Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
article index - [here]
 today - TransWilts Design entries end
tomorrow - Bristol clean air day
22/06/2019 - Steam on the District
22/06/2019 - Shaw Summer Fayre
24/06/2019 - National Rail Safety Week
25/06/2019 - First Group Shareholder mtg
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
June 19, 2019, 10:23:58 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[192] IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent pe...
[56] Off-lease High Speed Trains running out of time to avoid scrap...
[44] Problems with the Night Riviera sleeper - December 2014 onward...
[38] 2019 - TransWilts cancellation and amendments log
[34] And where on 1st June??
[32] Where am I today, 18th June 2019?
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: North Camp - Ash Vale interchange  (Read 1714 times)
sunfire
Newbie
*
Posts: 1


View Profile
« on: April 09, 2019, 12:18:47 pm »

Hohum here was me hoping GWR and SWR would work to NR to fix the long waiting times at the North Camp - Ash Vale interchange.

Currently in the evenings I have to wait 20-30 minutes for a train from Ash Vale on to Alton because their timetables don't match up.

The May timetable was the perfect to start looking at fixing but there don't appear to be any changes to the timetables to try and start fixing this.

No signs of any improvements on the the North Downs line at any point in the near future either.

Bit of a Cinderella service to be honest.

* : (
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 25423



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #1 on: April 09, 2019, 12:46:46 pm »

Welcome to the forum, Sunfire ...

I am aware that GWR have been looking to increase their services on the North Downs line from 2 to 3 per hour, but I understand that there are issues with level crossing safety yet to be resolved (as I understand it, more trains = higher risk).   And GWR trains are due to go up to 4 carriages, and be changed to a type that can run on electric power on the electric sections, at the end of the year.

Not sure how the extra trains, and the potential changes in train performance with 'bi-modes', will effect timetables - I'll leave that for others to comment on.

Connections aren't highest priority on train operator's lists, I'm afraid ... though a little local help to inform them of concerns / user groups / CRPs etc can be a big help.   Remember that their eyes are very much on meeting their contract which rarely includes connection times ... and they have hundreds of stations to look after and can so easily overlook opportunities to improve services.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and of RailFuture
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3955


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2019, 01:09:59 pm »

Yes, indeed, welcome Sunfire.

That particular connection time is probably about as low down the operators' priority list as you can get. It's between operators, the SWR timetable is too complex to change for it; the North Downs is a long(ish) cross-country run, it meets several other lines, and it has its timing set by the busy stations it has to share (Gatwick/Redhill and Guildford). So even if there is a will (and there may not be) you will probably end up with what you end up with.

I've had these "walking legs" crop up quite often when looking at journeys from Wokingham to the south or south-west, but hardly even actually done it - in part because the timing (walk plus wait) makes rail an unatractive mode. I'm not even sure about their status; while the NR Journey Planner does offer them, I can't see anything in the Routeing Guide that says they are even permitted routes.

But, as a regular user, how many other people do you reckon use that interchange (or the Farnborough one)?
Logged
Fourbee
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 553


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2019, 02:42:37 pm »

Not sure how the extra trains, and the potential changes in train performance with 'bi-modes', will effect timetables - I'll leave that for others to comment on.
Welcome Sunfire.

That walk/delay does look unfavourable to say the least. The SWR peak time departures to Alton from Waterloo miss out a couple of stops like Brookwood which makes for an earlier arrival at Ash Vale, breaking your connection (off-peak it can probably be made off the Redhill train in the 'official' 11 minutes allowed if you walk briskly and easily off the Gatwick Airport one from North Camp).

Another couple of thoughts - those heading the other way, from Guildford to Bentley and Alton will now generally have a bit longer to wait at Aldershot as a result of the May change.

Presumably the class 769s will have to switch over from diesel to electric while stationary and not all trains stop at Ash. Potentially running on diesel all the way from Wokingham to Reigate for those faster services?
Logged
Fourbee
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 553


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2019, 02:44:48 pm »

I can't remember where I read it, but I think Ash Vale has missed out on the DfT disability funding pot or whatever it is called; so more trudging up the stairs (for those fortunate enough to be able to).
Logged
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 363


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2019, 09:19:15 pm »

And a welcome from me too - good to see another North Downs line passenger on the forum.

Are we correct in assuming that you are coming from Guildford to North Camp? If so, perhaps you might want to "like" my suggestion on 5 April (see - http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=21342.0) that the new split Guildford to Farnham service be extended to Alton.

This is not the only inconvenient change of train timing for the North Downs service, I'm afraid.
Logged
CyclingSid
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 419


Hockley viaduct


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2019, 07:44:28 am »

Welcome. Ash Vale was not in the latest list of stations to get accessibility funding announced in the last week or so. It would be a major job. Any time I save cycling from North Camp I lose puffing up the stairs.
Logged
FenMan
Newbie
*
Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2019, 04:03:27 pm »


I've had these "walking legs" crop up quite often when looking at journeys from Wokingham to the south or south-west, but hardly even actually done it - in part because the timing (walk plus wait) makes rail an unatractive mode. I'm not even sure about their status; while the NR Journey Planner does offer them, I can't see anything in the Routeing Guide that says they are even permitted routes.

But, as a regular user, how many other people do you reckon use that interchange (or the Farnborough one)?

Hi, another North Downs regular here. These walking interchanges are both permitted routes. SWR offer some cheaper tickets for some flows via these interchanges e.g. the Blackwater - Basingstoke Anytime Return via Farnborough North/Farnborough Main is 10 whereas GWR charge 13.50 for the route via Reading.

Primarily these interchanges are for passengers travelling to/from stations to Reading and beyond. Off peak, 3 or 4 passengers per train arriving at North Camp from the Reading direction will walk to Ash Vale. Many more do this at peak times - the main flow is Reading <-> Aldershot.

Similar numbers alight at Farnborough North and walk to Farnborough Main (16 minutes).

National Rail Enquiries mandates a 17 minute minimum connection between North Camp and Ash Vale, but any reasonably fit adult without heavy luggage will walk it in 9 or 10 minutes, making connections possible that NRE doesn't display. My rule of thumb is that if the actual arrival at North Camp or Ash Vale is 12 minutes or more before the scheduled departure of the connecting service then it's safe to make the change without breaking into a trot!

Similarly the walk between the Farnborough stations takes 16 minutes (I am 60), making a 20 minute connection perfectly feasible.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3955


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2019, 07:26:53 pm »

Thanks FenMan - that's rather what I expected. But for BAW-BSK the Routeing Guide doesn't come into it, as there are two fares for Via Reading and Via Farnborough North. From further up or down the line the fare difference disappears and it becomes an Any Permitted (I think either via Reading or via Woking), and walking is an optional alternative.

What triggered my puzzlement about this was wanting to go from Wokingham to Brookwood. That's short but topologically challenged - a bit like trying to cross a complicated road junction on foot, and seeing the other side but being unable to see any route there. The only journeys I was offered by the NR OJP involved walking, unless I looked early or late in the day. So, if someone was not inclined to walk (not unlikely if you are visiting a cemetery!), what are the permitted alternatives? The routeing guide is not a sensible answer to the question, but does as a formality tell you.

The NRG gives: via Ascot and Ash Vale (including doubling back at Woking*), via Virginia Water and Weybridge, and via Reading and Baskingstoke(!). The OJP too gives via Ascot and via Virginia Water at odd times, but also via Guildford and Woking which costs extra - apart from that it's all walkies. I didn't see via Basingstoke offered, except overnight and followed by an error message, but when forced to it's quite happy with it (at the same 12.20/12.10 day return fare, but more if doubling back at Woking). 

So to my mind there is still an academic question as to where in the Routeing Guide it says you can break your journey on one line and join it on another - or come to that what are we meant to do with an "Interchange" (one of those orange blobs on the maps).

*I think this is a pointless relic of a time when some trains stopped at Ash Vale but not Brookwood.
Logged
CyclingSid
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 419


Hockley viaduct


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: May 14, 2019, 07:08:41 am »

This is the mental problem I have when I want to follow the Basingstoke Canal. If I do the first section, western end to Ash Vale; do I go to Basingstoke (Winchfield) from Reading and then Ash Vale back to Reading? If so what is the legitimate ticket.

Do the second section, Ash Vale to Woking, is not such a problem as Stuving suggests. Also the third section, Woking to the eastern end using Byfleet and New Haw doesn't seem so problematic.
Logged
FenMan
Newbie
*
Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 02, 2019, 10:49:49 am »

The NRG gives: via Ascot and Ash Vale (including doubling back at Woking*), via Virginia Water and Weybridge, and via Reading and Baskingstoke(!). The OJP too gives via Ascot and via Virginia Water at odd times, but also via Guildford and Woking which costs extra - apart from that it's all walkies. I didn't see via Basingstoke offered, except overnight and followed by an error message, but when forced to it's quite happy with it (at the same 12.20/12.10 day return fare, but more if doubling back at Woking). 

Sorry, I don't visit this forum very often and have just seen your post.

A routeing that doesn't involve walking or buying two tickets is available, but you may lose the will to live en route due to the lengthy journey time caused by poor connections. Here's an itinerary for Monday morning:-

11:13 d: Wokingham
11:37 a: Ash
-------
12:03 d. Ash
12:10 a: Aldershot
-------
12:34 d: Aldershot
12:46 a: Brookwood

Unfortunately it is very difficult to "force" NRE to display this route.

Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3955


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: June 02, 2019, 03:53:09 pm »

Unfortunately it is very difficult to "force" NRE to display this route.

I missed that possibility before because it isn't in the routeing guide or offered voluntarily by the OJP. Now that is bizarre, as it must be the shortest route in miles along track. But does that explain why the OJP is so reluctant to show it - if it's not a permitted route?

For this case the routeing point would be Ash Vale, and for WKM-AHV the NRG "yellow pages" give only map WW. That map doesn't even include the line from Wokingham to North Camp, so the only route it can validate is via Ascot. (To BKO there are two other routeing points).

I asked OJP for routes and fares just for WKM-AHV. Simple answer - plan A - 6 off-peak single to North Camp and walk (that's the CDS fare to North Camp). Force it via Aldershot, and it offers 14.80 via Ascot, or 10.40 to follow plan A and then do a return trip to Aldershot! Both of those are flagged as needing to tickets, so here OJP is not offering a permitted route at the "any permitted" fare!

Force it via Ash as well and it crashes, and just via Ash produces 14.90 off-peak via Guildford and Aldershot, or - at last - 7.30 changing at Ash and Aldershot. But the warning about two tickets only applies to going via Guildford, so the OJP thinks via Ash is a permitted route (and 7.30 is the only listed WKM-AHV fare, both anytime and off-peak at the same price).

There are three extra quirks visible here:

If your walk to you destination (AHV) you are charged for the journey without it (to NCM). So you don't pay to walk - which is fair enough - but if you walk part of the way mid-journey you pay the same as for train throughout.

The OJP has a secret supply of  routes it permits that the NRG doesn't - not just routes with walking legs, or indeed any off-network legs (not mentioned in the NRG but timetabled in the data feeds) but WKM-AVH via ASH too.

One permitted route (WKM-AHV on map WW) is offered by OJP but not at the "any permitted" (only) fare.

Somebody's not being at all clever here.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3955


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: June 05, 2019, 07:04:42 pm »

Watching this morning's TV on the D-day anniversary, someone was listing the groups of women involved in the liberation effort - as different as SOE and Bletchley. But they missed out military nurses, QAIMNS* and others, and that's been generally true of all the reflection on WW2 and WW1 recently.

The WW1 nurses we heard most about last November were the VADs or FANYs (partly because some became writers, of course). But those were really nursing auxiliaries, volunteers trained in first aid, while military hospitals were staffed mainly by QAIMNS. In WW2 there was less place for amateurs, but trained nurses volunteered in large numbers for the QAIMNSR (i.e. the reserve, greatly outnumbering the peacetime establishment). One of them was my Dad's cousin Isobel Spence.

And that's why I was visiting Brookwood (if you were wondering what the link was). There are many distinct cemetery areas there, one of which is the Brookwood Military Cemetery, and within that is the Brookwood Memorial (1939-45 Memorial to the Missing). That commemorates those killed abroad but with no known grave or other memorial, many lost at sea. Among them are the 1220 men and 77 women who died in the sinking of the SS Khedive Ismail, a troop ship, by a Japanese submarine on 5th February 1944 off the Maldives. That was the largest single loss of British servicewomen ever, and of the 54 from the QAIMNS on board, 9 survived. Isobel was 23.

*Queen Alexandra's Imperial Military Nursing Service, now the Queen Alexandra's Royal Army Nursing Corps
Logged
CyclingSid
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 419


Hockley viaduct


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 06, 2019, 07:02:24 am »

A time for remembrance. FANY (First Aid Nursing Yeomanry) could be a bit of a misnomer in WWII as a proportion of its members were diverted to SOE and similar organisations.
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the 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 the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page