Would it be possible to have faster services on the London Waterloo - Portsmouth route?

[pompeyfan]

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...efurbishment-and-redeployment.127422/page-134

From a personal point of view, it’s a shame there’s not a Portsmouth in 90 type service, first stop Petersfield or something similar, just as a headline train.

 

[mchd2000]

From a personal point of view, it’s a shame there’s not a Portsmouth in 90 type service, first stop Petersfield or something similar, just as a headline train.

An additional ‘super fast’ service in each peak calling at Haslemere, Havant, Fratton, Southsea and Harbour would be a good option.
On a clear run WAT-HSL can be done in around 45 mins.
Then to Havant would be a further 22
Fratton, a further 9
Southsea, a further 5
& Harbour, a further 4

Would be a journey time of 85 mins

 

[mchd2000]

It is strange that SWR run non-stop services to Winchester or even Southampton on the SWML yet they do nothing similar on the PDL.

Back in the days of SWT, there used to be a 1747 non-stop to Haslemere

 

[theironroad]

It is strange that SWR run non-stop services to Winchester or even Southampton on the SWML yet they do nothing similar on the PDL.

Back in the days of SWT, there used to be a 1747 non-stop to Haslemere

There are no timetabled non stop services from Waterloo to Southampton and only 4 per day in the evening peak m-f that are non stop to Winchester.

 

[mchd2000]

There are no timetabled non stop services from Waterloo to Southampton and only 4 per day in the evening peak m-f that are non stop to Winchester.

There’s the 1900 departure from Southampton Central which runs non-stop to Waterloo (which admittedly runs on a Sunday)

 

[HamworthyGoods]

An additional ‘super fast’ service in each peak calling at Haslemere, Havant, Fratton, Southsea and Harbour would be a good option.
On a clear run WAT-HSL can be done in around 45 mins.
Then to Havant would be a further 22
Fratton, a further 9
Southsea, a further 5
& Harbour, a further 4

Would be a journey time of 85 mins

And how do you propose a clear run to Haslemere without building additional infrastructure or taking existing services out.

It’s a well known fact that the more trains you run on a network the harder it is to provide “headline journey times” the Pompey fasts are already slower than optimal due to catching up the stopper.

 

[EastCoastway]

There simply is no more room or paths, that's why the CLJ stops have been removed from more services...

 

[mchd2000]

And how do you propose a clear run to Haslemere without building additional infrastructure or taking existing services out.

It’s a well known fact that the more trains you run on a network the harder it is to provide “headline journey times” the Pompey fasts are already slower than optimal due to catching up the stopper.

By example the 1715 and 1815 could run non-stop to Haslemere as they have a pathway and there are no trains in the way south of Guildford. It would also provide adequate clearance from the 1700 and 1800. Even if the service called at Haslemere and then Havant, Fratton, Southsea, Harbour, the preceding service wouldn’t be caught up.
Passengers for Guildford could use the 1718 and 1818 which have a similar journey time and are under-utilised

 

[The Ham]

Those "Surbiton" services can't stay on the slow lines as they are full further in. The timetable maximises overall capacity not journey speed. To see the full benefits of Woking flyover would also need some outer SWML power supply improvements.

However it would be needed for Southern Approach to Heathrow and/or Crossrail 2, given that there would be benefits in it being there before those schemes why not just do it early?

It would also mean that we weren't reliant on it being on part of the critical path for either schemes, so reduces the risk of it causing delays.

Even with the power supply improvements what's it due to cost £250 million? Given it could significantly reduce the risk of there being delays at Woking and delay repay gets paid out for <15 minutes then there's likely to be some savings there. Even before you consider the benefits (what would these be?) of the power supply improvements (I assume that these would also be required once additional services were running following the opening of Crossrail 2 and/or Southern Approach to Heathrow).

 

[HamworthyGoods]

By example the 1715 and 1815 could run non-stop to Haslemere as they have a pathway and there are no trains in the way south of Guildford. It would also provide adequate clearance from the 1700 and 1800. Even if the service called at Haslemere and then Havant, Fratton, Southsea, Harbour, the preceding service wouldn’t be caught up.
Passengers for Guildford could use the 1718 and 1818 which have a similar journey time and are under-utilised

Incorrect regarding the 17.15 and 18.15 having no trains in the way I’m afraid, they are at headway at Shalford Junction behind the 2Oxx Reading to Redhill service so removing Guildford wouldn’t make the slightest bit of difference, they would just end up sitting in platform 2 awaiting the road. That is why the 17.15 has an extended dwell at Guildford to maintain headway.

As you can see timetabling isn’t a piece of cake on an increasingly busy network.

 

[theironroad]

There’s the 1900 departure from Southampton Central which runs non-stop to Waterloo (which admittedly runs on a Sunday)

People only seemed to be talking about down services, hence I omitted the one a week up service .

 

[moley]

In any peak hour, with 3 Southern Services from Chichester, 2 SWR from Eastleigh, 2 SWR from Southampton, 1 GWR from Southampton and 4 SWR from Petersfield all headed to Fratton, plus 2 SWR and 2 Southern (and possibly a GWR for good measure) across the top of the triangle, you must be starting to get to the limit of the triangle at Farlington.

 

[pompeyfan]

In any peak hour, with 3 Southern Services from Chichester, 2 SWR from Eastleigh, 2 SWR from Southampton, 1 GWR from Southampton and 4 SWR from Petersfield all headed to Fratton, plus 2 SWR and 2 Southern (and possibly a GWR for good measure) across the top of the triangle, you must be starting to get to the limit of the triangle at Farlington.

I don’t think there’s 2 SWR across the Netley apart from the additional Poole service but I get your point.

 

[Monty]

Not really how it can be justified for Haslemere, a town with a population of a mere 15,000 people to have a non stop service to and from London even if its just the peak. I think people forget that places like Godalming, Haslemere and Petersfield are modest sized towns that already have a very good service provision. There are much larger towns that have a worst service (or in the case of Gosport no service at all). Running trains 'non stop' on the SWD is a nightmare enough as it is.

 

[pompeyfan]

Not really how it can be justified for Haslemere, a town with a population of a mere 15,000 people to have a non stop service to and from London even if its just the peak. I think people forget that places like Godalming, Haslemere and Petersfield are modest sized towns that already have a very good service provision. There are much larger towns that have a worst service (or in the case of Gosport no service at all). Running trains 'non stop' on the SWD is a nightmare enough as it is.

Haslemere is very blue though and those kind of service provisions win seats if someone else can take the glory. To reconnect gosport would cost an absolute bomb, but would do wonders if you could get the station close enough to the major Suburbs like Ann’s Hill or the town centre.

 

[mchd2000]

Haslemere is very blue though and those kind of service provisions win seats if someone else can take the glory.

In all fairness, Haslemere does have very high passenger numbers for a town of it’s size (1.8m recorded in 17/18) which is significantly larger than Petersfield and Godalming at 1.4m each. There also is a very high proportion of season ticket holders making it justifiable to have a non-stop up and down peak service, potentially calling at all stations before and after Haslemere respectively.
Key point to note is SWR passenger numbers are probably pretty similar all in all at Haslemere station to Havant station (2m passengers recorded in 17/18 on Southern/SWR) once those using Southern have been stripped out

 

[HamworthyGoods]

In all fairness, Haslemere does have very high passenger numbers for a town of it’s size (1.8m recorded in 17/18) which is significantly larger than Petersfield and Godalming at 1.4m each. There also is a very high proportion of season ticket holders making it justifiable to have a non-stop up and down peak service, potentially calling at all stations before and after Haslemere respectively.
Key point to note is SWR passenger numbers are probably pretty similar all in all at Haslemere station to Havant station (2m passengers recorded in 17/18 on Southern/SWR) once those using Southern have been stripped out

The 17.15 ex Waterloo effectively does that, calling only at Guildford before Haslemere.

 

[Graham H]

Not really how it can be justified for Haslemere, a town with a population of a mere 15,000 people to have a non stop service to and from London even if its just the peak. I think people forget that places like Godalming, Haslemere and Petersfield are modest sized towns that already have a very good service provision. There are much larger towns that have a worst service (or in the case of Gosport no service at all). Running trains 'non stop' on the SWD is a nightmare enough as it is.

Not sure such a service would be regarded as just for Haslemere. Isnt it more about capacity from stations south of there ? I know I used to travel to London from Havant on a train that was non stop from Haslemere and that was always full and standing by then so really that was a case of why stop as we are full already. There was also a service which added a unit at Guildford, a 444 from Havant then either a 450 or 444 would be waiting. Seemed like a great idea as the good folk of Guildford could roll up, find a seat easily (quite a novel experience for them !) and wait in the relative warmth of a coach rather than on the platform. I've often wondered why that wasn't a more common idea, I recall Western region had a scheme whereby a train would always be in Paddington for Bristol (I think) so you never had to hang around waiting or joining the scrum when the gates opened. One unit from Portsmouth joining another at Guildford would reduce the amount of fresh air on a 10 or 12 coach set up south thereof and arguably a 444 from Portsmouth with a 450 added would be a sensible use of resources.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Not sure such a service would be regarded as just for Haslemere. Isnt it more about capacity from stations south of there ? I know I used to travel to London from Havant on a train that was non stop from Haslemere and that was always full and standing by then so really that was a case of why stop as we are full already. There was also a service which added a unit at Guildford, a 444 from Havant then either a 450 or 444 would be waiting. Seemed like a great idea as the good folk of Guildford could roll up, find a seat easily (quite a novel experience for them !) and wait in the relative warmth of a coach rather than on the platform. I've often wondered why that wasn't a more common idea, I recall Western region had a scheme whereby a train would always be in Paddington for Bristol (I think) so you never had to hang around waiting or joining the scrum when the gates opened. One unit from Portsmouth joining another at Guildford would reduce the amount of fresh air on a 10 or 12 coach set up south thereof and arguably a 444 from Portsmouth with a 450 added would be a sensible use of resources.

The train which attached at Guildford in the morning (07.45 ex PMH) was removed to run as a 10 car from Pompey when stock became available as passengers from Haslemere and south of were unable to get a seat.

 

[mchd2000]

The 17.15 ex Waterloo effectively does that, calling only at Guildford before Haslemere.

Agreed it does, but if there were to be a slight retiming of the service, say 2 mins earlier from Waterloo, and running via Woking it could easily clear Guildford before the GWR North Downs service crossing Shawford Junction meaning increased capacity and reduced journey time for those south of Haslemere. It would also alleviate the pressure on the Fasts

 

[Dibbo4025]

Agreed it does, but if there were to be a slight retiming of the service, say 2 mins earlier from Waterloo, and running via Woking it could easily clear Guildford before the GWR North Downs service crossing Shawford Junction meaning increased capacity and reduced journey time for those south of Haslemere. It would also alleviate the pressure on the Fasts

But with a service about every 3 minutes on the fasts out of Waterloo even such a small alteration would probably require a recast of a large amount of the timetable. In this case you'd need to swap it with the 1711 Basingstoke which then has pathing issues over Woking junction...

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Agreed it does, but if there were to be a slight retiming of the service, say 2 mins earlier from Waterloo, and running via Woking it could easily clear Guildford before the GWR North Downs service crossing Shawford Junction meaning increased capacity and reduced journey time for those south of Haslemere. It would also alleviate the pressure on the Fasts

On the SWML a 2 minute re-timing isn’t ‘slight’ it’s a whole train path.

There is no path to run that service via Woking non-stop due to the 16.50 Waterloo to Woking 2F stopper crossing from the down slow into the down bay, that’s why the 17.15 Pompey runs via Cobham.

I hear you say re-time the Woking stopper into the bay later but they have to make that crossing move sometime (any time is never a good time), putting it later would knock onto the 17.18 Haslemere (which in turn would delay the 17.30 Pompey at Haslemere) and more critically knock onto the 17.20 Exeter which has to hit its slot at Basingstoke as the cross-country from Manchester to Bournemouth crosses at margin behind.

Timetabling is a balance, the 17.15 takes 53 minutes to get to Haslemere the same as the average fast trains. I think in this case with the 17.15 they’ve got it about right when you look at the impacts of what you suggest.

 

[AlbertBeale]

People only seemed to be talking about down services, hence I omitted the one a week up service .

What's the reason for the single Sunday evening non-stop Soton-Waterloo, given that no other service in either direction does that all week? Is it just because they can? (And at Soton it's only 5 minutes behind another Poole-London service - which it overtakes.) Is there really a need for two trains' capacity on that route then? Or is it that rich weekenders in Poole and Bournemouth expect a rapid, almost non-stop, trip (on a train under-populated with plebs) back to their London homes on Sunday evenings?

I came across it "by accident" when travelling from Southampton to London one weekend recently, arriving at the station just moments before it arrived, and wondered what was going on when it didn't then stop anywhere...

 

[infobleep]

Incorrect regarding the 17.15 and 18.15 having no trains in the way I’m afraid, they are at headway at Shalford Junction behind the 2Oxx Reading to Redhill service so removing Guildford wouldn’t make the slightest bit of difference, they would just end up sitting in platform 2 awaiting the road. That is why the 17.15 has an extended dwell at Guildford to maintain headway.

As you can see timetabling isn’t a piece of cake on an increasingly busy network.

Given there is an extended dwell at Guildford, why not stop at an additional station on route. Choose the most popular one and run it as a fast train to that station.

Would they need another minute to do that as I see the dwell at Guildford is 4 minutes?

 

[Dibbo4025]

Given there is an extended dwell at Guildford, why not stop at an additional station on route. Choose the most popular one and run it as a fast train to that station.

Would they need another minute to do that as I see the dwell at Guildford is 4 minutes?

So theoretically yes but there isn't really anywhere you would stop. There isn't a oath through Woking so you couldn't stop there and still have to run via the new line and the stop has to be after Surbiton as the slow to Guildford via Cobham is immediately behind at Hampton Court junction. So that basically only leaves Effingham or Cobham as options and I'm not sure either warrant such a fast service.

Also given the congestion on the fasts out of Waterloo I'm sure SWR are quite happy to have that dwell to help keep the train on time by the point it reaches the Havant-Portsmouth corridor.

 

[theironroad]

What's the reason for the single Sunday evening non-stop Soton-Waterloo, given that no other service in either direction does that all week? Is it just because they can? (And at Soton it's only 5 minutes behind another Poole-London service - which it overtakes.) Is there really a need for two trains' capacity on that route then? Or is it that rich weekenders in Poole and Bournemouth expect a rapid, almost non-stop, trip (on a train under-populated with plebs) back to their London homes on Sunday evenings?

I came across it "by accident" when travelling from Southampton to London one weekend recently, arriving at the station just moments before it arrived, and wondered what was going on when it didn't then stop anywhere...

It's supposed to be a stock move to get a 10- 442 from Bournemouth depot to fratton depot for a Monday morning, however it hasn't had a 442 on it yet and is replaced by a desiro.

When it arrives in London it forms a fast service to Portsmouth via the new line.

It's actually a good idea to have it in service from Poole to Waterloo as while ,yes, a lot of weekenders wil probably use it, so will daytrippers on a sunny day in summer and it takes the pressure of the stopper in front which can be rammed on a hot day with locals from Southampton downwards going to Bournemouth beach.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

So theoretically yes but there isn't really anywhere you would stop. There isn't a oath through Woking so you couldn't stop there and still have to run via the new line and the stop has to be after Surbiton as the slow to Guildford via Cobham is immediately behind at Hampton Court junction. So that basically only leaves Effingham or Cobham as options and I'm not sure either warrant such a fast service.

Also given the congestion on the fasts out of Waterloo I'm sure SWR are quite happy to have that dwell to help keep the train on time by the point it reaches the Havant-Portsmouth corridor.

Also it allows the signaller on the day to route it via Woking if required. If it had a new line stop it would have to run that route even if it meant following a stopper all the way.

 

[AlbertBeale]

It's supposed to be a stock move to get a 10- 442 from Bournemouth depot to fratton depot for a Monday morning, however it hasn't had a 442 on it yet and is replaced by a desiro.

When it arrives in London it forms a fast service to Portsmouth via the new line.

It's actually a good idea to have it in service from Poole to Waterloo as while ,yes, a lot of weekenders wil probably use it, so will daytrippers on a sunny day in summer and it takes the pressure of the stopper in front which can be rammed on a hot day with locals from Southampton downwards going to Bournemouth beach.

Thanks for this explanation. However - excuse my ignorance - but what's "the new line"?

 

[theironroad]

Thanks for this explanation. However - excuse my ignorance - but what's "the new line"?

The 'new line' is the line between just south of Surbiton (diverge/converge at Hampton Court Junction) and just north of Guildford where it joins the mainline.

Of the top of my head and despite being built in the 19th century, it was the line that was built after the mainline via woking and worplesdon, hence 'new'.

 

[AlbertBeale]

The 'new line' is the line between just south of Surbiton (diverge/converge at Hampton Court Junction) and just north of Guildford where it joins the mainline.

Of the top of my head and despite being built in the 19th century, it was the line that was built after the mainline via woking and worplesdon, hence 'new'.

Aha - so that's the route via Effingham Junction! (I always think of that as the old slow route ... well, it is slow.) Thanks.