Electrification west of Newbury

[swt_passenger]

Has anyone told Weston residents (and their MP) that it might not be sensible to continue with the 8 through London services per day. I expect not and I expect a loud outcry when that penny drops.

They have been informed. The GW franchise ITT published a few months ago already stated in black and white that only connections need to be provided:

Weekdays: Provide connections with at least 8tpd from London Paddington. Weekends: Provide connections with at least 11 trains from London Paddington.

There are 40 tpd Bristol to Weston on weekdays, and 55 on Sat/Sun combined.

 

[TheWalrus]

I don't know as yet how many change for Weymouth there but with the proposal to increase the frequency of these, it could increase the credibility of this as a journey option.
The Exeter semi-fast would cost a lot more to run but it'd be another profitable service they'd have. I can't imagine they make a lot running practically empty Newbury-Bedwyn and back!
Other stations on the line saw negative growth around 08-09 except Westbury.
I have looked at Glastonbury and that it didn't happen in 2006. Even taking away say 20000, it's still a reasonably large figure in comparison to other stations.

And your evidence for such a service being profitable is what? FGW is already soaking up £200m a year in revenue support, according to Modern Railways, so I don't imagine DafT will be rushing to approve such a massive and costly increase in services as you suggest along the Berks & Hants line, which is not noted for the number of major metropolises lining the route. Where are all these people wanting to go to Weymouth coming from? in London you just go to Waterloo, from the North, Midlands and Thames Valley you use XC to Bournemouth and change and the FGW Weymouth services run through to/from Worcester/Gloucester/Bristol anyway. As regards the festival, that's effectively 10 per cent of the annual footfall at the station in the course of about six days, which rather distorts the overall figure, however you look at it.

For a start it would be providing a service to destinations people want to go to - Bedwyn is not! This would provide many more journey opportunities which are currently not feasibly possible.
I'm not aware of a "all these people" who want to go to Weymouth, and haven't made out it is or will be a major passenger flow. I'm merely suggesting it could be another journey opportunity made available by providing a decent service along the B&H and Weymouth line, using Castle Cary as an interchange. Passengers could, if they so wished, used it as an alternate route to London, or as a link to the Kennet Valley and the West of England. However as you suggest, I agree this traffic may be minimal and therefore would not support the service alone. I believe that reasonably strong flows along the line have a good chance of providing enough revenue to support such a service.
I have discussed this many times with a contact at FGW who agrees it could be commercially viable, it's an issue of not having suitable stock.
I would like to ask why you don't think this line should have a decent service, and what would you suggest as an alternative? When we will soon be sending an hourly semi-fast up the North Cotswolds and to Cheltenham, which will probably see lighter loadings than an Exeter semi-fast. We also have hourly services on some West Country branchlines which have much lower passenger usage. How are these things justified, while many people don't want the B&H to have a proper service?

 

[Xavi]

For a start it would be providing a service to destinations people want to go to - Bedwyn is not! This would provide many more journey opportunities which are currently not feasibly possible.
I'm not aware of a "all these people" who want to go to Weymouth, and haven't made out it is or will be a major passenger flow. I'm merely suggesting it could be another journey opportunity made available by providing a decent service along the B&H and Weymouth line, using Castle Cary as an interchange. Passengers could, if they so wished, used it as an alternate route to London, or as a link to the Kennet Valley and the West of England. However as you suggest, I agree this traffic may be minimal and therefore would not support the service alone. I believe that reasonably strong flows along the line have a good chance of providing enough revenue to support such a service.
I have discussed this many times with a contact at FGW who agrees it could be commercially viable, it's an issue of not having suitable stock.
I would like to ask why you don't think this line should have a decent service, and what would you suggest as an alternative? When we will soon be sending an hourly semi-fast up the North Cotswolds and to Cheltenham, which will probably see lighter loadings than an Exeter semi-fast. We also have hourly services on some West Country branchlines which have much lower passenger usage. How are these things justified, while many people don't want the B&H to have a proper service?

Where there are hourly or better West Country branch services (Exmouth, Paignton, Barnstaple, Falmouth) they are now so well patronised that the current rolling stock is insufficient. Certainly not carting around air these days. Surplus Turbos from London can't come soon enough. Put on a decent service where it's needed (accessing the likes of Exeter) and the crowds will come, especially in these times of falling car ownership amongst the young generation.

 

[TheWalrus]

I know the ones youv'e mentioned are busy, but what about Newquay, Looe, St Ives when it's not summer?

 

[Xavi]

I know the ones youv'e mentioned are busy, but what about Newquay, Looe, St Ives when it's not summer?

Not sure that Newquay or Looe are hourly - both run with minimal resources. I did forget about St Ives, quiet in winter, but summer traffic alone (standing in a 4-car DMU) easily justifies he minimal infrastructure cost.

Even Gunnislake (Bere Alston) route will be very busy once rebuild to Tavistock happens.

 

[TheWalrus]

Looe is Newquay is roughly two hourly. I'm sure these routes or the Gunnislake or St Ives (except summer) are commercially viable?

 

[jimm]

For a start it would be providing a service to destinations people want to go to - Bedwyn is not! This would provide many more journey opportunities which are currently not feasibly possible.
I'm not aware of a "all these people" who want to go to Weymouth, and haven't made out it is or will be a major passenger flow. I'm merely suggesting it could be another journey opportunity made available by providing a decent service along the B&H and Weymouth line, using Castle Cary as an interchange. Passengers could, if they so wished, used it as an alternate route to London, or as a link to the Kennet Valley and the West of England. However as you suggest, I agree this traffic may be minimal and therefore would not support the service alone. I believe that reasonably strong flows along the line have a good chance of providing enough revenue to support such a service.
I have discussed this many times with a contact at FGW who agrees it could be commercially viable, it's an issue of not having suitable stock.
I would like to ask why you don't think this line should have a decent service, and what would you suggest as an alternative? When we will soon be sending an hourly semi-fast up the North Cotswolds and to Cheltenham, which will probably see lighter loadings than an Exeter semi-fast. We also have hourly services on some West Country branchlines which have much lower passenger usage. How are these things justified, while many people don't want the B&H to have a proper service?

And the prospects of there being more trains to Weymouth than there are now? Pretty minimal.

Not having suitable stock? Well they used to have 180s, some of them even ran to Exeter. They then chose to use them elsewhere. And what does viable mean, a rock-solid profit-generator, more than outweighing operating costs, or just something that doesn't bleed red ink? With the current revenue support bill, DfT won't agree to anything except the former.

Yes, there is the prospect of hourly off-peak trains on the Cotswold Line, although the service is pretty near that now, and more frequent in the peak and in patches off-peak, especially at the eastern end of the line. But it's also well within London commuter territory, for quite a distance past Oxford, and with decent levels of the demand the rest of the day as well.

In the case of Gloucester/Cheltenham, the current service is dictated by both rolling stock issues (a full HST would be overkill much of the day) and the need to change at Swindon to/from a dmu otherwise, which is a clear demand-killer, same as changing at Oxford was on the Cotswold Line before Turbos and all-day through running to/from London arrived in 1993. An hourly five-car IEP Cheltenham service, with an extra set added east of Swindon, is likely to produce a significant boost in custom there. And there are a lot more people living in Stroud, Gloucester and Cheltenham (or a short drive from Kemble in the case of Cirencester) than along the Berks and Hants.

An hourly Exeter semi-fast would presumably mean removal of most B&H stops by West Country expresses, so there would be a lot of stops for anyone travelling to/from the likes of Castle Cary. Taking express stops out at Tiverton and especially Taunton would cause uproar if they were forced into something making half-a-dozen or more stops on the way to or from Reading just to make the numbers add up. And there are already rather a lot of trains between Exeter and Taunton. Is there really a need for even more?

If an hourly B&H semi-fast is such a great idea, someone would surely have done something about it long ago. A more modest increase in frequency and a less random calling pattern may be worth pursuing but I think an hourly operation would simply result in a lot of air being carried about.

 

[Xavi]

And the prospects of there being more trains to Weymouth than there are now? Pretty minimal.

Not having suitable stock? Well they used to have 180s, some of them even ran to Exeter. They then chose to use them elsewhere. And what does viable mean, a rock-solid profit-generator, more than outweighing operating costs, or just something that doesn't bleed red ink? With the current revenue support bill, DfT won't agree to anything except the former.

Yes, there is the prospect of hourly off-peak trains on the Cotswold Line, although the service is pretty near that now, and more frequent in the peak and in patches off-peak, especially at the eastern end of the line. But it's also well within London commuter territory, for quite a distance past Oxford, and with decent levels of the demand the rest of the day as well.

In the case of Gloucester/Cheltenham, the current service is dictated by both rolling stock issues (a full HST would be overkill much of the day) and the need to change at Swindon to/from a dmu otherwise, which is a clear demand-killer, same as changing at Oxford was on the Cotswold Line before Turbos and all-day through running to/from London arrived in 1993. An hourly five-car IEP Cheltenham service, with an extra set added east of Swindon, is likely to produce a significant boost in custom there. And there are a lot more people living in Stroud, Gloucester and Cheltenham (or a short drive from Kemble in the case of Cirencester) than along the Berks and Hants.

An hourly Exeter semi-fast would presumably mean removal of most B&H stops by West Country expresses, so there would be a lot of stops for anyone travelling to/from the likes of Castle Cary. Taking express stops out at Tiverton and especially Taunton would cause uproar if they were forced into something making half-a-dozen or more stops on the way to or from Reading just to make the numbers add up. And there are already rather a lot of trains between Exeter and Taunton. Is there really a need for even more?

If an hourly B&H semi-fast is such a great idea, someone would surely have done something about it long ago. A more modest increase in frequency and a less random calling pattern may be worth pursuing but I think an hourly operation would simply result in a lot of air being carried about.

Issue on B&H is more complex than just serving the demand from the intermediate stations. Such is the demand from Taunton and west thereof that often you cannot get a seat on those services that do serve the stations on the B&H if you join east of Taunton. The demand from Taunton and west would also be even greater if non-stop to Reading was the hourly pattern. I don't see Taunton, or even Tiverton Parkway stops being omitted from all but a few services though.

Think of it like Scottish expresses all serving Newark, Grantham - they don't for a simple reason. The world tends not to think of demand for travel from Devon & Corwall in the same way as Edinburgh, and I understand why, but if you can fill an hourly fast express why wouldn't you? Don't talk about populations please - the trains are full!

 

[gwr4090]

For a start it would be providing a service to destinations people want to go to - Bedwyn is not! This would provide many more journey opportunities which are currently not feasibly possible.
I'm not aware of a "all these people" who want to go to Weymouth, and haven't made out it is or will be a major passenger flow. I'm merely suggesting it could be another journey opportunity made available by providing a decent service along the B&H and Weymouth line, using Castle Cary as an interchange. Passengers could, if they so wished, used it as an alternate route to London, or as a link to the Kennet Valley and the West of England. However as you suggest, I agree this traffic may be minimal and therefore would not support the service alone. I believe that reasonably strong flows along the line have a good chance of providing enough revenue to support such a service.
I have discussed this many times with a contact at FGW who agrees it could be commercially viable, it's an issue of not having suitable stock.
I would like to ask why you don't think this line should have a decent service, and what would you suggest as an alternative? When we will soon be sending an hourly semi-fast up the North Cotswolds and to Cheltenham, which will probably see lighter loadings than an Exeter semi-fast. We also have hourly services on some West Country branchlines which have much lower passenger usage. How are these things justified, while many people don't want the B&H to have a proper service?

As a Dorchester resident, I have occasionally travelled via Castle Cary to London. Indeed in several timetables the first train of the day was slightly quicker than travelling to Waterloo, but the connection at Castle Cary only worked well for one or two trains a day. The real problem is the lack of a regular interval hourly service between Westbury and Weymouth, although the GW ITT asks bidders to cost this as an option.

I also note that the franchise consultation document also proposed an hourly Paddington-Westbury semi-fast service, serving Newbury, Hungerford, Bedwyn and Pewsey which collectively have a reasonably large catchment area. It suggests that the IEP fleet size includes provision for this. Whether this would be sufficient to justify electrification I have my doubts.

David

 

[jimm]

Issue on B&H is more complex than just serving the demand from the intermediate stations. Such is the demand from Taunton and west thereof that often you cannot get a seat on those services that do serve the stations on the B&H if you join east of Taunton. The demand from Taunton and west would also be even greater if non-stop to Reading was the hourly pattern. I don't see Taunton, or even Tiverton Parkway stops being omitted from all but a few services though.

Think of it like Scottish expresses all serving Newark, Grantham - they don't for a simple reason. The world tends not to think of demand for travel from Devon & Corwall in the same way as Edinburgh, and I understand why, but if you can fill an hourly fast express why wouldn't you? Don't talk about populations please - the trains are full!

Well you have to talk about the populations, because if you separate out the B&H flows from the West Country services, which is what providing this hourly semi-fast service would appear to entail, then the communities along the B&H are going to have to turn up in sufficient numbers to fill those trains (and all day, not just in the peaks, where the service is already partly structured to separate out the two flows). People from further west won't be using the semi-fasts due to the time penalty all those stops impose - you only have took look at the current timetable to see the difference between the fasts and the trains that do make the stops between Reading and Taunton.

You also have to talk about populations because with the best will in the world, the numbers living in the West Country simply do not compare with those in Yorkshire, the North East and Edinburgh, which mean there are a lot more trains out there on the East Coast to serve the Newarks and Granthams, than there ever will be to and from the South West.

I have heard the Newark and Grantham argument deployed before in the context of the Cotswold Line by people who seem to believe that Worcester and Hereford (two of the smallest cities in England) should get limited stop expresses, despite the fact that most of the passengers and the revenue that have permitted the build-up of the service the full length of the line to its current frequencies come from the eastern end of the line in Gloucestershire and Oxfordshire. Start trying to separate flows there or decide which intermediate stops are 'important' enough to be served by limited-stop trains (eg 'unimportant' Pershore will soon have a bigger car park than 'important' Evesham, 'unimportant' Hanborough will soon have a car park double the size of Worcester Shrub Hill) and mess up calling patterns and you risk undermining the whole operation and driving people off into the arms of Chiltern.

Going all the way back to the original premise of the thread, as gwr4090 has noted, there is a suggestion of an hourly IEP to Westbury anyway, whether powered by wire or diesel, and the original reason I posted in the thread was to address specifically The Walrus's suggestion that serving Castle Cary was "a big problem".

With the connectional opportunities Westbury offers and the stops served along the Vale of Pewsey, it would seem a not unreasonable end point, whereas running trains on all the way to Taunton or Exeter to provide an hourly service to Castle Cary looks a far more dubious proposition. Whether wiring to Westbury makes sense remains to be seen but with the weather wiping out the Swindon-Bristol Parkway line again this week, another electrified route to Bristol may come in very handy.

 

[The Ham]

I would doubt that electrification west of Newbury would extend beyond Westbury.

Therefore if you were to electrify to Westbury have that as a stopping service run by EMU's and then run a service using IEP to Paignton from Paddington calling at (possible new stations in brackets):

Reading, Newbury, Pewsey, Westbury, Frome, Bruton, Castle Cary, (Somerton), (Langport), Taunton, (Wellington), Tiverton Parkway, (Stoneyford & Cullompton), Exeter St David's, Dawlish, Teignmouth, Newton Abbot, Torre, Torbay.

It would probably take about 2:45 to get to Exeter (assuming calling at all the potential new stations) that's about 30 minutes longer than at present over a train which calls at Reading, Taunton, Tiverton Parkway but still about 30 minutes faster than going via Salisbury.

That way as long as the new service leaves London/Reading after a fast train and gets to Taunton/Tiverton Parkway (and ideally Exeter) before the next fast train, then you'd still get people from those places using it. Especially if you sold more and/or cheaper advanced fairs for the slower service from those locations.

That would then mean that the slower service would still be viable, would ease crowding on the longer distance services (so you could sell more longer distance tickets) and could mean that more people from between Exeter & Paignton would have a direct service to London (even though it would take longer than changing at Exeter to an express) without having to slow down the express services.

It would also mean that places like Westbury & Pewsey had a service which was almost as good as the intercity services which currently calls there, so you'd get less complaints from them.

With regards to services to Weymouth along the Heart of Wessex line, these are likely to see passenger numbers increase as FGW are trailing allowing bus pass holders getting the benefits of an annual Senior Railcard for free. The reason being it is cheaper to provide funding to the trains (which already run) than it is to provide subsidised bus services, so I'd expect that (as long as it attracts passengers) it would continue.

Also the operator of the GW franchise area will see the number of seats for their peak hour services increase (especially within the Thames Valley commutator area) at the same time as their costs fall (due to electrification) so I'd expect that the overall government payment for train services (including the NR costs) will at least fall (from the current 5.8p/passenger mile), reach cost neutral (i.e. 0p/passenger mile) and maybe even return a profit to the government within the next ten years. Especially as this has already fallen from 9.9p/passenger mile since 2009/2010.

 

[TheWalrus]

And the prospects of there being more trains to Weymouth than there are now? Pretty minimal.

Not having suitable stock? Well they used to have 180s, some of them even ran to Exeter. They then chose to use them elsewhere. And what does viable mean, a rock-solid profit-generator, more than outweighing operating costs, or just something that doesn't bleed red ink? With the current revenue support bill, DfT won't agree to anything except the former.

Yes, there is the prospect of hourly off-peak trains on the Cotswold Line, although the service is pretty near that now, and more frequent in the peak and in patches off-peak, especially at the eastern end of the line. But it's also well within London commuter territory, for quite a distance past Oxford, and with decent levels of the demand the rest of the day as well.

In the case of Gloucester/Cheltenham, the current service is dictated by both rolling stock issues (a full HST would be overkill much of the day) and the need to change at Swindon to/from a dmu otherwise, which is a clear demand-killer, same as changing at Oxford was on the Cotswold Line before Turbos and all-day through running to/from London arrived in 1993. An hourly five-car IEP Cheltenham service, with an extra set added east of Swindon, is likely to produce a significant boost in custom there. And there are a lot more people living in Stroud, Gloucester and Cheltenham (or a short drive from Kemble in the case of Cirencester) than along the Berks and Hants.

An hourly Exeter semi-fast would presumably mean removal of most B&H stops by West Country expresses, so there would be a lot of stops for anyone travelling to/from the likes of Castle Cary. Taking express stops out at Tiverton and especially Taunton would cause uproar if they were forced into something making half-a-dozen or more stops on the way to or from Reading just to make the numbers add up. And there are already rather a lot of trains between Exeter and Taunton. Is there really a need for even more?

If an hourly B&H semi-fast is such a great idea, someone would surely have done something about it long ago. A more modest increase in frequency and a less random calling pattern may be worth pursuing but I think an hourly operation would simply result in a lot of air being carried about.

Issue on B&H is more complex than just serving the demand from the intermediate stations. Such is the demand from Taunton and west thereof that often you cannot get a seat on those services that do serve the stations on the B&H if you join east of Taunton. The demand from Taunton and west would also be even greater if non-stop to Reading was the hourly pattern. I don't see Taunton, or even Tiverton Parkway stops being omitted from all but a few services though.

Think of it like Scottish expresses all serving Newark, Grantham - they don't for a simple reason. The world tends not to think of demand for travel from Devon & Corwall in the same way as Edinburgh, and I understand why, but if you can fill an hourly fast express why wouldn't you? Don't talk about populations please - the trains are full!

Exactly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would doubt that electrification west of Newbury would extend beyond Westbury.

Therefore if you were to electrify to Westbury have that as a stopping service run by EMU's and then run a service using IEP to Paignton from Paddington calling at (possible new stations in brackets):

Reading, Newbury, Pewsey, Westbury, Frome, Bruton, Castle Cary, (Somerton), (Langport), Taunton, (Wellington), Tiverton Parkway, (Stoneyford & Cullompton), Exeter St David's, Dawlish, Teignmouth, Newton Abbot, Torre, Torbay.

It would probably take about 2:45 to get to Exeter (assuming calling at all the potential new stations) that's about 30 minutes longer than at present over a train which calls at Reading, Taunton, Tiverton Parkway but still about 30 minutes faster than going via Salisbury.

That way as long as the new service leaves London/Reading after a fast train and gets to Taunton/Tiverton Parkway (and ideally Exeter) before the next fast train, then you'd still get people from those places using it. Especially if you sold more and/or cheaper advanced fairs for the slower service from those locations.

That would then mean that the slower service would still be viable, would ease crowding on the longer distance services (so you could sell more longer distance tickets) and could mean that more people from between Exeter & Paignton would have a direct service to London (even though it would take longer than changing at Exeter to an express) without having to slow down the express services.

It would also mean that places like Westbury & Pewsey had a service which was almost as good as the intercity services which currently calls there, so you'd get less complaints from them.

With regards to services to Weymouth along the Heart of Wessex line, these are likely to see passenger numbers increase as FGW are trailing allowing bus pass holders getting the benefits of an annual Senior Railcard for free. The reason being it is cheaper to provide funding to the trains (which already run) than it is to provide subsidised bus services, so I'd expect that (as long as it attracts passengers) it would continue.

Also the operator of the GW franchise area will see the number of seats for their peak hour services increase (especially within the Thames Valley commutator area) at the same time as their costs fall (due to electrification) so I'd expect that the overall government payment for train services (including the NR costs) will at least fall (from the current 5.8p/passenger mile), reach cost neutral (i.e. 0p/passenger mile) and maybe even return a profit to the government within the next ten years. Especially as this has already fallen from 9.9p/passenger mile since 2009/2010.

Again this picks up on many of my points.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Issue on B&H is more complex than just serving the demand from the intermediate stations. Such is the demand from Taunton and west thereof that often you cannot get a seat on those services that do serve the stations on the B&H if you join east of Taunton. The demand from Taunton and west would also be even greater if non-stop to Reading was the hourly pattern. I don't see Taunton, or even Tiverton Parkway stops being omitted from all but a few services though.

Think of it like Scottish expresses all serving Newark, Grantham - they don't for a simple reason. The world tends not to think of demand for travel from Devon & Corwall in the same way as Edinburgh, and I understand why, but if you can fill an hourly fast express why wouldn't you? Don't talk about populations please - the trains are full!

Going all the way back to the original premise of the thread, as gwr4090 has noted, there is a suggestion of an hourly IEP to Westbury anyway, whether powered by wire or diesel, and the original reason I posted in the thread was to address specifically The Walrus's suggestion that serving Castle Cary was "a big problem".

With the connectional opportunities Westbury offers and the stops served along the Vale of Pewsey, it would seem a not unreasonable end point, whereas running trains on all the way to Taunton or Exeter to provide an hourly service to Castle Cary looks a far more dubious proposition. Whether wiring to Westbury makes sense remains to be seen but with the weather wiping out the Swindon-Bristol Parkway line again this week, another electrified route to Bristol may come in very handy.

I agree Westbury is a sensible place to terminate, (much more than Bedwyn!) but on the other hand strongly believe that Castle Cary should also be eligible for such a service. I recommend Exeter as the ultimate destination as it's a reasonably popular destination which people from the B&H would travel to. It would also provide a half-hourly Exeter to London service, relieving the fast services (which can get exceptionally busy) while also competing with SWTs service to Waterloo. I feel that a lot more people would use it heading sown to Exeter, while only going as far as Westbury may attract less people.

 

[tbtc]

So basically any electrification west of Paddington will see people complain.

If it goes to Newbury then it should have gone to Westbury. If it goes to Westbury then it should have extended to Castle Cary - and then to Exeter, to Plymouth... until every Cornish branch line is wired and everyone is happy...

So since we're not going to wire all the way to Penzance this decade, Newbury seems a pretty sensible place to wire to for now.

 

[Xavi]

Well you have to talk about the populations, because if you separate out the B&H flows from the West Country services, which is what providing this hourly semi-fast service would appear to entail, then the communities along the B&H are going to have to turn up in sufficient numbers to fill those trains (and all day, not just in the peaks, where the service is already partly structured to separate out the two flows). People from further west won't be using the semi-fasts due to the time penalty all those stops impose - you only have took look at the current timetable to see the difference between the fasts and the trains that do make the stops between Reading and Taunton.

You also have to talk about populations because with the best will in the world, the numbers living in the West Country simply do not compare with those in Yorkshire, the North East and Edinburgh, which mean there are a lot more trains out there on the East Coast to serve the Newarks and Granthams, than there ever will be to and from the South West.

I have heard the Newark and Grantham argument deployed before in the context of the Cotswold Line by people who seem to believe that Worcester and Hereford (two of the smallest cities in England) should get limited stop expresses, despite the fact that most of the passengers and the revenue that have permitted the build-up of the service the full length of the line to its current frequencies come from the eastern end of the line in Gloucestershire and Oxfordshire. Start trying to separate flows there or decide which intermediate stops are 'important' enough to be served by limited-stop trains (eg 'unimportant' Pershore will soon have a bigger car park than 'important' Evesham, 'unimportant' Hanborough will soon have a car park double the size of Worcester Shrub Hill) and mess up calling patterns and you risk undermining the whole operation and driving people off into the arms of Chiltern.

Going all the way back to the original premise of the thread, as gwr4090 has noted, there is a suggestion of an hourly IEP to Westbury anyway, whether powered by wire or diesel, and the original reason I posted in the thread was to address specifically The Walrus's suggestion that serving Castle Cary was "a big problem".

With the connectional opportunities Westbury offers and the stops served along the Vale of Pewsey, it would seem a not unreasonable end point, whereas running trains on all the way to Taunton or Exeter to provide an hourly service to Castle Cary looks a far more dubious proposition. Whether wiring to Westbury makes sense remains to be seen but with the weather wiping out the Swindon-Bristol Parkway line again this week, another electrified route to Bristol may come in very handy.

My reference to population was about filling hourly fast services from Cornwall, Devon and Somerset. Not that of B&H towns and villages. The stoppers would be at a frequency to match demand. Ironically your conclusion that wiring to Westbury may be justifiable to provide the electrified diversion route for Bristol and South Wales is what I suggested several days ago.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So basically any electrification west of Paddington will see people complain.

If it goes to Newbury then it should have gone to Westbury. If it goes to Westbury then it should have extended to Castle Cary - and then to Exeter, to Plymouth... until every Cornish branch line is wired and everyone is happy...

So since we're not going to wire all the way to Penzance this decade, Newbury seems a pretty sensible place to wire to for now.

Ever heard of long term planning? If electrification is going to continue after CP5, then you need a plan and strategy. Newbury to Bathampton via Westbury at the start of CP6 using the teams and equipment from CP5 schemes has to be worth considering. Diversion route for Bristol and first part of gradual electrification further west, and not at the expense of Derby - Westerleigh etc, those schemes will happen too.

 

[tbtc]

Ever heard of long term planning?

Yes, of course I have...

If electrification is going to continue after CP5, then you need a plan and strategy. Newbury to Bathampton via Westbury at the start of CP6 using the teams and equipment from CP5 schemes has to be worth considering. Diversion route for Bristol and first part of gradual electrification further west, and not at the expense of Derby - Westerleigh etc, those schemes will happen too.

Fact is, no "half way house" seems to satisfy the people on here, and there's no hope of getting everything wired up in the next decade. There will be a finite distance wired in each Control Period, and Newbury seems a sensible place to go to in CP5.

It gets hard to argue when people go into "wishlist" mode (reopening closed stations, electrifying lines that only have a handful of services a day at the moment, introducing dozens of extra services etc).

 

[Cliveblackpool]

So basically any electrification west of Paddington will see people complain.

If it goes to Newbury then it should have gone to Westbury. If it goes to Westbury then it should have extended to Castle Cary - and then to Exeter, to Plymouth... until every Cornish branch line is wired and everyone is happy...

So since we're not going to wire all the way to Penzance this decade, Newbury seems a pretty sensible place to wire to for now.

Imo it should be a rolling program, finishing at Paignton and Penzance say in around 10 years time!
I can't see there is any rush to wire any of the Cornish or Devon Branch Lines, as there are few through services.
Newquay might be the first because of its through services, but there is a long Winter!

 

[Xavi]

Yes, of course I have...



Fact is, no "half way house" seems to satisfy the people on here, and there's no hope of getting everything wired up in the next decade. There will be a finite distance wired in each Control Period, and Newbury seems a sensible place to go to in CP5.

It gets hard to argue when people go into "wishlist" mode (reopening closed stations, electrifying lines that only have a handful of services a day at the moment, introducing dozens of extra services etc).

I don't think anyone has said Newbury is not OK for CP5, there's so much to be done in CP5 Network Rail couldn't possibly do any more. So the likes of Westbury would have to be CP6. No fantasy reopenings for me, just want Devon & Cornwall to retain a very busy express service via B&H without any of these ideas of slotting in via Bristol with extended journey times and inevitable delays. HSTs will be fine for another 20 years as far as I and many others are concerned. However, I believe an alternative wired diversion route for Bristol / South Wales would be invaluable, and a good by product of this would probably be more non stop Taunton to Reading services, which are badly needed to cater for demand. And finally, if Westbury did get wired in CP6 then the options for a Devon and Cornwall fleet of bi-modes will start to stack up a bit better (not that any IEP really does). Wouldn't be beyond DfT to go to such lengths to make another case for IEP, it will also help the case for the non-IEP 125 mph Thames Valley EMU fleet that they're now pushing...

 

[tbtc]

I believe an alternative wired diversion route for Bristol / South Wales would be invaluable

When so many people are complaining about there being "too many" bi-mode IEPs on London - Bristol/ South Wales services I can't see any justification for electrifying diversionary lines.

One attraction of bi-mode is that there's little need to worry about diversionary lines.

 

[Xavi]

When so many people are complaining about there being "too many" bi-mode IEPs on London - Bristol/ South Wales services I can't see any justification for electrifying diversionary lines.

One attraction of bi-mode is that there's little need to worry about diversionary lines.

I believe somewhere at the start of his thread there was mention that DfT has now realised that the all electric IEP fleet should be increased since they've finally worked out that, with the wires now reaching Swansea and the Vale of Glamorgan line, the MTUs would be carted around under wires for 90%+ of the time! Even when there are diversions in South Wales! My sources tell me that Westbury / Bathampton is seen as a key to fully justifying the greater electric fleet and would also allow 90 of the no longer needed MTUs to be used in the option for a fleet of 16 x 9-car bi-mode IEP for Devon & Cornwall. The wires as far as Westbury also help to justify IEP rather than life-extended HSTs.

 

[The Ham]

I don't think anyone has said Newbury is not OK for CP5, there's so much to be done in CP5 Network Rail couldn't possibly do any more. So the likes of Westbury would have to be CP6. No fantasy reopenings for me, just want Devon & Cornwall to retain a very busy express service via B&H without any of these ideas of slotting in via Bristol with extended journey times and inevitable delays. HSTs will be fine for another 20 years as far as I and many others are concerned. However, I believe an alternative wired diversion route for Bristol / South Wales would be invaluable, and a good by product of this would probably be more non stop Taunton to Reading services, which are badly needed to cater for demand. And finally, if Westbury did get wired in CP6 then the options for a Devon and Cornwall fleet of bi-modes will start to stack up a bit better (not that any IEP really does). Wouldn't be beyond DfT to go to such lengths to make another case for IEP, it will also help the case for the non-IEP 125 mph Thames Valley EMU fleet that they're now pushing...

As someone who has suggested that Wesbury to Taunton doesn't need electrifying until after the Cornish main line as services between London and Cornwall can run via Bristol I would like to explain why.

Firstly IC125's are not fine for another 20 years, as although the engines may last than long and the coaches COULD theoretically last that long, they would need a fairly expensive rebuild and replacement of some fairly critical items. Even then some of the coaches may need to be scrapped before then because of corrosion. Which is likely to make it not cost effective to carry on using them much beyond 2020. See this thread: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=74368&page=1

I was not suggesting that once the Cornish main line was electrified that there would be no services to Cornwall along the B&H. Rather there would be SOME EMU services to Cornwall which ran via Bristol. However the majority of the services would still run along the B&H as Bi-model.

This is because it is better to not electrify the B&H and run Bi-model trains along it and electrify in Cornwall first. As by doing so many more services can be converted to EMU running (including the XC services) and there would be enough services for NR to justify looking at line speed enhancements between Bristol & Exeter.

Also if the B&H is electrified and electrification reaches Plymouth, then if in the future the government isn't investing as much and doesn't wish to electrify more; then Cornwall could no longer have a direct service with everyone changing at Plymouth. This would be to avoid running long distances under the wires or have having a new bi-model train built. However if B&H is done last and the government doesn't wish to electrify more then the B&H will probably still be done as it would be cheaper than having to build a new bi-model train.

A likely service pattern would be 1 EMU service per 2 hours (9 coaches) running via Bristol with similar journey time as via the B&H. Then 1 Bi-model service per hour running via the B&H made up of 2x5 coaches which splits at Plymouth. Either with one set retuning to London whilst one runs onto Penzance or with one running to Penzance (semi fast to Par) and one to Newquay (stopping).

On top of that there could also be a new hourly bi-model stopping service from Paignton to Paddington along the B&H (semi fast from Westbury to Paddington). Which could remove some of the passenger loadings from the Cornish services towards the eastern end of the route.

 

[Xavi]

As someone who has suggested that Wesbury to Taunton doesn't need electrifying until after the Cornish main line as services between London and Cornwall can run via Bristol I would like to explain why.

Firstly IC125's are not fine for another 20 years, as although the engines may last than long and the coaches COULD theoretically last that long, they would need a fairly expensive rebuild and replacement of some fairly critical items. Even then some of the coaches may need to be scrapped before then because of corrosion. Which is likely to make it not cost effective to carry on using them much beyond 2020. See this thread: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=74368&page=1

I was not suggesting that once the Cornish main line was electrified that there would be no services to Cornwall along the B&H. Rather there would be SOME EMU services to Cornwall which ran via Bristol. However the majority of the services would still run along the B&H as Bi-model.

This is because it is better to not electrify the B&H and run Bi-model trains along it and electrify in Cornwall first. As by doing so many more services can be converted to EMU running (including the XC services) and there would be enough services for NR to justify looking at line speed enhancements between Bristol & Exeter.

Also if the B&H is electrified and electrification reaches Plymouth, then if in the future the government isn't investing as much and doesn't wish to electrify more; then Cornwall could no longer have a direct service with everyone changing at Plymouth. This would be to avoid running long distances under the wires or have having a new bi-model train built. However if B&H is done last and the government doesn't wish to electrify more then the B&H will probably still be done as it would be cheaper than having to build a new bi-model train.

A likely service pattern would be 1 EMU service per 2 hours (9 coaches) running via Bristol with similar journey time as via the B&H. Then 1 Bi-model service per hour running via the B&H made up of 2x5 coaches which splits at Plymouth. Either with one set retuning to London whilst one runs onto Penzance or with one running to Penzance (semi fast to Par) and one to Newquay (stopping).

On top of that there could also be a new hourly bi-model stopping service from Paignton to Paddington along the B&H (semi fast from Westbury to Paddington). Which could remove some of the passenger loadings from the Cornish services towards the eastern end of the route.

Sounds reasonably sensible, but with life extension work HSTs could work for another 20 years. Ask Roger Ford. However, DfT is rapidly realising that bi-modes for anything to Bristol/South Wales is plainly stupid, so we may see a B&H bi-mode sooner rather than later (a home for all those MTUs that Hitachi has ordered) with the HSTs retired.

 

[jimm]

I would doubt that electrification west of Newbury would extend beyond Westbury.

Therefore if you were to electrify to Westbury have that as a stopping service run by EMU's and then run a service using IEP to Paignton from Paddington calling at (possible new stations in brackets):

Reading, Newbury, Pewsey, Westbury, Frome, Bruton, Castle Cary, (Somerton), (Langport), Taunton, (Wellington), Tiverton Parkway, (Stoneyford & Cullompton), Exeter St David's, Dawlish, Teignmouth, Newton Abbot, Torre, Torbay.

It would probably take about 2:45 to get to Exeter (assuming calling at all the potential new stations) that's about 30 minutes longer than at present over a train which calls at Reading, Taunton, Tiverton Parkway but still about 30 minutes faster than going via Salisbury.

That way as long as the new service leaves London/Reading after a fast train and gets to Taunton/Tiverton Parkway (and ideally Exeter) before the next fast train, then you'd still get people from those places using it. Especially if you sold more and/or cheaper advanced fairs for the slower service from those locations.

That would then mean that the slower service would still be viable, would ease crowding on the longer distance services (so you could sell more longer distance tickets) and could mean that more people from between Exeter & Paignton would have a direct service to London (even though it would take longer than changing at Exeter to an express) without having to slow down the express services.

It would also mean that places like Westbury & Pewsey had a service which was almost as good as the intercity services which currently calls there, so you'd get less complaints from them.

With regards to services to Weymouth along the Heart of Wessex line, these are likely to see passenger numbers increase as FGW are trailing allowing bus pass holders getting the benefits of an annual Senior Railcard for free. The reason being it is cheaper to provide funding to the trains (which already run) than it is to provide subsidised bus services, so I'd expect that (as long as it attracts passengers) it would continue.

Perhaps before reopening stations you should bear in mind that the existing semi-fast services tend to call at all, or some of Theale, Thatcham and Hungerford, in addition to the calls by Newbury and Bedwyn dmus, so unless you ditch those stops, which FGW presumably makes for sound reasons, the odds of getting to/from London within three hours would be slim. And if the idea is to provide seats along the B&H, then filling them with people on cheap tickets from further west rather defeats the object (always assuming people want a cheaper, slower journey when that option is already available from Exeter to Waterloo anyway - the trains weren't exactly thronged with long-distance passengers at the western end of the LSW line when I lived in Exeter.

I agree Westbury is a sensible place to terminate, (much more than Bedwyn!) but on the other hand strongly believe that Castle Cary should also be eligible for such a service. I recommend Exeter as the ultimate destination as it's a reasonably popular destination which people from the B&H would travel to

But Westbury is sensible from a connectivity angle, Castle Cary isn't, as trains have to go on to/come from elsewhere, adding hugely to the costs - more faster, more frequent Westbury services would allow removal of stops by some West Country services further east on the B&H, which could be reallocated to Castle Cary. As for B&H passengers wanting to go to Exeter, who knows? Rather fewer than want to go east, that's for sure.

My reference to population was about filling hourly fast services from Cornwall, Devon and Somerset. Not that of B&H towns and villages.

a. it wasn't at all obvious what you were referring to.
b. Population is highly relevant to likely use of passenger services from nearby stations and frequency of trains on particular routes.

 

[tbtc]

with life extension work HSTs could work for another 20 years. Ask Roger Ford

If you spend enough money on them you could squeeze twenty extras years out of Pacers. Doesn't mean it's cost effective or its going to happen though.

There's nothing unique about HSTs.

 

[Xavi]

If you spend enough money on them you could squeeze twenty extras years out of Pacers. Doesn't mean it's cost effective or its going to happen though.

There's nothing unique about HSTs.

Who said it was going to happen? I actually said HST retirement is now looking more likely.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

a. it wasn't at all obvious what you were referring to.
b. Population is highly relevant to likely use of passenger services from nearby stations and frequency of trains on particular routes.

A. Try some basic grammar, the extract below appears to refer to hourly express services which, given the thread, means the B&H services to Devon & Cornwall.

but if you can fill an hourly fast express why wouldn't you? Don't talk about populations please - the trains are full!

B. Of course it is, but too often population is used by some commentators / consultants to dismiss traffic levels on any route that doesn't directly serve large metropolitan areas. The express services to Devon & Cornwall are full and need to be fast through the day Taunton to Reading.

 

[tbtc]

Who said it was going to happen? I actually said HST retirement is now looking more likely

Not getting at you, but there are some on here who jump on claims like the "twenty more years" one as evidence that HSTs are indestructible and that we should abandon IEP.

 

[Xavi]

Perhaps before reopening stations you should bear in mind that the existing semi-fast services tend to call at all, or some of Theale, Thatcham and Hungerford, in addition to the calls by Newbury and Bedwyn dmus, so unless you ditch those stops, which FGW presumably makes for sound reasons, the odds of getting to/from London within three hours would be slim. And if the idea is to provide seats along the B&H, then filling them with people on cheap tickets from further west rather defeats the object (always assuming people want a cheaper, slower journey when that option is already available from Exeter to Waterloo anyway - the trains weren't exactly thronged with long-distance passengers at the western end of the LSW line when I lived in Exeter.



But Westbury is sensible from a connectivity angle, Castle Cary isn't, as trains have to go on to/come from elsewhere, adding hugely to the costs - more faster, more frequent Westbury services would allow removal of stops by some West Country services further east on the B&H, which could be reallocated to Castle Cary. As for B&H passengers wanting to go to Exeter, who knows? Rather fewer than want to go east, that's for sure.



a. it wasn't at all obvious what you were referring to.
b. Population is highly relevant to likely use of passenger services from nearby stations and frequency of trains on particular routes.

Not getting at you, but there are some on here who jump on claims like the "twenty more years" one as evidence that HSTs are indestructible and that we should abandon IEP.

Understood. I suppose I sit somewhere in the middle. The right service for the B&H route being the primary concern. Simple preference for the (quite possibly IEP) stock is that it has the performance, comfort and capacity of the HSTs.

 

[jimm]

Who said it was going to happen? I actually said HST retirement is now looking more likely.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


A. Try some basic grammar, the extract below appears to refer to hourly express services which, given the thread, means the B&H services to Devon & Cornwall.

but if you can fill an hourly fast express why wouldn't you? Don't talk about populations please - the trains are full!

B. Of course it is, but too often population is used by some commentators / consultants to dismiss traffic levels on any route that doesn't directly serve large metropolitan areas. The express services to Devon & Cornwall are full and need to be fast through the day Taunton to Reading.

It may appear to refer to it to your mind. Not to mine which is obviously too slow/thick. My original point about population didn't even mention the West Country. It was addressing the suggestion that the stations actually along the B&H line (not places further west) were equally or more deserving of semi-fasts than the Cotswold Line and Cheltenham/Gloucester/Stroud were of getting all-day hourly services to/from Paddington.

If the trains are full, why do FGW offer advance singles between Plymouth and Paddington for 20-odd quid and sometimes less at some times of the day? Presumably some of those who use Castle Cary, Westbury, etc, have heard of seat reservations and do get a seat for their journey up to London.

And now you do admit that it's okay to talk about population. The population in the West Country is why there is a basic hourly fast service between there and London and not a lot more, while the populations of Bristol, Cardiff and places along the ECML and WCML mean they have plenty of additional services. The population along the B&H line is relevant to why, thus far, a standard pattern semi-fast service has not been introduced, however much people may say what a genius idea it is, and why the West Country trains have to fill in along there for parts of the day.

Electrification to Newbury or somewhere beyond will clearly have an impact on whatever service patterns emerge in a few years' time but so will the number of people living thereabouts and other factors, such as proximity to London, wider connectivity benefits of service changes, etc - same as they do for any route across the country when it comes to making investment decisions and/or adding extra services.

To my mind that is not dismissing anything, it is just a statement of the obvious.

 

[Kali]

Maybe they're just not full from Plymouth? are those services starting there?

Not sure what the usage is past Exeter because I've rarely been that way, but in a bit more than a couple of decades ( I can at least remember using Tiv Jct ) of using that route starting or ending between Taunton & Exeter, I can remember times when the trains hardly had room to stand ( late 80s ) down to times where they were comfortably full, but I can't remember a trip outside really late services or a relief which has been particularily empty.

Rather than keeping arguing about empty things, can anyone dig up some usage for B&H stations and compare with growth from similar places which have had similar service improvements?

 

[jimm]

Maybe they're just not full from Plymouth? are those services starting there?

Not sure what the usage is past Exeter because I've rarely been that way, but in a bit more than a couple of decades ( I can at least remember using Tiv Jct ) of using that route starting or ending between Taunton & Exeter, I can remember times when the trains hardly had room to stand ( late 80s ) down to times where they were comfortably full, but I can't remember a trip outside really late services or a relief which has been particularily empty.

Rather than keeping arguing about empty things, can anyone dig up some usage for B&H stations and compare with growth from similar places which have had similar service improvements?

What's empty about establishing that population in an area is relevant to the level of rail service it is likely to get?

And if FGW know they are going to fill all the seats on HSTs anyway - which appears to be the contention from all these posts about how busy the West Country trains are - then they wouldn't offer advances at all, just wait for people to turn up and pay full whack.

And if you don't believe me, you just try finding an advance fare on the Cotswold Line. FGW don't sell them - because they don't need to to fill the seats (and to be clear, I mean the stations west of Oxford - from Oxford there are bargain basement advance fares to take on the M40 coaches). You will find cheap advances from Hereford but they are all for travel changing at Newport, not direct via Worcester and Oxford.

Why don't you find the station usage figures yourself? It's not hard, just look at the Wikipedia pages for stations, as someone with a lot of time on their hands seems to have posted them for pretty much every station in Britain.

 

[Kali]

The bit I don't know is where to look for comparison. I'm just after some quantifiable idea about what sort of service semi-rural areas can sustain and how better services can change that - I'm fairly sure there must be prior examples around.