Chuff Chuff Alert! Options

[JeffG]

What, you preferred the old??

Yes me too. All this platform 23B stuff or whatever is totally confusing. At least I knew my way around and where platforms 4 and 5 were (main down and up). The new station is like a foreign land. When we had to change at Reading for the replacement bus I would never have guessed it was out of the back door, rather than the front. Fortunately the person I was with had done it before.

[Andy Capp]

I'm quite surprised. After all would willingly travel to work in a 1980s car unless it was absolutely necessary? There has been a huge investment for quite a few years now but there seems to be very little to show for it. As already mentioned, Reading Station is a good example, it clearly wasn't designed with passenger convenience in mind.

That's right, it is a toilet of a station. You have to know your train route (platform) and be able bodied, otherwise you are screwed. And why don't they display the route the train is going to take on the internal ticker-tape displays? Instead it's just: 'Welcome to First Great Western'. I couldn't give a stuff who the service provider is, but I would dearly love an indication I am on the right train (that I have had to run from platform 14a to catch)!

[Biker1]

You have to know your train route (platform) and be able bodied, otherwise you are screwed.

Link

And why don't they display the route the train is going to take on the internal ticker-tape displays? Instead it's just: 'Welcome to First Great Western'.

Come on Andy, the displays in the "Turbo" trains show and announce the destinations and calling points of the train.
As for Reading station you can't please all the people all the time.
The platform numbering into A/B etc. is so that more trains can use 1 platform.
How would you folks have had it? With increasing numbers of passengers and trains Reading station was creaking at the seams. It had to be made much bigger, yes?

[Biker1]

I'm quite surprised. After all would willingly travel to work in a 1980s car unless it was absolutely necessary?

An unjust and inaccurate comparison. Trains last a lot longer than cars. Would you suggest the cost of replacing trains as often as most replace their cars?

There has been a huge investment for quite a few years now but there seems to be very little to show for it.

There is plenty to show for it in many parts of the country. Unfortunately, in the part of the country you are in, there is not so much visible to the layman as of yet but it is all going on in the background ready for electrification and new trains.
For example, the closures at weekends at present are to replace and improve the signalling along this line in readiness.
At Newbury, for example, you will see a new massive gantry at the end of platform 1 and a new signal at the other end.

As already mentioned, Reading Station is a good example, it clearly wasn't designed with passenger convenience in mind.

Well of course it was!
There was a full public consultation and exhibition (did you go to those? ) and the input from them was used in the final design.

[Andy Capp]

Link

I learned from recent bitter experience that it cannot be trusted and not handy when you are on a journey and have to change your plans (with the inevitable delays due to 'signal failure').

Come on Andy, the displays in the "Turbo" trains show and announce the destinations and calling points of the train.

They are often not running. Especially before the train starts its journey.

As for Reading station you can't please all the people all the time.
The platform numbering into A/B etc. is so that more trains can use 1 platform.
How would you folks have had it? With increasing numbers of passengers and trains Reading station was creaking at the seams. It had to be made much bigger, yes?

More carriages.

I think Reading station is rubbish for occasional users. Like I said, you have to be fit to use Reading station and to have done your homework.

[On the edge]

An unjust and inaccurate comparison. Trains last a lot longer than cars. Would you suggest the cost of replacing trains as often as most replace their cars?


There is plenty to show for it in many parts of the country. Unfortunately, in the part of the country you are in, there is not so much visible to the layman as of yet but it is all going on in the background ready for electrification and new trains.
For example, the closures at weekends at present are to replace and improve the signalling along this line in readiness.
At Newbury, for example, you will see a new massive gantry at the end of platform 1 and a new signal at the other end.


Well of course it was!
There was a full public consultation and exhibition (did you go to those? ) and the input from them was used in the final design.

Well Biker1, spoken like a real unreconstructed railwayman! I certainly think it would have been wise for the railways to have employed some senior mangers with at least a little inkling of what passengers really want. They really aren't interested in making the train set nice and shiny, just want it to work properly and effectively every day. Its not an airline and never will be, the best analogy is a lift. Tell us what's going to be delivered at the end of this investment!

I sincerely hope those who honestly thought the 'bus based' design was acceptable have nothing to do with it. You are right though, the car analogy is wrong. If anyone had brought a car like that in the 1980s it would have been returned under warranty ! If it really was bus technology, do you know anywhere there are 30 year old buses still in heavy revenue earning service?

Still, it's good to know nothing changes!

[JeffG]

What we really need are more trains like this:



(I have travelled on a Micheline - albeit a slightly more modern version than this!)

[Mr Brown]

An unjust and inaccurate comparison. Trains last a lot longer than cars. Would you suggest the cost of replacing trains as often as most replace their cars?


There is plenty to show for it in many parts of the country. Unfortunately, in the part of the country you are in, there is not so much visible to the layman as of yet but it is all going on in the background ready for electrification and new trains.
For example, the closures at weekends at present are to replace and improve the signalling along this line in readiness.
At Newbury, for example, you will see a new massive gantry at the end of platform 1 and a new signal at the other end.


Well of course it was!
There was a full public consultation and exhibition (did you go to those? ) and the input from them was used in the final design.

Yes, I'd certainly expect to replace or upgrade the equipment that sits at the very heart of the customer experience pretty frequently. Especially if it had been poorly laid out and gave rise to criticism. That's basic business sense.

I'd agree that most of the investment has been into infrastructure and not much is visible. Nevertheless, this has been going on for many years now and there is still very little, if any improvement in the passenger environment. Yet a few minor and cosmetic changes would make all the difference. Failing to do that is certainly not helping public perception!

I wasn't in the district when the consultation took place, no excuse I know. Nonetheless, I would have expected what is essentially a retail organisation to know what it's customers want. A colleague from Reading did go to some event, which she felt was more a PR session; probably wrong event; but you know what customers are like

[MontyPython]

I have travelled to the New Reading station on a few occasions now and think it excellent - of course others are entitled to have a different opinion.

I am not sure what the new rolling stock will be like and fear the worst. The Thameslink stock we were supposed to get was very cramped seating and having travelled by Southern trains when visiting my parents at the weekend the seats were hard and uncomfortable. They have also assumed that passengers cries for more seats will mean they are willing to sacrifice their legs!

[Andy Capp]

I have travelled to the New Reading station on a few occasions now and think it excellent - of course others are entitled to have a different opinion.

Why do you think it is excellent? And where were you going? ...if you don't mind me asking!

[Biker1]

Well Biker1, spoken like a real unreconstructed railwayman! I certainly think it would have been wise for the railways to have employed some senior mangers with at least a little inkling of what passengers really want. They really aren't interested in making the train set nice and shiny, just want it to work properly and effectively every day. Its not an airline and never will be, the best analogy is a lift. Tell us what's going to be delivered at the end of this investment!

I sincerely hope those who honestly thought the 'bus based' design was acceptable have nothing to do with it. You are right though, the car analogy is wrong. If anyone had brought a car like that in the 1980s it would have been returned under warranty ! If it really was bus technology, do you know anywhere there are 30 year old buses still in heavy revenue earning service?

Still, it's good to know nothing changes!

You are quite right the "Pacers" as they are known are dreadful and should never have been built. They were introduced in the more austerity times of British Rail under the auspices of the railway hating Thatcher.
They should have been scrapped years ago but the government dictates that money is not available for their replacement and they must soldier on for many years.
I was just drawing attention to them to highlight the fact that those who complain of the turbos (which are currently undergoing yet another refurbishment!) things could be worse!

[Andy Capp]

You are quite right the "Pacers" as they are known are dreadful and should never have been built. They were introduced in the more austerity times of British Rail under the auspices of the railway hating Thatcher.

I'll defer to you on matters relating to rail, but reading a sample of forums on BR in the 80s, it seems the Thatcher government weren't as 'anti' train as one might imagine and some comment that it was in a better condition at the end of the 80s than at the beginning. It would seem that the modernisation of the rail network started in the 80s.

[Biker1]

I'll defer to you on matters relating to rail, but reading a sample of forums on BR in the 80s, it seems the Thatcher government weren't as 'anti' train as one might imagine and some comment that it was in a better condition at the end of the 80s than at the beginning. It would seem that the modernisation of the rail network started in the 80s.

Yes you are right in most of what you say.
I didn't say that the Thatcher government were anti-rail, I said Thatcher was anti-rail.
She persuaded her Transport minister to commission the Serpell Report which was classified amongst railway circles as a "second Beeching" and would, if implemented at it's most severe, would have reduced the railway network to a skeleton of major routes.
Newbury, for example, would have been a one platform terminus of a branch from Reading.
Before it could be implemented a general election came along and, at the advice of her government wishing to be re-elected, Thatcher dropped the plan and thankfully it was never implemented and, as you rightly say, spurned a new age of redevelopment and investment in the railways.
I would say that the modernisation of the railways began in the 60's with the rapid elimination of steam power albeit with too much haste and with many errors of judgement.

[Andy Capp]

My gut feeling is Thatcher was more anti-union than rail, but judging people by actions rather than words, it seems she was prepared to listen to argument - until she seemed to go round the twist that is.


My biggest grudge with the rail system we have is that it is not user friendly enough (notwithstanding cost). I'm not the thickest bloke in the world, nor the most timid, but I find myself running for trains more than I think I should be and often find myself worried that I am actually on the right train more than I think I should. The ticket machines should be given a user interface upgrade too.

[On the edge]

Yes, it used to be called 'customer shoes'. A very good maxim for all, put yourself in the customers shoes and don't assume they know your business. Why should they; you don't know theirs.

Certainly, this rule had been disregarded for years hence the lack of leg room, ineffective customer information, lack of consideration scheduling platforms, etc. etc.
All quite simple to correct, often at little or no cost.

To be fair, this malaise isn't just restricted to railways, it's simply more apparent there because the cost of infrastructure renewal seems to be endless. So a bog standard commuter sees the fares rise year on year well over the rate of inflation, yet they get no pay rise to compensate! Plus the actual service deteriorates as the old trains get older and more delays and cancellations occur because of maintenance overruns, or system damage.

One of her apologists suggests Margaret Thatchers dislike of railways arose from her time commuting between her then Kent home into London and back during the 1950's. She apparently suffered much the same, over crowded trains, delays, cancellations and high fares. So, even since she left, for all that money since invested, as far as the core aim is concerned, the railway hasn't moved an inch!

[MontyPython]

Why do you think it is excellent? And where were you going? ...if you don't mind me asking!

Nice Wide platforms and overbridge. Modern but i Thought stylish design. The train display was adequate for my needs. My journeys were either to/from Reading or interconnecting with journeys to from London Slough (someone has to go there) and Maidenhead.

[MontyPython]

I'll defer to you on matters relating to rail, but reading a sample of forums on BR in the 80s, it seems the Thatcher government weren't as 'anti' train as one might imagine and some comment that it was in a better condition at the end of the 80s than at the beginning. It would seem that the modernisation of the rail network started in the 80s.

Thatcher was anti-rail, Porta-loo wasn't. The real turn-round in the 80's was Network SouthEast and Chris Green. His focus on informing customers and improving the environment (station and trains) really started the increase in passengers and investment. And whilst it wasn't brilliant after the transformation it was streets ahead of where it had been!

[JeffG]

Thatcher was anti-rail, Porta-loo wasn't.

If you mean Michael Portillo, then obviously not, judging by all the rail travel programmes he does.

[Andy Capp]

Nice Wide platforms and overbridge. Modern but i Thought stylish design. The train display was adequate for my needs. My journeys were either to/from Reading or interconnecting with journeys to from London Slough (someone has to go there) and Maidenhead.

Similar to mine then.

Style is purely a matter of taste and to me it looked out of date before it was built (looks like a budget 70s si-fi set).

I notice no difference in the platform width, although the concourse is expansive, but that is where it comes unstuck for me. It seems to catch the Maidenhead trains you have to go from P1 to P14, which is a bit of a trek - especially as often the Newbury train is stalled as it approaches Reading, therefore occasionally missing the connection.

I find the main display(s) are inadequate and I end up having to browse each platform display before I can find the platform I want.

It is also infuriating having to go round to the Southern Entrance to get to platform 1/2/3/7 when all the other platforms have direct access from the concourse. It seems to me that the concourse is a lot higher than the subways were deep, when one went under the track as opposed to over (but that is probably just me).

[On the edge]

Thatcher was anti-rail, Porta-loo wasn't. The real turn-round in the 80's was Network SouthEast and Chris Green. His focus on informing customers and improving the environment (station and trains) really started the increase in passengers and investment. And whilst it wasn't brilliant after the transformation it was streets ahead of where it had been!

Umm, I'm clearly getting to old and am cursed with a memory. There was time when trains had comfortable seats with reasonable leg room....indeed, even those turbo trains when first introduced, had air conditioning units. So what passenger transformation is this? I've clearly missed something. As for customer information, until recent times FGW couldn't even be bothered to tell you what platform your train might arrive at in Newbury! OK if you happen to be a nice fit railman but a nightmare if you were a disabled OAP.