7082
|
Journey by Journey / Chiltern Railways services / Re: New car park for Banbury
|
on: October 12, 2012, 13:05:02
|
So, I'm hoping they'll give up on this scheme and go with the original idea using the grant funding to at least pay for the majority of the project - rather than have a fight with both local residents and the planning authority which won't endear them to either.
Yes, moving that NR» centre would certainly be a better location for a 2 or 3 tier multi-storey car park than where they are talking about - presumably the two stabling sidings would also have to be moved southwards to where the old south goods yard used to be? Sounds like a bit of an awkward situation that Chiltern find themselves in!
|
|
|
7084
|
Journey by Journey / London to the West / Re: Night Riviera sleeper service - Cornwall to London
|
on: October 12, 2012, 10:22:18
|
It eventually arrived Paddington at 06:09, 44 minutes late.
The NR» log for the delay makes interesting reading and shows that a light loco had to run from Old Oak Common which got delayed by the gas leak. It also shows what amendments to engineering possessions had to take place as a result:
Delays 77 mins PENZANCE WTG REPLACEMENT 57 FROM OOC▸
Log: 18:00 FGW▸ has requested priority be given to 0Z57 1500 OOC to Penzance as this engine is required to work 1A40 2145 Penzance to Paddington as the engine that should work it has failed. Service will be double-headed tonight - with both the failed engine and the replacement engine. Signal boxes en route advised. 20:16 0Z57 currently running 35mins late due to earlier line blockage at Norton Fitzwarren (gas leak). This means 1A40 will be approx 45mins late departing Penzance. Penzance Signaller tipped off. This will cause delay to Item 76, but this can be accommodated. 21:23 Penzance Signaller advised that FGW predict 1A40 will only now depart at approx midnight. 00:05 The following planned engineering possessions were held off being taken due to late departure of 1A40 : Item 76 St Budeaux Ferry to Saltash due to be taken at 0010 hours Item 77 Truro to Roskear due to be taken at 0030 hours Item 78 Roskear to Long Rock due to be taken at 0030 hours 00:09 Plymouth signaller advised that the PICOP▸ for Item 76 has cancelled the possession due to 1A40 not yet having left Penzance
|
|
|
7089
|
All across the Great Western territory / Your rights and redress / Re: Rail passengers^ experiences and priorities during engineering works
|
on: October 08, 2012, 16:57:46
|
The dislike of rail replacement buses is not just a matter of the vehicle itself often being inferior to a train, but also the risks of incidents like that to which I refer above. To be delayed by an hour, as advertised due to a connecting bus, is arguably fair enough. To be delayed by several hours, and have to stand for much of that time, and then be surcharged is not acceptable.
The other reason, IME▸ that a through train is prefered, even if delayed/diverted, is that if one obtains a seat on the train then this seat may normally be utilised for the entire journey. If changing to a bus and then another train, there is more risk of standing on the connecting service.
Buses are generaly considered to be slower and inferior, but cheap. In the case of local or suburban rail trips, a rail replacement bus can take a lot longer than existing buses.
Plus there's not much chance of getting a Pullman meal on a replacement bus. Most of them haven't even got a Travelling Chef.
|
|
|
7092
|
All across the Great Western territory / Fare's Fair / Re: Rail fare prices - the basis of increases (merged ongoing discussion)
|
on: October 08, 2012, 16:52:13
|
I'm somewhat cynical about these u-turns. I get the impression the government gets us all prepared for eye-watering rises and then shows us how nice they really are by lowering the increase. It is a welcome announcement but I fear it has little to do with railway finances and more to do with political expediency.
At least with a 2 year announcement, there won't be all the usual RPI▸ +3% headlines late next summer, with all the negative messages about rail fares that sends out, before the (far less dramatic) actually it'll only be RPI+1% stories hit the press later in the year. An announcement to be applauded I say.
|
|
|
7093
|
All across the Great Western territory / Across the West / Re: First Great Western announces extra capacity across network
|
on: October 06, 2012, 14:30:13
|
Just a couple of comments..
The 18.36 has always been more than 3 carriages so your suspected short formation in December is true I'm sure
No idea why the 19.06 is still only 3 carriages.. It is a very busy/popular train at least as far as Maidenhead.
One of the reasons I was wondering about extra carriages was because I got the 19.18 recently and it was still 3 carriages so I guess a problem on that day...
I've since noticed that a Class 180 failed at Worcester yesterday afternoon (it spent the night at Worcester in fact), so that will also have impacted on the service. The train it was due to form, the 17:18 PAD» - OXF» was formed by a 5-car Turbo instead, so it's quite possible that other trains were a little shorter than normal to provide those Turbo carriages - the 17:12 departure for example. A Class 180 shortage would also have no doubt led to your 19:18 PAD-OXF being a 3-car Turbo when you travelled. I'll take another look in the week and correct what was missing last night, for the most accurate picture.
|
|
|
7094
|
All across the Great Western territory / Across the West / Re: First Great Western announces extra capacity across network
|
on: October 05, 2012, 21:33:05
|
Here's the follow-up post to my morning comparison, showing the situation this evening from Paddington to Maidenhead compared with an evening early last December before any of the additional carriages and trains had arrived. It includes all services timed to depart Paddington between 16:30 and 20:30. As far as I know both evenings were free of disruption and short formations apart from those specifically mentioned.
Fast services (those that take 30 minutes or less): 17:18dep 17:38arr Now: 5 Was: 3 17:36dep 17:57arr Now: 5 Was: 8 (Was a HST▸ , now a 5-Car Turbo, so standard class seating has actually increased) 17:50dep 18:09arr Now: 8 Was: 8 (Now a HST with 5x Standard Class - same amount) 18:18dep 18:39arr Now: 6 Was: 5 18:36dep 19:03arr Now: 5 Was: 2 (Suspected short formation last December) 19:06dep 19:26arr Now: 3 Was: 3 19:18dep 19:39arr Now: 5 Was: 3 (Now a Class 180, so actual seating remains roughly the same) 19:48dep 20:06arr Now: 8 Was: 8 (Now a HST with 5x Standard Class - same amount)
Total number of seats has risen slightly, but not to the same extent as found in the morning peak. The additional carriage on probably the most popular train, the 18:18 departure, will no doubt have been welcomed, though with 30 minutes until the next fast train after the 18:36, it's no wonder that the 19:06 3-Car Turbo is still very crowded. All of the HSTs tonight were of the 5 Standard Class carriage types, but may also often be formed of the 6 Standard Class carriages type.
Slow services: 16:42dep 17:30arr Now: 5 Was: 5 16:55dep 17:43arr Now: 5 Was: 3 17:12dep 17:47arr Now: 2 Was: 3 (Suspected short formation tonight) 17:15dep 18:05arr Now: 5 Was: 5 17:25dep 18:10arr Now: 5 Was: 3 17:42dep 18:13arr Now: 3 Was: 3 17:45dep 18:26arr Now: 6 Was: 6 17:57dep 18:43arr Now: 5 Was: 5 18:12dep 18:48arr Now: 3 Was: 5 18:15dep 18:57arr Now: 6 Was: 6 18:25dep 19:10arr Now: 5 Was: 5 18:45dep 19:21arr Now: 5 Was: 3 18:57dep 19:43arr Now: 5 Was: 5 19:12dep 19:52arr Now: 5 Was: 3 19:27dep 20:09arr Now: 5 Was: 3 19:42dep 20:29arr Now: 3 Was: 2 19:57dep 20:34arr Now: 3 Was: 3 20:12dep 20:55arr Now: 3 Was: 3 20:27dep 21:04arr Now: 3 Was: 2
On the slow trains that's an increase in the total number of carriages by 9 from 73 to 82. That is with one suspected short formation tonight, so the actual number is probably in double figures. It's worth pointing out that a few of these 'slow' trains only just take over the 30 minute mark, so could be described as semi-fast I suppose.
|
|
|
|