How bad is TfL Rail?

[cactustwirly]

They are operated by GWR.

But the trains are operated by toilet less 345s

 

[ThameslinkUser]

Crossrail going to be the name of the TOC?

MTR Elizabeth Line is the TOC. Formerly known as MTR Crossrail. This is the post detailing it

On September 30th MTR Corporation Crossrail Limited changed it trading name to MTR Elizabeth line.

The new trading name reflects the company’s role as operator of the future Elizabeth line.

When fully open, Transport for London’s (TfL’s) Elizabeth line will increase central London’s rail capacity by 10% and provide 700 timetabled services per weekday for an anticipated 200 million passengers annually.

 

[Starmill]

They are operated by GWR.

So what? TfL Rail should still be paying to staff them if they proposed to remove onboard toilets from the trains surely?

 

[BayPaul]

To paraphrase Basil Fawlty - what exactly do you expect from a metro rail operator?

Herds of Wildebeast seem quite likely in the circumstances

 

[Starmill]

From Twyford/Maidenhead etc the longest 'typical' journeys will be to Stratford/Canary Wharf and no further (fair enough a reasonable distance without toilet, but this will be generally home-to-work type journeys with toilet access before you leave)

Canary Wharf to Maidenhead will surely be an hour at least? London Paddington to Maidenhead is 41 minutes and it's not like there's going to be any alternative service?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Aug 2020 ==

TFL rail is - and will be when the Liz Line is finally, eventually, OMG one day opened - a glorified tube line that ends at/beyond the fringes of London like many other tube lines. It just so happens that the trains are national rail sized running partly on what was national rail tracks.

Nobody would be reasonably describing Maidenhead as 'on the fringes of London'? And there's no such thing as 'national rail tracks', most of the infrastructure was and is still Network Rail's.

 

[geordieblue]

And there's no such thing as 'national rail tracks', most of the infrastructure was and is still Network Rail's.

You can say the same about the Overground too. Ultimately both of these brands are providing metro services on Network Rail infrastructure, a job they generally do well - and a job that doesn't require comfortable seating, tables, toilets, buffet cars etc. The point of these services is to provide high-frequency trains to serve mass movements of people (although the markets for Crossrail/ the Overground are slightly different) and whilst they may not be Tube lines, they are marketed and run in a way that is more similar to metro operation than conventional heavy rail.

 

[yorkie]

You can say the same about the Overground too. Ultimately both of these brands are providing metro services on Network Rail infrastructure, a job they generally do well - and a job that doesn't require comfortable seating, tables, toilets, buffet cars etc. The point of these services is to provide high-frequency trains to serve mass movements of people (although the markets for Crossrail/ the Overground are slightly different) and whilst they may not be Tube lines, they are marketed and run in a way that is more similar to metro operation than conventional heavy rail.

But is that appropriate for Maidenhead to London? Comparing such a journey with a typical LO journey isn't really comparing like-for-like.

I don't think anyone is asking for buffet cars, but more of an 'intermediate' level of provision, as appropriate for a journey of that length.

 

[cactustwirly]

To paraphrase Basil Fawlty - what exactly do you expect from a metro rail operator?

It's not metro rail, it's an outer suburban rail service, like Thameslink but east to west

 

[geordieblue]

But is that appropriate for Maidenhead to London? Comparing such a journey with a typical LO journey isn't really comparing like-for-like.

I don't think anyone is asking for buffet cars, but more of an 'intermediate' level of provision, as appropriate for a journey of that length.

But in reality I don't think many are asking for this intermediate provision; if they are so keen for toilets, there are other TOCs serving the station with toilets on their trains.

 

[cactustwirly]

It's not just toilets, the seats are very uncomfortable, and the trains have a harsh ride which is not very nice for the almost hour long journey I had on Sunday.
Next time I'd rather wait an hour for the next GWR train tbh, a 387 with the so called ironing boards is actually a lot more pleasurable.

The communication and disruption recovery is very bad as well. The whole service seems to completely collapse at the smallest hiccupp

 

[Starmill]

But in reality I don't think many are asking for this intermediate provision; if they are so keen for toilets, there are other TOCs serving the station with toilets on their trains.

Only because the rollout is delayed though. There isn't going to be an alternative for a through train from Twyford or Maidenhead to London...

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Maidenhead is the major flaw with the Elizabeth Line master plan. With the full GWR intercity timetable there are few if any robust opportunities to provide calls on the mainline, whilst the volume of slow MTR passenger trains and freights (and lack of grade separated main-relief crossovers) prevents the sort of intermediate outer-suburban fast trains that, for example, you see on the WCML at places like Leighton Buzzard.

I must admit, personally I always imagined the Crossrail offering would be more comparable to Thameslink than to the Metropolitan Line or Central Line, given the distances involved. IMO giving it to a body like TfL Rail was a mistake, as although the funding is easier, the product they specialise in represents inner, not outer, suburban rail.

 

[geordieblue]

Only because the rollout is delayed though. There isn't going to be an alternative for a through train from Twyford or Maidenhead to London...

Not sure I follow; I though GWR services were continuing?

 

[Ianno87]

It's not metro rail, it's an outer suburban rail service, like Thameslink but east to west

No, it's a metro service where one branch happens to go to outer suburban locations (Maidenhead/Reading) for operation convenience.

 

[Wolfie]

No, it's a metro service where one branch happens to go to outer suburban locations (Maidenhead/Reading) for operation convenience.

Yup. Now the outer suburban tail is whinging that it can't wag the metro service dog...

 

[Bald Rick]

It's not metro rail, it's an outer suburban rail service, like Thameslink but east to west

No it isn’t. It is very firmly a Metro service.

 

[matt_world2004]

Only because the rollout is delayed though. There isn't going to be an alternative for a through train from Twyford or Maidenhead to London...

There's going to be no further reduction in GwR services from these stations .

 

[PeterC]

I don't recall Class 315s between Liverpool Street and Shenfield ever having toilets or on-train staff? There is no such 'expectation'.

Nor where there toilets on the 306s that preceeded them. There was a guard on board, but he (always was "he" back then) was just the guard not a conductor.

 

[cactustwirly]

There's going to be no further reduction in GwR services from these stations .

Who's services are only hourly because of Covid
Which means you'll be on the 345s if you turn up at the wrong half an hour.

 

[PeterC]

You can't do that in the evenings or Sunday afternoons as the toilets are locked when the stations are unstaffed.
The train service is only every half an hour so you'd be waiting 25 minutes for the next train after a trip to the toilet.

Just like hopping out of a Chesham at Harrow for the same reason. The local users' group in Chesham has never made an issue about it.

 

[cactustwirly]

No, it's a metro service where one branch happens to go to outer suburban locations (Maidenhead/Reading) for operation convenience.

Well if it goes to outer suburban locations at a sub metro frequency then it is an outer suburban service surely?

 

[87015]

Who's services are only hourly because of Covid
Which means you'll be on the 345s if you turn up at the wrong half an hour.

Which is a GWR issue / decision, not one you should moan about MTR for.

 

[Wolfie]

No it isn’t. It is very firmly a Metro service.

Absolutely. That is what Londoners paid for through Council tax, business rates etc.

 

[cactustwirly]

Which is a GWR issue / decision, not one you should moan about MTR for.

If MTR provided a decent usable service then I wouldn't have to moan.
It's literally a backwards step in terms of service provision to 15 years ago. I'd rather have the class 165s back ngl

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Aug 2020 ==

No, it's a metro service where one branch happens to go to outer suburban locations (Maidenhead/Reading) for operation convenience.

If it is a metro service, why aren't they charging metro fares?

 

[matt_world2004]

Who's services are only hourly because of Covid
Which means you'll be on the 345s if you turn up at the wrong half an hour.

I don't think you can blame TfL rail for GwR reducing their services to once per hour during coronavirus.

 

[si404]

But the trains are operated by toilet less 345s

The three stations you mentioned are also served by toileted 387s (Paddington-Didcots) most of the time (OK, Slough isn't at peak times, but the station is surely staffed and toilets open then!)

So what? TfL Rail should still be paying to staff them if they proposed to remove onboard toilets from the trains surely?

Twyford is 5 minutes from Reading, Maidenhead 3 minutes from Taplow, etc.

Worst case scenario I've found if GWR locks its loos late at night is 16 minutes Reading - Taplow. I think people can be reasonably expected to travel 16 minutes from one place with an open toilet to another place with an open toilet late at night.

Perhaps TfL Rail should be paying for GWR staffing when it's just them serving the stations in the small-hours, but security and assistance is far more the reason to do it than a lack of loos on trains.

Canary Wharf to Maidenhead will surely be an hour at least?

55 minutes. A minute less than Amersham-KXSP off-peak. And this is for an 'out the other side' journey that few will make.

Nobody would be reasonably describing Maidenhead as 'on the fringes of London'?

Distance-wise from Charing Cross it is 41km as the crow flies - pretty much the same distance as Amersham (38km)/Chesham (40km) which tend to be treated as "on the fringes of London" and I've had to unreasonably describe as such as it's the general understanding of the area. It depends what you mean by "fringes", I guess...

I guess, with Maidenhead, despite it being closer in timewise than the Met places and only really a tiny bit further distance-wise feels a lot further out in people's minds. It is a long way west of the edge of the London Travel to Work area - but that's because, rather than having a tentacle of London extending out to Chorleywood like with the Met places, the Slough and Heathrow Travel to Work area that Maidenhead is a part of takes a big bite out of London, all the way in to Southall (and Brentford, and East Sheen, and Kingston, and Perivale, and a large chunk of Harrow...). Also, the pick of Rickmansworth Aquadrome that's in Greater London (that very rural bit surrounding Harefield) is only 9 or 11km away from Amersham or Chesham stations respectively, whereas Maidenhead station is about 16km away from it's nearest bit of Greater London (Grand Union Canal near Poyle) and there's a large town (Slough) in between, helping make it seem further from London than it actually is.

Only because the rollout is delayed though. There isn't going to be an alternative for a through train from Twyford or Maidenhead to London...

The GWR service pattern for those stations is in its final state. 2tph Paddington-Didcot: at peak times non-stop Paddington-Maidenhead, off-peak semi-fast calling at Ealing Broadway, Hayes & Harlington and Slough as well.

Well, almost in the final state - as there's not 4tph XR off-peak to Maidenhead, the GWR semi-fasts also call at West Drayton, which they won't in the final state.

With the full GWR intercity timetable there are few if any robust opportunities to provide calls on the mainline, whilst the volume of slow MTR passenger trains and freights (and lack of grade separated main-relief crossovers) prevents the sort of intermediate outer-suburban fast trains that, for example, you see on the WCML at places like Leighton Buzzard.

There's literally (peak-only) trains exactly like that at Maidenhead. 2tph non-stop Paddington-Maidenhead. They could run them off-peak, but they are doing a semi-fast service instead.

Leighton Buzzard is Reading distance away (both 59km crow-flies from Charing Cross). The Maidenhead equivalent on the WCML is Berkhamsted (both 41km out).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Aug 2020 ==

If it is a metro service, why aren't they charging metro fares?

Iver and Langley - I don't know. Beyond that - GWR set the fares.

 

[cactustwirly]

The three stations you mentioned are also served by toileted 387s (Paddington-Didcots) most of the time (OK, Slough isn't at peak times, but the station is surely staffed and toilets open then!)
Twyford is 5 minutes from Reading, Maidenhead 3 minutes from Taplow, etc.

Worst case scenario I've found if GWR locks its loos late at night is 16 minutes Reading - Taplow. I think people can be reasonably expected to travel 16 minutes from one place with an open toilet to another place with an open toilet late at night.

Perhaps TfL Rail should be paying for GWR staffing when it's just them serving the stations in the small-hours, but security and assistance is far more the reason to do it than a lack of loos on trains.
55 minutes. A minute less than Amersham-KXSP off-peak. And this is for an 'out the other side' journey that few will make.
Distance-wise from Charing Cross it is 41km as the crow flies - pretty much the same distance as Amersham (38km)/Chesham (40km) which tend to be treated as "on the fringes of London" and I've had to unreasonably describe as such as it's the general understanding of the area. It depends what you mean by "fringes", I guess...

I guess, with Maidenhead, despite it being closer in timewise than the Met places and only really a tiny bit further distance-wise feels a lot further out in people's minds. It is a long way west of the edge of the London Travel to Work area - but that's because, rather than having a tentacle of London extending out to Chorleywood like with the Met places, the Slough and Heathrow Travel to Work area that Maidenhead is a part of takes a big bite out of London, all the way in to Southall (and Brentford, and East Sheen, and Kingston, and Perivale, and a large chunk of Harrow...). Also, the pick of Rickmansworth Aquadrome that's in Greater London (that very rural bit surrounding Harefield) is only 9 or 11km away from Amersham or Chesham stations respectively, whereas Maidenhead station is about 16km away from it's nearest bit of Greater London (Grand Union Canal near Poyle) and there's a large town (Slough) in between, helping make it seem further from London than it actually is.

The GWR service pattern for those stations is in its final state. 2tph Paddington-Didcot: at peak times non-stop Paddington-Maidenhead, off-peak semi-fast calling at Ealing Broadway, Hayes & Harlington and Slough as well.

Well, almost in the final state - as there's not 4tph XR off-peak to Maidenhead, the GWR semi-fasts also call at West Drayton, which they won't in the final state.
There's literally (peak-only) trains exactly like that at Maidenhead. 2tph non-stop Paddington-Maidenhead. They could run them off-peak, but they are doing a semi-fast service instead.

Leighton Buzzard is Reading distance away (both 59km crow-flies from Charing Cross). The Maidenhead equivalent on the WCML is Berkhamsted (both 41km out).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Aug 2020 ==

Iver and Langley - I don't know. Beyond that - GWR set the fares.

Nothing stopping them from introducing TfL only fares at tube rates

 

[Wolfie]

Nothing stopping them from introducing TfL only fares at tube rates

They are hardly in Zones 1-6! Higher fares for stations outside the regular zonal structure are long-established practice. Oh, and despite your comments, 345s are not tube trains.

 

[matt_world2004]

Nothing stopping them from introducing TfL only fares at tube rates

The introduction of contactless fares to reading saw the fare price drop by nearly 50%. And they were forbidden from introducing operator only fares as condition for taking over the line. They were with the shenfield metro services.

 

[yorkie]

Oh, and despite your comments, 345s are not tube trains.

No-one is quite saying that; but they are broadly equivalent to the sub-surface 'S Stock' trains operated by London Underground; rightly or wrongly some people colloquially refer to the Met as a "tube" line (though that's more of a branding thing, as LU use the term "Tube" to refer to any LU service, and by extension in some contexts, to almost any service they operate; hence the "Tube map")

Also those mentioning Amersham to London are forgetting the fact that many Amersham to London commuters will in fact be taking Chiltern, which is a higher quality service than the Met.

I'd argue Crossrail is more like Thameslink than the Met (or, at least, should be!)