Yet Another Dire Day On The North Downs Line

[Deepgreen]

Today has seen a large number of cancellations on the North Downs line. Train crew issues, 'being replaced with a slower train' and 'unknown cause' are among the reasons shown on RTT so far today. Service performance has been dipping steadily again of late, and shows no sign of improving. Does anyone have any light to shed on the background to this, other than the general lack of rolling stock?

 

[800301]

Today has seen a large number of cancellations on the North Downs line. Train crew issues, 'being replaced with a slower train' and 'unknown cause' are among the reasons shown on RTT so far today. Service performance has been dipping steadily again of late, and shows no sign of improving. Does anyone have any light to shed on the background to this, other than the general lack of rolling stock?

Lack of turbos mainly due to cab air cooling faults, which binned off the Bedwyn Shuttle, Basingstoke, Windsor and Greenfords yesterday at various points alongside other faults.

Staff coverage hasn’t been wonderful this week either, tomorrow isn’t looking much better down west either

 

[DelW]

There have been signalling problems on the Portsmouth Direct for the last few days, blamed on the hot weather, affecting NDL trains through Guildford.

When I was travelling on Thursday afternoon, a failure around Shalford Junction meant that there were no northbound trains through Guildford tunnels between 15:30 and 16:30, delaying two Reading bound trains as well as delaying or cancelling SWR services. Southbound were being delayed as well, and the only Portsmouth bound service I saw unusually used p5.

The 15:43 Guildford to Reading left at 16:32 and ran non-stop to Reading in just over 30 minutes.

 

[Deepgreen]

Awful yet again today with many cancellations attributed to the "late arrival of an inbound service". From a quick look, none of the trains were more than about 12 minutes late (although I may have missed stuff). This is so poor.

 

[Stephen42]

Awful yet again today with many cancellations attributed to the "late arrival of an inbound service". From a quick look, none of the trains were more than about 12 minutes late (although I may have missed stuff). This is so poor.

YI is a reactionary attribution, that the problem is caused from another incident. Late arrival in this context can include no arrival at all. The public information system has the cancellations down as more trains needing repair than usual.

1O56 cancelled due to no available stock (and several services later on the same diagram attributed as YI) and 1O61 failed at Guildford with a traction issue (and similarly the services it goes on to work attributed as YI). Real Time Trains won't show skipped stops unless it infers a skip, I can't see any where a returning working has been cancelled due to late running of the previous working today.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Awful yet again today with many cancellations attributed to the "late arrival of an inbound service". From a quick look, none of the trains were more than about 12 minutes late (although I may have missed stuff). This is so poor.

They've rostered the 165s to destruction with the new timetable and should have soldiered on with the 769s now we will be left with an issue for many years as there no way they can release any from the West of England even when the 175s get brought into use.

 

[Deepgreen]

YI is a reactionary attribution, that the problem is caused from another incident. Late arrival in this context can include no arrival at all. The public information system has the cancellations down as more trains needing repair than usual.

1O56 cancelled due to no available stock (and several services later on the same diagram attributed as YI) and 1O61 failed at Guildford with a traction issue (and similarly the services it goes on to work attributed as YI). Real Time Trains won't show skipped stops unless it infers a skip, I can't see any where a returning working has been cancelled due to late running of the previous working today.

Thank you. However, from the passengers' point of view, yet another terrible day.

 

[father_jack]

From what I could see yesterday two trains failed and a guard was taken ill. I was that confident in the service (with the Waterloo issues also) I went Alton to Bristol via Fratton !!!

 

[Deepgreen]

The 1229 Gatwick to Reading has been cancelled today owing to "A problem with the traction equipment" according to RTT - but is still managing to run ECS from Gatwick sidings at normal speed so far. No actual 'traction' problems, it seems!

 

[Towers]

The 1229 Gatwick to Reading has been cancelled today owing to "A problem with the traction equipment" according to RTT - but is still managing to run ECS from Gatwick sidings at normal speed so far. No actual 'traction' problems, it seems!

If it’s ended up in Gatwick sidings there’s definitely an issue somewhere!

National Rail suggests that the inward working, the 12:25 arrival into Gatwick, never left Reading - are you sure you’re looking at the right train?!

 

[Deepgreen]

If it’s ended up in Gatwick sidings there’s definitely an issue somewhere!

National Rail suggests that the inward working, the 12:25 arrival into Gatwick, never left Reading - are you sure you’re looking at the right train?!

I thnk so - this one:



Replaced with this one, although if the inward working didn't run, the ECS must have been another set?

 

[Horizon22]

I thnk so - this one:

View attachment 184687

Replaced with this one, although if the inward working didn't run, the ECS must have been another set?

View attachment 184688

There are plenty of issues which mean a train can run a line-speed but is not able to be used for passenger service.

 

[FGW_DID]

It was 165110, had power issues on a previous working, got moving again but problem resurfaced and unit was dumped in the sidings at Gatwick until it could be recovered to Reading.

 

[Deepgreen]

It was 165110, had power issues on a previous working, got moving again but problem resurfaced and unit was dumped in the sidings at Gatwick until it could be recovered to Reading.

Thanks.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jul 2025 ==

There are plenty of issues which mean a train can run a line-speed but is not able to be used for passenger service.

Indeed, and not having a guard would be foremost, but not many of those issues could be described as traction equipment problems, perhaps?

 

[Horizon22]

Thanks.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jul 2025 ==


Indeed, and not having a guard would be foremost, but not many of those issues could be described as traction equipment problems, perhaps?

RTT reasons are not always the same as would be used on passenger-facing systems. Probably would be described as a "train fault".

 

[Towers]

I thnk so - this one:

View attachment 184687

Replaced with this one, although if the inward working didn't run, the ECS must have been another set?

View attachment 184688

Ah. Fair shout sir!

 

[Clarence Yard]

That inward working should have been 165110 because the whole diagram got cancelled much earlier in the day after ‘110 got into trouble on a Gatwick working and limped into Gatwick.

Co-incidentally, it eventually ran ECS back to Reading TMD in the approximate path of one of its diagrammed passenger workings.

 

[crablab]

Are these trains basically knackered?

If I remember correctly, there was an 'expression of interest' published for replacements.

Perhaps they can't come soon enough...

 

[Deepgreen]

Four more cancellations again so far today...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2025 ==

Are these trains basically knackered?

If I remember correctly, there was an 'expression of interest' published for replacements.

Perhaps they can't come soon enough...

It may be a total coincidence but the reliability seems to have dropped with their refurbishment!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2025 ==

That inward working should have been 165110 because the whole diagram got cancelled much earlier in the day after ‘110 got into trouble on a Gatwick working and limped into Gatwick.

Co-incidentally, it eventually ran ECS back to Reading TMD in the approximate path of one of its diagrammed passenger workings.

Thanks. Anyone waiting en route must have been annoyed to see 'their' train shooting through!

 

[Snow1964]

They've rostered the 165s to destruction with the new timetable and should have soldiered on with the 769s now we will be left with an issue for many years as there no way they can release any from the West of England even when the 175s get brought into use.

Are these trains basically knackered?

Yes parts of them are so old and overworked, they now fail faster than the depot can maintain enough of them to work the service.

Clearly either GWR (or DfT puppet masters) have not calculated the required fleet size correctly, because there should be enough serviceable spares. Generally as a train fleet gets old, you have higher proportion of spares, or withdraw some to provide more spare parts. They have done opposite, and using them more intensively.

Clearly current overuse is not sustainable, and not achievable with an aged fleet that is already 33-34 years old.

What is not comprehensible to me, is if cancellations are 8.48%, it is not flagging up at DfT that something needs to be done as not working.(performance figures, for route group EF09, as per attacment). How bad does it need to get before someone accepts not enough stock.

https://www.gwr.com/-/media/gwr-sc-website/files/about-gwr/what-you-can-expect/our-performance/GWR-Periodic-Web-Report-P2603.pdf

 

[Horizon22]

What is not comprehensible to me, is if cancellations are 8.48%, it is not flagging up at DfT that something needs to be done as not working.(performance figures, for route group EF09, as per attacment). How bad does it need to get before someone accepts not enough stock.

Surely it is known - Project Churchward somewhat helps? - but that in the short to medium-term, there's not going to be a real fix?

 

[FenMan]

Yes parts of them are so old and overworked, they now fail faster than the depot can maintain enough of them to work the service.

Clearly either GWR (or DfT puppet masters) have not calculated the required fleet size correctly, because there should be enough serviceable spares. Generally as a train fleet gets old, you have higher proportion of spares, or withdraw some to provide more spare parts. They have done opposite, and using them more intensively.

Clearly current overuse is not sustainable, and not achievable with an aged fleet that is already 33-34 years old.

What is not comprehensible to me, is if cancellations are 8.48%, it is not flagging up at DfT that something needs to be done as not working.(performance figures, for route group EF09, as per attacment). How bad does it need to get before someone accepts not enough stock.

https://www.gwr.com/-/media/gwr-sc-website/files/about-gwr/what-you-can-expect/our-performance/GWR-Periodic-Web-Report-P2603.pdf

Quite a few of the cancellations were attributed to staff shortages.

 

[Deepgreen]

Surely it is known - Project Churchward somewhat helps? - but that in the short to medium-term, there's not going to be a real fix?

Indeed so - dumping the 769s at the 11.9th hour was fatuous. It is down to the DaFT for not realising the false economy of shedding the fleet so close to service entry after their huge run-up!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2025 ==

Quite a few of the cancellations were attributed to staff shortages.

Nevertheless, if the 165s fall over more and more often, and with issues that cannot be fixed, what will be done? Suck it up (probably!), or draft in temporary stock (if any can even be scraped together)? The lack of a UK-wide rolling stock strategy proves disastrous yet again.

 

[Horizon22]

Indeed so - dumping the 769s at the 11.9th hour was fatuous. It is down to the DaFT for not realising the false economy of shedding the fleet so close to service entry after their huge run-up!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2025 ==

Well the 769 project should probably not have been started in the first place, but that's a different matter!

 

[Snow1964]

Surely it is known - Project Churchward somewhat helps? - but that in the short to medium-term, there's not going to be a real fix?

It was said in another thread that any Project Churchward order wouldn't be in service until at least 2030 with deliveries running until 2032.

So no real fix for at least 5 years, maybe longer, during which time the 165s will probably keep failing

 

[Horizon22]

It was said in another thread that any Project Churchward order wouldn't be in service until at least 2030 with deliveries running until 2032.

So no real fix for at least 5 years, maybe longer, during which time the 165s will probably keep failing

Even if stock was ordered today, then yes the time to build, deliver and train would probably be late 2020s at best.

Everything is far too reactive in rolling stock "strategy" - if you can even call it that.

 

[Snow1964]

Everything is far too reactive in rolling stock "strategy" - if you can even call it that.

Yes a strategy would be something like placing one, two or three framework orders (express, outer suburban/regional, local) with an overall drawdown rate of 400 deliveries per year for next few years. (Our non-strategy is nearer tenth of that rate in last 5 years)

400 per year, or 8 vehicles per week is based on a fleet of 15,000 vehicles and lifespan of say 37 years, with constant level of renewal. (sorry can't remember exact fleet size).

 

[Deepgreen]

Even if stock was ordered today, then yes the time to build, deliver and train would probably be late 2020s at best.

Everything is far too reactive in rolling stock "strategy" - if you can even call it that.

There has been no discernible strategy since privatisation - yet another of its predictable failings. Numerous new/rebuilt stocks have been embarrassingy handled, and now that GBR is starting to loom, no doubt there will be further confusion/inaction on rolling stock ordering/allocation. Dire.

 

[father_jack]

Yes a strategy would be something like placing one, two or three framework orders (express, outer suburban/regional, local) with an overall drawdown rate of 400 deliveries per year for next few years. (Our non-strategy is nearer tenth of that rate in last 5 years)

Snipped.......

A strategy would have been a full 150/153/158 replacement fleet of 172s on top of the Overground and London Midland orders in about 2008 instead of taking their cast off 150s.

 

[Bikeman78]

Are these trains basically knackered?

If I remember correctly, there was an 'expression of interest' published for replacements.

Perhaps they can't come soon enough...

I thought the same 30 years ago. Horrible things.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jul 2025 ==

Indeed so - dumping the 769s at the 11.9th hour was fatuous. It is down to the DaFT for not realising the false economy of shedding the fleet so close to service entry after their huge run-up!

Despite my dislike of 165s, I cannot believe that 769s would be any better.