Class 387 coming to Thames Valley - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[Adelante_CCT]

Also numerous large posters at many stations showing the above alighting information

[a-driver]

Personally I think GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have been left to deal with a shambles. Electrification is behind schedule and parts of it have been deferred. You’ve got 12-car trains calling at stations where all vehicles can’t be accommodated. That’s always going to cause delays even with proper full announcements. All platforms should be able to accommodate the full length of the train on busy commuter routes.
I’m not saying GWR are totally blameless but NR^» (Network Rail - home page) and the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have failed passengers in the Thames Valley in a big way.

[NickB]

Also numerous large posters at many stations showing the above alighting information

If you tell me that they exist then I believe you. I’ll take a look out for them today, but as of last night I hadn’t seen/read/processed them.

If GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) are going to rely on such posters then late-boarding is ill-advised as passengers, particularly those unfamiliar with the train and route, will board speedily in to carriages 10-12.  Equally, if you are going to do station and on-train announcements about the train dividing at Reading then why haven’t you announced that the rear 4 carriages are inaccessible for the preceding station?

[grahame]

All platforms should be able to accommodate the full length of the train on busy commuter routes.

Not an issue unique to GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) ... witness minor underground stations like Baker Street.

I’m not saying GWR are totally blameless but NR^» (Network Rail - home page) and the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have failed passengers in the Thames Valley in a big way.

Fair summary.  A question I often wonder about asking those who favour the replacement of private companies operating trains by nationalised bodies / the government is how accountability from those nationalised bodies to the passengers would work.  We may at times grumble about how hard it is to deal with GWR, but in comparison to Network Rail ...

[IndustryInsider]

Also numerous large posters at many stations showing the above alighting information

If you tell me that they exist then I believe you. I’ll take a look out for them today, but as of last night I hadn’t seen/read/processed them.

If GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) are going to rely on such posters then late-boarding is ill-advised as passengers, particularly those unfamiliar with the train and route, will board speedily in to carriages 10-12.  Equally, if you are going to do station and on-train announcements about the train dividing at Reading then why haven’t you announced that the rear 4 carriages are inaccessible for the preceding station?

There are posters, though as Nick says that should only be part of the solution and will be missed/mis-understood by many.  Having to move forward one coach isn’t so bad and can be usually dealt with when approaching the station, but four or five coaches is a much different scenario that should be widely advertised (including on Paddington CIS^▸ (Customer Information System) screens and boarding announcements), and then announced on the train both before it departs and shortly after it has departed, as well as before it arrives.

Regulars will soon get used to it, but by no means every passenger is a regular.

[paul7575]

12 car trains made up of 3 x 4 car corridor EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) has been routine on the three "southern" TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) for ages.  Stopping at mostly 12 car platforms but eventually getting to shorter platforms at some stations further down the line is also commonplace.   It really isn't a major problem. 

Splitting a long train en route with the rear portion going out of service, which AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) may happen at Reading, is also common.

What I'd like to know is the eventually expected 12 car services and their exact normal calling patterns, before a molehill becomes a mountain...

Paul

[bobm]

In some cases there might be a margin to cross the 387 over to platform 4 at Twyford East and back over at Twyford West - that would create a cross platform transfer for the Henley Branch and reduce or eliminate any hold being needed. 

If an up stopper from Reading was slightly delayed it could probably make up a few minutes before Paddington.

[grahame]

It then arrived Twyford at 18:19, three minutes late, but it looks as if the 18:20 connection to Henley left on time (well, it left early at 18:19 according to the automatic reports).  If true it is shocking that the connection was allowed to leave as the train pulled into the platform.

[advocate mode=devil]Not sure why "shocking". Maybe this is unusual practise in the Thames Valley, but I can find you recent examples in my area of two trains in motion alongside a platform - one drawing to a halt as the other pulls out in what's supposed to be a connection, and even of trains crossing over in front one another in a station throat - with the arriving train not releasing his doors until the connection's doors (on the same island) are locked![/advocate]

[ray951]

Apparently there were 11 Class 387 units out of service yesterday, which is about 25% of the fleet.
I don't know what the issues were, but I find that odd given that these trains having been running for several years (although not on GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)) and that the GWR examples were the last off the 'production' line.

[stuving]

Also numerous large posters at many stations showing the above alighting information

If you tell me that they exist then I believe you. I’ll take a look out for them today, but as of last night I hadn’t seen/read/processed them.

If GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) are going to rely on such posters then late-boarding is ill-advised as passengers, particularly those unfamiliar with the train and route, will board speedily in to carriages 10-12.  Equally, if you are going to do station and on-train announcements about the train dividing at Reading then why haven’t you announced that the rear 4 carriages are inaccessible for the preceding station?

There are posters, though as Nick says that should only be part of the solution and will be missed/mis-understood by many.  Having to move forward one coach isn’t so bad and can be usually dealt with when approaching the station, but four or five coaches is a much different scenario that should be widely advertised (including on Paddington CIS^▸ (Customer Information System) screens and boarding announcements), and then announced on the train both before it departs and shortly after it has departed, as well as before it arrives.

Regulars will soon get used to it, but by no means every passenger is a regular.

We now have some 10-car (2x458) trains running on Reading-Waterloo, though still more 8-car ones. From the start they had warnings about short platforms in the recorded "next stop" messages, though of course the limited choice of stopping patterns makes that easier to provide. To start with the guards included the same warnings, using almost the same words, for every stop. In fact it gets rather tedious to have so much repetition - and that may even make it easier to forget about it (though I'd be unlikely to use an affected station anyway).

[didcotdean]

I would guess the main problem is at Paddington with the likely to remain relatively rare 12 carriage services. A low tech solution would be stick notices on the doors of the first 4 with 'Reading Only'. This will make the Reading commuters feel as if they have a dedicated service

This doesn't help entirely those at stations served only by sixes and sevens, but would cut down the number of carriages they would walk through.

[didcotdean]

Apparently there were 11 Class 387 units out of service yesterday, which is about 25% of the fleet.
I don't know what the issues were, but I find that odd given that these trains having been running for several years (although not on GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)) and that the GWR examples were the last off the 'production' line.

Top of the bath tub curve?

[IndustryInsider]

12 car trains made up of 3 x 4 car corridor EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) has been routine on the three "southern" TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) for ages.  Stopping at mostly 12 car platforms but eventually getting to shorter platforms at some stations further down the line is also commonplace.   It really isn't a major problem. 

We now have some 10-car (2x458) trains running on Reading-Waterloo, though still more 8-car ones. From the start they had warnings about short platforms in the recorded "next stop" messages, though of course the limited choice of stopping patterns makes that easier to provide. To start with the guards included the same warnings, using almost the same words, for every stop. In fact it gets rather tedious to have so much repetition - and that may even make it easier to forget about it (though I'd be unlikely to use an affected station anyway).

Are there any examples where it is as many as 5 carriages at the rear which remain locked?  And if there are would any of them have hundreds of passengers alighting such as at Maidenhead and Twyford?  I think the fact it's a 'new' way of working at stations like Maidenhead means it should be given more attention than it was yesterday, and sticking a few posters up is not enough.  I agree with 'a-driver' that any platform extensions at both locations should have been completed on time.

In some cases there might be a margin to cross the 387 over to platform 4 at Twyford East and back over at Twyford West - that would create a cross platform transfer for the Henley Branch and reduce or eliminate any hold being needed. 

The crossover at Tywford East is only 25mph and has 'approach controlled' signalling, so by the time a train is signalled in via that route it would actually be slower in terms of transferring passengers than getting them to go over the (well located) footbridge as normal.

Apparently there were 11 Class 387 units out of service yesterday, which is about 25% of the fleet.
I don't know what the issues were, but I find that odd given that these trains having been running for several years (although not on GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)) and that the GWR examples were the last off the 'production' line.

Despite all being used, many have had very light use over the last few months, some sitting for weeks on end in Didcot Yard, as there simply weren't the diagrams for them - I believe some required software updates for example.  Combined with the fatality at Iver late Monday evening, it's perhaps not surprising fleet availability was poor, though that should have been predicted as yesterday was a disaster.  Seems to be much better today though?  What experiences have JaneS, TG and Nick had today?

[paul7575]

Before SWT^▸ (South West Trains) had their Desiro fleet modified to provide 'carriage level' ASDO^▸ (Automatic Selective Door Operation) there were numerous locations where the doors were only opened on half of a 10 car 444. 

At Shawford there were even calls by 10 car 444s using a local door only, because even 5 cars were too long.  I'm not suggesting that Shawford is a typical example though.   

[IndustryInsider]

Maidenhead is around 25x busier than Shawford though...