|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on May 11, 2009 19:13:11 GMT
Well thank you my good man, I do try and maintain a stiff upper lip and the traditions of a gentleman. Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid (Oh my God, that's twice with a Smiley - I really must desist)
|
|
|
Post by sibodkent on May 28, 2009 10:54:50 GMT
Well it's almost June and no word from SET about this preview service.
Any news appreciated from those in the know :-)
|
|
|
Post by William Dargan on May 28, 2009 23:34:09 GMT
New start date is..... June 22nd - but don't count on it
|
|
|
Post by heofgreatwisdom on May 29, 2009 7:06:49 GMT
That date is very significant in my life and I do not particularly wish it to be associated with such an inauspicious event. Could someone please put the start date back again!!!!
HOGW
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on May 29, 2009 7:20:42 GMT
Dear heofgreatwisdom
They can only put it back another week for you - or they break their franchise agreement: -
4.1.1 from 28 June 2009 to 19 September 2009 a twice hourly service in each direction between Ashford and St Pancras. Such service shall operate 12 hours a day for all seven days of the week; and 4.1.2 from 20 September 2009 to 12 December 2009: (a) a twice hourly service in each direction between Ashford and St Pancras. Such service shall operate 12 hours a day for all 7 days of the week; and (b) a twice hourly service in each direction between Ebbsfleet and St Pancras. Such service shall operate 12 hours a day for all seven days of the week.
...and as you can see it requires a little more than has been leaked so far.
Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by Vinnie on May 29, 2009 18:24:17 GMT
Hello,
I don't know if this has been posted before,but i've seen the staff booklet for HS1 and although pretty vague,i think it's up to date.I may be able to help with some questions. I did notice the parking charges for Ebbsfleet are £8 a day,or £5 a day for season ticket holders.
Vinnie.
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Jun 1, 2009 9:42:41 GMT
Friends
GoVex have announced that their ChavLine service from Ashford will cost the full 20% premium fare. Not a problem - it will be their eventual loss - but they are still using false statements about current journey times being 80 minutes at present when there is an hourly one from Charing Cross in 60 minutes. Considering that they have already been told to remove their advertising by the Advertising Standards Association it is a bit of a cheek.
There was a note in the news about potential overcrowding on these trains (unlikely) and the same report noted that GoVex consider that it needs 600 passengers to make a train viable. Given that very few ChavLine trains will be 12cars then each service should be moving 600 passengers. Given that each 6car unit has 352 (or 354 both have been quoted) seats and a standing capacity of 154 it will take all standing places plus the full premium fare to make any train profitable.
So Sevenoaks passengers will still have to stand because the DfT cannot plan a train service that meets customer requirements...
Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by jumpedup on Jun 1, 2009 10:20:34 GMT
but they are still using false statements about current journey times being 80 minutes at present when there is an hourly one from Charing Cross in 60 minutes. Considering that they have already been told to remove their advertising by the Advertising Standards Association it is a bit of a cheek. Question - how many 60 minute trains to Charing Cross run in peak hours? - none? and, if we are being picky (we are!) aren't the 60 minute trains you quote actually 63 or 64 minutes?
|
|
|
Post by genehuntisking on Jun 1, 2009 12:48:43 GMT
Question - how many 60 minute trains to Charing Cross run in peak hours? - none?
and, if we are being picky (we are!) aren't the 60 minute trains you quote actually 63 or 64 minutes?[/quote]
xx.53 out of Charing Cross get to Ashford at xx.53. I make that 60 minutes, and if you were spinning it positively you could say from "London" - Ashford in 57 minutes, assuming that the "London" you were basing your figures on was Waterloo East.
There can't be that many people (apart from a few lazy journalists, who will swallow any press release whole) who still believe the regularly quoted "80 minutes to Ashford" etc are a reflection of all services. If quoting fastest journey times, isn't it only correct to compare fastest with fastest?
The Gene Genie
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Jun 1, 2009 13:18:41 GMT
Thank you for your note Genie.
...and if the trains stopped at London Bridge it would be 53 minutes - and it is then getting very close to the 38 minutes from North London.
Let us not kid ourselves, there will be some passengers on ChavLine services, one expects more so from Ashford than from Medway. These are more likely in the morning off-peak than either evening trips for entertainment or peak hours in my view. (One hears moans from those using North London terminals now because of the time that it takes to get from theatres and the extra time alllowed to make sure of catching the train because of longer intervals in tube services)
Does everyone remember the original survey that asked opinions on speed verses frequency verses cost? There is a value in faster travel between A and B but not necessarily when the alternative is A to C when C is closer to the destination for many people. What is the better option? - every 30 minutes from North London or every 20 minutes from the City and West End. Govex seems to consider frequency might well be important for Medway by departing from the original specification and extending two high peak "Rochester Shuttles" to Faversham. Will this encourage use - I doubt it beacuse of the third variable. If the cost of journeys to and from the office are much higher then available disposable income comes into play. This may be only the premium fare to "London" for the 20% who already have an underground journey from their London terminal but for the 80% who walk then it is a cost that they may not be able to make, or may view it as being of lower priority than other family expenditure when considering how little is gained in overall journey time. For the 3% of passengers who travel to/from beyond London there may be little perceived difference in an overall high price but whilst improving access to mainline departures from Kings Cross and St Pancras there is little advantage for services departing Euston or Paddington and a complete loss of a decent service departing from Waterloo or to Gatwick Airport.
Time will show who is right and who is wrong.
Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by jumpedup on Jun 1, 2009 21:30:40 GMT
xx.53 out of Charing Cross get to Ashford at xx.53. I make that 60 minutes, and if you were spinning it positively you could say from "London" - Ashford in 57 minutes, assuming that the "London" you were basing your figures on was Waterloo East. OK maybe if I'm being picky (and saying I am being so) I should read the post VERY carefully. The 63/64 mins I mention is the service in the other way (Ashford - London CX). But I think that the general point about comparison times being made here is wrong - it is also wrong the way southeastern are publishing it. We should be looking at the two different markets. Peak and Off-peak. For a peak traveller the useful comparison is around 80 mins compared with around 40 mins and people will be able to factor in whatever journey they have at the other end to make their 'own' comparison. The off peak is more difficult and the 60mins to 40 mins comparison is better, at least if you look during the day M-F. But in the evening there are no (or fewer?) 'fastest' CX to Ashford services (without intermediate stops between Tonbridge and Ashford) which means slowing down the comparison 'classic' service while the 'HS1' services do not get the slow-down. For the Medway services the comparisons (almost however you do it) show that there's no superb advantage to HS1 compared with Classic (unless you happen to work very close to St Pancras) in the peak (I feel I will keep a CST season ticket i.e. not via HS1 as my particular journey time door to door would be about the same but involving tube) but I think that the availability in the off-peak, especially evenings of four 'fast' trains an hour to Faversham via Medway (i.e. two from StP and two from Vic but a 'bit' slower than now) will come to be seen as a valuable improvement. I can see a lot of 'extension' type tickets being bought for off peak but remain to be convinced how many people will buy season tickets via HS1 on the Medway line. We'll just have to see. I do feel a daytime trip to the Ebbsfleet car-park coming on in July, though!
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Jun 1, 2009 23:29:04 GMT
Dear jumpedup
I can see where you are coming from but do have some comments on what you say.
Yes the up direct fast services from Ashford are indeed 63mins. If you look at why you may find an easy answer - GoVex are pretty awful when it comes to writing a timetable. The trains run fast to Tonbridge in 22mins and then stand for 3mins, for no apparent reason. Arrival at Charing Cross is 3mins behind the preceeding service from Hastings that stops at Sevenoaks and London Bridge.
Not having any fast services during peak hours is again a fault of GoVex. When the line was electrified in 1962 there was a 17.10 from Cannon Street taking 63 minutes to Ashford with a stop at Tonbridge - and the maximum speed at that time was 75mph instead of 100mph on the straight stretch from Tonbridge to Ashford. Some trains were also split at Tonbridge with front part running fast to Ashford and beyond and the rear part stopping at all stations. The services were speeded up over the years as the line speed was raised but then Eurostar arrived and the service was changed to accommodate them. All of a sudden the ability to operate a decent service seemed to cease as services were handed over to franchised operators who answered to government instead of passengers.
There are loops at Paddock Wood and Headcorn at which slower services can be looped for faster ones to overtake - used significantly (via only a 3mins stop) when there could be 4 boat trains an hour. There could be faster classic services but the DfT and GoVex would rather not try and provide them - leaving commuters to presently have longer journey times than necessary and more expensive services with little overall gain in time in the future.
If we had true competition with Classic and Chavline services operated by different operators then we might well see faster classic services on both Chatham and Tonbridge lines against ChavLine services at lower prices - because the market would then decide.
Yes there will be four trains per hour to Medway but none of them will be "fast". What real commercial case could exist for stopping three trains per hour after 19.00 at Longfield and Meopham? Look at the footfall statistics published by the DfT - it isn't very high at either station. The only reason is to give the perception of North London being a faster route. In fact if market research was really undertaken it is more likely that at least 1tph would be better starting at Charing Cross for the benefit of those going out to restaurants and theatres in the evening. The same argument can also apply to Maidstone East, Ashford and beyond.
The problem seems to be that high costs and slow trains on useful routes is set by a group of people in the DfT who know very little about product definition, railway operations or their correct position as working for the public who pay their salaries. They simply like to play trains and have now made so many mistakes around the country that it is surprising that they are still allowed to consistently fail to serve the real public need. One can excuse GoVex from this as I believe that Keith Ludeman has been honest enough to admit that they are only in it to make money.
Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by Richard Trevithick on Jun 2, 2009 7:49:00 GMT
Yes there will be four trains per hour to Medway but none of them will be "fast". What real commercial case could exist for stopping three trains per hour after 19.00 at Longfield and Meopham? My Dear OVS, Perhaps the heat is hazing my judgement... Surely it makes more commercial sense to stop a larger number of trains than to run them fast? In the past when I have borrowed a body for the day to return to the living and see how the Railways compare relative to my days, it is extremely frustrating to have several fast (and largely empty!) trains zipping past the platform with the next stopper being 20 mins away. I totally understand the need for fast services, but they only benefit an extremely small minority of travellers, especially off-peak. Putting aside the very valid case for fast trains during the peak, I believe that the majority of off-peak trains should be stoppers to benefit a considerably larger percentage of travellers, with a maximum of 1 fast train each hour - maybe 2 if there is significant demand for it. One benefit of having these perceived "pointless" station stops is over time, people will be encouraged to use the trains more. If a line only has 1 or 2 tph, people will be inclined to drive. If there is a train to/from London every 15-20 minutes, then there is more incentive to use public transport. Realistically, taking into account slowing down, stopping, having the doors open for 20 seconds and then accelerating, each of these station stops is only going to affect the service by approximately 90 seconds per station. So between those 2 stations, you've lost 3 minutes - which is exactly the padding given for just 1 station! So chances are the stop has been swallowed up by excessive dwell time at the major station on either side and the journey length is still more-or-less the same. Do we have details of last years timetable and the current/proposed one with the stops at these 2 stations? Are there any new housing developments in the vicinity of Meopham and Longfield? If so, perhaps this is the reason for the additional stops. The WK Coldstore at Dunton Green (recently burnt down!) will soon be turned into a huge housing development and as such, Dunton Green will be getting considerably more stopping services in the near future. Whilst everyone would wish for the train to go fast to London from their home station and back again, there are a much larger number of people between home and the City to consider who could benefit from a slightly slower service stopping at more stations. For a typical traveller, we're not talking about more than 10-15 minutes additional travel time for a typical journey in excess of 1 hour. The real scandal is the amount of padding in the timetable. EVERYONE could benefit if the 3+ minutes of dwell time at each station was removed from mainline services, and these services then be given a timetable that's as tight as the suburban services, where you are lucky to get 20 seconds dwell time! Unfortunately due to commercial reasons and keeping the shareholders happy, this will never happen. RT
|
|
|
Post by heofgreatwisdom on Jun 2, 2009 14:41:41 GMT
I asgree with much of the sentiment expressed by RT above. I am doubtful that his comment on Dunton Green will be fulfilled! Yes there is to be an enormous housing estate but as the line between Orpington and Sevenoaks is currently running at maximium tph, where does RT find the space to put additional stopping services at DG? Of course nothing is impossible, but I doubt that extra services from DG could be included without some detriment to current services. There is already disquiet that Sevenoaks will bear the brunt of extra passengers from DG; even more so if a suitable car park facility is not built with the new development. With Sevenoaks Station area already looking like a concrete jungle, I have doubts that planners will allow another jungle at DG! This development is probably two years hence but I doubt that its consequences have yet reached Fraggle Rock!
HOGW
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Jun 2, 2009 17:50:24 GMT
My Dear Mr Trevithick I'm sorry but on this occasion I cannot agree with you and I'll try and explain why using the table below: - Bromley South | 218% | St Mary Cray | 44% | Swanley | 42% | Farningham Road | 5% | Longfield | 16% | Meopham | 8% | Sole Street | 2% | Rochester | 45% | Chatham | 100% | Gillingham | 80% | Rainham | 46% | Newington | 4% | Sittingbourne | 70% | Teynham | 5% | Faversham | 47% | Whitstable | 25% | Chestfield & Swalecliffe | 3% | Herne Bay | 23% | Birchington-On-Sea | 7% | Westgate-On-Sea | 5% | Margate | 38% | Broadstairs | 27% | Dumpton Park | 2% | Ramsgate | 40% |
This represents, proportioned to footfall at Chatham, the off-peak number of passengers at each station from Bromley South to Thanet. You'll notice that Chatham is 100% and Bromley is 218% - or just over twice as many passengers as use Chatham. Look at Sole Street and it attracts 2% of the number using Chatham - but has 2tph to London. There are a number of variables that get involved in determining service patterns - population size, remote access to a railhead, competition, speed vs other options, frequency, pricing, location of stations against absolute origin/destination, comfort, conditions of booking and, not so much with rail but on other transport modes - carrier and loyalty benefits. Given that between London and Ramsgate, Bromley South and Chatham are obvious stopping points then where else would you stop your services? You would certainly have to stop some service between all stations so that might account for a stopping service each hour covering the least used but if you stop it at too many stations you will lose business because overall speed then starts to become uncompetitive. GoVex have rightly chosen to operate a stopping service as far as Gillingham. If I was left with two services (as for Dec 2009) then I'd look at doubling the service at the most used stations to Gillingham - St Mary Cray, Swanley (connections from Sevenoaks to Medway), Rochester, Chatham and Gillingham. The third services would be might be Bromley South, Rochester, Chatham and Gillingham as this would give speed to longer distance destinations. I'd actually think twice about Bromley South as it would already have four services per hour - two Maidstone and two Medway. Beyond Gillingham we would have two services per hour and one of them would need to serve all stations. Revenue from the smallest is minimal, about a quarter from a few and approaching half of Chatham's total at a few. I would stop the semi-fast Gillingham service at all stations and then stop the fastest at Rainham, Sittingbourne, Faversham, Whitstable, Herne Bay, Margate, Broadstairs and Ramsgate. Why not Birchington? - well it has low off-peak use but higher at peak periods. There is more to it than the simple choice above but the fact is that if you stop trains at more stations the private car becomes more attractive for the whole off-peak journey. London is the least affected destination in that nobody in their right mind would drive into the capital - but might drive faster to an intermediate station and pick up a train from there - which would cost GoVex potential income. It works very much like a set of variables on a spreadsheet, change one and the others change as a reaction - once you decide what rules apply for those dynamics. Longfield and Meopham? The former has a full car park all day and no room to expand due to housing. House building opportunities are limited locally and if it isn't local then there is no space to hold more cars in the car park. Meopham has many restictions in terms of house building opportunities. Like most villages it is only possible within the village envelope - and there is not a lot of opportunity there. There is an opportunity to drive to Meopham of course, the car park is less than full but it doesn't produce any volume now so the commercial viability of stopping trains (cost of braking and acceleration) is doubtful so why there are 3tph is not logical in the December 2009 timetable - apart from politics to try and get passengers to use services to North London by making any form of competition look less attractive - and taking historic passenger numbers it should have, perhaps, been St Mary Cray and Swanley. This smells very similar to the current MPs' expenses problem in that the only way to justify the CTRL was to introduce what has turned out to be ChavLine trains, very complicated, very expensive to operate so making viability difficult without premium fares - but keep it quite and don't tell anyone the true facts. Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|