SWR "Summer timetable"

[Bikeman78]

And what happens when the rest of the 455s go pop?

Why would they go pop? Unless they are not being maintained properly? It's a pretty poor show that SWR is having to take trains out of the timetable to prevent a meltdown.

You'd best direct that towards SWR.

What would be the point? Nothing would change.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Why would they go pop? Unless they are not being maintained properly? It's a pretty poor show that SWR is having to take trains out of the timetable to prevent a meltdown.

What would be the point? Nothing would change.

I don’t mean literally. I mean when they run out of miles.

 

[Bikeman78]

How many of those actually work, though?

At least 49 of them. I think there were 41 diagrams last week. Presumably 39 from tomorrow, given the extra 701 diagram.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Jul 2025 ==

I don’t mean literally. I mean when they run out of miles.

Fair comment, but deadlines will be spread out. Even if they were last overhauled at the rate of one per week, that would only lose another 25 units this year. 13 extra 701s would cover that.

 

[Goldfish62]

What would be the point? Nothing would change.

Do I really have to explain?

 

[davews]

With one week to these changes coming into effect, the changes are quite well hidden on the SWR website and can only be found by hunting among the service updates.

"This amended timetable includes the reduction of a small number of quieter, off-peak services during the summer holiday, when fewer customers are looking to travel."

The list posted earlier in this thread includes over 50 services and quite a few peak time ones. Very few of them can be described as 'quieter'. Who are SWR trying to fool. As pointed out the services have just been removed from the timetable and next Monday people turning up for their regular service will be puzzled why it doesn't even appear on the screens.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

As has been mentioned earlier this (may) be a case that crew numbers are stretched due to a number of reasons during the next couple of months, therefore diagrams, as in out and back from Waterloo, portions of stock diagrams, and the associated crew diagrams for those legs, have been pulled out to reduce the numbers of bodies required to run the service.

To pull out individual services so that ALL such trains removed were within recognised quieter periods, there would be a far increased level of crew diagram re-organisation required in so far as far more alterations to PNB times, relieving/relief of other crews and potentially changes to sign on/sign off times, the result of which (given the Union/TOC rostering rules that have to be abided by whatever the issue) would very likely result in very little, if any actual reduction in crew numbers needed. That will be the reality for those planning these temporary savings. If it was easy to remove quieter period trains only, and still make the (crew) savings required to still run the service, this would have been done, believe me.

 

[Craig1122]

To pull out individual services so that ALL such trains removed were within recognised quieter periods, there would be a far increased level of crew diagram re-organisation required in so far as far more alterations to PNB times, relieving/relief of other crews and potentially changes to sign on/sign off times, the result of which (given the Union/TOC rostering rules that have to be abided by whatever the issue) would very likely result in very little, if any actual reduction in crew numbers needed. That will be the reality for those planning these temporary savings. If it was easy to remove quieter period trains only, and still make the (crew) savings required to still run the service, this would have been done, believe me.

I think most people here realise that. It's the disingenuous and very well hidden comms that stick in the throat. SWR are the only ones describing them as quieter services.

I realise nothing will improve quickly but personally I had hoped there might be a move to be more honest & customer friendly with the change of operator but so far there's no discernable difference.

It's a stark contrast to the Stagecoach era. When they suspended Ascot - Guildford to catch up with training for Desiro introduction they were very open that was the reason and did at least offer free travel on the replacement buses.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I think most people here realise that. It's the disingenuous and very well hidden comms that stick in the throat. SWR are the only ones describing them as quieter services.

I realise nothing will improve quickly but personally I had hoped there might be a move to be more honest & customer friendly with the change of operator but so far there's no discernable difference.

It's a stark contrast to the Stagecoach era. When they suspended Ascot - Guildford to catch up with training for Desiro introduction they were very open that was the reason and did at least offer free travel on the replacement buses.

SWR and @JonathanH, who has been telling us in SWR land that our rush hour trains are very quiet for a good three or four years now

 

[Bald Rick]

it’s a straight choice between:

1) a few cancellations now when demand drops over the summer, and higher capacity with more new trains available in the autumn
2) normal service now, and cancellations in the autumn through not enough trains and fewer 701s with higher capacity.

 

[Class15]

it’s a straight choice between:

1) a few cancellations now when demand drops over the summer, and higher capacity with more new trains available in the autumn
2) normal service now, and cancellations in the autumn through not enough trains and fewer 701s with higher capacity.

I’d pick 2) because the SWR network is coping with the number of 455s and 701s currently available. There can be more 701 drivers being trained after the summer holidays.

 

[Bald Rick]

I’d pick 2) because the SWR network is coping with the number of 455s and 701s currently available. There can be more 701 drivers being trained after the summer holidays.

That misses the point ps that a) some current 455s will be out of service in the autumn, b) there are lots of instructor drivers who would otherwise be sat doing nothing for the summer if the 701 training was suspended, c) having more 701s in service by autumn will be a great help for performance, d) continuation of the training will make diagramming easier (thus avoiding on the day cancellations due to crew issues) and e) autumn is the busiest time on the railway, and more 701s will be needed then.

Put another way , if this timetable isnt put in service, there will be fewer trains in Autum to carry more people, less reliably.

 

[MasterPhillips]

it’s a straight choice between:

1) a few cancellations now when demand drops over the summer, and higher capacity with more new trains available in the autumn
2) normal service now, and cancellations in the autumn through not enough trains and fewer 701s with higher capacity.

The problem is SWR not making it clear if this is actually the reason. From what they have posted, and the announcements at stations, you would think this is just a normal timetable change that changes very little. The announcement at stations says there are only “minor“ changes. Leaving hour gaps between services is not minor.

 

[Watershed]

Additional traincrew demand during periods of training is something that should be addressed in the plan for introducing new fleets. So what has gone wrong with SWR's plan? Rather a lot, obviously - but it is a fundamental issue they would have faced regardless of when the 701s were ready to enter squadron service.

If their plan was always "cut X number of traincrew diagrams" then they should have also thought about how they were going to communicate that to the public. Which, you'd hope, would involve a degree of honesty that is lacking at the moment.

 

[Craig1122]

The problem is SWR not making it clear if this is actually the reason. From what they have posted, and the announcements at stations, you would think this is just a normal timetable change that changes very little. The announcement at stations says there are only “minor“ changes. Leaving hour gaps between services is not minor.

And this for me is the crux of the issue. I guessed this was probably for crew training and can grudgingly accept that it's the least worse option given the ongoing debacle of the 701 introduction. But there's been absolutely nothing official to confirm that's the case. It's also more than a little annoying that the cuts mean I'll probably end up paying to drive to work despite having just bought an annual season yet I won't be able to claim a penny back because they're claiming it's just a normal timetable change

 

[Watershed]

And this for me is the crux of the issue. I guessed this was probably for crew training and can grudgingly accept that it's the least worse option given the ongoing debacle of the 701 introduction. But there's been absolutely nothing official to confirm that's the case. It's also more than a little annoying that the cuts mean I'll probably end up paying to drive to work despite having just bought an annual season yet I won't be able to claim a penny back because they're claiming it's just a normal timetable change

If the timetable change wasn't advertised at the time when you bought your season ticket, you could try to make a claim for a pro-rata refund if you no longer want the season ticket. That would be under the Consumer Rights Act, on the basis that they are not providing the service with reasonable care and skill and/or in accordance with information they provided that influence your purchasing decision (i.e. the timetable).

In practice it would probably be easier to get a changeover to a very cheap season ticket like Hatton to Lapworth (£20.40 per month or £212 per year). Changeovers are calculated pro rata, so you would be refunded the difference between your current season ticket's daily cost and the new route's daily cost for the number of remaining days your season ticket is valid.

As Hatton to Lapworth is so cheap, the aforementioned changeover refund would likely equate to something like 90+% of what a full pro-rata refund of your season ticket would otherwise be.

Alternatively, you can also opt for a straightforward refund of your season ticket, as permitted under the Conditions of Travel. However, this would usually result in a lower refund than doing a changeover to a cheap season ticket, as it's calculated based on the cost of a season ticket and/or daily tickets for the duration you have already held your season ticket.

Since longer season tickets cost less per day than shorter ones (a monthly season costs 3.84x a weekly one, and an annual one costs 40x a weekly one), this ends up giving you less than a pro rata refund.

 

[bb21]

I’d pick 2) because the SWR network is coping with the number of 455s and 701s currently available. There can be more 701 drivers being trained after the summer holidays.

While the network is "coping" with the existing fleet of 455s, it offers a very much poorer travel experience for the customers than the new trains, especially in the summer season, which means it is a no brainer to take up training facilities available over summer to get as many crews competent as possible, when travel demand is more evenly spread out throughout the day and overall quieter during peak times.

It also helps guard against clusters of failures in 455s, which are becoming much more unreliable due to their age and difficulty in sourcing replacement parts, once summer season is over and resilience in peak capacity is very much crucial.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

I think most people here realise that.

No offence intended, and I'm sure you are correct in relation to those who are regular contributors.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

While the network is "coping" with the existing fleet of 455s, it offers a very much poorer travel experience for the customers than the new trains, especially in the summer season, which means it is a no brainer to take up training facilities available over summer to get as many crews competent as possible, when travel demand is more evenly spread out throughout the day and overall quieter during peak times.

Yes I for one cannot criticise SWR for this, if this is genuinely going to contribute to a faster 455 retirement/701 rollout.

 

[Class15]

Yes I for one cannot criticise SWR for this, if this is genuinely going to contribute to a faster 455 retirement/701 rollout.

Okay, so what would you rather?

1. Services get cancelled in the summer and 701s get into service quicker

2. Services don’t get cancelled in the summer and the 455s hang on for longer

I’d take 2 and the SWR commuters I know have agreed with me.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

2. Services don’t get cancelled in the summer and the 455s hang on for longer

As others have pointed out, the continuing existence of remaining 455's that are both serviceable and available in sufficient quantity may be ok as we speak this week, but the more they are used to back fill for lack of 701's, the faster they will reach their individual exam mileage limits, and there will come a point in time, may be sooner than some realise, that these old workhorses start dropping off the cliff at a rapid rate of knots, and if insufficient 701's and competent crews to work same are not available in the numbers required to cover the service in the autumn/winter this year, then the commuters concerned will have far more to complain about.

SWR have had to make a judgement call, based on all the information they (not us on here) will have, and to my mind as a former insider, they have probably gauged the situation as best as can be, as things stand currently.

 

[FRSZMZ56]

Okay, so what would you rather?

1. Services get cancelled in the summer and 701s get into service quicker

2. Services don’t get cancelled in the summer and the 455s hang on for longer

I’d take 2 and the SWR commuters I know have agreed with me.

Some commuters I know actively try to time their trains to catch the 701s in the summer, so considering they already go out of their way to sometimes catch a different one to their usual I would say they would prefer option 1 more.

Alongside what others have said about the 455s retiring faster, option 1 is easily the logical choice when there naturally is less demand over the summer. People will be impacted either way, and option 2 risks there being stock issues down the line as others have mentioned.

Even 1x new 701 in service per week is 2x 455s replaced, which is roughly the rate its been going at since May. I believe there is only 50-60ish 455s remaining (please correct me if im wrong), so 25/30 weeks if the rate continues means we could be rid of pretty much all of them by the end of the year.

 

[Bald Rick]

Okay, so what would you rather?

1. Services get cancelled in the summer and 701s get into service quicker

2. Services don’t get cancelled in the summer and the 455s hang on for longer

I’d take 2 and the SWR commuters I know have agreed with me.

But those aren’t the options available, as I explained above.

Put simply it is:

1) services get cancelled in the summer in a planned way with advance notice when passenger demand is reduced (by around 20%) and 701s get into service quicker

2) services dont get cancelled in the summer, but more services are cancelled or short formed in the autumn (ie more than are being cancelled now), often on the day with no notice, at the time when passenger demand is at its highest for the year.

which would you choose?

 

[Route115?]

Would it have been possible to put replacement buses on the lighter loaded Guildford - Acot services as they did in the early days of the Stagecoach SWT service?

 

[Craig1122]

Would it have been possible to put replacement buses on the lighter loaded Guildford - Acot services as they did in the early days of the Stagecoach SWT service?

It's now been split into Ascot - Aldershot and Farnham - Guildford. I understand that reflects passenger flows better but means that substituting the more lightly used part from Ascot would only now release 3 diagrams.

 

[Bikeman78]

Still a fair bit of tidying up to do on RTT, e.g. train arrives at Waterloo but next working cancelled.

 

[Stephen42]

Still a fair bit of tidying up to do on RTT, e.g. train arrives at Waterloo but next working cancelled.

The amends have gone in for next week, expect will be done on a week by week basis alongside the usual weekly alterations.

Looks like maybe 3 fewer services at peak times (so 6 units) alongside several other unit diagrams spending longer in depots or platforms between peaks.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

But those aren’t the options available, as I explained above.

Put simply it is:

1) services get cancelled in the summer in a planned way with advance notice when passenger demand is reduced (by around 20%) and 701s get into service quicker

2) services dont get cancelled in the summer, but more services are cancelled or short formed in the autumn (ie more than are being cancelled now), often on the day with no notice, at the time when passenger demand is at its highest for the year.

which would you choose?

Of course (1) is the best decision and they should have promoted the rationale for it and just listed out all trains impacted. I also hope they've had posters up at affected stations to alert passengers to short notice changes as surely this is within the brief that Heidi Alexander set for the industry "delivering excellent services for passengers wherever they travel"

 

[Craig1122]

Local MP for Runnymede posting on Facebook, don't think a link will work so text quoted below. Comments vary but generally they're blaming nationalisation and anticipating more cuts to come. If the reason is as speculated on this thread then this is why SWR need to be open & honest about it, the current approach, which seems to be just hoping no one will notice, is a PR disaster.

"Only in the mind of SWR could services between 7:00-9:30 on the Chertsey-Addlestone loop be considered 'off peak'.

Services that they have specifically reduced as part of their summer timetable this year, which they say includes 'the reduction of a small number of quieter, off-peak services during the summer holiday'.

Does SWR not think Chertsey and Addlestone have commuters who need to work during the summer? What are they supposed to do?

These timetable changes sum up SWR's attitude to the Chertsey and Addlestone loop, which I'm sure contributes to it being SWR's worst performing line, and is far from what Government promised nationalisation would deliver.

SWR need to stop serving themselves and start serving customers by reversing these planned changes now."

 

[RealTrains07]

Buried in the SWR website if you happen to scroll down the "plan my journey" page there's an entry which states that a summer timetable will operate from 28th July until 29th August, ie the school holiday period. The routes listed are mostly mainline suburban and Windsor lines routes, plus Alton, but no clue is given as to what the changes are other than they are "minor" and we should check journey planners.

Live Train Times & Travel Information | South Western Railway

Our journey planner provides live train times and train disruption information. Plan your journey and check for changes that might affect your journey

www.southwesternrailway.com

That's about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

Can anyone enlighten us as to what the changes are? Are they the odd minute here or there, or are whole journeys removed, for example?

They say its due to those routes having fewer customers travelling during the summer holidays.

Think we all know there far more to it than that i.e reduced train crew availability, lack of train stock to operate services, etc.

Take a pick but I highly doubt in the current swr climate this timetable is happening just because of “fewer” passenger numbers.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Local MP for Runnymede posting on Facebook, don't think a link will work so text quoted below. Comments vary but generally they're blaming nationalisation and anticipating more cuts to come. If the reason is as speculated on this thread then this is why SWR need to be open & honest about it, the current approach, which seems to be just hoping no one will notice, is a PR disaster.

"Only in the mind of SWR could services between 7:00-9:30 on the Chertsey-Addlestone loop be considered 'off peak'.

Services that they have specifically reduced as part of their summer timetable this year, which they say includes 'the reduction of a small number of quieter, off-peak services during the summer holiday'.

Does SWR not think Chertsey and Addlestone have commuters who need to work during the summer? What are they supposed to do?

These timetable changes sum up SWR's attitude to the Chertsey and Addlestone loop, which I'm sure contributes to it being SWR's worst performing line, and is far from what Government promised nationalisation would deliver.

SWR need to stop serving themselves and start serving customers by reversing these planned changes now."

Of course he’s going to say it’s the worst performing line though, because it’s his local patch.