Great Western Coffee Shop

First post on the board, so please forgive me if this topic has been covered before.

Anyone else suspicious of the continual cancelling of these services to & from Paddington this week?
As far as I am aware shuttle services are operating between Maidenhead & both of them but the through  services to Paddington aren't, how can the tracks be safe & or clear enough to run the shuttle services but not the through ones.
I usually catch / get off them when they stop at Slough but they have been cancelled this week because of "The Snow".
I can understand this reason being given on the first day of the bad weather but I suspect FGW are using it as a convenient excuse for not running the services for the rest of the week.
They did exactly the same thing last February when the bad weather hit.

Welcome to the forum, JRobb.

It has been covered elsewhere on the forum, but to summarise, Network Rail have implemented their severe weather plans which involve minimising the risk of infrastructure problems occurring by not using certain sets of points unless essential.  There is a real risk of ice causing the points to not 'detect' properly which means the signalbox can't be sure that they are set properly and therefore safe to use.  Points that are in frequent use are much less likely to fail to detect as there won't be the build up of any ice, and at certain strategically important locations staff are on hand to deal with any problems that may arise - but this can't be done everywhere.

The Bourne End and Henley through services use points that divert the trains onto the branch line that are not in common use except for these services a couple of times a day, so they've basically told FGW that they need to 'lock in' a train on the two branches throughout the day so that there is no risk of the above failures which would cause major problems with the normal service.

The locked in train can then shuttle back and forth all day with no problems, and if it needs fuelling or replacing for some other reason that can be done late night/early morning when it won't impact on the normal service too much.

Whilst I fully appreciate the problems of getting detection on little used points in cold weather. Espescialy as I managed to lock up the whole of Sutton Station trying to turn a train round from the Epsom Downs branch. On control's orders I might add. Fortunately it was mechanical locking and a little judicious use of of a Birmingham screwdriver  by the local (on site!)  S&T technicain soon got the sliders lined up to pull the signal. But not before we had 4 trains piled up waiting to enter the station.

A couple of things occur. I thought most points were now fitted with heaters which I believe are now  electrical. Surely these could be switched on say an hour or two before the points need to be changed, and switched off during the day until next required?

Didn't the platelayers use a special cold weather grease possibly with anitfreeze.

If you saw Portillo's Wednesday programme he flew in a Network rail chopper with an infra red camara up the ECML near York and although there was no obvious frost or snow the point heaters were on and the rails were glowing.

Hi, JRobb, and welcome to the forum.

The answers above pretty much cover the 'technical' end of it, but it's also been interesting to note in the limited travelling that I've done that there have been fewer people travelling too - so that (at least what little I've seen) remaining services haven't been overcrowded and it may be a sensible precaution to thin out services somewhat.  As well as the Henley and Marlow branches, I think the crossover at Warminster was out of use for a while, as was the line from Trowbridge to Chippenham, and the whole line from Bristol to Severn Beach.  As I write, I think only Severn Beach and St Andrew's Road are still lacking any service at all; everywhere else is either at full normal service or, if reduced, has a train at least once an hour.

Personal view - it's better to run a "derated" service that reduces frequent services to (say) once an hour, and perhaps has them taking longer, calling at more stations, not duplicating routes ... rather than trying to keep everthing running at full speed - we're told to slow down as we drive, so we shouldn't be suprised if the trains need to slow down / test their brakes regularly.  But shutting stations completely - at the very time that it's dangerous for people who must travel to drive themselves - could lead me to one of these <rant> ... </rant> sections!

A small, pedantic, point. The SVB beach line, because of it's non-clockface usual timetable is actually running less than 1tph. It's averaging out at about 1 train every 80 minutes.

(EDIT. On paper that is. The reality has seen no trains on the SVB since this morning as far as I can gather.)

When I was a kid in Sarf East London, there used to be a special timetable for use in the event of fog. It had much the same set of alterations - the Bromley North branch lost its regular through journeys to Charing Cross and ended up as a shuttle to and from Grove Park. But the difference was that Southern Region publicised it as "this is what we will do in the event of fog".

It's nonsense to say that the service on the Bourne End and Henley branches is "disrupted due to inclement weather". It isn't. "Disrupted due to inclement weather" implies blizzards and tornadoes - not the sound and sensible reasons for changing the service pattern. Surely there must be a more sensible description?

I understand that the extreme weather precautions are to be withdrawn from Monday, providing of course we don't get another significant snowfall. So through services should resume on Monday.

I can see why Slough passengers could get annoyed with the canning of the Bourne End's and Henley's as these provide in the peaks most of the Padd Slough non stops

I was once told, many years ago, by the London Div Manager at Paddington there were 2 key services that if there were not put in place correctly would mess up the whole Division they were the Bourne End, Henley branches through services; he said it was best to can them when normal time tabling was not possible. 

Thanks for all of your replies.
Electric Train hit the nail on the head when he said that the Henley & Bourne End services provide the only direct non stop services to & from Paddington at peak time in the morning & early evening.
These services are always the first ones to be either cancelled or disrupted whether it's winter or summer & in my opinion FGW view them as expendable, they can cancel them & thus save money but they still manage to get people to & from London, the fact that people are crammed on to slow stopping services & in some cases have to fight (And I have witnessed fist fights starting at first hand) to get on or off trains just does not seem to matter to them.
The staff at Slough station seem to take a perverse delight in telling people that services have been cancelled & I have lost count of the amount of times I have seen staff verbally abusing & threatning customers with police action who have only  asked why services have been cancelled.
To summarise, in my opinion FGW love any spell of bad weather, it gives them the perfect excuse to cancel or change as many services as they wish, save money & then blame it on the weather.

FGW had nothing to do with cancelling these services. Network rail who operate the pointwork decided in the interest of point reliability they would be locked shut all day. Thus the through trains to London Paddington could not operate.

FGW aren't miracle workers and they've fared far better than the people looking after the highways. Some of them were death traps.

Whilst I understand and sympathise with your frustration, speaking as resident of West Wiltshire I'd have to refute that...

That's an interesting conjecture, Phil

I've taken a look back at some historic data I have and at a first, very rough, glance the 17:02 Worcester to Southampton service (which is supposed to call at Melksham at 19:11) has appeared in the list of service alterations four times for every time the 07:28 Bourne End to Paddington has appeared.     I would have to take a further look at other "first to be cancelled" candidates to see if I can find something even worse, and I suspect the 06:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington would be a likely candidate. The effect of the cancellation should also be born in mind.  If the 06:30 is cancelled, there's another train 10 minutes later.  If the Bourne End service to Paddington is canned, its a delay of - what - 30 to 40 minutes?   If the 17:02 is cancelled, the next train on the TransWilts calls at Melksham 11 hours and 29 minutes later.

The rail industry as a whole is so fragmented in who's reponsible for what that it becomes deeply frustrating at times. I have spent years asking Wiltshire County Council who have told me to as the Department for Transport who have told me to ask First Great Western who have told me to ask Wiltshire County Council ... all for an appropriate service that everyone agrees would be sensible and has a great "benefit cost ratio". But none of them has taken any responsibility or initiative (that looks like it is changing, subtely and perhaps significantly) and whenever you say "DfT got it wrong", "WCC got it wrong" or "FGW got it wrong", the answer you get is "not us, guv! Ask the next one in the line".

The truth is ... the system has it wrong many times; I can't speak for Thames Valley Branches, but I can for my own area.   Here, no-one has responsibility to the people who want to use the current TransWilts train. The Train Operating Company are responsible to their shareholders to make them as much profit as possbile, and to the government to fulfill the terms of their contract which says they must run at least two trains each way on most days, but allows exceptions at times of bad weather. So, yes, there is money to be saved if the trains can be run when there are spares available (the 05:19 from Gloucester, and the 19:35 from Westbury spring to mind) ... especially if many of the people who want to travel at other times of day will put  up with a significantly elongated journey - twice the mileage, twice the time, and help further pack trains that are already busy.  Passenger Focus is the organisation that's supposed to look after the passenger's interests, but it's funded by the DfT, and with much - but not all - of its work is limited to ensuring that the train operating companies work within the rules, rather than taking a wider view.  If you ask passengers on the 05:19 "is this a good time for you", you'll not get a full view of all potential passengers - just those few who happen to be able to make use of this oddly timed train. I would, though, like to offer Passenger Focus more support than I have done previously over their championing of aspects of the GWRUS.

I suspect FGW do NOT love bad weather and there are a lot of people there who really do / want put customer care high up their agenda.   But it does - in this silly system - make great sense for all players in the rail industry to err on the side of caution if bad weather is forecast; you are correct JRobb, in identifying that by doing so they may inconvenience passengers more than they shouldd, but they save themselves money.

It's my own view that the main reason that the passenger railway network exists is to transport people around.  And as such, there should be a better and more efficient way of meeting the needs and wishes of travellers and potential travellers.  That could be a decent TransWilts service, it could be fast peak trains with seats available from Slough to Paddington. The $64,000 question is "how can we get towards those improvements" ... and I have to say it's very hard work. But we need to do it working with the people already in place, the majority of whom share some of / most of our frustrations at the system. And we've also got to be careful that if we're looking to resolve essentially local issues we don't look to do so in such a way that we're in effect calling for a wholesale change to railway operation and management that has ramifications from Penzance to Lowestoft and from Dover to Maryport!

If you're hoping to find a conclusion here .. sorry - you won't find one.   But you will find me suggesting that you, and we in Wiltshire, look to working locally and where appropriate more widely, with the people who runs the trains and rails today and probably (even if the controlling company changes) will be doing to tomorrow.   There's a few bad eggs, but they're mostly good sticks!

Well I sure hope you return at some point and find a way to back this statement up.

An unnecessarily flippant comment, perhaps? Whilst FGW might save a few quid in diesel, they are still paying staff, leasing stock etc etc so the suggestion that they are "saving money" through cancellations is pretty hard to justify. As II and others have pointed out above, the cancellations to which you refer were mandated by Network Rail and are sensible operational decisions designed to benefit as many passengers as possible under difficult circumstances.

Bear in mind that the services you suggest are always the first to be cancelled may be just that, and for a good reason - put yourself in the position of a controller having to decide what best to do with limited resources (for whatever reason). Do you cancel a train that runs infrequently with no easy alternative available, or do you cancel a train where, although it may involve modest disruption like having to make an extra change, the inconvenience to passengers will be relatively smaller? Not a particularly tough call to make when you step back, put yourself in someone elses's shoes and look at the situation objectively really, is it?

It also has to be remembered that its not only the train path of Padd to Bourne End / Henley and vice versa that has to be taken into account it is also getting the stoke to the start point and then away from the end point, these services are odd balls in the already complex diagram however they are currently part of the ORR franchise requirement.  The Bourne End through trains cease when Crossrail starts.

Slough passengers should not have to much to complain quite a few fast trains during the day, Maidenhead and Twyford passengers have no choice of fasts off peak

It is an open secret locally that the performance of Marlow branch in particular is very closely monitored by very very senior FGW personnel.

I would image there was great reluctance to acceed to Networkrail's request to suspend the through trains, but as they control the points FGW had to agree.

Did wonder why its reliability and conectivity with London and reading trains has improved

I've obviously hit a raw nerve with a few people here by daring to offer an opinion on the service that FGW provide. When I joined I was not aware that opinions & thoughts had to be put across in such a way as not to offend certain people. (Phil & Ollie please accept my humble apologies for daring to have a view on FGW that you don^t agree with. I will try harder in the future to always see things from the FGW perspective, after all I only pay to use their train services & should be grateful for whatever service FGW can be bothered to provide)
I call things as I see them & having used the Slough ^ Paddington route & mainly the Henley & Bourne End services to travel the route over the past 3 & a bit years I feel qualified to offer at least an opinion on what I pay to use every day.
If someone from FGW could be bothered to communicate to passengers the reasons why trains are cancelled as opposed to falling back on the catch all line of ^Bad Weather^ then most people would I^m sure be more forgiving & understanding.
If passengers had been made aware of the fact that it was a Network Rail decision to cancel services & also that sets of points had been locked a certain way because of the weather, then at least from a passenger perspective they know why their usual service has been cancelled, they may not like it but at least they have been made aware of the real reason.
The majority (Please note, not all of them) of FGW staff at Slough & Paddington that I have had the dubious pleasure of asking for information are generally rude & aggressive & by their attitude & language more than often make a bad situation worse.
Before anyone slaps me down, I know that passengers can be just as rude & aggressive but that does not excuse some of the behaviour that I have seen from some FGW staff.
To the board members that have posted reasonable & helpful replies to my first post, I thank you, particularly for the Network Rail information, I honestly had no idea that they could cancel services.

Unfortunately it is one of the anomalies  of the performance regime that a TOC or Networkrail can  cancel trains, change stopping patterns etc for events deemed outside their control without occuring any penalty.

Thus when I was commuing regularly I've been held up by  bridge strikes, lineside fires, suicides, bad weather etc. on many occasions without it counting in the figures.

It actually used to say on the performance poster which used to be posted at stations, (are they still?) something like events discounted in this period and then say bridge strike at Langley and give dates.

Those on here who know me will know that I have no issue with people complaining about FGW and making an opinion, as long as it is backed up. You will also notice I was only responding to a small bit of your post:

Thanks for your very interesting first few posts, JRobb!

This is not a formal intervention by an administrator, it's just my own personal opinion.

I was rather interested in your choice of specifying two members who have posted on this topic previously, where you apparently believe you have "hit a raw nerve with a few people here by daring to offer an opinion on the service that FGW provide".

Far from it: I happen to know both of those members personally, and while one is 'staff' and one is 'a passenger', they have both been known to criticise FGW in forthright terms, when appropriate.  Indeed, I too (and I am not, and never have been, FGW staff), have also been known to criticise FGW on this forum, quite forcibly, on specific issues in the past - and yet I too have been accused of being more pro-FGW than some of the staff!

I think the point is that you need to make sure you produce evidence for any specific criticism: if you "have seen staff verbally abusing & threatning customers with police action", you should take that further through the appropriate complaints procedure.

On the other hand, any sweeping criticism of 'FGW staff', or 'FGW train services' will not have too much credibility, as it flies in the face of the evidence.

See www.passengerfocus.org.uk where there is evidence that FGW are performing well - and are improving their performance!

Chris, thanks for your feedback & I'll take your points on board, when posting in the future.

JRobb, I too came to this forum after experiencing some frustrating moments when dealing with FGW.

There were two incidences at the time. One where I was being overcharged on my local line and another when I was ejected from a train for calling FGW 'muppets'

Regarding the overcharging, I was eventually compensated and recieved an apology and a further gesture of goodwill. I'd recieved some interesting pointers from forum members, with one FGW staff member looking into the issue on my behalf.

Being ejected from the train I've not mentioned on the forum before, but it was, without doubt, the worst experience I've had on the rail network. I'd booked a 1st class seat on a Pullman train out of PAD to sample the food on offer, and was refused service because I'd brought along my own bottle of (non-alcoholic) wine. I was having a 'dry' period at the time and didn't want to drink alcohol. The customer host refused to bring me a glass and said I could only purchase drinks from the restaurant menu. I even offered to pay a corkage fee, but no dice. I asked why I couldn't drink my own wine with my meal only to be told it was 'company policy'. That's when I called FGW 'muppets'. Not the CH herself but the company she worked for.

Taking exception to my criticism of her employer, she called the train manager and told him I was verbally abusive toward her. I was asked to get off at Reading where I was met by a couple of private security staff who took the TM's version of events as gospel and proceeded to attempt to escort me off station premises. I asked for the station manager, who backed up all staff and tried to get me to sign a piece of paper banning me from Reading station. When I refused, BTP were called and I finally got to tell someone my side of the story and to point out that at no time was I abusive, and my criticism of FGW was nothing worse than calling the company, and not any individual, 'muppets'. Banning me from the station, was, I was told a civil matter, and the station manager could do that to whoever he wanted. After a long and protracted debate, where I managed to get BTP on my side (it didn't help FGW that the station manager walked off while BTP were talking to him) I was eventually allowed to resume my journey, minus the slap up meal. Right throuhout this experience I remained calm (I was seething inside!) and made my points constructively and never raised my voice or created a scene.

I wrote to BTP for an incident report, and then contacted James Burt, who at the time was FGW's Customer Service Director. He called me personally and said he'd investigated the matter fully and agreed, lightheartedly, that my calling FGW 'muppets' could be taken as fair comment and that the reaction of all the staff concerned was grossly inappropriate. He confirmed that Pullman staff had been advised that it was fine for diners to bring their own drinks if they so wished, and further said that the private security firm were being replaced at Reading after numerous complaints, with FGW funding BTP PCSO's instead.

What I hope to highlight with these two experiences is that in the first case this forum can be a wonderful resource to help get problems with FGW resolved, and in the second case, occasionally we do come up against jobsworths, but with a calm head (perhaps it helped that I was 'dry' at the time!!) you can get your point across, and when all the evidence is in, see a satisfactory conclusion to your complaint.

JRobb, don't take the robust replies to your initial posts as a sleight. Generally this forum is a friendly place, where people can have differences of opinion without debates descending into slanging matches. The moderation is 'light touch' and friendly. This forum has opened my eyes in lots of ways regarding FGW and the wider rail network, I dunno how I coped before I stumbled on it!

Finally. I'm just a FGW passenger and I too am occasionally a muppet.  ;)

Every day a 10,000 piece jigsaw puzzle is tipped out of its box and a team, a very large team working for different organisation, start to put the puzzle together; just occasionally pieces of the puzzle are missing or someone nudges the table.   The picture these people are building is one of a wonderful railway scene many times the jigsaw goes together perfectly we forget we see this, just occasionally the picture is grotesque these we do remember because to us the traveling public its the stuff of nightmares.

This 10,000 piece jigsaw to being put together all around the UK.

My point is the railway is quite possibly the largest logistic operation in the UK that repeats its self day in day out a lot of the time with out a hitch.