TrawsCambria / TrawsCymru

[TheGrandWazoo]

Not true. These unnecessary extensions SE of Carmarthen are not needed for the purpose for which TrawsCymru was set up, namely to provide longer distance bus links where there is no adequate rail link. They do not deserve public subsidy and if not commercially viable, will inevitably be withdrawn. TfW are right to promote the rail/bus connection at Carmarthen station as the way to travel from Aberystwyth/Aberaeron/Lampeter to SE Wales. Good riddance to services T1S and T1C.

Haven't we been over the ground ad nauseum? We've had continued discourse about this throughout late August

 

[rcro]

£10 return was *incredibly* cheap. Try covering that sort of distance on any other local bus service or train in England or Wales for less than double that. I don’t see why Aberystwyth deserves a special coach service with such levels of subsidy for travel to Swansea and Cardiff - and the Welsh government are right not to waste taxpayer money on it.

Pity the poor people of Presteigne… How do they get to Cardiff for their shopping trips?

 

[Markdvdman]

It used to be £10 the Trawscymru Day Rider is now £11 but still cheap. The problem with the T1C is it should revert to the old timetable leaving Cardiff at 4:10pm and taking Swansea back into it 7 days a week! Would be well used then!

 

[johntrawscymru]

£10 return was *incredibly* cheap. I don’t see why Aberystwyth deserves a special coach service with such levels of subsidy for travel to Swansea and Cardiff - and the Welsh government are right not to waste taxpayer money on it.

You obviously do not use Trawscymru services. Cardiff (T1C) is a coach and Swansea (T1S) was a bus. The level of subsidy, notably the £10 day ticket is not peculiar to T1C Aberystwyth to Cardiff or T1S Aberystwyth to Swansea. You could use it on the T4 from Llandrindod to Cardiff. You could also use the Trawscymru Network for free at weekends before the pandemic . The £10 day ticket is in use throughout Wales on the Trawscymru Network. You can go Cardiff to Wrexham or Carmarthen to Bangor for £10. If you read through the previous 2,220 posts you will see that many people buy a £10 day ticket and just rove around. You will also see that "day trippers" from England could buy the £10 day ticket and were even treated to Free Travel at Weekends. So there is no special deal for passengers using the T1C and T1S.
The extension of subsidised and Free Weekend travel to English taxpayers was definitely a waste of Welsh taxpayers money by the Welsh government .
The T1C and T1S are not used by "day trippers" and are almost exclusively used by Welsh taxpayers to make essential journeys.

Not true. These unnecessary extensions SE of Carmarthen are not needed for the purpose for which TrawsCymru was set up, namely to provide longer distance bus links where there is no adequate rail link. They do not deserve public subsidy . Good riddance to services T1S and T1C.

Sorry you are incorrect .
The purpose for which TrawsCymru was set up was to provide longer distance bus links between major towns in Wales and Aberystwyth , Cardiff , Carmarthen and Swansea all qualify as major towns .
Unfortunately your definition that "TrawsCymru was set up to provide longer distance bus links where there is no adequate rail link." does not fit with the existing Trawscymru Network .
Why do the Trawscymru T5 and the Trawscymru T11 run between Haverfordwest and Fishguard when the train covers the same journey in a shorter time? Based on your definition the T11 bus route should be scrapped and passengers forced onto the perfectly adequate rail link.
Why does the Trawscymru T12 run from Machynlleth to Wrexham taking 3 hrs 30 mins when the train service takes 2 hours.

Why not say Good riddance to services T11 and T12 ?

Haven't we been over the ground ad nauseum? We've had continued discourse about this throughout late August

We did not cover the scrapping of the T1S and the introduction of integrated rail/bus ticketing between Aberystwyth and Swansea. Introduction of integrated rail/bus ticketing is fine but should not interfere with bus provision. Train and bus are 2 very different markets. I know that certain passengers (one a Member of the Senedd (MS)) would rather use the train between Aberystwyth and Cardiff (in the case of an MS, First Class at taxpayers expense) rather than use the T1C which is faster and deposits passengers at Cardiff Bay where the Senedd buildings are located. There is a "peasant" mentality regarding bus transport but the answer to that is to use more coaches like the T1C for long distance services with more direct routes.
The Welsh Government, by scrapping the T1S and replacing it with integrated rail/bus ticketing are removing the ability of the "peasants" to even consider long distance travel by public transport at all.

The savings are based off a stupid journey which very few people would do. TFW do state on their website "When compared with standard single fare by rail only journey via Shrewsbury"

Thank you. Whoever worked out the 2 hrs 11 mins "time saving" must have asked the above MS how they would get from Swansea to Aberystwyth by public transport. As you say entirely "stupid" and how people can defend the Welsh Government actions is beyond me.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Why do the Trawscymru T5 and the Trawscymru T11 run between Haverfordwest and Fishguard when the train covers the same journey in a shorter time? Based on your definition the T11 bus route should be scrapped and passengers forced onto the perfectly adequate rail link.

The train doesn't really cover Fishguard to Haverfordwest. The train service runs from Goodwick whereas the T5 runs from Fishguard, the T5 runs almost direct (there is one detour on most workings) with no changes required while the rail option requires a change at the rather remote request stop that is Clarbeston Road. Also, at present the train service at Fishguard has been cut to 2tpd and the full service isn't expected to return until May 2022.

Why does the Trawscymru T12 run from Machynlleth to Wrexham taking 3 hrs 30 mins when the train service takes 2 hours.

Why not say Good riddance to services T11 and T12 ?

The T11 and T12 are local services which provide public transport links for a fair number of intermediate settlements which are not served by the rail network. There is an argument that they should not pretend to be long-distance trunk routes, but in the case of these two routes they are shown as TrawsCymruConnect and not TrawsCymru anyway. How long the train service takes between Machynlleth and Wrexham is irrelevant to the need for these services.

The Welsh Government, by scrapping the T1S and replacing it with integrated rail/bus ticketing are removing the ability of the "peasants" to even consider long distance travel by public transport at all.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm guessing the T1S was never the only way of travelling between Carmarthen and Swansea by bus? If I recall correctly, the bus from Carmarthen to Llanelli I used to use semi-regularly on summer Saturdays carried on (with a change of route number I think) beyond Llanelli to Swansea.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

We did not cover the scrapping of the T1S and the introduction of integrated rail/bus ticketing between Aberystwyth and Swansea. Introduction of integrated rail/bus ticketing is fine but should not interfere with bus provision. Train and bus are 2 very different markets. I know that certain passengers (one an MS) would rather use the train between Aberystwyth and Cardiff (in the case of an MS First Class at taxpayers expense) rather than use the T1C which is faster and deposits passengers at Cardiff Bay where the Senedd buildings are located. There is a "peasant" mentality regarding bus transport but the answer to that is to use more coaches like the T1C for long distance services with more direct routes.
The Welsh Government, by scrapping the T1S and replacing it with integrated rail/bus ticketing are removing the ability of the "peasants" to even consider long distance travel by public transport at all.My

My comment was in response to the comments about extensions south east of Carmarthen per se. It was discussed ad nauseum and just because you're now in T1S mode rather than T1C mode doesn't really alter the points that the poster was making.

The purpose for which TrawsCymru was set up was to provide longer distance bus links between major towns in Wales and Aberystwyth , Cardiff , Carmarthen and Swansea all qualify as major towns .
Unfortunately your definition that "TrawsCymru was set up to provide longer distance bus links where there is no adequate rail link." does not fit with the existing Trawscymru Network .
Why do the Trawscymru T5 and the Trawscymru T11 run between Haverfordwest and Fishguard when the train covers the same journey in a shorter time? Based on your definition the T11 bus route should be scrapped and passengers forced onto the perfectly adequate rail link.
Why does the Trawscymru T12 run from Machynlleth to Wrexham taking 3 hrs 30 mins when the train service takes 2 hours.

Why not say Good riddance to services T11 and T12 ?

This is misrepresentation on an industrial scale and in many places, you are just plain wrong.

Firstly, it is not that wherever a train goes, then no bus should go. TrawsCymru is designed to provide long distance bus services and it is stated in the Winckler report that "There is a strong case in favour of a network of medium- to long-distance, strategically important bus services that connect key towns in Wales and which complement the rail network" - that word complement is key. It is something that can be in addition to but isn't an either/or statement. In fact, the same report highlights "The most recent Government statement is in the National Transport Plan 2010, which states only that Traws Cambria would “fill in gaps in the rail network”, although it does not specify which gaps and how they should be filled" and Winckler did say that there had been some confusion and that TC should be more than just infilling of gaps.

You can have routes in different modes that do parallel each other; it might be that whilst the end points are the same, the intermediate route is markedly different or that it has to serve areas that don't have rail stations; an example of this would be the bus from Llandovery to Ammanford that serves many intermediate villages that the train cannot service effectively. In some instances, the rail line simply cannot accommodate services, in terms of line capacity or commercially, and so overlaying a bus service makes sense - see Conwy Valley and the T19. As @Bletchleyite has opined correctly, the nirvana is to ensure that they do truly complement each other - coordinated timetables and interavailability of ticketing.

Now you ask "Why do the Trawscymru T5 and the Trawscymru T11 run between Haverfordwest and Fishguard when the train covers the same journey in a shorter time?" I was under the impression that the train service from Fishguard heads via Clarbeston Road to Carmarthen https://tfw.wales/sites/default/files/2021-10/TfW_Network_Map_Web_011021.pdf. Even though it has been much reduced with Covid timetables, even in 2019, it was a handful of journeys. The T5 clearly provides the link along the main A40 and the villages along that road, far from the rail line that trundle from Clarbeston Road to Fishguard without intermediate stations. The T11 is even more pronounced - it is quite simply two services from Fishguard to St Davids and St Davids to Haverfordwest that have been amalgamated. To suggest that a Fishguard to Haverfordwest train service, were it to exist, would be comparable is frankly ridiculous. Similarly, the T12 runs from Machynlleth to Wrexham but aside from the end points, the route hardly parallels the rail service. It runs from Mach to Newtown but the train has only one stop at Caersws so there is a huge amount of territory on A489/A470 that the T12 serves and is the only public transport service. Likewise, the train runs to Welshpool but there are no intermediate stations so hence why the T12 helps serve places like that and then onward to Oswestry to serve the villages that haven't seen a train since 1966. The examples you point out in the T5, T11 and T12 are all ones where even if a limited rail service exists on an end to end or over parts of it, the bus provides unique public transport links.

And this is the point, and it was made some months ago by @RT4038 - if the train is too expensive for a combined ticket, then TfW can sort the train fare out. The T1C and T1S didn't provide a unique link - they provide a cheaper link.

Should the T1C be sacrificed to fund initiatives as the free weekend travel or the T10? No, it probably shouldn't be but does that mean that the retention of the T1C is the right thing to do? I don't think that's right either. There are certainly corridors that could benefit but have seen no expenditure - perhaps those "peasants" might be more deserving than having a dedicated shoppers coach?

 

[Dai Corner]

The purpose for which TrawsCymru was set up was to provide longer distance bus links between major towns in Wales and Aberystwyth , Cardiff , Carmarthen and Swansea all qualify as major towns .

Wales' third largest city, Newport, doesn't qualify. But the English city of Bristol does?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Wales' third largest city, Newport, doesn't qualify. But the English city of Bristol does?

To be fair, the T7 is just another one of those political moves that affect TrawsCymru. In the same way that the T1C was introduced to quell disquiet in that part of the world, the same was the case with the T7. Still, not as curious as the T9 introduction to support the newly nationalised airport.

Always thought the Newport to Monmouth was a potential opportunity to bring TC to that part of Wales

 

[johntrawscymru]

That they commissioned and then discarded the Bevan Foundation review.... again, as I've said before, the Winckler review was a poorly executed, desk top exercise with little evidential substance. That it was commissioned in that way is the issue; that they didn't then pursue a bad piece of work is perhaps a relief.

it is stated in the Winckler report that "There is a strong case in favour of a network of medium- to long-distance, strategically important bus services that connect key towns in Wales and which complement the rail network" -

Strange to see you invoking the Winckler review to support your argument in view of your previous comments. Winckler's words "long-distance, strategically important bus services that connect key towns in Wales" is key. There is no mention of not supplying a Trawscymru service if there is a direct train link between the 2 towns.

Similarly, the T12 runs from Machynlleth to Wrexham but aside from the end points, the route hardly parallels the rail service.

Yes it does. Between Machynlleth and Newtown (30 miles). The railway line and road cross each other virtually all the way. If you are arguing that the T1S route between Carmarthen and Swansea (28 miles) should be removed from the Network forcing passengers onto the train then why not remove that part of the T12 route between Machynlleth and Newtown and just run the T12 from Newtown to Wrexham.

How long the train service takes between Machynlleth and Wrexham is irrelevant to the need for these services.

Sorry the journey time is relevant . The T12 Machynlleth to Wrexham should be a long-distance, strategically important bus service that connects Machynlleth, Newtown, Welshpool and Wrexham. To be strategically important it should cover the journey in the shortest possible time and not take large diversions from a direct route. A 3hr 30 mins journey time to cover what should be a distance of 63 miles is a complete joke. How can that service be used as a strategic springboard to link with other Transport options in Wrexham. I believe the Winckler review had something to say on the subject of diversions off the main route and journey times.

You can have routes in different modes that do parallel each other.

.
Fine then lets agree on that. Why not allow the T1S to run between Carmarthen and Swansea and "parallel" the train.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm guessing the T1S was never the only way of travelling between Carmarthen and Swansea by bus?

Correct . The X11 Carmarthen to Swansea takes nearly 2 hours against the 52 minutes taken by the T1S . The train takes 50 minutes and thereby hangs the problem TfW do not want a Trawscymru bus service that takes the same time as the train. The X11 is a local bus service stopping at a multitude of stops along the way whereas the T1S was a true Trawscymru strategically important bus service connecting the key towns of Carmarthen and Swansea. Correct me if I'm wrong but is there still an X85 service running between Machynlleth and Newtown on exactly the same route as the T12 with the same journey time so why do we need the T12 to operate on that part of the route when it is served by the X85 and a train ?

The T5 clearly provides the link along the main A40 and the villages along that road, far from the rail line. The T11 is even more pronounced - it is quite simply two services from Fishguard to St Davids and St Davids to Haverfordwest that have been amalgamated.

Accepted .
A T11 Trawscymru Connect service between Haverfordwest and Fishguard which connects at both ends with the same Trawscymru T5 service between Haverfordwest and Cardigan. Both the T11 and T12 (T12 quite simply three services that have been amalgamated.) should have remained as Local bus services.
Perhaps the introduction of the T11 and T12 was just another one of those political moves that affect TrawsCymru. It did of course increase the total number of passengers carried on the Trawscymru Network which was a political motive in itself.

Always thought the Newport to Monmouth was a potential opportunity to bring TC to that part of Wales

Good one . Fast main road all the way , but hang on its only 24 miles and hardly long distance. Also not sure Monmouth is a key town in a strategic location .
Could have Newport via Abergavenny to Hereford (42 miles) and Hereford would be a key strategic location to link up with onward public transport into the Midlands but dear me there is a train service on the route so cannot have that either. However if a few judicious diversions were put in place it could probably fit the bill at the expense of extra time. It would definitely be slower than the train even without diversions so Tfw could not object and say it competed with the train like the T1S.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Strange to see you invoking the Winckler review to support your argument in view of your previous comments. Winckler's words "long-distance, strategically important bus services that connect key towns in Wales" is key. There is no mention of not supplying a Trawscymru service if there is a direct train link between the 2 towns.

Selective editing of the quotation (again) but the full quotation relates to that referencing the 2010 WG report. I still think much of the Winckler report is a high level desktop exercise but she did refer to an earlier report that provides that tie in to filling in the gaps of the rail network. I said what was there, not what wasn't.

Yes it does. Between Machynlleth and Newtown (30 miles). The railway line and road cross each other virtually all the way. If you are arguing that the T1S route between Carmarthen and Swansea (28 miles) should be removed from the Network forcing passengers onto the train then why not remove that part of the T12 route between Machynlleth and Newtown and just run the T12 from Newtown to Wrexham.

It physically follows the same valley but the service offering is not parallel; it is not a duplication as there are virtually no intermediate stations. This was explained earlier; do you now understand?

Fine then lets agree on that. Why not allow the T1S to run between Carmarthen and Swansea and "parallel" the train.

Because the T1S doesn't provide a unique transport link. With hourly trains and even the X11, the T1S provides little that isn't provided by the other options.

Good one . Fast main road all the way , but hang on its only 24 miles and hardly long distance. Also not sure Monmouth is a key town in a strategic location .
Could have Newport via Abergavenny to Hereford (42 miles) and Hereford would be a key strategic location to link up with onward public transport into the Midlands but dear me there is a train service on the route so cannot have that either. However if a few judicious diversions were put in place it could probably fit the bill at the expense of extra time. It would definitely be slower than the train even without diversions so Tfw could not object and say it competed with the train like the T1S.

I was thinking that it would be Newport - Monmouth - Hereford. The southern part is already tendered and the northern part is part supported albeit by Herefordshire Council. As an aside, this would recreate the former X49 service that disappeared at deregulation.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2021 ==

The T11 and T12 are local services which provide public transport links for a fair number of intermediate settlements which are not served by the rail network. There is an argument that they should not pretend to be long-distance trunk routes, but in the case of these two routes they are shown as TrawsCymruConnect and not TrawsCymru anyway. How long the train service takes between Machynlleth and Wrexham is irrelevant to the need for these services.

Absolutely right. If you look at the end to end times, then the bus compares poorly but as you say, the end to end market is minimal if it exists at all. They serve intermediate stops as you say but also they provide a number of overlapping passenger flows.

 

[daodao]

Because the T1S doesn't provide a unique transport link. With hourly trains and even the X11, the T1S provides little that isn't provided by the other options.

Exactly. Bin the T1S (and T1C).

I was thinking that it would be Newport - Monmouth - Hereford. The southern part is already tendered and the northern part is part supported albeit by Herefordshire Council. As an aside, this would recreate the former X49 service that disappeared at deregulation.

There is insufficient demand for an express service on this route. The most that is needed is a daytime stopping service (at most 2 hourly) serving intermediate points (including Usk). Newport Transport currently run route 60 (presumably as a subsidised service) and wouldn't be keen on running north of Monmouth; it is easier to keep the services separate. As you state, the through X49 service disappeared at deregulation in 1986 (I was working in Newport at that time) and wasn't competitive time-wise with the direct Newport-Hereford train service.

 

[Dai Corner]

There is insufficient demand for an express service on this route. The most that is needed is a daytime stopping service (at most 2 hourly) serving intermediate points (including Usk). Newport Transport currently run route 60 (presumably as a subsidised service) and wouldn't be keen on running north of Monmouth; it is easier to keep the services separate. As you state, the through X49 service disappeared at deregulation in 1986 (I was working in Newport at that time) and wasn't competitive time-wise with the direct Newport-Hereford train service.

There is also the Stagecoach X3 Cardiff-Cwmbrân-Pontypool-Abergavenny-Hereford which goes through Newport (though not the city centre - change at Cwmbrân instead). That's a much larger potential market than Usk and Monmouth.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

There is insufficient demand for an express service on this route. The most that is needed is a daytime stopping service (at most 2 hourly) serving intermediate points (including Usk). Newport Transport currently run route 60 (presumably as a subsidised service) and wouldn't be keen on running north of Monmouth; it is easier to keep the services separate. As you state, the through X49 service disappeared at deregulation in 1986 (I was working in Newport at that time) and wasn't competitive time-wise with the direct Newport-Hereford train service.

Again, I wouldn't be expecting an express but literally, the combination of what are two council supported services, albeit with two different authorities. The 60 is definitely tendered (Monmouthshire) and the 36 is partially (Herefordshire) AFAIK.

The end-to-end journey time is irrelevant as the train will win but it's more about the unique travel opportunities that it could provide, but appreciate, we're very much in the crayons here. That said, it is similar to the T12 which is essentially the former Crosville S22 and D71 linked via a bit of new route.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Sorry the journey time is relevant . The T12 Machynlleth to Wrexham should be a long-distance, strategically important bus service that connects Machynlleth, Newtown, Welshpool and Wrexham. To be strategically important it should cover the journey in the shortest possible time and not take large diversions from a direct route. A 3hr 30 mins journey time to cover what should be a distance of 63 miles is a complete joke. How can that service be used as a strategic springboard to link with other Transport options in Wrexham. I believe the Winckler review had something to say on the subject of diversions off the main route and journey times.

Yes, the Winckler review did advise that TrawsCymru routes should avoid detours, and I completely agree that "To be strategically important it should cover the journey in the shortest possible time and not take large diversions from a direct route." Indeed, I have made this argument on many occasions for the T5 between Cardigan/Fishguard and Aberystwyth, and for the T1, both of which I feel are currently too slow to be marketed as through services.

However, the T12 is not a TrawsCymru service; it is a TrawsCymruConnect service. Neither is it a strategically important long-distance route - I suppose the bit between Welshpool and Wrexham could be considered strategically important but between Machynlleth and Welshpool it doesn't need to be a strategic long-distance route because the train does that job on that section. The T12 absolutely needs to be there as well, but it doesn't need to try and do the same job the train is doing.

Why not allow the T1S to run between Carmarthen and Swansea and "parallel" the train.

Correct . The X11 Carmarthen to Swansea takes nearly 2 hours against the 52 minutes taken by the T1S . The train takes 50 minutes and thereby hangs the problem TfW do not want a Trawscymru bus service that takes the same time as the train.

I see no reason to forbid any operator from running the T1S if they feel able to do so commercially. However, if it requires a public subsidy then we must ask whether there are better places to spend that subsidy. Potential passengers already have a choice of a train service (which delivers the fast journey time provided by the T1S) and the X11 which is slower but serves more intermediate stops and may be cheaper (it certainly is if you have a concessionary travel pass and use the bus for free). Spending public money to run the T1S in addition adds nothing except perhaps providing a cheaper way of doing the journey quicker. If this is desired I would suggest that it might be better to do this by increasing the rail subsidy to reduce the rail fare. Alternatively, it might be better to divert the additional subsidy to a route that doesn't already ofter the choice of a fast service and a local service. The T5 for example currently only has a slow local bus service (an equivalent to the X11) and no equivalent to the rail service. Carmarthen to Swansea is about 28 miles which if it takes 52 minutes (by train/T1S) is an average speed of around 32.3mph. If we increase the distance to 38 miles (Cardigan to Aberystwyth) and use the same average speed we should be able to do Cardigan-Aberystwyth in under 71 minutes. The T5 generally alternates between 104 and 110 minutes.

Is providing another option for travel in 52mins between Carmarthen and Swansea a better use of public subsidy than giving Cardigan back it's 82min journey time to Aberystwyth (until Arriva pulled out of Aberystwyth there were several direct X50 services per day that did that, now the T5 only manages it once a day and even that's southbound only)?

Both the T11 and T12 (T12 quite simply three services that have been amalgamated.) should have remained as Local bus services.

You could say they did remain as local bus services, after all they are branded as TrawsCymruConnect and not TrawsCymru. Personally, I think they should have kept one of their previous numbers (411 or 413 in the case of T11) rather than being renumbered to look more like a TrawsCymru service. After all, other TrawsCymruConnect routes (eg. the 460) don't have a 'T' number.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Yes, the Winckler review did advise that TrawsCymru routes should avoid detours, and I completely agree that "To be strategically important it should cover the journey in the shortest possible time and not take large diversions from a direct route." Indeed, I have made this argument on many occasions for the T5 between Cardigan/Fishguard and Aberystwyth, and for the T1, both of which I feel are currently too slow to be marketed as through services.

However, the T12 is not a TrawsCymru service; it is a TrawsCymruConnect service. Neither is it a strategically important long-distance route - I suppose the bit between Welshpool and Wrexham could be considered strategically important but between Machynlleth and Welshpool it doesn't need to be a strategic long-distance route because the train does that job on that section. The T12 absolutely needs to be there as well, but it doesn't need to try and do the same job the train is doing.

I see no reason to forbid any operator from running the T1S if they feel able to do so commercially. However, if it requires a public subsidy then we must ask whether there are better places to spend that subsidy. Potential passengers already have a choice of a train service (which delivers the fast journey time provided by the T1S) and the X11 which is slower but serves more intermediate stops and may be cheaper (it certainly is if you have a concessionary travel pass and use the bus for free). Spending public money to run the T1S in addition adds nothing except perhaps providing a cheaper way of doing the journey quicker. If this is desired I would suggest that it might be better to do this by increasing the rail subsidy to reduce the rail fare. Alternatively, it might be better to divert the additional subsidy to a route that doesn't already ofter the choice of a fast service and a local service. The T5 for example currently only has a slow local bus service (an equivalent to the X11) and no equivalent to the rail service. Carmarthen to Swansea is about 28 miles which if it takes 52 minutes (by train/T1S) is an average speed of around 32.3mph. If we increase the distance to 38 miles (Cardigan to Aberystwyth) and use the same average speed we should be able to do Cardigan-Aberystwyth in under 71 minutes. The T5 generally alternates between 104 and 110 minutes.

Is providing another option for travel in 52mins between Carmarthen and Swansea a better use of public subsidy than giving Cardigan back it's 82min journey time to Aberystwyth (until Arriva pulled out of Aberystwyth there were several direct X50 services per day that did that, now the T5 only manages it once a day and even that's southbound only)?

You could say they did remain as local bus services, after all they are branded as TrawsCymruConnect and not TrawsCymru. Personally, I think they should have kept one of their previous numbers (411 or 413 in the case of T11) rather than being renumbered to look more like a TrawsCymru service. After all, other TrawsCymruConnect routes (eg. the 460) don't have a 'T' number.

Some very fair points there and without seeking to break them down forensically or selectively pick things out...

You've hit the nail on the head with the T1S. It could be commercially operated but isn't. The subsidy spent on that, and other initiatives that I think are also less than necessary such as the T10 or weekend free travel, could be better employed. Again, it's not to say that there isn't a number of people who used it; there clearly was but should it be something that is being provided when there are other areas that don't have any investment.

The issue of speed was picked up in the Winckler report as you mention. Of course, there are no hard and fast rules and there's the balance:

• Speeding up routes and improving end to end journey times vs
• Not serving particular traffic sources especially in rural Wales where passengers are not so plentiful and the cost of providing alternative facilities may be prohibitive.

It probably makes sense for a Bwcabus for Llandysul to stop the T1 being compromised as it has the critical mass to justify a feeder service. Alternatively, a Bwcabus to serve Llandrilo on the T3 would be more expensive to serve a village a third of the size of Llandysul in order to save 1.5 miles and about 5-10 mins. The Winckler report didn't look at the cost benefit analysis of such schemes - hence why I question quite how useful the report is and its limitation. That's not to say that there aren't other places where it could be done or indeed, with attention to speeding up services, and perhaps the T5 might be the one as you say. Perhaps it is an area where a CBA can be undertaken?

The T12 is one of those routes where, end to end, the market is covered by the train. Even the Mach to Welshpool is but over that 42 miles, there are only two intermediate stations (Caersws and Newtown) and so it becomes a mix between long distance and longer duration journeys that aren't able to be done by train. It feels more like a support act to the train/T4 and hence the TCC designation is more appropriate.

 

[Rhydgaled]

The issue of speed was picked up in the Winckler report as you mention. Of course, there are no hard and fast rules and there's the balance:

• Speeding up routes and improving end to end journey times vs
• Not serving particular traffic sources especially in rural Wales where passengers are not so plentiful and the cost of providing alternative facilities may be prohibitive.

It probably makes sense for a Bwcabus for Llandysul to stop the T1 being compromised as it has the critical mass to justify a feeder service. Alternatively, a Bwcabus to serve Llandrilo on the T3 would be more expensive to serve a village a third of the size of Llandysul in order to save 1.5 miles and about 5-10 mins. The Winckler report didn't look at the cost benefit analysis of such schemes - hence why I question quite how useful the report is and its limitation. That's not to say that there aren't other places where it could be done or indeed, with attention to speeding up services, and perhaps the T5 might be the one as you say. Perhaps it is an area where a CBA can be undertaken?

I agree, in some cases it is probably not affordable to provide both a local service and a direct service. The Winckler report's view on "whether the need for speed outweighs the need for a bus service" was "that it does not" and I agree with that. I think transport for quality of life, whose Lynn Sloman is currently heading up the Welsh Government's review of road-building, have proposed introducing a minimum public transport service (as exists in at least part of Switzerland) level for all settlements over a certain size in Wales. That is a principle I very much agree with; so the priority is getting a local service everywhere.

However, there is then the question of what the TrawsCymru brand is for. At a consultation roadshow years ago, I was told (I think by Prof. Stuart Cole) that the TrawsCambria brand had some 'baggage'; hence the plan to rebrand as TrawsCymru. This leads me to a comment John made earlier:

I know that certain passengers (one a Member of the Senedd (MS)) would rather use the train between Aberystwyth and Cardiff (in the case of an MS, First Class at taxpayers expense) rather than use the T1C which is faster and deposits passengers at Cardiff Bay where the Senedd buildings are located. There is a "peasant" mentality regarding bus transport

This idea that buses are for 'peasants' and that people won't use buses because it is somehow 'beneath them' is one I believe needs to be tackled, just as how smoking was once a social norm and now much less so. However, it isn't going to happen overnight so I feel that it is important to make the TrawsCymru brand free of baggage. Embed brand values and quality standards that distance TrawsCymru from the social stigma of buses, despite the fact that a bus service is what TrawsCymru is. If you ask somebody why they won't use buses, one of the things they might say is "they're slow", so that's one of the things TrawsCymru should avoid being. If it can't avoid being slow because the budget doesn't allow seperate local and direct services, then run just the slow service anyway just don't tarnish the brand by sticking it on something like the T5 or T1 that is slow.

Going back to take a look at some of the details in the post quoted above:

It probably makes sense for a Bwcabus for Llandysul to stop the T1 being compromised as it has the critical mass to justify a feeder service. Alternatively, a Bwcabus to serve Llandrilo on the T3 would be more expensive to serve a village a third of the size of Llandysul in order to save 1.5 miles and about 5-10 mins. The Winckler report didn't look at the cost benefit analysis of such schemes - hence why I question quite how useful the report is and its limitation. That's not to say that there aren't other places where it could be done or indeed, with attention to speeding up services, and perhaps the T5 might be the one as you say. Perhaps it is an area where a CBA can be undertaken?

I would generally argue in favour of fixed services rather than Bwcabus (although I'm aware Llandysul has 'Bwcabus fixed services' which I assume are just fixed services using a Bwcabus branded vehicle).

Clearly, a cost-benefit analysis is needed in each case* but for the T1 what I would suggest is a Carmarthen-Pencader-Llandysul service every two hours (possibly going through from Llandysul to New Quay or Newcastle Emlyn) allowing the TrawsCymru to run direct Carmarthen to Lampeter in those hours (in the other hours it would remain as-is via Pencader and somehow be stripped of the TrawsCymru branding but I'm not sure how that could be acheived).

I don't think I've used the T3 (certainly not in full) but looking at the map and assuming the quicker route is the A494 between Corwen and Bala then any 'local service' introduced to speed up the T3 would serve Cynwyd, Llandrillo and Llandderfel, so the CBR wouldn't look quite so bad as if it really was just Llandrilo.

I've probably said what I'd do with the T5 enough times for now.

* along with the study recommended by the Winckler report, but never carried out, to establish what an acceptable time penalty is. Again my view is that the time penalty shouldn't be used to cut villages off the bus network but to define the TrawsCymru brand - if a route cannot meet the very high standards necessary to try and shake the 'for peasants mentality' then it shouldn't carry the brand

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I agree, in some cases it is probably not affordable to provide both a local service and a direct service. The Winckler report's view on "whether the need for speed outweighs the need for a bus service" was "that it does not" and I agree with that. I think transport for quality of life, whose Lynn Sloman is currently heading up the Welsh Government's review of road-building, have proposed introducing a minimum public transport service (as exists in at least part of Switzerland) level for all settlements over a certain size in Wales. That is a principle I very much agree with; so the priority is getting a local service everywhere.

However, there is then the question of what the TrawsCymru brand is for. At a consultation roadshow years ago, I was told (I think by Prof. Stuart Cole) that the TrawsCambria brand had some 'baggage'; hence the plan to rebrand as TrawsCymru. This leads me to a comment John made earlier:


This idea that buses are for 'peasants' and that people won't use buses because it is somehow 'beneath them' is one I believe needs to be tackled, just as how smoking was once a social norm and now much less so. However, it isn't going to happen overnight so I feel that it is important to make the TrawsCymru brand free of baggage. Embed brand values and quality standards that distance TrawsCymru from the social stigma of buses, despite the fact that a bus service is what TrawsCymru is. If you ask somebody why they won't use buses, one of the things they might say is "they're slow", so that's one of the things TrawsCymru should avoid being. If it can't avoid being slow because the budget doesn't allow seperate local and direct services, then run just the slow service anyway just don't tarnish the brand by sticking it on something like the T5 or T1 that is slow.

Going back to take a look at some of the details in the post quoted above:

I would generally argue in favour of fixed services rather than Bwcabus (although I'm aware Llandysul has 'Bwcabus fixed services' which I assume are just fixed services using a Bwcabus branded vehicle).

Clearly, a cost-benefit analysis is needed in each case* but for the T1 what I would suggest is a Carmarthen-Pencader-Llandysul service every two hours (possibly going through from Llandysul to New Quay or Newcastle Emlyn) allowing the TrawsCymru to run direct Carmarthen to Lampeter in those hours (in the other hours it would remain as-is via Pencader and somehow be stripped of the TrawsCymru branding but I'm not sure how that could be acheived).

I don't think I've used the T3 (certainly not in full) but looking at the map and assuming the quicker route is the A494 between Corwen and Bala then any 'local service' introduced to speed up the T3 would serve Cynwyd, Llandrillo and Llandderfel, so the CBR wouldn't look quite so bad as if it really was just Llandrilo.

I've probably said what I'd do with the T5 enough times for now.

* along with the study recommended by the Winckler report, but never carried out, to establish what an acceptable time penalty is. Again my view is that the time penalty shouldn't be used to cut villages off the bus network but to define the TrawsCymru brand - if a route cannot meet the very high standards necessary to try and shake the 'for peasants mentality' then it shouldn't carry the brand

The image problem of buses is pretty difficult to shift but, in fairness to TC, the vehicles are generally better than comparable buses or those that they replaced. For stuff like the T3, the fleet is much better than the Arriva Commanders (which weren't bad in themselves) but they again were a quantum leap ahead of the days when you might get an Optare Delta but as easily would get a B series National (and let's not have the coach vs bus argument). Arguably, the free weekend travel was an attempt to get non-bus users on board to show what they were like; I don't think it was the best way in which to spend the money.

Without getting into too much detail, the T3 CBA is really about whether saving 5-10 mins will be rewarded by improved patronage whilst paying £100k for an additional Bwcabus vehicle. I mentioned Llandrillo as the largest village; Cynwyd is a little smaller whilst Llandderfel isn't really a village at all and combined, you're looking at a population still probably less than Llandysul (and that doesn't include places around there). Might be a bit more scope with the T5.

 

[johntrawscymru]

It physically follows the same valley but the service offering is not parallel; it is not a duplication as there are virtually no intermediate stations. This was explained earlier; do you now understand?

No I do understand. There were no intermediate stops for the T1S, except at Cross Hands, which is not serviced by the train route, and this is why it managed the same journey time as the train which has stops at intermediate stations. The T1S was different to the T12 in one very simple respect that it was a true Trawscymru service which travelled on the fastest direct route between 2 major towns .

Because the T1S doesn't provide a unique transport link. With hourly trains and even the X11, the T1S provides little that isn't provided by the other options.

.

It did provide a link with the T1 and T1C in Carmarthen and the X10 in Swansea. The T1S also provided a service to Cross Hands which is not on the rail route. Your argument would appear to be that Swansea, a city almost the same size as Cardiff, should not be on the Trawscymru Network, that no fast bus links should be operating in South Wales between Carmarthen, Swansea and Cardiff and that Cardiff, the capital of Wales only requires 1 Trawscymru service which takes nearly 4 hours to cover 95 miles to Newtown and fits the bill for a TrawscymruConnect service . Your argument would appear to be that fast bus links are not required because the train operates between Carmarthen and Newport.

I was thinking that it would be Newport - Monmouth - Hereford.

I did wonder whether you meant the route to continue from Monmouth to Hereford (18 miles along A466 and masks on at Newport and masks off at Monmouth as Monmouth to Hereford is in England).

I apologise for the editing below.

The Winckler report didn't look at the cost benefit analysis of such schemes - hence why I question quite how useful the report is and its limitation.

Alternatively, a Bwcabus to serve Llandrilo on the T3 would be more expensive to serve a village a third of the size of Llandysul in order to save 1.5 miles and about 5-10 mins.

other initiatives that I think are also less than necessary such as the T10 or weekend free travel, could be better employed.

The T12 is one of those routes where, end to end, the market is covered by the train.

perhaps the T5 might be the one as you say. Perhaps it is an area where a CBA can be undertaken?

I was told (I think by Prof. Stuart Cole) that the TrawsCambria brand had some 'baggage';

the end to end market is minimal if it exists at all.

There is insufficient demand for an express service on this route.

The end-to-end journey time is irrelevant as the train will win but it's more about the unique travel opportunities that it could provide,

I have made this argument on many occasions for the T5 between Cardigan/Fishguard and Aberystwyth, and for the T1, both of which I feel are currently too slow to be marketed as through services.

However, the T12 is not a TrawsCymru service; it is a TrawsCymruConnect service.

it doesn't need to be a strategic long-distance route because the train does that job on that section. The T12 absolutely needs to be there as well, but it doesn't need to try and do the same job the train is doing.

I see no reason to forbid any operator from running the T1S if they feel able to do so commercially. However, if it requires a public subsidy then we must ask whether there are better places to spend that subsidy.

The T5 for example currently only has a slow local bus service (an equivalent to the X11).
until Arriva pulled out of Aberystwyth there were several direct X50 services per day that did that, now the T5 only manages it once a day and even that's southbound only
This idea that buses are for 'peasants' and that people won't use buses because it is somehow 'beneath them' is one I believe needs to be tackled.
However, there is then the question of what the TrawsCymru brand is for.
if a route cannot meet the very high standards necessary to try and shake the 'for peasants mentality' then it shouldn't carry the brand
Clearly, a cost-benefit analysis is needed in each case*
I would generally argue in favour of fixed services rather than Bwcabus
so the priority is getting a local service everywhere.

Many interesting points above . I apologise again for the editing.

Firstly, the question of what the TrawsCymru brand is for and the 'for peasants mentality', which Rhydgaled covered:

The Trawscymru network should be a series of long distance services that connect the major towns and cities by the most direct fastest possible route in comfortable buses. The services should be timed to connect with available onward bus or rail connections. The "clock-face" timing mentality in use now should be abandoned in favour of prioritising Trawscymru connections with other rail and bus services.

All new routes should be subject to a cost benefit analysis (CBA). The practice of looking for the easy option and existing Local Bus Services to link together as a Trawscymru service should be abandoned.
There should be no removal of Trawscymru long distance services because they compete with a train service. Bus and Rail are different markets.

TrawscymruConnect should be abandoned. Local bus services are the potential connection to either rail services or TrawsCymru Services. Priority should be given to improving local bus service coverage and identifying those Local services that can be used to link passengers to the rail and Trawscymru networks. Local Authorities cannot do this alone and it needs some level of central direction.

Bwcbus should be abandoned in favour of timed local bus services.
The Trawscymru Free Weekend Travel Scheme should be abandoned in favour of say a 50% fare reduction say every Wednesday (not at weekends) to encourage new passengers to use the network regularly.

Secondly, the criticism of the Winckler Trawscymru review is unnecessary. The report was commissioned in May 2013 finished in August 2013, supplied to the Welsh Government in January 2014 and published in August 2017.
review of trawscymru - Gov.Waleshttps://beta.gov.wales › default › files › publicationsPDF
30 Aug 2017 — REVIEW OF. TRAWSCYMRU.

It was in late 2016/early 2017 that it was revealed in the Welsh Assembly that the Winckler review had not been published or acted upon. The Winckler Trawscymru review was commissioned to examine the network and make recommendations on its future expansion. Winckler was NOT asked to do a CBA but recommended that all future routes considered should be subject to a CBA. The Welsh Government did not like this recommendation along with several other recommendations.

Lack of cost benefit analysis has been honed to a fine art by the WG . You will find no cost benefit analysis for the T10 or any other Trawscymru service introduced since the Winckler review was completed in 2014. You will find no cost benefit analysis for the Free Weekend Travel scheme, which was unsuccessful in its first year, and has been continued at a cost of £1 Million per annum until it was stopped by the Covid Pandemic.

Thirdly, diversions and timings:

I agree entirely regarding the slowness of the T1 and T5. The T5 diversions, (Aberporth, Newquay) are ridiculous for a Trawscymru Service. The T1 is just criminal. This service has the very highest standard of punctuality of all the Trawscymru Services at 99%. The reason for this is the timings have been engineered to give plenty of slack. Even though it has planned waits at Lampeter and Aberaeron it frequently either trundles or stops for a few minutes in order to stay on timetable. Both the T1 and T5 in the current parlance are therefore TrawscymruConnect, the T1 because of speed and the T5 for diversions.

I disagree with the comments regarding speeding up the T3. The T3 has diversions into Llanuwchlyn (5 mins), through Llandrilo /Llanderfel (10 mins). Both these diversions could be avoided by a local bus service in a figure of 8 from Corwen to Bala and West around Bala Lake. The saving of 15 minutes in each direction (30 minutes total ) would allow T2 timings to be altered in Dolgellau to provide better connectivity between T2/T1 in Aberystwyth.

If this were too expensive an option then time could be saved by missing out Ruabon Station and simply taking the T3 direct from Llangollen to Wrexham saving 10 mins . This is perfectly possible because (a) no passengers get on or off at Ruabon Station as there are no connecting train services and (b) a No 5 Luxury double decker service now operates between llangollen and wrexham along exactly the same route as the T3 and runs every 20 mins.

The T3 route has not changed since the Ruabon to Barmouth railway closed in 1966. (Who mentioned route design? It is a disgrace that this route has not been changed for 56 years. This may be the "baggage" that Rhydgaled mentioned after his conversation with Professor Stuart Cole. Professor Cole has reviewed the T3 route in 2018 and the review can be found at https://gov.wales/trawscymru-t3-summary-recommendations-professor-stuart-cole).

The T3 is not a fast direct service and therefore should be classed as TrawscymruConnect.

The T2 cannot be accused of major diversions. It does however need a complete overhaul of the timetable to correct inexplicable decisions in 2018 which resulted in removal of connections with the T1 in aberystwyth.

Nobody would use the T12 as a long distance service,

The T11 is inexplicable even as a TrawscymruConnect service . The 2 Local bus services should have remained local services feeding the T5 at Haverfordwest and Fishguard.

Fourthly, Future Trawscymru Services:
The Welsh Government have to address the TrawsCymru brand as Rhydgaled pointed out. Passengers are put off using long distance bus services if they take forever making diversions/ U-turns and failing to make connections when they reach their destination. There is a market for long distance bus travel in Wales and it should be encouraged in the very near future in order to remove cars from the roads. The current network is not fit for purpose and there is no analysis being used in the formulation of new routes.

My own feelings on the T1/T1C/T1S/T2/T3/T5/T12 routes are as follows:

1. The routing of the T3 should be reviewed to improve journey times.
2. The timetable of the T2 should also be reviewed to improve T2/T1 connectivity in both directions following the route review of the T3.
3. The T12 should operate from Aberystwyth to Wrexham on a faster direct route with no other diversions linking with other services at Llangurig, Llanidloes, Newtown, Welshpool and Oswestry.
4. The T5 should have its diversions removed to improve journey time and be linked to the T12 and T2 and the rail network in Aberystwyth. The 460 should be renumbered T460 and converted to a direct Trawscymru service between Carmarthen and Newquay via Cardigan (30 miles) thereby opening up a route to Swansea (56 miles) similar to the T3 Wrexham to Barmouth (58 miles) .
5. The T1 route should be rationalised. Half the services should operate as the T1 via Lampeter and half should operate as a new T701 service via llandysul. The T701 would provide a faster service and would release the connecting service between Llandysul and the T1 in Pencader. The T701 should stop for passengers at Pencader which the T1C does not.
6. The T1C could then be removed as an Aberystwyth to Cardiff service if another service the T702 (say) was introduced to run between Carmarthen and Cardiff. The T702 could access Swansea as well as the other stops used by the T1C . Contrary to popular belief passengers on the T1C never get on or off at the 2 retail outlets that it visits, both of which frequently resulted in delays due to traffic congestion. The T1C is not a “shopping “ bus and both these stops should be removed. Accessing Swansea would (a) remove the necessity for the T1S and (b) result in a longer journey time so that there is no element of competition with the Train route .
7. The shorter journey of the T701 and T702 would mean a coach need not be employed (as with the T1C) just a comfortable Trawscymru bus. I would envisage say 4 T1 and 4 T701 services with 2 T1 and 2 T701 linking to 4 T702 services. You would end up with 4 faster more direct services between Carmarthen and Cardiff which were not in competition with the train . This would probably be cheaper than the current T1/Llandysul Bwcabus/T1C/T1S set up. There would be no extra T1 services, no Llandysul Bwcabus/no T1C and 4 T702 services replacing (7/8??) T1S services.

The word Trawscymru implies that passengers are able to move across Wales easily and relatively quickly given the terrain constraints. It is pointless providing services that are acknowledged to be not long distance "end to end" services. The Trawscymru network needs a complete, root and branch, overhaul and until that is done passengers will not be attracted to use Trawscymru services.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Firstly the question of what the TrawsCymru brand is for and the 'for peasants mentality'which Rhydgaled covered.
The Trawscymru network should be a series of long distance services that connect the major towns and cities by the most direct fastest possible route in comfortable buses. The services should be timed to connect with available onward bus or rail connections. The "clock-face" timing mentality in use now should be abandoned in favour of prioritising Trawscymru connections with other rail and bus services.
All new routes should be subject to a cost benefit analysis (CBA). The practice of looking for the easy option and existing Local Bus Services to link together as a Trawscymru service should be abandoned.
There should be no removal of Trawscymru long distance services because they compete with a train service. Bus and Rail are different markets.
TrawscymruConnect should be abandoned. Local bus services are the potential connection to either rail services or TrawsCymru Services. Priority should be given to improving local bus service coverage and identifying those Local services that can be used to link passengers to the rail and Trawscymru networks. Local Authorities cannot do this alone and it needs some level of central direction.
Bwcbus should be abandoned in favour of timed local bus services.
The Trawscymru Free Weekend Travel Scheme should be abandoned in favour of say a 50% fare reduction say every Wednesday (not at weekends) to encourage new passengers to use the network regularly.

I've split these into the constituent chunks just for ease of reading.

As ever, some of the points are simply not a binary choice and the rights and wrongs are disputed by many. Clockface timetabling is often seen as a desirable thing rather than some obscure 70 min headway. Connections are clearly a key element of the TC offering and that is why there are nodal points where time allowances are made, such as in Brecon or Dolgellau. That, in itself, is a practice that adds in 10 mins into the running time.

We can discuss all the opportunities for speeding up journeys and CBAs should be undertaken for this. Indeed, CBAs should be undertaken so that the benefits of introductions can be established (such as the T10). However, I cannot understand why the practice of linking existing services to create new links should be abandoned; these are already supported services and the ability to create new links and connections with wider TC network would seem to be a perfectly laudable thing to do.

The removal of TC services where a rail service exists, or is introduced, should be done on a case by case basis. I disagree that they are separate markets; indeed, the decline of services in the Valleys as routes like the Ebbw Vale line shows how rail can abstract traffic from buses; they are public transport users. The impact of any rail line is related not merely to end to end time, but also frequency and/or the existence and location of stations.

Secondly, the criticism of the Winckler Trawscymru review is unnecessary. The report was commissioned in May 2013 finished in August 2013, supplied to the Welsh Government in January 2014 and published in August 2017.
review of trawscymru - Gov.Waleshttps://beta.gov.wales › default › files › publicationsPDF
30 Aug 2017 — REVIEW OF. TRAWSCYMRU.
It was in late 2016/early 2017 that it was revealed in the Welsh Assembly that the Winckler review had not been published or acted upon. The Winckler Trawscymru review was commissioned to examine the network and make recommendations on its future expansion. Winckler was NOT asked to do a CBA but recommended that all future routes considered should be subject to a CBA . The Welsh Government did not like this recommendation along with several other recommendations.
Lack of cost benefit analysis has been honed to a fine art by the WG . You will find no cost benefit analysis for the T10 or any other Trawscymru service introduced since the Winckler review was completed in 2014. You will find no cost benefit analysis for the Free Weekend Travel scheme, which was unsuccessful in its first year, and has been continued at a cost of £1 Million per annum until it was stopped by the Covid Pandemic

Criticism is fine as long as it is balanced and fair. The Winckler report was done very much as a desktop exercise, and the limitations of the report are perhaps reflected in having both a person who is not a transport professional and also the terms of reference. It is nothing more than a diverting read. Winckler was not asked to undertake CBAs or detailed analysis. Equally, the terms of reference also meant that the WG was not bound by the conclusions of the report that they had commissioned. The lack of cost benefit analyses is an area that should be improved upon especially where large amounts of spend are involved. The little additional spend to create the T11 from what is essentially existing resources is perhaps a no-brainer. However, with all new facilities (like the T10), then the business case should be established.

I agree entirely regarding the slowness of the T1 and T5. The T5 diversions, (Aberporth, Newquay) are ridiculous for a Trawscymru Service. The T1 is just criminal. This service has the very highest standard of punctuality of all the Trawscymru Services at 99%. The reason for this is the timings have been engineered to give plenty of slack. Even though it has planned waits at Lampeter and Aberaeron it frequently either trundles or stops for a few minutes in order to stay on timetable. Both the T1 and T5 in the current parlance are therefore TrawscymruConnect, the T1 because of speed and the T5 for diversions.

I disagree with the comments regarding speeding up the T3. The T3 has diversions into Llanuwchlyn (5 mins), through Llandrilo /Llanderfel (10 mins). Both these diversions could be avoided by a local bus service in a figure of 8 from Corwen to Bala and West around Bala Lake. The saving of 15 minutes in each direction (30 minutes total ) would allow T2 timings to be altered in Dolgellau to provide better connectivity between T2/T1 in Aberystwyth. If this were too expensive an option then time could be saved by missing out Ruabon Station and simply taking the T3 direct from Llangollen to Wrexham saving 10 mins . This is perfectly possible because (a) no passengers get on or off at Ruabon Station as there are no connecting train services and (b) a No 5 Luxury double decker service now operates between llangollen and wrexham along exactly the same route as the T3 and runs every 20 mins. The T3 route has not changed since the Ruabon to Barmouth railway closed in 1966. (Who mentioned route design ?. It is a disgrace that this route has not been changed for 56 years. This may be the "baggage" that Rhydgaled mentioned after his conversation with Professor Stuart Cole. Professor Cole has reviewed the T3 route in 2018 and the review can be found at https://gov.wales/trawscymru-t3-summary-recommendations-professor-stuart-cole . ).
The T3 is not a fast direct service and therefore should be classed as TrawscymruConnect.
The T2 cannot be accused of major diversions. It does however need a complete overhaul of the timetable to correct inexplicable decisions in 2018 which resulted in removal of connections with the T1 in aberystwyth.
Nobody would use the T12 as a long distance service,
The T11 is inexplicable even as a TrawscymruConnect service . The 2 Local bus services should have remained local services feeding the T5 at Haverfordwest and Fishguard.

In respect of the timings for routes, where there is the opportunity to tighten up timings without jeopardising the reliability of services, this should naturally be done, as with any other bus service. Removing diversions to speed up services is also desirable and these should be investigated. Aberporth and New Quay (given their larger populations) would appear to have more likelihood of justifying a Bwcabus vehicle running to a fixed schedule and this should be the subject of a CBA. My view is that the case is probably stronger with this than with the T3. I'd be happy to see a CBA undertaken, as per Prof Cole's suggestion but I suspect that the cost of £100k for a fully resourced, accessible vehicle is unlikely to be justified by the relatively small benefit and the limited number of passengers impacted. That the route of the T3/X94/94/D94 hasn't changed in 56 years is not a surprise; many routes continue to operate in the same manner for many years as travel patterns are well established and, in Wales more than most places, they are often shaped by the geography. That isn't to say that routes should be preserved in aspic and the opportunity to speed it up between Llangollen and Wrexham should be pursued through bypassing Johnstown as an example.

That the T12 isn't a long distance service is not a surprise either. Neither is the T4 by the same measure. No one travels from Newtown to Cardiff but what you do have is a range of short journeys (Llandod to Builth, Libanus to Brecon) overlaid with longer journeys.

As for your fourth tranche of suggestions, they are largely a reflection on your previous, oft argued comments. Those have been discussed in some detail so I won't re-enter that area.

 

[burns20]

As a driver on the T2/T12 journey surprising combinations are actually made quite regularly

Mach to Gobowen Hospital
Caersws to Montgomery
Montgomery to Wrexham
Newtown to Oswestry (ok the old X71)
Welshpool to Wrexham

People do wait now for the T12 in Chirk and Oswestry to get to Wrexham faster, they comment on how it should be more frequent

An odd introduction of a Powys supported 72 now means one journey a day on the T12 now runs fast from Four Crosses to Oswestry as it runs 3 mins ahead of the T12

I agree with the fact the T12 should be extended to Aberystwyth, the faces you see from Newtown at Morrisons in Aberystwyth waiting for the 1400 T2 to connect with the 1500ish T12 from Mach is surprising

The X28 should be renumbered T2 and diverted round the 34A route in Mach and rebranded The Mach Loop

The T2 should be made hourly just like the T1 and T5 with alternate buses via Dinas Mawddwy to replaces the 33, 36, T36 and 533

The T3 should be extended to Porthmadog via "Top Harlech" replacing the 39

The 35 should be withdrawn

The T19 should be extended to Caernarfon via the proposed T22 route every 2 hours Llandudno to Caernarfon but hourly combined Blaenau to Caernarfon

The 1, 1R, 1N, 1S mess should be replaced by the T22 plus an hourly 21 Nantlle/Nebo-Penygroes-Rhosgadfan-Caernarfon

The Lleyn Penninsula network is a mess to be sorted for another day

 

[johntrawscymru]

The Winckler report didn't look at the cost benefit analysis of such schemes - hence why I question quite how useful the report is and its limitation.

Winckler was not asked to undertake CBAs or detailed analysis.

Glad we have cleared that one up. As you say Winckler was not asked to undertake CBAs therefore lets not criticise the fact that Winckler did not carry out CBAs . She advised in 2014 that the Welsh Government should carry out CBAs on new routes but 7 years later there have been no CBAs. Professor Stuart Cole was asked in 2018 ""to review and advise on what other cost effective improvements could potentially be introduced to further enhance the TrawsCymru T3 long distance service"" but 3 years later there is still no CBA for the T3. It is no use talking about using CBAs/Business Cases and then never doing them.

The Winckler report was done very much as a desktop exercise, and the limitations of the report are perhaps reflected in having both a person who is not a transport professional and also the terms of reference. It is nothing more than a diverting read.

It would have been a diverting read if Welsh assembly members and the Welsh Public had the opportunity of reading it on 07/01/2014 instead of nearly 4 years later on 30/08/2017.
Winckler was not chosen as a "transport professional" . She was asked to speak with stakeholders in the Trawscymru network including bus users, Bus Companies, Local Authorities and incidentally the Welsh Government Officials who continually refuse to carry out CBAs.
She consulted with "transport professionals" including Welsh Government Officials and made recommendations to the Welsh Government regarding "Welsh Government’s involvement in developing and providing the TrawsCymru longer distance bus network" . Winckler was chosen to undertake the review because of her background in social justice and equality as well as her knowledge of public transport from her previous work in local government.

https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2017-10/review-trawscymru.pdf

Clockface timetabling is often seen as a desirable thing rather than some obscure 70 min headway.

You will have to explain "some obscure 70 min headway".

Please divert your reading to the Traffic Commissioners Practice Direction: Standards For Local Bus Services https://assets.publishing.service.g.../file/485030/practice-direction-standards.pdf.

This states

Commissioners are of the view that it is more important to offer passengers a timetable that can normally be achieved rather than one which in theory relies upon clock face headway “which is easy for the public to remember” but which rarely achieves its aspirations.

In other words connectivity is the key and if connections can be made by moving away from a clock-face timing then that should be done.

However, I cannot understand why the practice of linking existing services to create new links should be abandoned; these are already supported services and the ability to create new links and connections with wider TC network would seem to be a perfectly laudable thing to do.

The little additional spend to create the T11 from what is essentially existing resources is perhaps a no-brainer.

You have misunderstood the point I was making. Trawscymru services should be services that employ a direct route with no diversions in the shortest time possible. If this is not done passengers are discouraged from using the Trawscymru brand for long distance journeys. I do not buy your argument that nobody wants to travel long distances. They do but are not prepared to put up with slow services with lots of diversions.

Every Local Bus Service is then a possibility to connect to the Trawscymru Network of direct services and Local Services should be assessed to see whether they can be connected to the network either by alterations to their timetable or alterations to their route.

Designing the Trawscymru direct routes and which places they serve comes first and second comes examination of how the Local Services can be linked to the Trawscymru direct routes.

The T11 was a no-brainer because it was unnecessary and did nothing to give additional connectivity to the T5 Trawscymru service. The Connectivity with the T5 was already there with the 2 Local Bus services already in use before they were amalgamated into the T11. The Bus Service Support Grant funding was simply changed to Trawscymru funding so the taxpayer would pay the same .

In your own words this was about Politics. The passenger numbers were moved from Local Bus statistics to Trawscymru statistics and allowed Welsh Government Officials to claim success in attracting extra passengers. I have no objection to the 2 services being amalgamated into 1 service but that should still be a local service and passengers would still use the service in the way they did before ie to travel to either Haverfordwest or to Fishguard if they want to connect with the T5.

the opportunity to speed it up between Llangollen and Wrexham should be pursued through bypassing Johnstown as an example.

So you now accept that the useless link by the T3 to Ruabon Station should be removed. At least someone has finally recognised this. Professor Cole in his review of the T3 suggested an in depth study into interchange requirements with rail services at Ruabon, but of course this has not materialised along with the CBA.

As for your fourth tranche of suggestions, they are largely a reflection on your previous, oft argued comments.

I am a little disappointed with this. I have not in the past mentioned any of the following:

• The 460 should be renumbered T460 and converted to a direct Trawscymru service between Carmarthen and Newquay via Cardigan (30 miles) thereby opening up a route to Swansea (56 miles) similar to the T3 Wrexham to Barmouth (58 miles).
• The T1 route should be rationalised. Half the services should operate as the T1 via Lampeter and half should operate as a new T701 service via llandysul. The T701 would provide a faster service and would release the connecting service between Llandysul and the T1 in Pencader. The T701 should stop for passengers at Pencader which the T1C does not.
• The T1C could then be removed as an Aberystwyth to Cardiff service if another service the T702 (say) was introduced to run between Carmarthen and Cardiff. The T702 could access Swansea as well as the other stops used by the T1C . Contrary to popular belief passengers on the T1C never get on or off at the 2 retail outlets that it visits, both of which frequently resulted in delays due to traffic congestion. The T1C is not a “shopping “ bus and both these stops should be removed. Accessing Swansea would (a) remove the necessity for the T1S and (b) result in a longer journey time so that there is no element of competition with the Train route.
• The shorter journey of the T701 and T702 would mean a coach need not be employed (as with the T1C) just a comfortable Trawscymru bus. I would envisage say 4 T1 and 4 T701 services with 2 T1 and 2 T701 linking to 4 T702 services. You would end up with 4 faster more direct services between Carmarthen and Cardiff which were not in competition with the train . This would probably be cheaper than the current T1/Llandysul Bwcabus/T1C/T1S set up. There would be no extra T1 services, no Llandysul Bwcabus/no T1C and 4 T702 services replacing (7/8??) T1S services.

I would have thought you would be overjoyed at the loss of the T1C coach service, loss of the Pencader Bwcabus, reduction in the number of Trawscymru services competing with the train across South Wales from 8/9? (1 T1C and rest T1S) to 4 T702 Carmarthen to Cardiff via Swansea. I just do not understand why you think Trawscymru services should not operate across South Wales. Perhaps the brand should be TrawsCymruExceptSouthWales.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Glad we have cleared that one up. As you say Winckler was not asked to undertake CBAs therefore lets not criticise the fact that Winckler did not carry out CBAs . She advised in 2014 that the Welsh Government should carry out CBAs on new routes but 7 years later there have been no CBAs. Professor Stuart Cole was asked in 2018 ""to review and advise on what other cost effective improvements could potentially be introduced to further enhance the TrawsCymru T3 long distance service"" but 3 years later there is still no CBA for the T3. It is no use talking about using CBAs/Business Cases and then never doing them.


It would have been a diverting read if Welsh assembly members and the Welsh Public had the opportunity of reading it on 07/01/2014 instead of nearly 4 years later on 30/08/2017.
Winckler was not chosen as a "transport professional" . She was asked to speak with stakeholders in the Trawscymru network including bus users, Bus Companies, Local Authorities and incidentally the Welsh Government Officials who continually refuse to carry out CBAs.
She consulted with "transport professionals" including Welsh Government Officials and made recommendations to the Welsh Government regarding "Welsh Government’s involvement in developing and providing the TrawsCymru longer distance bus network" . Winckler was chosen to undertake the review because of her background in social justice and equality as well as her knowledge of public transport from her previous work in local government.

https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2017-10/review-trawscymru.pdf

You will have to explain ""some obscure 70 min headway.""

Please divert your reading to the Traffic Commissioners Practice Direction: Standards For Local Bus Services https://assets.publishing.service.g.../file/485030/practice-direction-standards.pdf.

This states ""Commissioners are of the view that it is more important to offer passengers a timetable that can normally be achieved rather than one which in theory relies upon clock face headway “which is easy for the public to remember” but which rarely achieves its aspirations. "".
In other words connectivity is the key and if connections can be made by moving away from a clock-face timing then that should be done.




You have misunderstood the point I was making. Trawscymru services should be services that employ a direct route with no diversions in the shortest time possible. If this is not done passengers are discouraged from using the Trawscymru brand for long distance journeys. I do not buy your argument that nobody wants to travel long distances. They do but are not prepared to put up with slow services with lots of diversions.
Every Local Bus Service is then a possibility to connect to the Trawscymru Network of direct services and Local Services should be assessed to see whether they can be connected to the network either by alterations to their timetable or alterations to their route.
Designing the Trawscymru direct routes and which places they serve comes first and second comes examination of how the Local Services can be linked to the Trawscymru direct routes.

The T11 was a no-brainer because it was unnecessary and did nothing to give additional connectivity to the T5 Trawscymru service . The Connectivity with the T5 was already there with the 2 Local Bus services already in use before they were amalgamated into the T11. The Bus Service Support Grant funding was simply changed to Trawscymru funding so the taxpayer would pay the same . In your own words this was about Politics. The passenger numbers were moved from Local Bus statistics to Trawscymru statistics and allowed Welsh Government Officials to claim success in attracting extra passengers. I have no objection to the 2 services being amalgamated into 1 service but that should still be a local service and passengers would still use the service in the way they did before ie to travel to either Haverfordwest or to Fishguard if they want to connect with the T5.



So you now accept that the useless link by the T3 to Ruabon Station should be removed. At least someone has finally recognised this. Professor Cole in his review of the T3 suggested an in depth study into interchange requirements with rail services at Ruabon, but of course this has not materialised along with the CBA.



I am a little disappointed with this. I have not in the past mentioned any of the following
---The 460 should be renumbered T460 and converted to a direct Trawscymru service between Carmarthen and Newquay via Cardigan (30 miles) thereby opening up a route to Swansea (56 miles) similar to the T3 Wrexham to Barmouth (58 miles) .
---The T1 route should be rationalised. Half the services should operate as the T1 via Lampeter and half should operate as a new T701 service via llandysul. The T701 would provide a faster service and would release the connecting service between Llandysul and the T1 in Pencader. The T701 should stop for passengers at Pencader which the T1C does not.
---The T1C could then be removed as an Aberystwyth to Cardiff service if another service the T702 (say) was introduced to run between Carmarthen and Cardiff. The T702 could access Swansea as well as the other stops used by the T1C . Contrary to popular belief passengers on the T1C never get on or off at the 2 retail outlets that it visits, both of which frequently resulted in delays due to traffic congestion. The T1C is not a “shopping “ bus and both these stops should be removed. Accessing Swansea would (a) remove the necessity for the T1S and (b) result in a longer journey time so that there is no element of competition with the Train route .
---The shorter journey of the T701 and T702 would mean a coach need not be employed (as with the T1C) just a comfortable Trawscymru bus. I would envisage say 4 T1 and 4 T701 services with 2 T1 and 2 T701 linking to 4 T702 services. You would end up with 4 faster more direct services between Carmarthen and Cardiff which were not in competition with the train . This would probably be cheaper than the current T1/Llandysul Bwcabus/T1C/T1S set up. There would be no extra T1 services, no Llandysul Bwcabus/no T1C and 4 T702 services replacing (7/8??) T1S services.

I would have thought you would be overjoyed at the loss of the T1C coach service, loss of the Pencader Bwcabus, reduction in the number of Trawscymru services competing with the train across South Wales from 8/9? (1 T1C and rest T1S) to 4 T702 Carmarthen to Cardiff via Swansea. I just do not understand why you think Trawscymru services should not operate across South Wales. Perhaps the brand should be TrawsCymruExceptSouthWales.

I'm going to try to keep this short and I have no wish to indulge in further excessive posts

In terms of you and your proposals, you have previously mentioned your issues with the T1 and its route/speed. You have mentioned the T3 rerouting before. You have mentioned the T1/T2 connections before. Your proposals do reflect your long held views as I said "they are largely a reflection on your previous, oft argued comments."

I recognise the terms of reference of the Winckler Report, and the limitations that it placed on her. CBAs were recommended by her but were not part of her brief. That is not to say that the report in and of itself is particularly good. The level of research is also extremely limited, and her inherent lack of knowledge is evident in a number of facets. Perhaps if she'd had more time and more resources or a better brief, then it might be more impressive and useful, but she didn't and that is shown by the report.

The obscure 70 min headway reference is simply a reference to having a service every 70 mins rather than a rigid hourly clockface timetable. A clockface timetable is desirable (for ease of customer use) but the reference is that this must be balanced and not sacrificed by having something that is ultimately not achievable though, with your references to the T1 and T5, they are actually extremely achievable given the recovery time en route.

The next line "You have misunderstood the point I was making. Trawscymru services should be services that employ a direct route with no diversions in the shortest time possible. If this is not done passengers are discouraged from using the Trawscymru brand for long distance journeys. I do not buy your argument that nobody wants to travel long distances. They do but are not prepared to put up with slow services with lots of diversions." At what point did I make any statement that nobody wants to travel long distances? Clearly they do from Brecon to Cardiff, or from Aber to Carmarthen. In fact, what I actually said was

No one travels from Newtown to Cardiff but what you do have is a range of short journeys (Llandod to Builth, Libanus to Brecon) overlaid with longer journeys.

You are misrepresenting what I said. Such a practice is again shown in the two quotes below:

That isn't to say that routes should be preserved in aspic and the opportunity to speed it up between Llangollen and Wrexham should be pursued through bypassing Johnstown as an example.

So you now accept that the useless link by the T3 to Ruabon Station should be removed. At least someone has finally recognised this. Professor Cole in his review of the T3 suggested an in depth study into interchange requirements with rail services at Ruabon, but of course this has not materialised along with the CBA.

I don't accept it as I never mentioned Ruabon.

Now, I'm rather tired of trying to have a reasoned discussion when the other person is continually misrepresenting what I have written.

Good day to you; I wish peace on you.

 

[markymark2000]

As a driver on the T2/T12 journey surprising combinations are actually made quite regularly

Mach to Gobowen Hospital
Caersws to Montgomery
Montgomery to Wrexham
Newtown to Oswestry (ok the old X71)
Welshpool to Wrexham

People do wait now for the T12 in Chirk and Oswestry to get to Wrexham faster, they comment on how it should be more frequent

An odd introduction of a Powys supported 72 now means one journey a day on the T12 now runs fast from Four Crosses to Oswestry as it runs 3 mins ahead of the T12

I agree with the fact the T12 should be extended to Aberystwyth, the faces you see from Newtown at Morrisons in Aberystwyth waiting for the 1400 T2 to connect with the 1500ish T12 from Mach is surprising

The X28 should be renumbered T2 and diverted round the 34A route in Mach and rebranded The Mach Loop

The T2 should be made hourly just like the T1 and T5 with alternate buses via Dinas Mawddwy to replaces the 33, 36, T36 and 533

The T3 should be extended to Porthmadog via "Top Harlech" replacing the 39

The 35 should be withdrawn

The T19 should be extended to Caernarfon via the proposed T22 route every 2 hours Llandudno to Caernarfon but hourly combined Blaenau to Caernarfon

The 1, 1R, 1N, 1S mess should be replaced by the T22 plus an hourly 21 Nantlle/Nebo-Penygroes-Rhosgadfan-Caernarfon

The Lleyn Penninsula network is a mess to be sorted for another day

There are so many flaws in this comment. Crikey.

T12, yes people may wait because it is faster but why are taxpayers funding a service which is taking people away from COMMERCIAL routes? The T12 should be cut back to Oswestry while funded. Oswestry to Wrexham then being undertaken as part of a commercial operation. People will be quick to slate Arriva if they cut the 2/2A back because they have lost a lot of passengers but in reality, it's the Welsh Govt doing it so that Arriva reduce buses, become the big bad bus company and then the Welsh Govt can run all the buses and become the big high and mighty dictator that they so crave to be.

T12, I think if the route was split, you would have an argument for extending to Aber to replace some of the X28. The route is already 3 and a half hours long. Extending it would just mean a shed load more money being wasted on excessive layovers and padding to try and ensure that the route runs on time. Newtown - Mach - Aber would work, I'd quite support that idea. A dead cert 'No' from me though running it as part of the existing T12.

T2 to Dinas Mawddwy, Why needlessly increase journey times? One of the pros of the T2 is the journey time, you're just making people needlessly travel around the world as a bit of a laugh to pick up one or two passengers.

T3, Same as the T12. T3 is long enough without extending it. Given the lack of 'through' passengers, I say that there is more of an arguement to cut the T3 at Dollgellau and run the 39 more frequently from Doll to Barmouth.

35, Isn't it's sole purpose as a bus to get vehicles to the 3B? It's not useful to anyone and hardly anyone uses it except for the short trips that they would already make on the T2 and 3B. It's just there for dead mileage.

T19/T22, The proposal from the Welsh Government which has gone out for tender is an absolute shambles. As if any more proof was needed that we shouldn't trust civil servants with a bus network. The biggest 'U' route for absolutely zero reason because there aren't the through passengers. The T19 should extend to Porthmadog to replace the 3B. If they feel that the T2 needs additional capacity between Caernarfon and Port, then it should be on the T2 (not like it needs extra buses but that's a different matter). Alternatively, so as not to duplicate the T2, run the proposed route to rid some of the '1' series routes and run Caernarfon to Dollgellau via the 1 to Porthmadog then 39 routing to Dollgellau via Barmouth. That would be much better, providing some half decent through links for people as the 39 does seem like the route where people want to travel 'through' Porthmadog.

 

[johntrawscymru]

Thank you. A very interesting contribution especially from someone who actually drives the routes and observes the travel patterns of passengers. The Welsh Government should take more interest on the views of drivers. If they did that we would not have the appalling situation with Trawscymru connections in Aberystwyth that we have had since 01/01/2018.

People do wait now for the T12 in Chirk and Oswestry to get to Wrexham faster, they comment on how it should be more frequent

.

This is exactly the point I am trying to make with the T3 between Llangollen and Wrexham. If the service was speeded up, by removing the unnecessary diversion to Ruabon Station, and travelling direct between Llangollen and Wrexham passengers would be more inclined to use the T3 as a long distance service.

Unfortunately Oswestry to Wrexham is the only part of the T12 route that is fast. Then it also has the diversions at Caersws, Montgomery and Gobowen Hospital. The 2 times I travelled no passengers were dropped off or picked up at these locations . The Montgomery diversion was particularly difficult where one bus was held up by poor car parking as it attempted to depart Montgomery down a very narrow street. These 3 diversions are the main reason why the T12 is so slow. Montgomery, East of Newtown, is the worst which explains passengers going to Newtown are happy to use the service but not beyond there.

I agree with the fact the T12 should be extended to Aberystwyth, the faces you see from Newtown at Morrisons in Aberystwyth waiting for the 1400 T2 to connect with the 1500ish T12 from Mach is surprising

I have used the T12 twice to travel to Wrexham. One of the drivers laughed when I got on in Machynlleth and asked to go to Wrexham. He said "you have a long journey ahead of you". He laughed even more when I told him that I had travelled by bus from South of Aberystwyth. I doubt whether he has had anymore passengers since who have done the full journey.
It is interesting that passengers from Newtown are prepared to make that journey involving 4 buses whereas 2 journeys on a T12 would be so much easier. Everybody South of Aberystwyth has an even worse problem and they have to catch 6 Trawscymru buses to get to Wrexham (80 miles) and back.

The T2 should be made hourly just like the T1 and T5 with alternate buses via Dinas Mawddwy to replaces the 33, 36, T36 and 533

If you drive the T2 you must know which passengers want to go where. If there is a number wanting to go via Dinas Mawddwy then fine . I have used that bus route only once when a serious accident blocked the T2 route between Cross Foxes and Mach. The T2 seemed as fast as the normal route.
Do passengers travelling from Dolgellau to Dinas Mawddwy need to use the T2 to Mach and then travel out from Mach to Dinas Mawddwy on another bus or is there an alternative local service direct from Dolgellau ?.
This principal of splitting routes is fine in my view as long as it does not impact on connections at the destination. I have suggested splitting the T1 route in a similar way.

The X28 should be renumbered T2 and diverted round the 34A route in Mach and rebranded The Mach Loop

I am puzzled by this one. I presume you want X28 passengers from Mach to be able to have easier access to the X28 all over the Mach loop. That would be sensible although presumably it would impact on X28 timings and reduce the number of X28 services per day. This would however still be a local bus route not a Trawscymru service and I do not understand the suggestion to renumber it T2.

The T3 should be extended to Porthmadog via "Top Harlech" replacing the 39

I am not sure this would work. Presumably the 39 is currently a connecting service to the T3 ? Adding the 39 to the T3 would be a big diversion off the Wrexham to Barmouth route, which is currently compromised by poor journey times due to other diversions it makes between Wrexham and Barmouth. I think adding the 39 to the T3 would inevitably result in less services, less frequency unless extra buses, extra drivers were employed. Are there large passenger numbers linking between the T3/39 at Barmouth ?
In addition the anti-bus lobby would insist that the new integrated ticket was used to travel by rail from Barmouth to Porthmadog. All told a dead duck.

 

[markymark2000]

I am not sure this would work. Presumably the 39 is currently a connecting service to the T3 ? Adding the 39 to the T3 would be a big diversion off the Wrexham to Barmouth route, which is currently compromised by poor journey times due to other diversions it makes between Wrexham and Barmouth. I think adding the 39 to the T3 would inevitably result in less services, less frequency unless extra buses, extra drivers were employed. Are there large passenger numbers linking between the T3/39 at Barmouth ?

There is hardly enough passengers on the 39 to sustain itself. It's probably around 5 people per trip. Maybe 6 if you're lucky. School trips do much better but that's it. Not really that many in the grand scheme of things. I do think one or two carry on on the 39 to Doll but they do so on the 39 trips which continue and not connecting between buses.

 

[johntrawscymru]

There are so many flaws in this comment. Crikey.

.
They are not flaws. They are suggestions just like the ones you and I are making.

T12, yes people may wait because it is faster but why are taxpayers funding a service which is taking people away from COMMERCIAL routes? The T12 should be cut back to Oswestry while funded.

It would be very difficult to construct a Trawscymru Network which nowhere touches a Commercial route or a rail route. We would have a very strange long distance network if this were so.

then the Welsh Govt can run all the buses and become the big high and mighty dictator that they so crave to be.

I would not disagree. That is why with Transport for Wales (TfW) now in control of rail and the Trawscymru Network it is such a dangerous situation for the future of long distance bus services. The new integrated rail/Trawscymru bus ticket is a fine idea but disadvantages those passengers who have limited funds. The scrapping of the T1S is just the first salvo in dismantling long distance bus services and forcing passengers onto trains.

The Welsh Government (WG) were forced into Nationalising rail by the Covid Pandemic. They did not particularly want to do it. The rail operation was a shambles but the WG were happy with this as they were claiming £Millions in fines from the train company KeolisAmey due to missing/late trains with passengers left stranded.

Transport for Wales: KeolisAmey fined £2.3m for poor performance

Economy minister Ken Skates says the penalty notices are "vital" to improve services.

www.bbc.co.uk

The train company contracted to run Transport for Wales services, KeolisAmey, has been fined £2.3m by the Welsh Government for poor performance.

Economy minister Ken Skates said the penalty notices were "vital", saying the company had not lived up to what was agreed.

Recent improvements must continue, he added. The company took over the £5bn franchise in October 2018.

KeolisAmey apologised for the disruption of the last few months.

It is not clear when the fines were imposed. Transport for Wales said it was a "overall sum" imposed over "different periods", with fines issued on a periodic basis.

The company was awarded the Wales and Borders franchise by the Welsh Government in 2018.

New timetable blamed for train cancellations
160 trains 'miss stops each day'
Why Wales' quietest station got busier
The day-to-day contract is managed by Transport for Wales - a part of Welsh Government which also provides the branding the train services use.

In December the organisation saw cancellations following the introduction of a new timetable. The company blamed staff shortages.

"So far, something in the region of £2.3m in penalty notices have been issued to KeolisAmey," Mr Skates told the assembly's economy committee.

He said the money would be reinvested in rail services.

Transport for Wales said the fines were triggered because the operator had not met agreements for the subsidy it gives it.

The cash has been paid by deducting it from the subsidy, TfW said.

"A key challenge has been due to a shortage of fleet available to operate on a day-to-day basis," a spokesman added.

Trains have been out of service due to modifications for people with reduced mobility, internal and external refurbishments and work to install wheel slip protection before the Autumn leaf fall.

Recently extra capacity has been provided for 6,500 more passengers.

KeolisAmey has been running services since October 2018
Vikki Howells, Labour AM for Cynon Valley, told the committee she was dealing with constituents who faced disciplinary action in work because of their lateness, have lost wages and had to spend cash on bus fares because of recent disruption.

Simon Jones, Welsh Government director of economy infrastructure, told her a measure called "passenger time lost" had "driven" some of the penalty notices.

He said it focuses on the "busiest journeys" - creating more of a problem for the train company if there were problems at rush hour.

Mr Skates said the proportion of trains arriving within three minutes of the scheduled time had improved by 6% in the "latest period".

That has increased to 76.1%, but the minister said that was against a target of 77%.

He did not want to be issuing penalty notices. "However it is something I feel is absolutely vital in order to incentivise better performance and to ensure passengers know when performance is not what people expect money is being returned.

"Performance has not been what has been expected and has not lived up to what the contract stated and what was agreed."

He told the committee the contract with KeolisAmey includes a break clause.

"If failure was to be seen in the future of course we would have to respond accordingly by looking at the contract," he added.

'Encouraging'
Kevin Thomas, chief executive of KeolisAmey Wales, apologised for the disruption of the past few months.

"We recognise that we have not been able to deliver the quality of service that we aim to and that our passengers across the network deserve," he said.

"It is encouraging to report that we are starting to see some improvements, with a 24% reduction in network delay minutes following the introduction of our December timetable.

"We have welcomed the arrival of the Class 170's, the recruitment of over 200 additional train crew and the introduction of more than 186 new Sunday services."

Caerphilly Labour AM Hefin David welcomed the fines: "I have had assurances from Transport for Wales that things are set to get better through 2020 and I will be monitoring this as a committee member and in my constituency."

The fact that the WG appointed KeolisAmey at all is a puzzle as Keolis (the rail arm) was in the process of being kicked out of both North America and Germany at the time (a fact that was plastered all over the internet and was the subject of investigation by the German Parliament) . Keolis lost the German contract in September 2019. Amey (the construction arm to work on the Swansea metro etc) was virtually bankrupt due to a contract dispute with Birmingham City Council.
If they had carried out "Due Diligence" the WG would have had no illusions that Keolisamey would spell disaster.

MBTA fines commuter rail operator $1.6 million - The Boston Globe

The company than runs the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s commuter rail must pay the T $1.6 million in penalties for its performance in November and December, according to figures from the MBTA.

www.bostonglobe.com

Keolis loses contract for Rhine-Ruhr S-Bahn service

German transport authority VRR covering the Rhine-Ruhr conurbation has prematurely broken off a contract with Eurobahn, a subsidiary of Keolis. It was expected that the railway operator will start to provide train service on two lines of Rhine-Ruhr S-Bahn from 15 December. The possible reason...

www.railtech.com

Outsourcing giant Amey to kickstart break-up plan

Amey is putting up for sale divisions which between them employ about 5,000 people, Sky News learns.

news.sky.com

Amey seeks consistency after £428m loss

Amey UK Plc has posted a loss of £428m for 2018 after extricating itself from the controversial

www.highwaysmagazine.co.uk

T12, I think if the route was split, you would have an argument for extending to Aber to replace some of the X28. The route is already 3 and a half hours long

The route is too long . Its operation should be from Aberystwyth (linking with T1/T5,T2,X28) to Wrexham direct without diversions stopping at Llangurig, Llanidloes, Newtown,Welshpool, Oswestry. There should be none of this "cannot go there because it competes with a rail route or a Commercial service". It would be a direct, fast long distance service.

Newtown - Mach - Aber would work

.
Under the current scheme of things it will not because the anti-bus lobby would argue that Newtown - Mach - Aber is served by a train along the whole of the route trundling along beside the T12.

Newtown - Llanidloes - Llangurig - Aber is not served by a train therefore wrexham to Aber via Llanidloes and Llangurig is the only option which increases connectivity across the whole of the network. The T12 starting at Mach will only connect with the T2/X28. The T12 starting at Aber will connect with the T2/X28/T1 and T5. The population of Aber compared to Mach and the facilities it has also dictate that the route should be Wrexham to Aber.

Let us also not forget Winckler's recommendation that the WG should investigate whether the T3 should run from Wrexham to Aberystwyth and not to Barmouth as Wrexham to Aber was a more strategic route. The WG have for 7 years refused to conduct that investigation.

One of the pros of the T2 is the journey time,

I would agree except in respect of the changes that were introduced on 01/01/2018 by an emergency application for a timetable change to the Traffic Commissioner (TC).

In 2016 the T2 services reaching Dolgellau had a 5 minute planned wait to link with the T3 Wrexham to Barmouth. This was just like other services where the 5 minute wait was based on the TC requirement that 95% of services reached their destination no more than 5 minutes late. However T2 services were also subject to a further 10 minute "delayed departure" which the WG said was necessary to wait for "late running T3 services from Wrexham" .
In 2016 the TC forced the WG to reduce the 10 minute "delayed departure" to 5 minutes as 10 minutes contravened the Road traffic Regulations.
On 01/01/2018 the WG changed the timings in a perfectly legal way by employing a 10 minute planned wait for the T2 and a 5 minute "delayed departure". The changes of 01/01/2018 had a number of disastrous effects to T2 connections in Aberystwyth.

So yes I have no complaints with the speed of the T2 apart from the Dolgellau situation nor on diversions but the complete lack of regard to connectivity of the T2 with other Trawscymru Services in Aberystwyth is a disgrace.

T2 to Dinas Mawddwy, Why needlessly increase journey times?

I am not sure it would increase journey times. It was a long time ago that I was on the diverted T2 but I seem to remember less climbing and less bends on the Dinas Mawddwy diversion compared to the route through Corris.

I say that there is more of an arguement to cut the T3 at Dollgellau and run the 39 more frequently from Doll to Barmouth.

That may be something that is well worth exploring.
The T3 would have a shorter journey time and there should be no necessity for the 15 minute T2 waits in Dolgellau.
However it would not find favour with the WG who rely on the through trade to Barmouth to boost passenger numbers and justify the route.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

There are so many flaws in this comment. Crikey.

T12, yes people may wait because it is faster but why are taxpayers funding a service which is taking people away from COMMERCIAL routes? The T12 should be cut back to Oswestry while funded. Oswestry to Wrexham then being undertaken as part of a commercial operation. People will be quick to slate Arriva if they cut the 2/2A back because they have lost a lot of passengers but in reality, it's the Welsh Govt doing it so that Arriva reduce buses, become the big bad bus company and then the Welsh Govt can run all the buses and become the big high and mighty dictator that they so crave to be.

T12, I think if the route was split, you would have an argument for extending to Aber to replace some of the X28. The route is already 3 and a half hours long. Extending it would just mean a shed load more money being wasted on excessive layovers and padding to try and ensure that the route runs on time. Newtown - Mach - Aber would work, I'd quite support that idea. A dead cert 'No' from me though running it as part of the existing T12.

T2 to Dinas Mawddwy, Why needlessly increase journey times? One of the pros of the T2 is the journey time, you're just making people needlessly travel around the world as a bit of a laugh to pick up one or two passengers.

T3, Same as the T12. T3 is long enough without extending it. Given the lack of 'through' passengers, I say that there is more of an arguement to cut the T3 at Dollgellau and run the 39 more frequently from Doll to Barmouth.

35, Isn't it's sole purpose as a bus to get vehicles to the 3B? It's not useful to anyone and hardly anyone uses it except for the short trips that they would already make on the T2 and 3B. It's just there for dead mileage.

T19/T22, The proposal from the Welsh Government which has gone out for tender is an absolute shambles. As if any more proof was needed that we shouldn't trust civil servants with a bus network. The biggest 'U' route for absolutely zero reason because there aren't the through passengers. The T19 should extend to Porthmadog to replace the 3B. If they feel that the T2 needs additional capacity between Caernarfon and Port, then it should be on the T2 (not like it needs extra buses but that's a different matter). Alternatively, so as not to duplicate the T2, run the proposed route to rid some of the '1' series routes and run Caernarfon to Dollgellau via the 1 to Porthmadog then 39 routing to Dollgellau via Barmouth. That would be much better, providing some half decent through links for people as the 39 does seem like the route where people want to travel 'through' Porthmadog.

Bit brutal but can appreciate some of what you're saying.

The T12 extending to Wrexham may abstract some trade but the question is how much when you're running every two hours rather than every 30 mins. The same argument exists with the T2 from Caernarfon to Bangor; you can cut it short so as not to impinge on the 5s but given the disparity in frequency, how damaging is that vs. the benefits and the potential to grow the market. If the perception is that you can never potentially duplicate a commercial corridor in any way, you'd terminate the T3 at Llangollen! Certainly, I can't see any reason to extend the T12 further.

Agree with the view on Dinas Mawddwy - that would be the antithesis of improving the directness and speed of services. However, not certain about truncating the T3 in Dolgellau; there is quite a bit of traffic to the seaside in summer particularly. The 35 is a bit superflous TBH and with the 39, it would probably be better to run the 35 from BF via Tan y Bwlch and Harlech which I think it did as the 38 moons ago.

The T19/T22 is a curious confection and yep, it needs a fundamental rethink for that corridor

 

[markymark2000]

It would be very difficult to construct a Trawscymru Network which nowhere touches a Commercial route or a rail route. We would have a very strange long distance network if this were so.

It's going to touch commercial routes somewhere, I get that but where possible, shouldn't extract from a core route. As we know, it doesn't take companies much to drop a route, we don't need taxpayers funding the takedown of commercial companies. I think that the amount of distance passengers can not justify the route and ideally, this should be a commercial extension by Lloyds and Tanat rather than a subsidised section of route.

Under the current scheme of things it will not because the anti-bus lobby would argue that Newtown - Mach - Aber is served by a train along the whole of the route trundling along beside the T12.

Newtown - Llanidloes - Llangurig - Aber is not served by a train therefore wrexham to Aber via Llanidloes and Llangurig is the only option which increases connectivity across the whole of the network. The T12 starting at Mach will only connect with the T2/X28. The T12 starting at Aber will connect with the T2/X28/T1 and T5. The population of Aber compared to Mach and the facilities it has also dictate that the route should be Wrexham to Aber.

That is a fair point, I didn't think of that. I was trying to keep things as close to current as possible. Via Llanidloes and Llangurig would be a very good idea though. Yes too long but there is half a chance of people using it as Aber does seem to be quite good in terms of passengers. In Mach, you wouldn't know if it was Christmas Day or peak season it's that dead. The only down side is this would increase the length of the route. Albeit not by as much as Newtown - Mach - Aber but an extention nevertheless. Maybe as part of wider changes to the bus network, this could be made much better (to go in depth would be off topic though)

The T12 extending to Wrexham may abstract some trade but the question is how much when you're running every two hours rather than every 30 mins. The same argument exists with the T2 from Caernarfon to Bangor; you can cut it short so as not to impinge on the 5s but given the disparity in frequency, how damaging is that vs. the benefits and the potential to grow the market. If the perception is that you can never potentially duplicate a commercial corridor in any way, you'd terminate the T3 at Llangollen! Certainly, I can't see any reason to extend the T12 further.

According to the poster, it seems to be a decent flow and people are holding back for it.
T2 Caernarfon to Bangor does have the same argument but there is significant amounts of through passengers (through Caernarfon) to the hospital and rail connections. The same can't be said so much for the T12 where through passengers would surely be much lower. Perhaps maybe run to Gobowen still for the hospital and rail connections.

T3 should be sorted somehow as the Llangollen situation is a mess. Too many buses on the corridor and I would say Arriva have to compete with the T3 because of how it all is.

Agree with the view on Dinas Mawddwy - that would be the antithesis of improving the directness and speed of services. However, not certain about truncating the T3 in Dolgellau; there is quite a bit of traffic to the seaside in summer particularly. The 35 is a bit superflous TBH and with the 39, it would probably be better to run the 35 from BF via Tan y Bwlch and Harlech which I think it did as the 38 moons ago.

I can only speak for the T3 when I have been on it and there wasn't much through traffic on it, kind of unloaded and reloaded at Dolgellau. If it's busier in the summer season, I will take that onboard.
35 is a positioning run, not meant to be useful, just cover dead mileage so they can claim BSOG. It does act as a handy extra bus as well from Oakley Arms to Blaneau. when I used the 35, a few people made journeys boarding along that section.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

According to the poster, it seems to be a decent flow and people are holding back for it.
T2 Caernarfon to Bangor does have the same argument but there is significant amounts of through passengers (through Caernarfon) to the hospital and rail connections. The same can't be said so much for the T12 where through passengers would surely be much lower. Perhaps maybe run to Gobowen still for the hospital and rail connections.

T3 should be sorted somehow as the Llangollen situation is a mess. Too many buses on the corridor and I would say Arriva have to compete with the T3 because of how it all is.

There may be some abstraction but it may also be generating new journeys and creating organic growth. I guess only Arriva will know the impact but as I say, it's a service that is every two hours in the main vs every 30 mins. The T2 providing rail or hospital connections - just like the 5c. It's pretty similar.

As for Llangollen to Wrexham, isn't it more the case that the service levels on that were more determined by historic battles between Crosville Wales and Bryn Melyn/Wrights/GHA over time, rather than any impact from the T3. Closer to Wrexham, with the service levels on the 2/5 groups, it's probably very minor.

I can only speak for the T3 when I have been on it and there wasn't much through traffic on it, kind of unloaded and reloaded at Dolgellau. If it's busier in the summer season, I will take that onboard.
35 is a positioning run, not meant to be useful, just cover dead mileage so they can claim BSOG. It does act as a handy extra bus as well from Oakley Arms to Blaneau. when I used the 35, a few people made journeys boarding along that section.

The 38 was the old Crosville Wales and later Express Motors route that went from Dolgellau/Barmouth via Harlech to Tan y Bwlch to BF.

 

[markymark2000]

There may be some abstraction but it may also be generating new journeys and creating organic growth. I guess only Arriva will know the impact but as I say, it's a service that is every two hours in the main vs every 30 mins. The T2 providing rail or hospital connections - just like the 5c. It's pretty similar.

As for Llangollen to Wrexham, isn't it more the case that the service levels on that were more determined by historic battles between Crosville Wales and Bryn Melyn/Wrights/GHA over time, rather than any impact from the T3. Closer to Wrexham, with the service levels on the 2/5 groups, it's probably very minor.

The T3 offers unique links though to the Maelor which the 2/5 don't offer which could take some people off Arriva, I don't think it's major though. I am not dead set against the T3 to Wrexham as it does provide useful links for the many distance passengers who seem to board at Corwen and beyond. That said, there are too many buses at times and ideally, especially Sundays and Evenings, the T3 and 5 should be coordinated and at least one of them should be going through Cefn Mawr at all times to provide a link from there to Llangollen for shopping, employment and education links.

The 38 was the old Crosville Wales and later Express Motors route that went from Dolgellau/Barmouth via Harlech to Tan y Bwlch to BF.

Is that why the whole Oakley Arms interchange thing came about?