|
Title: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 25, 2016, 09:22:14 Speaking to my cousin this morning who was on this train last night, he said it was pretty much the worst he'd ever experienced.
The train was crush loaded beyond anything he'd known on departure from Paddington. A number of people were unable to get off at Reading and were overcarried to Newbury. There was no room for luggage, it was blocking the gangways where people were also having to stand. Several children hurt themselves trying to clamber over it. People were unable to reach the toilets and were visibly distressed. Even with many people doing the decent thing and giving up their seats, there were older people having to stand long distances in appalling conditions. Comments on Twitter seem to thoroughly bear this out. My cousin travels extensively all over the World and was shocked by what he saw, he is an ex Royal Marine and not easily perturbed....as he said to me earlier, 1st class prices for 4th class service in 3rd world conditions. He (and others) asked staff at Paddington why no effort was being made to control boarding, the response was a shrug and "It's Easter mate". As he sounded like he needed cheering up, I forwarded him a link to the ORR propaganda page explaining how extreme overcrowding represents no risk to his health and safety, and reminded him of the cheery stock response from GWR "No-one is forced to get on a train, and anyway in a few (indeterminate) years there'll be more capacity than we know what to with" Interested in any comments from anyone else unlucky enough to be on this train or others similarly packed to the rafters last night? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: John R on March 25, 2016, 09:45:22 There were three later services to Plymouth, two within the hour, one of which (1945) is shown on RTT as running on the 24th only. Though how aware passengers would have been of those alternatives is a moot point.
The other point is that passengers were overcarried from Reading to Newbury (where a local service appears to have been delayed to enable them to return to Reading promptly). I wonder whether the 1903 was shown as pick up Reading only, as that would have helped, particularly if gateline staff proactively checked tickets at Paddington. It wouldn't have been rocket science to have worked out that the first super off peak departure in the evening would have been seriously overloaded yesterday and tried to manage it. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: SirBroccoli on March 25, 2016, 12:38:23 I was on this train yesterday between Reading and Exeter St Davids and I can safely say that this was some of the worst overcrowding I have seen on a train back to the West Country. At Reading they announced that the service was for reservation holders only, even though the platform staff wouldn't or couldn't enforce this rule. I was in Coach D and there were people stood throughout the carriage until Taunton, with people in the vestibules, even after Tiverton Parkway.
However, knowing that I wanted to travel on the first super off-peak train at the start of the Easter Bank Holiday Weekend getaway and that demand would far exceed supply, I booked myself an advance ticket for ^19.00 on the 12th of JANUARY. Whilst I entirely accept that there will be some who will need to make last minute travel plans, surely it's reasonable to say that the vast majority were in a similar boat to me and could've been more organised by booking at around the same time. Yes, government policy over decades has meant a lack of investment on additional rolling stock and conditions which you wouldn't keep cattle in, the 1915 out of Paddington on a Friday night a particularly notorious example. But I ask you this question. Would the demand yesterday evening and the limited paths out of Paddington meant overcrowding, irrespective of how many extra trains GWR put on? The two additional trains to Swansea and Penzance were also reported to be full and standing for long periods last night. Just my two cents. Cheers, Alex Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: broadgage on March 25, 2016, 12:47:21 This is nothing new, though that does not make it any more acceptable. I have experienced similar conditions in previous years on Maundy Thursday, before vowing "never again" and altering my working arrangements so as to avoid travel at times when the railway cant cope.
Increases in capacity are always a few years in the future, I think that I still have a letter received from FGW in about 2003, apologising for overcrowding at Easter and explaining that increased capacity would be available "in a few years" I have previously expressed doubts about the adequacy of the new shorter trains that are to replace the HSTs. They may well prove just barely sufficient under normal conditions, at least for the first year or two. Obviously we cant expect the railway industry to provide capacity for Easter, Christmas, bank holidays, rush hours, beginning of university terms, major rugby matches, weekends, school holidays, cup finals, pop festivals, and all the other events that happen so seldom as to make provision for such events unreasonable. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Umberleigh on March 25, 2016, 16:43:15 Talking to my nephew who is at college in Plymouth and most of his friend use either National Express or Megabus, partly because of cost but most because they are carrying luggage and have had experiences of packed trains with no luggage space, or having to leave their belongings out of sight. Apart from the longer journey time, apparently the National Express coaches measure up well, with leather seats, air con, toilet, and some have wifi
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 25, 2016, 16:48:19 It seems to me that there is a willingness by GWR to sell as many tickets as possible with no effort to manage the consequences. If they can manage boarding for events like Glastonbury, why not for these occasions too? There seems to be an overwhelming case for limiting ticket sales for these extremely busy services with seat reservations only and perhaps a very limited number of tickets sold for an unreserved carriage. If passengers were being told "reservations only" at Reading as Sir Broccoli states, why couldn't this have been the case at Paddington?
Obviously GWR won't do this, as they are putting their revenue ahead of any considerations of safety or comfort for their passengers. Whilst it maybe the case in a pure engineering sense that excess loading does not compromise safety in terms of the integrity of the train, only a fool would insist that the physical environment endured by customers last night and on similar occasions is either safe or healthy, and in the event of an emergency or need for sudden evacuation on a train packed 3, 4 or more times over capacity? Doesn't bear thinking about. Tongue firmly in cheek, Broadgage hits the nail on the head. Despite repeated assurances, the railway is unable to cope with perfectly predictable and regularly repeated periods of high demand which can be anticipated months in advance, and they appear to be totally unable to manage the equally predictable chaos and consequences of selling far too many tickets for the services which do run.........still, all that revenue pays for a lot of green paint I guess, so who's worrying? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: grahame on March 25, 2016, 17:08:01 ... or having to leave their belongings out of sight. ... I witnessed the aftermath of a young ladies case bag being taken off the train at an intermediate [major] station on Monday ... got to say "allegedly" but her distress looked pretty genuine, and there was a general assumption on the part of other through passengers that it had been stolen by [description given]. Not for the first time, I wondered about the seats facing away from the luggage; I noted a luggage rack on a 170 later in the week well away from the door, making it necessary for people to carry past people - perhaps IEPs will have luggage racks in the middle of the seats? Further question ... Is there a motion alarm for sale that could be left in luggage - not too sensitive t go off on train motion, but it would if picked up without being disarmed? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ChrisB on March 25, 2016, 17:09:33 I do believe pax mostly have brains & they can always choose to travel on different services?
Why should an operator do the thinking for pax? Extremely few of those travellers will be first time travellers over busy periods & thus chose freely to board that service. I do have some sympathy for GWR in this instance. If pax can't be arsed to reserve in advance, why should GWR force them to? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 25, 2016, 17:21:42 I do believe pax mostly have brains & they can always choose to travel on different services? Why should an operator do the thinking for pax? Extremely few of those travellers will be first time travellers over busy periods & thus chose freely to board that service. I do have some sympathy for GWR in this instance. If pax can't be arsed to reserve in advance, why should GWR force them to? .......Good evening and welcome to the GWR Customer Service Department ::) Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: John R on March 25, 2016, 17:54:44 ... or having to leave their belongings out of sight. ... I witnessed the aftermath of a young ladies case bag being taken off the train at an intermediate [major] station on Monday ... got to say "allegedly" but her distress looked pretty genuine, and there was a general assumption on the part of other through passengers that it had been stolen by [description given]. Not for the first time, I wondered about the seats facing away from the luggage; I noted a luggage rack on a 170 later in the week well away from the door, making it necessary for people to carry past people - perhaps IEPs will have luggage racks in the middle of the seats? Further question ... Is there a motion alarm for sale that could be left in luggage - not too sensitive t go off on train motion, but it would if picked up without being disarmed? In the days before airline seats, there was a lot of additional luggage space between the seat backs. Wouldn't fit the largest cases admittedly, but were still pretty handy in terms of a) additional luggage capacity and b) being able to keep it close to you. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: SandTEngineer on March 25, 2016, 18:16:49 In fairness to GWR there was an additional 1933 Paddington to Penzance followed by the normal 1945 Paddington to Plymouth. I wonder how busy they were?
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ChrisB on March 25, 2016, 18:22:02 Quite. And at least the earlier of those would have been displayed at the same time as the 1903, so those that boarded could easily have got the 1933, if not the 1945. if they had wanted to
They chose not to, and some boarded when it was obviously already heavily-loaded. You can't really do much more in those circumstances Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: bobm on March 25, 2016, 19:04:16 I was talking to a couple of staff on Wednesday who were due to work the 19:03 last night and they were dreading it.
Apparently last Easter there was a relief train which ran not far in front of it and that obviously eased the problem. Part of the problem with the 19:03 is it is the first West of England service which off peak tickets are valid on for stations to Exeter St Davids. In addition the train is used by many commuters to Newbury - as the train usually sees a lot of people get off there on a "normal" day. Add a bank holiday weekend into the mix and it is never going to be a comfortable ride on that train. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: IndustryInsider on March 25, 2016, 19:14:37 Departures to the west were extremely busy this morning as well. I noted a couple of 'please wait for the next train' announcements at Reading.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: bobm on March 25, 2016, 19:19:40 Ironically I was at Teignmouth this afternoon waiting for a train going to Paignton that was advertised as Full and Standing. When it pulled in there were plenty of seats - most of the passengers had got off at the previous stop, Dawlish!
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: simonw on March 25, 2016, 19:24:46 After my experience four weeks ago getting the Swansea bound train, 1915/Friday, I can sympathise.
The issue has to be addressed by GWR/Paddington. The options are allow 50-100 saver plus ticket holders on earlier trains if space is available. Limit boarding of the train and ignore reservation tickets. If you can't get to the station at time of boarding should the train staff keep a reservation on an overcrowded train? I have been on loads of trains when reserved seats have been empty because people do not turn up. Add extra train 15 minutes later. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: broadgage on March 25, 2016, 19:47:01 I do believe pax mostly have brains & they can always choose to travel on different services? Why should an operator do the thinking for pax? Extremely few of those travellers will be first time travellers over busy periods & thus chose freely to board that service. I do have some sympathy for GWR in this instance. If pax can't be arsed to reserve in advance, why should GWR force them to? Some customers cant "choose to travel on different services" because they have advance tickets that are valid on the booked train only and would face a huge "fine" for use of an alternative service. Not certain how reserving in advance would help ? I tried that on the 18-03 on a Maundy Thursday a few years ago ! My booked seat was occupied by someone else who simply refused to move, a regular problem on grossly overcrowded services. The train staff felt unable to intervene, so being reluctant to give the usurper a thump I had to stand to Taunton. Never again ! Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ellendune on March 25, 2016, 19:49:17 The options are allow 50-100 saver plus ticket holders on earlier trains if space is available. That would be extremely difficult to enforce. Effectively you would be saying that saver tickets are valid on earlier trains. Result make aearlier trains even worse. Limit boarding of the train Limit the boarding of the train if you can. I am not sure how easy it would be if there are two trains boarding on opposite platforms. and ignore reservation tickets. If you can't get to the station at time of boarding should the train staff keep a reservation on an overcrowded train? I have been on loads of trains when reserved seats have been empty because people do not turn up. No that is the last thing to do. Stop on-line sales automatically giving reservations with anything but advance fares unless requested. The problem is people who have already travelled. I see a possibility for an electronic solution in another age, where the use of (an electronic) ticket on an earlier train would cancel the later reservation. Add extra train 15 minutes later. On this occasion that is what they did, but people always want to catch the first train they can. More practical (perhaps) solutions: 1) Make these trains reservation only. 2) Make the first train (rather than the relief) not stop at Reading as the relief train can cater for these passengers. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: grahame on March 25, 2016, 20:05:38 1) Make these trains reservation only. <advocate mode="devil">But doesn't that limit a train with 500 seats to 500 passengers rather than allowing a reasonable level of standing? And with reservations being available free of charge and with a significant proportion not being taken up, might you not find that the actual number of passengers carried was more like 350 even if it was fully reserved?</advocate> Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: broadgage on March 25, 2016, 20:24:33 As improved capacity is still the usual "few years" away, it seems that all that can be done is to manage demand, or put bluntly price people off busy trains.
I am not convinced that ANY discounted advance tickets should be sold for services that are going to be overcrowded. I thought that the purpose of selling heavily discounted advance tickets was to fill seats that would otherwise go unused ? and not to make an already overcrowded train even worse ? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Timmer on March 26, 2016, 07:04:13 It was a similar story on the East Coast line both on Thursday and yesterday with services very heavily loaded. I'm sure other lines out of London would have been the same. So many wanting to travel long distance at the same time with little/no spare capacity to bring out at times such as Easter. It's the same every year.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: old original on March 26, 2016, 07:28:33 I think made slightly worse by the early Easter as near all schools and colleges broke up on Thursday and most people want to get to where they're going by the weekend. If Easter weekend falls in the middle of the holiday period, people could vary their travel dates a bit more so perhaps the idea in the news this morning about fixing Easter could be beneficial, in this case....
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: plymothian on March 26, 2016, 07:34:48 Not necessarily so as Maundy Thursday is the busiest travel day of the year across all modes of transport, regardless of whether it falls within/at the start/near the end of the Easter school holidays. This has been known and publicised for years.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 26, 2016, 08:52:14 As improved capacity is still the usual "few years" away, it seems that all that can be done is to manage demand, or put bluntly price people off busy trains. I am not convinced that ANY discounted advance tickets should be sold for services that are going to be overcrowded. I thought that the purpose of selling heavily discounted advance tickets was to fill seats that would otherwise go unused ? and not to make an already overcrowded train even worse ? I don't disagree - although it won't go down well, especially after the much heralded stripping out of First class -it'd be interesting to know how many "cheap" tickets were sold as a proportion on the trains which were always going to be overcrowded on Thursday (and yesterday was no better it would seem in terms of severe overcrowding) That needs to be added to additional measures such as more proactive boarding management from GWR when things are obviously starting to get silly - we need to move the attitude of shrugging the shoulders and saying "It's Easter/Summer/Christmas/major sporting event" etc etc, all of which are generally fixed in the calendar year after year - really it's just about planning. In that way, GWR might not get caught with their pants down quite so much. Out of interest, taking London - Plymouth as an example, given a similar service pattern, how many seats will be added by the new trains? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: a-driver on March 26, 2016, 08:54:36 It was a similar story on the East Coast line both on Thursday and yesterday with services very heavily loaded. I'm sure other lines out of London would have been the same. So many wanting to travel long distance at the same time with little/no spare capacity to bring out at times such as Easter. It's the same every year. Exactly, these were pictures I found on social media of Virgin East Coast and West Coast services so it's not a problem confined to just GWR. It all goes back to the DfT who haven't got a strategy to cope with growth Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 26, 2016, 09:04:02 I don't think anyone is suggesting that the problem is confined to GWR - but it would be interesting to know if they have a strategy to cope with severe overcrowding, other than just letting more and more people pile on?
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: a-driver on March 26, 2016, 09:20:51 I would say from those pictures the answer would be no!! Although having said that I've heard the Pendolinos on the West Coast have a weight limit on them whereby the brakes will not release if that limit is exceeded. If that's true I suppose it could relate to the tilt mechanism.
Passengers have put themselves on those trains, how many would willingly leave it though if asked?? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 26, 2016, 09:32:26 I would say from those pictures the answer would be no!! Although having said that I've heard the Pendolinos on the West Coast have a weight limit on them whereby the brakes will not release if that limit is exceeded. If that's true I suppose it could relate to the tilt mechanism. Passengers have put themselves on those trains, how many would willingly leave it though if asked?? ......exactly - which proves that prevention is always better than cure - hence the discussion above re: demand/boarding management. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: a-driver on March 26, 2016, 09:38:00 I would say from those pictures the answer would be no!! Although having said that I've heard the Pendolinos on the West Coast have a weight limit on them whereby the brakes will not release if that limit is exceeded. If that's true I suppose it could relate to the tilt mechanism. Passengers have put themselves on those trains, how many would willingly leave it though if asked?? ......exactly - which proves that prevention is always better than cure - hence the discussion above re: demand/boarding management. But would it? Once passengers become aware that there will be boarding limits boarding a train itself will become dangerous, a survival of the fittest. The surge at Euston when boarding is announced is frightening. VT will wait until the train is full and then ask passengers to leave the service. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 26, 2016, 09:43:03 I would say from those pictures the answer would be no!! Although having said that I've heard the Pendolinos on the West Coast have a weight limit on them whereby the brakes will not release if that limit is exceeded. If that's true I suppose it could relate to the tilt mechanism. Passengers have put themselves on those trains, how many would willingly leave it though if asked?? ......exactly - which proves that prevention is always better than cure - hence the discussion above re: demand/boarding management. But would it? Once passengers become aware that there will be boarding limits boarding a train itself will become dangerous, a survival of the fittest. The surge at Euston when boarding is announced is frightening. VT will wait until the train is full and then ask passengers to leave the service. OK we're at cross purposes - this thread primarily concerns GWR through Paddington.........however the situation you describe sounds even worse! Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Henry on March 26, 2016, 09:45:44 I
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 26, 2016, 09:55:29 I suspect they may at last do something, they must be keen to avoid these sorts of pictures/reports being plastered all over the Press again............
http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Train-passengers-8216-forced-stand-hours-8217/story-28997853-detail/story.html Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: a-driver on March 26, 2016, 09:58:22 I would say from those pictures the answer would be no!! Although having said that I've heard the Pendolinos on the West Coast have a weight limit on them whereby the brakes will not release if that limit is exceeded. If that's true I suppose it could relate to the tilt mechanism. Passengers have put themselves on those trains, how many would willingly leave it though if asked?? ......exactly - which proves that prevention is always better than cure - hence the discussion above re: demand/boarding management. But would it? Once passengers become aware that there will be boarding limits boarding a train itself will become dangerous, a survival of the fittest. The surge at Euston when boarding is announced is frightening. VT will wait until the train is full and then ask passengers to leave the service. OK we're at cross purposes - this thread primarily concerns GWR through Paddington.........however the situation you describe sounds even worse! The issue I was trying to highlight, albeit badly, was that if you implent boarding controls from Paddington, granted, you'll fix the overcrowding issue on the train but will you be creating a potentially dangerous crush situation at the barriers as passengers fight to get themselves on the train before boarding is closed? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 26, 2016, 10:06:17 I would say from those pictures the answer would be no!! Although having said that I've heard the Pendolinos on the West Coast have a weight limit on them whereby the brakes will not release if that limit is exceeded. If that's true I suppose it could relate to the tilt mechanism. Passengers have put themselves on those trains, how many would willingly leave it though if asked?? ......exactly - which proves that prevention is always better than cure - hence the discussion above re: demand/boarding management. But would it? Once passengers become aware that there will be boarding limits boarding a train itself will become dangerous, a survival of the fittest. The surge at Euston when boarding is announced is frightening. VT will wait until the train is full and then ask passengers to leave the service. OK we're at cross purposes - this thread primarily concerns GWR through Paddington.........however the situation you describe sounds even worse! The issue I was trying to highlight, albeit badly, was that if you implent boarding controls from Paddington, granted, you'll fix the overcrowding issue on the train but will you be creating a potentially dangerous crush situation at the barriers as passengers fight to get themselves on the train before boarding is closed? .........seems to work OK for Glastonbury/Cheltenham Festival from Paddington and in Cardiff after the rugby without the mass frenzy you allude to? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ellendune on March 26, 2016, 10:11:32 .........seems to work OK for Glastonbury/Cheltenham Festival from Paddington and in Cardiff after the rugby without the mass frenzy you allude to? I was about to say "Before anyone says they can do I for Glastonbury etc..." but I was not quick enough. When they have Glastonbury they use the space on P8/9 as holding queue to do this safely, but they can only do this for one destination they can't do it for several as they only have the space for one queue of this nature. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: a-driver on March 26, 2016, 10:14:09 .........seems to work OK for Glastonbury/Cheltenham Festival from Paddington and in Cardiff after the rugby without the mass frenzy you allude to? I was about to say "Before anyone says they can do I for Glastonbury etc..." but I was not quick enough. When they have Glastonbury they use the space on P8/9 as holding queue to do this safely, but they can only do this for one destination they can't do it for several as they only have the space for one queue of this nature. Plus you're not involving the last trains out of Paddington for these events. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 26, 2016, 10:43:02 .........seems to work OK for Glastonbury/Cheltenham Festival from Paddington and in Cardiff after the rugby without the mass frenzy you allude to? I was about to say "Before anyone says they can do I for Glastonbury etc..." but I was not quick enough. When they have Glastonbury they use the space on P8/9 as holding queue to do this safely, but they can only do this for one destination they can't do it for several as they only have the space for one queue of this nature. Plus you're not involving the last trains out of Paddington for these events. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ellendune on March 26, 2016, 10:47:39 OK so the basic current position then is that GWR are unable to manage a situation which is at best totally unsatisfactory, at worst dangerous which they themselves have created by selling too many tickets for too few trains with inadequate capacity and making no real attempt to control the consequences....leave aside DFT issues, we're talking about the here & now. Are they allowed to not sell walk up fares on such occasions? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: a-driver on March 26, 2016, 10:50:24 .........seems to work OK for Glastonbury/Cheltenham Festival from Paddington and in Cardiff after the rugby without the mass frenzy you allude to? I was about to say "Before anyone says they can do I for Glastonbury etc..." but I was not quick enough. When they have Glastonbury they use the space on P8/9 as holding queue to do this safely, but they can only do this for one destination they can't do it for several as they only have the space for one queue of this nature. Plus you're not involving the last trains out of Paddington for these events. It's not just GWR you are levelling those allegations at though. You're aiming those at the industry as a whole, an industry where no train operating company has managed to solve and the DfT isn't interested either, why do you think that is? The train company doesn't sell tickets for too few trains. Many run during the day relatively empty. If you want to implement boarding controls, once you get to the last train out of the evening and you've got queues leading out of Paddington what are you going to do? Do you think season tickets holders will be happy that there ticket is now only valid one specific train? And what happens if they impose limits on season tickets? how will commuters reach London then? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: didcotdean on March 26, 2016, 10:59:59 It can be argued that selling a ticket valid only on a particular date would be expected to be used on that date, if not known on which train so could be controlled in some fashion. There can't be the same consideration though with the return portion of say off-peak returns which could be used on any day within a calendar month.
GWR notably hadn't prohibited the use of GroupSave to anywhere on Thursday, although it was on a certain number of trains to Penzance on Friday as is always the case. Corralling passengers etc at Paddington wouldn't solve anything at Reading though where people with reserved seats couldn't get their way onto some trains and probably wouldn't be able to get to the seat anyway. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ellendune on March 26, 2016, 11:18:10 The whole system was founded on the idea at privatisation of a railway that would continue to decline. Crush loaded trains on a daily basis were never even thought of when the rules were made and any peak crush loading would not last long as demand declined (usually in response to reduced services).
No one has worked out how to turn this into a system to cope with a growing railway. The long franchises of Chiltern have shown us a way to increase infrastructure and even train capacity. But DfT does not seem to like long franchises as it curtails their fondness for micro managing while denying all responsibility for the outcome of their actions. If they are to continue to curtail capacity by their desire to micro-manage then they need to redesign he ticketing system to allow it to manage limited capacity. The danger there is, however, they would use it to supress rather than manage demand every day. So, although I want them to redesign the ticketing system I would rather a growth of capacity - accepting that there will always be problems on certain days. The DfT still come out with the mantra that there is capacity because off peak trains are not full, there will always be off-peak trains with spare capacity. Unless we get elastic trains. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: IndustryInsider on March 26, 2016, 11:44:57 Out of interest, taking London - Plymouth as an example, given a similar service pattern, how many seats will be added by the new trains? Impossible to be very precise, given we don't know the frequency of trains and times they will run. However, as a guide, the latest seating layout in HST's has an average (depending on whether it's a full size or mini-buffet) of 490 Standard and 70 First Class seats (560 total), the SET trains were specified for 526 Standard and 101 First Class (627 total) for the 9-Car Electric version and a 5-Car Bi-Mode unit (running as a pair) would have 540 Standard and 90 First Class (total 630). An extra carriage on the 9-car sets could up that total to well over 700, but even then you'd find it hard to eliminate standees on days like Maundy Thursday! You'd assume that the AT300 follow on order for 'West of England' services would have similar capacities to the SET units currently being built, though if rumours of provision of a buffet car on those sets are realised, then that would knock out about 15-20 seats at a guess. However the Wikipedia article on these Class 802s states a total capacity of 655 seats on a 9-car unit. Clear as mud at the moment! Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: broadgage on March 26, 2016, 11:48:23 OK so the basic current position then is that GWR are unable to manage a situation which is at best totally unsatisfactory, at worst dangerous which they themselves have created by selling too many tickets for too few trains with inadequate capacity and making no real attempt to control the consequences....leave aside DFT issues, we're talking about the here & now. Are they allowed to not sell walk up fares on such occasions? IMO it is not the walk up fares that are the problem, it is the sale of discounted advance tickets for services that are expected to be overcrowded. Trying to ban the sale of full fare tickets in order to give more space for those with discounted tickets seems a very odd way of proceeding. As is the idea of limiting boarding to those with discounted advance tickets whilst turning away those with full fare tickets. Near the beginning of this thread, someone speaks of obtaining an advance ticket for ^19, such tickets should not in my view be sold for services expected to be busy. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: John R on March 26, 2016, 11:59:21 Near the beginning of this thread, someone speaks of obtaining an advance ticket for ^19, such tickets should not in my view be sold for services expected to be busy. I totally agree, and it would appear poor commercially to do so. However, I suspect that TOC's may be afraid of the bad publicity they may get if they don't offer them on busy services, as they will then be accused of "ripping people off", and no matter how logical the argument, they will lose it in the eyes of the media and public (a bit like when they withdrew GroupSave for Reading's day out at Wembley). Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ellendune on March 26, 2016, 12:05:36 Near the beginning of this thread, someone speaks of obtaining an advance ticket for ^19, such tickets should not in my view be sold for services expected to be busy. I totally agree, and it would appear poor commercially to do so. However, I suspect that TOC's may be afraid of the bad publicity they may get if they don't offer them on busy services, as they will then be accused of "ripping people off", and no matter how logical the argument, they will lose it in the eyes of the media and public (a bit like when they withdrew GroupSave for Reading's day out at Wembley). I suspect there would be some members of this community who would make that accusation. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ChrisB on March 26, 2016, 12:11:42 It would be the walk-up fares that caused overcrowding if you ban Advances though....most I reckon were pax visiting relatives for Easter, not holiday-makers. And thus would grumble but still pay
Make these trains reserved only(I'm sure this used to happen?), no reservation, no travel. Season holders then make up (no reservations in E of course) the 'overs'. It would need extreme heavy advertising. And possibly a queuing system for the trains (including the extra 1933) The BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-35903343?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_england&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=english_regions) reported thus on a train at Plymouth Quote Passengers forced off train at Plymouth due to overcrowding About 150 train passengers were told to leave an overcrowded train because of safety concerns. British Transport Police helped Great Western Railway (GWR) staff with some passengers on the London Paddington to Penzance service who refused to leave at Plymouth. GWR provided another train to Penzance later on Good Friday and said the service had been busier than usual. It said it was looking at ways to prevent a similar situation on Monday. Passengers tweeted photos of people lying in the aisles A spokesman from GWR said the 10:00 GMT service was "very busy" when it left London Paddington and it "picked up more passengers" as it travelled towards Penzance. "Two services arrived at Plymouth ahead of the London Paddington service and terminated there, which resulted in a lot of people waiting to board this train. "The train manager said the situation was unsafe and asked people standing right by the doors to leave." He said police assisted staff as some passengers did not want to leave. GWR said a further six carriages were added to a two carriage train that departed about one hour later and took passengers into Cornwall. Pictures in the link above. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ChrisB on March 26, 2016, 12:13:39 Near the beginning of this thread, someone speaks of obtaining an advance ticket for ^19, such tickets should not in my view be sold for services expected to be busy. I totally agree, and it would appear poor commercially to do so. However, I suspect that TOC's may be afraid of the bad publicity they may get if they don't offer them on busy services, as they will then be accused of "ripping people off", and no matter how logical the argument, they will lose it in the eyes of the media and public (a bit like when they withdrew GroupSave for Reading's day out at Wembley). I suspect there would be some members of this community who would make that accusation. Yes, some regular posters are awfully quiet..... Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: IndustryInsider on March 26, 2016, 12:24:58 There's part of the problem in trying to manage overcrowding on a train that's already loaded. Ask/tell some people to leave and they refuse. Police have to be called. The minutes quickly pass by, tempers flare, and you end up with arguably a worse situation than you would have with everyone crammed in and the train on the move!
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: broadgage on March 26, 2016, 12:43:32 Out of interest, taking London - Plymouth as an example, given a similar service pattern, how many seats will be added by the new trains? Impossible to be very precise, given we don't know the frequency of trains and times they will run. However, as a guide, the latest seating layout in HST's has an average (depending on whether it's a full size or mini-buffet) of 490 Standard and 70 First Class seats (560 total), the SET trains were specified for 526 Standard and 101 First Class (627 total) for the 9-Car Electric version and a 5-Car Bi-Mode unit (running as a pair) would have 540 Standard and 90 First Class (total 630). An extra carriage on the 9-car sets could up that total to well over 700, but even then you'd find it hard to eliminate standees on days like Maundy Thursday! You'd assume that the AT300 follow on order for 'West of England' services would have similar capacities to the SET units currently being built, though if rumours of provision of a buffet car on those sets are realised, then that would knock out about 15-20 seats at a guess. However the Wikipedia article on these Class 802s states a total capacity of 655 seats on a 9-car unit. Clear as mud at the moment! That information may be out of date ? I thought that first class provision had been down graded to about 36 on the half length units and to about 71 on the few full length units. That would of course give an increase in total seating capacity, though the increase appears modest for all the expense and disruption incurred. The above also presumes that all services will be either 9 car, or two 5 car coupled together. If the voyager experience is anything to go by, this might be an optimistic assumption. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ellendune on March 26, 2016, 12:45:00 There's part of the problem in trying to manage overcrowding on a train that's already loaded. Ask/tell some people to leave and they refuse. Police have to be called. The minutes quickly pass by, tempers flare, and you end up with arguably a worse situation than you would have with everyone crammed in and the train on the move! A few years ago, following disruption, I was on an HST at Paddington that was so overcrowded they announcer said it was unsafe to proceed. They asked anyone fro Reading to get off and take another service that was waiting on another platform. I did not see anyone move. After a long while I saw the other service leave. So those who had taken it would have got to Reading earlier. In some circumstances I think it would be preferable just to say "This service will no longer stop at Reading" Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ChrisB on March 26, 2016, 12:50:01 And those waiting for it at Reading do what?
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ellendune on March 26, 2016, 12:55:51 And those waiting for it at Reading do what? As I said it was a time of disruption (the line outside Paddington had been closed for a time). I suspect they had been turning some services around at Reading anyway so the demand there would not have been as great. There were several trains leaving in close succession, so it would not have been a long wait. It would have been a method of getting the service going again. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: IndustryInsider on March 26, 2016, 12:57:24 Out of interest, taking London - Plymouth as an example, given a similar service pattern, how many seats will be added by the new trains? Impossible to be very precise, given we don't know the frequency of trains and times they will run. However, as a guide, the latest seating layout in HST's has an average (depending on whether it's a full size or mini-buffet) of 490 Standard and 70 First Class seats (560 total), the SET trains were specified for 526 Standard and 101 First Class (627 total) for the 9-Car Electric version and a 5-Car Bi-Mode unit (running as a pair) would have 540 Standard and 90 First Class (total 630). An extra carriage on the 9-car sets could up that total to well over 700, but even then you'd find it hard to eliminate standees on days like Maundy Thursday! You'd assume that the AT300 follow on order for 'West of England' services would have similar capacities to the SET units currently being built, though if rumours of provision of a buffet car on those sets are realised, then that would knock out about 15-20 seats at a guess. However the Wikipedia article on these Class 802s states a total capacity of 655 seats on a 9-car unit. Clear as mud at the moment! That information may be out of date ? I thought that first class provision had been down graded to about 36 on the half length units and to about 71 on the few full length units. That would of course give an increase in total seating capacity, though the increase appears modest for all the expense and disruption incurred. The above also presumes that all services will be either 9 car, or two 5 car coupled together. If the voyager experience is anything to go by, this might be an optimistic assumption. Yes indeed, hence me saying it was difficult to be precise and that what I said was only a guide. There has been statements from GWR to the effect of 'no 5-car trains in the peaks' so in the case of Maundy Thursday evening services I would hope everything would be 9/10 carriages heading out of Paddington. Time will tell. I'd certainly welcome the first class seating reduced to around 70 seats per trains as it is now, to provide the extra standard class seats most people want, and which has now proven to work better on the vast majority of services, despite the usual predictions of doom on here. I can imagine how the 19:03 would have been on Thursday with the old 5 standard class, 2.5 first class carriage ratio. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: didcotdean on March 26, 2016, 13:38:06 Although the first class provision was also insufficient on Thursday. Can remember on twitter someone who with a partner had paid together in excess of ^300 for standing space for much of their journey.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: a-driver on March 26, 2016, 14:36:40 The industry needs to make passengers aware that:
1. If you're travelling without a seat reservation then it is likely you will be standing. 2. Make it more visible in timetables which services where reservations are recommended and/or which services are historical likely to be full and standing. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: didcotdean on March 26, 2016, 15:42:12 The 19:03 is marked as 'reservations recommended' in the online and paper timetables weekdays - maybe it should say reservations essential for Fridays. Whether anyone would take much notice is another matter.
To Bristol / South Wales every weekday train between 16:15 and 19:30 is now listed as reservation recommended. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 26, 2016, 16:50:18 By way of an interesting comparison - from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-35903342):
Quote Plymouth Argyle v Morecambe: Review after fans miss game Football fans missed an away game after being stuck in traffic "chaos" as they attempted to travel more than 330 miles. The Good Friday fixture between Morecambe and Plymouth was delayed by 30 minutes after fans were stuck on the M6. Plymouth Argyle Football Club said it made "no sense" to schedule the match "for one of the busiest weekends". It "intends to carry out a thorough review". Argyle manager Derek Adams said: "We all know that the roads are going to be busy and I think we could all have played closer to home over this period." A number of vehicles were involved in a crash on the M6 at about 12:45 GMT on Good Friday, with three lanes closed for several hours between junctions 10a and 11. Plymouth fan James Hardy, who left at 06:30 and arrived at Morecambe at 17:30, said: "The coach drivers tried to follow diversions, but there was just more and more traffic. (http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/4AC9/production/_88954191_88954190.jpg) Fans from Plymouth were stuck in traffic on the M6 following a crash involving several vehicles "We arrived just as the game was about to finish, then it was six-and-a-half hours back home. We were gutted to never make it." He added it "would be nice" to be refunded for the match as a "goodwill gesture". Sally Kimmince told BBC News: "It was a nightmare. You can't blame the driver, it's all down to the Football League." In a statement, the club said: "We deeply regret that the majority of the Green Army were caught up in the traffic chaos on the M6 on Good Friday which severely affected their journey to watch our game at Morecambe. Even though, at the request of Argyle officials, the game's kick-off was delayed by half an hour, some fans that set off from Plymouth at the crack of dawn were turned back without reaching the Globe Arena after hours on the road. That is heartbreaking." Argyle said it was "entirely predictable that such chaos would ensue" and "we believe it made no sense to schedule a fixture which involves a 660-mile round-trip for Plymouth-based Argyle supporters for one of the busiest weekends of the year". "We will also be making representation to the Football League to try to ensure that our loyal supporters will be spared such an ordeal in the future." The Football League is yet to comment. Plymouth Argyle picked up their first win in five games, winning 2-0 at Morecambe. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: JayMac on March 26, 2016, 18:34:31 Overcrowding issues on services to the west continued into Good Friday. This time with police involvement at Plymouth.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-35903343 http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Train-passengers-8216-forced-stand-hours-8217/story-28997853-detail/story.html So, here we have the operator confirming that overcrowding can be unsafe. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Adelante_CCT on March 26, 2016, 18:36:28 Pedant mode on:
Quote Plymouth Argyle v Morecambe: Review after fans miss game Should be Morecambe v Plymouth Argyle:Pedant mode off: :) Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: John R on March 26, 2016, 18:38:16 Overcrowding issues on services to the west continued into Good Friday. This time with police involvement at Plymouth. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-35903343 http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Train-passengers-8216-forced-stand-hours-8217/story-28997853-detail/story.html So, here we have the operator confirming that overcrowding can be unsafe. Already posted by ChrisB a dozen posts up? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: JayMac on March 26, 2016, 18:47:17 Already posted by ChrisB a dozen posts up? Apologies. With the forum's broken 'Show unread posts since last visit' function I missed that. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: a-driver on March 26, 2016, 19:08:59 Overcrowding issues on services to the west continued into Good Friday. This time with police involvement at Plymouth. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-35903343 http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Train-passengers-8216-forced-stand-hours-8217/story-28997853-detail/story.html So, here we have the operator confirming that overcrowding can be unsafe. It will be deemed unsafe if the TM has to get to certain vestibules to release the doors and secondly, if the train calls at locations where the whole train doesn't fit on the platform then you have issues of passengers trying to move to coaches where they can alight. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: grahame on March 27, 2016, 07:04:03 Quote A number of vehicles were involved in a crash on the M6 at about 12:45 GMT on Good Friday, with three lanes closed for several hours between junctions 10a and 11. Sally Kimmince told BBC News: "It was a nightmare. You can't blame the driver, it's all down to the Football League." Argyle said it was "entirely predictable that such chaos would ensue" and "we believe it made no sense to schedule a fixture which involves a 660-mile round-trip for Plymouth-based Argyle supporters for one of the busiest weekends of the year". "We will also be making representation to the Football League to try to ensure that our loyal supporters will be spared such an ordeal in the future." Whilst it might make sense to have shorter trips on busier weekends, I can't help thinking that the Football League were not responsible for the closure of 3 lanes of the motorway ... of course, had they gone by train, the motorway incident would not have effected them! Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 27, 2016, 07:52:47 Quote A number of vehicles were involved in a crash on the M6 at about 12:45 GMT on Good Friday, with three lanes closed for several hours between junctions 10a and 11. Sally Kimmince told BBC News: "It was a nightmare. You can't blame the driver, it's all down to the Football League." Argyle said it was "entirely predictable that such chaos would ensue" and "we believe it made no sense to schedule a fixture which involves a 660-mile round-trip for Plymouth-based Argyle supporters for one of the busiest weekends of the year". "We will also be making representation to the Football League to try to ensure that our loyal supporters will be spared such an ordeal in the future." Whilst it might make sense to have shorter trips on busier weekends, I can't help thinking that the Football League were not responsible for the closure of 3 lanes of the motorway ... of course, had they gone by train, the motorway incident would not have effected them! Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: PhilWakely on March 27, 2016, 09:47:18 .......I have friends who recall a trip from Plymouth to watch Argyle at Carlisle.....It was a midweek match and the single supporters coach left Home Park at 0430 for a 1930 kick off, arriving back mid morning the next day, still soaking wet after an evening on an open terrace in torrential rain...you'd have to be very keen indeed.....! I recall one occasion, many moons ago (mid-80s I think!) when the Grecians made a similar midweek trip to Cumbria. Me and about a dozen or so other fools hired a minibus. We left Exeter at about 6am and were somewhere in the region of Shap at about 4 o'clock, in the pouring rain, when one of our number spotted the ECFC team coach going in the opposite direction. We got off the motorway, found a 'phone box and discovered the game had been called off because of a waterlogged pitch. We got home at about 3am the following morning! Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 28, 2016, 10:04:32 Good luck to all those travelling back from the Westcountry today - hope the overcrowding and the weather don't ruin your journey!
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: JayMac on March 28, 2016, 11:05:46 I note that the luggage area in power cars is being utilised on services between London and Plymouth today. Note on screens at Paddington requesting passengers use the free luggage porter service.
Should free up space for folk to sit in luggage racks! Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 28, 2016, 11:30:31 I note that the luggage area in power cars is being utilised on services between London and Plymouth today. Note on screens at Paddington requesting passengers use the free luggage porter service. Should free up space for folk to sit in luggage racks! May slow things up a bit at stations but worth a go I reckon? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: JayMac on March 28, 2016, 11:51:43 Message for the 1200 said free porter service for passengers to Plymouth. I guess not for intermediate calls.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: IndustryInsider on March 28, 2016, 12:13:26 Yes, they normally just do it for the one terminating station as they'd be all sorts of problems with doing it for all of them - wrong bags being taken, ages to find them etc. Plus, the luggage area in a power car actually isn't that massive - couple of dozen cases and it would be full. There will be no such option on the new trains of course.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 28, 2016, 12:27:11 Already seeing complaints & pictures of significant overcrowding on Westcountry services heading towards London....ticket acceptance on GWR in respect of cancelled SWT trains seems to be making matters worse.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: PhilWakely on March 28, 2016, 12:57:20 Already seeing complaints & pictures of significant overcrowding on Westcountry services heading towards London....ticket acceptance on GWR in respect of cancelled SWT trains seems to be making matters worse. Yes - it is not helped by the Exeter to Salisbury line closed because of a landslip at Templecombe and flooding in the Axminster area.Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: bobm on March 28, 2016, 14:53:58 Trains now able to pass the site of the Templecombe landslip at caution but the first train to Waterloo from Exeter won't be until 17:20.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Western Pathfinder on March 28, 2016, 16:23:07 Happy Easter Everyone !
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on March 28, 2016, 17:20:49 Happy Easter Everyone ! Reciprocated.............but judging by reports those travelling back from the Westcountry this afternoon by train may have had their Easter eggs crushed! :( Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: JayMac on March 28, 2016, 18:27:19 1600 down not particularly busy, I joined it at RDG for TAU.
Heard via a TM that the up services from PLY this afternoon at 1448, 1503 (one of those a relief?) and 1602, 1633 (again, relief?) were all full and standing by Taunton. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: SirBroccoli on March 29, 2016, 00:13:53 Good luck to all those travelling back from the Westcountry today - hope the overcrowding and the weather don't ruin your journey! Don't think I could face travelling back to Reading on Easter Monday. Fortunately the office is closed tomorrow..! Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Rob on the hill on March 29, 2016, 10:13:14 From The Plymouth Herald:
http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Passengers-ordered-overcrowded-Plymouth-train/story-29011429-detail/story.html Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Sam290893 on March 29, 2016, 11:07:13 It's a difficult situation people moan the train is unsafe and then when they do get told to get off the kick off, thing is you will never please everyone but overcrowding doesn't just bow down to GWR it's all train operators! Virgin Trains West Coast had busy services yesterday due to the face East Coast had major problems!
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: IndustryInsider on March 29, 2016, 11:20:36 Yesterday seemed a lot less 'critical' than Thursday. Many trains busy, with people standing - but hey, it's Easter! - but not many crush loaded nightmares like on Thursday night.
Three reasons for that I suspect: 1) There was an effort to get luggage stowed in the power car vans, which would have had a small impact on space within the trains, but more importantly: 2) Rather than a large percentage all wanting to go away for Easter after finishing work on Maundy Thursday, their return journeys were much more spread throughout the day - some leaving after breakfast, some after lunch and some leaving it as late as possible. 3) There would have been very few regular commuters also wanting to travel at the same time, as there would have been Maundy Thursday evening. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ChrisB on March 29, 2016, 11:23:31 And, of course, some would be staying longer into this week & not having to return for today
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: PhilWakely on March 29, 2016, 11:30:45 From The Plymouth Herald: Which I entirely agree with, except in situations such as the one being reported, many people simply could not get to their seat reservations, so that will not alleviate the problem!Quote A spokesman for Great Western Railway said:........... "Good Friday is one of the busiest days for train travel across the country, and we advise customers to take advantage of our free seat reservation service wherever possible." This has been done to death, but unless proper gateline procedures that control numbers getting on (which will not be easy to implement because of gate controlling multiple platforms) and 'pick up only' means exactly that - nothing will change! Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: simonw on March 29, 2016, 11:34:29 Out of curiosity, is it possible for GWR to re-allocate 2/3 carriages to each train on busy routes at peak times to help address these issues?
If so, why is it not done? Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: IndustryInsider on March 29, 2016, 11:39:14 Not quite sure what you mean, simonw?
It is just about possible to run HST's with an extra carriage on some GW routes, so they'd have 9 rather than 8, but platform lengths at terminal stations make it a bit of a headache on some routes and impossible on others. Plus there's a small performance penalty to consider with the extra weight. Certainly not possible to go any further than that until the new SET's arrive with their possible 10 car formations. Other types of train that GWR operate regularly run at extended lengths to reflect demand, but again can only be a certain length depending on route. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on May 28, 2016, 10:34:39 Sounds like conditions were very unpleasant again last night coming out of Paddington heading for the Westcountry, the usual horrendous Bank Holiday overcrowding - not sure if any additional services were laid on to address it?
I note the GWR line on overcrowding has changed from "it's not dangerous" to "there is no legal limit". Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: ellendune on May 28, 2016, 12:30:16 Sounds like conditions were very unpleasant again last night coming out of Paddington heading for the Westcountry, the usual horrendous Bank Holiday overcrowding - not sure if any additional services were laid on to address it? I am not sure where GWR could get extra trains to run in the peak on a Friday evening. It is not as if the loadings to South Wales, Cheltenham or North Cotswolds are going to be down so that they can take an extra train from there. Even if they did it would be difficult to find extra paths east of Reading. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: SandTEngineer on May 28, 2016, 16:20:24 All the Exeter to Plymouth Friday extensions ran and also an additional 1933 to Penzance (the normal 1903 Friday extension from Plymouth to Penzance being terminated short at Plymouth).
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: IndustryInsider on May 28, 2016, 16:25:56 All bar the last one arriving 'on time'. That last one got in 25 late.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: SandTEngineer on May 28, 2016, 16:48:18 .....and there was an additional 1434 to Plymouth as well.
Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: bobm on May 30, 2016, 22:11:51 From Journeycheck
Quote 19:40 London Paddington to Plymouth due 23:49 An additional train service has been planned to operate as shown 30/05/16 19:40 London Paddington to Plymouth due 23:21. This is due to overcrowding because of an event. Shame about the Wembley play off result from a West Country point of view. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: a-driver on May 31, 2016, 08:15:22 From Journeycheck Quote 19:40 London Paddington to Plymouth due 23:49 An additional train service has been planned to operate as shown 30/05/16 19:40 London Paddington to Plymouth due 23:21. This is due to overcrowding because of an event. Shame about the Wembley play off result from a West Country point of view. West Country services departing from Paddington after 1800 1800 Penzance 1830 Plymouth 1900 Penzance 1907 Plymouth via Bristol 1927 Plymouth via Bristol 1930 Plymouth 1940 Plymouth (first stop Exeter, not even a Reading call!) Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: TaplowGreen on May 31, 2016, 10:16:12 From Journeycheck Quote 19:40 London Paddington to Plymouth due 23:49 An additional train service has been planned to operate as shown 30/05/16 19:40 London Paddington to Plymouth due 23:21. This is due to overcrowding because of an event. Shame about the Wembley play off result from a West Country point of view. It certainly was for us Argyle fans, although Cornwall winning the County Championship at Twickenham on Sunday redressed the balance a little...............as did England crushing Wales (again!) - we even missed all our kicks to give them a chance!!! ;D Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Adelante_CCT on May 31, 2016, 12:43:02 Quote 1940 Plymouth (first stop Exeter, not even a Reading call!) Unfortunately however it was routed behind the 19:30 which itself stopped at Reading, Newbury, Pewsey, Westbury, Castle Cary, Taunton & Tiverton, hence the 19:40 still taking over 4 hours to get to Plymouth. Title: Re: 1903 Paddington - Plymouth 24th March Post by: Sleepy on April 17, 2017, 11:59:19 Wow no tales of Easter chaos/overcrowding on the 1903 this year ??
This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net |