OwenB
Member
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2018
- Messages
- 300
05.18, 05.22 and 05.52 all cancelled. 05.18 was showing this morning then removed after saying 'delayed'
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Thameslink Services/Timetable from May 20th 2018
- Thread starter blakey1152
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Failed Unit
Established Member
Must admit this is the best day I have experienced since they timetable change. The 0727 Cambridge- London even ran although wasn’t on the timetable when I checked the live departure board.(Not on it of course)
On 0724 Peterborough - Horsham service. A reasonable number of people like myself joined at Finsbury Park. I would suggest at least half the train remaining onboard after St Pancras.
Will nearly be 1 hour early for work. First time it has worked for me since the timetable change. Let’s hope they can keep it up.
Lots left at both City Thameslink and Blackfriars. So demand exists. Even with the current shambles.
On 0724 Peterborough - Horsham service. A reasonable number of people like myself joined at Finsbury Park. I would suggest at least half the train remaining onboard after St Pancras.
Will nearly be 1 hour early for work. First time it has worked for me since the timetable change. Let’s hope they can keep it up.
Lots left at both City Thameslink and Blackfriars. So demand exists. Even with the current shambles.
Last edited:
The 0522 ran. The 0518 was delayed and cancelled. Not sure if the 0552 was meant to run. As I said, all scheduled/booked services ran bar one.
OwenB
Member
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2018
- Messages
- 300
Yep, was listed on the NRE app until around 5.20, i.e. about 10 minutes before I was going to leave the house.
Edit: My mistake re: 05.22 - double listing on Recent Train Times
Last edited:
Failed Unit
Established Member
For interest how to you know what is scheduled? A number of trains made it through that were not in the journey planner. But the operated and added last minute. Not sure if they also remove things last minute. As there is no published timetable it is still a lottery IMO
Last edited:
The 8.25 Wimbledon to Sutton was cancelled today 6 minutes after it should have left. It hadn't even left Radlit at that point.
When asking on Twitter, why it was cancelled, I was told it is due to the amended service.
If that is the case, why wasn't it cancelled last night?
The next train wasn't until 8.55, so I decided to head to New Malden and catch a bus. It dawned on me that during the disruption my ticket is valid on the buses.
I got to the bus stop and had just missed a 213. The next one was in 9 minutes. I saw there was an X26 due at the New Fountain Roundabout in 14 minutes but they aren't much faster than the 213 and don't go so close to my destination. Imagine my frustration when my bus reaches the New Fountain Roundabout just after an X26 departs. So much for it being 14 minutes.
Needless to say, today the X26 is much faster.
At least I will reach my destination about the same time as if I'd waited for the 8.55.
Had I actually got out at New Malden in the first place, I'd have saved 25 minutes or more.
I see the 9.55 is cancelled due to more trains needing repair than usual. With so many trains cancelled, it's a shame they can't get a train in the right place to run that service. There must be spare rolling stock somewhere.
When asking on Twitter, why it was cancelled, I was told it is due to the amended service.
If that is the case, why wasn't it cancelled last night?
The next train wasn't until 8.55, so I decided to head to New Malden and catch a bus. It dawned on me that during the disruption my ticket is valid on the buses.
I got to the bus stop and had just missed a 213. The next one was in 9 minutes. I saw there was an X26 due at the New Fountain Roundabout in 14 minutes but they aren't much faster than the 213 and don't go so close to my destination. Imagine my frustration when my bus reaches the New Fountain Roundabout just after an X26 departs. So much for it being 14 minutes.
Needless to say, today the X26 is much faster.
At least I will reach my destination about the same time as if I'd waited for the 8.55.
Had I actually got out at New Malden in the first place, I'd have saved 25 minutes or more.
I see the 9.55 is cancelled due to more trains needing repair than usual. With so many trains cancelled, it's a shame they can't get a train in the right place to run that service. There must be spare rolling stock somewhere.
Last edited:
notverydeep
Member
- Joined
- 9 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 886
Credit where due: 2C13, the 0822 from Welwyn Garden City ran as advertised by the driver yesterday. Somewhat oddly retimed to 0821, but showing on Live Departures (though not RTT). And it ran on time - my first 'par' morning journey of the new timetable and a late running Orpington train at St. Pancras enabled an hour and a minute door to door - two minutes better than the connection I would expect to make with this timetable, though still slightly worse than on time under the old timetable. Can I look forward to this tomorrow? The driver did not repeat his promise this morning...
I have managed one 'par' afternoon return journey - on the first Monday of the timetable, but not achieved it since.
Don't hold your breath, it is probably just a dead cat bounce before service returns to the current poor form.
Dunnyrail
Member
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 138
Last night I wnt to a Mac User Group meeting in Luton. After the interesting talk he dashed to the Station if I do not get the 2110 (think it was) I do not get another till 2200 or after. On walking over the Bridge to my car noticed that his trainwas getting on for 50 late. Glad I went by car, did not realise that the Midland was in just as much of a meltdown as GN. Sad days for the Railway.
JonD
JonD
Failed Unit
Established Member
Went for 1221 London KX - Cambridge
“On time” at 1215. Then 15 late.
Member of the platform staff came on and said the driver is a Royston
The train didnt stand a chance of running so wonder why it took them so long to Cancel it.
Oh well hopefully next one will run.
“On time” at 1215. Then 15 late.
Member of the platform staff came on and said the driver is a Royston
The train didnt stand a chance of running so wonder why it took them so long to Cancel it.
Oh well hopefully next one will run.
Failed Unit
Established Member
Lots in Hornsey when I passed earlier this morning.
Two very clear things come out from this to me:
1. The usual TOC Operations' attitude of JFDI - no-one spends any time thinking they just go straight into "doing" mode.
2. Really, if GTR really had no idea that they were going to be faced with "rostering" problems (which actually seems to mean that did't have the right training for the right drivers), then they're even more incompetent than I thought.
Yesterday I boarded the 16:06 from Victoria which is normally one of the faster services that stops at Horsham. Shortly after East Croydon, an announcement was made that the train would now be making an additional stop at Redhill, because of Thameslink (he stopped short of giving further details). Does anyone know what that was all about?
Presumably the lack of services between Redhill and Gatwick / the Arun Valley caused by Thameslink cancellations. The gaps in the timetable between Redhill and Gatwick are just as bad if not worse than the gaps between London Bridge and Redhill.
fusionblue
Member
- Joined
- 10 May 2012
- Messages
- 327
Was London Bridge fitted out to allow Thameslink trains to use platforms 3 and 5 at London Bridge? I've seen the RLU/FLU markers and i'm wondering if this is the case. If so, what would they be used for?
tsr
Established Member
Platform 3 is used in the event of incidents meaning Platform 4 is unavailable (for example, it has been used a fair few times by trains avoiding others which are stood awaiting pilot drivers in Platform 4). Platform 5 is the vanilla-flavour standard option for northbound TL services.
bramling
Veteran Member
I decided to give the train a go going in today. Took 12:56 Letchworth - King's Cross. Train was late coming out of the siding at Letchworth - how on earth that could happen for a train which has a massive layover is beyond me. Not indicated on the departures boards at either Letchworth or Hitchin, so hardly anyone on. With very slack timings (this train runs four minutes earlier from Letchworth than comparable services, I'm presuming the Letchworth start is to facilitiate a freight path on the Cambridge branch, however I can't see any obvious reason for the difference in timings), the train was back on time by Welwyn. Then caught up with a 313 after Potters Bar, which is a predicted common issue with the up Cambridge/KX stopping services, but was turned out onto the fast line at New Barnet. A few minutes late into King's Cross. All in all it did the job, good to have carriage to self for the entire journey, but sloppy operation may well have meant it had lost its path into the core had it been a ThamesLink/ service, and it would have picked up greater delay had the fast line not been utilised. Also journey did seem to drag - even had it ran right time the journey would have been a few minutes slower than 1990s 317 timings, so all in all a bit underwhelming. Looking forward to a ride home on one of the Pullman services later.
Perhaps they are taking an opportunity to do works on all of them.
This evening I ended up on a Southern train from East Croydon but I did notice a train from Cambridge to Brighton was running with a 21 minute.
If I ask Thameslink on Twitter I wonder if they would say it's due to the amended timetable.
If so I'd say why wasn't it in the timetable yesterday? I am aware though that some people state it sometimes necessary to let trains run late as it's not possible timetable them at the time they actually leave. Maybe that is the case here.
Incidentally I got the X26 from Sutton this evening. Unlike the X26 that left this morning, it was showing as 2 minutes early when I got ready to catch it and 7 minutes later it was now running 4 minutes late. It left 10 minutes late.
Thus I had to run to the platform to catch my intended train. I only made it because it left 2 minutes late instead of its predicted 1. It arrived shortly before I got to the platform. I was lucky.
It showcases why I never like catching buses in order to connect with trains.
I know the trains are unreliable at the moment but with buses you simply don't know if you'll make a train in time most of the time. When a bus is every 30 minutes you can't always leave earlier either.
If I ask Thameslink on Twitter I wonder if they would say it's due to the amended timetable.
If so I'd say why wasn't it in the timetable yesterday? I am aware though that some people state it sometimes necessary to let trains run late as it's not possible timetable them at the time they actually leave. Maybe that is the case here.
Incidentally I got the X26 from Sutton this evening. Unlike the X26 that left this morning, it was showing as 2 minutes early when I got ready to catch it and 7 minutes later it was now running 4 minutes late. It left 10 minutes late.
Thus I had to run to the platform to catch my intended train. I only made it because it left 2 minutes late instead of its predicted 1. It arrived shortly before I got to the platform. I was lucky.
It showcases why I never like catching buses in order to connect with trains.
I know the trains are unreliable at the moment but with buses you simply don't know if you'll make a train in time most of the time. When a bus is every 30 minutes you can't always leave earlier either.
That’s what GTR are claiming. To be fair they didn’t get the confirmed timetable from Network Rail until very late in the day but you’d have thought they’d have run the draft timetable (which wasn’t a million miles different from the final one) through their diagram and rostering software to give them a heads up on what the position was likely to be.
It appears that GTR just thought it would all be ok and that they’d get through. Then at the very last minute they realised the reality but it was too late by then.
87015
Established Member
Claiming being the operative word. Most of the delay was down to GTR changing things because they didn't think they could resource what they'd bid for.
Last edited:
This is exactly what they should have done. They didn't even need to be perfect with the diagramming, just done a basic draft to see if any issues were revealed. It beggars belief that they didn't do this, so either they are liars or they are completely useless. If it were anyone other than GTR I'd bet on the former, but with GTR I'm not sure.
BTW one of the reasons that NR were late with the confirmed TT was that GTR's timetable had a huge number of conflicts, including conflicts with their own trains. None of this was mentioned to the committee...
87015
Established Member
Largely because they've basically abandoned it. A clear example of the mentality is that they are not even trying to bid around engineering work and are re-bidding WTT schedules that go straight through blocks at the last minute and then blame NR for not providing a working weekend TT. GTR then put the effort into removing delay minutes to NR despite utterly shafting them. If any of the trade mags were interested in getting off their pro-TOC high horses it would really help...
Failed Unit
Established Member
Are network rail allowed to defend themselves in the enquiries and state these facts? Or has Chris Grayling gagged them? It just amazes me that it only seems to be this forum challenging the “party line” it is all network rails fault.
I am with many others. The basic timetable isn’t much different to what was implemented. There is no way Network rail are totally attributable to this mess.
Speaking of delays being transmitted from the rest of the country through London, 9J63 1954 Peterborough to Horsham was on time this evening at Arlesley. It was delayed by 1T59 1947 Ely to London Kings Cross at Hitchin presumably picking up some additional stops.
Slight delay at Digswell for a late running East Coast train following problems at Retford. Then, it was put on the slow line at Welwyn behind a stopping service, resulting in it being 16 minutes late when it got back on the fast line at Potters Bar. Result, a 15 minute late presentation into the Core.
What is the point of these trains having 9 headcodes if that is going to happen? Maybe the 700s should have been specified for a higher speed to keep their place on the fast line after Welwyn.
Ultimately, the reason for the delay was the problem at Retford.
https://www.virgintrainseastcoast.c...isruption-id=B25CB8FDC5544CB1BE77986435D7806B
Slight delay at Digswell for a late running East Coast train following problems at Retford. Then, it was put on the slow line at Welwyn behind a stopping service, resulting in it being 16 minutes late when it got back on the fast line at Potters Bar. Result, a 15 minute late presentation into the Core.
What is the point of these trains having 9 headcodes if that is going to happen? Maybe the 700s should have been specified for a higher speed to keep their place on the fast line after Welwyn.
Ultimately, the reason for the delay was the problem at Retford.
https://www.virgintrainseastcoast.c...isruption-id=B25CB8FDC5544CB1BE77986435D7806B
I suspect the DfT is heavily involved in the shambles but no-one in the industry dare criticise them.
Given GTR is a management contract if they needed more drivers DfT would need to agree.
If GTR needed to spend more on driver training DfT would need to agree.
Don't get me wrong, GTR are just as culpable but I can just see a classic 'Yes Minister' scene:
Government (I.e. Network Rail) causes a delay to the timetable
GTR need more resources for training and flag to DfT. In typical Yes Minuster style this wouldn't be a direct request, it would be an incomprehensible message saying that there were certain unquantifiable risks rather than a direct 'the whole operation's going to turn into a complete shambles and a vote loser'.
DfT dither and tell GTR to mitigate the risks in an equally incomprehensible response.
Everyone buries their heads in the sand, the rail service falls apart and the DfT announces an enquiry.
The enquiry will be chaired by someone 'sound' and will completely exonerate the DfT from any blame.
Grayling will end up being promoted at the next reshuffle.
Given GTR is a management contract if they needed more drivers DfT would need to agree.
If GTR needed to spend more on driver training DfT would need to agree.
Don't get me wrong, GTR are just as culpable but I can just see a classic 'Yes Minister' scene:
Government (I.e. Network Rail) causes a delay to the timetable
GTR need more resources for training and flag to DfT. In typical Yes Minuster style this wouldn't be a direct request, it would be an incomprehensible message saying that there were certain unquantifiable risks rather than a direct 'the whole operation's going to turn into a complete shambles and a vote loser'.
DfT dither and tell GTR to mitigate the risks in an equally incomprehensible response.
Everyone buries their heads in the sand, the rail service falls apart and the DfT announces an enquiry.
The enquiry will be chaired by someone 'sound' and will completely exonerate the DfT from any blame.
Grayling will end up being promoted at the next reshuffle.
- Status