• 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!

Woolwich/Sidcup Rounders: What Destination Should They Show?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,027
Location
SE London
Split from the thread Southeastern Franchise: Extension granted for minimum 18 months - thanks @yorkie

@MikeWh's comments concern whether people might travel from Bexley and Crayford to Abbey Wood to connect with Crossrail once Crossrail opens

Well, my two friends are definitely interested. Thier current commute (when it returns) is a 24 minute journey from Crayford to Lewisham and a 16-20 minute journey on the DLR to Canary Wharf (their timings before they knew what I was asking about). This will be replaced by a 20 minute journey to Abbey Wood and an 11-12 minute journey on Crossrail. I thought one of them started at Bexley but it turns out she drives from Joydons Wood to Crayford as she can park at her Mums.

(Stuff from the old thread deleted)

Another issue that may be depressing the numbers on those trains through Slade Green is the poor quality of information in the timetables and train destination screens about where those trains actually go. Seems to vary quite a bit depending where you are, but they are very often simply shown as if they were terminating at Slade Green, with no indication that they actually continue round the loop. So I'd bet a lot of commuters who aren't that into trains don't actually realise what journeys you can make on those trains. For example, whenever I've been on a Sidcup line rounder heading East, the on-train information simply states that the train is going to Slade Green, right up to the point where the train arrives at Slade Green. I'm sure at that point I've even heard it say something along the lines that the train has reached its final destination and please keep our personal belongings with us as we get off blah blah. You really have to be 'in the know' to realise you can go to Abbey Wood on them!
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
Another issue that may be depressing the numbers on those trains through Slade Green is the poor quality of information in the timetables and train destination screens about where those trains actually go. Seems to vary quite a bit depending where you are, but they are very often simply shown as if they were terminating at Slade Green, with no indication that they actually continue round the loop. So I'd bet a lot of commuters who aren't that into trains don't actually realise what journeys you can make on those trains. For example, whenever I've been on a Sidcup line rounder heading East, the on-train information simply states that the train is going to Slade Green, right up to the point where the train arrives at Slade Green. I'm sure at that point I've even heard it say something along the lines that the train has reached its final destination and please keep our personal belongings with us as we get off blah blah. You really have to be 'in the know' to realise you can go to Abbey Wood on them!
This.

It seems that the on-board information can only be changed once at either Slade Green or Crayford. The screens at stations do show the destination as Woolwich Arsenal from I think Sidcup onwards and vice-versa the other way.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,399
Location
UK
It seems that the on-board information can only be changed once at either Slade Green or Crayford.

The information can be changed at any time. It's better to change it at Slade Green.
 

4-SUB 4732

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2018
Messages
2,150
The information can be changed at any time. It's better to change it at Slade Green.

If the train was to have PIS that was capable of updating, it could leave London as Crayford via Sidcup and then at Lee become an Abbey Wood, then at Sidcup become a Greenwich, and at Crayford become a Cannon Street. The headcode doesn't change - the computer can't find it that difficult.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,399
Location
UK
If the train was to have PIS that was capable of updating, it could leave London as Crayford via Sidcup and then at Lee become an Abbey Wood, then at Sidcup become a Greenwich, and at Crayford become a Cannon Street. The headcode doesn't change - the computer can't find it that difficult.

The PIS is fully capable of doing just that. Its just better to change it at Slade Green
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
The PIS is fully capable of doing just that. Its just better to change it at Slade Green
Why?

It's very confusing when the platform PIS says Woolwich Arsenal and the train comes in saying Slade Green. Much better to synchronise the message.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,399
Location
UK

Deep breath in...

It's very confusing when the platform PIS says Woolwich Arsenal and the train comes in saying Slade Green.

It is confusing; but which is correct ? The train or the platform ? CIS is frustrating and often leads to passengers getting on the wrong train or flat out giving out the incorrect information. The CIS isn't that reliable. It drops out, it doesn't deal with delays, cancellations, or service disruption that well. I've been on many services where the platform is saying one thing but I'm doing something completely different. CIS is also for those on the platform. The PIS is for those onboard. The people onboard are important because they need to know where the train they are on is going. When you have the PIS saying something that doesn't fit with your expectations you get confused passengers and they tend to be twitchy and tend to panic.

Specifically for the rounders you have to balance confusion, operational information and passenger expectations. The reason why the CIS states Woolwich or Hither Green etc is because there used to be a situation where both the up and down platforms would state 'Cannon Street' this is clearly a situation to be avoided. Then it evolved to the next stop past the loops. This is probably the best option and one that reflects the service better. The only problem with that is at the London end but most people know what train they are getting on and the intermediate services are the most important. Having the CIS state 'Woolwich' suits nobody. It makes it look as if the service is going to terminate at Woolwich and its rare to see passengers going round the loops. Again, most people go up or down the line and then they either go on to Dartford or get off at Crayford/Barnehurst/Slade Green etc.

The PIS provides information to the people onboard and needs to reflect the service they are getting. Passengers are rarely going beyond the loop so anything past the loop stop is superflous information. They aren't coming down the line and then going straight back up it. If you have the PIS constantly changing onboard it just adds to the confusion. You get on at Cannon and then it announces to Sidcup; where this train terminates.. It then gets to Sidcup and changes but we have the same situation we want to avoid. The service isn't terminating :/ Not forgetting that people on the platform at Sidcup see a train with the destination as Sidcup and you need to remember that there are services that can terminate en route at Sidcup, Crayford, and Barnehurst. When the PIS changes, those twitchy passengers think that their service has been diverted or terminated early.

Both the CIS and PIS need to reflect the actual service being run. Rounders are effectively two services being run from a single train and shouldn't really be seen as a Cannon Street <> Cannon Street service. It's being done for operational reasons. Therefore both the CIS and PIS should reflect what is actually happening with the service and not some weird mashup. If you stick the PIS in at Cannon Street you get a situation where you have a train on the platform stating Sidcup but the platform CIS is stating Barnehurst again, this is confusing and needs to be avoided.

The reality is that most people are so used to it that it makes little difference. The services are almost empty by the end of the line and only a few people are going round the loop to the next stop and they tend to be boarding and not travelling down from London.

There is also dwell time built in at Slade Green and Crayford for a genuine change/restart of the service. That dwell gives passengers time to check the platform and the train. The way it is now only allows a 30 second dwell so your gone before anyone can decide to get on or get off. When your at Slade Green you can get passengers popping their heads in to listen to where the PIS is saying the train is actually going. The is because they do not trust what the platform screen is showing but they trust what the train is doing or they are asking someone on board. This kinda behaviour highlights that its the CIS that causes most of the problems and passengers rely more on what is being announced onboard.

Much better to synchronise the message.

The CIS changes en route. So it starts synchronised but then changes depending where you get on. I'm not sure that changing both the CIS and PIS every few stops is practical or sensible. The option that reflects the service, affects less passengers, provides the most accurate information, offers the least confusing message, is to have all stations showing the next stop after the loop. There is no need to show all stations past Slade Green/Crayford.

Operationally its a mess too. The Drivers diagram is often completely different to everything. :/


[Obi Wan] There is another option...[/Obi Wan]
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
Deep breath in...
Thank you for a detailed explanation. I agree completely about some of the scenarios that you mention. In particular when in normal times you can be standing on the concourse at London Bridge in the evening peak faced with departures to Crayford and Barnehurst which both go down the opposite line.

However, the Circle line copes admirably with rolling destinations and I still don't see why properly done this situation shouldn't work too. You say that most people don't know that the service exists, or at least don't use it much between Crayford and Slade Green. Could that be because their experience travelling to/from work hides the nature of the service? If the announcements/display on the train always included "via Crayford" or "via Slade Green" until that station was reached there surely wouldn't be that much confusion? For example, at Hither Green it could say "This is the Southeastern service to Abbey Wood via Crayford, calling at Lee, Mottingham, ...".

Edit. There is one particular use case that does see plenty on the train between Slade Green and Crayford. Home matches at Charlton.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,399
Location
UK
In particular when in normal times you can be standing on the concourse at London Bridge in the evening peak faced with departures to Crayford and Barnehurst which both go down the opposite line.

It works surprisingly well. Passengers tend to look at the 'Via X' more than the destination. Barnehurst passengers don't take the 'Via Sidcup' trains.

However, the Circle line copes admirably with rolling destinations and I still don't see why properly done this situation shouldn't work too.

I'm not up to speed with the Tube. When I use it I know what line I need for my destination station and just get on the next service that arrives. I think there is a benefit with the tube that its all stations and high frequency. With the Tube I find that my only real concern is the direction I need. There is an element of that at SE stations too. You get a directional (Tube style) board at some stations. I think that helps too.

You say that most people don't know that the service exists, or at least don't use it much between Crayford and Slade Green. Could that be because their experience travelling to/from work hides the nature of the service?

Did I say that ? Apologies if I implied that. The locals are quite conversant with the rounders its just that the trains empty out at Crayford/Slade Green etc. You do get small numbers of people who go between Slade Green/Barnehurst/Crayford but its really minimal.

My experience of the North Kent is that it has a very diverse passenger base. Comuters go up and down. Locals tend to go a couple of stations, and there is a significant amount of leisure travel. These past couple of weeks you can see the locals who are only going a couple of stations. The fun thing about my job is that I get to people watch all day :)

If the announcements/display on the train always included "via Crayford" or "via Slade Green" until that station was reached there surely wouldn't be that much confusion? For example, at Hither Green it could say "This is the Southeastern service to Abbey Wood via Crayford, calling at Lee, Mottingham, ...".

I don't really understand the reason why there is a desire for it to show more stations than it needs to or show the return trip only halfway. (Saying the service continues to Slade Green serves the same purpose). Surely its better to have two separate journeys ? IIRC the Via display shows Via Sidcup/Bexleyheath/Abbey Wood.

If you start from Cannon Street you have a couple of options.

This is the service to Abbey Wood, calling at..
New Cross
St Johns
Lewisham
Hither Green
...
Sidcup
...
Crayford
Slade Green
Erith
Belvedere
and Abbey Wood; where this train terminates.

That would display 'Abbey Wood'

It doesn't reflect the train continuing on and nobody is going to Abbey Wood via Sidcup all the way from Cannon. :/

Far better to announce the service as a simple Cannon Street to Crayford. The appended Slade Green shows it goes back round the loop and not continue to Dartford. I think we have to ask ourselves the simple question of does anyone care where the train goes after they get off ? I'm not sure there are many people who care what the reversal is.

I would support a more human approach with something along the lines of :

This is the service to Crayford. Calling at..
London Bridge
New Cross
St Johns
Lewisham
Hither Green
Lee
Mottingham
New Eltham
Sidcup
Albany Park
Bexley and
Crayford. Where this train will continue its journey / will return to Cannon Street Via Abbey Wood.

Have the CIS and PIS in synch with each other and then flip the PIS/CIS at Crayford. I'm not a fan of displaying 'the next service terminates here' but its common place across the network.

Edit. There is one particular use case that does see plenty on the train between Slade Green and Crayford. Home matches at Charlton.

They draw quite a local crowd with most heading into Kent and Medway. Leisure travel is always an exception. Same with what you were discussing earlier. People will flock to the Lizzy line because it opens up journey possibilities.
 

4-SUB 4732

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2018
Messages
2,150
Realistically we aren't talking about rounds being heavily used, is something I'm sure we can all agree. Frequency increases will be to the detriment of Dartford-bound trains where more people will want easier connections towards Medway and the Thanet Coast. With the Bexleyheath, Sidcup and Woolwich lines all now having off-peak direct services to at least Gravesend, and with High Speed connections, there is in fact the fantastic thing of one-change journeys from all points to at least Faversham, Whitstable and Margate which is positive. I would sooner keep Dartford services than rounders, where I have little use for the Rounder.
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
Either I'm missing something obvious, or not explaining myself well enough. Trains should not be described as going somewhere when there are likely to be faster services via a different route. I'd even describe those evening peak Barnehurst/Crayford trains as stopping at the earlier station until they'd got beyond Lewisham.

My last attempt using a Sidcup-Woolwich direction rounder:

At Cannon Street, London Bridge, New Cross, St Johns and Lewisham describe the destination as Crayford.
At Hither Green, Lee, Mottingham and New Eltham describe the destination as Abbey Wood.
At Sidcup, Albany Park, Bexley and Crayford describe the destination as Woolwich Arsenal.
From Slade Green onwards describe the destination as Cannon Street.

And the other way:

At Cannon Street, London Bridge, Deptford, Greenwich, Maze Hill and Westcombe Park, describe the destination as Slade Green.
At Charlton, Woolwich Dockyard, Woolwich Arsenal and Plumstead describe the destination as Sidcup.
At Abbey Wood, Belvedere, Erith and Slade Green describe the destination as Hither Green.
From Crayford onwards describe the destination as Cannon Street.
 

Metal_gee_man

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2017
Messages
669
At least the other rounder services run by SE are PISed and advertised better, the STP to STP rounders are normally advertised to either Sandwich via AFK and DVP and to Ramsgate via FAV and HNB
The benefit of newer rolling stock I guess
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,027
Location
SE London
Passengers are rarely going beyond the loop so anything past the loop stop is superflous information. They aren't coming down the line and then going straight back up it.

Yes, not many people go beyond the loop, but how much of that is precisely because the train destination information is so misleading? Along with the long dwell at Slade Green making the train so much less attractive. Once Crossrail is running and if you could sort those problems, I'd bet you'd start to see quite a few people using the rounders to get from Barnehurst/Crayford/Bexley to Abbey Wood. Maybe even a few from Bexleyheath, although the bus provides a good alternative from there.

If you have the PIS constantly changing onboard it just adds to the confusion. You get on at Cannon and then it announces to Sidcup; where this train terminates..

I would say that having the PIS constantly changing is only confusing because because it falsely states that the train is terminating at places that it's not terminating. Announce it instead as a circular service and calibrate the changes carefully and it's unlikely to confuse most people. As an example, here's one way I'd do it for the Sidcup-Woolwich rounders.
  • Initially, the destination is: 'Circular via Sidcup'. List all stations as far as Slade Green then say 'continues via the Woolwich line'.
  • At Lee, destination changes to 'circular via Sidcup and Slade Green' List all stations as far as Abbey Wood then say 'continues via Woolwich'
  • At Sidcup, destination changes to 'circular via Slade Green'. List all stations to Woolwich Arsenal then say 'continues via Greenwich'
  • At Crayford, destination changes to 'circular to Cannon Street via Slade Green'. List all stations to Woolwich Arsenal then say 'continues to Cannon Street via Greenwich'
  • At Slade Green, destination changes to 'Cannon Street'. List all stations as normal.
Notice how with this scheme, the destination never changes completely - it always changes just a bit - leaving enough in common with what it previously said that most people are unlikely to be confused. And the 'circular via' will alert people that it's not a final destination - so they won't be so surprised when it changes.

Also have that the destination screen at each station should always roughly match what the on-train PIS will say on leaving that station - the only issue here is you'd need to do something clever regarding the long destinations. Perhaps scroll or use an extra line depending what type of screen is involved.

Both the CIS and PIS need to reflect the actual service being run. Rounders are effectively two services being run from a single train and shouldn't really be seen as a Cannon Street <> Cannon Street service.
It's being done for operational reasons.

For me, the issue is that, even if the original motivation of those services was, operational reasons, you're almost certainly (a) confusing and (b) losing passengers by continuing to list them on screens as if they are separate services.

(Despite my arguing with you, I do appreciate your long drivers-view explanation btw)
 
Last edited:

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,399
Location
UK
Trains should not be described as going somewhere when there are likely to be faster services via a different route.

In which we agree.

My last attempt using a Sidcup-Woolwich direction rounder:


And the other way:

Yep, absolutely horrendous isn't it. Hence why I eliminate all that useless information and flip the PIS at Slade Green/Crayford so you are either going away from Cannon Street or towards it.


Along with the long dwell at Slade Green making the train so much less attractive

There really isn't a long dwell time and its often swallowed up with late running. What you may be seeing is the dwell times on the loop.


I would say that having the PIS constantly changing is only confusing because because it falsely states that the train is terminating at places that it's not terminating.

Agreed. It's misleading and incorrect.

Announce it instead as a circular service and calibrate the changes carefully and it's unlikely to confuse most people. As an example, here's one way I'd do it for the Sidcup-Woolwich rounders.

Why do you need so many changes to the PIS/CIS ? It's too much and as the service is rarely used you are providing information to pretty much nobody. KISS. Keep it simple.

For me, the issue is that, even if the original motivation of those services was, operational reasons, you're almost certainly (a) confusing and (b) losing passengers by continuing to list them on screens as if they are separate services.

a) is true and I doubt there is a single fit solution for all. For me the CIS is the most confusing. Passengers like simple and minimalist. It's a rounder service with an up and a down. Anything else starts to complicate matters.

b) doubtful. Firstly its a captive market and secondly I'm not convinced there is any real passenger flow between the stations. Maybe some country end but if the rounders didn't exist I genuinely don't think there would be much of an impact. As you say; Crossrail will be a gamechanger and we may see a necessity for the rounders and the PIS and CIS should reflect Abbey Wood. Easily done in the same way the DLR is advertised.


(Despite my arguing with you, I do appreciate your long drivers-view explanation btw)

I can give you tons of anecdotal evidence. When you spend 90% of your day looking out the window you become an expert in human behaviour. I can categorically state that the onboard PIS takes priority in the passengers mindset. In my experience I have found that constantly changing the onboard announcements causes more problems and has a greater impact on the passenger.
 

Class800

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
1,941
Location
West Country
I was on the train to Woolwich Arsenal from London Bridge one evening last autumn. It was advertised as Barnehurst. So that's a rounder via Bexleyheath - those at Woolwich are platform announced as Eltham (vs Sidcup). There was a man on board who was a bit miffed to find out he wasn't on the best choice of train for where he was going - Barnehurst! It was Barnehurst yes but via Woolwich
 

norbitonflyer

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2020
Messages
2,276
Location
SW London
On SWR's rounders the destination rolls forward as you go round, for example they leave Waterloo saying Teddington via Richmond, at Richmond the destination becomes Wimbledon, and at Twickenham they become Waterloo via Kingston. There are quirks though - the fastest trains to Teddington go the other way round the loop (advertised at Waterloo as Strawberry Hill via Kingston (or Shepperton via Kingston)), and trains via Richmond terminating at Kingston are advertised at Waterloo as destination Kingston. On the website and when platform alterations are announced at Waterloo they are announced as services from Waterloo to Waterloo with no mention of which of four possible routings the train in question has taken (via Wimbledon and Richmond, via Richmond and Wimbledon, via Richmond and Brentford, or via Brentford and Richmond)Natio
 

47444

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2019
Messages
282
If only train services carried route numbers like buses, the situation would be easier to explain. The Sidcup, Woolwich rounders could be numbered, say, 11A and 11C (A = anti-clockwise, C = clockwise. We could have a nice coloured route map and the question of intermediate destinations becomes less of an issue.

This picks up the Circle Line point above where the first "brand" the user is looking for is Circle. Another example is Berlin with the circular S-Bahn routes S41 and S42 (one each way round).
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,027
Location
SE London
I can give you tons of anecdotal evidence. When you spend 90% of your day looking out the window you become an expert in human behaviour. I can categorically state that the onboard PIS takes priority in the passengers mindset. In my experience I have found that constantly changing the onboard announcements causes more problems and has a greater impact on the passenger.

Sure, I can't argue with what you've seen about the behaviour of passengers. But you seem to be suggesting that the mere fact of train announcements changing en route confuses them. I would question whether that's largely because of the way the announcements are currently phrased; When the announcement says that the destination is - say - Crayford - almost everyone will expect that to stay fixed. Trains do not change their destination en route, so if the announcement were to suddenly start saying that the train is going to Sidcup, of course people will get confused. Ditto if they get on a train and the on-board information says a different destination from what the one on the station platform said.

But if the announcement says - basically - that it's a circular service and here's what the next few stops are - then most people are probably not going to be at all surprised when the list of stops evolves as the train makes its journey. For that reason I don't think it would be a problem that, with the scheme I suggested, the on-board information changes several times en route. And the advantage of doing that is that you can always ensure that the list of stops is relevant to people who would be on the train at that point. When the via-Sidcup train is at Lewisham, it's important to tell people it calls at Crayford, but not a good idea to tell people it calls at Woolwich Arsenal - because no-one going to Woolwich Arsenal should be on the train at that point, and there are much better ways to get from Lewisham to Woolwich. On the other hand by the time the train reaches Bexley, people going to Woolwich could very legitimately be getting on it (even if, as you say, it's only going to be a small flow) - so at that point, you really do need the information to show that the train will call there. The only way to solve that problem is to have the information evolve as the train makes its journey.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,027
Location
SE London
On SWR's rounders the destination rolls forward as you go round, for example they leave Waterloo saying Teddington via Richmond, at Richmond the destination becomes Wimbledon, and at Twickenham they become Waterloo via Kingston. There are quirks though - the fastest trains to Teddington go the other way round the loop (advertised at Waterloo as Strawberry Hill via Kingston (or Shepperton via Kingston)), and trains via Richmond terminating at Kingston are advertised at Waterloo as destination Kingston. On the website and when platform alterations are announced at Waterloo they are announced as services from Waterloo to Waterloo with no mention of which of four possible routings the train in question has taken (via Wimbledon and Richmond, via Richmond and Wimbledon, via Richmond and Brentford, or via Brentford and Richmond)Natio

Yeah, I've been on those and I think that's slightly better. But the fundamental problem there is that the system is phrasing it as if places like Teddington are the destination. And that's (a) not true, and (b) confusing because it means people on the train will suddenly hear a different destination - and that defies common sense because the destination isn't something that you expect to change en route. I think those announcements would be less confusing if they said something like 'Circular via Teddington' instead of 'To Teddington'.

As an aside, I'm guessing the Waterloo-Staines-Weybridge trains must have a similar problem where the destination starts as 'Addlestone' and later must change to 'Weybridge'. That probably requires a different solution though - I'm not sure what - as it's not a circular service.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,270
Yeah, I've been on those and I think that's slightly better. But the fundamental problem there is that the system is phrasing it as if places like Teddington are the destination. And that's (a) not true, and (b) confusing because it means people on the train will suddenly hear a different destination - and that defies common sense because the destination isn't something that you expect to change en route. I think those announcements would be less confusing if they said something like 'Circular via Teddington' instead of 'To Teddington'.

As an aside, I'm guessing the Waterloo-Staines-Weybridge trains must have a similar problem where the destination starts as 'Addlestone' and later must change to 'Weybridge'. That probably requires a different solution though - I'm not sure what - as it's not a circular service.
We’ve definitely had a very similar thread before all about the Kingston rounders, and how the pseudo destinations on the train PIS were out of step with the destinations on the platform displays. I suspect apart from the different station names all the same discussion points came up...
 
Joined
11 Jan 2015
Messages
677
I suspect, as the Kingston and Hounslow founders have been going for ages (100?years) that the people of south West London have some inbuilt understanding of what’s going to happen. And yes I know there was a period when off peak trains were not rounders on the Kingston line.

In south east London the expectation is that trains go to Dartford and north south journey are best carried out by really long-standing bus routes such as the 51 or 161.
 

London Trains

Member
Joined
9 Oct 2017
Messages
901
As an aside, I'm guessing the Waterloo-Staines-Weybridge trains must have a similar problem where the destination starts as 'Addlestone' and later must change to 'Weybridge'. That probably requires a different solution though - I'm not sure what - as it's not a circular service.

These services have a similar problem to rounders aswell in the fact no-one uses them to travel to the second half of its journey - people travelling to Weybridge, Addlestone or Chertsey will travel on a SWML service to Weybridge, people travelling to Feltham and Staines - Virginia Water will travel on the Reading train 2 minutes before which arrives over 20 minutes earlier, and people travelling to Ashford will travel on the Windsor train 6 minutes later which overtakes this train.

If it were up to me I would recast the whole timetable in this area when/if Crossrail 2 happens.

First, reinstate the Twickenham branch of Crossrail 2 because having 2tph rounders via Kingston interworking with Crossrail 2 is not a good idea and would be confusing and might carry delays from the Putney lines onto Crossrail.

Then increase the amount of rounders via Hounslow to 4tph, the extra 2tph replacing Weybridge services from Waterloo to Hounslow via Brentford and the Waterloo rounders that used to go via Kingston. These would be advertised as Hounslow all the way to Hounslow and will not have changing destinations as using bus services or the Overground from Richmond to Gunnersbury is much faster for most journeys across the loop. These would also have a few minutes dwell at Hounslow to minimise delays being carried around the loop.

Run shuttles between Virginia Water and Weybridge (including Sundays where they currently run to Woking).

Then services on the Richmond line should be sequenced Reading - Windsor - Hounslow rounder to enable 4tph to Reading and Windsor all at equal 15m intervals and to stop Reading services getting stuck behind stoppers.
 

NorthKent1989

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2017
Messages
1,898
I suspect, as the Kingston and Hounslow founders have been going for ages (100?years) that the people of south West London have some inbuilt understanding of what’s going to happen. And yes I know there was a period when off peak trains were not rounders on the Kingston line.

In south east London the expectation is that trains go to Dartford and north south journey are best carried out by really long-standing bus routes such as the 51 or 161.

That’s about right, the Rounders in SE London only started about twenty years ago in the late 90s, back then they were advertised as terminating at Sidcup, the in train describes used to say Hither Green and be like this

“HITHER GREEN calling at all stations to Slade Green via Greenwich then Crayford then all stations to Hither Green via Sidcup” or something like that
 

Dr_Paul

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2013
Messages
1,355
If only train services carried route numbers like buses, the situation would be easier to explain. The Sidcup, Woolwich rounders could be numbered, say, 11A and 11C (A = anti-clockwise, C = clockwise. We could have a nice coloured route map and the question of intermediate destinations becomes less of an issue. This picks up the Circle Line point above where the first "brand" the user is looking for is Circle. Another example is Berlin with the circular S-Bahn routes S41 and S42 (one each way round).

Those of us above a certain age will remember when Southern Region services all had a boldly-presented route number on the front of the first carriage. When the 455s first came into service, they had the route number displayed next to the destination on the front, but this didn't last very long. Using a route number and displaying it on all the information screens, on trains (internal and external) and stations, would, I feel, be useful for passengers, especially at stations at which many routes stop.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,624
Location
Another planet...
Those of us above a certain age will remember when Southern Region services all had a boldly-presented route number on the front of the first carriage. When the 455s first came into service, they had the route number displayed next to the destination on the front, but this didn't last very long. Using a route number and displaying it on all the information screens, on trains (internal and external) and stations, would, I feel, be useful for passengers, especially at stations at which many routes stop.
Route numbers on the South Western 455s lasted the best part of two decades: they were certainly still in use around 2003. New Malden had a poster on the Down side explaining which numbers corresponded to which line.
 

Roast Veg

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2016
Messages
2,200
I might not be of a certain age, but I certiainly remember taking the 22 to Tunbridge Wells before the CIGs and VEPs departed.
 

Dr_Paul

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2013
Messages
1,355
Route numbers on the South Western 455s lasted the best part of two decades: they were certainly still in use around 2003. New Malden had a poster on the Down side explaining which numbers corresponded to which line.

You're right. The route numbers did last a longer time on the 455s than I first thought.
 

Roast Veg

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2016
Messages
2,200
I would have indeed, but seeing as I was quite young back then I don't remember the 30.
 

norbitonflyer

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2020
Messages
2,276
Location
SW London
22 was Charing Cross to Hastings
30 Charing Cross to Tunbridge Wells

Multiples of 11 were only used on non-electrified routes, because the 4SUB electric units used stencils rather than roller blinds for route displays, and only carried one set of number stencils. As well as 22/33 for Charing Cross/Cannon Street-Hastings, (66 and 77 if routed via Ashford and Rye), 33 was also used for Eastleigh- Salisbury, 11 for Brighton- Exeter, 44 Eridge/Tonbridge and Portsmouth/Salisbury, 55/88 Reading-Tonbridge and return, 66 Reading/Basingstoke, and 66/77/88/99 for permutations of Victoria/London Bridge to East Grinstead/ Uckfield. Note the use, as was customary on both the South eastern and Central, of odds for City and evens for West End, and the duplication of numbers between non-overlapping routes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top