• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

SWR: improving the service pattern while not increasing number of trains

Status
Not open for further replies.

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
It seems the biggest problem with the cut-down timetables still in existence (due to scarce resources) is the frequently uneven and irregular frequency, rather than less trains per se. For example see these posts regarding Basingstoke in the December timetable thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/december-2022-timetable-changes.231835/page-49#post-5878658

Wondering whether changes could be made to essentially keep the same number of trains, but retime them to give a better spread of services? Have some ideas for the SWML and Portsmouth Direct below - don't take the timings too literally, but they are just there to give an idea of a possible improved service. Also I recognise it may take several years to actually implement something like this.

For the SWML, I'd say the emphasis should be on providing regular connectivity between the larger towns, even if that's at the expense of "super-fasts" to Southampton and Bournemouth (I'm suggesting cutting the latter from 2tph to 1tph). So something like this:

xx35 to Weymouth to remain essentially unchanged, providing the one "super-fast" per hour. Perhaps the Woking stop could be removed (as there will be 2tph Woking-Southampton fasts in any case, see below) speeding this service up further.

xx05 to call additionally at Woking and Eastleigh. This would incur, perhaps, a 4 minute delay to stations beyond Eastleigh, but would allow the service to be part of a 2tph "principal towns" fast service. Essentially this service would restore the old Bournemouth semi-fast of the 70s, 80s and 90s.

xx09 to be withdrawn, replaced by xx39 below

xx39 Poole stopper to be restored, but with an altered calling pattern and terminating at Southampton Central: Clapham, Woking, Basingstoke, Winchester and Eastleigh, where the train would divide - front portion Parkway and Southampton Central, and rear portion all stations to Portsmouth via Fareham. This service would form the second "principal towns" service per hour.


Southampton-Poole stopper to be "fit in" in the best possible place (free paths/connectivity) calling at all stations from Totton onwards every hour, including Beaulieu Road. If it provides better connections or path usage, run it as two separate shuttles either side of Brockenhurst.

To compensate for a lack of fast services to Farnborough and Fleet, the xx42 Basingstoke would only call at Clapham and Woking, then all stations. (For alternative provision to Surbiton, Walton and Weybridge, see below). It would (paths allowing) then extend to Eastleigh, providing service for Micheldever and Shawford. (If paths don't work, run a Basingstoke-Eastleigh shuttle instead).

xx12 to Basingstoke - no change.

On the Portsmouth Direct I would suggest making best use of the limited resources by restoring a pattern rather like that of the 80s. So:

xx00 to Portsmouth Harbour principal stations only, i.e. Clapham, Woking, Guildford, Godalming, Haslemere, Petersfield, Havant, Fratton, PSS, PH

xx30 as above but with additional stops at Farncombe, and all stations beyond Haslemere.

xx45 stopper. To call additionally at Surbiton, Walton and Weybridge (compensating for the lack of these stops on the xx42), and then be looped at Guildford to allow the xx00 to overtake. Beyond Guildford, to call at all stations to Haslemere. This would mean that Farncombe, for example, would get even-interval (roughly) services, albeit with a change at Guildford needed for one train per hour. But this was always the pattern in the 80s anyway.

If there are resources to restore 3tph beyond Haslemere, and 2tph fast or semi-fast services to Portsmouth, I would then suggest removing Rowlands Castle, Bedhampton and Hilsea from the xx30, and extending the xx45 down to Portsmouth and Southsea.

As I said, don't take these timings too literally, it's the general service pattern I'm looking at. And as I said I don't expect such a change to happen overnight, but I think this is what the railway needs to be moving towards if we can't restore high-frequency timetables just yet - i.e. new timetables that make the best use of limited resources to provide a friendly service, rather than "2019 timetables with holes".
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
4,484
It seems the biggest problem with the cut-down timetables still in existence (due to scarce resources) is the frequently uneven and irregular frequency, rather than less trains per se. For example see these posts regarding Basingstoke in the December timetable thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/december-2022-timetable-changes.231835/page-49#post-5878658

Wondering whether changes could be made to essentially keep the same number of trains, but retime them to give a better spread of services? Have some ideas for the SWML and Portsmouth Direct below - don't take the timings too literally, but they are just there to give an idea of a possible improved service. Also I recognise it may take several years to actually implement something like this.

For the SWML, I'd say the emphasis should be on providing regular connectivity between the larger towns, even if that's at the expense of "super-fasts" to Southampton and Bournemouth (I'm suggesting cutting the latter from 2tph to 1tph). So something like this:

xx35 to Weymouth to remain essentially unchanged, providing the one "super-fast" per hour. Perhaps the Woking stop could be removed (as there will be 2tph Woking-Southampton fasts in any case, see below) speeding this service up further.

xx05 to call additionally at Woking and Eastleigh. This would incur, perhaps, a 4 minute delay to stations beyond Eastleigh, but would allow the service to be part of a 2tph "principal towns" fast service. Essentially this service would restore the old Bournemouth semi-fast of the 70s, 80s and 90s.

xx09 to be withdrawn, replaced by xx39 below

xx39 Poole stopper to be restored, but with an altered calling pattern and terminating at Southampton Central: Clapham, Woking, Basingstoke, Winchester and Eastleigh, where the train would divide - front portion Parkway and Southampton Central, and rear portion all stations to Portsmouth via Fareham. This service would form the second "principal towns" service per hour.


Southampton-Poole stopper to be "fit in" in the best possible place (free paths/connectivity) calling at all stations from Totton onwards every hour, including Beaulieu Road. If it provides better connections or path usage, run it as two separate shuttles either side of Brockenhurst.

To compensate for a lack of fast services to Farnborough and Fleet, the xx42 Basingstoke would only call at Clapham and Woking, then all stations. (For alternative provision to Surbiton, Walton and Weybridge, see below). It would (paths allowing) then extend to Eastleigh, providing service for Micheldever and Shawford. (If paths don't work, run a Basingstoke-Eastleigh shuttle instead).

xx12 to Basingstoke - no change.

On the Portsmouth Direct I would suggest making best use of the limited resources by restoring a pattern rather like that of the 80s. So:

xx00 to Portsmouth Harbour principal stations only, i.e. Clapham, Woking, Guildford, Godalming, Haslemere, Petersfield, Havant, Fratton, PSS, PH

xx30 as above but with additional stops at Farncombe, and all stations beyond Haslemere.

xx45 stopper. To call additionally at Surbiton, Walton and Weybridge (compensating for the lack of these stops on the xx42), and then be looped at Guildford to allow the xx00 to overtake. Beyond Guildford, to call at all stations to Haslemere. This would mean that Farncombe, for example, would get even-interval (roughly) services, albeit with a change at Guildford needed for one train per hour. But this was always the pattern in the 80s anyway.

If there are resources to restore 3tph beyond Haslemere, and 2tph fast or semi-fast services to Portsmouth, I would then suggest removing Rowlands Castle, Bedhampton and Hilsea from the xx30, and extending the xx45 down to Portsmouth and Southsea.

As I said, don't take these timings too literally, it's the general service pattern I'm looking at. And as I said I don't expect such a change to happen overnight, but I think this is what the railway needs to be moving towards if we can't restore high-frequency timetables just yet - i.e. new timetables that make the best use of limited resources to provide a friendly service, rather than "2019 timetables with holes".

The Portsmouth direct has already been changed in December to a pattern similar in some ways to what you are proposing. Although it’s the xx00 from Waterloo which gains the extra stops as if you put them in the xx30 it misses the ferry connection for the island.
 

infobleep

On Moderation
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
13,453
The Portsmouth direct has already been changed in December to a pattern similar in some ways to what you are proposing. Although it’s the xx00 from Waterloo which gains the extra stops as if you put them in the xx30 it misses the ferry connection for the island.
What I would like to see is 2 fast or semi-fast Portsmouth Direct trains an hour calling at Clapham Junction.

Would it not be possible to rejig the timetables to allow this? In the 80s the trains probably didn't stop there. I did read on here when they started to but I forget the answer.

Also, are the current timings of trains based around when passengers most want to travel?

For example, during the day there are 2 trains an hour to Alton and Basingstoke respectively but only 1 per hour in the evening. Does this reflect more people travelling during the day?
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
What I would like to see is 2 fast or semi-fast Portsmouth Direct trains an hour calling at Clapham Junction.
This is an odd omission which seems to have been the case for as long as I remember.

The "82" semi-fast started calling at Clapham in around 1988 (plus or minus one year). However the "81" fasts have never called, in any (IIRC) of the timetables since then. So since the "82" was looped at Haslemere in 2004, Clapham has not had a non-overtaken fast or semi-fast service to Portsmouth at all.

It's odd the Portsmouth fasts have never (IIRC) stopped at Clapham; not sure what the penalty for stopping there is (is it greater than the standard 1.5 to 2 minutes?) but I would guess not so great, because the curved line would slow down non-stops in any case. In the case of the xx30, it might be about blocking the xx35 to Weymouth. However the xx00 is followed by the xx05 which does stop at Clapham. Also in the case of the xx30, the Weymouth could (I guess?) be delayed by one minute to xx36 if that helped?
 

miklcct

Established Member
Joined
2 May 2021
Messages
5,017
Location
Cricklewood
It seems the biggest problem with the cut-down timetables still in existence (due to scarce resources) is the frequently uneven and irregular frequency, rather than less trains per se. For example see these posts regarding Basingstoke in the December timetable thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/december-2022-timetable-changes.231835/page-49#post-5878658

Wondering whether changes could be made to essentially keep the same number of trains, but retime them to give a better spread of services? Have some ideas for the SWML and Portsmouth Direct below - don't take the timings too literally, but they are just there to give an idea of a possible improved service. Also I recognise it may take several years to actually implement something like this.

For the SWML, I'd say the emphasis should be on providing regular connectivity between the larger towns, even if that's at the expense of "super-fasts" to Southampton and Bournemouth (I'm suggesting cutting the latter from 2tph to 1tph). So something like this:

xx35 to Weymouth to remain essentially unchanged, providing the one "super-fast" per hour. Perhaps the Woking stop could be removed (as there will be 2tph Woking-Southampton fasts in any case, see below) speeding this service up further.

xx05 to call additionally at Woking and Eastleigh. This would incur, perhaps, a 4 minute delay to stations beyond Eastleigh, but would allow the service to be part of a 2tph "principal towns" fast service. Essentially this service would restore the old Bournemouth semi-fast of the 70s, 80s and 90s.

xx09 to be withdrawn, replaced by xx39 below

xx39 Poole stopper to be restored, but with an altered calling pattern and terminating at Southampton Central: Clapham, Woking, Basingstoke, Winchester and Eastleigh, where the train would divide - front portion Parkway and Southampton Central, and rear portion all stations to Portsmouth via Fareham. This service would form the second "principal towns" service per hour.


Southampton-Poole stopper to be "fit in" in the best possible place (free paths/connectivity) calling at all stations from Totton onwards every hour, including Beaulieu Road. If it provides better connections or path usage, run it as two separate shuttles either side of Brockenhurst.

To compensate for a lack of fast services to Farnborough and Fleet, the xx42 Basingstoke would only call at Clapham and Woking, then all stations. (For alternative provision to Surbiton, Walton and Weybridge, see below). It would (paths allowing) then extend to Eastleigh, providing service for Micheldever and Shawford. (If paths don't work, run a Basingstoke-Eastleigh shuttle instead).

xx12 to Basingstoke - no change.

On the Portsmouth Direct I would suggest making best use of the limited resources by restoring a pattern rather like that of the 80s. So:

xx00 to Portsmouth Harbour principal stations only, i.e. Clapham, Woking, Guildford, Godalming, Haslemere, Petersfield, Havant, Fratton, PSS, PH

xx30 as above but with additional stops at Farncombe, and all stations beyond Haslemere.

xx45 stopper. To call additionally at Surbiton, Walton and Weybridge (compensating for the lack of these stops on the xx42), and then be looped at Guildford to allow the xx00 to overtake. Beyond Guildford, to call at all stations to Haslemere. This would mean that Farncombe, for example, would get even-interval (roughly) services, albeit with a change at Guildford needed for one train per hour. But this was always the pattern in the 80s anyway.

If there are resources to restore 3tph beyond Haslemere, and 2tph fast or semi-fast services to Portsmouth, I would then suggest removing Rowlands Castle, Bedhampton and Hilsea from the xx30, and extending the xx45 down to Portsmouth and Southsea.

As I said, don't take these timings too literally, it's the general service pattern I'm looking at. And as I said I don't expect such a change to happen overnight, but I think this is what the railway needs to be moving towards if we can't restore high-frequency timetables just yet - i.e. new timetables that make the best use of limited resources to provide a friendly service, rather than "2019 timetables with holes".
I don't think this is a good idea. In the current timetable the 2 fast trains spread evenly at Brockenhurst which is crucial for the Lymington connection. Anything which breaks this even spread will cause trouble timing the branch line trains, making massive service degrade at Lymington.

As the Portsmouth via Winchester and Exeter trains have both become 1tph, I suggest the Portsmouth train to be retimed on the opposite side of the hour, making the 3 Basingstoke fast trains spread even out. Also, all 3 of them will call at Clapham Junction as well, with the only train which doesn't call the xx:35 fast train to Weymouth, with the xx:20 and xx:39 can serving Clapham Junction passengers.

As the xx:09 is retimed to be the opposite side of the hour, the Winchester - Southampton can also be retimed to the opposite side of the hour as well, in such case a through service to Bournemouth can be restored without occupying the Southampton platform for an excessive time.

Therefore, the 4 Winchester / Salisbury trains per hour will be:
xx:05 - Clapham Junction, Basingstoke (48), Winchester (04), Southampton Airport (13), Southampton (21), ... (no change)
xx:20 - Clapham Junction, Woking (45), Basingstoke (06), Andover (24), Salisbury (44), ... (no change)
Winchester (xx:19) - Bournemouth stopper: Shawford (23), Eastleigh (29), Southampton Airport (34), Southampton Central (42) - wait for the fast train to pass then depart at xx:56 again
xx:35 - Clapham Junction, Woking (00), Winchester (34), Southampton Airport (42), Southampton (51), ... (add a call at Clapham Junction)
xx:39 - Clapham Junction, Woking (04), Farnborough (15), Fleet (20), Basingstoke (33), Micheldever (44), Winchester (52), Eastleigh (01), ...

In the eastbound direction, the 3 Basingstoke - Waterloo train are spread evenly, and the Bournemouth - Winchester stopper fits well, so there is no need to change the timetable. Because the westbound Eastleigh - Portsmouth train is shifted by half an hour, it will necessitate a change of interworking with the Waterloo - Portsmouth direct.

In addition, I suggest all off-peak trains call at Clapham Junction as well to improve connectivity between the major towns and peripheral London.
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
21,979
Location
Airedale
This is an odd omission which seems to have been the case for as long as I remember.

The "82" semi-fast started calling at Clapham in around 1988 (plus or minus one year). However the "81" fasts have never called, in any (IIRC) of the timetables since then. So since the "82" was looped at Haslemere in 2004, Clapham has not had a non-overtaken fast or semi-fast service to Portsmouth at all.

It's odd the Portsmouth fasts have never (IIRC) stopped at Clapham; not sure what the penalty for stopping there is (is it greater than the standard 1.5 to 2 minutes?) but I would guess not so great, because the curved line would slow down non-stops in any case. In the case of the xx30, it might be about blocking the xx35 to Weymouth. However the xx00 is followed by the xx05 which does stop at Clapham. Also in the case of the xx30, the Weymouth could (I guess?) be delayed by one minute to xx36 if that helped?
The pre Covid timetable had alternate fast line trains stopping which presumably reflected traffic levels. The time penalty on Up trains is a little more IIRC because of using the Loop.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
The pre Covid timetable had alternate fast line trains stopping which presumably reflected traffic levels. The time penalty on Up trains is a little more IIRC because of using the Loop.

IIRC the xx15 and xx45 stopped, yes - but neither was a non-overtaken Portsmouth service. The former terminated at Haslemere and the latter was looped there.

Just about every other mainline route had at least one non-overtaken train stop at Clapham per hour (e.g. Weymouth and Exeter) so seems odd the xx00 Portsmouth did not.
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
21,979
Location
Airedale
IIRC the xx15 and xx45 stopped, yes - but neither was a non-overtaken Portsmouth service. The former terminated at Haslemere and the latter was looped there.

Just about every other mainline route had at least one non-overtaken train stop at Clapham per hour (e.g. Weymouth and Exeter) so seems odd the xx00 Portsmouth did not.
I know, but then you'd have 00+15 (and maybe +45, but that seems overkill) which is better for beyond Haslemere but worse for stations nearer London.
There's no ideal solution.
 

infobleep

On Moderation
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
13,453
I know, but then you'd have 00+15 (and maybe +45, but that seems overkill) which is better for beyond Haslemere but worse for stations nearer London.
There's no ideal solution.
There is no ideal situation perhaps with the current timetable but could a revised one work or is the current timetable the best one? After all, as someone once wrote on here, in reply to the comment I posted, there will always be winners and losers.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
I know, but then you'd have 00+15 (and maybe +45, but that seems overkill) which is better for beyond Haslemere but worse for stations nearer London.
There's no ideal solution.

I was suggesting 00/15/45 - all three of them. 3 out of 4 per hour calling at Clapham is consistent with other main-line routes.
 

infobleep

On Moderation
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
13,453
...except those operated by SW.
They run too many trains if one wants more to stop at Clapham Junction in either direction.

Unless of course it's possible to rejig the timetable so more can stop, given fewer trains are running save in the peaks.
 

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
4,484
I don't think this is a good idea. In the current timetable the 2 fast trains spread evenly at Brockenhurst which is crucial for the Lymington connection. Anything which breaks this even spread will cause trouble timing the branch line trains, making massive service degrade at Lymington.

As the Portsmouth via Winchester and Exeter trains have both become 1tph, I suggest the Portsmouth train to be retimed on the opposite side of the hour, making the 3 Basingstoke fast trains spread even out. Also, all 3 of them will call at Clapham Junction as well, with the only train which doesn't call the xx:35 fast train to Weymouth, with the xx:20 and xx:39 can serving Clapham Junction passengers.

As the xx:09 is retimed to be the opposite side of the hour, the Winchester - Southampton can also be retimed to the opposite side of the hour as well, in such case a through service to Bournemouth can be restored without occupying the Southampton platform for an excessive time.

Therefore, the 4 Winchester / Salisbury trains per hour will be:
xx:05 - Clapham Junction, Basingstoke (48), Winchester (04), Southampton Airport (13), Southampton (21), ... (no change)
xx:20 - Clapham Junction, Woking (45), Basingstoke (06), Andover (24), Salisbury (44), ... (no change)
Winchester (xx:19) - Bournemouth stopper: Shawford (23), Eastleigh (29), Southampton Airport (34), Southampton Central (42) - wait for the fast train to pass then depart at xx:56 again
xx:35 - Clapham Junction, Woking (00), Winchester (34), Southampton Airport (42), Southampton (51), ... (add a call at Clapham Junction)
xx:39 - Clapham Junction, Woking (04), Farnborough (15), Fleet (20), Basingstoke (33), Micheldever (44), Winchester (52), Eastleigh (01), ...

In the eastbound direction, the 3 Basingstoke - Waterloo train are spread evenly, and the Bournemouth - Winchester stopper fits well, so there is no need to change the timetable. Because the westbound Eastleigh - Portsmouth train is shifted by half an hour, it will necessitate a change of interworking with the Waterloo - Portsmouth direct.

In addition, I suggest all off-peak trains call at Clapham Junction as well to improve connectivity between the major towns and peripheral London.

Move the xx09 Portsmouth to the opposite half hour you break the connection between services from Romsey and Chandlers Ford to Fareham at Eastleigh.

More significantly you would also bunch all 3tph between Fareham and Portsmouth within 10 minutes whereas currently two of them are half hour apart. This is a far bigger service degradation than affecting the Lymington connections.

To solve one problem you would create bigger problems elsewhere.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
Move the xx09 Portsmouth to the opposite half hour you break the connection between services from Romsey and Chandlers Ford to Fareham at Eastleigh.

More significantly you would also bunch all 3tph between Fareham and Portsmouth within 10 minutes whereas currently two of them are half hour apart. This is a far bigger service degradation than affecting the Lymington connections.

To solve one problem you would create bigger problems elsewhere.

That's a good point, as I said in my original post "don't take the timings too literally", I was trying to give an idea of the service pattern we should have.

Maybe the xx35 could call at Basingstoke in lieu of the xx05, and the xx09 could lose the Farnborough and Fleet stops (not ideal, but one has to remember that traditionally, Farnborough and Fleet were only served by the Basingstoke stoppers anyway).
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,379
the xx09 could lose the Farnborough and Fleet stops (not ideal, but one has to remember that traditionally, Farnborough and Fleet were only served by the Basingstoke stoppers anyway).
In at least one period, the Portsmouth via Basingstoke was an extension of a Basingstoke stopper as well.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
In at least one period, the Portsmouth via Basingstoke was an extension of a Basingstoke stopper as well.

Late 90s. Certainly was the case in 1997-99.

In practice, through passengers would have changed at Eastleigh, though they did work a lot of the services (perhaps 2 out of 3 off-peak) with CIGs, normally aimed at faster / longer-distance services, so maybe they were anticipating some through passengers.

I'm not sure exactly when they restored the semi-fast Portsmouth-via-Eastleigh, but it was definitely before the big 2004 change. The xx15 to Southampton Central (in 1999 there was a clockface 15-min service to there) got diverted to Portsmouth.
 
Last edited:

miklcct

Established Member
Joined
2 May 2021
Messages
5,017
Location
Cricklewood
In at least one period, the Portsmouth via Basingstoke was an extension of a Basingstoke stopper as well.

Late 90s. Certainly was the case in 1997-99.

In practice, through passengers would have changed at Eastleigh, though they did work a lot of the services (perhaps 2 out of 3 off-peak) with CIGs, normally aimed at faster / longer-distance services, so maybe they were anticipating some through passengers.

I'm not sure exactly when they restored the semi-fast Portsmouth-via-Eastleigh, but it was definitely before the big 2004 change. The xx15 to Southampton Central (in 1999 there was a clockface 15-min service to there) got diverted to Portsmouth.

Can you explain more about this? My knowledge is limited to the very recent years, i.e. the 05/35 to Weymouth, 09 to Portsmouth (Woking, Farnborough, Basingstoke, ...) and 39 to Poole (Clapham Junction, Farnborough, Fleet, Basingstoke, ...); and 00/30 Portsmouth direct fast, 15/45 slow (one of them being the Haslemere terminator - is that the 15?).

Now the 39 has gone and from December 2022, a Fleet call will be added to the 09 to compensate for the loss of 39. The Eastleigh - Fareham is normally hourly but in the afternoon peak some 12 Basingstoke stoppers are extended to make it half-hourly.

Do you mean that, in the past, there were no 09/39 but one of the Basingstoke stoppers (both in the peak) in the hour continued to Portsmouth, and for the Portsmouth direct it was a clockface 15-min service with the xx:15 going to Southampton after Havant (like the current 19:15 service)?
 

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
4,484
That's a good point, as I said in my original post "don't take the timings too literally", I was trying to give an idea of the service pattern we should have.

Maybe the xx35 could call at Basingstoke in lieu of the xx05, and the xx09 could lose the Farnborough and Fleet stops (not ideal, but one has to remember that traditionally, Farnborough and Fleet were only served by the Basingstoke stoppers anyway).

Traditionally maybe but Farnborough has had fast trains called since the mid 1990s when the SWT Shuttle was launched to Southampton. After 25 years dropping fast services would be a bit of a no, no.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top