New South Western franchise: Awarded to First/MTR

[TheAdelante]

I just hope SWR have insurance on their cab windows...

 

[theironroad]

No the key has to be removed by the driver before the door control work in the leading cab. This would increase dwell time which the DFT wanted to reduce.

I'm not going to engage further with this conversation as you clearly have no idea how swr 450/444 desiros work in the driving cab.

 

[HH]

Is that right!?? Ok chap!

I think you'll find what the DfT is actually hoping is that they simply won't exist any more.

I agree; they see the position of a train guard as similar to that of a fireman; they serve no useful purpose. That's not to say they want no on-board staff, it's rather that they want less and they want them to do what they regard as more productive things, like checking tickets and assisting customers.

 

[Robertj21a]

I just hope SWR have insurance on their cab windows...

?? Explain please.

 

[nowananorack]

I'm a bit out of date, having not used the trains recently.
Class 442's used to have door controls in the guards office and in the corridor outside the office. Also in the doorways behind the drivers cab.
All sets of controls had a rotary control for single unit/whole train operation.
444/450 controls were at each set of doors. Also the guard had to use a set of controls in one of the intermediate drivers cab to isolate a single unit for short platforms.

 

[The Ham]

I agree; they see the position of a train guard as similar to that of a fireman; they serve no useful purpose. That's not to say they want no on-board staff, it's rather that they want less and they want them to do what they regard as more productive things, like checking tickets and assisting customers.

Personally I think that in passenger safety terms it would be better if:

- all trains had driver assistance screens (which advise track speeds and the like) which tells drivers where to so the trains at platform (removes the risk of stopping in the wrong place due to different length s of units) as well as advanced ASDO with the drivers pressing a single door open button at stations (removes the need for someone to manually check to see if the train is in the right location and that they are releasing the doors on the correct side of the train). This then removes the need for guard to open the doors when the train is operating normally (they would still be trained to do door release in case of a system failure) which then speeds up door release.

- dispatch would be with guards, however on any train over 6 coaches long the guard would have a tablet that could show views from the front looking backwards and from the front looking backwards to assist with determining that dispatch is safe. These views would remain visible until the train has left the platform so that if someone where to interact with the train the guard could put on the emergency brakes.

- all guards would be first aid trained, so that they could assist when passengers (or even the driver) required assistance. (Given that one of the"needs for guards is cited as"what if the driver suffers a heart attack in a remote location?"). This could save passengers lives of there were a major incident, as even though the guard could test everyone, they could give instructions to others to stabilise some whilst they see to the rest of the train. Although there is often someone that the guard could call on to administer first aid, there could be times when there isn't anyone first aid trained on the train or the train is so busy that it will take too long for the guard to make a call for someone first aid trained and for then to get to the location of the patient.

 

[infobleep]

I've heard people pole day that South Western Railway are n doing enough to promote the delay repay scheme.

How about all guards announce it on the trains. They did that for the timetable consultation and they regularly say see it, say it, sort it.

 

[infobleep]

Deleted. Wrong thread.

 

[The Ham]

I've heard people pole day that South Western Railway are n doing enough to promote the delay repay scheme.

How about all guards announce it on the trains. They did that for the timetable consultation and they regularly say see it, say it, sort it.

It's on posters at most (possibly all, but I can't be sure) of the stations that I've traveled through since the franchise changeover, so it is reasonably well advertised in that regard. Could they do more, probably. Does it need doing, possibly, but given that for most people who don't know about it are likely to be infrequent travelers having lots of announcements on trains when the trains are on time will just annoy a lot of people.

 

[Kite159]

I see SWR/NR has started to input the amendments to this Sunday timetable into the various systems due to the engineering works around Basingstoke

Better late than never, but it is beyond a joke. Seems most other operators can input details of service alternations for planned engineering works at the 12-week point but not SWR

 

[samuelmorris]

I emailed SWR about September and October's ignored claims on the 7th, still nothing back yet, not even an automated reply telling me to wait n weeks.
By contrast I submitted a DR claim to both Greater Anglia and TfL Rail on the 9th and as of this morning both have now been approved (TfL was approved same day).

I've seen no evidence to suggest SWR's customer service is any less appalling now than it was when they took over. Such a shame. I really don't remember SWT being all that bad, and now we have another Govia-esque operation on our hands.

 

[LowLevel]

It's on posters at most (possibly all, but I can't be sure) of the stations that I've traveled through since the franchise changeover, so it is reasonably well advertised in that regard. Could they do more, probably. Does it need doing, possibly, but given that for most people who don't know about it are likely to be infrequent travelers having lots of announcements on trains when the trains are on time will just annoy a lot of people.

I believe it is written into new franchise requirements that trains with guards, hosts or whatever the on board crews happen to be called must announce that you can claim delay repay if people are likely to be entitled to it either as a result of heavy delay to their train or by missed connections, or by telling individuals when checking tickets if they become aware they're likely to be entitled.

Whenever we have trains delayed we get messages sent out to us reminding us to make these announcements.

 

[infobleep]

I believe it is written into new franchise requirements that trains with guards, hosts or whatever the on board crews happen to be called must announce that you can claim delay repay if people are likely to be entitled to it either as a result of heavy delay to their train or by missed connections, or by telling individuals when checking tickets if they become aware they're likely to be entitled.

Whenever we have trains delayed we get messages sent out to us reminding us to make these announcements.

Maybe that is happening in some cares but I'm sure if the 17:51 or 18:52 Woking arrivals from Watweloo miss the Portsmouth train from Woking, no announcement is made. Bear in mind passengers would be delayed by either 15 to 30 minutes depending on their destination along that line or possibly other connections missed to.

How practical it would be announced at the last minute, as the guard may not be aware of passengers being about to miss their connection, since it relies on the signalman at times to decide what is going to happen, is another matter.

 

[Dougal2345]

I've heard people pole day that South Western Railway are n doing enough to promote the delay repay scheme.

How about all guards announce it on the trains. They did that for the timetable consultation and they regularly say see it, say it, sort it.

Well, public-spirited railforums members could always carry sheaves of DR forms with them, ready to hand out to their fellow passengers when they're on a delayed train

 

[Domh245]

The Franchise agreement has now appeared on the DfT website, including a rather odd requirement to look at the feasibility of converting their ~30 year old DMUs into bi-modal DEMUs.

 

[infobleep]

The Franchise agreement has now appeared on the DfT website, including a rather odd requirement to look at the feasibility of converting their ~30 year old DMUs into bi-modal DEMUs.

On pages 136 and 137 it talks about having a seat off peak.

Is the off peak time defined elsewhere in the agreement or is it based on ticket type held? If the latter, you'd get one person who should have a seat within 20 minutes on a service when another should expect it straight away!

 

[Domh245]

Is the off peak time defined elsewhere in the agreement or is it based on ticket type held? If the latter, you'd get one person who should have a seat within 20 minutes on a service when another should expect it straight away!

“Off-Peak” means, in relation to any Passenger Service, the period of time outside of the Peak;

“Peak” means the Morning Peak and the Evening Peak;

So no cold hard times - but ticket validity would probably be a good benchmark to go off of.

See below

 

[infobleep]

On pages 136 and 137 it talks about having a seat off peak.

Is the off peak time defined elsewhere in the agreement or is it based on ticket type held? If the latter, you'd get one person who should have a seat within 20 minutes on a service when another should expect it straight away!

I've found the answer. Morning peak is 07:00-09:59 and evening peak is 16:00-1959 or any other such three hour and four hour time slot that the secretary of state stipulates.

 

[D235 Apapa]

I've found the answer. Morning peak is 07:00-09:59 and evening peak is 16:00-1959 or any other such three hour and four hour time slot that the secretary of state stipulates.

That indicates a long overdue update. The 'legal' (for want of a better word) morning peak has been as above for many, many years, but the evening peak has, and still is, as of today (AFAIK) 1600-1859. It's long been recognised by many that 2000 hours, or thereabouts, is a far more realistic cut off time in todays world. That's excellent news.

 

[Adsy125]

That indicates a long overdue update. The 'legal' (for want of a better word) morning peak has been as above for many, many years, but the evening peak has, and still is, as of today (AFAIK) 1600-1859. It's long been recognised by many that 2000 hours, or thereabouts, is a far more realistic cut off time in todays world. That's excellent news.

It's not really excellent news because it means that less people can expect to have a seat. In a lot of places on SWR even 1900 is relatively quiet.

 

[D235 Apapa]

It's not really excellent news because it means that less people can expect to have a seat. In a lot of places on SWR even 1900 is relatively quiet.

Post deleted

 

[dgl]

The Franchise agreement has now appeared on the DfT website, including a rather odd requirement to look at the feasibility of converting their ~30 year old DMUs into bi-modal DEMUs.

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? what sort of idiots do the have working at the DFT? converting DEMU's or EMU yes but DMMUs? the would surely need some quite heavy modification, not least finding space for both traction convertors, motors AND still have space for an engine with enough power not only to not impede acceleration but to be able to operate at a minimum of 90mph.

 

[Domh245]

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? what sort of idiots do the have working at the DFT? converting DEMU's or EMU yes but DMMUs? the would surely need some quite heavy modification, not least finding space for both traction convertors, motors AND still have space for an engine with enough power not only to not impede acceleration but to be able to operate at a minimum of 90mph.

It is only a feasibility study, but it is one that I could probably write right now! I suspect the answer may come back as "try again with more appropriate stock" - but seeing it in the franchise agreement really hammered home that bi-mode is flavour of the month/year/parliament at the DfT

 

[Matt Taylor]

Maybe that is happening in some cares but I'm sure if the 17:51 or 18:52 Woking arrivals from Watweloo miss the Portsmouth train from Woking, no announcement is made. Bear in mind passengers would be delayed by either 15 to 30 minutes depending on their destination along that line or possibly other connections missed to.

How practical it would be announced at the last minute, as the guard may not be aware of passengers being about to miss their connection, since it relies on the signalman at times to decide what is going to happen, is another matter.

No instruction about announcing delay repay has been made to SWR guards that I'm aware of, and missing a three minute connection at Woking wouldn't count anyway as the minimum connection time is five minutes.

 

[Carlisle]

It is only a feasibility study, but it is one that I could probably write right now! I suspect the answer may come back as "try again with more appropriate stock" - but seeing it in the franchise agreement really hammered home that bi-mode is flavour of the month/year/parliament at the DfT

Seeing as BR had serious proposals around 1990 to extend 3rd rail to either Salisbury or Exeter it’s a shame going by what you suggeting we’re unlikely to be any further forward almost 30 years later.

 

[43096]

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? what sort of idiots do the have working at the DFT? converting DEMU's or EMU yes but DMMUs?

Strictly speaking they are DHMUs not DMMUs.

But the point is very valid. Why is there this obsession with UPOW* multiple units?


* Under Powered Over Weight

 

[bb21]

I accept what you say, but to clarify where I was coming from, the old (as it is today) evening peak, ends at 1859, thereby train formations leaving Waterloo after this time are not regulated (in seats/capacity terms) by the DfT criteria, so in theory, the TOC could run (worst case scenario) minimal formations after 1900.

Incorrect.

Capacity is measured all day every single day on SWR, so what you said simply isn't true.

 

[The Ham]

Seeing as BR had serious proposals around 1990 to extend 3rd rail to either Salisbury or Exeter it’s a shame going by what you suggeting we’re unlikely to be any further forward almost 30 years later.

I would like to see electrification extended West from Basingstoke, however I would guess that it's likely to happen in stages (i.e. possibly taking over 5 years) to reach all the way to Exeter and so I can see the logic in having units that can take advantage of the new wires.

However where it could really be beneficial is once the wires reach Yeovil and SWR can then replace the units with straight EMU's. As then other areas could then have access to the 158/159's. My guess would be that they would be preferable to the converted 319's not least due to their air conditioning.

It could also mean that (given the SWR have funded the first units) the rest of the 158 fleet could follow as the big development costs have been covered, making the cost per unit for the rest of the fleet less than what the SWR fleet had cost.

 

[The Ham]

I've started a new thread to discuss the possible conversion of the 158/159's:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/possible-class-159-158-conversation-to-bi-modal.159925/

 

[HowardGWR]

Looking through the Agreement (posted link above) I gather that there is to be a report on whether SWR should take over cross country services to Bristol (not Cardiff for some reason) and Bristol to Weymouth. Also a service Exeter to Brighton is mentioned, along with Southampton to Swindon. Page 258.

It is supposed to be submitted in February, by the 1st, IIRC. This is all news to me. Does anyone know better /more?