Thames Valley infrastructure problems causing disruption elsewhere - 2019

[whole diary]

[Timmer]

And once again unsurprisingly it’s the SF (super fast) trains that are getting canned. You book on those on the understanding that they will be the first to go at times of disruption so best not rely on them for an appointment/ flight etc. Defensive scheming required which kind of negates having a SF service.

[Marlburian]

"A track defect near Slough is causing disruption to journeys between Reading and London Paddington. Trains may be cancelled, delayed by up to 20 minutes or revised.This is currently expected until the end of the day.This issue is not currently affecting services between Slough and Windsor & Eton Central."

The National Rail website suggests that most trains are leaving Reading for Paddington on time, but the 0733, 0810 and 0814 are cancelled.

[Adrian]

And once again unsurprisingly it’s the SF (super fast) trains that are getting canned. You book on those on the understanding that they will be the first to go at times of disruption so best not rely on them for an appointment/ flight etc. Defensive scheming required which kind of negates having a SF service.

This morning it was the 0615 and 0713 CDF^» (Cardiff - next trains) to PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) that were cancelled, which are the stopping services.  The fast SWA^» (Swansea - next trains) - PAD trains that are scheduled to overtake them at Swindon did run - although I suspect they made Swindon stops in lieu.

[TaplowGreen]

.....here we go again, Day 2.

Cancellations to services between Reading and London Paddington
Due to a speed restriction over defective track between Reading and London Paddington fewer trains are able to run.
Train services running to and from these stations may be cancelled, delayed by up to 15 minutes or revised. Disruption is expected until the end of the day.
Customer Advice
Owing to a short section of defective track in the Slough area, which requires some remedial work, a speed restriction has had to be imposed on the London bound fast line in that area

[TaplowGreen]

Delays to services between London Paddington and Reading


Due to a speed restriction over defective track between London Paddington and Reading trains have to run at reduced speed on the London Paddington bound high speed line.
Train services running to and from these stations may be delayed by up to 10 minutes. Disruption is expected until the end of the day.

[broadgage]

"Defective track" is a bit old school, I thought that the new approved term was "a safety inspection of the track"
Whatever next, an admission that the new trains have engines rather than generating units, or even that a footbridge exists at Reading rather than a transfer deck.

[TaplowGreen]

Cancellations to services between West Drayton and London Paddington
Due to a fault with the signalling system between West Drayton and London Paddington trains have to run at reduced speed on the line.
Train services running to and from these stations will be cancelled or delayed by up to 15 minutes. Disruption is expected until 08:00 28/12.

[NickB]

Now until 11am, with 50% cancellations.

[NickB]

The wisdom of stripping toilets from the tfl services, and then only running tfl services over weekends, and then running them with 45min delays, is soon to be tested.

I’m on the 10.16 from maidenhead. Stuck at Hayes ad infinitum.

[Reading General]

TFL^▸ (Transport for London) are a metro service operator, if they want to run services on railways there should be legislation in place to make sure they provide the same as other operators provide, and have the relevant infrastructure in place at wherever their vehicles are stored overnight. This should especially be applied on lines shared by many other services with long gaps between stations.

[Marlburian]

The wisdom of stripping toilets from the tfl services, and then only running tfl services over weekends, and then running them with 45min delays, is soon to be tested.

I’m on the 10.16 from maidenhead. Stuck at Hayes ad infinitum.

The National Rail website suggests it was delayed by 19 minutes,  with all other Maidenhead-Hayes services also late or cancelled.

I recall that the official justification for no on-board loos is that the average time spent on a TfL^» (Transport for London - about) train is expected to be 20 minutes and there are facilities at stations. Dunno what are the opening hours for some of the smaller stations, and I imagine that when there are no staff the waiting-rooms and toilets are locked. Could be some unpleasant whiffs around the next morning, as occasionally there are on Tilehurst Station footbridge, together with the odd pool of puke.

Marlburian

[Reading General]

I think that the average time people spend on a crossrail train is going to be higher than that, and I would have thought that TFL^▸ (Transport for London) and the department for transport were hoping so if they want people from Maidenhead to be travelling direct to east London, Canary Wharf, etc.

[IndustryInsider]

I think that the average time people spend on a crossrail train is going to be higher than that, and I would have thought that TFL^▸ (Transport for London) and the department for transport were hoping so if they want people from Maidenhead to be travelling direct to east London, Canary Wharf, etc.

I think it probably will be about that - vast numbers of people will just use it to station hop within London which will bring the average journey time down - but that's not to say that there won't be a lot of people on board (in terms of numbers if not percentage) for an hour or more.  Toilets should have been provided.

[Reading General]

Overall, I think TFL^▸ (Transport for London) is the wrong operator for these services and a national rail network operator would have been better suited. Like I mentioned, if TFL want to run trains on the national network, then they should follow the same rules as other operators, and the tried and tested methods used by the national network, rather than trying to apply their underground methods to a railway which is clearly interurban.

[stuving]

Overall, I think TFL^▸ (Transport for London) is the wrong operator for these services and a national rail network operator would have been better suited. Like I mentioned, if TFL want to run trains on the national network, then they should follow the same rules as other operators, and the tried and tested methods used by the national network, rather than trying to apply their underground methods to a railway which is clearly interurban.

It's been a long-standing practice to extend tube lines by connecting inner suburban lines to them instead of their terminus. This was seen as relieving capacity constraints in the track leading to the terminus rather than in platforms, though of course it does that too. At the same time it prevented numbers on suburban lines dropping too far (which was a big issue in the 60s), by offering a direct link into the tube network.

Crossrail is just a tube on steroids, and the same principle applies. Its higher speed means that Maidenhead was easily as close (in time) as other lines' outer limits, end even Reading not much further. So you can see why it looked the obvious way of doing things. 

With SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) now introducing toilets on their new inner suburban trains - I think for the first time - the question in my mind is for urban railways in general: "what took you so long?" I don't think the relevant bit of human anatomy (and physiology, and even pathology) has evolved a huge amount in even the last fifty years ... but our expectations have.