Just how bad can it get?

[whole diary]

[tonya]

A friend reports she was on the 5:22 from BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI)) to Portsmouth, yesterday. Packed to capacity. Got to Bath. Couldn't load more passengers on to 2 coach train. Passengers on the platfrom became very angry indeed and the police were called.
I fail to understand how we can continue to justify this as a train service we can rely on.
My old parents wanted to visit me this week from waterloo to Bath via salisbury. They assumed they could book seats. I had to warn them  off as I don't think they would survive the trip if they had to change onto a cattle truck at Salisbury, that's if they got on in the first place.
Call this a railway?
The tradgedy is the staff are the people in the front line so they take all the flak, when none of this is of their making. Andrew Griffiths actually said to me last week that perhaps in retrsopect FGW^▸ (First Great Western) should not have taken this franchise on under these terms.

[Lee]

A friend reports she was on the 5:22 from BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI)) to Portsmouth, yesterday. Packed to capacity. Got to Bath. Couldn't load more passengers on to 2 coach train. Passengers on the platfrom became very angry indeed and the police were called.
I fail to understand how we can continue to justify this as a train service we can rely on.
My old parents wanted to visit me this week from waterloo to Bath via salisbury. They assumed they could book seats. I had to warn them  off as I don't think they would survive the trip if they had to change onto a cattle truck at Salisbury, that's if they got on in the first place.
Call this a railway?
The tradgedy is the staff are the people in the front line so they take all the flak, when none of this is of their making. Andrew Griffiths actually said to me last week that perhaps in retrsopect FGW^▸ (First Great Western) should not have taken this franchise on under these terms.

Whoever people think is to blame for this - the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) , FGW , the two combined or "other factors" , this is beginning to take on an air of "the last days of Rome." Quote from the recent Andrew Haines interview (link below) :
http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=144913&command=displayContent&sourceNode=231190&home=yes&more_nodeId1=144922&contentPK=19248873

But he said more rolling stock would help First Great Western - part of a transport group which also runs most of Bristol's buses and made ^195.8 million profit last year - improve services in the region.

He urged local authorities to work together to secure new engines and carriages from the Government's Department for Transport.

He said: "We'd love more rolling stock and I've been talking with Bristol City Council as well as the other interested parties on this issue. We lost out to the North last time because there has been significant passenger growth in areas like Manchester and Leeds.

"But the Government has made 1,300 new trains available over the next seven years and we've got to make a concerted case for getting our hands on some of that.

If that is the "cunning plan" , then I fear that passengers in the "Cross - Bristol" area will be disappointed. Here is a DfT link that indicates where the extra carriages are likely to go.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/about/strategy/whitepapers/whitepapercm7176/railwphlsospecimen

Other Major Cities
Additional peak capacity on the following corridors:

    Bristol
    Yatton
    Bath
    Filton

    Leicester
    Loughborough
    Nuneaton

    Liverpool
    Wigan
    Rainhill (Chat Moss)
    Warrington (CLC^▸ (Castle Cary))

    Newcastle
    Morpeth
    Hexham
    Chester-le-Street
    Durham Coast
    Darlington-Saltburn

    Nottingham
    Chesterfield
    Derby and Leicester
    Grantham and Sleaford

    Sheffield
    Goldthorpe
    Barnsley
    Edale
    Chesterfield
    Kiveton
    Doncaster

Around 50-80 carriages in total for the six cities

How many extra coaches are "Cross - Bristol" passengers likely to see out of "Around 50-80 carriages in total for the six cities" ?

Here is what's in the pipeline for passengers elsewhere in the FGW area :

"Illustrative specimen capacity enhancement options were developed by DfT, and modelled in the Network Modelling Framework (NMF), to demonstrate that the HLOS^▸ (High Level Output Specification) output metric requirements can be delivered within the Statement of Funds Available; as outlined in the Schedule to Appendix A of the Rail White Paper ^Delivering a Sustainable Railway."

Good to see a nice friendly worded catchy opening paragraph to the document... 

Great Western ^ Provision of additional 2tph 6-car semi-fast Reading-Paddington service, with the existing Paddington - Greenford service running between Greenford and West Ealing at enhanced frequencies.  Additional suburban train lengthening, 7-cars in the peak from Reading and 6-cars from Slough.

I've often thought that the Paddington-Greenford service running at 30 minute intervals in the peak with a maximum of 2 coaches (due to platform lengths) was a huge waste of peak capacity, given that West Ealing has land owned by the railway that could easily be transformed into a nice little bay platform. OK, the relatively small number of commuters from Paddington/Acton/Ealing Broadway to Drayton Green/Castle Bar Park/Greenford would have extended journey times and a change of train at West Ealing, but overall it would offer so many extra seats on the other suburban routes out of Paddington that means it would be of huge benefit.

The first time I heard this officially mentioned was in this year's Network Rail Business Plan and all of a sudden it seems to be gaining support. It would also enable an increase to 3tph between West Ealing and Greenford using the same two trains that provide a 2tph sevice on the through route. Most people would be benefitting from the scheme. However you watch complaints flood in from various organisations and the public about cutting the through trains from London.

The question I am interested in seeing the answer to is what type of train will provide these additional coaches? With the Pendolinos and some of the other modern trains they can just build extra coaches to the specification of the original order. With the 165/6's used on suburban routes out of Paddington being over 15 years old, I assume they will be new build units, possibly like the 168's build rescently for Chiltern? Does anyone know?

[devon_metro]

The 1630 Cardiff - Portsmouth is actually booked 4 car, so it is not an everyday occurence that it is 2 car.

[Lee]

The 1630 Cardiff - Portsmouth is actually booked 4 car, so it is not an everyday occurence that it is 2 car.

I think you will find that I knew that........

Here is a list of services from the "Cross - Bristol" area that are due to be strengthened from December 2007. A couple of caveats :

1) The list is taken from the original draft December 2007 Timetable. As a result , the timings shown may differ slightly from the "final" version.

2) Sometimes extra carriages are added or taken off en route. Where this is due to be the case , I have noted it in brackets.

SERVICES DUE TO BE STRENGTHENED WITH A 2 - COACH CLASS 158 UNIT

0640 Frome - Cardiff Central (detached at Bristol Temple Meads.)
0723 Warminster - Great Malvern (attached at Westbury , detached at Bristol Temple Meads.)
0600 Portsmouth Harbour - Cardiff Central (detached at Bristol Temple Meads.)
1222 Portsmouth Harbour - Cardiff Central (attached at Bristol Temple Meads.)
1622 Portsmouth Harbour - Cardiff Central.
2038 Westbury - Bristol Temple Meads.
0625 Westbury - Frome.
0545 Bristol Temple Meads - Weymouth / Portsmouth Harbour (split at Westbury.)
1230 Cardiff Central - Portsmouth Harbour (attached at Bristol Temple Meads.)
1630 Cardiff Central - Portsmouth Harbour.

SERVICES DUE TO BE STRENGTHENED WITH A 1 - COACH CLASS 153 UNIT

0540 Weymouth - Bristol Parkway (attached at Westbury.)
1704 Bristol Temple Meads - Bristol Parkway.
2130 Southampton Central - Bristol Temple Meads (Class 150 / 153 combo from Westbury onwards.)
0845 Bristol Parkway - Westbury (detached at Bristol Temple Meads.)
1648 Bristol Parkway - Westbury (attached at Bristol Temple Meads.)
1748 Bristol Parkway - Westbury (attached at Bristol Temple Meads.)

SERVICES DUE TO BE OPERATED BY A 3 - COACH CLASS 158 UNIT

0554 Bristol Temple Meads - Cardiff Central.
1122 Portsmouth Harbour - Cardiff Central.
1922 Portsmouth Harbour - Cardiff Central.
0730 Cardiff Central - Portsmouth Harbour.
1530 Cardiff Central - Portsmouth Harbour.

I was on the 1722 travelling between Bristol - Oldfield Park on Wednesday , and even with 4 coaches , many passengers were standing.

[devon_metro]

I was replying to Tonya.

[Lee]

I was replying to Tonya.

Fair enough. I think that it would only be fair to point out that this particular train is regularly overcrowded with 4 coaches though , and to run it with only 2 is asking for trouble (which I think was sort of your point as well.)

[Timmer]

All because First wanted to save money by letting a fleet of 158s off lease. They said they could do without them so DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) took them at their word and handed them over to someone else. Wessex had just about fixed overcrowding problems on Cardiff-Portsmouth by splitting some of their fleet of 158s to make a small fleet of three car sets. Ever since FGW^▸ (First Great Western) disbanded this small fleet there has been nothing but trouble on this route.

As for Andrew Griffiths, who is an ex-Wessex man, I actually feel a bit sorry for him because he is the one who has to face the cameras every time the timetable changes to explain why everything is going wrong because of higher up management decisions on cutting costs. In the main I think the new timetable is a good one. BUT if you dont have the right capacity then it doesn't matter how good a timetable you produce it will be perceived as useless.

First Group have or are about to enter the FTSE 100 index of listed companies which makes them one of the biggest companies in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom). If they wanted, they could dig down in those ever increasingly deeper pockets of theirs and spend some money on this franchise because if they don't eventually it could drag them down because it's become a laughing stock of a franchise and something needs to be done. If they get stripped of this franchise then it could be a long time before they are ever trusted with another for quite sometime.

[crwydryn]

It's interesting that Cardiff-Portsmouth and its hideous overcrowding and frequent cancellations/early terminations is seemingly ignored by the Welsh Assembly planners and by Passenger Focus. I know this question could invite cynical responses - but are there real reasons for this?   

Given the bouyant existing traffic and the potential for increase, surely there is  a real opportunity for a cross-country standard of service, with enough seats for all and first class seating available - why are the horizons so pathetically low for Welsh Assembly, Passenger Focus and FGW^▸ (First Great Western)?   

[Timmer]

It's interesting that Cardiff-Portsmouth and its hideous overcrowding and frequent cancellations/early terminations is seemingly ignored by the Welsh Assembly planners and by Passenger Focus. I know this question could invite cynical responses - but are there real reasons for this?   

Given the bouyant existing traffic and the potential for increase, surely there is  a real opportunity for a cross-country standard of service, with enough seats for all and first class seating available - why are the horizons so pathetically low for Welsh Assembly, Passenger Focus and FGW^▸ (First Great Western)?   

Not at all because its a good point. I find it bizarre that such a vital link between two cities Bristol and Cardiff is so poorly served in terms of the rolling stock used and the capacity available thus producing overcrowding, but this has been the case for many many years.

[John R]

The WAG^» (Welsh Assembly Government - about) is not interested (maybe it has no remit) in funding or promoting services between England and Wales (except where required to get from North to South Wales). The withdrawal of the former Wales & Borders services to the West of England demonstrate this point.

Mind you, I'm not sure if I were them that I would want to part fund an enhanced service between Cardiff and Portsmouth when most of the benefit would go to English passengers. Still I agree with the sentiment that the quality of service provided for the route is abysmal, and in contrast to the gradual service and stock improvements in Wales. (Rumour is that some 180s are headed into Wales shortly.)     

[Graz]

If anyone ever comes back from Waterloo to Bath/Bristol, I STRONGLY recommend they take the SWT^▸ (South West Trains) direct services whenever possible and not change for the Cardiff ones. I've had experience with both and I can safetly say that the SWT services are an awful lot better- they terminate at Bristol and don't run to a clockface timetable, so are always an awful lot less busy. You can also always guarantee it'll be one of their very comfortable 158s.

[swlines]

It'll be a 159. :p

No 158s are booked on the Bristol or London services from Salisbury on SWT^▸ (South West Trains).

[Lee]

It's interesting that Cardiff-Portsmouth and its hideous overcrowding and frequent cancellations/early terminations is seemingly ignored by the Welsh Assembly planners and by Passenger Focus. I know this question could invite cynical responses - but are there real reasons for this?   

Given the bouyant existing traffic and the potential for increase, surely there is  a real opportunity for a cross-country standard of service, with enough seats for all and first class seating available - why are the horizons so pathetically low for Welsh Assembly, Passenger Focus and FGW^▸ (First Great Western)?   

Not at all because its a good point. I find it bizarre that such a vital link between two cities Bristol and Cardiff is so poorly served in terms of the rolling stock used and the capacity available thus producing overcrowding, but this has been the case for many many years.

As I understand it , the plan is to put together a package to return Portsmouth - Cardiff to a 3 - coach service. This would be submitted to DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) as a bid for extra carriages under the "1300 plan."

Mystic Fletcher predicts that FGW will ask for around 10 new - build 3 - coach units , with the intention of starting a rolling stock cascade that relieves overcrowding elsewhere and (perhaps) frees up a unit for extra Frome / Melksham / TransWilts services.

Mystic Fletcher further predicts (based on DfT modelling) that FGW will receive a token gesture of around 4 such units , simply to take the edge off the worst Bristol area overcrowding.

That , of course , is assuming the "1300 plan" actually goes ahead :

Dozens of rail schemes designed to relieve overcrowding may be scrapped or delayed indefinitely because of a ^1.5 billion funding gap in the Government^s railway expansion programme (link below.)
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2007/12/cash_to_ease_rail_crowding_is.html#more

Ministers promised in July to increase rail capacity by more than a fifth by 2014 and improve punctuality to 93 per cent of trains arriving on time. But The Times has learnt that the Department for Transport has cut the public subsidy for the railways so severely that there is not enough money to pay for the promised improvements , even assuming big efficiency gains by the industry.

Key schemes , such as lengthening trains on the most overcrowded routes, removing bottlenecks on the tracks and expanding stations , may have to be abandoned.

The rail regulator will write to the DfT on Thursday urging it to consider which schemes it is prepared to sacrifice if the funding gap is confirmed.

A Network Rail source said that the DfT could choose to delay the purchase of extra carriages. The DfT may also be forced to reduce the punctuality target , which Network Rail estimates would cost an extra ^400 million to meet on top of the work already planned to reduce signal failures , broken rails and other causes of delay. Both the regulator and Network Rail believe that the Treasury is unlikely to agree to bridge the gap by allocating extra funding to the railways.

Tom Harris , the Rail Minister , said that the Government still believed that its forecasts were accurate and was confident that its expansion plans could be implemented with the budget that it had already allocated.

He said: ^We are a long way away from asking for more money or cutting projects.^

[TerminalJunkie]

10 new - build 3 - coach units

I know we've been over this before, but those extra spaces around the hyphens have mangled that sentence rather badly. I think you probably meant to say "10 new-build 3-coach units", but the way you've typed it makes it look like the "build 3" part is a sub-clause, and is the equivalent of "10 new coach units, of which 3 will be built", which means something entirely different...

[Lee]

10 new - build 3 - coach units

I know we've been over this before, but those extra spaces around the hyphens have mangled that sentence rather badly. I think you probably meant to say "10 new-build 3-coach units", but the way you've typed it makes it look like the "build 3" part is a sub-clause, and is the equivalent of "10 new coach units, of which 3 will be built", which means something entirely different...

And your point on the topic itself was.....