Do you think Thameslink has failed? And what can be done to fix it

[NorthKent1989]

Before any assumes this let me just say that I’m not bashing Thameslink, this is just a genuine question.

But it does seem that the majority of people who live on the newly expanded Thameslink network aren’t happy and have valid complaints, people have seen journey times slowed down or downgraded, some stations haven’t even had a train stop there since the changeover began (see Higham)

The thing I found strange about Thameslink in particular is that it had not real finalised destination, at least South of Thames until 2016 at least, unlike Crossrail which had its routes finalised years before construction began (bar the late in the day Reading extension which makes sense)

Is Thameslink being overly ambitious about running 24tph in the peaks

 

[Agent_Squash]

But it does seem that the majority of people who live on the newly expanded Thameslink network aren’t happy and have valid complaints, people have seen journey times slowed down or downgraded, some stations haven’t even had a train stop there since the changeover began (see Higham)

Journey times being reflective of what they actually are (instead of being later and later). I also think several trains have stopped at Higham since TL started operating...

I appreciate that the service has been abhorrent, but it's not been as bad as you're making it out to be...

 

[Abpj17]

I think the facts speak for themselves.

It was a poor service before the timetable change, and now service is varying between non-existent and dreadful.

The two tables below are (1st) morning 8am to midday from Leagrave to City Thameslink and (2nd) 8pm to midnight from Blackfriars to Leagrave. This is a fair representation of my commuting experience - a sea of cancellations and delays. And this is against the timetable, it ignores the fact that we lost around a third of services even if the timetable change had been successful. And this is on a route that has been served for at least 20 years by successive franchises.

With what's left in the timetable, there seem to be gaps of an hour or two, followed by four trains in a narrow window. I've survived in the evening merely by targeting that window at night (23:50 - 00:20) and at least a couple of them have turned up. And in the morning by allowing an additional hour or so (ugh) and by not leaving the house until I can see the train has departed Bedford whenever possible (this trick only works outside rush hour though due to local traffic).

 

[talldave]

Journey times being reflective of what they actually are (instead of being later and later). I also think several trains have stopped at Higham since TL started operating...

Indeed a few have, I was on one of them, but a handful of trains a week is not a service is it? It's pathetic.

I appreciate that the service has been abhorrent, but it's not been as bad as you're making it out to be...

It has!!

 

[NorthKent1989]

Journey times being reflective of what they actually are (instead of being later and later). I also think several trains have stopped at Higham since TL started operating...

I appreciate that the service has been abhorrent, but it's not been as bad as you're making it out to be...

It’s pretty bad when Peterborough to Horsham trains haven’t been going through the core as much as they should have and the last Thameslink trains to Medway have often been at 1800hrs.......pretty shoddy

So how can it be fixed because it needs to be fixed

Also sorry for starting another Thameslink thread but I wasn’t sure if my question would be answered on the other thread

 

[Robertj21a]

1. No

2. It's early days. Anything new has bugs to resolve.

.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

1. No

2. It's early days. Anything new has bugs to resolve.

.

..and in the meantime some people are losing their jobs as a result - what have the TOC apologists to say to them ?

 

[higthomas]

..and in the meantime some people are losing their jobs as a result - what have the TOC apologists to say to them ?

Well clearly what has happened is completely unacceptable. To those people I guess all one can say is sorry, we (they) got this very very wrong.
Therefore so far Thameslink has failed. Whether that means that the whole endeavor will be seen to have failed in 5 years time, I don't think we can say.

 

[3141]

1. No

2. It's early days. Anything new has bugs to resolve.

.

I agree with 1. No. According to posts on the other thread, it's not Thameslink that has failed, but GTR's inability to have enough drivers retrained to operate it.

But as for 2, the bugs should be sorted out before anything new starts, not tested on the passengers. The car industry used to be like that, and it could be two years before the inadequacies of a new model that the manufacturer had failed to sort out were all discovered by new owners and production finally became reliable. The excuse "it's early days" three weeks after a new timetable has started suggests complacency and a complete lack of concern for rail travellers.

 

[gingerheid]

My wonder.... should once they have enough trained drivers (and for a while at least) they give up on advertising services as going past the core and advertise them as South of London to St P and North of London to Blackfriars?

They could do driver changeovers at these places, and decide what the final destination of the train was when it entered the core based on where the timetable showed a train of that length was due to go to next and that they had a driver for?

This way, assuming the right number of trains entered the core in the first place, they could reset delays and prevent disruption snowballing across the network?

A lot of the benefit of Thameslink would still be achieved (taking you to more parts of London without a change, reducing the total number of changes in your journey, making some changes sane platform and easier), but if course not all.

It wouldn't work at the moment, of course...

 

[Class465fan]

I appreciate that the service has been abhorrent, but it's not been as bad as you're making it out to be.

Well it is though. People are getting really stressed (and also getting to school/college/work late) just because of their appalling services and constantly having to change for another service just because of GTR mess.

 

[the Rat]

My wonder.... should once they have enough trained drivers (and for a while at least) they give up on advertising services as going past the core and advertise them as South of London to St P and North of London to Blackfriars?

They could do driver changeovers at these places, and decide what the final destination of the train was when it entered the core based on where the timetable showed a train of that length was due to go to next and that they had a driver for?

This way, assuming the right number of trains entered the core in the first place, they could reset delays and prevent disruption snowballing across the network?

A lot of the benefit of Thameslink would still be achieved (taking you to more parts of London without a change, reducing the total number of changes in your journey, making some changes sane platform and easier), but if course not all.

It wouldn't work at the moment, of course...

Something similar did cross my mind, at least initially until the new timetable had bedded in - as you say, you'd achieve a large part of the TL ambition to reduce LU traffice but you'd also minimise delays but cutting the journey times to a more manageable length.

However I don't think the infrastructure at either STP or BFR is equipped to deal with terminating trains.

 

[Agent_Squash]

Well it is though. People are getting really stressed (and also getting to school/college/work late) just because of their appalling services and constantly having to change for another service just because of GTR mess.

I didn't say it wasn't bad - it's just the member in question claimed that there had been no service at all at some stations.

 

[Robertj21a]

..and in the meantime some people are losing their jobs as a result - what have the TOC apologists to say to them ?

They must have very poor employers.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I didn't say it wasn't bad - it's just the member in question claimed that there had been no service at all at some stations.

Okay so ther have been some services, but In Higham’s case there’s have been no trains for up to 6 hours on some days while HS1 trains sail on by

The kinks should have been sorted out long before passengers were due To travel on Thameslink, of Thameslink weren’t ready they should have delayed this to the summer or to Be on the safer side until December

 

[Class465fan]

So why are no trains stopping at higham?

 

[NorthKent1989]

So why are no trains stopping at higham?

HS1 should stop at least 1tph at Higham, I know that because of the long gaps between services Higham is relying on a replacement bus service to Gravesend and Strood

 

[talldave]

Something similar did cross my mind, at least initially until the new timetable had bedded in - as you say, you'd achieve a large part of the TL ambition to reduce LU traffice but you'd also minimise delays but cutting the journey times to a more manageable length.

However I don't think the infrastructure at either STP or BFR is equipped to deal with terminating trains.

Since you've taken to using the same gobbledygook as Thameslink, and they can't explain what it means, could you please explain what on earth "bedding in" a timetable actually means?

The timetable exists and, if the drivers existed to drive all the trains, all the services on the timetable would be running. Job done. That should have happened on the 20th May. If it's not flawed, then there's nothing needs doing to it. So no amount of "bedding in" what ever that actually is, is going to make any difference until there are some drivers.

What seems to have happened is that the timetable has been pruned (or hacked to pieces) with a machete to take account of there being very few drivers available. A bit more honesty about this from Thameslink would be appreciated by passengers, rather than meaningless phrases that sound like they're the result of a drug-induced corporate focus group session.

 

[jon0844]

In the grand scheme if things, once the timetable is fixed - even if it takes six months - I think most people will forget. Just like a flight from hell with loads of delays, but once you're home you feel relieved and forget about the pain suffered.

The issues running the service haven't really been tested yet as the service isn't running at full capacity yet. So we can't know until that happens and we see how things cope when a train breaks down or the wires come down etc.

 

[the Rat]

Since you've taken to using the same gobbledygook as Thameslink, and they can't explain what it means, could you please explain what on earth "bedding in" a timetable actually means?

The timetable exists and, if the drivers existed to drive all the trains, all the services on the timetable would be running. Job done. That should have happened on the 20th May. If it's not flawed, then there's nothing needs doing to it. So no amount of "bedding in" what ever that actually is, is going to make any difference until there are some drivers.

What seems to have happened is that the timetable has been pruned (or hacked to pieces) with a machete to take account of there being very few drivers available. A bit more honesty about this from Thameslink would be appreciated by passengers, rather than meaningless phrases that sound like they're the result of a drug-induced corporate focus group session.

I think good planning should always contain a contingency, so allowing something to work for a while before augmenting is often a better option. In any case I wasn't referring to the current timetable but discussing other ways this project might have been approached. Purely hypothetical.

I agree that there should be no excuses for things disintegrating as quickly or as disasterously as they have, especially after the time, effort and money spent, but life is rarely black and white.

It's nice to know the language police are still out there.

 

[MML]

For the MML, I think the following service pattern would work:

2 tph - Thameslink Express (Bedford-Luton-St Albans) - 700/1 - destination Gatwick Airport
2 tph - Thameslink Fast (Bedford all stations to St Albans) - 700/1 - destination Brighton
2 tph - Thameslink Semi-Fast (Bedford all stations to Elstree, West Hampstead) - 700/0 - destination East Grinstead
2 tph - Thameslink Semi-Fast (Luton all stations to Elstree, West Hampstead) - 700/0 - destination Rainham
4 tph - Thameslink Slow (Luton all stations to St.Pancras) - 700/0 - destination Orpington
4 tph - Thameslink Slow (St Albans all stations to St Pancras) - 700/0 - destination Sutton
2 tph - Thameslink Slow (Cricklewood all stations to St Pancras) - 700/0 - destination Rainham

For GN:
2 tph - Thameslink Fast (Cambridge all stations to Royston, Stevenage, Finsbury Park) - 700/0 - destination Brighton
2 tph - Thameslink Semi-Fast (Cambridge all stations to Hitchin, Stevenage, Finsbury Park) - 700/0 - destination Gatwick Airport
2 tph - Thameslink Semi-Fast (Peterborough all stations to Hitchin, Stevenage, Finsbury Park) - 700/1 - destination Horsham
All remaining GN fast and semi-fast services operate to KX, with slow services operating to Moorgate.

18 x MML and 6 x GN services per hour giving the maximum 24 tph through the core.
Drivers based at Bedford, Luton, St Albans and Cricklewood.
Drivers based at Cambridge, Horsham and Peterborough.

 

[Daz28]

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Thameslink timetable. If and when GTR start to deliver the service we will find out how good or bad it actually is.

Thameslink is essential. Whilst there may not be a huge demand for end to end journeys North to South or vice versa, there is demand for destinations North and South of the traditional London terminals. The key benefit is increased capacity. Delivering 24tph through the core is the equivalent of two new six platform terminals, something that would never have been achieved.

Delivering a rail service is of course complex, but the fundamentals are simple. They need to get the right driver, with the right train to the right place at the right time. If you don’t have enough trained drivers, then you have no chance of getting the other three things right. When things go wrong, you can mitigate some of the pain with strong leadership and excellent communication. GTR seem to have all but two of those qualities.

When we were promised a “Turn up and Go” service, we didn’t realise that was only from the drivers perspective.

 

[TimG]

It has been a failure. It will be very successful for many.

 

[Robertj21a]

Since you've taken to using the same gobbledygook as Thameslink, and they can't explain what it means, could you please explain what on earth "bedding in" a timetable actually means?

The timetable exists and, if the drivers existed to drive all the trains, all the services on the timetable would be running. Job done. That should have happened on the 20th May. If it's not flawed, then there's nothing needs doing to it. So no amount of "bedding in" what ever that actually is, is going to make any difference until there are some drivers.

What seems to have happened is that the timetable has been pruned (or hacked to pieces) with a machete to take account of there being very few drivers available. A bit more honesty about this from Thameslink would be appreciated by passengers, rather than meaningless phrases that sound like they're the result of a drug-induced corporate focus group session.

If you really don't know what most people mean by 'bedding in' then it must be quite difficult to enter into any debate on a forum such as this.

 

[jon0844]

I think good planning should always contain a contingency, so allowing something to work for a while before augmenting is often a better option. In any case I wasn't referring to the current timetable but discussing other ways this project might have been approached. Purely hypothetical.

I agree that there should be no excuses for things disintegrating as quickly or as disasterously as they have, especially after the time, effort and money spent, but life is rarely black and white.

It's nice to know the language police are still out there.

I think they perhaps spent too much time coming up with solutions to the more likely problems, like a broken down train, a train arriving out of position (but not 50 minutes late!) and so on. Seems they didn't consider the driver issues!

 

[the Rat]

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Thameslink timetable. If and when GTR start to deliver the service we will find out how good or bad it actually is.

Technically you are bang on - are we seeing this timetable in action - no - so how can we judge.

But the reality is, given how poor things have been so far, will anyone believe that this timetable can be delivered, especially by GTR. And then, if delivered, will there be more winners than losers? That in itself will go a long way to determine whether it has been a success.

 

[talldave]

If you really don't know what most people mean by 'bedding in' then it must be quite difficult to enter into any debate on a forum such as this.

OK, so maybe my hat has devil's advocate printed on the front. Had the timetable been implemented on the 20th May and some conflicts/problems had been found then you could imagine a process of debugging/tweaking schedules to improve things - and that could conceivably be referred to as bedding in. But Thameslink are attempting to describe their current unmitigated disaster, where random trains run and stop based on someone throwing darts at a dart board (or so it appears!), as bedding in. It's just a total shambles and, if anything, is getting worse. It's surely guaranteed to get worse still as the school holidays arrive and drivers understandably take their holidays?

 

[The Box Photter]

OK, so maybe my hat has devil's advocate printed on the front. Had the timetable been implemented on the 20th May and some conflicts/problems had been found then you could imagine a process of debugging/tweaking schedules to improve things - and that could conceivably be referred to as bedding in. But Thameslink are attempting to describe their current unmitigated disaster, where random trains run and stop based on someone throwing darts at a dart board (or so it appears!), as bedding in. It's just a total shambles and, if anything, is getting worse. It's surely guaranteed to get worse still as the school holidays arrive and drivers understandably take their holidays?

This. It's like trying to call some flour, eggs, cheese and milk a souffle. Mix them all together in the correct proportions and bake for the right amount of time in an oven and you've got a souffle. At the moment, the Thameslink timetable is just flour, eggs, cheese and milk. You wouldn't expect to feed that to a punter in a posh restaurant and expect them to say; "Mmmm, what a lovely souffle".

Thameslink was barely functioning as it was. There was still a driver shortage, the trains were unreliable and services were skip-stopping like crazy at either end of the routes to make up time because of out of course delays. When it worked, it was adequate at best and bearable sometimes. After nearly 15 years of commuting on Thameslink/FCC/Thameslink, I can honestly say that the most reliable period for service was during the St Pancras blockade, when all trains terminated at St Pancras High Level. It isn't surprising since it meant that our trains didn't get marooned in 3rd rail land because of the famous "signal failure at Balcome".

Instead of having two separate commuter flows north and south, each of around 60 miles, Thameslink created a 120-mile delay magnet, running over poorly maintained infrastructure south of the river and beneath bargain-basement OHLE north of St Pancras. Chuck in only having just about enough drivers and poorly-designed trains, and you've a potent recipe for daily mayhem.

Thameslink has now become a byword for failure and poor service. It needs a re-brand and a re-think.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

For the MML, I think the following service pattern would work:

2 tph - Thameslink Express (Bedford-Luton-St Albans) - 700/1 - destination Gatwick Airport
2 tph - Thameslink Fast (Bedford all stations to St Albans) - 700/1 - destination Brighton
2 tph - Thameslink Semi-Fast (Bedford all stations to Elstree, West Hampstead) - 700/0 - destination East Grinstead
2 tph - Thameslink Semi-Fast (Luton all stations to Elstree, West Hampstead) - 700/0 - destination Rainham
4 tph - Thameslink Slow (Luton all stations to St.Pancras) - 700/0 - destination Orpington
4 tph - Thameslink Slow (St Albans all stations to St Pancras) - 700/0 - destination Sutton
2 tph - Thameslink Slow (Cricklewood all stations to St Pancras) - 700/0 - destination Rainham

For GN:
2 tph - Thameslink Fast (Cambridge all stations to Royston, Stevenage, Finsbury Park) - 700/0 - destination Brighton
2 tph - Thameslink Semi-Fast (Cambridge all stations to Hitchin, Stevenage, Finsbury Park) - 700/0 - destination Gatwick Airport
2 tph - Thameslink Semi-Fast (Peterborough all stations to Hitchin, Stevenage, Finsbury Park) - 700/1 - destination Horsham
All remaining GN fast and semi-fast services operate to KX, with slow services operating to Moorgate.

18 x MML and 6 x GN services per hour giving the maximum 24 tph through the core.
Drivers based at Bedford, Luton, St Albans and Cricklewood.
Drivers based at Cambridge, Horsham and Peterborough.

Missing 2 tph there for the Sutton loop , - could start in the Blackfriars Bay though

 

[the Rat]

OK, so maybe my hat has devil's advocate printed on the front. Had the timetable been implemented on the 20th May and some conflicts/problems had been found then you could imagine a process of debugging/tweaking schedules to improve things - and that could conceivably be referred to as bedding in. But Thameslink are attempting to describe their current unmitigated disaster, where random trains run and stop based on someone throwing darts at a dart board (or so it appears!), as bedding in. It's just a total shambles and, if anything, is getting worse. It's surely guaranteed to get worse still as the school holidays arrive and drivers understandably take their holidays?

Just because Thameslink inappropriately uses a phrase to describe their shambolic cock-ups, it does not take it out of the lexicon of English language for the rest of us.

And if Thameslink honestly think that this disaster is simply 'bedding in', I can't honestly imagine a more unstable bed...