Thameslink Services/Timetable from May 20th 2018

[jon0844]

There are changes underway in Hatfield with a new Traffic Regulation Order being put in place by Herts CC to control the area in front of the station (the yellow lines have been painted) plus new dedicated short term bays within the car park itself. There will be a publicity campaign regarding the changes within the next few weeks, once everything is in place.

The new bays in the car park are there but it's hard to get anyone to go in. People fear they're charged on entry and don't see the bit about getting 20 minutes free.

There's secure bike parking going in too. Accessible via smart card.

 

[Failed Unit]

Thank you for responding so comprehensively. Apart from the "Are the 700s comfortable?" answer, which is entirely subjective and a personal opinion,* you appear to be speaking about ECML/GN line services rather than all of the other areas (MML, BML, Southern Metro and Souteastern).
My post #4878 was really about the almost completely off-topic diversion about car parks at various stations. The tenuous link to the current timetable issues (the actual topic of this thread) made a point in one post that then got dragged off the thread's topic onto anything vaguely near to a Thameslink station even including a Youtube link to Arlesley High Street traffic. With over 30 posts about car parking, time is surely ripe to create a dedicated thread about the subject which would enable those who have it seems so much to say on the subject to fill their boots.

* Not all posters here (and passengers in the real world) see the class700s as a comfort problem.

Agree this parking discussions possibly should be in their own thread but I get the impression that Southern was always an improvement and the former MML routes are an improvement. It is just Great Northern suffering (but that was always the plan)

As for comfort I agree it is subjective but the 700s have less seats than the 317s. On the trains I used we always got a seat but remove 140 seats per service and you don’t. Hence why comfort is reduced.

It is argued that the 700s are better for standees but when the train is the reason you have standees in the first place then they are less comfortable whatever your opinion of the seat is.

Maybe in May 2019 when some of the WGC services go through the core I may like the new timetable assuming of course the 717s stay out the way now we are stuck on the slow lines. Maybe as well when the full service is in place some of the passengers from further north will use the 12 coach trains rather than the 8s. That will improve comfort. As I have said before I have watched the 12 car 1742ish from Finsbury Park - Cambridge leave with lots of empty seats. It overtakes the over crowded 1731 service on route. I suspect people won’t wait for the later service in case it arrives at Finsbury Park but doesn’t have a driver to go north.

 

[ijmad]

I believe that the May timetable is supposed to be implemented in December. That is the message GTR have been telling the RUGs on the GN route.

That certainly seems to line up with what's been loaded in to RTT at the moment.

 

[Ianno87]

Agree this parking discussions possibly should be in their own thread but I get the impression that Southern was always an improvement and the former MML routes are an improvement. It is just Great Northern suffering (but that was always the plan)

As for comfort I agree it is subjective but the 700s have less seats than the 317s. On the trains I used we always got a seat but remove 140 seats per service and you don’t. Hence why comfort is reduced.

It is argued that the 700s are better for standees but when the train is the reason you have standees in the first place then they are less comfortable whatever your opinion of the seat is.

Maybe in May 2019 when some of the WGC services go through the core I may like the new timetable assuming of course the 717s stay out the way now we are stuck on the slow lines. Maybe as well when the full service is in place some of the passengers from further north will use the 12 coach trains rather than the 8s. That will improve comfort. As I have said before I have watched the 12 car 1742ish from Finsbury Park - Cambridge leave with lots of empty seats. It overtakes the over crowded 1731 service on route. I suspect people won’t wait for the later service in case it arrives at Finsbury Park but doesn’t have a driver to go north.

The 1742 Finsbury Park-Cambridge is also (for passengers who might otherwise find it attractive):
-Just overtaken by the 1733 LNER off King's Cross, which Stevenage passengers may prefer
-Overtaken by the 1742 King's Cross-King's Lynn, for Royston and Cambridge passengers

 

[jon0844]

The Cambridge stoppers can and do get put on the fast lines to overtake late inners. You'll even get the northbound services on the down fast until WGC where it cuts in just outside the platform.

 

[Failed Unit]

The Cambridge stoppers can and do get put on the fast lines to overtake late inners. You'll even get the northbound services on the down fast until WGC where it cuts in just outside the platform.

Really? I haven’t experienced this since they downgraded the service in May. My experience is that if the stopper gets ahead you are screwed. (Both directions of course)

 

[jon0844]

Really? I haven’t experienced this since they downgraded the service in May. My experience is that if the stopper gets ahead you are screwed. (Both directions of course)

Yes, really! Sadly on occasion it doesn't happen. Seems to depend if the signaller is on the ball.

 

[bramling]

Yes, really! Sadly on occasion it doesn't happen. Seems to depend if the signaller is on the ball.

It’s a lot rarer than pre May for sure - in those days around half were actually booked fast line, now pretty much nothing is.

From playing the sim it’s pretty much the *only* way to resolve an issue of one of the KX services being up behind a 313.

I predict this will play out a lot more if and when these services find their way from and to the core.

I may be misremembering, however I have a feeling I recall reading early documentation suggesting that these services were originally envisaged to be booked fast line as far as Potters Bar. Clearly that hasn’t happened, so not sure whether this is because they found a way of patching them on the slows, or they couldn’t be pathed on the fasts, or whether it’s a resilience measure to try and separate out the various service groups.

The Potters Bar to Welwyn section will doubtless be a bottleneck. Down services have the benefit of some stand time at Welwyn, although dubious benefit if you’re travelling north and want to get to your destination as quickly as possible! In the up direction it will be more of an arse for the core, depending on how much recovery time they get in the Canal tunnels of course.

 

[sefton]

I see that GTR are using 387s from Peterborough to Kings Cross instead of the originally intended 700s at the weekend.

I was interested to see the platform boards and platform announcements continue to say "1st class is at the front of the train" as if it was a 700.

Taking what the announcements say, then presumably the 1st class section in the rear four coaches of the 387 is declassified...

 

[Hadders]

There's generally a mix of 365s, 387s and 700s at weekends. Also worth noting that not a single 12-car 700 has run at weekends on the GN side.

 

[sefton]

There's generally a mix of 365s, 387s and 700s at weekends. Also worth noting that not a single 12-car 700 has run at weekends on the GN side.

So is the rear of the 365s declassified as well.

 

[bramling]

I see that GTR are using 387s from Peterborough to Kings Cross instead of the originally intended 700s at the weekend.

I was interested to see the platform boards and platform announcements continue to say "1st class is at the front of the train" as if it was a 700.

Taking what the announcements say, then presumably the 1st class section in the rear four coaches of the 387 is declassified...

I have a feeling that's not the case.

The weekend services are of course originally booked for 700/1s under the FailPlan timetable. The revised diagrams aren't running 700/1s, which may be because it's too awkward to fit them into the platform space at King's Cross - with the rest of the timetable of course not being planned to accommodate them.

It's not feasible to simply replace with 700/0s, because (i) there aren't enough of them on the GN side as they weren't planned to be running these services, and, (ii) they don't stable at Peterborough, from where some of these diagrams originate from in the morning, and few stable at Cambridge.

Clearly GTR's left hand doesn't know what GTR's right hand is doing. I don't really see why they need to be advertising which end is first class on the CIS anyway.

 

[sefton]

I don't really see why they need to be advertising which end is first class on the CIS anyway.

To let people know the rear end is declassified.

 

[bramling]

To let people know the rear end is declassified.

The message they're putting out at the moment doesn't imply that.

I wouldn't have said it's good practice to be advertising on the CIS about sections being declassified - it could result in large numbers trying to pile into one part of the train, which isn't a good thing to be happening.

 

[Skimble19]

So is the rear of the 365s declassified as well.

No, it isn't. Its an error with the CIS, it appears to have been applied to all services at weekends instead of only those which are 700s. However as it only says First Class is at the front, and doesn't specifically say the rear (or middle if 365) is declassified I wouldn't take your chances.

 

[jon0844]

No, it isn't. Its an error with the CIS, it appears to have been applied to all services at weekends instead of only those which are 700s. However as it only says First Class is at the front, and doesn't specifically say the rear (or middle if 365) is declassified I wouldn't take your chances.

Or you could and then start a thread in Disputes & Prosecutions about what happened next.

Today there are more 365s standing in for 700s. I expect they'll have the same announcements. But, I can see why announcing where first class is, rather than where first class isn't, is a good move because if the stock IS wrong then GTR hasn't at any point stated first class in any other part of the train isn't in operation.

Yes that means nobody is told implicitly that they can sit at the back of a 700, but the screens say that and, let's be honest, do you want everyone in the world to know?

 

[sefton]

The message they're putting out at the moment doesn't imply that.

It certainly does. It doesn't say "There is a 1st class section in the front of the train" which is just helpful information and would allow for a 1st class section in the rear, but says "1st class is at the front of the train" that is a statement that means 1st class cannot be at the rear of the train.

Anyway surely it it not beyond the skill and intelligence of GTR to ensure they delivered the correct announcements and display for the type of train they were operating that day. Oh wait, it's GTR...

 

[Aictos]

It certainly does. It doesn't say "There is a 1st class section in the front of the train" which is just helpful information and would allow for a 1st class section in the rear, but says "1st class is at the front of the train" that is a statement that means 1st class cannot be at the rear of the train.

Anyway surely it it not beyond the skill and intelligence of GTR to ensure they delivered the correct announcements and display for the type of train they were operating that day. Oh wait, it's GTR...

Indeed to the average passenger seeing information stating that First Class is at the front of the train will presume that is the case and any other First Class sections of the train will be declassified.

Under First Capital Connect, they gave out information especially on the Thameslink route stating exactly First Class is ie Front and Rear, Middle etc so yes I agree with @sefton that GTR are mostly certainly in the wrong here.

If other TOCs can do this then GTR should be able do or get someone in who can actually do the job....

 

[jon0844]

It certainly does. It doesn't say "There is a 1st class section in the front of the train" which is just helpful information and would allow for a 1st class section in the rear, but says "1st class is at the front of the train" that is a statement that means 1st class cannot be at the rear of the train.

Anyway surely it it not beyond the skill and intelligence of GTR to ensure they delivered the correct announcements and display for the type of train they were operating that day. Oh wait, it's GTR...

Given all the issues of late, this really isn't a big deal. It would be seen by many as incorrect information as someone with a first class ticket would see a 387 arrive London bound and not find it at the front. They could complain and maybe get a refund.

Nobody else has been told anything that says they can walk into first class. It's a bit like a safety failsafe in that if the message is wrong for a unit it doesn't do any real harm. First class users (bound to be loads on a Sunday) get inconvenienced and standard class ticket holders don't get penalty fared because the screens said first class at the rear was available to all and a 365 or 387 rolls in.

 

[Stampy]

I noticed that when I caught the 2200 service out of King's Cross a week last Tuesday back home to Peterborough, that we accelerated normally (up to 115mph) until we got to Hatfield - where the brakes came on sharp, and we slowed down to 75mph over Digswell (Welwyn) Viaduct before accelerating back up to line speed again after the two tunnels...

The cause was soon seen as we approached Knebworth - The Horsham-Peterborough Thameslink train was on the slow line, so I presume that IT was given priority over the 2-track section, even though it was running late (even though the links I've attached showed it running on time!!!)

It was definitely a Thameslink train we passed as we accelerated past it just before Knebworth!!

 

[bramling]

I noticed that when I caught the 2200 service out of King's Cross a week last Tuesday back home to Peterborough, that we accelerated normally (up to 115mph) until we got to Hatfield - where the brakes came on sharp, and we slowed down to 75mph over Digswell (Welwyn) Viaduct before accelerating back up to line speed again after the two tunnels...

The cause was soon seen as we approached Knebworth - The Horsham-Peterborough Thameslink train was on the slow line, so I presume that IT was given priority over the 2-track section, even though it was running late (even though the links I've attached showed it running on time!!!)

It was definitely a Thameslink train we passed as we accelerated past it just before Knebworth!!

Nothing unusual. The 2154 KX to Letchworth GN service virtually every night gets delayed by the aforementioned Horsham-Peterborough service being late. The only time it doesn’t is if the Horsham is so late that it runs behind rather than in front... but then chances are it gets delayed by the preceding very late Brighton-Cambridge train instead.

Since May I’ve used the 2154 KX-Letchworth service fairly often, and only once or twice has it had a completely unchecked run.

 

[bramling]

It certainly does. It doesn't say "There is a 1st class section in the front of the train" which is just helpful information and would allow for a 1st class section in the rear, but says "1st class is at the front of the train" that is a statement that means 1st class cannot be at the rear of the train.

Anyway surely it it not beyond the skill and intelligence of GTR to ensure they delivered the correct announcements and display for the type of train they were operating that day. Oh wait, it's GTR...

I agree that it’s sloppy, however I really don’t think it’s reasonable to make the connection that “1st class is at the front” means it cannot be elsewhere as well. I certainly wouldn’t be taking my chances with revenue on that one.

If the CIS said “formed of 4 coaches” does this mean the train CANNOT be formed of more?

As usual it’s something GTR haven’t thought through properly, they’d be better off with nothing.

 

[jon0844]

They'd be better off running 700s as intended on Sunday. And that would mean ensuring the trains are in the right place (first train today was 45 minutes late as the train was in the wrong place and a driver had to take a taxi to fetch it) and drivers can sign them.

The Peterborough drivers start route learning for Horsham tomorrow. Takes 10 weeks. Do the maths. When's the new timetable starting? (It's not 10 weeks from now).

 

[sefton]

I agree that it’s sloppy, however I really don’t think it’s reasonable to make the connection that “1st class is at the front” means it cannot be elsewhere as well. I certainly wouldn’t be taking my chances with revenue on that one.

Of course I wouldn't want to discuss it with a GTR 'Passenger host' (after asking my host to take my coat and get me a drink...), but as I set out before the wording they have used is designed to mean exactly that 1st Class is only at the front as that is the situation on a 700. Otherwise how would customers know the rear 1st class on a 700 is declassified when they are stood on the platform? - And don't suggest the inside display because it can be 20 minutes before it eventually cycles round to display that information.

 

[bramling]

Of course I wouldn't want to discuss it with a GTR 'Passenger host' (after asking my host to take my coat and get me a drink...), but as I set out before the wording they have used is designed to mean exactly that 1st Class is only at the front as that is the situation on a 700. Otherwise how would customers know the rear 1st class on a 700 is declassified when they are stood on the platform? - And don't suggest the inside display because it can be 20 minutes before it eventually cycles round to display that information.

Perhaps the answer is that GTR *don’t* want all and sundry to know, as if everyone decides they want to use that area then it will cause problems - not least with dwell times. Let’s remember that the situation has only arisen because the 700s were poorly specified with too much first, not so much on the 12-cars but definitely on the 8-cars, and it’s simply a sticking-plaster solution to try to placate people.

As I implied before, I don’t see the CIS advertising first being at the front by definition means any other first is automatically declassified. They would be better off simply saying nothing on the CIS - which was the case until the last couple of weeks.

 

[Fred26]

The Peterborough drivers start route learning for Horsham tomorrow. Takes 10 weeks. Do the maths. When's the new timetable starting? (It's not 10 weeks from now).

There are certainly some PBO drivers who already sign the route. I know of a few that have signed it, gradually, since May.

Speaking to drivers, apparently the diagrams are out for the December (May) timetable and have been agreed with the union.
Driver depots will now be separated - Hitchin, Hornsey, and half of Welwyn to do Moorgate's only; Cambridge, PBO, and other half of Welwyn to do 700 work (core/current Cambridge stoppers to Kings Cross); Kings Cross drivers to do Cambridge/Kings Lynn flyers, plus Peterborough peak extras.

I suspect separating these off is in preparation for the Moorgate services going to London Overground, and possibly the Flyers/Peterborough Peak services going to LNER. I have no confirmation of that either way though.

 

[bramling]

There are certainly some PBO drivers who already sign the route. I know of a few that have signed it, gradually, since May.

Speaking to drivers, apparently the diagrams are out for the December (May) timetable and have been agreed with the union.
Driver depots will now be separated - Hitchin, Hornsey, and half of Welwyn to do Moorgate's only; Cambridge, PBO, and other half of Welwyn to do 700 work (core/current Cambridge stoppers to Kings Cross); Kings Cross drivers to do Cambridge/Kings Lynn flyers, plus Peterborough peak extras.

I suspect separating these off is in preparation for the Moorgate services going to London Overground, and possibly the Flyers/Peterborough Peak services going to LNER. I have no confirmation of that either way though.

That all sounds rather inefficient!

Who does the Baldocks?

 

[swt_passenger]

There are certainly some PBO drivers who already sign the route. I know of a few that have signed it, gradually, since May.

Speaking to drivers, apparently the diagrams are out for the December (May) timetable and have been agreed with the union.
Driver depots will now be separated - Hitchin, Hornsey, and half of Welwyn to do Moorgate's only; Cambridge, PBO, and other half of Welwyn to do 700 work (core/current Cambridge stoppers to Kings Cross); Kings Cross drivers to do Cambridge/Kings Lynn flyers, plus Peterborough peak extras.

I suspect separating these off is in preparation for the Moorgate services going to London Overground, and possibly the Flyers/Peterborough Peak services going to LNER. I have no confirmation of that either way though.

Rearranging the depots seems to have been primarily about making Thameslink work, and not having driver changes in the middle of the network. It should probably have happened first, and well before the timetable changes commenced.

I suspect a future transfer to LO is one of the things it might enable, but that’s probably not number 1 on the list...

 

[hwl]

Rearranging the depots seems to have been primarily about making Thameslink work, and not having driver changes in the middle of the network. It should probably have happened first, and well before the timetable changes commenced.

I suspect a future transfer to LO is one of the things it might enable, but that’s probably not number 1 on the list...

All helps clarify who needs training on 717s and reducing the numbers involved. With 5 units types (313, 365, 387, 700, 717) operating in the GN area for the next year it is probably sensibly to focus things around driver training requirements and retention (both route and traction).

The plan appears to have some big changes vs previously i.e. Kings Cross being retained (vs being redistrubuted), surely it is slight simplistic as I'd expect Cambridge / PBO to cover some of the Cambridge/Kings Lynn flyers, plus Peterborough peak extras especially early /late turns (as was the case with the previous plan.

 

[387star]

I thought originally part of Hornsey would do TL work though given no TL services stop there makes sense. That said not all TL depots sign Hornsey depot

Peterborough have plenty of non core work most of which uses 700s but for services that won't ever go through the core plus GN peak extras . The 0320 off Peterborough for example
.think Cambridge was planned to have three links one for ashford one for Brighton and one for GN