December 18 Timetable Consultation

[whole diary]

[stuving]

When we first saw the proposal to split the Weybridge-via-Hounslow service into two bits, I pointed out that:

One awkward change which will annoy a few (possibly very few) is not running the Hounslow loop stoppers on to Virginia Water, but starting a separate Weybridge service there. Worse, initially they will be using the same trains and running them ECS^▸ (Empty Coaching Stock) Hounslow-VW; I can see that going down well.

They means that from e.g. Kew Bridge out towards Reading is no longer one change at e.g. Staines, but change at Hounslow and again by Staines (only 2 tph to Windsor will go via Houslow and turn right). Changing at Twickenham might be faster, but at the moment it's not valid on the cheapest ticket.

That have addressed the connectivity issue, by running the inner bit of the service (all stops to Hounslow) round to Twickenham, where it will now reverse to run ECS to Virginia water. That's in the timetables, though a little hard to follow, but the words about it don't make a lot of sense:

The Waterloo to Weybridge service is split into a Waterloo to Twickenham via Hounslow service (with connections available at Twickenham for Kingston, Reading and Richmond), running every 30 minutes and a Virginia Water to Weybridge shuttle service operating every 30 minutes calling only at Vauxhall, Clapham Junction, Putney, Brentford and Hounslow.

That bolded text seems to have been misplaced; it refers to the 2 Windsor tph which are the semi-fast ones:

For the first time in over a decade a semi-fast service will be provided all day Monday to Saturday on the Hounslow Loop, including the peaks calling only at Brentford and Hounslow. This maintains connectivity from the Hounslow Loop to Feltham and Staines whilst also considerably improving journey times from Hounslow and Brentford to London (up to seven minutes quicker). Earlier and later trains will also be provided on this route. This increases the off-peak Windsor Lines services from 12 trains per hour currently to 16 trains per hour.

[paul7575]

Reading Platforms 4A/4B 

That might still be the official name! Not for the platforms, obviously, but then this timetable doesn't have platform numbers for anywhere else. The point is that those three platforms are part of Reading station for signalling purposes, but operationally have to be separate, especially if you are running third-rail EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit). Hence a label just for this part of the station.

That’s right, it is still the internal name of the separate timing point location for the “Southern” platforms, you can see it on an opentraintimes query, the code to enter is RDNG4AB.  The normal public facing systems must combine these split locations, of which there’ll probably be quite few across the country...

[Surrey 455]

Looks like I'll be getting an improved service at Bookham. I can only see the Monday to Friday times but morning peaks increase from 2 tph to 4 and evenings increase from 1 tph to 2. Hopefully Sundays will also double to 2 tph.

[stuving]

SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) have published their response to the consultation exercise. A number of the headline changes, as discussed above, are no longer being proposed - notably the reduction in the number of through Weymouth-Waterloo trains, and splitting the Hounlsow loop service from the Weybridge branch trains. Generally, changes planned to speed up trains by removing stops are being rescinded.

I do wonder how much allowance they have made for the obvious bias in such a consultation; loss of connectivity is a clearer disadvantage than a minute of extra time, and those who feel aggrieved are more likely to respond to a consultation (as a form of complaint) than those who gain. And how many might want to now respond to a consultation on the changes now proposed to the original changes?

Paul Clifton on South Today tonight made a lot of the U-turn aspect of this, and rather naughtily didn't once mention it was a consultation!

[paul7575]

SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) have published their response to the consultation exercise. A number of the headline changes, as discussed above, are no longer being proposed - notably the reduction in the number of through Weymouth-Waterloo trains, and splitting the Hounlsow loop service from the Weybridge branch trains. Generally, changes planned to speed up trains by removing stops are being rescinded.

I do wonder how much allowance they have made for the obvious bias in such a consultation; loss of connectivity is a clearer disadvantage than a minute of extra time, and those who feel aggrieved are more likely to respond to a consultation (as a form of complaint) than those who gain. And how many might want to now respond to a consultation on the changes now proposed to the original changes?

Paul Clifton on South Today tonight made a lot of the U-turn aspect of this, and rather naughtily didn't once mention it was a consultation!

It’s the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) who have to do the U turn, SWR’s proposals were nearly all in accordance with the ITT^▸ (Invitation to Tender). Even the much criticised Weymouth reduction was in the ITT.  Many of the latest changes such as reduction of the off peak Windsor service require the DfT to alter the SLCs^▸ (Service Level Commitment).

Paul

[grahame]

Of note within the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) area:

A limited number of stops at Freshford will be introduced on services to Bristol and the majority of trains will now call at Oldfield Park to serve the university campus nearby;

No mention of Dilton Marsh calls which - however - were in the draft timetables and supported via write-ins.   They were good news, and I suspect that no further mention of them means they remain good news.  Platform extension at Dilton Marsh is underway.

Oldfield Park, Freshford and Dilton Marsh will now enjoy direct London services.

The SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) reports on five other (cross-franchise) services for the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) are separate from this consultation - and there was a separate stakeholder discussion on them - so are not reflected in this SWR report, nor the timetable to which it refers. Nothing in the SWR plans goes against the requests / suggestion in to them as stakeholder suggestions for that next step.

[Timmer]

Some one uk Rail forums mentioned the other day if it’s not mentioned it’s not changed from what was shown in the draft timetable. I don’t think anyone was going to object to the extra services/stops on the Waterloo-Westbury-Bristol line so all good. Get a regular Swindon-Southampton service and things have never looked better on the Cardiff-Portsmouth line.

edit: spelling correction