Bourne End & Henley Services to & from Paddington

[whole diary]

[JRobb]

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^▸ (First Great Western) 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.

[IndustryInsider]

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^▸ (First Great Western) 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.

[eightf48544]

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^▸ (Signalling and Telegraph) 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^▸ (East Coast Main Line) near York and although there was no obvious frost or snow the point heaters were on and the rails were glowing.

[grahame]

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!

[JayMac]

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.)

[Worcester_Passenger]

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?

[Oxman]

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.

[Electric train]

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. 

[JRobb]

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^▸ (First Great Western) 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.

[devon_metro]

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) 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.

[Phil]

These services are always the first ones to be either cancelled or disrupted whether it's winter or summer

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

[grahame]

These services are always the first ones to be either cancelled or disrupted whether it's winter or summer

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.

[grahame]

To summarise, in my opinion FGW^▸ (First Great Western) 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.

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^» (Department for Transport - about) got it wrong", "WCC^▸ (Wiltshire County Council (Until March 2009)) 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^▸ (Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy).

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!

[Ollie]

To summarise, in my opinion FGW^▸ (First Great Western) 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.

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

[inspector_blakey]

To summarise, in my opinion FGW^▸ (First Great Western) 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.

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?