Shortage of rolling stock since September 2017 - ongoing problems, and subsequent discussion

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

Why? You simply wouldn't squeeze 6standing cars into half the space. So cut out just one stop & there's enough.

The other solution would be to cut more than one stop. Best to just miss the one I reckon.

[NickB]

So everyone gets to wait at Paddington for an hour rather than half the passengers getting home?  Awesome.

[ChrisB]

Sorry, there's more than one train an hour to Maidenhead!!!

[NickB]

The next Train is a 40min service which gets to Maidenhead at 19.20.  That’s 40mins after the 18.18.
Most passengers for the 18.18 know to arrive at Paddington by 18.05 in order to board so that’s an hour and twenty from Paddington to Maidenhead. But in pure timetabling terms a 45min delay.

[grahame]

So everyone gets to wait at Paddington for an hour rather than half the passengers getting home?  Awesome.

Not understanding why everyone might get to wait an hour. As well as the 18:18 there are (admittedly slower) trains to Maidenhead at 18:10, 18:25, 18:42 and 18:50 - a couple of which are electrics and terminating at Maidenhead, so unlikely to be overcrowded (for another three weeks).

It makes sense to drop an early stop that's predominantly set-down where there's overcrowding likely an a more frequent service to that early stop.  Indeed there have been some timetables scheduled so that limited capacity services running a longer or diverging route don't collect significant traffic that would displace users headed for the further, less frequent places.

edit to add

I was a bit slow in researching that. I can understand an hour from arriving at Paddington Station to leaving Maidenhead Station, especially if people are in the habit of arriving early and awaiting the 18:18.

[Adelante_CCT]

The next Train is a 40min service which gets to Maidenhead at 19.20.  That’s 40mins after the 18.18.
Most passengers for the 18.18 know to arrive at Paddington by 18.05 in order to board so that’s an hour and twenty from Paddington to Maidenhead. But in pure timetabling terms a 45min delay.

18:18 arrives Maidenhead at 18:39
18:25 arrives Maidenhead at 19:10
18:42 arrives Maidenhead at 19:14

I don't see that as a 45 minutes delay.


We discussed this the other day on this forum when a Cotswold train was 2 car vice 8 and it was suggested that passengers for Maidenhead should try an electric train for a more comfortable service, whilst it was suggested on here as to why not miss out the stop altogether to make the train more comfortable (or simply be able to board) for those travelling further afield. I agree that this should be done when necessary

[NickB]

The 18.42 never arrives on time and has been running an average of 7.5mins late for the past month - often 15 to 20 mins late.  If I arrive at Paddington at 18.00 or thereabouts to catch the 18.18 then extending my journey by a further 20, 30 or 40mins is not acceptable in my opinion.

BUT - We are arguing semantics about timings. The original point that I was trying to make is that cancelling services because they might be busy is a new phenomena in my experience and one that personally I am not happy about.

In this particular example a couple of hundred passengers had to wait for a later, slower, train than they needed to. Whether the train in short formation could have taken ALL passengers that would have wanted to take it is not in doubt, but a couple of hundred had that choice removed. That is not good in my opinion.

[ellendune]

So what were the alternatives for the Oxford Passengers?

[NickB]

So what were the alternatives for the Oxford Passengers?

Compared to the 18.18?  The 18.22 leaving 4 minutes later and arriving earlier?

[ellendune]

So what were the alternatives for the Oxford Passengers?

Compared to the 18.18?  The 18.22 leaving 4 minutes later and arriving earlier?

Actually now I look - quite a few

What about Cholsey again quite a few.

Seems like most stations on the route had quite a few options.  Didn't check the journey times but given the number of alternatives i don't see a problem with the cancellation.

I remember being on a first train out of Pad after disruption and there were considered even by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to be too overcrowded for it to be safe.  Passengers for Reading were asked to take an alternative HST^▸ (High Speed Train) but few did so the alternative train left first.  It would have been so much more effective to cancel the Reading stop so that passengers going further, who would have faced longer delays could away. 

Remember also that long distance passengers pay more per mile especially in the peaks. 

[a-driver]

If I was there early enough I would have tried jumping the 1805 Frome service. Jump off at Twyford at 1826 then catch the 1837 back to Maidenhead arriving at 1844.  If there wasn’t space on that I would have tried the 1815 and travel through to Reading.

[NickB]

If I was there early enough I would have tried jumping the 1805 Frome service. Jump off at Twyford at 1826 then catch the 1837 back to Maidenhead arriving at 1844.  If there wasn’t space on that I would have tried the 1815 and travel through to Reading.

I'm sure that this has been covered elsewhere in the past, but what is the ticketing situation regarding getting on a service that clearly doesn't call at your final destination, to a further station, and then travelling back?

[grahame]

I'm sure that this has been covered elsewhere in the past, but what is the ticketing situation regarding getting on a service that clearly doesn't call at your final destination, to a further station, and then travelling back?

In some cases at least an easement allows this - for example Salsibury to Dilton Marsh, double back at Westbury and (I believe) Cheltenham Spa and south thereof to Bromsgrove, double back at New Street.  Think you can also double back at Paddington for the Greenford branch if you're coming in longer distance?

Normally not technically allowed, but would be sympathetically accepted at times of disruption to direct stopping services.

[Thatcham Crossing]

I'm sure that this has been covered elsewhere in the past, but what is the ticketing situation regarding getting on a service that clearly doesn't call at your final destination, to a further station, and then travelling back?

I was recently fined by GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) for taking a Paddington to Newbury service, and changing there back to Thatcham on a Thatcham-Paddington return ticket.

I protested that such routings are shown in the National Rail journey planner, but had it pointed out that in the small print it does say "you need to buy more than one ticket for this journey".

By bad luck, there was a ticket check on the 3 mile journey back to Thatcham from Newbury  and have to say I didn't appreciate being treated like a criminal for something that was a genuine misunderstanding on my part (it also wasn't the first time I had done this  )

[didcotdean]

There is a specific negative easement in place:

700309 Circuitous Route Customers travelling via Reading to Thatcham may not travel via Newbury. This easement applies in both directions.

This suggests, maybe that it was at one time permitted, or at least not otherwise barred.