Thameslink Services/Timetable from May 20th 2018

[Agent_Squash]

Honestly still cannot believe that this is going on, it’s been a month, I’ve been on holiday so I’ve not been aware of anything going on with the Medway route, does Higham have trains stopping there yet? And are there still gaps in services on the line?

One thing I was aware of is how the reality of Thameslink is starting to sink in in the inner SE London areas particularly at Charlton, Woolwich A and Abbey Wood which previously had the fasts, but also the Greenwich branch which had a simple yet reliable service before, the honeymoon period is over now it seems.

Makes me wonder if Thameslink in its current form can survive much longer, issues seem to be much deeper than there not being enough drivers, how many people would opt to return to the old timetable even if it meant losing glossy journey opportunities?

Yes, Higham has had trains stopping there and they continue to do so. Your use of hyperbole is excessive to say the least.

 

[talldave]

Yes, Higham has had trains stopping there and they continue to do so. Your use of hyperbole is excessive to say the least.

Enough to justify calling it a "service"? Why are there still buses for Higham/Strood at Gravesend then?

 

[farleigh]

Your use of hyperbole is excessive to say the least.

'Excessive' seems an exaggeration

 

[Silver Cobra]

So I've finally left Arlesey on the delayed 0825 service (running 32 minutes down). The reason given for the delay is a singalling fault, which has also led to the 0855 being cancelled.

Looks like the delays and cancellations are the knock-on effect of a signal or points failure at Luton, messing up all the services in the core. Not sure which of those it is, as BBC 3CR said it's a points failure while the departure boards at Arlesey said signalling problems.

 

[47421]

This morning 1P03 0605 PBO - KGX shown on NRE as stopping Sandy and Arlesey. Some commuters query with @gnrailuk on twitter whether definitely stopping as shown on tracksy as on fast line, told yes stopping, actually runs on fast line, with 100+ people waiting on platforms. Challenged on twitter told "don't know perhaps the driver didn't accept the stop order". What a grim business. 4 weeks in to this and this nonsense ongoing. Pity the poor social media team. Not their fault. But if you are sat in DfT would be difficult not to conclude that they have not got the right people managing this franchise.

 

[Kanrakuq]

Actually it was the 1P01 0542 from Peterborough that didn't stop at Arlesey at 0618. After that 1P03 (0605 from Peterborough) ended up making an unscheduled stop at 0644-ish at Arlesey to rescue the passengers, although it's not shown on RTT.

That 0618 (0542 from PBO) is scheduled for tomorrow as well, so surely it is part of their semi-emergency timetable and they did actually want it to stop ... how come it ended up on the wrong line?

This morning Arlesey -> London had a 0644, a 0704, a 0734 and then an 0804 (albeit 10L) ... wow, it's the closest to a service we've seen for a month I think.

(edit: having said that, hope no one overslept because the 1034 is delayed by 20 minutes and its contribution to Arlesey will be waving to the people on the platform as it skip stops by, and the 1104 is cancelled!)

 

[Silver Cobra]

This morning Arlesey -> London had a 0644, a 0704, a 0734 and then an 0804 (albeit 10L) ... wow, it's the closest to a service we've seen for a month I think.

I was at Arlesey long enough to see that all four services from the 0704 to the 0834 ran this morning, with the 0804 being around 10 minutes down like you say, and the 0834 running to Kings Cross instead of Horsham. So almost the level of service we should be getting. In comparison, northbound was obliterated due to the knock-on effects of the points/signal failure at Luton.

After being 32 minutes down with Thameslink, I made it to Doncaster, only to watch my booked TPE service pull out of the station (was never likely to catch it but did hope it was possible). Oh well... Full value delay repay claim with Thameslink will be in order later today, as the next service to Cleethorpes is an hour later.

 

[Kanrakuq]

9J24 from Horsham to Peterborough departed 18 minutes late, then inconvenienced the people of Horley, Redhill, Merstham and Coulsdon South by skip stopping to make up 10 minutes, whereupon it arrived at Finsbury Park and waited for a driver for ... 10 minutes.

 

[bramling]

9J24 from Horsham to Peterborough departed 18 minutes late, then inconvenienced the people of Horley, Redhill, Merstham and Coulsdon South by skip stopping to make up 10 minutes, whereupon it arrived at Finsbury Park and waited for a driver for ... 10 minutes.

Sadly this is the longer-term legacy. The driver issue will no doubt eventually be resolved, more or less, but reliability issues won’t be. Indeed this will become more and more apparent when more services do run.

Places like Arlesey will never have a dependable service under this timetable, and even those places with a more frequent service (eg Hitchin and Stevenage) will need to leave longer for their journeys to account for the greater likelihood of a given train being delayed. The one good thing about the current shambles is it has given people a very good taste of what the service will look like going forward, so no doubt there will be continuing political pressure for something more robust.

 

[JonathanH]

Apparently, 9P08 0630 Rainham to Luton spent 27 minutes at London Bridge this morning waiting for a pilot driver causing delays to the trains following it.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W64369/2018/06/21/advanced

Some fairly considerable delays through London Bridge northbound this morning between 0800 and 0900 as a result compounded by the problems at the Bedford end.

 

[Hadders]

It seems that even the St Albans passengers have had enough.

Commuters in St Albans 'kick at gates' in Thameslink delays http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-44560769

Angry commuters have been "kicking at gates" at a station after signalling problems caused delays to an already troubled line.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

So I've finally left Arlesey....In comparison, northbound was obliterated due to the knock-on effects of the points/signal failure at Luton.

Doesn't that excuse come out of the "the customer is too thick to notice we're talking rubbish" box of excuses... how can the northbound service be affected by a points failure at Luton? come to think of it how can any service at Arlesey be affected by an incident at Luton? They are on totally different lines!

 

[bramling]

Doesn't that excuse come out of the "the customer is too thick to notice we're talking rubbish" box of excuses... how can the northbound service be affected by a points failure at Luton? come to think of it how can any service at Arlesey be affected by an incident at Luton? They are on totally different lines!

It’s a bit like when we pointed out how the single-line sections north of Littleport would have a big effect on GN/TL, and someone just had to make the royally stupid observation that “Thameslink won’t be affected because it doesn’t go to Littleport.”

Now without spending time analysing what happened today, it’s not possible to say whether a failure at Luton did or didn’t affect Arlesey. However it’s quite feasible for a number of scenarios to occur where there will then be reactionary delays. Queue of trains in the core, queue of delayed trains going across a conflicting junction, train stuck somewhere without a relief blocking ones behind, train stuck behind a delayed slower service, a wrong signal sonewhere in chaos, et cetera. That is the inherent weakness of Thameslink, and is why many people don’t want their journey to be 100% reliant on it.

 

[bramling]

It seems that even the St Albans passengers have had enough.

Commuters in St Albans 'kick at gates' in Thameslink delays http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-44560769

Oh dear, St Albans passengers throwing a hissy-fit when they don’t get their precious service! Maybe if St Albans start kicking off (literally or not!) then that may be the proverbial straw that breaks the ThamesLink/ back and causes the whole pack of cards to come down.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

It’s a bit like when we pointed out how the single-line sections north of Littleport would have a big effect on GN/TL, and someone just had to make the royally stupid observation that “Thameslink won’t be affected because it doesn’t go to Littleport.”

Now without spending time analysing what happened today, it’s not possible to say whether a failure at Luton did or didn’t affect Arlesey. However it’s quite feasible for a number of scenarios to occur where there will then be reactionary delays. Queue of trains in the core, queue of delayed trains going across a conflicting junction, train stuck somewhere without a relief blocking ones behind, train stuck behind a delayed slower service, a wrong signal sonewhere in chaos, et cetera. That is the inherent weakness of Thameslink, and is why many people don’t want their journey to be 100% reliant on it.

I'm sorry if I'm being a bit thick.. but Luton is nearly 30 miles north of the junction where the former GN services split from the former BedPan lines... for a points failure at Luton causing delays at Arlesey just seems ridiculous... ok so a failed signal will cause delays/ queing... but are you really saying that TL are running enough trains for a 30 mile "traffic jam" to build up so early in the day?

 

[mallard]

Of course, even if the Luton failure had a significant effect on non-MML Thameslink routes, it doesn't explain EMT's "hold everything on the MML for 20 minutes during the morning peak" response. I suppose their attitude is that if the London commuters are going to be delayed, they better make sure everybody else is too...

I get the "queueing" situation, but Derby (where at least two trains were held for that length of time) is nearly 100 miles from Luton! While I'm sure cancelling and turning a couple of trains at Bedford wouldn't have helped with the crowding there, it wouldn't have made anybody later and would have been pretty darned useful to the passengers trying to reach their jobs in the East Midlands. EMT's "London to the exclusion of all else" attitude at it's worst.

Oh dear, St Albans passengers throwing a hissy-fit when they don’t get their precious service!

I'm sure if your boss was breathing down your neck about your tardiness over the last couple of weeks (due to the overall TL shambles), you'd be more than a little annoyed about yet anouther hour-plus delay. Seems you have the DfT view that passengers are just numbers, not real people.

 

[jonm]

Oh dear, St Albans passengers throwing a hissy-fit when they don’t get their precious service!

What a curious thing to say. I think every single commuter no matter where has every right to be "throwing a hissy-fit" right now given the shocking state of the service.

 

[bramling]

Of course, even if the Luton failure had a significant effect on non-MML Thameslink routes, it doesn't explain EMT's "hold everything on the MML for 20 minutes during the morning peak" response. I suppose their attitude is that if the London commuters are going to be delayed, they better make sure everybody else is too...

I get the "queueing" situation, but Derby (where at least two trains were held for that length of time) is nearly 100 miles from Luton! While I'm sure cancelling and turning a couple of trains at Bedford wouldn't have helped with the crowding there, it wouldn't have made anybody later and would have been pretty darned useful to the passengers trying to reach their jobs in the East Midlands. EMT's "London to the exclusion of all else" attitude at it's worst.



I'm sure if your boss was breathing down your neck about your tardiness over the last couple of weeks (due to the overall TL shambles), you'd be more than a little annoyed about yet anouther hour-plus delay. Seems you have the DfT view that passengers are just numbers, not real people.

Not at all, if you read some of my other posts on the subject you’ll see that my view is completely the opposite. However, we hear so much on here from some people about how much the city of St Albans allegedly has a love affair with Thameslink, so it’s mildly amusing to see what happens when they don’t get their 8+tph service.

 

[bramling]

What a curious thing to say. I think every single commuter no matter where has every right to be "throwing a hissy-fit" right now given the shocking state of the service.

Have a read of some historic posts and you’ll see there’s a little background to my comment...

 

[bramling]

I'm sorry if I'm being a bit thick.. but Luton is nearly 30 miles north of the junction where the former GN services split from the former BedPan lines... for a points failure at Luton causing delays at Arlesey just seems ridiculous... ok so a failed signal will cause delays/ queing... but are you really saying that TL are running enough trains for a 30 mile "traffic jam" to build up so early in the day?

As I said, I don’t know, and without spending some time looking through RTTT and the like there’s no easy way to tell. However it’s by no means impossible - and remember delays on the GN side build up *very quickly* due to the nature of the railway with its numerous conflicts constraints and pinchpoints, so a pretty minor delay of a few minutes can quite happily become 20.

Also, a gentle reminder that in the morning there's some interworking of the Peterborough service with the Midland route, as morning northbound Peterborough ShamblesLink/ services start from Gatwick Airport instead of Horsham, in some cases their previous incoming origin having been Bedford.

 

[47421]

What a curious thing to say. I think every single commuter no matter where has every right to be "throwing a hissy-fit" right now given the shocking state of the service.

Completely agree, one thing to expect people to put up with a few days of major disruption, but for it to go on for weeks and weeks with no end in sight is shocking. I really feel for the station staff having to deal with this day in day out. The absence of any detailed communication from GTR as to what they are doing and when they will have a stable timetable in operation, together with the unforced errors of advertising stops and then not stopping etc etc, is appalling. Going to do lasting damage to the industry.

 

[Failed Unit]

I'm sorry if I'm being a bit thick.. but Luton is nearly 30 miles north of the junction where the former GN services split from the former BedPan lines... for a points failure at Luton causing delays at Arlesey just seems ridiculous... ok so a failed signal will cause delays/ queing... but are you really saying that TL are running enough trains for a 30 mile "traffic jam" to build up so early in the day?

That is sort of what happened. The incident happened at about 6am

The Horsham - Peterborough service arrived at London Bridge and got stuck in a queue of trains that couldn’t clear the core. Probably displaced drivers.

It lost 30 minutes between London Bridge and St Pancras.

Unless in such incidents they turn trains that will keep happening. This was a knock on 2 hours after the original incident so I suspect Northbound trains were hit by lack of drivers that should have got into London.

 

[Verulamius]

Not all, if you read some of my other posts in the subject you’ll see that my view is completely the opposite. However, we hear so much on here from some people about how much the city of St Albans allegedly has a love affair with Thameslink, so it’s mildly amusing to see what happens when they don’t get their 8+tph service.

It should be 16tph during the rush hour including stoppers!

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

That is sort of what happened. The incident happened at about 6am

The Horsham - Peterborough service arrived at London Bridge and got stuck in a queue of trains that couldn’t clear the core. Probably displaced drivers.

It lost 30 minutes between London Bridge and St Pancras.

Unless in such incidents they turn trains that will keep happening. This was a knock on 2 hours after the original incident so I suspect Northbound trains were hit by lack of drivers that should have got into London.

Again, sorry if this sounds a bit thick... but...

the Bedpan line should have approx 16 TL trains/hr and MML runs 4 or 5... meaning 20 trains per hr... now the incident took place at 6am... so in 2 hrs that's 40 trains involved... 50 miles of track {BedPan line is 2 tracks in each direction} now I'm pretty sure that there is a signal more often than once a mile so I think some serious questions should be asked how the service on the GN lines fell apart so catastrophically... to me, and I'm sure to many passengers who are lay people, it just seems that TL found a particularly convenient excuse to say "not our fault the service is a shambles" this morning

 

[bramling]

Again, sorry if this sounds a bit thick... but...

the Bedpan line should have approx 16 TL trains/hr and MML runs 4 or 5... meaning 20 trains per hr... now the incident took place at 6am... so in 2 hrs that's 40 trains involved... 50 miles of track {BedPan line is 2 tracks in each direction} now I'm pretty sure that there is a signal more often than once a mile so I think some serious questions should be asked how the service on the GN lines fell apart so catastrophically... to me, and I'm sure to many passengers who are lay people, it just seems that TL found a particularly convenient excuse to say "not our fault the service is a shambles" this morning

Having had a quick look through RTTT, it seems trains were losing massive amounts of time in the core. It's hard to say how much this might have been exacerbated by the ongoing crewing "issues", however it certainly doesn't bode well -- but, and sorry to keep repeating, lest I be accused of being a broken record, there are plenty of people here who will join me in saying "we told you so"!

In essence, you're absolutely right that a signal failure at Luton shouldn't be disrupting Peterborough. Unfortunately, thanks to the Thameslink Programme, it now does. Politically I think that will become increasingly unacceptable, even more so than it already is. Quite simply there will have to be a re-think of the GN side of things so that there is a reliable core (and I don't mean core as in Thameslink core!) service to every destination. In practice this means a base service of 1tph KX-Peterborough, 1tph KX-Cambridge (semi-fast), 1tph KX-Cambridge (stopping), 1tph KX-Kings Lynn (fast), plus the inners of course. All the better if we can utilise the stored 365s and send the displaced 12-car 700s to uplift capacity elsewhere, bearing in mind plans have changed since the 8-cars were ordered for the abortive Caterham/Tattenham Corner service.

As posted elsewhere, I know exactly what I'd do. 365s for hourly Cambridge/Peterborough, take the 6x387s used for the Peterborough peak fast service and use them to expand at least two Baldock services to 12 cars (would have to find a solution to how to reverse them), backfill the 387s with 365s and a 700 or two to make up the numbers, and send the remaining 12-car 700s to the Rainham service, leaving a very small number of 8-car 700s spare. If the wind was blowing the right way I might look at whether the 1tph KX-Ely service could become a ThamesLink/ service, but again there would be some infrastructure and political issues to work through (running 12 cars north of Cambridge, are there enough 700s, and Kings Lynn not getting 2tph). If all the above could be achieved, this would mean:
* At least an hourly KX service to every GN outer-suburban destination - so greater reliability for those who need it
* More off-peak seats (365 vice 700) and superior rolling stock (e.g. more legroom, more sideroom, tables, etc.)
* More peak seats on the fast Peterborough services (365 vice 387)
* More seats and extra standing capacity on 2x high-peak Baldock services (3x387 vice 2x365)
* More seats and extra standing capacity on selected Luton-Rainham services (FLU vice RLU)

 

[Failed Unit]

Again, sorry if this sounds a bit thick... but...

the Bedpan line should have approx 16 TL trains/hr and MML runs 4 or 5... meaning 20 trains per hr... now the incident took place at 6am... so in 2 hrs that's 40 trains involved... 50 miles of track {BedPan line is 2 tracks in each direction} now I'm pretty sure that there is a signal more often than once a mile so I think some serious questions should be asked how the service on the GN lines fell apart so catastrophically... to me, and I'm sure to many passengers who are lay people, it just seems that TL found a particularly convenient excuse to say "not our fault the service is a shambles" this morning

I would agree it shouldn’t- but it did.

Let’s say for easy life the 0600 Bedford - Brighton should have change drivers at London Bridge.

Said driver should have taken a train North at 0800. That driver is stuck in Luton.

Along comes the train for 0800 and they park it in the through platform at London Bridge. It has no driver and is going nowhere.

The 0805 Peterborough service with driver is behind but can’t go anywhere until they shift the 0800.

In an ideal world they would have turned the services that couldn’t get north elsewhere so they didn’t block the core for other services. However as the signal failure is network rail, they are liable GTR have no interest in recovering the service. They know the bill will go to Network Rail which is why the service collapsed. Not sure if wires down at Alexandra palace would have the same impact. Probably as they will send a train north and it will sit at St Pancras blocking the route north.

 

[tsr]

Pilot drivers got stuck due to the Luton disruption (which was much more than just a mere signal failure - the entire system around Luton quite literally ended up stuck showing red aspects, because the system couldn’t prove the integrity of the messages it was sending/receiving).

Said pilots are required for certain trains through the Core which have origins or destinations on both the TL and GN sides.

Therefore both routes were affected.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Yes, Higham has had trains stopping there and they continue to do so. Your use of hyperbole is excessive to say the least.

I only ask because for several days Higham had no rail service whatsoever for hours at a time, its not hyperbole nor is it excessive four weeks we've had this new timetable and there are still issues, so people are naturally going to be rightfully concerned or even dare I say so angry that there has been distruption.

 

[Table 52]

It seems that even the St Albans passengers have had enough.

Commuters in St Albans 'kick at gates' in Thameslink delays http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-44560769

For the normally reserved and respectful people of St Albans, this sort of thing must be the equivalent of the Cuban Revolution. At this rate, we can only be a couple of weeks away from commuters reverting to canabilism and eating one another on the train while facing a lengthy delay waiting for platform 1 to become free at Hendon.

 

[The Box Photter]

Pilot drivers got stuck due to the Luton disruption (which was much more than just a mere signal failure - the entire system around Luton quite literally ended up stuck showing red aspects, because the system couldn’t prove the integrity of the messages it was sending/receiving).

Said pilots are required for certain trains through the Core which have origins or destinations on both the TL and GN sides.

Therefore both routes were affected.

So, for the duration of this monumental shambles, pilot drivers shouldn't be interworked on regular duties. The necessary drivers should be restricted to these pilot duties and be accommodated in suitable hotels within 10 minute waliking distance of Finsbury Park and London Bridge. Theye shouldn't be relying on an already broken system to get to the parts of the network where they're needed most.