3tph on North Downs Line

[Clarence Yard]

The DfT are ultimately paying for all this so there is no dispute about funding the studies. It’s just somebody has to make some sense out of them and give a definitive quantified answer on the peak/off peak position rather than just say “I think......”.

 

[tornado]

Is the extra capacity/substations expensive, or technically difficult? I am just wondering the reason it hasn't been implemented in parallel with the introduction of the 769s. They seem the ideal stock to be used with a section-by-section introduction of electric power. Surely, small sections could be done at a time now with immediate savings in fuel and emissions.

 

[Minstral25]

Redhill to Reigate is the weak section limited to 4 cars and needs to be reinforced if the Thameslink service is going to be diverted. Redhill to Gatwick is 12 car conductor rail index with power system reinforced both with additional substations and National Grid capacity over the last 10 years so a couple of extra 4 cars aint going to break the system. Wokingham to Reading maybe closer to capacity due to grid capacity rather than lineside traction substation capacity but this is about NR being tasked to make an assessment but no doubt GWR dont want to pay for the studies and NR dont do anything for nothing.

Logic says that but I have been told by NR staff that whilst the main line is very compliant the slow line which these will run along has only just got enough capacity for what it currently runs. It seems odd slow line has significantly less capacity than a mainline right next to it. Perhaps someone with better knowledge of local lines around Redhill could explain or debunk the lack of capacity argument.

 

[JonathanH]

Logic says that but I have been told by NR staff that whilst the main line is very compliant the slow line which these will run along has only just got enough capacity for what it currently runs. It seems odd slow line has significantly less capacity than a mainline right next to it. Perhaps someone with better knowledge of local lines around Redhill could explain or debunk the lack of capacity argument.

That doesn't seem obvious. It would be good to have an explanation.

Aren't there fewer trains south of Redhill on the slow lines in the peak hours now than there were prior to May 2018, and prior to that when Gatwick Express trains used to run fast through the middle lines at Redhill. Indeed, what happens when the Quarry Line is shut? There must be more than eight trains an hour through Redhill (ie including those running non-stop) on those occasions.

As a case in point, in the normal peak hour, there are six electric trains southbound from Redhill to Gatwick, plus the GWR service.
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/se...20-12-17/1800-1900?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt

On Sunday 8 November, the Quarry line is shut and there are nine electric trains each hour from Redhill to Gatwick (seven non-stopping at Redhill), plus the GWR service.
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/se...20-11-08/1200-1300?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Logic says that but I have been told by NR staff that whilst the main line is very compliant the slow line which these will run along has only just got enough capacity for what it currently runs. It seems odd slow line has significantly less capacity than a mainline right next to it. Perhaps someone with better knowledge of local lines around Redhill could explain or debunk the lack of capacity argument.

Earlswood to Three Bridges has the same capacity on ALL lines. Furthermore the Slows have and do support 12-14 trains/hour (12 car) when engineering works are in progress on the Fasts. Redhill upto Reigate is the weak link but it can support an electric 4 car on each line.
The fact that NR is promoting the decarbonisation policy for the network yet we have situations like this amongst others. The next potential farce will be EMRs 810 running electric Kettering to Bedford only and diesel under the wires Bedford to St Pancras but maybe some will get a grip of this one before squadron service starts

 

[Class 170101]

Wokingham to Reading maybe closer to capacity due to grid capacity rather than lineside traction substation capacity but this is about NR being tasked to make an assessment but no doubt GWR dont want to pay for the studies and NR dont do anything for nothing.

Is that what Track Access payments are for? GWR will be paying for the 3rd Path per hour surely this study should come from these funds otherwise is there an incentive for NR to do anything?

 

[gallafent]

Sure, a 319 with windows open at 100mph is pretty noisy, I won't disagree with that!

GWR ones should - their units are fitted with AC throughout the train.

— so the GWR 769s should be a lot quieter inside when running electric than a 319 (with at least one window open in a carriage!), since they have air-con (and other comments in the thread linked above suggest that the hopper windows will be locked closed though still available for emergencies …).

 

[infobleep]

Is the point of making them bi-modes so they can be sold on elsewhere if GWR doesn't need them any more?

 

[JonathanH]

Is the point of making them bi-modes so they can be sold on elsewhere if GWR doesn't need them any more?

No, it is just a function of the fact that the diesel trains which were available used to be pure electrics and the electric functionality isn't being removed.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Is that what Track Access payments are for? GWR will be paying for the 3rd Path per hour surely this study should come from these funds otherwise is there an incentive for NR to do anything?

Track Access payments are for maintenance activities - anything to do with enhancements has to be separately authorized and funded by the DfT, which is what they are doing now to enable a full power survey on the Wessex side to be carried out.

 

[Class 170101]

Track Access payments are for maintenance activities

Thats as may be but there won't be anymore work done in Section 4 if what I've seen elsewhere is anything to go by I'm afraid.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Track Access payments are for maintenance activities - anything to do with enhancements has to be separately authorized and funded by the DfT, which is what they are doing now to enable a full power survey on the Wessex side to be carried out.

How long have GWR been going to deploy 769s to NDL - 2-3 years at least and there only doing a survey now!! The industry seems incapable of learning from past mistakes despite the vast armies of consultants and hangers on employed on six figure salaries. Anyhow give Gatwick is looking like a lost cause for several years now they have time to get it sorted or if they get there finger out actually electrify the missing bits and then they can use SWR or GTR emus on it!!

 

[Wyrleybart]

Is the point of making them bi-modes so they can be sold on elsewhere if GWR doesn't need them any more?

No. Porterbrook have a pile of 319s gently rusting away which are not yet considered life expired. Someone in their ROSCO thought it might be a good idea to hang a couple diesel gensets underneath which theoretically would be able to provide an equivalent source of 750V DC to the traction equipment. These "franks" were made available to TOCs and Northern, TfW and GWR took the bait.
Not sure that Porterbrook as owner would sell them on, if and when it's contract with GWR expired. That is assuming those 769s are successfully brought into traffic and are reliable ewnough to displace the Turbos to the west.

 

[Clarence Yard]

How long have GWR been going to deploy 769s to NDL - 2-3 years at least and there only doing a survey now!! The industry seems incapable of learning from past mistakes despite the vast armies of consultants and hangers on employed on six figure salaries. Anyhow give Gatwick is looking like a lost cause for several years now they have time to get it sorted or if they get there finger out actually electrify the missing bits and then they can use SWR or GTR emus on it!!

GWR aren’t doing the survey - NR are doing it, paid for by the DfT who are really behind the 769 procurement. Until recently NR has been lukewarm about the 3TPH and the power supply position along the route, the latter with good reason although there is nationwide industry frustration about NR’s inability to clearly define the limits of their power supply, something that BR had a better handle on with their own experienced power supply staff.

 

[Bikeman78]

Not sure that Porterbrook as owner would sell them on, if and when it's contract with GWR expired. That is assuming those 769s are successfully brought into traffic

I'd happily bet a few quid that none will ever carry passengers!

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

GWR aren’t doing the survey - NR are doing it, paid for by the DfT who are really behind the 769 procurement. Until recently NR has been lukewarm about the 3TPH and the power supply position along the route, the latter with good reason although there is nationwide industry frustration about NR’s inability to clearly define the limits of their power supply, something that BR had a better handle on with their own experienced power supply staff.

Yeah we had simulation programmes running off mainframes in 1980's that RTC built for the DofMEE. This isnt difficult to do with modern day computing all you need is a timetable and electrical profiles of the stock. I had to submit simulations for overnight runs now you can do it in seconds on a decent desktop and run multiple permutations. What seems difficult is the industry still not be joined up to get the ducks lined up as I say GWR wanted to deploy 769's to NDL so why wasn't the assessment initiated then?

 

[Bald Rick]

I'd happily bet a few quid that none will ever carry passengers!

I’ll tske that.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I would too, as it’s most definitely going to happen. In fact I‘d bet a fair few quid on a GWR 769 being in passenger service this side of Easter.

 

[Bikeman78]

I would too, as it’s most definitely going to happen. In fact I‘d bet a fair few quid on a GWR 769 being in passenger service this side of Easter.

Might beat the Welsh and Northern ones then!

 

[infobleep]

Back to 3tph, given we are locking down what are the changlves of GWR removing all trains to Gatwick Airport again or will they deem the lockdown to be short enough to allow those to run?

 

[Bald Rick]

Back to 3tph, given we are locking down what are the changlves of GWR removing all trains to Gatwick Airport again or will they deem the lockdown to be short enough to allow those to run?

It’s very unlikely TOCs will implement a ‘lockdown only’ timetable.

All the timetable changes we have seen over the summer have taken 4-6 weeks to plan.

 

[Wyrleybart]

I would too, as it’s most definitely going to happen. In fact I‘d bet a fair few quid on a GWR 769 being in passenger service this side of Easter.

Given the first one was delivered in August and it is practically November I assume a couple of dozen drivers have completed training then ? Or has it (the first one) actually left Reading depot yet ?
Photos of GWR 769s are rather scarce from what I can see, but obviously the latest partial lockdown will have an impact from Thursday.

 

[JN114]

Given the first one was delivered in August and it is practically November I assume a couple of dozen drivers have completed training then ? Or has it (the first one) actually left Reading depot yet ?
Photos of GWR 769s are rather scarce from what I can see, but obviously the latest partial lockdown will have an impact from Thursday.

Engineering staff are still undergoing training on them at present.

***

As it stands, there are no plans to change the timetable for lockdown this time around; although I’m sure industry leaders are monitoring the situation constantly

 

[infobleep]

It’s very unlikely TOCs will implement a ‘lockdown only’ timetable.

All the timetable changes we have seen over the summer have taken 4-6 weeks to plan.

That's good news. I thought that might be the case but then they didn't seem to implement timetable changes fairly quickly from the user perspective back in March. It may not have been like that in reality of course.

 

[Deepgreen]

I would too, as it’s most definitely going to happen. In fact I‘d bet a fair few quid on a GWR 769 being in passenger service this side of Easter.

Not on the NDL though, I strongly suspect.

 

[infobleep]

I'm sure this has been asked before but does anyone know when they might consider whether the trail additional services to Redhill have been a success or failure operational wise? They may also be in between those two extrems too. So I'm not saying it is binary.

I decided to avoid one of the terminates to Redhill and get the 19:3ō from Guildford instead.

However, due to earlier trespasser incident they decided to terminate the train at Redhill to the benefit of other trains. They also decided to switch to platform 0 and due to delays of other services to Reading, we had to wait for platform 0 to become free thus delaying us into Redhill by 10 minutes.

Of course it goes right down to the far end so its quite a ran to reach platform 3 and I thus missed the late running 20:25. Still delay repay now due.

They could do with another footbridge to enable easier access to platform 3 but that's for another thraad, not that I could see it happening. Far more deserving places isn't have such things.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I'm sure this has been asked before but does anyone know when they might consider whether the trail additional services to Redhill have been a success or failure operational wise? They may also be in between those two extrems too. So I'm not saying it is binary.

I decided to avoid one of the terminates to Redhill and get the 19:3ō from Guildford instead.

However, due to earlier trespasser incident they decided to terminate the train at Redhill to the benefit of other trains. They also decided to switch to platform 0 and due to delays of other services to Reading, we had to wait for platform 0 to become free thus delaying us into Redhill by 10 minutes.

Of course it goes right down to the far end so its quite a ran to reach platform 3 and I thus missed the late running 20:25. Still delay repay now due.

They could do with another footbridge to enable easier access to platform 3 but that's for another thraad, not that I could see it happening. Far more deserving places isn't have such things.

Platform 0 cost £50m surely most expensive P0 addition to the infrastructure yet its debatable that it has improved the passengers lot one iota, despite NR telling us "We are putting passengers First", when I hear examples like this. Inherently the operation of the new layout condemns anyone on the Tonbridge shuttles or anything of four cars or less on P0 being dumped 200yds from the subway steps hardly conducive to making timely connections. So whilst its very disappointing a footbridge wasn't installed some simple rejigging of the stop markers could massively improve the passengers lot.

 

[JN114]

However, due to earlier trespasser incident they decided to terminate the train at Redhill to the benefit of other trains. They also decided to switch to platform 0 and due to delays of other services to Reading, we had to wait for platform 0 to become free thus delaying us into Redhill by 10 minutes.

Of course it goes right down to the far end so its quite a ran to reach platform 3 and I thus missed the late running 20:25. Still delay repay now due.

Ah...

It was congestion mitigation as to why the train terminated at Redhill. NR were, rightly, trying to thin out the service a little at Gatwick to allow things to recover. When the decision was made (around the time the train was at North Camp), the fast lines through Gatwick were closed, and there was a train at every signal from Gatwick back to Redhill on the slows.

It was complicated by the fact that on the way back from Gatwick it attaches to the next stopper from Reading. I thought Three Bridges were going to shunt it over to Loco Sidings and back in on top of the stopper (which is due to run into London end of 0), but instead they decided to hold you outside until 0 was free and instructed the driver to go to the far end, causing an annoying reverse attachment that was then a pig to sort back out when it got back to Reading, as well as missed connections etc etc - 20/20 hindsight but if they’d said they were going to mess around like that I’dve fought harder for the train to go through...

Generally though the new TT works. It’s still a pain to recover from major disruption, but that’s more down to how it’s crewed, with the vast majority of trains out-and-back crews from Reading. There’s more to manage, but that’s not a bad thing in my book.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Ah...

It was congestion mitigation as to why the train terminated at Redhill. NR were, rightly, trying to thin out the service a little at Gatwick to allow things to recover. When the decision was made (around the time the train was at North Camp), the fast lines through Gatwick were closed, and there was a train at every signal from Gatwick back to Redhill on the slows.

It was complicated by the fact that on the way back from Gatwick it attaches to the next stopper from Reading. I thought Three Bridges were going to shunt it over to Loco Sidings and back in on top of the stopper (which is due to run into London end of 0), but instead they decided to hold you outside until 0 was free and instructed the driver to go to the far end, causing an annoying reverse attachment that was then a pig to sort back out when it got back to Reading, as well as missed connections etc etc - 20/20 hindsight but if they’d said they were going to mess around like that I’dve fought harder for the train to go through...

Generally though the new TT works. It’s still a pain to recover from major disruption, but that’s more down to how it’s crewed, with the vast majority of trains out-and-back crews from Reading. There’s more to manage, but that’s not a bad thing in my book.

JN114 for clarity are you saying two units run in multiple over this route - quite unusual i believe on NDL?

 

[JonathanH]

JN114 for clarity are you saying two units run in multiple over this route - quite unusual i believe on NDL?

Multiple working happens on both Saturday and Sunday night now - in each case the rear unit is out of service. It is right to say that it hasn't been common in the past but it was not unknown for a failure to be attached to the rear of a suitable service when necessary.

On Saturdays, 1V68 2058 Gatwick Airport to Reading works in multiple from Redhill with the unit which arrives on 2O51 1924 Reading to Redhill
On Sundays, 1V65 2015 Gatwick Airport to Reading works in multiple from Redhill with the unit which arrives on 2O87 1847 Reading to Redhill

Interestingly, multiple working only appears to happen westbound, presumably because it be a nuisance to have a Redhill terminator on the back of a Gatwick service and having the front train out of use isn't practical. The current weekend timetables require units to work empty from Reading to Redhill at the start of service - eg 5V50 0538 Reading to Redhill on Saturday and 5V38 0733 Reading to Redhill on Sunday.