‘Slow trains hurting business’ in Southampton says MP Ian Swales

‘Slow trains hurting business’ says MP

‘Slow trains hurting business’ says MP

First published in Hampshire Business
Last updated
Hampshire Chronicle: Photograph of the Author by , Parliamentary Correspondent

TRAINS crawl at less than 55mph from Southampton to most key English towns and cities, ministers have been warned – punishing passengers and businesses.

An MP unveiled a study that revealed a failure to invest in rail travel unless it served to “concentrate economic and administrative power” in London.

He said no wonder people drive instead – when going by train involved dismal average speeds and multiple changes.

The study said the slowest speeds from Southampton, calculated using road miles, were to reach other south coast destinations Brighton (36.8mph) and Plymouth (39.7mph).

He said this compared to a speed of up to 100mph to get to London from almost anywhere in the country.

Other long journeys include trips to Cambridge (43.4mph), Nottingham (44.2mph), Oxford (46.6mph), Swindon (47.3mph) and Sheffield (48.1mph).

Leeds can be reached a bit quicker (52.6mph) – but that requires a soul-destroying three changes of train to get there.

The research was carried out by Ian Swales, a north-east Liberal Democrat MP, but seeks to expose the same problem across the country.

Mr Swales told ministers: “There has often seemed to be an assumption that the only thing people want to do when they get on a train is travel to or from London.

“Research shows that prioritising transport heavily on connections to a capital tends to suck economic activity into that capital.”

The MP said one mind-numbing journey – from Liverpool to the north-east – had left Business Secretary Vince Cable “stunned” when he endured it.

And he said such poor cross-country links were also a problem for business leaders, such as major ports, which include Southampton.

Mr Swales added: “Rail investment is not just about passengers, but about freight. A large, modern port needs good connections to a wide hinterland.”

In reply, rail minister Stephen Hammond said rail passengers were benefiting from “massive investment from this Government”.

He told MPs: “This Government is also investing a huge amount in electrification.

“This major investment links the core centres of population and economic activity in the west, East Midlands and Yorkshire with the south of England.

“It will provide electrification of the lines from Nuneaton and Bedford to Oxford, Reading, Basingstoke and Southampton.

“All this will provide faster, more reliable services on many important strategic routes, and not just routes into London.”

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:12am Thu 16 Jan 14

malcher says...

i AM SURE THE AVERAGE SPEED TO ALL THOSE DESTINATIONS BY ROAD WOULD BE CONSIDERABLY SLOWER
i AM SURE THE AVERAGE SPEED TO ALL THOSE DESTINATIONS BY ROAD WOULD BE CONSIDERABLY SLOWER malcher
  • Score: -9

11:53am Thu 16 Jan 14

derek james says...

not sure it's the speed but the price of rail travel
not sure it's the speed but the price of rail travel derek james
  • Score: 15

12:10pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Zeo says...

It's the Speed, it's about 20 - 30 minute car ride from Southampton to Fareham, yet it's 40 minutes by train. HCC are looking at introducing a new service in the next 10 years so the all stopping service between Southampton and Portsmouth will miss out some stops but will increase frequency by 3 times the amount.
It's the Speed, it's about 20 - 30 minute car ride from Southampton to Fareham, yet it's 40 minutes by train. HCC are looking at introducing a new service in the next 10 years so the all stopping service between Southampton and Portsmouth will miss out some stops but will increase frequency by 3 times the amount. Zeo
  • Score: 2

12:16pm Thu 16 Jan 14

SilvanDryad says...

Driving may be slower, but if more than one person is travelling it is considerabley cheaper, and you are guaranteed a seat!.
Driving may be slower, but if more than one person is travelling it is considerabley cheaper, and you are guaranteed a seat!. SilvanDryad
  • Score: 12

12:17pm Thu 16 Jan 14

southy says...

Its governments that hurt the small business no slow trains
Its governments that hurt the small business no slow trains southy
  • Score: -8

12:24pm Thu 16 Jan 14

SilvanDryad says...

It may be slower to drive, Malcher, but if more than one person is travelling it is considerably cheaper, and you are guaranteed a seat! Not only that, you can set off when you like, stop when and where you want and don't have to sit next to a drunk.
It may be slower to drive, Malcher, but if more than one person is travelling it is considerably cheaper, and you are guaranteed a seat! Not only that, you can set off when you like, stop when and where you want and don't have to sit next to a drunk. SilvanDryad
  • Score: 8

12:44pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
Its governments that hurt the small business no slow trains
What, because you made a mess of yours?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Its governments that hurt the small business no slow trains[/p][/quote]What, because you made a mess of yours? Shoong
  • Score: -4

12:54pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Niel says...

Zeo wrote:
It's the Speed, it's about 20 - 30 minute car ride from Southampton to Fareham, yet it's 40 minutes by train. HCC are looking at introducing a new service in the next 10 years so the all stopping service between Southampton and Portsmouth will miss out some stops but will increase frequency by 3 times the amount.
On a good day 25 minutes by road, on an average day 45 minutes and that's on a motorcycle making suitable progress by filtering through all the telephonists in their cages playing at being a traffic jam! And at it's worst over 2 hours when forced to drive something with 4 wheels...
[quote][p][bold]Zeo[/bold] wrote: It's the Speed, it's about 20 - 30 minute car ride from Southampton to Fareham, yet it's 40 minutes by train. HCC are looking at introducing a new service in the next 10 years so the all stopping service between Southampton and Portsmouth will miss out some stops but will increase frequency by 3 times the amount.[/p][/quote]On a good day 25 minutes by road, on an average day 45 minutes and that's on a motorcycle making suitable progress by filtering through all the telephonists in their cages playing at being a traffic jam! And at it's worst over 2 hours when forced to drive something with 4 wheels... Niel
  • Score: -4

1:25pm Thu 16 Jan 14

bogart259 says...

Niel wrote:
Zeo wrote:
It's the Speed, it's about 20 - 30 minute car ride from Southampton to Fareham, yet it's 40 minutes by train. HCC are looking at introducing a new service in the next 10 years so the all stopping service between Southampton and Portsmouth will miss out some stops but will increase frequency by 3 times the amount.
On a good day 25 minutes by road, on an average day 45 minutes and that's on a motorcycle making suitable progress by filtering through all the telephonists in their cages playing at being a traffic jam! And at it's worst over 2 hours when forced to drive something with 4 wheels...
While the quickest train is 22 minutes, and the slowest is 33 minutes.
[quote][p][bold]Niel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zeo[/bold] wrote: It's the Speed, it's about 20 - 30 minute car ride from Southampton to Fareham, yet it's 40 minutes by train. HCC are looking at introducing a new service in the next 10 years so the all stopping service between Southampton and Portsmouth will miss out some stops but will increase frequency by 3 times the amount.[/p][/quote]On a good day 25 minutes by road, on an average day 45 minutes and that's on a motorcycle making suitable progress by filtering through all the telephonists in their cages playing at being a traffic jam! And at it's worst over 2 hours when forced to drive something with 4 wheels...[/p][/quote]While the quickest train is 22 minutes, and the slowest is 33 minutes. bogart259
  • Score: 5

1:42pm Thu 16 Jan 14

bogart259 says...

Assuming that you don't stop, sleep or crash, Southampton to Leeds by car is an average 60 mph for a four hour journey. If you're an average human being, you're going to want to stop at least once for an hour - so that brings it down to an average 47 mph. Suddenly the train looks so much faster.
Assuming that you don't stop, sleep or crash, Southampton to Leeds by car is an average 60 mph for a four hour journey. If you're an average human being, you're going to want to stop at least once for an hour - so that brings it down to an average 47 mph. Suddenly the train looks so much faster. bogart259
  • Score: 2

1:47pm Thu 16 Jan 14

gilbertratchet says...

southy wrote:
Its governments that hurt the small business no slow trains
It can't be both? Do you really have to drag your tedious politics into every single story that doesn't contain geographical errors?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Its governments that hurt the small business no slow trains[/p][/quote]It can't be both? Do you really have to drag your tedious politics into every single story that doesn't contain geographical errors? gilbertratchet
  • Score: 6

2:24pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Donald2000 says...

I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes.

Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.
I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes. Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties. Donald2000
  • Score: 7

2:25pm Thu 16 Jan 14

jackois says...

I suspect time is the biggest bugbear....

roughly an hour and a half to get the 70 miles from Southampton to London...

but at around £42 (off-peak) for a return it isn't going to tempt you up for a day out on a regular basis..
I suspect time is the biggest bugbear.... roughly an hour and a half to get the 70 miles from Southampton to London... but at around £42 (off-peak) for a return it isn't going to tempt you up for a day out on a regular basis.. jackois
  • Score: 6

2:30pm Thu 16 Jan 14

gilbertratchet says...

Donald2000 wrote:
I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes.

Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.
Same all over the country. Isn't that the big joke, that Stephenson's Rocket went from Manchester to Liverpool faster than the Intercity manages it?
[quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes. Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.[/p][/quote]Same all over the country. Isn't that the big joke, that Stephenson's Rocket went from Manchester to Liverpool faster than the Intercity manages it? gilbertratchet
  • Score: 6

2:52pm Thu 16 Jan 14

elvisimo says...

bogart259 wrote:
Assuming that you don't stop, sleep or crash, Southampton to Leeds by car is an average 60 mph for a four hour journey. If you're an average human being, you're going to want to stop at least once for an hour - so that brings it down to an average 47 mph. Suddenly the train looks so much faster.
stop for an hour? yes maybe if you are 90 years old. Otherwise its probably not that strenuous. plus you wont have t spend £240 for a standard ticket - or if you want one of those nice head rest covers - £450 return for first.
[quote][p][bold]bogart259[/bold] wrote: Assuming that you don't stop, sleep or crash, Southampton to Leeds by car is an average 60 mph for a four hour journey. If you're an average human being, you're going to want to stop at least once for an hour - so that brings it down to an average 47 mph. Suddenly the train looks so much faster.[/p][/quote]stop for an hour? yes maybe if you are 90 years old. Otherwise its probably not that strenuous. plus you wont have t spend £240 for a standard ticket - or if you want one of those nice head rest covers - £450 return for first. elvisimo
  • Score: 4

3:46pm Thu 16 Jan 14

bogart259 says...

elvisimo wrote:
bogart259 wrote:
Assuming that you don't stop, sleep or crash, Southampton to Leeds by car is an average 60 mph for a four hour journey. If you're an average human being, you're going to want to stop at least once for an hour - so that brings it down to an average 47 mph. Suddenly the train looks so much faster.
stop for an hour? yes maybe if you are 90 years old. Otherwise its probably not that strenuous. plus you wont have t spend £240 for a standard ticket - or if you want one of those nice head rest covers - £450 return for first.
Obviously you are a super human, whereas the rest of us will want to stop for a drink and something to eat.

If you book well enough in advance, you can get some really cheap fares. Book now for the end of March, and Southampton to Leeds is about £80 return. Not £240 as you suggest.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bogart259[/bold] wrote: Assuming that you don't stop, sleep or crash, Southampton to Leeds by car is an average 60 mph for a four hour journey. If you're an average human being, you're going to want to stop at least once for an hour - so that brings it down to an average 47 mph. Suddenly the train looks so much faster.[/p][/quote]stop for an hour? yes maybe if you are 90 years old. Otherwise its probably not that strenuous. plus you wont have t spend £240 for a standard ticket - or if you want one of those nice head rest covers - £450 return for first.[/p][/quote]Obviously you are a super human, whereas the rest of us will want to stop for a drink and something to eat. If you book well enough in advance, you can get some really cheap fares. Book now for the end of March, and Southampton to Leeds is about £80 return. Not £240 as you suggest. bogart259
  • Score: -2

3:48pm Thu 16 Jan 14

gilbertratchet says...

bogart259 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
bogart259 wrote:
Assuming that you don't stop, sleep or crash, Southampton to Leeds by car is an average 60 mph for a four hour journey. If you're an average human being, you're going to want to stop at least once for an hour - so that brings it down to an average 47 mph. Suddenly the train looks so much faster.
stop for an hour? yes maybe if you are 90 years old. Otherwise its probably not that strenuous. plus you wont have t spend £240 for a standard ticket - or if you want one of those nice head rest covers - £450 return for first.
Obviously you are a super human, whereas the rest of us will want to stop for a drink and something to eat.

If you book well enough in advance, you can get some really cheap fares. Book now for the end of March, and Southampton to Leeds is about £80 return. Not £240 as you suggest.
Secret option 3: you take a break, but it's shorter than an hour.
[quote][p][bold]bogart259[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bogart259[/bold] wrote: Assuming that you don't stop, sleep or crash, Southampton to Leeds by car is an average 60 mph for a four hour journey. If you're an average human being, you're going to want to stop at least once for an hour - so that brings it down to an average 47 mph. Suddenly the train looks so much faster.[/p][/quote]stop for an hour? yes maybe if you are 90 years old. Otherwise its probably not that strenuous. plus you wont have t spend £240 for a standard ticket - or if you want one of those nice head rest covers - £450 return for first.[/p][/quote]Obviously you are a super human, whereas the rest of us will want to stop for a drink and something to eat. If you book well enough in advance, you can get some really cheap fares. Book now for the end of March, and Southampton to Leeds is about £80 return. Not £240 as you suggest.[/p][/quote]Secret option 3: you take a break, but it's shorter than an hour. gilbertratchet
  • Score: 2

3:53pm Thu 16 Jan 14

House Sparrow says...

Donald2000 wrote:
I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes.

Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.
They have increased the time allowed to travelbetween each stop. By doing this the train company are more likely to meet their punctuality targets and therefore not have to pay fines or compensate season ticket holders.
[quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes. Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.[/p][/quote]They have increased the time allowed to travelbetween each stop. By doing this the train company are more likely to meet their punctuality targets and therefore not have to pay fines or compensate season ticket holders. House Sparrow
  • Score: 2

3:57pm Thu 16 Jan 14

bogart259 says...

Donald2000 wrote:
I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes.

Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.
Every hour, the xx35 from London Waterloo takes one hour and 14 minutes to get to Southampton central (every hour). That's 74 minutes, not 91 minutes, e very hour. And it's 79 miles, not 70

That's about 64mph average for that one train, every hour.
[quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes. Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.[/p][/quote]Every hour, the xx35 from London Waterloo takes one hour and 14 minutes to get to Southampton central (every hour). That's 74 minutes, not 91 minutes, e very hour. And it's 79 miles, not 70 That's about 64mph average for that one train, every hour. bogart259
  • Score: 1

4:25pm Thu 16 Jan 14

george h says...

Donald2000 wrote:
I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes.

Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.
Very true. The SW Trains service to Waterloo is abysmal.

Compare it with the nationalized electrified East Coast service from York to Kings Cross, a service that I use frequently. Fast expresses from Edinburgh calling at York typically take under two hours for the 195 miles, even with two stops at Doncaster and Peterboro'.

An average speed of over 100 mph.

And that's by no means the fastest journey time. Some are non-stop. Some are operated by Grand Central using refurbished Great Western InterCity 125 diesels. Even those manage an average of 100 mph.

And there are fast express trains every 30 mins all day, and every day.

Compare with SW Trains Southampton to London that are utter garbage and the highest price per mile on the network.
[quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes. Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.[/p][/quote]Very true. The SW Trains service to Waterloo is abysmal. Compare it with the nationalized electrified East Coast service from York to Kings Cross, a service that I use frequently. Fast expresses from Edinburgh calling at York typically take under two hours for the 195 miles, even with two stops at Doncaster and Peterboro'. An average speed of over 100 mph. And that's by no means the fastest journey time. Some are non-stop. Some are operated by Grand Central using refurbished Great Western InterCity 125 diesels. Even those manage an average of 100 mph. And there are fast express trains every 30 mins all day, and every day. Compare with SW Trains Southampton to London that are utter garbage and the highest price per mile on the network. george h
  • Score: 4

9:02pm Thu 16 Jan 14

southy says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
southy wrote:
Its governments that hurt the small business no slow trains
It can't be both? Do you really have to drag your tedious politics into every single story that doesn't contain geographical errors?
its very political the statement was made by a politician, think about it longer
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Its governments that hurt the small business no slow trains[/p][/quote]It can't be both? Do you really have to drag your tedious politics into every single story that doesn't contain geographical errors?[/p][/quote]its very political the statement was made by a politician, think about it longer southy
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Donald2000 says...

bogart259 wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes.

Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.
Every hour, the xx35 from London Waterloo takes one hour and 14 minutes to get to Southampton central (every hour). That's 74 minutes, not 91 minutes, e very hour. And it's 79 miles, not 70

That's about 64mph average for that one train, every hour.
Thank you. I have checked your facts. You are right. I am wrong. Sorry about that.
[quote][p][bold]bogart259[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes. Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.[/p][/quote]Every hour, the xx35 from London Waterloo takes one hour and 14 minutes to get to Southampton central (every hour). That's 74 minutes, not 91 minutes, e very hour. And it's 79 miles, not 70 That's about 64mph average for that one train, every hour.[/p][/quote]Thank you. I have checked your facts. You are right. I am wrong. Sorry about that. Donald2000
  • Score: 2

12:44am Fri 17 Jan 14

george h says...

Donald2000 wrote:
bogart259 wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes.

Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.
Every hour, the xx35 from London Waterloo takes one hour and 14 minutes to get to Southampton central (every hour). That's 74 minutes, not 91 minutes, e very hour. And it's 79 miles, not 70

That's about 64mph average for that one train, every hour.
Thank you. I have checked your facts. You are right. I am wrong. Sorry about that.
On your corrected figures It's still an average speed of only 64 mph.

Abysmal by the standards of the Great Western, the East Coast Mainline and the West Coast Mainline that typically run at 125 mph and average 100 mph.

Were SW Trains to match their average speeds we'd have a service from Southampton to Waterloo that offered us a 48 minutes journey time.
[quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bogart259[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: I have computed the average speed in miles per hour on the London run and excepting one train from London Waterloo in the rush hour, the average speed of SW Trains to London is only 46.15 mph between Southampton Central and Waterloo. That's at a distance of 70 miles and a timing of 91 minutes. Why this amount of time should be taken with modern electronic signalling, AWS and track circuit controls, no-one really knows. Indeed, the timings have deteriorated. It only used to take 70 minutes in the mid-nineties.[/p][/quote]Every hour, the xx35 from London Waterloo takes one hour and 14 minutes to get to Southampton central (every hour). That's 74 minutes, not 91 minutes, e very hour. And it's 79 miles, not 70 That's about 64mph average for that one train, every hour.[/p][/quote]Thank you. I have checked your facts. You are right. I am wrong. Sorry about that.[/p][/quote]On your corrected figures It's still an average speed of only 64 mph. Abysmal by the standards of the Great Western, the East Coast Mainline and the West Coast Mainline that typically run at 125 mph and average 100 mph. Were SW Trains to match their average speeds we'd have a service from Southampton to Waterloo that offered us a 48 minutes journey time. george h
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree