Portsmouth Harbour-Cardiff Central GWR

[fgwrich]

Football fans trashed it?

Having seen some of the footage from inside St Mary’s yesterday, that wouldn’t surprise me.

 

[Dai Corner]

Having seen some of the footage from inside St Mary’s yesterday, that wouldn’t surprise me.

I daresay some traincrew look at the football fixtures before volunteering to work a rest day; either to join the other fans and watch the match or avoid them. That may have led to the cancellations?

 

[Snow1964]

I daresay some traincrew look at the football fixtures before volunteering to work a rest day; either to join the other fans and watch the match or avoid them. That may have led to the cancellations?

The strange thing is yesterday some VST trains ran as class 5 empty instead of class 1 in service. Which suggests was lack of guards rather than drivers (as the empty run as Driver only, even if guard is present).

Or perhaps drivers volunteered to do overtime if it helped them get home quicker. Which is rather inconsistent with spirit of taking action, although understandable.

 

[kw12]

The strange thing is yesterday some VST trains ran as class 5 empty instead of class 1 in service. Which suggests was lack of guards rather than drivers (as the empty run as Driver only, even if guard is present).

Or perhaps drivers volunteered to do overtime if it helped them get home quicker. Which is rather inconsistent with spirit of taking action, although understandable.

How would volunteering to do overtime help drivers get home quicker?

 

[Anonymous10]

How would volunteering to do overtime help drivers get home quicker?

If they finish a shift in Cardiff and they live on fratton with the cancelled services it may well do so. Unsure if that's what the op is referring to though.

 

[Benjwri]

So GWR could say that they aimed to provide over 7% more than the number of seats they are required (and funded) to on these routes and actually provided 99.46% . Some of the shortfall will have been due to external factors. It doesn't look too bad if you look at it that way?

And yet these minimums, which are apparently the 'minimum formation that will provide enough capacity for the forecasted passenger loading', and yet people are still being left behind on the platforms regularly, which rather suggests the forcasts are wrong, and so complaints are valid anyways. However that is also a minimum, not the target, the target is the booked formations. What you're saying is more like, in terms of grades, 'we aimed for a C, we achieved an F, but it's fine because we only just failed'.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Football fans trashed it?

As a cardiff fan who travelled to Southampton yesterday (granted from where I live in Bristol and my actual itinerary should have kept me off the direct services, but disruption on SWR meant I was on an ex Cardiff service from Salisbury), whilst I'm not going to defend the actions of those responsible if there was damage or vandalism, fans travelling yesterday weren't exactly treated well either.

The "service" provided was atrocious. Cancellations and severe delays basically happened all day. The 7.27 service from Cardiff was cancelled which meant two trains loads on the 8.27. And the 9.27 ended up being 45 ish minutes late with a long wait at Westbury (whilst being very very full, which would not have been fun for anyone involved).

I'd also add that the service I was on form Salisbury was that delayed 9.27 from Cardiff and whilst incredibly full, there didn't seem to be anyone acting in an unreasonable manner. I'd imagine the toilets may have been worse for wear through usage mind you!

I'd also say I'm bloody glad I was staying over for a friend's birthday given the atrocious service heading back to Bristol / Cardiff too. Again plenty of cancellations and severe delays, and looks like most of the services that did run were terminated early before Cardiff so god knows the fun had there.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The forecasted loading in the TFCP will be an average, not a maximum so that’s where the 6.1 and 6.2 clauses in Chapter 4.1 come in. Every NRC TOC, according to 6.1, should be planning to give every off-peak punter a seat and a peak punter should not be planned to stand for more than 20 minutes but, according to 6.2, if they haven’t got enough stock to do that, the pain should be minimised.

What is interesting is that the DfT are approving a TFCP that is far less than the TOC LTP diagrams. Whilst some might think this is sharp practise, this is how the TOCs will deal with the difference between the average loadings produced for the TFCP and their 6.1 requirements. The DfT will find it useful because if the Treasury comes looking for more savings, they can instruct the TOC to retreat towards the TFCP seat levels and, presumably, release more stock. On the other hand, as demand recovers, the DfT has headroom between current diagrams and the existing TFCP in their resetting of the TFCP capacity figures for a future timetable period.

Yesterday the whole railway was in a bit of a mess, not just GWR and not just Pompey-Cardiff.

 

[Dai Corner]

And yet these minimums, which are apparently the 'minimum formation that will provide enough capacity for the forecasted passenger loading', and yet people are still being left behind on the platforms regularly, which rather suggests the forcasts are wrong, and so complaints are valid anyways. However that is also a minimum, not the target, the target is the booked formations. What you're saying is more like, in terms of grades, 'we aimed for a C, we achieved an F, but it's fine because we only just failed'.

More like aiming for a B but just missing the pass grade which was a C despite asking for extra lessons and getting turned down. In the nationalised-in-all-but-name railway we have now the Dft specify the minimum service, allocate the resources and pay the costs and the Treasury receive the revenue.

It could be argued that the exam should be harder, but that's up to the politicians.

 

[Benjwri]

More like aiming for a B but just missing the pass grade which was a C despite asking for extra lessons and getting turned down. In the nationalised-in-all-but-name railway we have now the Dft specify the minimum service, allocate the resources and pay the costs and the Treasury receive the revenue.

It could be argued that the exam should be harder, but that's up to the politicians.

Yes, that is true from a GWR perspective. I was talking about the running of the overall 'franchise', which I would argue is a combination of both the DfT and GWR's failures, and therefore counting the DfT as 'taking the test' in the analogy.

 

[Snow1964]

I now directly work next to the line and would agree with your observations. The numbers of 2 cars has increased considerably of late.

Lot more two cars
Today (9th Dec)

1F03 2 car 158
1F05 2 car 158
1F07 2 car 158
1F09 3 car 158 (clearly borrowed as none scheduled these days)
1F11 3 car 166

just in case anyone is wondering 1F01 doesn't exist Saturdays

Sometimes think a route serving 7 cities is being treated like obscure branch line than quasi inter city

 

[Jim]

Lot more two cars
Today (9th Dec)

1F03 2 car 158
1F05 2 car 158
1F07 2 car 158
1F09 3 car 158 (clearly borrowed as none scheduled these days)
1F11 3 car 166

just in case anyone is wondering 1F01 doesn't exist Saturdays

Sometimes think a route serving 7 cities is being treated like obscure branch line than quasi inter city

1F09 is booked a 3 car 158 I think.

 

[75A]

I daresay some traincrew look at the football fixtures before volunteering to work a rest day; either to join the other fans and watch the match or avoid them. That may have led to the cancellations?

Tell you a story from the 80's:
Brighton ran a 'seagull Special' to all their away games, and the 75A drivers that were supporters would always arrange to get the 'leaving' turn from Brighton, and stay on to get to the ground for free.
On one occasion the game was in the south west (can't remember where) and driver 'R' took the train as far as Salisbury where he was relieved by a driver from further west. On the trip back he knew the driver who had the turn, and as 'R' used to be a Salisbury man himself he knew the route, so the 'western' man got off @ his home station and ' R' brought the train into Salisbury much to the surprise of the Brighton Driver & Secondman who'd gone pass to Sarum to bring thye train back.

 

[Parallel]

Lot more two cars
Today (9th Dec)

1F03 2 car 158
1F05 2 car 158
1F07 2 car 158
1F09 3 car 158 (clearly borrowed as none scheduled these days)
1F11 3 car 166

This is really poor with all those two-cars, especially considering the popularity of city visits for Christmas shopping this time of year… Friday and Saturday seems to be the busiest on this route from my observation, which seems to coincide with when shortforms are most prevalent.

Unfortunately the only GWR routes that regularly see services formed of 2 regional units are Portsmouth to Cardiff, and Exmouth to Paignton and both regularly seem to act as donor routes to stop complete cancellations elsewhere. Issue is, if you’re leaving people behind from Cosham for example, there is the question whether this is justified, or if it’s better to have a diagram cancelled elsewhere.

Judging by the number of cancellations GWR are reporting today, I’d say it’s lucky a 2 car services are even operating.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Lot more two cars
Today (9th Dec)

1F03 2 car 158
1F05 2 car 158
1F07 2 car 158
1F09 3 car 158 (clearly borrowed as none scheduled these days)
1F11 3 car 166

just in case anyone is wondering 1F01 doesn't exist Saturdays

Sometimes think a route serving 7 cities is being treated like obscure branch line than quasi inter city

Honestly I'm surprised it's running at all. It's been cancelled every time I've been at Cardiff Central this week.

The major irony is people complained when the route was consistently (and it was VERY consistent too, with perhaps one or two services a month producing a 2 car 158 + 150 combo) 3 car 158s, and I'd say the situation is far graver for capacity now these days, not the same and let alone better.

 

[Mike Machin]

It‘s getting to the point where it would probably be better to just withdraw the ‘service’ entirely. Most of us on this forum are aware of how woeful this complete on-going shambles is. But it’s completely unfair to inflict such misery on people who have paid their hard-earned money in good faith in expecting a punctual, comfortable travelling experience in a 21st century train.

The present situation is nothing short of criminal deception, it’s a complete scam - no less duplicitous than the kind of dodgy trading one hears about in internet fraud. Trading standards should become involved.

At least if the service was permanently withdrawn, people would not be drawn into being victims of the rouge traders GWR have become on this route, and it would allow them to make other arrangements for their travel rather than being conned and scammed by this on-going deception.

 

[Anonymous10]

It‘s getting to the point where it would probably be better to just withdraw the ‘service’ entirely. Most of us on this forum are aware of how woeful this complete on-going shambles is. But it’s completely unfair to inflict such misery on people who have paid their hard-earned money in good faith in expecting a punctual, comfortable travelling experience in a 21st century train.

The present situation is nothing short of criminal deception, it’s a complete scam - no less duplicitous than the kind of dodgy trading one hears about in internet fraud. Trading standards should become involved.

At least if the service was permanently withdrawn, people would not be drawn into being victims of the rouge traders GWR have become on this route, and it would allow them to make other arrangements for their travel rather than being conned and scammed by this on-going deception.

And what about for those this is their local route?

 

[Clarence Yard]

Utter wibble, MM. The reason the service has been poor in the last few days is down to the current industrial action, coupled with a disruptive derailment of 158766 at Fratton. If you have not enough crew to attach, detach, get the units on and off depot, runs the service without spinning short or if you have units sitting in the wrong place with little hope of getting them in the right place, then it is going to be a shambles, which it has been.

In P1 to P7 GWR was contracted to provide an average of 136 seats a service on that service group. It diagrammed an average of 237 seats a service and provided an average of 219 seats a service, short forming nearly 20% of services but only 1% on their individual contracted train formation commitments.

The answer to all chaos is, of course, 5 car fixed formation trains so you can get decent accommodation all the time and you then can’t get any short forms. But until the DfT get the Treasury to open their cheque book for enough decent stock, you are going to continue to be stuffed. And if the Treasury ever find out that GWR are currently diagramming to over provide on their contracted seats commitment, that could get very interesting for the DfT.

And the DfT don’t see it as an intercity service either - from who actually uses it, it’s clearly a regional service. Unfortunately the number of through journeys that do decent mileage are far outweighed by the number of short journeys on the route and that largely determines the DfT’s thinking.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

At least if the service was permanently withdrawn, people would not be drawn into being victims of the rouge traders GWR have become on this route, and it would allow them to make other arrangements for their travel rather than being conned and scammed by this on-going deception.

How is it a scam, outside of the current industrial action it suffers no worse than other routes for cancellations.

How is withdrawing the service going to make it better for users?

 

[FGW_DID]

It‘s getting to the point where it would probably be better to just withdraw the ‘service’ entirely. Most of us on this forum are aware of how woeful this complete on-going shambles is. But it’s completely unfair to inflict such misery on people who have paid their hard-earned money in good faith in expecting a punctual, comfortable travelling experience in a 21st century train.

The present situation is nothing short of criminal deception, it’s a complete scam - no less duplicitous than the kind of dodgy trading one hears about in internet fraud. Trading standards should become involved.

At least if the service was permanently withdrawn, people would not be drawn into being victims of the rouge traders GWR have become on this route, and it would allow them to make other arrangements for their travel rather than being conned and scammed by this on-going deception.

I'll have a pint of what ever you've had!!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Is there no merit in clearing the route for IET in case one happened to be available (I know availability isn’t up to much) where a 2 car 158/165 is the only other option? I know they can’t go via Bursledon due to a bridge restriction, as was the same for HSTs, but in these circumstances it could divert via Eastleigh and Hedge End? Some already run that route now.

 

[Snow1964]

Is there no merit in clearing the route for IET in case one happened to be available (I know availability isn’t up to much) where a 2 car 158/165 is the only other option? I know they can’t go via Bursledon due to a bridge restriction, as was the same for HSTs, but in these circumstances it could divert via Eastleigh and Hedge End? Some already run that route now.

I guess it would depend on the cost, if it is going to be spend millions then not going to happen, if it is just need to move handful of platform edge stones then would be sensible.

The line from Westbury to Wilton was originally broad gauge, and many bridges Salisbury-Redbridge were rebuilt as diversionary route for container trains, Redbridge-St Denys also had gauge enhancement (for big containers). So any problems are going to be on Portsmouth section

The IETs are narrower 2.70m than turbos 2.81m, but 26m long instead of 23m, so any problem areas are only going to be on sharp curves where they overhang beyond the 5cm (2 inch) narrower width each side. I can only guess body profile is different shape because I tried to do some geometry maths and found that to exceed the width envelope the curve has to be surprisingly tight radius

 

[Dan G]

Utter wibble, MM. The reason the service has been poor in the last few days is down to the current industrial action, coupled with a disruptive derailment of 158766 at Fratton. If you have not enough crew to attach, detach, get the units on and off depot, runs the service without spinning short or if you have units sitting in the wrong place with little hope of getting them in the right place, then it is going to be a shambles, which it has been.

In P1 to P7 GWR was contracted to provide an average of 136 seats a service on that service group. It diagrammed an average of 237 seats a service and provided an average of 219 seats a service, short forming nearly 20% of services but only 1% on their individual contracted train formation commitments.

The answer to all chaos is, of course, 5 car fixed formation trains so you can get decent accommodation all the time and you then can’t get any short forms. But until the DfT get the Treasury to open their cheque book for enough decent stock, you are going to continue to be stuffed. And if the Treasury ever find out that GWR are currently diagramming to over provide on their contracted seats commitment, that could get very interesting for the DfT.

And the DfT don’t see it as an intercity service either - from who actually uses it, it’s clearly a regional service. Unfortunately the number of through journeys that do decent mileage are far outweighed by the number of short journeys on the route and that largely determines the DfT’s thinking.

Strikes me that it's a very similar service to what East West Rail will be. Sure, some passengers will be riding end to end, but only a pretty small minority

 

[Snow1964]

Strikes me that it's a very similar service to what East West Rail will be. Sure, some passengers will be riding end to end, but only a pretty small minority

I think part of the problem is DfT seems to only categorise as : Intercity to/from London; Commuter; Regional;

Multiple examples around country where Regional Express should exist but doesn't (eg Liverpool-Manchester-Sheffield etc), but is treated like a local service with some through trains. The nearest they seem to have is regional via Birmingham (Cross country), but if it doesn't go to London or Birmingham generally have to put up with local trains doing extended itineraries

Clearly linking 7 cities from Portsmouth to Cardiff should fall in a Regional Express category, but it appears to be not how the DfT sees it, hence the make to with barely sufficient quantity of 30+ year old rolling stock. I would say insufficient stock, it's not even sweating assets, because that is using them intensively, but not running out so multiple trains per day are short formed.

I would happily pose a question what was last date a full service ran, without single short form or set substitution, part or full cancellation, or engineering work alteration. I suspect most people couldn't even remember the month or year. I haven't a clue, but know it wasn't in last 12 months, probably pre pandemic

 

[Dai Corner]

I think part of the problem is DfT seems to only categorise as : Intercity to/from London; Commuter; Regional;

Multiple examples around country where Regional Express should exist but doesn't (eg Liverpool-Manchester-Sheffield etc), but is treated like a local service with some through trains. The nearest they seem to have is regional via Birmingham (Cross country), but if it doesn't go to London or Birmingham generally have to put up with local trains doing extended itineraries

Clearly linking 7 cities from Portsmouth to Cardiff should fall in a Regional Express category, but it appears to be not how the DfT sees it, hence the make to with barely sufficient quantity of 30+ year old rolling stock. I would say insufficient stock, it's not even sweating assets, because that is using them intensively, but not running out so multiple trains per day are short formed.

I would happily pose a question what was last date a full service ran, without single short form or set substitution, part or full cancellation, or engineering work alteration. I suspect most people couldn't even remember the month or year. I haven't a clue, but know it wasn't in last 12 months, probably pre pandemic

Perhaps they should concentrate on the seven cities, with nice long hourly trains calling only there, and fit in whatever stoppers they can timetable and resource around them?

 

[vicbury]

Perhaps they should concentrate on the seven cities, with nice long hourly trains calling only there, and fit in whatever stoppers they can timetable and resource around them?

I really would rather not do that. It is such a useful service for so many journeys. My current main use is between Severn Tunnel Junction and Bristol Temple Meads / Bath Spa. When living in and in Bristol I used the service for a whole variety of journeys, both local and regional.

It truly should not be that hard to have five car trains on each and every service which would be sufficient 95+% of the time and help use of the route to grow.

 

[Envoy]

How do they know the number of people who travel long distance v short hops?

I have just been on a split site & put in for CDF > SOU return in Tuesday and it came up with splits at Newport, Warminster & Salisbury. So, if they are going by ticket sales and the public are aware of splits, then the powers that be will assume that this one person is not making a long trip but 3 shorter journeys.

 

[Dan G]

.

 

[Sun Chariot]

IThe IETs are ... 26m long instead of 23m

Yes, the inner and outer overhang has the potential to limit their usage over Cosham Junction to Portcreek Junction. It's a tight radius and it's access to Portsmouth (Portsea Island) from the west.
Here's Flying Scotsman negotiating it.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I guess it would depend on the cost, if it is going to be spend millions then not going to happen, if it is just need to move handful of platform edge stones then would be sensible.

The line from Westbury to Wilton was originally broad gauge, and many bridges Salisbury-Redbridge were rebuilt as diversionary route for container trains, Redbridge-St Denys also had gauge enhancement (for big containers). So any problems are going to be on Portsmouth section

The IETs are narrower 2.70m than turbos 2.81m, but 26m long instead of 23m, so any problem areas are only going to be on sharp curves where they overhang beyond the 5cm (2 inch) narrower width each side. I can only guess body profile is different shape because I tried to do some geometry maths and found that to exceed the width envelope the curve has to be surprisingly tight radius

There is also nowhere to stable IETs overnight other than at Bristol, they require shore supply connections which don’t exists at Westbury or Fratton stabling points.