May 2015 Timetable

[David Goddard]

Quick question regarding Table Numbers.

Whilst I don't pretend to know a lot about the National Rail Timetable; I'd have thought that keeping Table Numbers consistent as much as possible would be beneficial?

A bit like how a few years ago all of the East Anglia local routes moved down one number-
East Suffolk , St Edmunds, Wherry, Broads, Breckland and Spalding were always 14 through to 19 inclusive, they suddenly moved to 13 through 18, with the Skegness service splitting from 27 to take up 19.

 

[splashoutradio]

As has been mentioned elsewhere, table 100 contains quite a few major errors. So, attached is an updated (but very unofficial) version generated using ATOC data published on 16th May. It also outlines which trains are scheduled to be LHCS.

Hopefully this will be of use to someone

 

[SprinterMan]

Somewhat unbelievably, Southern STILL do not have their new timetables up, a week after they changed.......

Adam

 

[PHILIPE]

As has been mentioned elsewhere, table 100 contains quite a few major errors. So, attached is an updated (but very unofficial) version generated using ATOC data published on 16th May. It also outlines which trains are scheduled to be LHCS.

Hopefully this will be of use to someone

This came about due late finalisation of plans for the LHCS services.

 

[Philip C]

As has been mentioned elsewhere, table 100 contains quite a few major errors. So, attached is an updated (but very unofficial) version generated using ATOC data published on 16th May. It also outlines which trains are scheduled to be LHCS.

Hopefully this will be of use to someone

Thank you. Not only useful but also very well presented.

 

[D6975]

As has been mentioned elsewhere, table 100 contains quite a few major errors. So, attached is an updated (but very unofficial) version generated using ATOC data published on 16th May. It also outlines which trains are scheduled to be LHCS.

Hopefully this will be of use to someone

Excellent, thanks for that.

Just another 200 odd to do....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Whilst I don't pretend to know a lot about the National Rail Timetable; I'd have thought that keeping Table Numbers consistent as much as possible would be beneficial?

I agree within limits.
When a TOC starts running regular through services over a new route not previously used, then it can become a pain tracking services through different tables, made even more frustrating by the fact that the new timetabling software doesn't show connections nowadays either. Rearranging tables or modifying the contents of tables in these circumstances does make sense.

ps even then it sometimes doesn't work properly due to the serious weaknesses of the software. Table 123 was modified quite a while ago to reflect FGWs modifications to the services on this route (Great Malvern in particular), but even now the early morning FGW from Pompey to Brighton doesn't show in 123.

 

[berneyarms]

There is also the Northern timetable for the route....

 

[berneyarms]

The revised table numbers reflect the changes in operating patterns - these can and do change and the NRT needs to change with them from time to time.

 

[387star]

The down 1o98 from great Malvern to Brighton no longer calls at Keynsham and Oldfield Park yet insists on calling at Freshford Avoncliff and Dilton Marsh... I believe a South West Trains service has picked up the Oldfield stop

The return working 1v96 the 1659 from Brighton to Bristol Temple Meads has omitted Dilton Marsh since the last timetable change doesn't call at Avoncliff and Freshford but still calls Oldfield Park and Keynsham

The up 1v94 the 0859 from Brighton to Great Malvern does not stop at Dilton but stops at Avoncliff Freshford Oldfield and keynsham

Today 1o98 and 1v96 is a 2-car 150

 

[berneyarms]

Excellent, thanks for that.

Just another 200 odd to do....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I agree within limits.
When a TOC starts running regular through services over a new route not previously used, then it can become a pain tracking services through different tables, made even more frustrating by the fact that the new timetabling software doesn't show connections nowadays either. Rearranging tables or modifying the contents of tables in these circumstances does make sense.

ps even then it sometimes doesn't work properly due to the serious weaknesses of the software. Table 123 was modified quite a while ago to reflect FGWs modifications to the services on this route (Great Malvern in particular), but even now the early morning FGW from Pompey to Brighton doesn't show in 123.

I wouldn't expect a train starting in Portsmouth and going to Brighton to be in table 123 though - that table is for trips from Wessex (and points west) to the south coast, and not coastway services, even if it is operated by FGW.

That train is correctly shown in table 188 which is the table covering the coastway west route.

 

[Hophead]

Somewhat unbelievably, Southern STILL do not have their new timetables up, a week after they changed.......

Adam

You can now make that 2 weeks near enough (just checked)!

 

[Parallel]

The down 1o98 from great Malvern to Brighton no longer calls at Keynsham and Oldfield Park yet insists on calling at Freshford Avoncliff and Dilton Marsh... I believe a South West Trains service has picked up the Oldfield stop

The return working 1v96 the 1659 from Brighton to Bristol Temple Meads has omitted Dilton Marsh since the last timetable change doesn't call at Avoncliff and Freshford but still calls Oldfield Park and Keynsham

The up 1v94 the 0859 from Brighton to Great Malvern does not stop at Dilton but stops at Avoncliff Freshford Oldfield and keynsham

Today 1o98 and 1v96 is a 2-car 150

I think the main reason the Great Malvern - Brighton service still calls at Freshford and Avoncliff is because it acts as a stopping service between Bristol and Westbury that operates hourly. As the SWT service already stops at Keynsham and then just gets stuck behind the Brighton stopper which runs a few mins in front, it makes sense for SWT to stop at Oldfield Park as it often ends up stationary near the Limpey Stoke viaduct for 5 minutes anyway.

It does look slightly weird on paper that the many stops FGW Great Malvern - Brighton service doesn't call at these FGW managed stations, and then a different operator does 10 or so minutes later. I still find it more difficult to digest that Keynsham gets more direct services to London Waterloo than Paddington... (Though most would change at Bath).

 

[backontrack]

Some of the most extensive changes have been in Scotland, with Dunbarton and Lanark services having big alterations. Here are Monday-Saturday off-peak timings.

2tph Helensburgh Ctrl - Edinburgh (stopping)
2tph Milngavie - Edinburgh (fast)
2tph Balloch - Airdrie via Singer (stopping)
1tph Milngavie - Cumbernauld via Hamilton and Motherwell (stopping)
2tph Dalmuir - Cumbernauld via Garscadden and Springburn (stopping)
1tph Queen St High Level - Falkirk Grahamston via Springburn (stopping)
2tph Dalmuir - Larkhall via Garscadden (stopping, avoids Bridgeton and Dalmarnock)
2tph Dalmuir - Whifflet via Singer, 1tph extends to Motherwell (stopping)
1tph Ctrl High Level - Edinburgh via Shotts (stopping)
1tph Ctrl High Level - Edinburgh via Shotts (fast)
2tph Ctrl High Level - Lanark via Bellshill (fast)

This gives 6tph between Partick and Airdrie, 5tph between Glasgow and Cumbernauld, 3tph between Partick and Whifflet and 6tph between Glasgow and Motherwell on Scotrail alone (6.5 counting the two-hourly XC services and there are also the infrequent VTEC, VT and FTPE services).

Carstairs terminators remain sporadic, as do Edinburgh through services via Carstairs.
Further north, there is now no late connection from Fearn and Alness to the sleeper as the 16:00 from Wick now misses out its Fearn, Alness and Conon Bridge calls (the latter is served by the 17:13 from Kyle of Localsh).

 

[Tetchytyke]

Not sure if it was mentioned before, but I noticed today that the Monday to Saturday Abbey Flyer is going to go hourly during the day from October. Is that a leaf fall timetable set out early, or are London Midland just scrimping on things yet again?

 

[Starmill]

I'm a bit confused as to what of that is different to the previous timetable, Backonrack...

 

[380gk]

I'm a bit confused by the dodgy maths

 

[MidnightFlyer]

You can now make that 2 weeks near enough (just checked)!

They're up now.

 

[MichaelAMW]

Following on from earlier questions along the lines of "Where do I now find...?", as various tables have been changed but the station index has not been updated, does anyone know where to find the intermediate stops between Nottingham and Peterborough on the 04.56 and 06.10 Nottingham - Norwich services, which both run via Loughborough?

 

[70014IronDuke]

Following on from earlier questions along the lines of "Where do I now find...?", as various tables have been changed but the station index has not been updated, does anyone know where to find the intermediate stops between Nottingham and Peterborough on the 04.56 and 06.10 Nottingham - Norwich services, which both run via Loughborough?

Perhaps table 53, or whichever one covers Nottingham and Leicester to Brum (used to be 57, I think)

 

[D6975]

I think this may be another case of services not being picked up by the compiling sofware when they don't follow convention established routes. They ought to appear in 53, but because they don't go to Leicester and beyond, they haven't been picked up. 'Long distance' timetables often omit local stoppers in this way. They both appear in 49, but that doesn't have these 'off route' stations listed, or even a footnote about extra stops, which the old software used to do. 'calls additionally at xxxx xx:22' or similar.

 

[70014IronDuke]

I think this may be another case of services not being picked up by the compiling sofware when they don't follow convention established routes. T .............

You are correct, I am sure, but I think it is worse than that.

Table 49 does not even include the early morning Cambridge to Stansted workings and the mid to late-evening Stansted - Cambridge workings that are part of Table 49 itself.

To locate these trains, you have to look at .. jussa minute - not in my head - ah yes, I was right - Table 22.

I can understand (to a point - though I don't agree with it) where a timetable operated very largely by one company does not contain the odd working by another TOC, but here they are failing to advertise their own services.

Am I the only one to find this bonkers?

70014 - The only Britannia to have been timed at 100 mph?
70014 - The only Britannia to have lost its in active service tender? :cry:

 

[berneyarms]

You are correct, I am sure, but I think it is worse than that.

Table 49 does not even include the early morning Cambridge to Stansted workings and the mid to late-evening Stansted - Cambridge workings that are part of Table 49 itself.

To locate these trains, you have to look at .. jussa minute - not in my head - ah yes, I was right - Table 22.

I can understand (to a point - though I don't agree with it) where a timetable operated very largely by one company does not contain the odd working by another TOC, but here they are failing to advertise their own services.

Am I the only one to find this bonkers?

70014 - The only Britannia to have been timed at 100 mph?
70014 - The only Britannia to have lost its in active service tender? :cry:

The Cambridge-Stansted services were never shown in table 49, but always included in table 22, which is the relevant table for trains on the WAML.

What relevance have they to table 49 given they don't go beyond Cambridge?

 

[70014IronDuke]

The Cambridge-Stansted services were never shown in table 49, but always included in table 22, which is the relevant table for trains on the WAML.

What relevance have they to table 49 given they don't go beyond Cambridge?

I'm sure you are correct, ie they have never been shown as part of table 49 - sorry, now renumbered Table 47.

That is not the point. They are part and parcel of the same service. At the very least there should be a note saying something like "see Table 22 for the complete service between CAM and STD."

I guess few "normals" actually consult timetables as such, they will just do a train search. But if they do, I fear many will not realise additional services exist.

 

[Goatboy]

Anyone know why this has changed for the new timetable? It used to go through to Great Malvern and now doesn't - which rather screws those of us who used it to get to GMV.

http://www.opentraintimes.com/schedule/P02047/2015-06-26

It's described in the FGW list of changes as:

1728 Warminster to Great Malvern will depart Bristol Temple Meads at 1837
and will run earlier to Gloucester. The service will depart Gloucester at 1952
and will run later to Worcester Shrub Hill where the service will terminate.

It now sits at Gloucester for TWENTY minutes - so not only does it not go where it used to, but the connection at Cheltenham Spa off the Cross Country service from the South West is now over an hour!

Its becoming more and more difficult to get enthusiastic about rail travel - my train ticket is higher than its ever been, the cost of using my car is lower than it has been for years and now the Summer timetable makes the journey longer. I already find it difficult to explain to people why I'm using the train instead of driving when the train costs so much more and takes longer and now this.

Sigh

And the even better bit is the connection at Worcester is onto a service from Paddington which is almost never on time.

Which I guess is handy for delay repay

 

[30907]

Without having the previous timetable to hand I think it may be to give the 1742 PAD-Cheltenham a better path. It also connects from Cardiff now.

BTW, where in the NRT does Cheltenham-Worcester appear? Not 57, 71, 125 or 134...

 

[70014IronDuke]

Without having the previous timetable to hand I think it may be to give the 1742 PAD-Cheltenham a better path. It also connects from Cardiff now.

BTW, where in the NRT does Cheltenham-Worcester appear? Not 57, 71, 125 or 134...

58

New TT number, just to itself.

 

[30907]

Thanks. Never thought to check as memory said 58 is Watford DC lines.

 

[Goatboy]

Without having the previous timetable to hand I think it may be to give the 1742 PAD-Cheltenham a better path. It also connects from Cardiff now.

Whilst I appreciate it's a balancing act it seems connections from the Cross Country main line services to Malvern get screwed further with every timetable iteration - first it was the Hereford line improvements breaking the connection at Worcester to Cheltenham on Sunday afternoons (I now have to drive to Worcester to get the train!) and now it's this in the other direction too.

This is a tricky route to get a connection on at the best of times because the FGW service between Cheltenham and Worcester is only 2 hourly.

I hope those on the 17:42 appreciate the better path!

 

[berneyarms]

Revised timetable pdfs for many FGW routes are now online (valid from 7 September).

Also some weekend supplements are available as well.

Southern have a revised timetable pdf for Redhill & Reigate from 7 September available on their website.

 

[berneyarms]

Chiltern leaf fall timetable pdf is now online, as is the new timetable from October 25.

Leaf fall timetable pdf files for certain routes on London Midland, Northern, Merseyrail, WYPTE, Southeastern and South West Trains are all now available.