Portsmouth - Cardiff service potential solutions?

[RPI]

So I touched on this in another thread, but a possible solution, albeit robbing Peter to pay Paul, would be to cut the Night Riviera service, which is unprofitable, and use the class 57s with most likely the mk3 coaches from the HSTs when they go, to boost capacity on the service. Ultimately GWR costs stay roughly the same, although the new service would bring in more money, so be a net benefit, and deal with the overcrowding.

Can you provide a source for your claim that the sleeper is unprofitable?

Reading your post I still can't work out whether its a joke or not? Probably be more worthwhile top and tailing the 57's with the sleeper stock on the Exmouth branch (no thats not serious, but at least some crew would be familiar as only Exeter Train Managers sign the sleepers), it's just so far fetched and unworkable that it can't have been a serious post.

 

[MattRat]

Can you provide a source for your claim that the sleeper is unprofitable?

From another thread:

Caledonian Sleeper and the Night Riviera make huge losses.

 

[Western Sunset]

West Country MPs would never allow the sleeper to be withdrawn. It's too much for their own convenience...

 

[Snow1964]

They aren't an option.

Driver knowledge will have lapsed, they aren't PRM adapted, they only go 75mph and can't go to Portsmouth in any case.

They might be a source of spares.

The 153s were converted from the 155s that worked Portsmouth-Cardiff 1988-1990, therefore seems odd they can’t go to Portsmouth unless it is just a case of old paperwork not being updated. Although the non-PRM and 75mph reasons are more obvious.

Without sounding daft, there is probably a case for extra intermediate single vehicles (without cabs), but a proportion of seats at one side replaced by large luggage stacks, as the services are used by luggage heavy cruise passengers to/from Southampton to South Wales, SW England and SW Midlands. At times there is more luggage than some trains to airports.

Some of the 5car 158 formations (on rare occasion they run) are a driving cab in all 5 vehicles which is rather wasting space

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The 153s were converted from the 155s that worked Portsmouth-Cardiff 1988-1990, therefore seems odd they can’t go to Portsmouth unless it is just a case of old paperwork not being updated. Although the non-PRM and 75mph reasons are more obvious.

The issue (IIRC) is the steps added to the "small cab" end when they were converted, which get too close to the third rail. As 155s those steps weren't there so weren't a problem.

 

[RPI]

From another thread:

Not exactly a detailed analysis is it

 

[The exile]

Indeed, and what we have at the moment is nowhere near that balance. I liked the earlier, entirely theoretical, suggestion of bi mode 170s!


With the announcement that the local authorities wish to introduce more stopping trains to the route, perhaps the Portsmouth to Cardiff trains can miss some of the smaller stations, furthering the case for alternative traction?

Nonetheless, I don’t think end vestibules are as bad as all that- many other routes (e.g London Waterloo to Weymouth, London Paddington to Worcester) run with them for the sake of the longer distance passenger, surely the not insignificant numbers of long distance travellers on Portsmouth to Cardiff deserve the same.

End vestibules and narrow doorways are ok-ish for the stereotypical London commute (everyone on at the London terminus then off at all subsequent stops - yes, I know that’s a massive oversimplification) - but less so where the churn is two-way at many stations, as it is on the Severn-Solent line (revealing my age there!)

 

[irish_rail]

So I touched on this in another thread, but a possible solution, albeit robbing Peter to pay Paul, would be to cut the Night Riviera service, which is unprofitable, and use the class 57s with most likely the mk3 coaches from the HSTs when they go, to boost capacity on the service. Ultimately GWR costs stay roughly the same, although the new service would bring in more money, so be a net benefit, and deal with the overcrowding.

I'm just imagining the look on the drivers faces at the likes of Westbury and Fratton when a PQA driver who has driven nothing but turbos and has driven for all of a year or so is told they need to learn to stop and start 57s!.... not gonna happen matey, thankfully for all concerned!

 

[RobShipway]

I'm just imagining the look on the drivers faces at the likes of Westbury and Fratton when a PQA driver who has driven nothing but turbos and has driven for all of a year or so is told they need to learn to stop and start 57s!.... not gonna happen matey, thankfully for all concerned!

I have to agree, it certainly not going to happen with class 57's on the Carddif - Portsmouth route. For 1, where is the coaching stock suppose to come from?

End vestibules and narrow doorways are ok-ish for the stereotypical London commute (everyone on at the London terminus then off at all subsequent stops - yes, I know that’s a massive oversimplification) - but less so where the churn is two-way at many stations, as it is on the Severn-Solent line (revealing my age there!)

Unless the DFT agree to new stock being purchased, I cannot see any options where money would have to be paid to convert trains to diesel or other non electric power that would not have doors at the ends in some form.

The only possibility, would be if the Avanti West Coast class 221 fleet joined the XC fleet and this in turn released some of the class 170 units for GWR to use on the Cardiff - Portsmouth route. Only other option, would be for GWR to be using the class 769 units just in diesel mode as TFW are doing. But I believe that has been discussed before in the Class 769 thread and the answer is a most defiant no to that option.

 

[MattRat]

The only possibility, would be if the Avanti West Coast class 221 fleet joined the XC fleet and this in turn released some of the class 170 units for GWR to use on the Cardiff - Portsmouth route. Only other option, would be for GWR to be using the class 769 units just in diesel mode as TFW are doing. But I believe that has been discussed before in the Class 769 thread and the answer is a most defiant no to that option.

They have to replace the XC HSTs first. Well, that and not be put into storage instead, like some Avanti 221s currently are.

 

[Snow1964]

The only possibility, would be if the Avanti West Coast class 221 fleet joined the XC fleet and this in turn released some of the class 170 units for GWR to use on the Cardiff - Portsmouth route. Only other option, would be for GWR to be using the class 769 units just in diesel mode as TFW are doing. But I believe that has been discussed before in the Class 769 thread and the answer is a most defiant no to that option.

There is some merit in using the ex-Avanti 221s to XC as they become available, thus releasing the 170s.

Would probably be easier to move the 170s to Thames Valley (and re-use the training time now not needed for 769s), thus allowing extra 165s to strengthen the short formed Cardiff-Portsmouth service. I assume the smaller fleet there means less staff to train than if 170s were added to random Wessex services.

To some extent this would be a stop-gap as it doesn’t really solve the long term problems of Cardiff-Portsmouth and its overcrowding caused by problems maintaining 30+ year old diesel trains.

Longer term (not that long term as trains would need to be ordered in 2-5 years time) is complete replacement. I have already given my views on what is needed further up thread.

 

[Energy]

There is some merit in using the ex-Avanti 221s to XC as they become available, thus releasing the 170s.

They have a lower capacity, unless they can use the higher top speed or better acceleration there is little benefit.

 

[Snow1964]

We can all see what's wrong here, but nothing will change until DfT gets revised orders from Downing Street. The Cardiff-Portsmouth route goes through plenty of rural parliamentary constituencies. Those who use this route need to get their MPs rattling cages about the awful service.

I have already done that, and contacted my MP, it will be interesting to see if I get a standard cut and paste reply or something that actually answers the points raised.

 

[Snow1964]

Page 78 of DfT new decarbonisation strategy has Filton-Bristol-Salisbury-Redbridge/Eastleigh coloured on the map as core electrification

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1009448/decarbonising-transport-a-better-greener-britain.pdf

Therefore appears just need a dual voltage EMU (although the electrification timescale isn't stated), just that it is part of planned core on the map

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Just no on so many levels!
Would love to know how you figure costs would be roughly the same!!

Locos running miles away from their maintenance depot in Penzance

Locos and rolling stock not compatible electrically

Who pays for all that crew training such as drivers

The list of reasons for NO is endless

And would also require a top and tail.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2023 ==

I'm just imagining the look on the drivers faces at the likes of Westbury and Fratton when a PQA driver who has driven nothing but turbos and has driven for all of a year or so is told they need to learn to stop and start 57s!.... not gonna happen matey, thankfully for all concerned!

Just to be pedantic, they drive Sprinters too

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2023 ==

They have to replace the XC HSTs first. Well, that and not be put into storage instead, like some Avanti 221s currently are.

XC can just about get by without a replacement for those. It won't be great for passengers, but these budget cuts never are.
You couldn't run Voyagers on Stansted, but Nottingham Cardiff would be fine, and in theory they could do some Leicester stoppers, but that's far from ideal.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2023 ==

There is some merit in using the ex-Avanti 221s to XC as they become available, thus releasing the 170s.

Would probably be easier to move the 170s to Thames Valley (and re-use the training time now not needed for 769s), thus allowing extra 165s to strengthen the short formed Cardiff-Portsmouth service. I assume the smaller fleet there means less staff to train than if 170s were added to random Wessex services.

I 100% disagree that 170s are more suited to the North Downs Line and Basingstoke/Reading than Cardiff Portsmouth. The former need the seats that the 165s can provide (and yes, the middle ones DO get used), and the latter needs a more long-distance friendly train. Pairs of 170s would be very good.

 

[FGWHST43009]

I was dismayed to read that part of the planning to replace the Castle class HSTs on the Penzance - Cardiff route will be switching 158s from the Portsmouth - Cardiff route.

Although many services are diagrammed for 5 coaches (165+166), in practise anything from 2,3,4 and 5 cars are actually provided. I have been on 3 car trains where there is excessive dwell time at stations where passengers attempt to cram into a train that is already full of standing passengers or attempt to fight their way through the crowd to alight. I have also been on trains where passengers have been unable to board and have been left behind.

The service seems prone to cancellations due to issues with rolling stock. Two recent examples:

On 15/12 the 0721 Portsmouth - Cardiff was diverted between Fareham and Southampton via Eastleigh. It was cancelled at Southampton due to a problem with the traction equipment (MD).

The following 0823 Portsmouth - Cardiff was also terminated at Southampton. I understand that unit was then used to drag the failed unit somewhere for attention.

Today (29/12) the 0810 Southampton - Cardiff was cancelled due to a problem with the train (M8). The 1123 Portsmouth - Cardiff was also cancelled. According to the displays at Southampton, this was due to the lack of serviceable trains.

Clearly, this service is struggling. I would be interested to know how many days in 2022 every train scheduled on this route has actually run from end to end of its planned journey.

Switching 158 units away from this route will only lead to an even worse service.

One of the issues I've identified is that the Cardiff-Portsmouth service is trying to do too many things at the same time. It's trying to be an inter-city, regional and commuter train all in one. It connects several cities that vary in size and population. It also stops at many places in between and it's the fastest service between Southampton and Portsmouth. All sometimes operated by a single Class 165.

 

[JohnRegular]

One of the issues I've identified is that the Cardiff-Portsmouth service is trying to do too many things at the same time. It's trying to be an inter-city, regional and commuter train all in one. It connects several cities that vary in size and population. It also stops at many places in between and it's the fastest service between Southampton and Portsmouth. All sometimes operated by a single Class 165.

That may be the case, but as I said in post 77 of this thread, there's just not many stops you'd want to drop. If Dilton Marsh could get a regular service (extension of the Swindon-Westbury to Salisbury) you could drop the occasional calls there. Hardly transformational.
All of the regular stops are well used enough to justify the calls, in my opinion.

 

[FGWHST43009]

That may be the case, but as I said in post 77 of this thread, there's just not many stops you'd want to drop. If Dilton Marsh could get a regular service (extension of the Swindon-Westbury to Salisbury) you could drop the occasional calls there. Hardly transformational.
All of the regular stops are well used enough to justify the calls, in my opinion.

So surely the solution would just be extra rolling stock?

 

[JohnRegular]

So surely the solution would just be extra rolling stock?

Yes.

 

[Snow1964]

So surely the solution would just be extra rolling stock?

And a few short platform extensions to enable a fleet of pairs of 3 car units, as forming a 2+3 often seems to be difficult as need ava units of both types to get correct formation.

Some platforms only need few metres, not 23m extra extensions, and many can take 6car (or longer) trains anyway.

 

[FGWHST43009]

Yes.

Slightly off topic but while it's more expensive, it's technically quicker to get from Cardiff to Southampton by going via Reading. On a different note, if I was playing Transport Tycoon I'd build a fast line connecting Cardiff, Newport, Bristol, Bath, Salisbury, Southampton and Portsmouth but hey

 

[GWVillager]

Slightly off topic but while it's more expensive, it's technically quicker to get from Cardiff to Southampton by going via Reading. On a different note, if I was playing Transport Tycoon I'd build a fast line connecting Cardiff, Newport, Bristol, Bath, Salisbury, Southampton and Portsmouth but hey

The crucial factor here is prices in reality are considerably different to that in Transport Tycoon!

Cardiff to Southampton may be slightly quicker via Reading but it is more complicated (as well as expensive, as you point out) and hardly a realistic alternative for most. Many passengers on this line carry large amounts of luggage, which is somewhat harder to deal with on a Voyager with changes. You then have to get to Portsmouth too.

 

[FGWHST43009]

The crucial factor here is prices in reality are considerably different to that in Transport Tycoon!

Cardiff to Southampton may be slightly quicker via Reading but it is more complicated (as well as expensive, as you point out) and hardly a realistic alternative for most. Many passengers on this line carry large amounts of luggage, which is somewhat harder to deal with on a Voyager with changes. You then have to get to Portsmouth too.

I'd say one of the major factors preventing the use of longer stock on the route is St Denys curve. I think if another electric fast service is provided between Southampton and Portsmouth, then passengers travelling on that section could be encouraged to use that service instead. That could relieve the pressure off the current service.

 

[GWVillager]

I'd say one of the major factors preventing the use of longer stock on the route is St Denys curve. I think if another electric fast service is provided between Southampton and Portsmouth, then passengers travelling on that section could be encouraged to use that service instead. That could relieve the pressure off the current service.

I still think they best bet lies in the Portsmouth to Cardiff service itself, it clearly generates enough demand the trains just need to meet it. As for train length, SDO is not entirely out of the question is it?

 

[JonathanH]

I think if another electric fast service is provided between Southampton and Portsmouth, then passengers travelling on that section could be encouraged to use that service instead.

Such a service would be difficult to fit in given the need to run the stopping service as well on that section. Indeed, a second stopper might be worthwhile as well.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Cardiff to Portsmouth is a thorn in the side of GWR, and it barely belongs to it either. It's like the North Downs - you could make a case for SWR running it as well (particularly if you assume the practice of using TfW crew between Cardiff and Bristol on some services would make the thing more viable).

If you were doing it properly, you'd provide a regular 5 car. It's 8 circuits, so you'd do the 166s up properly to include provision for the luggage and some catering, like a trolley. You then tag a 165 onto each one, and make that the "capacity buster". Those 166s, done up and providing catering, would also then be very good for an overlay service between Swindon and Southampton (every 2 hours), Bristol and Southampton (every 2 hours) and Bristol and Weymouth (every 2 hours), so Westbury-centric stuff would have catering.

 

[FGWHST43009]

Cardiff to Portsmouth is a thorn in the side of GWR, and it barely belongs to it either. It's like the North Downs - you could make a case for SWR running it as well (particularly if you assume the practice of using TfW crew between Cardiff and Bristol on some services would make the thing more viable).

If you were doing it properly, you'd provide a regular 5 car. It's 8 circuits, so you'd do the 166s up properly to include provision for the luggage and some catering, like a trolley. You then tag a 165 onto each one, and make that the "capacity buster". Those 166s, done up and providing catering, would also then be very good for an overlay service between Swindon and Southampton (every 2 hours), Bristol and Southampton (every 2 hours) and Bristol and Weymouth (every 2 hours), so Westbury-centric stuff would have catering.

Are 6, 7 or 8 car trains possible? I mean, more stock would definitely be needed to make that happen. Would the services still go to Cardiff? Also what are the restrictions at St Denys curve, in terms of which trains can and can't traverse the curve? Considering how built-up the area is, it's virtually impossible to straighten it

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Would the services still go to Cardiff? Also what are the restrictions at St Denys curve, in terms of which trains can and can't traverse the curve? Considering how built-up the area is, it's virtually impossible to straighten it

I'm not aware of what these restrictions are, but I'm sure someone can explain.

One of the main issues with this route, of course, is the extremely bad signalling spacing.

 

[RobShipway]

The St Denys curve is quite bendy and a I doubt that trains such as the length of coaches of the IET trains would be able to go round the curve easily.

I am beginning to think that a better idea would be new trains rather than using class 166/165 or units that other Operators are stopping leasing. I would say that perhaps a six coach version of Class 755/756 would be ideal with tri-mode capacity, especially if it included the luggage spaces and trolley spaces as mentioned above by 4-Sub 4732. However, I know that it would be difficult, if not impossible for any ROSCO to either get or provide finance for such trains.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I would say that perhaps a six coach version of Class 755/756 would be ideal with tri-mode capacity, especially if it included the luggage spaces and trolley spaces as mentioned above by 4-Sub 4732. However, I know that it would be difficult, if not impossible for any ROSCO to either get or provide finance for such trains.

You also aren’t allowed under UK law allowed to just go out and procure a particular class of train - you have to go out to procure certain functionality and see what the market responds with. You can make the specification quite ‘tight’ which whilst it might make sure you end up the train you want it’ll probably be at higher price as there won’t be any competition to drive a deal.