First Group win South West franchise

[Siberian Snooper]

Here is the link to the NLS map

 

http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=51.5035&lon=-0.1123&layers=163&b=1

 

If you move the blue spot on the left it exposes the Bing map underneath.

Edited August 23, 2017 by Siberian Snooper

[Southernman46]

 

The LSWR built their own private tube line to Bank precisely because of the practical difficulties and astronomical cost of getting closer to the City on the surface -  and the same is still true today unless you want to decimate SE services.

Curiously with all this Waterloo connection discussion - next week SE services fro Kent will actually operate into Waterloo (via 9-Elms Jn though) for a week whilst LB is shut

[Geep7]

 

Does anyone have any clue regarding the timescale for 442 reintroduction ?

Saw a couple of 442's in the sidings at Eastleigh yesterday. Are these the ones being kept in warm storage?

[DavidB-AU]

"In addition, 18 refurbished class 442 five-car EMUs will be deployed on London Waterloo - Portsmouth services from December 2018."

 

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/commuter-rail/firstgroup-and-mtr-take-over-south-western-franchise.html

[4630]

"In addition, 18 refurbished class 442 five-car EMUs will be deployed on London Waterloo - Portsmouth services from December 2018."

 

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/commuter-rail/firstgroup-and-mtr-take-over-south-western-franchise.html

 

 

Given that that's only 16 months away, 18 refurbished 442....from December 2018, it'll be mighty impressive if it can done in that time.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Seriously, what have you been smoking / eating / drinking recently!

 

Just think about it for a moment - conflicting moves on the flat with every single London Bridge to Charing Cross service and withdrawing half of the South Eastern services to Cannon Street too to make room!

 

Please put down your crayons and take a good hard look at the real world practicalities before suggesting such nonsense.

 

The LSWR built their own private tube line to Bank precisely because of the practical difficulties and astronomical cost of getting closer to the City on the surface -  and the same is still true today unless you want to decimate SE services.

 

Before jumping in with both feet (into mouth) and being so rude, you should perhaps have looked out that book and what was written there. Then you would be in a valid position to comment.

 

Far from "decimating" South Eastern services (I suspect you have used that word in the current journalistic fashion rather than the correct one), it would have helped improve them by eliminating conflicts and saving the time spent terminating trains. Really a much better use of capacity and achieving much of what has been achieved by Thameslink 20xx at far less cost and disruption.

 

In the context of this thread, it would also have resulted in 10-car trains in the SW suburbs many years ago.

[phil-b259]

Before jumping in with both feet (into mouth) and being so rude, you should perhaps have looked out that book and what was written there. Then you would be in a valid position to comment.

 

Far from "decimating" South Eastern services (I suspect you have used that word in the current journalistic fashion rather than the correct one), it would have helped improve them by eliminating conflicts and saving the time spent terminating trains. Really a much better use of capacity and achieving much of what has been achieved by Thameslink 20xx at far less cost and disruption.

 

In the context of this thread, it would also have resulted in 10-car trains in the SW suburbs many years ago.

 

How exactly does a Waterloo - Cannon Street service eliminate conflicts given it has to cross all Charing Cross - London Bridge services on the flat!

 

I'm sorry but if you are going to come out with such an ill thought out proposal and glibly quote it in such a fashion then don't be supposed when people point out just how silly it is.

 

(I have no problem with people putting forward well thought out proposals that show they have considered physical, legislative conditions and which do not sacrifice overall capacity).

 

I repeat, the LSWR studied the issue in great depth in the past and came up with all sorts of ideas (including some similar to yours) but rejected them all as being far to complicated, expensive and extremely unlikely to carry favour with our elected representatives due to the negative impacts of on the surface construction through a built up area. Hence the creation of the Waterloo & City - which you will note lacks any intermediate stations precisely because that would potentially undermine its ability to do the job it was built for.

 

Yes there have also been studies done at various times since (during / just after WW2 being one occasion) where some pretty radical ideas were drawn up as regards London Termini which did include suggestions like abandoning Charing Cross and sending all services from the SE to the SW lines. These however were very much what we would now call 'high level' / 'desktop' exercises and were not widely supported by commuters or Politicans - nor did they actually consider the nitty-gritty things like how they would be built or whether the same levels of service could be provided. they also were far from 'low cost' options either...

 

Thus If what you were suggesting was to create some sort of through Vauxhall - Waterloo - London Bridge - Lewisham through service, yes it is theoretically possible, but would still end up costing just as much as Thameslink (see below) and is far from a 'win - win' situation the tone of your post suggested. In particular this still doesn't serve the City so travellers that currently use the W&C tube would have to walk across London Bridge while some Charing Cross bound commuters would be faced with walking across Waterloo Bridge / the Hungerford footbridges.

 

Without the additional platforms and trackwork at London Bridge / Borough Market (which is where the majority of the Thameslink projects expenditure has been inured) then you will still end up roughly halving the number of Kent - Charing Cross services if you try and link SW and SE services via the Victorian era viaducts. Thats the beauty of the Thameslink works it retains the existing service frequency through to Charing Cross and Cannon Street through the provision of an extra pair of tracks for Thameslink all the way from Bermondsey to Metropolitan Junction. To achieve anything close to this with your proposal you are looking at widening SE viaduct through Waterloo East to 6 platforms / tracks followed by some form of grade separation to prevent conflicts with Charing Cross services, plus you still need the new viaduct over borough market and extra platforms at London Bridge.

 

In fact the only bit of the current Thameslink works that would not be required under your scenario is the Bermondsey grade separation - but the money spent there (and some) would not be 'saved' - it would have to be spent on the costly viaduct works at Waterloo / Southwark.

 

Another point to remember is that thanks to the restrictive bridge girders on the Hungerford river bridge, the throat for Charing Cross where trains are sorted into the platforms occurs a lot further out than normal, the first stage being immediately outside Waterloo on the south bank and then further east Metropolitan junction where the two tracks across borough market become 4. This is important as a restricted throat and approaches can artificially limit the number of trains a station can handle - one of the big restrictions with Cannon Street is the fact that it only has 3 approach tracks from London Bridge where as ideally it needs at least 4 to achieve its full potential . (The main issue is getting rid of empty stock in the morning peaks to free up platforms for incoming services will be a challenge (given that the previous option of using the west curve and reversing just outside Blackfriars to use the route via Elephant & castle will not be possible due to Thameslink). Furthermore BR spent lots of money trying to segregate Charring Cross and Cannon Street services through London bridge (with it effectively being split into two parallel lines) precisely because of the congestion caused by having the split at Borough Market junction.

 

Ultimately any other scheme you come up with must retain the current service levels into Charing Cross or cannon Street for it to be acceptable. Thameslink meets this requirement as well as extending trains that used to terminate at London Bridge low level across the river and through the Heart of London. In short no-body suffers from having services to their current London termini removed (a bone of contention with SW commuters as Crossrail 2 bypasses the City on its way to Euston, etc yet is proposed to take over the service provision at the likes of Hampton Court, and Chessington)

Edited August 24, 2017 by phil-b259

[lapford34102]

Hi,

 As the one who started this with a "Crossrail 4" comment which was meant to be very tongue in cheek I'm slightly dismayed at events. Hopefully those involved can at least agree to disagree.... :-)

Doing a bit of reading around did note the link wasn't successful partly due to the LSWR and SER not agreeing on how it should be run/financed/etc and the subsequent building of the Waterloo and City.

My thoughts were something along the lines of Basing-Ashford direct though quite why I'm not  sure when all you need to do is get off at the East and walk over to the main to achieve the same. It was partly due to SouthEastern "downgrading" the Ashford-CharingX service to virtually a stopper in favour of the Ashford-St Pancras service. As someone who been traveling Broadstairs - Weymouth for the past 40 odd years having now to cross London by tube to get the best service is a bit of a pain so it's largely a bit of selfish daydreaming.

Still miffed at SWR's intention of reducing the Weymouth - Waterloo direct service to one an hour though perhaps it'll be fast from Soton like the good old days.......

 

Stu

[Ron Ron Ron]

Waterloo's new platforms take shape.

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2017 by Ron Ron Ron

[Gwiwer]

PA announcements being made at stations today advise that the normal timetable will return from Tuesday.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Was out and about again in London.

 

No trouble in arriving at Waterloo, despite the reduced service. Fortunately the Shepperton trains seem to have clear access to the ex-International

platforms. Not too much time waiting for a clear platform.

 

PA announcements seem to be still up the creek on some trains. Was on train via Hounslow and it kept announcing that the next station was the one we'd just called at. At least one passenger missed their stop.

 

First time I've ever been on the DLR (well worth a trip, especially if you sit at the front or back). Also went on a train from Marylebone - never

done that terminus before.

 

Also saw my first Class 68 and had my first Class 90 haulage (I lead a sheltered life.....)

 

And all for the price of a Travelcard.

Edited August 25, 2017 by Peter Kazmierczak

[Peter Kazmierczak]

 

 

Here's an idea.

 

Divert all the SW stuff via Clapham Junction to Denmark Hill, and all the SE traffic via Lewisham and Denmark Hill. Then you could have

direct through services, plus close Waterloo, London Bridge, Cannon St and Charing Cross.

 

Sensible or what?

Edited August 25, 2017 by Peter Kazmierczak

[Chris116]

Here's an idea.Divert all the SW stuff via Clapham Junction to Denmark Hill, and all the SE traffic via Lewisham and Denmark Hill. Then you could havedirect through services, plus close Waterloo, London Bridge, Cannon St and Charing Cross.Sensible or what?

I think that comes into the "or what" category!

[Peter Kazmierczak]

One of the "delights" of the current temp timetable, is that sometimes it's quicker to walk.

 

I went to Strawberry Hill around lunchtime and took a photo of a Waterloo - Shepperton train. After a brisk walk I arrived at Fulwell to photo the

same train arriving (after its diversion and reversal at Kingston.

[Gwiwer]

One of the "delights" of the current temp timetable, is that sometimes it's quicker to walk.I went to Strawberry Hill around lunchtime and took a photo of a Waterloo - Shepperton train. After a brisk walk I arrived at Fulwell to photo thesame train arriving (after its diversion and reversal at Kingston.

Snap! Except in my case it was an up and photographed at Fulwell followed by Strawberry Hill.

 

Station announcements heard today do not include reference to normal services resuming on Tuesday as they did yesterday.

 

As seems to be the norm the platform indicators at Clapham Junction were out of sync. with reality again last night and not helped by the unique timetable for the day having long since been thrown out of various windows account signalling failures, various. It was a little disconcerting to watch a red 10-car train pull up while auto-woman tried to convince us it was going to Weymouth.

 

It was even more disconcerting a few minutes later to hear this: "The train now approaching platform 9 is the South Western Railway service for Alton and Basingstoke. Passengers travelling to Alton must join the front 12 carriages. Passengers travelling to Basingstoke must join the rear 12 carriages. This train is formed of 24 carriages"

 

I know they have been lengthening some platforms at Waterloo. I hadn't realised it was quite to this extent The train arrived formed of two 450 units making just 8 carriages and confusing everyone.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Agree about the problems at Clapham Jn last evening. The lady announcer seemed to be getting (rightly) frustrated by the incorrect auto data

on the platform screens.

"Ignore the platform screens and listen to my announcements" she was repeatedly saying. The only thing correct about the screens was the initial letter of the train's destination - Weybridge, not Windsor.....

[Fenman]

Agree about the problems at Clapham Jn last evening. The lady announcer seemed to be getting (rightly) frustrated by the incorrect auto data

on the platform screens.

"Ignore the platform screens and listen to my announcements" she was repeatedly saying. The only thing correct about the screens was the initial letter of the train's destination - Weybridge, not Windsor.....

I wonder how any deaf passengers got by?

 

Paul

[stewartingram]

They used to in older times.

 

Stewart

[jim.snowdon]

Agree about the problems at Clapham Jn last evening. The lady announcer seemed to be getting (rightly) frustrated by the incorrect auto data

on the platform screens.

"Ignore the platform screens and listen to my announcements" she was repeatedly saying. The only thing correct about the screens was the initial letter of the train's destination - Weybridge, not Windsor.....

In the days when Southern Region trains used to display their headcodes it did at least provide something positive to go by.

 

The best way to sort this sort of problem out is not to rely totally on electronically stored timetable data (and hope that someone has correctly updated it for any special services), but to get the train to tell the system what it is and where it is going. It does require trainborne and trackmounted transponders, but it is a well established approach amongst tramway and rapid transit systems.

 

Jim

[Gwiwer]

SWR class 455 units have always displayed headcodes and still do. The "via" blind above the driver's cab window includes the number whereas the "destination" blind above the offside cab window does not. Thus my train typically displays Kingston / 24 via Richmond.

 

Southern class 377 units used to show the headcode on the external electronic displays but this ceased a few years back

[corneliuslundie]

You can't rely on the train to know where it is going. My last journey from Birmingham to Newtown was in a train with Chester on the front and inside, and the conductor told me that the front half was going to Chester, the rear half to Aberystwyth. In fact it sent nowhere near Chester and was not timetabled to, the front half remained at Shrewsbury and the rear half went to Aberystwyth. This what the concourse indicator at Birmingham said would happen (and what I expected from the timetable) but ther platform indicators at Birmingham and stations to Shrewsbury were certain the front half was going to Machynlleth.

It was pretty obvious when we arrived at a bay platform at Shrewsbury that Chester was not an option, but even as we left on the way to Welshpool the announcement on board was that the next station was Gobowen. After that no announcement at all except "Welcome to Arriva Trains Wales".

A strong message has been sent to ATW and I am awaiting a reply, possibly including someone's head on a plate.

I stopped knowing where trains would go from Waterloo when they changed the times of the Hampton Court trains from 26 and 56 minutes past the hour! Mind you I haven't needed that information for a quarter of a century. And wasn't the headcode 30?

Jonathan

[Gwiwer]

I find that the platform displays agree with those on the train and the on-board announcements, all of which agree with reality, almost all the time. When they don't the reason is usually understandable: driver has input wrong or no details, late or in-running variation issued by control or altered carriage working again a last-minute thing. The displays at Clapham Junction however are often one train ahead and refresh at the time a departure should have occurred rather than when it actually does. Frequency of trains means a one-minute delay often results in the train at the platform being shown as the next one. That needs fixing.

 

Since the Siege of Waterloo has been on the internal audio and visual systems on the 455 and 456 units struggle to cope with the double-run between Shacklegate Junction and Kingston. Down trains departing Kingston towards Shepperton will announce the next station as Fulwell (it is Hampton Wick) but correct themselves while stopped at Hampton Wick. Up trains running between Teddington and Kingston have usually been one stop out of sync. In addition they remain one stop out after reversal at Kingston until correcting at Hampton Wick. Curiously they also and invariably announce "The next station is Teddington. Change here for Strawberry Hill" as though they are returning to Shepperton. Of course as soon as Teddington has been left the system confirms "The next station is Strawberry Hill."

[great central]

 

"Ignore the platform screens and listen to my announcements" she was repeatedly saying...

All they'll do then is look at their phones and tell you their phone says,......

And totally ignore the yooman bein who does actually know what's going on and can keep up with the alterations

[Fenman]

All they'll do then is look at their phones and tell you their phone says,......

And totally ignore the yooman bein who does actually know what's going on and can keep up with the alterations

That's because TOCs have spent years abusing their control of PA systems by shouting pompous and inane warnings at us to the point of lunacy. I now wear headphones as a matter of self-defence.

 

Incidentally, can anyone tell me why I must only take my "personal belongings" with me when I leave a train? What other sort of belongings might I have - and why is it ok to leave those on the train? Instead of those six syllables, could they not just use a good common word like "things"? There's an 85% efficiency gain straight away...

 

Paul (who's a bit grumpy this morning)

[great central]

That's because TOCs have spent years abusing their control of PA systems by shouting pompous and inane warnings at us to the point of lunacy. I now wear headphones as a matter of self-defence.

 

Incidentally, can anyone tell me why I must only take my "personal belongings" with me when I leave a train? What other sort of belongings might I have - and why is it ok to leave those on the train? Instead of those six syllables, could they not just use a good common word like "things"? There's an 85% efficiency gain straight away...

 

Paul (who's a bit grumpy this morning)

We are given a set of standard scripts that we're supposed to use in PA announcements, of course the computer generated ones stick rigidly to them, some of us do vary them somewhat but I am aware of colleagues getting into bother for going too far off script.

 

Edit: Then again, and please don't take this personally, I don't always have a lot of sympathy for anyone who inconveniences themselves because they are wearing headphones. We had a PHBT a while ago on a foot crossing, no idea the train was coming, headphones still blaring after the event apparently. Most drivers now give a long loud blast on both horns at that crossing to this day.

 

Further edit: Personal belongings might also include things like rotting slimy banana skins, especially on early morning trains (just do those extra few steps and put them in the bin, grr) half drunk dustbins of coffee from their designer coffee shop and used nappies (GRR!)

 

GC who's feeling rather good this lovely sunny morning:-). No smilies on my phone

Edited August 27, 2017 by great central