Chiltern Oxford Link completed

[Oxfordblues]

A visit to Platforms 4 and 5 at Oxford station today revealed no evidence of demolition or construction work starting. Does anybody know when rebuilding is due to commence? The trackwork into platform 5 needs complete replacement.

(Incidentally, one of the parcels vans last received maintenance in December 1979!)

 

[Class 170101]

Basically the time it takes to get between two timing points. Each type of traction and freight has them (called timing loads and the usual source of confusion with Real Time Trains and what traction runs). Worked out assuming that the train is doing line speed, if it can, and on green signals, if possible. They are split into 4 moves if required, pass to pass, start to pass, pass to stop and stop to stop. If for example at Bicester Village you arrive on a red signal then the SRT needs inflating as a driver will treat it differently to coming in on a green.

stop to stop should be start to stop :P

Inflating the SRT at Bicester Village as you describe is one way of doing it the other is to place in Rules of the Plan a requirement that {time} is to be inserted if stopping at this station due to the crossing. Witham Station used this method until the foot crossing there was abolished.

Presumably this crossing is also set up for non-stop trains to pass through at linespeed and that these trains are not reduced to a crawl to pass over the crossing.

 

[The Planner]

No point defining squiggle time as there is more chance of some numpty missing it, sits better in the SRT.

 

[D1009]

My God, I never expected to see the term squiggle time on this forum, I bet it has people scratching their heads.

I suppose you could have negative squiggle time for the non stops.

 

[The Planner]

Best I call it Adjustment allowance { } before I get arrested by the jargon police! We do have negative squiggle, not a fan of it though as it just feels wrong.

 

[Andyjs247]

stop to stop should be start to stop :P

Inflating the SRT at Bicester Village as you describe is one way of doing it the other is to place in Rules of the Plan a requirement that {time} is to be inserted if stopping at this station due to the crossing. Witham Station used this method until the foot crossing there was abolished.

Presumably this crossing is also set up for non-stop trains to pass through at linespeed and that these trains are not reduced to a crawl to pass over the crossing.

I guess it would also vary at Bicester if running 'bang road', so probably an extra set of variables. Under normal operation when running towards Marylebone the train can come in to a stand in the platform at the red signal with the crossing barriers still raised. The signal is set back from the crossing and Platform 2 is also set back from the signal to allow this. But the opposite platform 1 is much closer to the crossing - the platforms are staggered and London Road also crosses at an angle, but the signals on each line are opposite. There's one passenger service in each direction that uses the "wrong" platform - if it's the 0734 to MYB you'd be stopping right at the end of Platform 1 but do the crossing barriers also have to be down first in this case?

 

[The Planner]

Shouldn't do as the strike in is in the same place I believe.

 

[work-traveller]

From press photos it seems that some of the first passenger services from Oxford Parkway to Marylebone were BR Class 68 locomotives + Mark 3 carriages (Mainline 'Silver Trains'). Is this expected to be a regular thing, or just a special introduction with them returning to their regular Marylebone/Birmingham route?

 

[berneyarms]

From press photos it seems that some of the first passenger services from Oxford Parkway to Marylebone were BR Class 68 locomotives + Mark 3 carriages (Mainline 'Silver Trains'). Is this expected to be a regular thing, or just a special introduction with them returning to their regular Marylebone/Birmingham route?

As has been mentioned several times here, one service from Oxford in the morning is Class 68 hauled and one return working in the evening.

The frequently requested diagrams thread has the current list of loco hauled trains.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1478545&postcount=4

 

[work-traveller]

...one service from Oxford in the morning is Class 68 hauled and one return working in the evening.

Lovely. Hope the good folks of Oxford (Parkway) and Bicester are taking advantage of this faster and more comfortable service.

 

[L&Y Robert]

There's one passenger service in each direction that uses the "wrong" platform -

Whadja mean, the "Wrong" platform? Running wrong road, is it? We are discussing Bicester Town are we? Without wishing to confuse the issue, wrong road in both directions do you mean? Why do they do that?

Perhaps you mean "The wrong station"?

 

[berneyarms]

Whadja mean, the "Wrong" platform? Running wrong road, is it? We are discussing Bicester Town are we? Without wishing to confuse the issue, wrong road in both directions do you mean? Why do they do that?

Perhaps you mean "The wrong station"?

The 07:24 (loco hauled service) operates wrong road from Oxford Parkway - there's only a crossover in one direction there.

There are two trains in Oxford Parkway between 07:19 and 07:24, so one has to depart wrong road all the way back through Bicester Village to Gavray Junction, the 07:24 being the train in question.

The 06:09 from Marylebone travels wrong road from Gavray Junction through Bicester Village to Oxford Parkway.

 

[L&Y Robert]

The 07:24 (loco hauled service) operates wrong road from Oxford Parkway - there's only a crossover in one direction there.

There are two trains in Oxford Parkway between 07:19 and 07:24, so one has to depart wrong road all the way back through Bicester Village to Gavray Junction, the 07:24 being the train in question.

The 06:09 from Marylebone travels wrong road from Gavray Junction through Bicester Village to Oxford Parkway.

Well, bless my soul!
I suppose the line is signalled for it then.

 

[berneyarms]

Well, bless my soul!
I suppose the line is signalled for it then.

Do you think?

 

[L&Y Robert]

Do you think?

AH! Little joke there, then!
Well, down to business. Let's get this right. I'm THE TRAIN at Ox.P departing wrong line. Through Bicester Town (sorry folks, I can't bring myself to say the V word) over the level crossing and switch to right road there? OR carry on to Gravy-boat junction where I don't take the first turnout right, but take the second, and thus onto the RIGHT (that's the left) road, up the hill and away.
Coming back, I'm on the right road from Princes Riz., don't take the first turnout left but take the second, down the ramp wrong road, onto the E-W line right road but immediately cross over to the wrong road, on through the level crossing, pause at that station wrong platform and then away to Ox.
Is that right?

 

[RPM]

AH! Little joke there, then!
Well, down to business. Let's get this right. I'm THE TRAIN at Ox.P departing wrong line. Through Bicester Town (sorry folks, I can't bring myself to say the V word) over the level crossing and switch to right road there? OR carry on to Gravy-boat junction where I don't take the first turnout right, but take the second, and thus onto the RIGHT (that's the left) road, up the hill and away.
Coming back, I'm on the right road from Princes Riz., don't take the first turnout left but take the second, down the ramp wrong road, onto the E-W line right road but immediately cross over to the wrong road, on through the level crossing, pause at that station wrong platform and then away to Ox.
Is that right?

No you cant get back onto the right road at Bicester Village. There is a crossover but it is only signalled for movements to Claydon. You cross over onto the right road at Gavray Junction, although it is also possible to carry on wrong road all the way to Princes Risborough, although nothing is currently booked to do that.

The journey in reverse is partly as you describe. You'd take the second turnout at Bicester South Junction but then stay wrong road right through to Bicester Village (and indeed on to OXP). I don't thing any trains are booked to do this, but it is there as an option.

 

[Andyjs247]

The 07:24 (loco hauled service) operates wrong road from Oxford Parkway - there's only a crossover in one direction there.

There are two trains in Oxford Parkway between 07:19 and 07:24, so one has to depart wrong road all the way back through Bicester Village to Gavray Junction, the 07:24 being the train in question.

The 06:09 from Marylebone travels wrong road from Gavray Junction through Bicester Village to Oxford Parkway.

I suppose the question is why the 07:24 leaves wrong road from OXP in the first place; or alternatively why doesn't the incoming ECS cross over into Platform 2? Is there another reason apart from its the flagship up loco-hauled service, plus it saves pax a longer walk and having to cross the footbridge at Oxford Parkway (and there is the capacity and flexibility to do so).

 

[route:oxford]

I suppose the question is why the 07:24 leaves wrong road from OXP in the first place; or alternatively why doesn't the incoming ECS cross over into Platform 2? Is there another reason apart from its the flagship up loco-hauled service, plus it saves pax a longer walk and having to cross the footbridge at Oxford Parkway (and there is the capacity and flexibility to do so).

Isn't it because the Slow train that calls at Islip will be using Platform 1?

 

[150219]

I suppose the question is why the 07:24 leaves wrong road from OXP in the first place; or alternatively why doesn't the incoming ECS cross over into Platform 2? Is there another reason apart from its the flagship up loco-hauled service, plus it saves pax a longer walk and having to cross the footbridge at Oxford Parkway (and there is the capacity and flexibility to do so).

1T05 (06:09 from Marylebone to Oxford Parkway) is timed to arrive at Oxford Parkway at 07:19 and the station constraints mean that one or the other of 1T05 or 1Y12 (07:24 from Oxford Parkway to Marylebone) would have to use the bi-di lines.

We have reversed the order of these two trains on an ad hoc basis since the start of the timetable.

 

[MichaelAMW]

All is not well, it seems - I don't think this has been posted elsewhere.

"Chiltern Railways admits Oxford-to-London line problems"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-34830043

A rail company has admitted its service on a new £320m rail line linking Oxford and London is "not up to standard", weeks after it opened.

Commuters have complained about delays and overcrowding on the new line into London Marylebone.

Chiltern Railways said it overestimated the numbers of travellers who would move from using Bicester North to the new Bicester Village station.

It said a later-than-usual autumn leaf fall had compounded delays.

Since the line opened on 26 October, trains from Bicester North have been cut from three to two an hour. An additional two trains an hour were introduced from Bicester Village, located at the other side of the town.
'Been miserable'

Commuter Jude Livermore, from Witney, said she was continuing to use Bicester North as there was more parking available.

"You pay £4,500 for a season ticket and you have to sit on the floor - these past few weeks have just been miserable. Every single day there has been a delay," she said.

"I respect Chiltern Railways a lot - they have been trying but I think they could have foreseen some of this stuff."

Chiltern's commercial director Thomas Ableman said: "Roughly, we thought about half the people would switch from Bicester North to Bicester Village. But nothing like that has happened so it's true, we've had people standing on trains from Bicester North.

"Ninety percent of trains are still arriving on time - it's still a very high number, just not up to our normal standard."

"You can forecast, model and plan as much as you like, but there is an element where you have to wait and see what happens in reality."

He said changes were being made to timetables and additional carriages, becoming available in mid-December, would make the service "significantly better".

The article is slightly confused, particularly the title and the first two sentences, as the problem is not on the new bit but on the old bit, as a result of the knock-on effects of the new bit.

 

[swt_passenger]

The article is slightly confused, particularly the title and the first two sentences, as the problem is not on the new bit but on the old bit, as a result of the knock-on effects of the new bit.

Totally confused would be better, I think. The headline writer mustn't have read the article underneath...

 

[muddythefish]

All is not well, it seems - I don't think this has been posted elsewhere.

"Chiltern Railways admits Oxford-to-London line problems"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-34830043

.

Yet another example of a railway reopening being swamped by demand. It's only a matter of time before the DfT wakes up and produces a plan to reopen lines across the country.

 

[CarltonA]

There were always going to be some problems as they have moved resources onto the new services and have only obtained a small amount of extra stock. Chiltern can rebalance things for the next timetable but then they have to allow for when they reach Oxford next year.

I have suffered some inconvenience but overall I am still happy with the way Chiltern do things and I am confident any problems will be ironed out over the next year.

 

[67018]

There were always going to be some problems as they have moved resources onto the new services and have only obtained a small amount of extra stock. Chiltern can rebalance things for the next timetable but then they have to allow for when they reach Oxford next year.

I have suffered some inconvenience but overall I am still happy with the way Chiltern do things and I am confident any problems will be ironed out over the next year.

I'm inclined to agree - although might have a different opinion if the last two weeks had been spent standing on delayed trains rather than working away - but am surprised by the statement "Roughly, we thought about half the people would switch from Bicester North to Bicester Village."

Chiltern's own leaflet that came through the door last week entitled "Which Bicester station is right for you?" clearly suggests that the majority of people are expected to use Bicester North, which it recommends for people driving to the station due to the larger car park as well as people local to the station. It only suggests Bicester Village for people who live close or are travelling to Oxford Parkway.

If they really have planned based on a 50/50 split, that's a predictable cock up.

Is the recent disruption anything out of the ordinary, or just normal leaf fall conditions? I seem to remember there were quite a few teething problems last time there were major timetable changes

 

[RPM]

Is the recent disruption anything out of the ordinary, or just normal leaf fall conditions? I seem to remember there were quite a few teething problems last time there were major timetable changes

Yes, a fair proportion of the current problems are the usual seasonal adhesion issues, but the tighter headways have magnified the effect somewhat.

There were several weeks of overcrowding and disruption after the Evergreen 3 Phase 1 timetable introduction. After a few weeks and some tweaks it settled down OK. I'm confident it will this time too.

 

[67018]

Yes, a fair proportion of the current problems are the usual seasonal adhesion issues, but the tighter headways have magnified the effect somewhat.

There were several weeks of overcrowding and disruption after the Evergreen 3 Phase 1 timetable introduction. After a few weeks and some tweaks it settled down OK. I'm confident it will this time too.

The overcrowding's potentially self-correcting as well, since there's an alternative available at Bicester by walking to the other station. I did this yesterday, an extra 12 minutes walk is no big problem when it's not raining, the reward being a silver train with plenty of seats!

I guess the evening peak is the bigger problem as anyone used to leaving London at 1718 or 1818 is now on a much slower train - which eliminates pretty much all the speed improvements of the last 4 years - but people will get used to it. The effect has been obvious since the timetable consultation was published for anyone paying attention.

 

[jimm]

The overcrowding's potentially self-correcting as well, since there's an alternative available at Bicester by walking to the other station. I did this yesterday, an extra 12 minutes walk is no big problem when it's not raining, the reward being a silver train with plenty of seats!

I guess the evening peak is the bigger problem as anyone used to leaving London at 1718 or 1818 is now on a much slower train - which eliminates pretty much all the speed improvements of the last 4 years - but people will get used to it. The effect has been obvious since the timetable consultation was published for anyone paying attention.

But are most people going to 'self-correct' by walking across Bicester? No.

A key part of the problem is that it is a whole lot easier to get to and from Bicester North in a car - as Chiltern themselves seem to admit. To get to Bicester 'Village' you either have to hope the level crossing will be in your favour, or traverse the town centre. Why bother when you can just head up Queens Avenue and Buckingham Road and straight into Bicester North's car park? If coming from the north you would have to drive past North to get to 'Village' anyway.

Chiltern seem to have made an assumption that people would just do what they wanted them to - without bothering to ask.You can have all the timetable consultations you like, it doesn't actually mean that lots of people pay attention, never mind absorb what is being proposed and understand the implications for their favourite journeys. And it's not as if the service from and back to North in the peaks has suddenly become deeply unattractive either, so no wonder people are still using it.

Chiltern may need to start making the point more forcibly that if people want a seat, rather than having to fight the West Midlands passengers for one, then they should head for Bicester 'Village' instead but on the basis of the leaflet you describe they seem to be doing the direct opposite. I suppose they could always take down the metal deck on the car park at North - that would certainly provide an incentive to switch...

While inevitable teething problems, leaf-fall season, etc may all be playing into the current situation, if Chiltern's long-term planning for growth has been done on the basis that lots of Bicester passengers will be switched on to Oxford route trains to make room for those using stations further north, they could have a serious problem unless they take steps to ensure that shift happens, no matter how many more dmus they can rustle up from other places.

 

[as1981]

Will any of the additional units, in December, be used to improve the frequency of the services north of Bicester? My commute is Leamington-Warwick and the evening peak time frequency has dropped to an hour or longer.

There are some that are Warwick Parkway only but it's not practical to walk, back to Warwick, due to the need to cross a bypass entrance/exit.

 

[43074]

Chiltern have announced a few changes from the December timetable:

Our new timetable starts on Sunday 13 December; we will be introducing the following carefully targeted alterations to improve capacity and enhance reliability.

The main changes to our weekday services are as follows:

• 05:42 from Oxford Parkway has an extra carriage targeted at passengers from Gerarrds Cross at 0637.
• 06:07 from Aylesbury to Marylebone via Amersham will be formed of 2 carriages instead of 3.
• 06:10 from B’ham Moor St has an extra carriage targeted at passengers from Bicester North at 0711.
• 06:47 from Oxford Parkway also calls at Beaconsfield at 0730 and increases by 2 carriages.
• 07:16 from Bicester North to Marylebone will no longer call at Seer Green.
• 07:25 from Princes Risborough to Marylebone calls at Seers Green at 07:43, but does not call at Beaconsfield. This is targeted at passengers from Gerrards Cross at 0749.
• 07:33 from Stratford-Upon-Avon will continue to call at High Wycombe.
• 08:08 from Marylebone to Oxford Parkway no longer calls at High Wycombe or Islip.
• 08:27 from Oxford Parkway calls additionally at High Wycombe and increases by 1 carriage.
• 09:07 from Marylebone to Oxford Parkway calls additionally at Islip.
• 12:10 Marylebone to B’ham Snow Hill and the1455 B’ham Snow Hill to Marylebone will be formed of 2 carriages instead of 4 (passenger counts show this is adequate for the number of passengers).
• 14:35 from Marylebone to Oxford Parkway will no longer call at High Wycombe.
• 14:40 Marylebone to B’ham Snow Hill calls additionally at High Wycombe.
• 15:05 from Marylebone to Oxford Parkway calls additionally at High Wycombe.
• 1540 Marylebone to Birmingham Snow Hill is formed of 4 carriages instead of 3.
• 17:18 from Marylebone to Oxford Parkway is formed of 2 carriages instead of 4 (passenger counts show that this is adequate for the number of passengers).
• 17:28 from West Ruislip to Marylebone will be replaced by the1727 from Ger’ds Cross to Marylebone.
• 17:50 from Marylebone to Oxford Parkway will be formed of 7 carriages instead of 6.

Source: http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/download-our-timetable/

It doesn't seem to solve any of the issues mentioned up-thread though, notably the Bicester issue. Maybe diverting a peak Oxford Parkway service to start from, say, Banbury would work to redress the balance?

 

[67018]

But are most people going to 'self-correct' by walking across Bicester? No.

A key part of the problem is that it is a whole lot easier to get to and from Bicester North in a car - as Chiltern themselves seem to admit. To get to Bicester 'Village' you either have to hope the level crossing will be in your favour, or traverse the town centre. Why bother when you can just head up Queens Avenue and Buckingham Road and straight into Bicester North's car park? If coming from the north you would have to drive past North to get to 'Village' anyway.

Chiltern seem to have made an assumption that people would just do what they wanted them to - without bothering to ask.You can have all the timetable consultations you like, it doesn't actually mean that lots of people pay attention, never mind absorb what is being proposed and understand the implications for their favourite journeys. And it's not as if the service from and back to North in the peaks has suddenly become deeply unattractive either, so no wonder people are still using it.

Chiltern may need to start making the point more forcibly that if people want a seat, rather than having to fight the West Midlands passengers for one, then they should head for Bicester 'Village' instead but on the basis of the leaflet you describe they seem to be doing the direct opposite. I suppose they could always take down the metal deck on the car park at North - that would certainly provide an incentive to switch...

While inevitable teething problems, leaf-fall season, etc may all be playing into the current situation, if Chiltern's long-term planning for growth has been done on the basis that lots of Bicester passengers will be switched on to Oxford route trains to make room for those using stations further north, they could have a serious problem unless they take steps to ensure that shift happens, no matter how many more dmus they can rustle up from other places.

Agreed. Bicester Village is poorly located in terms of ease of access by car, it's hard to see how it could have been made harder to get to even if someone tried.

It was a bit of a surprise that their leaflet didn't try to push Village station harder; maybe they are concerned about the smaller car park filling up. On the other hand, what if they encourage people to switch and then the trains end up full of Oxford commuters once the line int Oxford itself is opened?

It also seems strange that overcrowding on Birmingham trains should be a surprise, since quite often the morning ones were already pretty full before Bicester, especially early in the week (presumably due to people who stay in London Mon-Thu or Tue-Fri).

As far as the new timetable goes, people are going to be quite grumpy to find out that they have been shunted off the 1718 train, for the sake of only 2 cars worth of passengers, onto an hour long journey on the Banbury loco hauled set in all its shabby glory! However on previous occasions various tweaks have solved initial problems and it only takes a percentage of people to switch stations to make a difference.

Longer term, they could well have a serious problem as the underlying issue is lack of stock, something many non-electrified lines seem to be suffering from and one that doesn't have a quick solution. Are there more 168/3s due to enter service or are they all already in operation?