New Met Line Timetable

[Ben]

Which group of people within TfL's management are responsible for making the decision to concentrate on all stations services? Genuine question.

[littlebrute]

Out of interest, have journey times between Baker Street and Wembley Park been tightened up lately? Seems to go a lot quicker now.

[cooperman]

Dec 16, 2012 17:49:44 GMT Ben said:

Which group of people within TfL's management are responsible for making the decision to concentrate on all stations services? Genuine question.

The very same group of people who Deceived every one of the Passengers up this end of the woods. Giving us a straight through ( To London) service . Citing that it would be a " Faster Direct no need to Change service into London ". Knowing full well they were going to change the Service to All Stations and it would take Longer to get there Off peak.

As for Peak Services , N/B Peak services also stop at Wembley Park now. Not a problem really, but these Trains are often over crowded. Its not always possible to get on one of these very rare Fast Trains at Baker Street.

Don't get me started on getting charged a Peak Fair for an Off Peak "All Station "service N/B from Baker St in the Morning. ;D

[metman]

I also notice that there are only 15 trains a day which run through to Aldgate from Watford and Croxley. There are far too many local trains too. Glad I live in Harrow now!

[Deleted]

Dec 16, 2012 17:49:44 GMT Ben said:

Which group of people within TfL's management are responsible for making the decision to concentrate on all stations services? Genuine question.

No single person can be identified although someone must have come up with the idea - group decision so no one can be held responsible. The campaign to get rid of the all stations service won't go away as the service is clearly so inappropriate for the needs of passengers north of Ricky. The interesting thing is that lots of metline users are unhappy with the all stations service, not just the Amersham branch.

LU need to concede a cock up and explain what they are going to do about it. It's getting to the point where ordinary passengers, not manageable campaign groups, have started calling for heads to roll.

[londonstuff]

Surely Angela Beck, as Line Manager, would be at least partially responsible?

It's amazed me how they've appeared to do this absolutely without consultation, especially with how vocal Mr Amersham Man has been in the past.

[Deleted]

Dec 17, 2012 8:45:35 GMT londonstuff said:

Surely Angela Beck, as Line Manager, would be at least partially responsible?

It's amazed me how they've appeared to do this absolutely without consultation, especially with how vocal Mr Amersham Man has been in the past.

Don't think AB is a manager in the sense of overseeing all functions to run the service; rather, she is part of a team who manage the various elements but she is expected to co-ordinate them.

My concern is that a member of customer-facing staff will end up getting attacked the way things are now. The poor basic service, the breakdowns and the utterly dire communications (good service on all lines...) seem driven by inflexible policy and dogma of people too far away from the customer. Of course it's the poor station and train staff who end up catching the flack.

I hear there was an incident at Harrow last week which turned very nasty. Abusive behaviour towards staff is completely unacceptable but it seems Met line management are oblivious to the fact that their policies and practices are provoking it.

[cooperman]

Dec 17, 2012 10:49:31 GMT @metliner said:

Dec 17, 2012 8:45:35 GMT londonstuff said:

Surely Angela Beck, as Line Manager, would be at least partially responsible?

It's amazed me how they've appeared to do this absolutely without consultation, especially with how vocal Mr Amersham Man has been in the past.

Don't think AB is a manager in the sense of overseeing all functions to run the service; rather, she is part of a team who manage the various elements but she is expected to co-ordinate them.

My concern is that a member of customer-facing staff will end up getting attacked the way things are now. The poor basic service, the breakdowns and the utterly dire communications (good service on all lines...) seem driven by inflexible policy and dogma of people too far away from the customer. Of course it's the poor station and train staff who end up catching the flack.

I hear there was an incident at Harrow last week which turned very nasty. Abusive behavior towards staff is completely unacceptable but it seems Met line management are oblivious to the fact that their policies and practices are provoking it.

Yes i heard about that incident , and i totally Deplore that type of Behavior. There has been some Positives to this Timetable. Some Drivers have slowed down the service from Amersham/ Chesham , so we don't have have any Standing time to Regulate the Service.

Also I'm now on first name terms with some of the Station Staff. IMO they do a Fantastic job under the circumstances.

[Deleted]

Can anyone see whether there would be any wider impact of swapping the off peak Amersham and Chesham departures from Chalfont?

It looks as if it would be a self-contained change and it would allow Chesham passengers to/from London to use Chiltern to/from Chalfont, knocking about 15 mins off the journey.

[cooperman]

Jan 7, 2013 17:56:15 GMT @metliner said:

Can anyone see whether there would be any wider impact of swapping the off peak Amersham and Chesham departures from Chalfont?

It looks as if it would be a self-contained change and it would allow Chesham passengers to/from London to use Chiltern to/from Chalfont, knocking about 15 mins off the journey.

Good idea, but i think Amersham passengers would complain. Even though they don't mind standing up for their entire Journey on a Chiltern service S/B. I still don't understand why we need one extra Amersham service in the TT . If anyone going to Amersham would have any sense , they would be on the Chiltern service. This is very evident N/B , but of course I'm biased. ;D

[Ben]

I didn't want to throw AB's name into the ring, as the most crucial mistake to make nowadays is confusing who is in charge with who is responsible. It seems the upper eschlons of TfL like most other companies nowadays consider responsibility to be a secret.

I'm wondering who was the person who actually had the idea and what their reasons were for it? Honnestly I detest action without reason, and if no-one can justify something passionately with good reason you've got to ask why are they not, then, conceeding it might be less than a perfect solution...

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2013 0:27:30 GMT cooperman said:

Jan 7, 2013 17:56:15 GMT @metliner said:

Can anyone see whether there would be any wider impact of swapping the off peak Amersham and Chesham departures from Chalfont?

It looks as if it would be a self-contained change and it would allow Chesham passengers to/from London to use Chiltern to/from Chalfont, knocking about 15 mins off the journey.

Good idea, but i think Amersham passengers would complain. Even though they don't mind standing up for their entire Journey on a Chiltern service S/B. I still don't understand why we need one extra Amersham service in the TT . If anyone going to Amersham would have any sense , they would be on the Chiltern service. This is very evident N/B , but of course I'm biased. ;D

I wasn't suggesting getting rid of the Amersham services, merely swapping them with the Cheshams.

At present, there are four Met departures each way from Chalfont in the off peak; two to/from Amersham, two to/from Chesham. The Amershams connect much better with the Chilterns in both directions, so simply swapping them over would be a major benefit for Chesham, with no loss to Amersham (or anywhere else, as far as I can see).

LU could implement that from May if they really have the will to mitigate against the impact of the unfit for purpose timetable they seem hell bent on retaining...

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2013 3:13:32 GMT Ben said:

I didn't want to throw AB's name into the ring, as the most crucial mistake to make nowadays is confusing who is in charge with who is responsible. It seems the upper eschlons of TfL like most other companies nowadays consider responsibility to be a secret.

I'm wondering who was the person who actually had the idea and what their reasons were for it? Honnestly I detest action without reason, and if no-one can justify something passionately with good reason you've got to ask why are they not, then, conceeding it might be less than a perfect solution...

Regarding whose idea it was, probably worth looking at LU's Transport Planning team... I suspect elements of personal pride and a rigid mindset about LU being a metro operation are behind the lack of willingness to concede the timetable is unsuitable for the north end of the Met.

Added to that is the democratic deficit issue; zones 7-9 are outside the GLA area, so LU seem to be playing to the tune of voters within the GLA area. There is a strong campaign building along the north end of the line (Ricky and beyond) to get the Secretary of State for Transport to review the accountability arrangements for zones 7-9, especially as TfL's Overground plans stretch beyond the GLA. Some sort of joint management arrangement with Chiltern perhaps?

Whoever is behind the new timetable can look forward to forever being associated with having seeded the campaign to toughen up LU and TfL's accountability arrangements for these services.

[Ben]

Thats a shame though, because until the 90's came in LUL managed the line no worse than BR managed its bit. If there is any actual upshot from this it'll be some kind of beuracratic compromise involving statistics and managers and money per second per km per passenger and all the faff associated with it. When, actually, the arrangements could and did work until certain people came in and made them not work. It would save the taxpayer a lot of money if instead of a reorganisation of contracts there was just a reorganisation of some specific staff and their pet projects... Alas, management covers management.

[Deleted]

First posting on here and sadly something of a moan!

I too am not overly enthused by this new timetable. Firstly, the absolute contempt shown to its passengers who like most commuters have little in the way of options to get to work is sadly typical of today's out of touch management. If we're talking options for the Rickmansworth-Amersham section then the Chiltern is a contender. However, chances are you will end up miles away at the North End of Marylebone station, of which itself not exactly well placed or well represented by the tube. And unless there's going to be a significant improvement in the frequency or lengthening of the Chiltern services, you will probably stand for most of your journey in any case. I live in Harrow on the Hill and travel in both directions, and have noticed recently that Chiltern services are becoming pretty overcrowded if they weren't already before.

Plus, and I could be wrong, I just sense that the Underground has not really had any enthusiasm for the fast services for the last 10 years or so. On countless occasions I've boarded a 'fast' train to London from Harrow, only to crawl along and at Wembley be signalled behind the very train it waited a few minutes to connect with at Harrow. The punters would have been better staying on their slow train! Very frustrating to see empty after empty roaring along down the fast lines unhindered after 9am or so mind.

Its clear that the powers that be simply want a conventional 2 track all stations type railway just like most other lines, but the point is the Metropolitan line is/was the jewel in the crown of the London Underground and surely should be making use of its impressive infrastructure rather than doing its best to avoid it?

[crusty54]

Strangely enough a former head of transport planning lived at Chesham.

[metman]

The important word here is 'former'! Speaks volumes to me.

Yes I've noticed the Chiltern is very busy now. For example, the last week or so I have had to go into London and as I hate the Met line service and trains I use the Chiltern. The 11.19 train as been packed both times and this is with a 3 car train!

The Met is certainly not the jewel in the crown anymore.....

[Deleted]

Whilst the dear old Met is getting a hammering here and there, Chiltern have got off a bit lightly in my opinion. Yes, they are a decent TOC overall. Yes, they've bucked the trend and brought back a more efficient way to transport a large number of passengers, ie local hauled. Yes, they've turned around what was a total basket case railway even in NSE days. However, they still fail to provide nearly enough carriages on both peak and off peak services! Mind you, ever since the introduction of the new generations of DMU from the mid 80s onwards, it would seem they rarely get anywhere near the capacity of the loco/dmu sets that they replaced, so its not just Chiltern. Dare I say the only way out of this would be if the line was electrified 25kv, platforms lengthened and EMU's brought in. Running DMU's in multiple as long sets just doesn't seem to have caught on.

[metman]

I actually think Chiltern has lengthened their trains, certainly compared with 2 yrs ago. The strange thing is yes, there should be longer platforms and this is up to LUL (Harrow-Amersham) but why are all the Thames Turbos going elsewhere? Surely they should go to Chiltern?

[rincew1nd]

Jan 15, 2013 23:05:53 GMT metman said:

why are all the Thames Turbos going elsewhere? Surely they should go to Chiltern?

Have you tried travelling on Northern Rail. I would love to see the fuss kicked up if Amersham Man was offered a two car pacer for his daily commute!

[metman]

Oh my goodness! I can imagine that bouncing around. I remember taking a journey to York once, made the A stock feel smooth! ;D

[Deleted]

Took a trip today from Harrow to Aylesbury Vale Parkway more or less to admire the beauty of snowfall over the Chiltern hills. This is an open question as it may just be me imagining things, but wasn't there a proposal a few moons ago to electrify the Amersham-Aylesbury section and extend the Met line back to its old pastures? Maybe this was to coincide with the possible closure of Marylebone in the 1980s? Not that that looks likely nowadays. If anything I can see the Metropolitan Line abandoning Moor Park - Amersham altogether!!

[metman]

Had Crossrail gone to Aylesbury that would have happened.

[Deleted]

Jan 19, 2013 14:48:15 GMT @superatticman said:

.... If anything I can see the Metropolitan Line abandoning Moor Park - Amersham altogether!!

You could well be closer to the truth than you realise. Amersham and Cheshams' locations place them firmly into suburban commuter territory where you expect to speed into London in 30 minutes or so in reasonable comfort - a service that Chiltern provides. LUL is clearly concentrating on its task as a Metro operator, moving high volumes of people over shorter distances in trains designed like cattle trucks. The fact that there is less and less pretense at providing comfort, speed or frequent service to Amersham suggests to me that the decision has already been made behind the scenes. Soon a way will be found to increase the Chiltern capacity and Chesham will be either be served by a Chiltern shuttle or, I fear, closed, and at that point Met services will terminate at Moor Park.

[crusty54]

Jan 19, 2013 16:02:10 GMT @ohmslaw said:

Jan 19, 2013 14:48:15 GMT @superatticman said:

.... If anything I can see the Metropolitan Line abandoning Moor Park - Amersham altogether!!

You could well be closer to the truth than you realise. Amersham and Cheshams' locations place them firmly into suburban commuter territory where you expect to speed into London in 30 minutes or so in reasonable comfort - a service that Chiltern provides. LUL is clearly concentrating on its task as a Metro operator, moving high volumes of people over shorter distances in trains designed like cattle trucks. The fact that there is less and less pretense at providing comfort, speed or frequent service to Amersham suggests to me that the decision has already been made behind the scenes. Soon a way will be found to increase the Chiltern capacity and Chesham will be either be served by a Chiltern shuttle or, I fear, closed, and at that point Met services will terminate at Moor Park.

Sorry but this does not stack up.

Chiltern are currently providing the fast trains and LUL a stopping service which is well used. This is far better than a number of other routes to/from London.

New diesel trains will not be sanctioned by the DfT and there are no engines that meet emissions standards for the near future.

LUL have taken delivery of more trains than required for the current service. More and faster services will happen.

New signalling is being installed which will allow more trains and there should be less signal failures.

Not all passengers travel into/from Central London. There will be Met services for years to come.

A lot of London money is improving your service but this cannot be done overnight.

[Deleted]

I can only see the Chiltern line becoming the mainstay of the London-Amersham section if its electrified in some way or form. Whilst there's plenty of other examples countrywide, the fact that what is now a main line into London is diesel powered throughout simply isn't on. If LuL are to abandon the 'fast lines' from Harrow to Moor Park, then surely 25kv Electrification throughout the route has to be on the cards, as it should be on the route via Banbury too. However, if they hopefully do the decent thing and retain them, then you could always electrify London to Harrow 25kv, Harrow Amersham could remain 3rd/4th rail, then 25 kv onwards from Amersham. Dual voltage trains are ten a penny now.

I was half joking when I suggested LuL would give up the Met from Moor Park to Amersham, but IF the Chiltern went electric with 6-8 car sets running every 15 mins, I could see this actually happening as I do agree, LuL seem to be heading towards the one size fits all metro service and simply don't have the ambition or intent to run a slightly more complex railway.

As for Chesham, its a Branch line at the end of the day. Surely a 'shuttle', maybe even running heritage stock could be provided?

* I'll add to the above. It may even be a GOOD thing if the Met Abandoned Amersham - Moor Park and the fast lines to Harrow, providing that frequent electric trains we're provided by Chiltern. The route from Harrow to Amersham could easily see line speed increases to 90mph or so over the majority of the route and then 100mph from Amersham onwards.

[cooperman]

Jan 19, 2013 16:17:52 GMT crusty54 said:

Jan 19, 2013 16:02:10 GMT @ohmslaw said:

You could well be closer to the truth than you realise. Amersham and Cheshams' locations place them firmly into suburban commuter territory where you expect to speed into London in 30 minutes or so in reasonable comfort - a service that Chiltern provides. LUL is clearly concentrating on its task as a Metro operator, moving high volumes of people over shorter distances in trains designed like cattle trucks. The fact that there is less and less pretense at providing comfort, speed or frequent service to Amersham suggests to me that the decision has already been made behind the scenes. Soon a way will be found to increase the Chiltern capacity and Chesham will be either be served by a Chiltern shuttle or, I fear, closed, and at that point Met services will terminate at Moor Park.

Sorry but this does not stack up.

Chiltern are currently providing the fast trains and LUL a stopping service which is well used. This is far better than a number of other routes to/from London.

New diesel trains will not be sanctioned by the DfT and there are no engines that meet emissions standards for the near future.

LUL have taken delivery of more trains than required for the current service. More and faster services will happen.

New signalling is being installed which will allow more trains and there should be less signal failures.

Not all passengers travel into/from Central London. There will be Met services for years to come.

A lot of London money is improving your service but this cannot be done overnight.

Hmm ... Crusty54 I understand what your saying. To be fair i don't see the Evidence of that on the MET as a Chesham punter. Picking up a handful of the Passengers on the Slow track,is not a Positive when it puts another 12 mins on my Journey. IMO. I think omhslaw sums it up Beautifully.

[memorex]

Jan 15, 2013 22:47:14 GMT @superatticman said:

Yes, they've bucked the trend and brought back a more efficient way to transport a large number of passengers, ie loco hauled.

Nope, they didn't. That was the Wrexham & Shropshire Railway Company, WSMR, who were bought out by Deutsche Bahn, shortly after they had bought out Chiltern Railways, and therefore cancelled WSMR's routes and lumped the stock together.

[Deleted]

Jan 21, 2013 20:08:04 GMT memorex said:

Jan 15, 2013 22:47:14 GMT @superatticman said:

Yes, they've bucked the trend and brought back a more efficient way to transport a large number of passengers, ie loco hauled.

Nope, they didn't. That was the Wrexham & Shropshire Railway Company, WSMR, who were bought out by Deutsche Bahn, shortly after they had bought out Chiltern Railways, and therefore cancelled WSMR's routes and lumped the stock together.

You are correct here. However, they've certainly embraced loco hauled and have plans to increase it further with newer more fuel efficient and faster accelerating 'Eurolight' locos.

Don't suppose theres much chances of seeing these on the London-Aylesbury via Harrow mind

[Deleted]

Jan 19, 2013 17:03:10 GMT cooperman said:

Jan 19, 2013 16:17:52 GMT crusty54 said:

Sorry but this does not stack up.

Chiltern are currently providing the fast trains and LUL a stopping service which is well used. This is far better than a number of other routes to/from London.

New diesel trains will not be sanctioned by the DfT and there are no engines that meet emissions standards for the near future.

LUL have taken delivery of more trains than required for the current service. More and faster services will happen.

New signalling is being installed which will allow more trains and there should be less signal failures.

Not all passengers travel into/from Central London. There will be Met services for years to come.

A lot of London money is improving your service but this cannot be done overnight.

Hmm ... Crusty54 I understand what your saying. To be fair i don't see the Evidence of that on the MET as a Chesham punter. Picking up a handful of the Passengers on the Slow track,is not a Positive when it puts another 12 mins on my Journey. IMO. I think omhslaw sums it up Beautifully.

Chesham punters are incredibly lucky. Uxbridge has 6.9 million passengers a year, and has 8 tph. Chesham has 0.62 million, and Amersham 2.1 million. Looking at the numbers alone, Amersham are owed 2/3 tph and Chesham are owed around 1 tph if that! Similarly, Watford is very lucky at the moment to get 4 tph, since it only has 1.57 million passengers/year.

The reason Chesham and Watford have such a good service is because they are convenient places to turn trains around - not necessarily because they need the service they actually get.

Cheers,

TSM