Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[asylumxl]

Why's it not going to work? The Germans make it work on their S-Bahns.

I think the problem with the future TL timetable is that it's over ambitious. Assuming the reliability of the 700s improves, they won't be the cause of most issues.

I mean, as it is we already have trains from a variety of routes converging in to the Thameslink core, these trains mix with other traffic on both sides of the core and through various pinch-points on their respective routes. The potential for knock on delays is already high. It'll only get worse as more routes are sent through the core.

 

[physics34]

I think the problem with the future TL timetable is that it's over ambitious. Assuming the reliability of the 700s improves, they won't be the cause of most issues.

I mean, as it is we already have trains from a variety of routes converging in to the Thameslink core, these trains mix with other traffic on both sides of the core and through various pinch-points on their respective routes. The potential for knock on delays is already high. It'll only get worse as more routes are sent through the core.

there needs to be a contingency where a train coming from the south shall terminate at London Bridge platforms 10-15 if its, say, more than 15 minutes late...

(..will you be able to go from the Kent lines to LBG 10-15? Im not sure).

You can just see a domino effect if you mix late trains with on time trains.

A failure in the core of some kind or an extended delay doesnt bare thinking about.!!

 

[fusionblue]

I'm curious to see how the 700s fare on the Sevenoaks and Sutton routes with passengers (same length but less seats irrespective of quality, same frequency).

I suspect at some stations (lets use Crofton Park towards london, for example) people will just bunch in the front three carriages (irrespective of what the screens say if there is any seats) and not move down because the Blackfriars North entrance is at the front.

From anyone using the 700s already, is there evidence of this sort of thing happening?

Do you mean wheelslip? All modern Southern EMUs have an anti-wheelslip mechanism

I'm not 100% railway literate (so i dont know how to describe it very well, sorry!), but i experienced it again today on a 319. It was very jerky and chugging along every time it started to pull off with a corresponding change in tones from the motor? There was just a tiny bit of drizzle outside.

 

[physics34]

I'm not 100% railway literate (so i dont know how to describe it very well, sorry!), but i experienced it again today on a 319. It was very jerky and chugging along every time it started to pull off with a corresponding change in tones from the motor? There was just a tiny bit of drizzle outside.

Tiny bit of drizzle is worse than a complete wet rail/steady or heavy rain.

 

[Alteran Ancient]

there needs to be a contingency where a train coming from the south shall terminate at London Bridge platforms 10-15 if its, say, more than 15 minutes late...

(..will you be able to go from the Kent lines to LBG 10-15? Im not sure).

If you're already on the Catford Loop, your only options are Victoria (1-8) or the Bay Platforms at Blackfriars (3-4). If you've not made it to Beckenham Junction yet, you can switch on to the Hayes line and get to London Bridge that way, but I'd imagine that's already timetabled to capacity so not really feasible, for the same reasons the Bromley South to Cannon Street peak service was discontinued many years ago.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

If you're already on the Catford Loop, your only options are Victoria (1-8) or the Bay Platforms at Blackfriars (3-4). If you've not made it to Beckenham Junction yet, you can switch on to the Hayes line and get to London Bridge that way, but I'd imagine that's already timetabled to capacity so not really feasible, for the same reasons the Bromley South to Cannon Street peak service was discontinued many years ago.

Assuming you mean to get off at Catford and walk to Catford Bridge station to join a train from Hayes that will be full and standing already.

 

[Class377/5]

Yeah, we passengers who rely on Thameslink are overjoyed to hear you're excited that more sub-standard 700s are to be inflicted on us.

1W11 massively delayed this morning (700107) ran fast from Bedford to Luton. How is this delivering anywhere near the required level of customer service.?

1W93 was also delayed by having to be regulated to allow a late running 700 cross onto the down slow north of Leagrave. Your monstrosities are tearing the timetable apart.

That a bit of over dramatic colourful description of what NR did to a 700 service.

When you say 1W93 was delayed? Er it seems when you check this service, it actually ran right time as far as Elephant & Castle. Not sure your claimed regulation delay is actually true, unless your digging up pervious issues with no context? See the link for below...

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/G73654/2016/08/22/advanced

So this ripping the service apart claim of yours have any real evidence as it seems your description cannot be trusted when checked out.

Any chance you have some data showing that 700s are having more failures than the 319s or is this just anecdotal?

Seems real evidence shows a different result from that claimed.

Yep I believe a sub class should be created for outer suburban. It would be too late to change the order now I guess for interior fittings but I guess there was time a while back when this could've been altered.

The third variant of the 700s was scrapped. 8 car with no first class was the original plan for routes like Sutton and Sevenoaks.

there needs to be a contingency where a train coming from the south shall terminate at London Bridge platforms 10-15 if its, say, more than 15 minutes late...

(..will you be able to go from the Kent lines to LBG 10-15? Im not sure).

You can just see a domino effect if you mix late trains with on time trains.

A failure in the core of some kind or an extended delay doesnt bare thinking about.!!

Kent lines like the Maidstone East or Rainham via London Bridge service scould be diverted but it to reach the Core will be tough. Might be better to go elsewhere with the service.

The Sevenoaks/Orpington won't go near London Bridge so won't be affected.

I'm curious to see how the 700s fare on the Sevenoaks and Sutton routes with passengers (same length but less seats irrespective of quality, same frequency).

I suspect at some stations (lets use Crofton Park towards london, for example) people will just bunch in the front three carriages (irrespective of what the screens say if there is any seats) and not move down because the Blackfriars North entrance is at the front.

From anyone using the 700s already, is there evidence of this sort of thing happening?

The 0547 off Brighton loading varied wildly the first week the 700 was introduced. Since then they have stabilised with the front busier. This is to be expected with it being a London Bridge service so you have to exit the platform from the front of the train. No idea north of Gatwick how the loadings are tho.

 

[phoenixcronin]

Obligatory ask for this weeks workings?

 

[Class377/5]

Obligatory ask for this weeks workings?

Same as last weeks. s this thread has been moving quite quickly here they are...

TB501
5Y91 02+14 Jowett Sidings to Bedford
2W91 02.40 Bedford to Brighton
1B00 05.47 Brighton to London Bridge
1B05 07.12 London Bridge to Brighton
1B10 08.27 Brighton to London Bridge
1B15 09.42 London Bridge to Brighton
1B22 11.02 Brighton to London Bridge
1B25 12.12 London Bridge to Brighton
5B25 13+29 Brighton to Down Yard
5B38 14+42 Down Yard to Brighton
1B38 15.02 Brighton to London Bridge
1B41 16.12 London Bridge to Brighton
1B48 17.32 Brighton to London Bridge
1B51 18.42 London Bridge to Brighton
5W51 20+06 Brighton to Three Bridges Depot

TB502
5W93 05+10 Three Bridges Depot to Three Bridges
2W94 05.20 Three Bridges to Bedford
1W13 07.34 Bedford to Brighton
1W24 10.35 Brighton to Bedford
2W41 13.24 Bedford to Three Bridges
5W92 15+41 Three Bridges to Three Bridges Depot
5W92 15+56 Three Bridges Depot to Three Bridges
1W92 15.59 Three Bridges to Bedford
2W61 18.24 Bedford to Three Bridges
2W66 20.43 Three Bridges to Bedford
5Y68 23+00 Bedford to Jowett Sidings

TB503
5Y11 06+32 Jowett Sidings to Bedford
1W11 06.58 Bedford to Three Bridges
2W22 09.11 Three Bridges to Bedford
1W29 11.40 Bedford to Brighton
1W40 14.35 Brighton to Bedford
2W57 17.20 Bedford to Three Bridges
2W62 19.43 Three Bridges to Bedford
5Y62 22+00 Bedford to Jowett Sidings

TB504
5W02 05+07 Brighton Down Yard to Brighton
1W02 05.30 Brighton to Bedford
2W21 08.24 Bedford to Three Bridges
5W30 10+41 Three Bridges to Three Bridges Depot
5W30 10+56 Three Bridges Depot to Three Bridges
2W30 10.59 Three Bridges to Bedford
1W37 13.40 Bedford to Brighton
1W96 16.35 Brighton to Bedford
5Y96 19+03 Bedford to Jowett Sidings

TB505
5Y01 03+47 Jowett Siding to Bedford
1W01 04.16 Bedford to Brighton
1W82 07.22 Brighton to Bedford
1W23 10.10 Bedford to Brighton
1W34 13.05 Brighton to Bedford
1W45 15.50 Bedford to Brighton
1W56 18.35 Brighton to Bedford
5Y69 21+14 Bedford to Jowett Sidings
5Y69 21+27 Jowett Sidings to Bedford
1W69 21.40 Bedford to Brighton
5W69 00+25 Brighton to Down Yard

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Same as last weeks. s this thread has been moving quite quickly here they are...

TB501
5Y91 02+14 Jowett Sidings to Bedford
2W91 02.40 Bedford to Brighton
1B00 05.47 Brighton to London Bridge
1B05 07.12 London Bridge to Brighton
1B10 08.27 Brighton to London Bridge
1B15 09.42 London Bridge to Brighton
1B22 11.02 Brighton to London Bridge
1B25 12.12 London Bridge to Brighton
5B25 13+29 Brighton to Down Yard
5B38 14+42 Down Yard to Brighton
1B38 15.02 Brighton to London Bridge
1B41 16.12 London Bridge to Brighton
1B48 17.32 Brighton to London Bridge
1B51 18.42 London Bridge to Brighton
5W51 20+06 Brighton to Three Bridges Depot

TB502
5W93 05+10 Three Bridges Depot to Three Bridges
2W94 05.20 Three Bridges to Bedford
1W13 07.34 Bedford to Brighton
1W24 10.35 Brighton to Bedford
2W41 13.24 Bedford to Three Bridges
5W92 15+41 Three Bridges to Three Bridges Depot
5W92 15+56 Three Bridges Depot to Three Bridges
1W92 15.59 Three Bridges to Bedford
2W61 18.24 Bedford to Three Bridges
2W66 20.43 Three Bridges to Bedford
5Y68 23+00 Bedford to Jowett Sidings

TB503
5Y11 06+32 Jowett Sidings to Bedford
1W11 06.58 Bedford to Three Bridges
2W22 09.11 Three Bridges to Bedford
1W29 11.40 Bedford to Brighton
1W40 14.35 Brighton to Bedford
2W57 17.20 Bedford to Three Bridges
2W62 19.43 Three Bridges to Bedford
5Y62 22+00 Bedford to Jowett Sidings

TB504
5W02 05+07 Brighton Down Yard to Brighton
1W02 05.30 Brighton to Bedford
2W21 08.24 Bedford to Three Bridges
5W30 10+41 Three Bridges to Three Bridges Depot
5W30 10+56 Three Bridges Depot to Three Bridges
2W30 10.59 Three Bridges to Bedford
1W37 13.40 Bedford to Brighton
1W96 16.35 Brighton to Bedford
5Y96 19+03 Bedford to Jowett Sidings

TB505
5Y01 03+47 Jowett Siding to Bedford
1W01 04.16 Bedford to Brighton
1W82 07.22 Brighton to Bedford
1W23 10.10 Bedford to Brighton
1W34 13.05 Brighton to Bedford
1W45 15.50 Bedford to Brighton
1W56 18.35 Brighton to Bedford
5Y69 21+14 Bedford to Jowett Sidings
5Y69 21+27 Jowett Sidings to Bedford
1W69 21.40 Bedford to Brighton
5W69 00+25 Brighton to Down Yard

Thank you very much, just to say that some of us do appreciate your input...

 

[Class377/5]

Thank you very much, just to say that some of us do appreciate your input...

Thanks. Have the draft workings for Saturday onwards. This weekend will some 700s out Saturday, none Sunday (engineering works) and lots Monday onwards. Will update later in the week once its confirmed.

 

[The Box Photter]

Any chance you have some data showing that 700s are having more failures than the 319s or is this just anecdotal?

Check this evening's Thameslink Twitter feed or look on their website. My impirical data comes from daily being unable to get home because a 700 has had a "computer says no" moment & the service has been cancelled........like tonight.

 

[southern442]

No there are 2 seats across airline with no tables on the 377s. Bald Rick stated London Commuter trains so your study missed that and went for another point.

The reason why I went for a slightly different approach is because I believe that the point Bald Rick was making was missing the point myself and others were making. I was proving the point a lot of us have been making.

As for part tables, the 377/3 nubs are fairly useless.

I disagree. I can usually get a seat with a table on 377/3s so it might just be me, but even on a busier train you could still put small items on it so long as whoever is sitting next to you isn't too unfriendly. If you are travelling as a group then the tables are even more useful as there won't be anyone preventing you from using it.

But they are part of the service group Rick mentions so ignoring them to prove a point about something not said misses the point.

The service group Bald Rick mentions misses the point myself and others were making.

I'm not sure half tables are as easy as made out. Seat back tables require the seats to be replaced so its not going to be cheap either way if they get tables into the 700s.

It was a short-sighted decision to not compromise by including tables and they should be prepared to pay the price for that.

You however did by including the 377s and other classes. I don't think its fair to have a significant part of the train have no tables and yet be labelled as having tables. Especially as your lists were tables or no tables. I think a third group of some tables is needed for balance.

If I have time I will re-do the list with 'some tables' and include all stock (including tube stock as you suggested) to make it fairer. I personally think the tube stock will tip the balance in favour of armrests and tables/some tables.

Your points about increasing capacity on the railway are perfectly reasonable. We can't keep the railway as it is because demand is increasing rapidly, and on top of that as a country we need to curb road and air usage to keep pollution to a minimum. However I think that removing seats and cramming lots of people in is not the right approach. We need to keep the country moving but compromising comfort is not the way to do that, we need more frequent services along railway lines (which admittedly is happening here) but we also need more railway lines countrywide, and we need smaller railway lines such as the Uckfield Branch and North Downs lines to be heavily upgraded and promoted as alternatives. It won't come at a friendly cost but it is something that must be done.

 

[samuelmorris]

Narrowly missed 700107 on TG505 this morning and was genuinely disappointed at having to take the following 319s behind, so they must be doing something right!

Many thanks for the diagrams class 377/5, is much appreciated.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Thanks. Have the draft workings for Saturday onwards. This weekend will some 700s out Saturday, none Sunday (engineering works) and lots Monday onwards. Will update later in the week once its confirmed.

Thanks, better polish my lenses then....

 

[bramling]

Your views however have been extremely selfish

That's a matter of opinion. What you meant to say was "In my opinion your views have been extremely selfish".

you don't want anything to change despite the fact that increasing numbers mean it cannot stay the same forever.

Never said I don't want anything to change. (As usual, you feel the need to twist what people say before posting your counter-argument).

Nonetheless, as you well know, I have a number of issues and concerns with the Thameslink Programme:

1) The trains are inadequate for those travelling further than the metro area, as well as certain features making them poor even for short journeys.

2) Inherent unreliability of the extended operation. I'm not going to bother repeating all the same points, save to say that despite having read and considered the various "assurances" posted on here, nothing convinces me that this is all going to work well. For me (and many others throughout Sussex, Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire, Norfolk and Cambridgeshire) this is a worse risk than the inferior trains. Thameslink is an inherently unreliable and poorly performing operation. It's hard to find people with anything positive to say about its reliability. The works being done may deliver some improvement, but nothing solves the problem of trains picking up delays in other areas.

(As a completely non-statistically-significant example, just this morning when walking to King's Cross to catch my (on-time!) train, I happened to walk through St Pancras and observed that both northbound and southbound Thameslink services were running well late. Good job it's not 2019 or I'd probably have been late home.)

I have posted before that I would prefer Thameslink to be superimposed as far as possible over and above the existing service, rather than in place of it, particularly for the journeys further out. It's a good bet that this may well end up being the eventual result if punctuality and reliability deteriorates to levels that become politically unacceptable. By all means have Thameslink and the class 700s, but for those travelling further out there should be some degree of choice -- then most people would be happy.

That is not acceptable for a modern railway to do nothing about that. The TLP is about increasing capacity. You cannot do that without making through services as there is a limit to what the terminal stations can handle.

Fine. Just leave some services which don't run through.

he French figured this out awhile ago as well as other cities. It works here so why not London? This is no different from when the Tube took over various routes in London to help release capacity at the mainline station.

I'm struggling to think of a Tube route which runs over 75 miles from London!

I'm also struggling to think of a Tube route which has five different service groups all sharing the same platforms, let alone with a junction so close to central London.

It's worth remembering one particular Tube route where just two lines worth of passengers were sent down one tunnel -- the Bakerloo Line from 1939 whose junction was also very close to Central London at Baker Street, just like Thameslink Programme's key junction at St. Pancras. This was a disaster on so many levels, such that another tunnel, the Jubilee Line, had to be expensively built in the 1970s to provide relief. Meanwhile, LU has long-held aspirations to split the Northern Line for the same reason.

Its not rumours. Officials (I can't remember who) has stated they are in talks. That's what we call a fact btw. A rumour is something not officially discussed publicly.

Yes I've now seen it written officially. It would be interesting to know how much money will have been wasted by the initial decision not to include them. Evidently someone somewhere feels Thameslink Programme got it wrong. If money turns out to be wasted, Thameslink Programme and/or DFT should be held accountable for that.

Personally I'd rather have that so in an impact the canal deforms to keep my seat upright and my space persevered as much as possible than a external wall that deforms into me.

That sounds interesting, but you'll have to re-write that so it makes sense, as I can't work out what you're on about.

 

[asylumxl]

Speaking of wasting money, I'm hoping that the Sutton loop services don't remain through trains in the long term.

I understand that there was a lot of political backlash regarding the original decision to terminate them at Blackfriars, but when large sums of money have been spent to remove conflicting moves it seems rather unfair for other users to have their routes reliability impacted for the sake of just one.

 

[jon0844]

Wasn't it stated on here how they might address the issue of adding tables? Namely switching over nearer the end of the current construction and then swapping some seats - so not all will get seat back tables.

I also wonder if the 717s will get tables? If not, they could come with them too - and, again, the seats are swapped over.

I'm sure it can be done. It is perhaps a shame the seats weren't of the type where tables could be added easily. Today I was on a AGA 170 and you can see it's one standard seat back. Obviously the seat without a table doesn't need one, but if the 700s had been like that, they could ALL have had them retro-fitted.

https://goo.gl/photos/71zKHJAycwPT3gGk9

 

[bramling]

Why's it not going to work? The Germans make it work on their S-Bahns.

You board a northbound Thameslink train to Cambridge, which is 10 minutes late going north from St Pancras (for whatever reason).

First of all, you have to get onto the GN at Belle Isle. This probably won't be an issue, although it could be if something happens to be leaving King's Cross on the down slow just at the right time - if so one of the trains is going to be delayed.

At Finsbury Park there's the choice of three lines. You will probably find a slot on the down fast although may have to wait a gap in the East Coast, Hull Trains, Grand Central or even Great Northern service, so may sit in the platform at Finsbury Park waiting for this. Alternatively you can run on the down slow but somewhere along the line you're likely to catch an all-stations Hertford or Welwyn train, you will also be constrained by the lower line speeds on the slow.

By Potters Bar the train more-or-less *has* to cross to the down slow, as you now have station stops at Potters Bar and Hatfield, as well as later the need to slow for the DF-DS crossover at Welwyn GC if you stayed on the DF. If you stay on the fast, you *will* be holding up something else.

But crossing onto the down slow now means the out-of-path train may well become tangled up with an all-stations Welwyn GC train, which calls additionally at Brookmans Park and Welham Green. The signaller may be able to hold that back, delaying that, depending on how the two services converge. Worst case scenario is you follow one all the way to Welwyn, possibly losing 5-10 minutes depending on how it pans out.

Whatever happens, by the time you get to Welwyn, the train now has to occupy the down fast again to get over the viaduct, as well as the call at Welwyn North. The need to call at Welwyn North means you will take up the equivalent of two paths, bearing in mind the booked two paths have been wasted. Unless you're very lucky and there happens to be a two-path gap just at the right moment, either you get held back for a suitable gap, or something else gets delayed. So perhaps another couple of delay minutes for someone.

From Woolmer Green you can run fast line or slow, but you're calling at Knebworth and Stevenage, so if you run on the fast line you're almost certainly holding something up (the same train you may well have been holding up behind you whilst you called at Welwyn North). If you run on the slow line there might be a terminating Hertford line train reversing in platform 4 at Stevenage, which could block you for up to 10 minutes, or alternatively that could be held back and delayed to make room for you. Also bear in mind that there are 4tph to Cambridge and Peterborough who also need to be routed one line or another through Stevenage and are subject to the same constraints. By Hitchin, everything needs to share the one down platform in order to make the call. Quite easy to accrue 5-10 minutes delay here for one or more trains.

Having left Hitchin, you're no longer tangled up with Peterborough services, but you're now booked to call at *seven* intermediate stations. Using the same line are 2tph non-stop London to Cambridge, and 2tph which call at three of the seven stations. There's a limited overtaking opportunity at Hitchin by using the old route (albeit a train using the old route will have to cross both up lines on the level), and an even more limited opportunity at Royston by routing something through the up platform (if one of the 6tph up services aren't using it at the time). Both these overtaking opportunities rely on the trains being in the right place at the right time. So either you get held back at Hitchin for however long required (if there's somewhere to hold you that doesn't delay something else), or something else gets stuck behind you and potentially delayed for 15-20 minutes.

Finally at Shepreth Branch Junction you have to fit in with 3 or 4 tph off the West Anglia route. If you're unlucky enough to coincide, one or the other will be delayed by a couple of minutes. One of the Anglia services actually runs all the way to Birmingham.

Bear in mind that 2tph are ultimately planned for the London to Kings Lynn service, these being the non-stop trains described above. This route has long single-line sections between Littleport and Downham Market, and between Watlington and Kings Lynn. Delay one of these services and your down delay has now potentially transmitted to the entire up service with the same domino effects right back to London.

The alternative scenario is your service gets re-scheduled to miss out stops, or turned short somewhere. Either of these options creates a 60-minute gap at many intermediate locations with the proposed 2tph service patterns.

Now imagine all of the above when there's more than just one late-running service emanating from Thameslink...

 

[bluegoblin7]

Was 1W37 operated by a 700 yesterday as booked? If so (and part of me hopes it isn't, to avoid giving those with an agenda something to whine about), what was the fault that caused it to sit down at St. Albans for 30+ minutes?

 

[LBSCR Times]

Was 1W37 operated by a 700 yesterday as booked? If so (and part of me hopes it isn't, to avoid giving those with an agenda something to whine about), what was the fault that caused it to sit down at St. Albans for 30+ minutes?

It certainly was operated by a 700....
Siemens Engineers managed to talk the driver through the fault.
Most of the delay was in emergency egressing the doors to allow the passengers to alight before the driver could fault-find.

Some people have short memories....
The delays when the 377/5's entered service with FCC, and having Bombardier fitters riding on the units too.
(Never mind when earlier stock first came in to service either).

 

[urpert]

I passed this interesting 700 working at Farringdon earlier - taking a very long way around to get to Hornsey!

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O22131/2016/08/23/advanced

 

[swt_passenger]

I passed this interesting 700 working at Farringdon earlier - taking a very long way around to get to Hornsey!

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O22131/2016/08/23/advanced

Apart from the timing being STP, it is a normal route for Bedford or Cricklewood to Hornsey stock transfers that has been going on for years. 'Q' paths exist in the WTT Mon to Fri throughout the timetable period, here's a few for today:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...8/23/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=freight&order=wtt

 

[SAPhil]

Some people have short memories....
The delays when the 377/5's entered service with FCC, and having Bombardier fitters riding on the units too.
(Never mind when earlier stock first came in to service either).

I don't think people have forgotten at all. Some of the issues seem to be very similar so I would have hoped they could have been avoided this time around!

Given that there are teething troubles (which I'm sure will be sorted eventually) the decision to run the trains during the peak times is what seems to annoy a lot of people (myself included).

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Given that there are teething troubles (which I'm sure will be sorted eventually) the decision to run the trains during the peak times is what seems to annoy a lot of people (myself included).

They've been running them off peak as well....i.e. all day diagrams

 

[SAPhil]

They've been running them off peak as well....i.e. all day diagrams

I'm aware of that. My point was that it would have been better to have run only in the off peak until at least the door issues were resolved.

 

[AM9]

I'm aware of that. My point was that it would have been better to have run only in the off peak until at least the door issues were resolved.

Why are off-peak passengers less affected than commuters?

 

[ComUtoR]

Why are off-peak passengers less affected than commuters?

Easier service recovery. Lesser delay impact due to better paths. Less people to move. Easier to divert due to better paths. Higher availability of staff.

 

[AM9]

Easier service recovery. Lesser delay impact due to better paths. Less people to move. Easier to divert due to better paths. Higher availability of staff.

Or:

longer gaps between withdrawn trains,
passengers who have less alternative route knowledge,
passengers with luggage/children/old persons,
- maybe many of the above involved in critical long-distance connections.​

The failures so far are not necessarily down to defects in the trains themselves and it seems that many of them are operational issues that will need to be proven under all conditions. That includes running in the intense services that only occur in the peak hours.
Running full diagrams has to start soon and the larger population of operational failures encountered, the quicker the teething troubles will be overcome. I think that the intention is to get as far as possible into that process during the summer school holidays period of which there is only this week and next week left. Over that period, commuter traffic is normally much less than normal (whereas leisure travel in the off-peak is higher). Come mid-September peak traffic will rise back to previous normal levels (Brexit permitting ).

 

[ComUtoR]

Or:
longer gaps between withdrawn trains,

That's the problem with service recovery. You decide to cancel a train so that the services behind can then run on time, staff displacement is reduced and the knock on affect to services are dramatically reduced. In the peak you still get cancellations but there is carnage. Trains back up, passengers back up, staff back up. Then, the knock on effect still disrupts the off peak as you are still fighting service recovery.

Running full diagrams has to start soon and the larger population of operational failures encountered, the quicker the teething troubles will be overcome.

Staffing is the big problem. It is already happening where Driver are getting a 700 on their diagram but still don't sign the unit. Operationally behind the scenes there are just as many "teething problems".