).

For as long as we have a free market economy, firms are going to continue to choose to do this to succeed. HS2 might redress the balance in the long term to strengthen regional hubs like Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester and the East Midlands, but for the forseeable future, its something the railway is going to have to continue to adapt to deal with.

Crossrail 2 should also "unlock" housing in the Lea Valley too.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Rubbish.Medway doesn't need Thameslink.Start Thameslink at Dartford if you must and restore the Charing Cross service from Dartford to Medway.It makes far more sense.By all means stop at all stations, that does make sense now.

More selfishness from Medway commuters, there is a demand for stopping services along the line

 

[AM9]

92.168.128.95
ras
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ble-from-may-20th.164547/page-39#post-348sudo nan
yesmkdir #

8-10tph for many south London stations would be complete overkill and could back-fire by encouraging excessive population growth in areas which couldn't properly handle it. Not everywhere has to be built on. ...

Excessive population growth takes a bit more than a good trains service. There's homes, then the jobs to for their residents and of course enough cash to pay for the houses, don't forget, the prices rise as the local train services improve, currently known as the 'Crossrail effect'.

 

[NorthKent1989]

As usual your post reads like a pretty depressing vision of a Britain you seem to wish to inflict on everyone (else), and ignores a range of valid and important factors, from Thameslink reliability to the fact that Thameslink is in many ways a poor solution, particularly the way the current plan locks some routes into 8 cars - 16 wider doors is not as good as 24 normal width doors.

I don’t believe there should be this idea that population growth should be regarded as inevitable - it shouldn’t. The south-east in particular simply struggles to support the population it has now, let alone more. The normal economic forces of supply and demand interacting to produce market price should be used to allocate and if necessary ration scarce resources.

As for Brexit never happening, if Mystic AM9 Predicts is as accurate as it was on seat-back tables then I’ll get the champagne ready for next year. In the meantime Mystic Bramling predicted the trains would be unpopular and the service disastrously unreliable, which is exactly what we’ve seen, in fact much worse than anyone thought was possible. I know where I would place my bets.

It’s been less than two weeks and you want to stick the knife into Thameslink, give it a chance the timetable can work once more drivers are brought in

 

[Agent_Squash]

It’s been less than two weeks and you want to stick the knife into Thameslink, give it a chance the timetable can work once more drivers are brought in

The member in question has raised several valid concerns about Thameslink for the last few years.

 

[jdxn]

What simply doesn't stack up on the GTR side is that even if you say that the timetabling was very late there appears to be huge number of drivers who do not sign routes. Although timing alterations may mean that they need an extra few drivers here and there on certain routes, surely the vast majority of the route learning issues were entirely foreseeable.

 

[MML]

Same old PR propaganda supporting the failure of these overpaid Chief Executives.
'Exciting' and 'transformational' are just the PR sound bites used by the ignorant.
Challenging is simply seen as a positive word rather than difficult, failing, shambolic, problematic which although more appropriate are considered negative language.
How many additional drivers could have been trained had the salaries of the top executives been more wisely used ?

 

[bramling]

It’s been less than two weeks and you want to stick the knife into Thameslink, give it a chance the timetable can work once more drivers are brought in

Two weeks when real people needed to make real journeys to real places of work - it should have worked out of the box, at least to a much better extent than it has.

But even if we ignore the teething or not-so-teething issues, Thameslink still brings inherent unreliability, unpredictability and a less dependable service, plus less comfortable trains with a reduction in seating availability (which is still what most people want - a seat).

If you look through RTTT there are plenty of examples of trains which have picked up late running, which has propagated through the system and affected multiple services and/or led to people being inconvenience dthroigh recovery measures.

If the powers that be didn’t want knives stuck in, how about delivering something vaguely akin to what was advertised? The deliverables have already been descoped heavily. At present the whole programme looks like failure after failure, raising serious questions about the competence of those specifying, planning and delivering.

 

[jdxn]

Thinking further - the biggest failure of the whole thing is not deciding to postpone the changes in the weeks leading up to the timetable change as the TOC's must have realised it was not going to be possible to achieve.

 

[BRX]

8-10tph for many south London stations would be complete overkill

There are plenty of inner south london stations which already have >4-6tph in the peaks and as it is people can't physically get on the trains.

A lot of zone 2 london de-populated post war, and has arguably been underpopulated for some decades. In the relatively recent past we've seen it re-populated and many of the rail lines, which pre-war used to have more intensive services and on which many stations were closed, have not kept up. The effect is particularly pronounced in South London because it (as far as I understand) saw greater de-population and is also more reliant on mainline rail because of the sparsity of the tube network south of the river.

 

[jon0844]

Thinking further - the biggest failure of the whole thing is not deciding to postpone the changes in the weeks leading up to the timetable change as the TOC's must have realised it was not going to be possible to achieve.

That's why I want to know if GTR asked early on to postpone the new timetable and had the request refused.

 

[bramling]

There are plenty of inner south london stations which already have >4-6tph in the peaks and as it is people can't physically get on the trains.

A lot of zone 2 london de-populated post war, and has arguably been underpopulated for some decades. In the relatively recent past we've seen it re-populated and many of the rail lines, which pre-war used to have more intensive services and on which many stations were closed, have not kept up. The effect is particularly pronounced in South London because it (as far as I understand) saw greater de-population and is also more reliant on mainline rail because of the sparsity of the tube network south of the river.

This is interesting food for thought. One wonders of the capacity is being directed to the wrong places.

Instead of Thameslink to Rainham, Littlehampton et cetera, should the 12-car trains be being used on much more inner-suburban routes like Dartford, Hayes, et cetera? On the GN side should we be sending 700s to Welwyn and Hertford, and perhaps just running a high-frequency self-contained shuttle between Finsbury Park and Moorgate? This would keep Thameslink as a mainly London metro service plus St Albans with its love affair with Thameslink (I take it Luton and Bedford aren’t so in love with Thameslink given how much backlash there has been against the EMT changes!)

All the talk about how wonderful and vital the Thameslink capacity is gets rather ruined when one realises over half the undesiros are only 8 cars, which tend to be concentrated closer to London.

 

[jon0844]

This is interesting food for thought. One wonders of the capacity is being directed to the wrong places.

Instead of Thameslink to Rainham, Littlehampton et cetera, should the 12-car trains be being used on much more inner-suburban routes like Dartford, Hayes, et cetera? On the GN side should we be sending 700s to Welwyn and Hertford, and perhaps just running a high-frequency self-contained shuttle between Finsbury Park and Moorgate?

Now the trains are slowed down and some of the Moorgate trains skip stops, plus 717s coming with air conditioning and Wi-Fi (apparently Network Rail is also going to add 4G coverage in the Northern City Line tunnels, although that's not confirmed yet for sure) as well as faster acceleration that may speed the services up, it is certainly more tempting to look at these from WGC and south. Then ignore the King's Cross trains altogether.

The issue is that Finsbury Park is cramped but that is being worked on.

 

[Robert Symonds]

More selfishness from Medway commuters, there is a demand for stopping services along the line

That's not what I was saying.Im quite happy for services to stop at every station.What I am saying though is the Rainham to Luton service is not needed or wanted.The Charing Cross service was far more practical.Im certainly not being selfish I'm actually thinking of everyone then uses public transport? I use to live in Medway and my parents live in Higham, so I know what I'm talking about.I now actually live in Abbeywood and generally I'm very grateful to have 8 tph and lots more once Crossrail opens.Do you really think almost running no service with this new line is satisfactory.Leaving a station with almost no service, and please don't tell me this service will bed in.Im not convinced that a service running from Rainham all the way to Luton is ever going to be that reliable.

 

[Failed Unit]

Quick question about a real emergency timetable. Back in 2000 a train derailment at Hatfield caused network wide emergency timetables. I am not sure if the resources exist any more to do what was weekly rewrites as it was back then. Or if GTR can’t say how many resources they have irrespective. But that is what we really want now. Even if we go down to 1tph. 1 reliable train per hour is better than turn up and hope.

 

[nickswift99]

Now the trains are slowed down and some of the Moorgate trains skip stops, plus 717s coming with air conditioning and Wi-Fi (apparently Network Rail is also going to add 4G coverage in the Northern City Line tunnels, although that's not confirmed yet for sure) as well as faster acceleration that may speed the services up, it is certainly more tempting to look at these from WGC and south. Then ignore the King's Cross trains altogether.

The issue is that Finsbury Park is cramped but that is being worked on.

4G is a requirement for ESMCP (The replacement for the Airwave emergency services communication system). This would require 4G coverage in the tunnels. However, the Home Office are currently reviewing the whole programme with one option being to kick it into the very long grass. This will almost certainly impact NR's desire to deliver 4G.

 

[nickswift99]

Quick question about a real emergency timetable. Back in 2000 a train derailment at Hatfield caused network wide emergency timetables. I am not sure if the resources exist any more to do what was weekly rewrites as it was back then. Or if GTR can’t say how many resources they have irrespective. But that is what we really want now. Even if we go down to 1tph. 1 reliable train per hour is better than turn up and hope.

There's been similar questions about GWR reliability from the January 2018 timetable which I think would be hard for anyone to deny has not been the "5 go on a rip-roaring adventure" success that it should have been. I wonder if there's an organisational reluctance to recast timetables when they're demonstrated to be difficult/impossible to operate? Given that this seems to apply to several TOCs, is it an NR or DfT constraint that's making this happen?

 

[Failed Unit]

There's been similar questions about GWR reliability from the January 2018 timetable which I think would be hard for anyone to deny has not been the "5 go on a rip-roaring adventure" success that it should have been. I wonder if there's an organisational reluctance to recast timetables when they're demonstrated to be difficult/impossible to operate? Given that this seems to apply to several TOCs, is it an NR or DfT constraint that's making this happen?

Hard to comment about south of the river. But I understand on MML part of the problem was not to amend paths too much in Leicester are above. Likewise VTEC hasn’t changed much from Peterborough north. If the old timetable was the solution will it be that difficult on ECML and MML?

 

[BRX]

This is interesting food for thought. One wonders of the capacity is being directed to the wrong places.

Instead of Thameslink to Rainham, Littlehampton et cetera, should the 12-car trains be being used on much more inner-suburban routes like Dartford, Hayes, et cetera? On the GN side should we be sending 700s to Welwyn and Hertford, and perhaps just running a high-frequency self-contained shuttle between Finsbury Park and Moorgate? This would keep Thameslink as a mainly London metro service plus St Albans with its love affair with Thameslink (I take it Luton and Bedford aren’t so in love with Thameslink given how much backlash there has been against the EMT changes!)

I've no idea whether there'd be the capacity for the 24 tph through the core to turn around at the busy inner-suburban destinations you describe - do you?

As I understand it, one of the benefits of running the trains further out is that they can be turned around in places that are terminii or which don't have the intensity of service that London stations do. Plus there is some leeway to turn short to get diagrams back on track.

 

[the Rat]

8-10tph for many south London stations would be complete overkill and could back-fire by encouraging excessive population growth in areas which couldn't properly handle it. Not everywhere has to be built on.

It's not helped by business holding onto the idea that offices and jobs have to be in central London when they could just as easily be anywhere. We could do with some decent attempts to reverse that and local authorities having the gumption to support it rather than accept increasing amounts of the south east becoming dormitory towns.

Wow, this defence of an obviously poor timetable is quite incredible.

Put simply, instead of providing trains for areas of population, the suggestion is to move the areas of population to where the trains are running. 10/10 for blue sky thinking but, unfortunately, the reality is that the sky is a dark grey colour and everyone is about to get royally dumped on!!

 

[the Rat]

previously the semi fast trains never stopped at Plumstead or Deptford so Medway folk can now have the opportunity to explore those areas

So there you have it, Medway folk, you may be destitute through losing your job because of this omni-shambles of a timetable, but at least you can beg for the price of a cup of tea in Plumstead or Deptford now!!

 

[nickswift99]

I've no idea whether there'd be the capacity for the 24 tph through the core to turn around at the busy inner-suburban destinations you describe - do you?

As I understand it, one of the benefits of running the trains further out is that they can be turned around in places that are terminii or which don't have the intensity of service that London stations do. Plus there is some leeway to turn short to get diagrams back on track.

Another GWR anology (sorry). The turnback siding at Maidenhead and the Marlow "bay" has proved invaluable in allowing GWR to continue to run stopping services "most of the way" when there have been wiring issues or buckled rail problems east of Slough. This enabled the Didcot stoppers to run at least as far as there, localising the service impact - and yes, if you traveled from Hayes or Southall it was pretty grim. What opportunities exist, especially north of the Thames and outside the M25, for a similar approach?

This would at least mitigate the very poor service that seems to be happening on the GN.

 

[Robert Symonds]

So there you have it, Medway folk, you may be destitute through losing your job because of this omni-shambles of a timetable, but at least you can beg for the price of a cup of tea in Plumstead or Deptford now!!

I was going to reply to the poster on this, but I couldn’t be bothered.You would hope he was taking the mick, but going on his previous comments I feel he was serious.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

There are plenty of inner south london stations which already have >4-6tph in the peaks and as it is people can't physically get on the trains.

A lot of zone 2 london de-populated post war, and has arguably been underpopulated for some decades. In the relatively recent past we've seen it re-populated and many of the rail lines, which pre-war used to have more intensive services and on which many stations were closed, have not kept up. The effect is particularly pronounced in South London because it (as far as I understand) saw greater de-population and is also more reliant on mainline rail because of the sparsity of the tube network south of the river.

That is an excellent and relevant point , - a lot of inner - ish London had a major population decampment after WW2 , due partly to bomb damage , obsolescent housing conditions and the Government's New Town and dispersement policies , (the Location of Officers Bureau etc) , so that a chunk of Notting Hill's and Ladbroke Grove's people went from there to Carpenders Park , Bethnal Green went to Debden on the Central Line and so on ...(well documented by various geographers and sociological writers) , ergo "BR" was encouraged to reduce the inner services and concentrate more on the 30 miles + territories , though the hope was that local communities would be self contained.