Great Western Coffee Shop

Just a warning to people to expect timetabling changes on the Gatwick to Reading line in December.

Unfortunately the draft timetables shows the changes will be for the benefit of GWR not customers: longer journey times, no integration with timetables of connecting services and the continued use of platform 15A/B at Reading causing confusion and delay for passengers.

Expect further misery in May 2020 when the "new" Class 769 trains, which are currently experiencing large numbers of breakdowns during trial runs, are introduced. These are not new trains but simply refurbished trains which are actually older and slower stock than we have at the moment.

No word yet of improvements on this line: fixing the regular breakdown of signaling at Wokingham and Guildford, removing unnecessary rail crossing preventing access to platforms, removing the causes of frequent speed restrictions, electrification, or faster newer trains.

Feeling more and more like we are getting a Cinderella service.

Rgds.,
Sunfire

Thanks Sunfire - retirement looks even more attractive..

Can you direct me to where you found the new timetable please?

There are times on the data feeds, visible in e.g. Real Time Trains and Journey planners, which I guess is the basis for this. The timetable there was not complete when it first appeared and it still isn't - an afternoon gap with no trains through to Gatwick, and an evening one with no trains out of Reading. So, work still needed there.

Some of what was expected has been delayed, as we know, notably the third train per hour. The shifting of times of two trains to match those of two out of three (in an earlier draft feed) has disappeared too. I was expecting some issues with fitting trains around other increased services, at both ends and Guildford, though some of that has already happened and the extra Waterloo/Reading trains are also delayed.

What I do see are two things, one being a longer time for journeys at busier times (which may be what the OP was referring to). This is due to longer dwells from Reading to Guildford, up from one to two minutes (and three at Wokingham). I guess experience has shown that one minute isn't long enough for current passenger loads.

The other effect is the loss of the near-clockface service through much of the middle of the day. This is puzzling - surely the "more services" that have to be fitted around are also clockface? I can see that times might shift away from 30 minute spacing, but that was only ever possible at one end anyway. But a different time past every hour - why?

The rest of Cinderella's clothes are not timetabling issues, so there's no reason for her to change them for  a new timetable. And yes, 769s are pumpkins and will stay pumpkins.

I have a great deal of respect for your very detailed and analytical posts on this forum stuving. So for you to call 769s pumpkins doesn’t fill me with a great deal of confidence. The silence on this project also brings cause for concern.

They’ll be nice and whizzy on the 3rd rail sections at least, but I also have doubts about performance on diesel comparing favourably with a Turbo.

Presumably if they do end up providing a through service from Oxford they will have to use platform 15A/B, which is the only one that can access the cut under to the Wokingham line?

The ex-SR Diveunder can be accessed to/from Platform Nos.13, 14 and 15.

Presumably the extensive testing of the 769's is aimed at eliminating unreliabilty.

Looking at comparative powers, a 165 has 1050hp for 111t, about 7.6hp/t at rail.

A 769 at say 150t with 1046hp has about 5.6hp at rail but with 1440hp electric drive has 9.6hp/t at rail (again at 80% diesel transfer).

The route to Guildford from Reading is not that precipitous with only a mile climb to Crowthorne at 1:150 and an electrified descent into Guildford at 1:100.

However from Shalford Jn onwards the route is a switchback of c1:100 all the way to Reigate. This will tax and slow the 769's somewhat although being heavier they will be faster downhill!

Can marginal third rail electrification be that unsafe?

The 319, Thameslink units were much admired 30 years ago for their performance. It's not really fair to compare them with the latest over-powered units that have required so much upgrading of power supplies.

EOE,

OTC

I fear the 769s may be worse wimps on wheels than OTC foretells.

There is more information in a Rail Engineer article last year by Maclolm Dobell (https://www.railengineer.co.uk/2018/09/27/bi-mode-good-tri-mode-better/#), based on going to visit Porterbrook. They are reported thus:

That's only 70% of prime power, and there's still motor losses to come (and these are still the old DC motors) - far worse than OTC's already rather miserable assumption. They are going to struggle to get rid of all that heat!

On performance, they resort to what sounds like waffle.

If it can only do 87 mph on the flat, an envelope flip suggests it might just do 52 mph up 1 in 100.

Incidentally, the minimum tare weight of a 319 (based on equal axle loads in each vehicle) is 140.3 t and for a 769 the DTSOs put on 7.5 t each. Presumably the other two gain only a little, but the total must be over 156t. Note I used tare weights, I don't know if that 87 mph did - adding passengers will obviously make it even slower.

If you want an example that goes to the other extreme, look at the Stadler class 755/4 just come into service with GA. Here the weight is a bit of a guess, but based on this (https://anonw.com/2019/08/06/my-first-rides-in-a-class-755-train/) it's only 114 t. For some reason these 4-cars have four engines (the 755/3 has two) with an output of 1920 kW! Now, Stadler do say one is a spare - so they can run the rest at 75%, or give each a rest in turn. But even in that case you're looking at 12.6 kW/t (prime) - compared with 5.0 for the 769, before allowing for the very high losses. Must be for all those famous East Anglian hills.

Oh dear!


That is ridiculous! How are you going to encourage more usage of trains if passengers don't have a regular service that they know without looking it up when it's likely to be there? As GWR North Downs trains are the only users of several stretches (give or take a daily XC service), surely they could have achieved retaining the current pattern without too much difficulty.


So a packed one climbing to Crowthorne crammed with Farnborough students on a day with poor railhead conditions keeping to time looks remote. The Turbos already readily spin their wheels on the gradients around Sandhurst.


This is recognition of reality. My current regular morning trains (08-04 or 08-20 ex-Reading) usually are 2-3 minutes late at Guildford.

Hmm - not looking forward to the 769s coming to the North Downs line - Cinderella is very apt, Stuving!

 

Oh, I didn't mention adhesion did I? The figure of merit for that, indicating how well a train copes with low friction or the steepest gradient it could ever climb, is the fraction of its weight on motored axles. For a Turbo that's 0.5 (provided all engines are pushing), while for a 319 it's 0.36. Adding engines to the two DTSOs brings that down to below 0.33, a significant disadvantage relative to the Turbos.

And it was Sunfire who first mentioned Cinderella - I just dragged in her pumpkin; there'll be no fine carriage to take you to the ballGuildford young man!

Apologies Sunfire for not correctly attributing the Cinderella idea to you!

Bearing in mind the use of elderly diesels for Cinderella services (rebuilt Brush Type 4s for Night Riviera), perhaps someone will acquire a few old class 37s, spray them "new" GWR green, name them (after Manors - that would be appropriate for the North Downs?) and use them as banking engines between Reading and Gatwick! ::)

PS - Cross thread query prompted by my apology above - has the extensive combined eclectic fount of obscure knowledge that is the Coffee Shop given up on the challenge of tracing the first use of the who reads what newspaper gag? (see - http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5138.msg273919#msg273919) Or is Robin Summerhill still up in his loft looking - should someone call around to see if he's OK?

An insider posting on the RailUK forum says the 769s are now planned to run on diesel throughout, as Network Rail have objected to the additional loading on the 3rd rail infrastructure between Redhill and Gatwick.

Also, the 769s cannot transfer to electric operation "on the go", which means that GWR had already discounted the use of the 3rd rail between Ash and Guildford.

[sarcasm]I am so looking forward to the introduction of this stock.[/sarcasm]

I have another suggestion. I understand that EMR are releasing some 158s that currently operate Liverpool-Norwich. Keep 158s on the Cardiff-Portsmouth line where they are popular with the travelling public compared to 165/166s with 2+3 seating leaving 166s to continue to run Reading-Gatwick. Is it really worth converting an electric train over to diesel that from what is being said isn't looking a good option?

According to a post on railforums, the 3tph service on the North Downs Line, much delayed, is now happening next May.

The continued frustration of both passenger groups and GWR at the lack of improvements possible on the North Downs line was made very clear at today's GWR stakeholder conference.  With  a very clear message that GWR really want it to happen, but aren't able / allowed to do so because of limits to what the infrastructure provider is willing and able to let them do.

Really? Where are they going to get the rolling stock from if the 769s are not available by then - or if they are as unsuitable as recent posts imply?

I think you're forgetting that May 2020 is in the future. There are no facts in the future - only such as prediction, beliefs, estimates or, as in this case, plans (several meanings). As GWR currently plan to use these trains, they (involving NR etc.) are drawing up detailed plans do implement that. If something prevents that plan happening, new plans will be needed. Or do I mean when?

At the Stakeholder conference yesterday, we were told that a second 'production line' was to be opened for GWR 769s so that they're not waiting for units to follow follow other TOC's orders.   Also, notably, the minister told us (wit a prompt from his civil servants in the back of the room) that there will be a dispensation to allow the 143s to stay into the new year.   Finally, the minister spoke as if five car suburban trains are already pretty standard in the Bristol area, and I suspect a bit of later-than-planned-even-now lengthening could provide ....

Then of course the 125 group may be able to lend a castle ...

Sunfire, we have forgotten our manners - welcome to the Great Western Passengers' Forum! And thank you for a useful heads-up.

Hmm, that'll hurt the ROSCO's profit margin. That GWR have applied pressure, and the ROSCO has buckled, says plenty.

Smells of last chance saloon to me. I await developments with interest.

With only one week to go, the WTT now visible online has ... 3 tph most of the day, one to Gatwick and two to Redhill! (The "paper" one shows the same.) So presumably that will happen - a big jump from the current service of 1 tph most of the day, plus a few peak extras two of which get to Gatwick. The one train that stopped in the past at Winnersh to collect kids out of school doesn't do so now, nor after these changes.

I can understand that Gatwick is not expected to become a very popular destination this autumn, but it still looks odd. If it's to cope with the loadings and allow enough spacing in small trains, how does it match the split of  minor/only major stations? There are two semifasts, evenly spaced, one of which is a bit faster than the other - it's non-stop Wokingham to Guildford, where it overtakes the stopper (most of which are indeed all stops).

Is there any operational benefit? I did wonder if it could mean one less diagram, but the faster semifast, which doesn't go to Gatwick, goes off to the siding for 30 minutes to preserve the timing for Gatwick. It also passes the train from Gatwick in Redhill, and is overtaken by the stopper while in its siding. I can see that going wrong occasionally...

I heard the intention is to get the trains into the timetable, as a kind of 'preview' service, then fine tune them over time to remove some oddities and optimise them as best as possible.  Some further changes are planned to happen in December when the 769s (hopefully) get phased into service, which will hopefully optimise turn rounds margins and therefore improve performance. 

Then it's a case of wait and see how everything settles in, and see what the market is like after the pandemic, with a particular eye on interfaces with SWR trains between Reading and Wokingham, and Southern on the line between Reigate-Redhill-Gatwick.

Hopefully it will improve the connections with SWR trains (old fashioned idea?). I have spent best part of an hour reading on Guildford station between the Portsmouth - Waterloo train and getting the Reading train on recent Saturdays.

Well ... it looks as if someone has been listening in on your unspoken complaints. Now, the train from Portsmouth is on P5 and the fast to Reading on P6 - five minutes for a cross-platform change! Mind you the poor suckers who need to change between the two Reading services have to trek over or under to or from P8. And of course these short changes do, just ever so often, go wrong. Never mind, there's another almost as fast Reading train within half an hour.

GWR Press Release for Monday 14th September 2020.


https://www.gwr.com/about-us/media-centre/news/2020/september/gwr-realises-ambition-for-three-trains-an-hour-on-north-downs-line (https://www.gwr.com/about-us/media-centre/news/2020/september/gwr-realises-ambition-for-three-trains-an-hour-on-north-downs-line)

Somewhat bizarrely though we've lost a train from Reading between 8 and 9, when there is just one service (the old 8-04ish having been moved forward to 7-58 a little while back)- the 8-32/4ish to Gatwick has gone even though it was a useful second string for Guildford 9-30 starters!

From some posts on RailUK forums it appears that the start of the new services has been rather disrupted by infrastructure issues.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/3tph-on-north-downs-line.140595/post-4773385 (https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/3tph-on-north-downs-line.140595/post-4773385)

That's very careless! Where did we last have it?

From observations on the ground and on OTT maps it seems to be going reasonably well at the moment.  The known pinch points, are still pinch points, but are just about coping. 

Redhill is seeing quite a few short notice platform changes and stacking of trains (some would say that's nothing new!), and it's a shame that some of the additional trains have to head from Redhill into the loco siding to get out of the way for a while, which means crossing over all the other tracks twice.  That probably causes more hassles than sending them through to Gatwick, so as soon as the rebuild there is completed the better.

Guildford also seeing a few platform changes, but coping reasonably well, although if the additional Redhill>Reading service is more than a couple of minutes late, it does knock on to the Reading stopper and Farnham stopper behind.

The next Gatwick rebuild isn't going to increase train capacity, is it? It's for passengers, and even then it won't alter platforms 1/2 and 3/4 that the North Downs trains use.

No extra capacity on the usual layout, but whilst works are ongoing there is currently reduced capacity with platforms out of use one at a time.

Ah - I'd only just twigged that work had actually started, given it only started during lockdown. But since GX is suspended, it's probably a good time to get on with it. (P6 and P7 are currently closed.) I do hope the space left when P7 was built is enough for the widening of P5/6!

The new timetable saw the withdrawal of the ladt service from RDG to GTW, which departed at around 2334.
I've seen that the "new" last train at 2235 from RDG to GTW this evening has been cancelled and replaced with a bus.

I don't see how it was withdrawn, as it wasn't running anyway. It's not been reinstated for now, and probably not up to December at least. As for tonight's train - full excuseexplanation awaited, it's not in the systems yet. It has gone off the CIS at Reading, but is "delayed" en route and at Gatwick. However, there is a hint: the in-service run of the same unit back to Redhill is shown as "cancelled due to a shortage of train crew". I think the crew for that last train is (subject to current alterations) "borrowed" from Southern.