Chiltern May 2023 timetable change - for the worse or better?

[Bletchleyite]

You clearly don't suffer Chiltern. Is weekend leisure traffic 'tiny' now because we can't rely on it? Football, cancel all trains, concert cancel all or some trains. West Coast shut, cancel all trains.

It could be because people have given up on it and drive to Tring or Amersham for the actual Met instead, yes. However, I'm just speaking from experience of using the Chiltern Met service occasionally for a change of scenery at various times.

Evening hourly service more often 2 cars, full and standing is not a way to improve passenger numbers. Everyone seems to miss the point that Chiltern used to have enough stock, and now they don't. What's gone wrong?

I agree on weekday evening services. It was weekend off peak that was under discussion.

With stock there is the known issue with 165 spares. Plus perhaps adding Oxford was taking on too much without having brought in more DMUs?

 

[CyrusWuff]

With stock there is the known issue with 165 spares. Plus perhaps adding Oxford was taking on too much without having brought in more DMUs?

Also Chiltern have "lost" 17 vehicles: The 7 car slamdoor set, the 172s (which, admittedly, seemed to spend more time at the depot than in traffic) and 165004 hasn't returned from the aborted hybridisation work.

 

[Mikey C]

Why did Chiltern give up the 172s anyway, with no replacement? The ones of the Goblin seemed to work ok, similarly the ones in the West Midlands.

 

[Nova1]

Why did Chiltern give up the 172s anyway, with no replacement? The ones of the Goblin seemed to work ok, similarly the ones in the West Midlands.

I'm guessing it kind of sucked having such a micro fleet when the neighbours (west midlands railway) has loads of 172s.

They couldn't be sent via Amersham on the LU lines either.

They seemed to spend most of their days in the depot so presumably there is something else that meant Chiltern just preferred not to use them, I think at the time they were transferred to WMR, Chiltern didn't really need them and WMR were desperate for more units.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

With stock there is the known issue with 165 spares. Plus perhaps adding Oxford was taking on too much without having brought in more DMUs?

More DMUs were obtained for Chiltern at broadly the time the Oxford service began – the ex-Transpennine 170s (now 168/3).

 

[Mikey C]

I'm guessing it kind of sucked having such a micro fleet when the neighbours (west midlands railway) has loads of 172s.

They couldn't be sent via Amersham on the LU lines either.

They seemed to spend most of their days in the depot so presumably there is something else that meant Chiltern just preferred not to use them, I think at the time they were transferred to WMR, Chiltern didn't really need them and WMR were desperate for more units.

The shortformings currently being experienced suggest that was a short sighted decision. For a start they were on paper well suited for the slow services along the mainline such as the Aylesbury via Princes route, as they can do 100mph but also have decent acceleration. The 165s on the mainline can only trundle along at 75mph.

 

[Vanmanyo]

The shortformings currently being experienced suggest that was a short sighted decision. For a start they were on paper well suited for the slow services along the mainline such as the Aylesbury via Princes route, as they can do 100mph but also have decent acceleration. The 165s on the mainline can only trundle along at 75mph.

165s can surprisingly stick to 168 diagrams due to their incredible acceleration - but yes 172s weren't bad by any stretch, just woefully maintained due to microfleet

 

[CyrusWuff]

165s can surprisingly stick to 168 diagrams due to their incredible acceleration - but yes 172s weren't bad by any stretch, just woefully maintained due to microfleet

Pre-Covid, a 165 on an Oxford service that was timed for a 168 would lose at least 7 minutes by virtue of the lower maximum speed. That may be less of an issue in the current timetable due to the additional station calls, however.

December 2019: xx.11 from Oxford called at Oxford Parkway, Bicester Village, Haddenham & Thame Parkway, High Wycombe, then non-stop to Marylebone; xx.41 from Oxford called at Oxford Parkway and Bicester Village, then non-stop to Marylebone. Both were usually timed for 168s.

May 2023: xx.19 from Oxford calls at Oxford Parkway, Bicester Village, Haddenham & Thame Parkway, Princes Risborough, High Wycombe, Beaconsfield, Gerrards Cross, Wembley Stadium, and Marylebone, and are mostly timed for a 168; xx.49 from Oxford calls at Oxford Parkway, Bicester Village, Princes Risborough, Saunderton, High Wycombe, Beaconsfield, Gerrards Cross, then non-stop to Marylebone, and are mostly timed for a 165.

 

[peteb]

With Chiltern only running an hourly service to Birmingham this evening, not fancying the inevitable crush in the 7 car 1902 Marylebone to Moor St, and having a few hours left on my interrail** I did the 1732 STP to LEI then the 1950 LEI to BHM. Both ran to time giving a 2hr 8 mins journey time, with space, comfort and some super fast running up the Midland Mainline. Does this count as an any permitted London to Birmingham route? I've gone off Chiltern since they ditched Kidderminster and their 0614 is useless because the connection at Stourbridge Junction from Kiddy is long considering the early start. ** (Arriving from Brussels.)

 

[paddyb6]

With Chiltern only running an hourly service to Birmingham this evening, not fancying the inevitable crush in the 7 car 1902 Marylebone to Moor St, and having a few hours left on my interrail** I did the 1732 STP to LEI then the 1950 LEI to BHM. Both ran to time giving a 2hr 8 mins journey time, with space, comfort and some super fast running up the Midland Mainline. Does this count as an any permitted London to Birmingham route? I've gone off Chiltern since they ditched Kidderminster and their 0614 is useless because the connection at Stourbridge Junction from Kiddy is long considering the early start. ** (Arriving from Brussels.)

I hope so - I have used the MML once with a London to Birmingham ticket and was fine, it is certainly a good option to have.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

With Chiltern only running an hourly service to Birmingham this evening, not fancying the inevitable crush in the 7 car 1902 Marylebone to Moor St, and having a few hours left on my interrail** I did the 1732 STP to LEI then the 1950 LEI to BHM. Both ran to time giving a 2hr 8 mins journey time, with space, comfort and some super fast running up the Midland Mainline. Does this count as an any permitted London to Birmingham route? I've gone off Chiltern since they ditched Kidderminster and their 0614 is useless because the connection at Stourbridge Junction from Kiddy is long considering the early start. ** (Arriving from Brussels.)

I hope so - I have used the MML once with a London to Birmingham ticket and was fine, it is certainly a good option to have.

This is certainly my preferred alternative to Avanti when disruption ensues, far more pleasant than Chiltern I think.

 

[CyrusWuff]

With Chiltern only running an hourly service to Birmingham this evening, not fancying the inevitable crush in the 7 car 1902 Marylebone to Moor St, and having a few hours left on my interrail** I did the 1732 STP to LEI then the 1950 LEI to BHM. Both ran to time giving a 2hr 8 mins journey time, with space, comfort and some super fast running up the Midland Mainline. Does this count as an any permitted London to Birmingham route? I've gone off Chiltern since they ditched Kidderminster and their 0614 is useless because the connection at Stourbridge Junction from Kiddy is long considering the early start. ** (Arriving from Brussels.)

99% sure the MML isn't permitted in the Routeing Guide, but let's have a check.

First up we'll look at distances for each option:

Euston - New Street is 113.25 miles via the main line, or 115.25 miles via Northampton
Marylebone - Moor Street is 111.25 miles
St Pancras - Leicester - New Street is 139 miles, so fails the "shortest route, or within three miles thereof" test.

It's not a direct train, so we need to check the routeing guide in full:

London and Birmingham are both routeing groups, so we don't need to undertake a fare check and can go straight to the Yellow Pages to find our permitted routes:

Permitted routes are found on maps EB, GC, and RG+RB:

EB is the WCML, with optional detours via Northampton and/or Nuneaton
GC is the Chiltern route, with optional detour via Coventry from Leamington Spa
RG+RB is Paddington - Reading - Birmingham, with optional detours via Stratford-upon-Avon, Coventry or Nuneaton from Leamington Spa

No mention of the MML whatsoever, so it's not a permitted route in the normal course of events.

 

[Mikey C]

Pre-Covid, a 165 on an Oxford service that was timed for a 168 would lose at least 7 minutes by virtue of the lower maximum speed. That may be less of an issue in the current timetable due to the additional station calls, however.

December 2019: xx.11 from Oxford called at Oxford Parkway, Bicester Village, Haddenham & Thame Parkway, High Wycombe, then non-stop to Marylebone; xx.41 from Oxford called at Oxford Parkway and Bicester Village, then non-stop to Marylebone. Both were usually timed for 168s.

May 2023: xx.19 from Oxford calls at Oxford Parkway, Bicester Village, Haddenham & Thame Parkway, Princes Risborough, High Wycombe, Beaconsfield, Gerrards Cross, Wembley Stadium, and Marylebone, and are mostly timed for a 168; xx.49 from Oxford calls at Oxford Parkway, Bicester Village, Princes Risborough, Saunderton, High Wycombe, Beaconsfield, Gerrards Cross, then non-stop to Marylebone, and are mostly timed for a 165.

What this shows is how much the line would benefit from electrification (or less desirable more powerful DMUs) as the Chiltern would then have 100mph stock WITH good acceleration as well.

 

[Basil Jet]

What this shows is how much the line would benefit from electrification (or less desirable more powerful DMUs) as the Chiltern would then have 100mph stock WITH good acceleration as well.

I see a lot of press releases from Feb 2022 about the Chiltern hybrid project, but nothing newer...

 

[Vanmanyo]

I see a lot of press releases from Feb 2022 about the Chiltern hybrid project, but nothing newer...

All Class 168s are being refurbished with 168003 being the first to be refurbished. Not confirmed by the company but I have spoken to many staff who have confirmed

 

[BanburyBlue]

I was surprised the other day when we had a 165 on the front of a 168, on a Moor St to Marylebone train. I was expecting it to be late, but was only a couple of minutes late at Banbury.

 

[12LDA28C]

I did the 1732 STP to LEI then the 1950 LEI to BHM. Both ran to time giving a 2hr 8 mins journey time

I'm wondering how the trains you quote give a journey time of '2hr 8 mins' from London to Birmingham. If you left St Pancras at 1732 you would have arrived at New Street at 2038 which is clearly 3 hours and 6 minutes.

What this shows is how much the line would benefit from electrification (or less desirable more powerful DMUs) as the Chiltern would then have 100mph stock WITH good acceleration as well.

Electrification ain't gonna happen which is why the 165s are being replaced with new DMUs or Hybrid battery/DMUs.

I see a lot of press releases from Feb 2022 about the Chiltern hybrid project, but nothing newer...

The hybrid project is not being rolled out to the entire fleet.

 

[Mikey C]

Electrification ain't gonna happen which is why the 165s are being replaced with new DMUs or Hybrid battery/DMUs.

Electrification WILL happen eventually, even if it isn't in any current plans. Any order for 165 replacements will assume that during the lifetime of the trains, the line will be wired.

 

[12LDA28C]

Electrification WILL happen eventually, even if it isn't in any current plans. Any order for 165 replacements will assume that during the lifetime of the trains, the line will be wired.

Eventually... not within my lifetime.

 

[Birmingham]

All Class 168s are being refurbished

To what end?

 

[CyrusWuff]

To what end?

Being between 20 and 25 years old now, and last refurbished around 15 years ago, they're due for a refresh I would assume.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Being between 20 and 25 years old now, and last refurbished around 15 years ago, they're due for a refresh I would assume.

They're in surprisingly good nick, unlike the 165s which are getting rather tatty.

 

[barbette165]

To what end?

If they do get refurbished, I would assume it would be to both ends.

 

[LordFlashheart]

They're in surprisingly good nick, unlike the 165s which are getting rather tatty.

apart from the constant rattle from the glass screens and tables, worn out seats and toilets that are out of order. 165s are much quieter and cleaner. The air conditioning on 165s nearly always works as well (too well judging by some comments on twitter!)