Gross overcrowding on the 23:05 Waterloo to Poole service

[Eagle]

I accept that the DfT specify the number of trains, but surely the length of each train is up to the TOC.

Actually it isn't (at least not always). The DfT also set minimum capacity requirements on many services. This is why you get a lot of 450s going to Portsmouth, because 3x450 (12-car) holds a lot more people than 2x444 (10-car).

 

[swt_passenger]

I'm not sure if train lengths are specified by the DfT or not, but either way the TOC has incentive to cram as many people in as possible, as it reduces their costs.

One of the Thameslink ITT supporting documents is a set of tables defining the capacity required, by numbers of vehicles over time bands, so as paths are limited, that to all intents defines the average train length required.

Here's an example of what is just a footnote, regarding Uckfield line capacity, which has been mentioned in earlier threads:

... with effect from the Passenger Change Date in December 2016. From that date, the stated requirements include a minimum of three ten-car trains arriving in London Bridge from Uckfield between 0700 and 0959, with two of those trains arriving between 0800 and 0859, and a minimum of 40 vehicles arriving in London Bridge from Uckfield must be provided between 0700 and 0959...

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ment_data/file/245044/tsr-capacity-tables.pdf

 

[Tetchytyke]

In the OP's situation, SWT don't serve Wembley, so should they be expected to know that they will have extra passengers on that particular evening? ...any additional services will often need to be planned in advance and not just as passengers are turning up at the platforms expecting to get on a train.

An England international football match will attract a crowd of at least 65,000, usually more. If a TOC can't work out that their trains out of London after that match are likely to be busier than normal, then I'd politely suggest they have cotton wool between the ears.

This fixture was confirmed in September 2012, it isn't a surprise game that was announced a fortnight ago.

I'm not even suggesting that they run a football special, with the costs associated with that, but making the late train a 10-car on a Friday night shouldn't be beyond a TOC.

Sadly they make more money squashing people in like sardines- you pay the same if you have a seat or if you're sniffing someone's armpit for an hour- so there's no incentive.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So because they want to have their concerts finishing at 2300 public transport should rake up huge costs in moving the people, or maybe they should have the concerts earlier so they finish at a decent time when the buses and trains are still running! :roll:

Trains in London and the south east are still running at 2300, the issue is whether a TOC runs enough carriages on said trains to accommodate everyone who wants to travel.

If people are standing on a 5-car train as far as Winchester, and if a TOC has a depot full of extra carriages four miles down the track in Wimbledon, it doesn't take a genius to work out how to solve it. They don't even need any extra staff: scrap a Waterloo-Wimbledon ecs move and the job's done.

 

[Eagle]

They don't even need any extra staff: scrap a Waterloo-Wimbledon ecs move and the job's done.

That is assuming that the unit in question is in the right platform. Otherwise you'll have to get a driver to move it (and the lines coming out of Waterloo are so complicated and full of services, then that may require travelling as far as Clapham yard and back).

 

[Monty]

If people are standing on a 5-car train as far as Winchester, and if a TOC has a depot full of extra carriages four miles down the track in Wimbledon, it doesn't take a genius to work out how to solve it. They don't even need any extra staff: scrap a Waterloo-Wimbledon ecs move and the job's done.

Not quite job done as no 444s are stabled at Wimbledon Park overnight, so that rules that out.

 

[swt_passenger]

I'd like to know how the expected mode of travel figures pan out for a Wembley football crowd. Isn't the FA's recommendation to use National Express coachs for a start?

Let's assume about 60,000 head into Central London by tube for onward dispersal. What is the proportion of that number that's going to then leave London by main line train, and how many will get the tube elsewhere; and what is SWT's normally expected share of that overall number?

Let's assume SWT end up with about 5000 extra passengers compared to a normal Friday night. I don't suppose they all actually needed the last Poole train, so how many departures are there beyond 2305, and what's the total normal capacity? Just looked it up, there's around 200 carriages leave Waterloo from 2305 onwards each weeknight, say around 12000 seats plus standing capacity? Many of those trains are 8.455 so have stacks of standing room...

So what's the actual increase, in round numbers, caused by the football?

SWT might just have considered that the normal service usually copes OK if people actually spread themselves randomly over the large number of trains yet to depart at that time of night...

Meanwhile, anybody know what happened last night after the Poland game?

 

[Tetchytyke]

I'd like to know how the expected mode of travel figures pan out for a Wembley football crowd. Isn't the FA's recommendation to use National Express coachs for a start?

Not any more, NatEx didn't renew the sponsorship with the FA

 

[martybabes]

Still lots of posts saying how it can't be done. Where's the post that says what can be done. Come on people...

 

[Monty]

Still lots of posts saying how it can't be done. Where's the post that says what can be done. Come on people...

What currently is done can be done.

 

[Eagle]

Where's the post that says what can be done.

There isn't one because nothing can be done.

I'm sorry, I thought that was obvious.

 

[Deerfold]

There isn't one because nothing can be done.

I'm sorry, I thought that was obvious.

I understand it's very difficult under the present system but it seems a shame if there's never going to be any way of doing it - and a way of driving more people into travelling to events by car.

 

[87015]

There isn't one because nothing can be done.

I'm sorry, I thought that was obvious.

Rubbish. Strengthening off-peak, especially late night trains, even more esp Fridays, under LTP or STP is unlikely to be a major issue if the will is there for any ex-NSE operator.

Here is an example: http://www.c2c-online.co.uk/travel_information/current_timetable

 

[D6975]

A few years ago, Wales v England in the Rugby 5/6 nations was played at the Millenium Stadium on a Sat evening. FGW were worried about overcrowding on the last Eastbound train towards England that was the only realistic one that fans could hope to catch.

Their answer...
they cancelled the train and publicised the fact that fans would not be able to get home by train.

 

[vikingdriver]

SWT frequently strengthen services down the West of England line to meet demand when the private schools at Sherborne start / finish term and also when Yeovil played at Wembley, so it can be done.

 

[Drsatan]

SWT frequently strengthen services down the West of England line to meet demand when the private schools at Sherborne start / finish term and also when Yeovil played at Wembley, so it can be done.

I'm assuming that lengthening services on the WoE line and lengthening all late-night services from Waterloo is a different kettle of fish altogether.

To the best of my knowledge there's a fair amount of slack in the 159 fleet, so lengthening a couple of services will probably not be to the detriment of others. Additionally, I doubt lengthening a WoE service would require too many long-distance ECS moves: if a Waterloo to Exeter St Davids service needs to be six cars long for the length of the journey, the additional 159 can be left at Exeter Riverside sidings or returned on the next train.

 

[Eagle]

SWT frequently strengthen services down the West of England line to meet demand when the private schools at Sherborne start / finish term and also when Yeovil played at Wembley, so it can be done.

One of those things is predictable months if not years in advance (school terms), and one of those it's almost certain that there'll be a lot of passengers on this specific line (Yeovil to London).

 

[455driver]

There isn't one because nothing can be done.

I'm sorry, I thought that was obvious.

It is to us that have to work with the shambolic situation but not to those who dont have a clue about all the hoops the TOCs have to jump through just to scratch their own arse!

Anyone remember the pomp and ceremony around Virgin starting using the 90 and pretendolino on that Friday evening train?
You know the one which would have been sorted in about an hour in BR days and called a relief but now it took 6 months (I think) to sort out with all the <deleted>s patting themselves on the back telling everyone how good they are for sorting it so quickly.
That was one train on a Friday night, try sorting out a dozen in the 'modern' railway!

 

[Pumbaa]

Rubbish. Strengthening off-peak, especially late night trains, even more esp Fridays, under LTP or STP is unlikely to be a major issue if the will is there for any ex-NSE operator.

Here is an example: http://www.c2c-online.co.uk/travel_information/current_timetable

Was just about to butt in and say exactly that, but seems I was beaten...

It isn't difficult. Its not serious wonga at all, and its something that really SWT could do better with. I honestly don't know why it hasn't been done already, I suspect the answer lies with minimising mileage.

Clapham is a well known issue at night, lots of monitoring and number crunching going on there. But as with above, I have no idea if there are any plans to attempt to remedy it.

 

[306024]

........ I suspect the answer lies with minimising mileage.

Correct.

There have been different ThFO diagrams on the GE for years now to cater for the increased passenger loadings at the back end of the week. But as always it is a balancing act as mileage is a cost that can get out of control if not properly managed.

For most ex NSE TOC's, some of the claims in this thread regarding how difficult it is to plan are somewhat exaggerated. Any competent diagrammer will usually come up with a cunning plan, it depends on whether someone is prepared to sign the cheque.

 

[34D]

This isnt the railways (or bus companies) problem its the events organisers problem and they need to sort it.

To be fair, so few people take public transport, that it doesn't matter

 

[Tom B]

Monday 8 'spare' drivers, 7 of those allocated duties, 2 duties uncovered and 1 driver spare.
Tuesday 9 'spare' drivers, all 9 allocated duties, 2 uncovered duties, no drivers spare
Wednesday 10 'spare' drivers, 9 allocated duties, 1 uncovered duty, 1 driver spare
Thursday 9 'spare' drivers, 8 allocated duties, 1/2 a duty uncovered, 1 driver spare
Friday 5 'spare' drivers, all 5 allocated duties, 2 drivers in from ather depots, no drivers spare.

The drivers who are spare cannot work the uncovered duties because they are too far away from them (duty is 0500-1345 and driver is spare 1600-2430 for example), uncovered duties will be covered by drivers working their rest days.

So Mr Martybabes, with soooooo many spares sat around doing nothing how many extra trains can you run because you are obviously so much better than our resources team?

If there are regularly insufficient staff to cover the allocated duties, then employ more. If, as you say, staff are being paid O/T regularly to cover this, it will doubtless be cheaper - and then use O/T only for unexpectedly high absence, late night concerts etc.

 

[Pumbaa]

If there are regularly insufficient staff to cover the allocated duties, then employ more. If, as you say, staff are being paid O/T regularly to cover this, it will doubtless be cheaper - and then use O/T only for unexpectedly high absence, late night concerts etc.

That's why the driving school is currently bursting to the seams. One DI reckoned its the most trainees they've brought through in a year.

 

[A-driver]

If there are regularly insufficient staff to cover the allocated duties, then employ more. If, as you say, staff are being paid O/T regularly to cover this, it will doubtless be cheaper - and then use O/T only for unexpectedly high absence, late night concerts etc.

Wrong-it's always cheaper to rely on overtime. Saves costs on recruitment, training, sick leave, annual leave, uniform, HR/management costs etc.

If it were cheaper to employ more then they would do just that.

It's easy to tell TOCs to employ more drivers but people, including the DfT have been telling TOCs to do that since the late 90s and nothing has been done as they won't spend the money.

 

[A-driver]

That's why the driving school is currently bursting to the seams. One DI reckoned its the most trainees they've brought through in a year.

All TOCs do this-they will employ loads at once to make up establishments and then let the numbers dwindle down again over a couple of years before having a large recruitment drive again.

 

[Monty]

Just a passing note, the train I was working last night passed Clapham yard at around 2300 and it was still virtually empty, certainly no 444s that I could see of. So where you would source an extra unit for a 2305 service off waterloo during the week at short notice is any ones guess.

 

[maniacmartin]

If only we had the foresight to have common couplers and computer systems between different types of stock that was procured over the years. Then it wouldn't have to be a 444. The whole situation is a mess.

 

[starrymarkb]

I'm assuming that lengthening services on the WoE line and lengthening all late-night services from Waterloo is a different kettle of fish altogether.

To the best of my knowledge there's a fair amount of slack in the 159 fleet, so lengthening a couple of services will probably not be to the detriment of others. Additionally, I doubt lengthening a WoE service would require too many long-distance ECS moves: if a Waterloo to Exeter St Davids service needs to be six cars long for the length of the journey, the additional 159 can be left at Exeter Riverside sidings or returned on the next train.

There isn't that much slack in the 159 fleet - normal service requires 27 of the 30 units. However there is slack in the 158 fleet...

But yes, It's fairly easy to upgrade a daytime diagram to a double set especially as with the 159s most end up back at Salisbury at the end of service (IIRC about 5 or 6 sets overnight elsewhere)

 

[Monty]

If only we had the foresight to have common couplers and computer systems between different types of stock that was procured over the years. Then it wouldn't have to be a 444. The whole situation is a mess.

Wholeheartedly agree with you, the RSSB or whoever really needs to be enforcing a common coupling system (though I have noticed Dellner are becoming particularly popular) as well as an universal TMS that can communicate with as many types of train that is practically possible.

 

[455driver]

We have always had standard couplings, its just that they keep changing what is 'standard'.

While the Dellner is the new 'standard' coupling the actual fitments change all the time-
Physical height of the coupling,
Electrical box above or below the coupler, some foreign units have the boxes at the side.
The way the pins are configured inside the box.

So while the coupler might be the same there is no guarantee that they can physically coupler and even if they do physically couple the electrical configuration could be all wrong.

'Standards', dont you just luv em!

 

[Monty]

We have always had standard couplings, its just that they keep changing what is 'standard'.

While the Dellner is the new 'standard' coupling the actual fitments change all the time-
Physical height of the coupling,
Electrical box above or below the coupler, some foreign units have the boxes at the side.
The way the pins are configured inside the box.

So while the coupler might be the same there is no guarantee that they can physically coupler and even if they do physically couple the electrical configuration could be all wrong.

'Standards', dont you just luv em!

Bring back screwlink couplings and vacuum breaks I say!