|
grahame
|
 |
« on: July 26, 2021, 17:20:28 » |
|
From SWR» via TWSW» who have been invited to respond. I suggest inputs via this thread by 12th August, and I can then pass back to the board at TWSW. South Western Railway (SWR), in partnership with Network Rail and the Department for Transport, is today launching a consultation on proposals for our December 2022 timetable. This is a strategic review of future service levels across our network and we are keen to hear what you think.
Our consultation document is attached. We would invite you to read this before sharing your views with us: it sets out our plans in detail and includes a series of questions for you to answer, as well as FAQs▸ and guidance on how to respond.
Our approach to our future timetable is informed by an acknowledgement that, in the past, we have responded to ever higher customer demand by increasing the number of trains on the SWR network, often at the expense of the performance and reliability of our services. But, as we emerge from the Covid-19 pandemic, we have a unique opportunity to build back a better railway for the future.
Since March 2020, we have been supported by the Government to run a reduced service that has kept key workers moving. This period has shown that our performance improves significantly when we are able to run fewer trains while still meeting demand for our services. Customer satisfaction has also improved.
Even though passengers are returning to the railways, all the forecasts suggest they will not return to pre-Covid levels for the foreseeable future. Now is the time, therefore, to start planning for a long-term timetable that will retain the reliability improvements we’ve made, meet the forecast demand, provide value for the taxpayer while balancing other local and national priorities.
In summary, we are proposing changes which, while resulting in a slight reduction in frequencies, will still deliver capacity at 93% of pre-Covid levels. This is in excess of both current and predicted demand.
Crucially, we are considering a specification for services rather than specific trains or a timetable. It is for that reason that we are consulting with a defined set of organisations, which have a strategic or representative role rather than the wider community. You may wish, of course, to canvass opinion before responding to this consultation.
This consultation closes on 19th September 2021. We are conscious that your authority will need time to prepare a response. Please do let us know if you have any concerns about responding within the consultation timeframe. Document at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/mirror/SWR_Dec22_Consult.pdf - only for logged in members. This is a members only thread and I'll feed back through the defined channel. However, members may also wish to contact other "organisations with a strategic or representative role" too with their thoughts. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
|
|
|
|
Lee
|
|
« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2021, 17:39:26 » |
|
Or roughly translated "We know that passengers and the wider community are going to hate these widespread service cuts, so we intend to exclude them completely from the consultation process until it is too late for them to do anything about it"
Absolutely disgraceful. There is only one right, decent and principled response for TravelWatch SouthWest to give to this "Consultation" - Boycott it, say very publicly why, and encourage as many stakeholders as possible to do the same until SWR» back down and allow passengers and the communities they come from their rightful say.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Fairhurst
|
|
« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2021, 19:20:27 » |
|
An evening-only Reading–Salisbury is an interesting curiosity…
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
RichardB
|
|
« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2021, 19:44:24 » |
|
A couple of initial things jumped out at me:
1) The PM Exeter - Honiton/Axminster shorts being cancelled. This is really unfortunate and I wonder if GWR▸ would be able to step in and provide something similar to replace these SWR» services.
2) I'm originally from Bookham in Surrey and Waterloo - Guildford via Leatherhead is being reduced from half hourly to hourly off peak. The consultation makes great play of only Bookham losing out but surely the key thing about that service is the through link it provides between Epsom, Leatherhead and Guildford as well as the fact it provides Bookham - a very decently used station 322,142 estimated entries and exits in the last non Covid affected year, 18-19 (and 290,572 in 19-20) - with its half hourly service.
One bugbear of mine is that this kind of local service hasn't been actively promoted to the locals for decades. Big populations, good train services - basically not promoted. That's not a go at SWR - I don't think anyone has done it - SWT▸ , NSE▸ , BR▸ (S) - probably since the 60s. One exception is Thameslink when they ran the Luton (I think) - Guildford service for a short while many years ago. Always thought that was a strange one but it did restablish a through service between Epsom, Leatherhead and Guildford.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 26, 2021, 19:52:52 by RichardB »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stuving
|
|
« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2021, 19:54:45 » |
|
An evening-only Reading–Salisbury is an interesting curiosity…
... and always has been, for the two years it's been running. It was initially only on Sundays; now it's Mon-Fri but they were and are just to Reading late on and returning ECS▸ . There's now three two-way services on Sunday afternoon as well, but it's hard to tell whether that's related to works closing lines. Is what's proposed any curioser than that? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
PhilWakely
|
|
« Reply #5 on: July 26, 2021, 20:21:37 » |
|
An evening-only Reading–Salisbury is an interesting curiosity…
... and always has been, for the two years it's been running. It was initially only on Sundays; now it's Mon-Fri but they were and are just to Reading late on and returning ECS▸ . There's now three two-way services on Sunday afternoon as well, but it's hard to tell whether that's related to works closing lines. Is what's proposed any curioser than that? Probably just there as a route learner/refresher for BSK▸ - RDG‡, I guess. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Surrey 455
|
|
« Reply #6 on: July 26, 2021, 21:21:19 » |
|
A couple of initial things jumped out at me:
1) The PM Exeter - Honiton/Axminster shorts being cancelled. This is really unfortunate and I wonder if GWR▸ would be able to step in and provide something similar to replace these SWR» services.
2) I'm originally from Bookham in Surrey and Waterloo - Guildford via Leatherhead is being reduced from half hourly to hourly off peak. The consultation makes great play of only Bookham losing out but surely the key thing about that service is the through link it provides between Epsom, Leatherhead and Guildford as well as the fact it provides Bookham - a very decently used station 322,142 estimated entries and exits in the last non Covid affected year, 18-19 (and 290,572 in 19-20) - with its half hourly service.
One bugbear of mine is that this kind of local service hasn't been actively promoted to the locals for decades. Big populations, good train services - basically not promoted. That's not a go at SWR - I don't think anyone has done it - SWT▸ , NSE▸ , BR▸ (S) - probably since the 60s. One exception is Thameslink when they ran the Luton (I think) - Guildford service for a short while many years ago. Always thought that was a strange one but it did restablish a through service between Epsom, Leatherhead and Guildford.
Unfortunately it was reduced to an hourly service last year both peak and off peak. Page 17 of that document wrongly shows 2 trains in the May 2021 timetable for Guildford to Waterloo via Bookham and Leatherhead. I'm mildly pleased that they hope to re-introduce a half hourly service in the peaks but would have been happier if that were off-peak too. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
RichardB
|
|
« Reply #7 on: July 26, 2021, 21:29:58 » |
|
Unfortunately it was reduced to an hourly service last year both peak and off peak. Page 17 of that document wrongly shows 2 trains in the May 2021 timetable for Guildford to Waterloo via Bookham and Leatherhead. I'm mildly pleased that they hope to re-introduce a half hourly service in the peaks but would have been happier if that were off-peak too.
Not great they are trying to make a Covid cut - completely understandable during lockdowns - permanent. I do hope there is a big local campaign which makes the point about promoting the service too. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stuving
|
|
« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2021, 22:07:12 » |
|
An evening-only Reading–Salisbury is an interesting curiosity…
... and always has been, for the two years it's been running. It was initially only on Sundays; now it's Mon-Fri but they were and are just to Reading late on and returning ECS▸ . There's now three two-way services on Sunday afternoon as well, but it's hard to tell whether that's related to works closing lines. Is what's proposed any curioser than that? Probably just there as a route learner/refresher for BSK▸ - RDG‡, I guess. No need to guess - SWR» give their rationale as: "Operating these services to Reading allows us to maintain crew competency over this route which can be used during disruption or planned engineering work to divert services to Reading." It does look as if, having decided to run them anyway, they are trying to make at least the part up to Basingstoke a useful service. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Fairhurst
|
|
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2021, 23:53:38 » |
|
... and always has been, for the two years it's been running. It was initially only on Sundays; now it's Mon-Fri but they were and are just to Reading late on and returning ECS▸ . There's now three two-way services on Sunday afternoon as well, but it's hard to tell whether that's related to works closing lines. Is what's proposed any curioser than that? It makes it likely that the fastest journey from London to Salisbury (and vice versa), for significant periods in the evening, will be via Paddington and Reading - especially given that the consultation document says " replacing London Waterloo to Salisbury services". I wonder when that was last the case, if ever? (Perhaps at a time when the GWR▸ and LSWR▸ were in competition?) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #10 on: July 27, 2021, 14:51:52 » |
|
A couple of initial things jumped out at me:
1) The PM Exeter - Honiton/Axminster shorts being cancelled. This is really unfortunate and I wonder if GWR▸ would be able to step in and provide something similar to replace these SWR» services. Not a chance. The DfT» want to keep the reigns on costs, so a *very* good business case would be required, versus a 'nice to have' service (that may, yes, encourage more travellers) Performance has improved no end, and customer satisfaction is up. Packed trains, in excess of capacity complaints will be the only way to get the DfT to sanction an increase from current levels, or services missing that need to be reinstated for school or work shift times. Outside those parameters, wishful thinking. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
RichardB
|
|
« Reply #11 on: July 27, 2021, 16:09:51 » |
|
A couple of initial things jumped out at me:
1) The PM Exeter - Honiton/Axminster shorts being cancelled. This is really unfortunate and I wonder if GWR▸ would be able to step in and provide something similar to replace these SWR» services. Not a chance. The DfT» want to keep the reigns on costs, so a *very* good business case would be required, versus a 'nice to have' service (that may, yes, encourage more travellers) Performance has improved no end, and customer satisfaction is up. Packed trains, in excess of capacity complaints will be the only way to get the DfT to sanction an increase from current levels, or services missing that need to be reinstated for school or work shift times. Outside those parameters, wishful thinking. Let's just say, we will see. A lot depends on whether locals, MPs▸ etc just shrug their shoulders or make a fuss. I don't think these cuts would have been attempted pre-Covid and it's far too early to say where demand will finish up as we emerge from it (as far as we are ever going to in the foreseeable future). It's no secret that GWR have long wanted to run locals to Honiton and Axminster. Here are paths - that probably need improving - that GWR could slot into if (massive if) they have the will, the stock, the crews and - crucially - the DfT's permission. Far from impossible but if everyone simply shrugs their shoulders, probably not likely to happen. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 27, 2021, 16:17:15 by RichardB »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #12 on: July 27, 2021, 16:13:09 » |
|
yep, agree.
But the DfT» will want to wait & see also, and then reinstate where shown to be necessary. IMHO▸
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #13 on: July 27, 2021, 16:21:24 » |
|
Informed feedback via email: Thank you for the information Graham. There are a couple of small positives in that they have recognised that leisure travel is likely to increase above pre covid levels (from my own experience I would say that “off peak” travel is already back to at least pre covid levels) and that the Salisbury to Waterloo service which connects with the GWR▸ service from West Wilts will be reinstated from December 2022. However what about from December 2021 when they plan to withdraw the Waterloo to Bristol service?
Weekend Waterloo Bristol services in both directions are already very busy and unless GWR are going to run services in their place, which seems to rather defeat the “duplication argument”, then we will have more overcrowding issues. Overcrowding will not increase footfall. I’m unsure about the current weekday loadings but I will have a trip to Bath on the ones that are still running in the next week or 2 and report back. The morning one, as you know, which they have already withdrawn was always busy in both directions.
I found the customer satisfaction graph very interesting as the nose dive didn’t happen until First Group took over. All the time it was SWT▸ , apart from a few initial hiccups, which Stagecoach very quickly learnt from, the customer satisfaction levels were pretty steady and on the rare occasions they dipped slightly, it was generally due to circumstances beyond their control. SWT ran a very intensive service, yet the majority of trains were on time, probably in part due to the fact the train maintenance was better and they had sufficient staff to run the trains so weren’t reliant on people working overtime just to keep the service running. Even now with a lower level of service, unless drivers work their free days, a number of trains are cancelled. And that is before the additional problem of drivers being pinged by the covid app.
The current satisfaction figures, I assume were collated during the worst of the pandemic, so only those who were key workers or had something specific to attend would have been travelling because there was no where to go that was open. Everyone always enjoyed travelling more on an empty train and obviously if very few trains are running, it’s less likely something will go wrong so you would expect high satisfaction figures at the moment.
Overcrowding is already an issue on some trains, again particularly at weekends. It is quite worrying when talking to someone while I was out walking, she told me about how her daughter got a train from Bradford-on-Avon to Dilton Marsh (18 July I believe) which was full and standing, so she told her daughter to get a taxi in future.
I find it rather concerning that the "duplication" is just part of the route. Bristol - Waterloo gives you completely different journey opportunities so I fail to see how you can regard it as duplication. Is this a “test the water” to perhaps have Portsmouth - Cardiff terminating at Bristol because Newport and Cardiff “duplicate” with Transport for Wales?
ASLEF» union is totally against "the end of duplication", so think it very unlikely, Graham, they would dismiss out of hand your compromise suggestion for the Bristol - Waterloo service with crews from both SWR» and GWR working them. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #14 on: July 27, 2021, 20:34:56 » |
|
Need to bear in mind that farebox extraction services aren't likely to survive now that all farebox money goes one way - to the DfT» .
But what the DfT now need to realise is what happens to the customers currently being carried on these services - they are still likely to travel, so unless the 'main' services on the route(s) can currently cope with these additional pax, then they'll need to retain services that can.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
