Flange Squeal
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 1,523
Haven’t most trains run non-stop between Farnborough and Fleet since the closure of Bramshot Halt in the 1940s?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!
xx39 services out of Waterloo
- Thread starter nw1
- 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
Does Farnborough really do that badly in the peak without the xx39 train though?
The 1720, 1750 and 1820 stop Woking and Brookwood before Farnborough, and reach it in 38 minutes. The 1841 reaches Farnborough in 41 minutes with an extra stop at Clapham Junction. The 1709, 1807 and 1909 arrive in 35-37 minutes, without the Brookwood stop, the 1807 being slightly slower because it stops at Clapham Junction. There are corresponding up trains in the morning peak. Timings aren't uncompetitive compared with Guildford, and are better than those on the Alton line.
Not many xx09 services are 4-car either through the day. Psychologically, it stops at Woking, so may be a little less attractive than a train which is fast to Clapham Junction but it is still there.
The 1720, 1750 and 1820 stop Woking and Brookwood before Farnborough, and reach it in 38 minutes. The 1841 reaches Farnborough in 41 minutes with an extra stop at Clapham Junction. The 1709, 1807 and 1909 arrive in 35-37 minutes, without the Brookwood stop, the 1807 being slightly slower because it stops at Clapham Junction. There are corresponding up trains in the morning peak. Timings aren't uncompetitive compared with Guildford, and are better than those on the Alton line.
Not many xx09 services are 4-car either through the day. Psychologically, it stops at Woking, so may be a little less attractive than a train which is fast to Clapham Junction but it is still there.
That sounds about right, ISTR xx56 now you mention it, which was formerly the time of the peak extras formed by dividing the xx35 Waterloo at peak times.
The latter in many ways would make sense as it allows a more even service from the Waterloo direction to New Milton and Christchurch (xx05 direct and xx35 with change at Brockenhurst).
Or might they even go back to the 2004-07 pattern with a Waterloo-Southampton semi-fast, a Brockenhurst to Poole stopper and the xx05 taking up the Totton, Ashurst and Beaulieu Road calls?
There is a gap 1720 to 1750 though, which is quite large for the "peak" peak.
I do wonder whether (as stated above) when the 701s appear they will reintroduce one or two of the peak services.
The two trains which seem to be the most obvious services to re-instate are the 1739 and the 1748 (the latter as it provides a peak extra to the presumably still-busy Winchester and Parkway). Perhaps the 1739 could be re-purposed as a Basingstoke stopper (giving 3tph Winchfield and Hook in the peak). There could then be a Fareham connection at Eastleigh off the 1748.
Ah ok thanks - This is presumably a single diagram.
Given the comments above about some Basingstoke / Altons interworking with Portsmouth via Eastleigh, I do wonder why they don't put some 444s on those Basingstoke/Alton diagrams which cover the latter (rather than those which do not).
Last edited:
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
So sorry I mean Basingstoke not Fleet!
The 5-444 diagram is 1, and the 10-444 a separate one. It does a round trip to Alton it between Weymouth services.
The interworking is still pretty complex. The Portsmouth via Basingstoke services also interwork with the via Guildford services at both ends. The down Portsmouth via Basingstoke services are basically formed from something different each hour at Waterloo.
Ah ok, interesting thanks.
Are there CWNs anywhere incidentally? They always used to be on the UK Modern EMU group but that's now disappeared.
Wonder why the 10-444 does the Alton trip in between Weymouths? I'm guessing that the incoming Weymouth needs 10-car, but the corresponding outgoing trip only needs 5-car so it's a convenient way of swapping the sets over.
Looking again at the 2012 CWN, the xx09s (and xx39s) also had quite varied corresponding incoming workings Mon-Fri - and equally varied stock - though on Sat there was consistent interworking between the two.
Last edited:
It's more complicated than that.
The 1405 Weymouth is formed off the 1306 arrival from Basingstoke and 1351 arrival from Portsmouth Harbour via Guildford, so is still a 10-car.
The 1649 arrival from Weymouth forms the 1709 Portsmouth Harbour via Basingstoke.
It's just a way of ensuring the right length trains are provided on peak time services whilst keeping reliable enough turnaround times at Waterloo.
HamworthyGoods
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 4,247
All the daytime Weymouths are double sets
Big Jumby 74
Established Member
nw1: varied corresponding incoming workings Mon-Fri - and equally varied stock - though on Sat there was consistent interworking between the two.
TEW: It's just a way of ensuring the right length trains are provided on peak time services whilst keeping reliable enough turnaround times at Waterloo.
Unable to use 'quote' button for this, strange? Anyway, as TEW says, the peaks drive much of what happens between the peaks SX, but with the standard pattern service operating all day (as such) on Sat/Sun, a far more uniform pattern of workings can be planned. One other factor which certainly did come in to play (still does I suspect) is unit maintenance. A limited number of diagrams, mostly SX, require units to be returned to home depot whilst having started from specific locations. This can lead to planned out of pattern workings, and Waterloo is/was the best place to do this, with a multitude of diagrams being there within the same time span each hour.
TEW: It's just a way of ensuring the right length trains are provided on peak time services whilst keeping reliable enough turnaround times at Waterloo.
Unable to use 'quote' button for this, strange? Anyway, as TEW says, the peaks drive much of what happens between the peaks SX, but with the standard pattern service operating all day (as such) on Sat/Sun, a far more uniform pattern of workings can be planned. One other factor which certainly did come in to play (still does I suspect) is unit maintenance. A limited number of diagrams, mostly SX, require units to be returned to home depot whilst having started from specific locations. This can lead to planned out of pattern workings, and Waterloo is/was the best place to do this, with a multitude of diagrams being there within the same time span each hour.
True. Though thinking about it, I can imagine some need for "irregularity" on Saturdays as there are still "peaks" on Sat, e.g. to London in the morning and out of London in the early evening, perhaps necessitating longer trains at those times but not in between. Also to Bournemouth on summer mornings and out of Bournemouth on summer evenings.
Yet I don't really remember any timetable which had any irregularity in workings on Sat, right back to 1982/3. Perhaps the 1989 timetable had a bit as I seem to remember a bit of a random mix of VEPs and CIGs on the '93' stoppers on Sats with a slightly unpredictable pattern which couldn't be explained by the units being self-contained on the 93. Perhaps they interworked with Altons, not sure: despite 1989 being one of the most interesting timetables, my interests at the time were somewhat on non-rail matters.
The Sunday diagrams of 81/2 and 82/3 (I have CWNs of both) did show some variation as the half-hourly Woking stopper (alternating Basingstoke and Alton at the time) were operated with a single VEP until mid-afternoon, and then 8 car (often 8VEP but with an EPB and pair of HAPs in the mix too) in the late afternoon and evening. This necessitated some variation and there was some interworking with the Guildford via Cobham, which was hourly (4VEP) at the time and had a long layover at Waterloo.
A little OT but it's interesting to contrast the East Grinstead line in terms of peak enhancement. It appears that this is hourly off-peak but as much as 4tph in the peak (2 Southern, 2 TL, and with Southern and TL combining to produce a 15-min frequency) - a sharp contrast with SWR's peak!
Indeed the East Grinstead peak right now is arguably as good as, or better than (in the sense TL provides additional connectivity), it ever was. The whole timetable has a refreshingly "BR" look about it, if you know what I mean.
Uckfield not so good though, no evening peak extras at all, even shuttles from Oxted (which could be a good solution if there were no paths through the Croydon area). There is a morning peak extra though.
Last edited:
davethebus002@
On Moderation
There is an odd Mon to Fri 444 working it is the 23.22 Waterloo to woking via staines
Big Jumby 74
Established Member
The key in understanding why a 444 is diagrammed to work that train, is what said unit is diagrammed to work the following morning. A possible might be the 0619 Woking to Portsmouth Harbour followed by attaching (at PH) to form part of a 1Pxx PH to Waterloo? Purely a random guess on my part, but to reiterate, the reason certain unit (types) are allocated to certain (unusual?) services are often in connection with the wider picture and a need to plan the service without undue expense (stock movements and or crews).
And indeed, as we've discussed before, the slam-door era showed some extreme versions of this. A CIG was diagrammed down to Chessington South and back in 1982, for instance (usual stock a mix of 508s, EPBs and SUBs), in between Portsmouth workings.
davethebus002@
On Moderation
The following morning the unit that worked 2322 to woking via staines works the 0430 woking to waterloo then the first Weymouth at 0530
I have a copy of the current CWNs, I’d post it on here but I don’t want SWR lawyers coming at me for breaching commercial confidentiality or similar.
I think it’s worth remembering that SWR aren’t the only people that have a say in what services do and do not run. They’d have to build a very strong business case and present it to the DfT. You’d also need to find somewhere efficient to source the stock from. Do you bring it out of Clapham Yard, run an additional counter peak service from somewhere or just cancel something else. Not an impossible conundrum but not as easy as just reintroducing these additional services.
I wouldn’t be surprised if we never see these xx:39 departures again.
I think it’s worth remembering that SWR aren’t the only people that have a say in what services do and do not run. They’d have to build a very strong business case and present it to the DfT. You’d also need to find somewhere efficient to source the stock from. Do you bring it out of Clapham Yard, run an additional counter peak service from somewhere or just cancel something else. Not an impossible conundrum but not as easy as just reintroducing these additional services.
I wouldn’t be surprised if we never see these xx:39 departures again.
Fair enough, I guess the Modern EMUs group had some kind of special permission.
(It's not exactly confidential information though. You could easily make your own CWN by standing on the platform at Waterloo over a period of several days - to ensure consistency - and carefully noting the workings)
I think "never" is a very strongly worded comment though. Remember we are going through a period of financial hard times now, which is driving the current cuts. At some point, presumably, we will come out of these hard times. At some point, presumably, there will be more money for the railways, and thus scope to re-introduce the services lost to the post-Covid cuts. And of course, when the 701s finally arrive, there will be more 450s to run additional mainline services.
Also, it's constantly pointed out on here that off-peak is doing reasonably well. The xx39 is primarily an off-peak service (though it did run in the peak too).
Pedantically, though, you might be correct in the sense that by the time a second semi-fast on the mainline is re-introduced, the timetable may have been recast so it won't depart at xx39.
To give a historical similar example, the Arun Valley beyond Horsham was cut to hourly in 1985 (possibly 1984). If someone in 1989 (four years after the cut, compare 2024 and 2020) claimed that the Arun Valley would "never" go back to more than 1tph, they would of course be incorrect. The after-effects of the early 1980s recession didn't last forever, and eventually, by the late 90s (IIRC), a second train was reintroduced.
It's important IMO to realise that whatever is current now will not always be current in the future, as we know only too well from the last few years. I'm sure we'd have all wanted the railway scene of 2019 to last forever...
Last edited:
Ah ok. I do seem to remember the Chichester terminator (xx32) being operated with CIGs which would date it somewhat, but yes could be early 00s.
Wasn't it also around this time that 2tph fast Victoria-Brighton were introduced, meaning less need for the former xx32 semi-fast to run to Brighton? (In 1996 there was still just the one fast per hour - see Timetable World).
Last edited:
I think it was 1999 or 2000. 319s ran to Horsham from about 1995 to 1998; my last run was spring 1998. I had a 319 to Milton Keynes in September 1998. Initially the service was from Gatwick to Rugby. Wikipedia says it was curtailed at Watford in December 2000 but extended to Brighton. I thought it ran from Rugby through to Brighton for a while but I might have got that wrong.
I think half hourly fast to Brighton started in 1997 or 1998 when 319s took over from the CIG+BIG formations. The Rugby service started around the same time because all the 319s vanished off the Horsham line but I can't recall when that extended from Gatwick to Brighton.
Last edited:
1996 shows standard only on Horsham stoppers which would tie in with 319s operating the service. I presume it then reverted to VEPs?
(My experiences of Connex in this era was purely on Coastway West so never saw what went on further north).
Big Jumby 74
Established Member
That sounds like the old 0420 Guildford to Waterloo. Does that train no longer start Guildford? If it now starts Woking on a permanent basis (possibly because NR have required a longer engineering time window every night?), I doubt there will have been space to stable the 8-455 at Woking, in addition to other stabled stock, so to cover the 0430 it may have been a case of using a unit at Waterloo (previous night) and work it to Woking and stable in the down bay (p6), then back to Waterloo (0430) and form a booked 444 service next morning. Sounds like a case of a multiple way reworking of various diagrams to cover everything in as cost effective a way as possible. Makes perfect sense.
I do find it refreshing (the old "Heinexxxx" advert) when someone else points out what some of us had to work to.............and others still do of course..
...so, thank you!swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 32,846
I think when I checked it on RTT a few days ago the Woking via Staines 444, 1S77, ran empty to stable at Guildford P6, and returned to Woking empty the next morning to form the 0430 to Waterloo, 2F02.
Big Jumby 74
Established Member
That does sound like a new arrangement which gives the industry the opportunity to take/extend possession times between Guildford and Woking Jn without the need to provide additional rail replacement transport. It costs nothing to cancel an ECS and any down stream costs finding stabling space north of Guildford will be lost in the (E/W) mire of the day concerned.
On the same subject of lack of peak enhancement on SWR, I note that Southeastern still has considerable peak enhancement.
The off-peak service of 2tph towards Ashford and 2tph Hastings off-peak is enhanced with a half-hourly Tunbridge Wells from mid-afternoon AND 2tph extra Hastings plus 2tph extra towards Ashford from Cannon Street in the peak.
Interesting to contrast different TOCs' attitudes towards peak enhancement and that it's still alive and well with some.
Interesting also to note that Southeastern have designed their timetable such that the basic off-peak clockface is maintained in the peak AND they can insert all manner of peak extras. Must have taken some ingenuity.
The South Eastern always seemed to be good at large peak increases though, right back to the early 80s if not before.
Furthermore, SE are introducing further enhancements from June (see: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...services-next-june.258078/page-2#post-6662710)
I am not convinced that if a whole range of Kent stations, including some pretty rural ones, warrant 4tph in the peak, the likes of Farnborough and Fleet do not. Nor that Winchester does not deserve a single peak additional. Thus I do believe that the prime issue is sourcing the stock, not lack of demand, and that some of these services will return once the 701s are here and the stock problems start easing. I can certainly see that the 1739 and perhaps 1748 main-line services will be put back when that happens, even if the xx39 does not return off-peak.
The off-peak service of 2tph towards Ashford and 2tph Hastings off-peak is enhanced with a half-hourly Tunbridge Wells from mid-afternoon AND 2tph extra Hastings plus 2tph extra towards Ashford from Cannon Street in the peak.
Interesting to contrast different TOCs' attitudes towards peak enhancement and that it's still alive and well with some.
Interesting also to note that Southeastern have designed their timetable such that the basic off-peak clockface is maintained in the peak AND they can insert all manner of peak extras. Must have taken some ingenuity.
The South Eastern always seemed to be good at large peak increases though, right back to the early 80s if not before.
Furthermore, SE are introducing further enhancements from June (see: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...services-next-june.258078/page-2#post-6662710)
I am not convinced that if a whole range of Kent stations, including some pretty rural ones, warrant 4tph in the peak, the likes of Farnborough and Fleet do not. Nor that Winchester does not deserve a single peak additional. Thus I do believe that the prime issue is sourcing the stock, not lack of demand, and that some of these services will return once the 701s are here and the stock problems start easing. I can certainly see that the 1739 and perhaps 1748 main-line services will be put back when that happens, even if the xx39 does not return off-peak.
Last edited:
Big Jumby 74
Established Member
The latter was a very useful train in its day, between the 1745 to Havant and 1750 West of England, as both latter didn't call Woking IIRC, which had left a bit of a gap in that regard. The 1810 (Waterloo) departure was noted by Woking staff as being the busiest for decamping passengers at their station in the evening peak by some mile, their footbridge often becoming grid locked, but again a bit of a gap as peak wise a number of ML services didn't call.
Unfortunately the 1748 did struggle for a RT departure at times, as it relied upon the inbound West of England, due 1744 being on time (public 1749). This train was routinely late, often arriving 1748/49 ish, be it single line problems further west or other hold ups further in. The nature of increasing train lengths over time at that time of day, and associated platform occupancy meant both these trains had to remain in lower platforms, and so the problem remained until a stop on the Up WoE train was pulled (not Clapham Jn, although some did suggest that).
RailWonderer
Established Member
There are other non-fast 444 diagrams.
There is this one https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:Y00010/2024-03-01/detailed#allox_id=0
That goes out to Alton, back to Waterloo, out to Basingstoke and back before joining another 444 to a Weymouth fast. I’ve also had a couple of 9 car 450-444s these last couple of timetables.
Is lack of stock the reason why 450s, 455s and 458s are working Waterloo via Epsom to Guildford services?
I guess so yes, though 455s are presumably what you would expect.
RailWonderer
Established Member
I even saw a 707 https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:Y01653/2023-12-21#allox_id=0
For a route that was boring stock wise for decades it’s now interesting with SWR seeming to throw everything they have on it ! We just need a 444 or a 159 next (although the latter isn’t cleared)
- Status