Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Does anyone know why there are two Cardiff - Portsmouth Harbour departures within fifteen minutes of each other on Sunday evenings? From memory, both are booked 158 but the later of the two is almost always just two cars. I'm curious as to why they're two separate services.
Weekdays there's 2V58 that comes down from Gloucester or Great Malvern to Southampton and then departs 10 mins after whatever 1F service leaves, until it hits Salisbury, 10 min dwell, then Westbury, another 10 min dwell. Calls at Dilton Marsh, Freshford, Avoncliff etc.
Article in August`s Modern Railways says the submission will go to the DFT IMMINENTLY. It is for replacement stock for 150, 158 etc and is to use one type of train but with two configurations , ie one for the local branches and a second for the longer distance services ie Cardiff - Penzanze and Portsmouth. Mark Hopwood actually says that he struggles to be diplomatic" about the incomplete electrification, especially when foundations and some structures are in place. It says that the electrification of Chippenham to Bristol via Bath , Bristol Parkway to Bristol and Didcot to Oxford is paused and NOT cancelled suggesting that Cardiff to Portsmouth could work electrically if the Bath route was finished as it could run on eectric from Cardiff to Bathampton , battery to Redbridge then third rail to Portsmouth. Completing through to Oxford would enable 387`s to run this route freeing up more 800`s and it also suggests discontinuous electrification between Newton Abbot and Plymouth.
This is not rumour mill but the MD of FGW and if the bid going in is imminent then it suggests that it is based on stock that would need these electrification schemes to be completed as above. I know this is joined up thinking which the dft doesn`t really do but if not done it really implies diesels need to be ordered which politically is not a good look.
It doesn't matter whether I did or didn't, what point are you trying to make exactly by saying the comparisons don't work? It depends on what those comparisons are. There are multiple factors and variables involved as has already been made clear.
Definitely the case. Every Network Rail project has lots of little parts sub contracted to a lot of firms, especially in the design stage, and each firm takes their cut. Then different bits of the building of it are subcontracted, although to a lesser extent. As much as inflation exists and is a factor, part of the reason projects cost so much these days is so many firms are involved.
Definitely the case. Every Network Rail project has lots of little parts sub contracted to a lot of firms, especially in the design stage, and each firm takes their cut. Then different bits of the building of it are subcontracted, although to a lesser extent. As much as inflation exists and is a factor, part of the reason projects cost so much these days is so many firms are involved.
On many post-privatisation projects you’re 100% correct, however, it was not the case whatsoever with Okehampton. Read up on Project Speed. Phone call, mobilise, deliver. That’s why many in the industry can’t get their heads around the £40m cost.
On many post-privatisation projects you’re 100% correct, however, it was not the case whatsoever with Okehampton. Read up on Project Speed. Phone call, mobilise, deliver. That’s why many in the industry can’t get their heads around the £40m cost.
It doesn't matter whether I did or didn't, what point are you trying to make exactly by saying the comparisons don't work? It depends on what those comparisons are. There are multiple factors and variables involved as has already been made clear.
One is the regular pattern fast service (booked 4 cars), the other is a relief serving all stations. The other is a 2 car, run 6 cars and it’s back 2 locked out due to short platforms.
Regularly get this one often empty, wish it ran a bit later to have more of a night out in bristol (it's the last train back to southampton)
Maybe I've been lucky but the portsmouth to Cardiff trains ive caught have been good recently always 3, 4 or 5 cars though occasionally there cancelled between Portsmouth and Westbury...
Regularly get this one often empty, wish it ran a bit later to have more of a night out in bristol (it's the last train back to southampton)
Maybe I've been lucky but the portsmouth to Cardiff trains ive caught have been good recently always 3, 4 or 5 cars though occasionally there cancelled between Portsmouth and Westbury...
This is slightly off topic, speculative and not even sure if it would actually help, but it would good in a more integrated environment where Salisbury drivers could sign and drive the Portsmouth to Cardiff route.
This is what's particularly unique about the South West though, tourists tend to spend a relatively long time there, and often travel around by train during their stay, acting almost as members of the ordinary population.
Amazingly enough, tourists from the UK and abroad who are visiting the Cotswolds have also been known to take to odd day trip to the likes of Oxford while in the area - just like people visiting other parts of the country may use the train for a day out.
So now who`s complaining of smaller units to Hereford? Why does it not matter about the swelling of the south wests population which is definitely more than just July and August? Incidentally. I wonder how many 2nd homes are in places like Hereford, Worcester and the Cities of the North compared to "resident populations" of Devon and Cornwall as you put it?
Ah jimm I was wondering when I would get your condescending response. Tell you what, come back to me when you actually get south of Oxford and experience the routes to the south west, as opposed to your commuter line to Honeybourne or wherever the hell it is the Cotswold line serves.
I thought you had vowed to never address me directly again?
Needless to say, when you do, it is just revolves around the usual abuse of 'commuters'.
And why are you asking about where the Cotswold Line runs, when you have previously assured us many times that you know all about it? Even if you cannot actually tell us how...
True it gets busier in summer, however, ‘the season’ for tourists is mid-February to end October these days. Then there’s Christmas and New Year, so not much quieter time. Second homes have also grown traffic.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I’d like more trains or lengthened trains too. Guess I’m thinking 150s or 158s on the cheap is the most GWR might get.
The Avanti 221s are a must for XC , though I can see Treasury blocking that one too.
So what - people also visit other parts of the country over an extended period now, and even at Christmas and New Year. TOCs run advertising campaigns encouraging leisure travel year round.
My argument is though that a standee on the Cotswold line will almost certainly not be standing more than an hour, and in most cases much less than that. The difference compared with proper intercity trains to the south west , where a standee may be standing for several hours, and far more likely to have lots of luggage, plus children/elderly, as against the largely commuter passengers on the Cotswold.
As ever I respect your insight CY, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. But then I shouldn't be surprised when we are living in a country where the government feels the need to punish every one of us for its failings to manage the finances of the economy. Yes I'm being soppy, but I can't help getting upset when I see a family with young children on holiday packed into a vestibule for 3 hours. OK, they MAY not be generating as much income as a peak time commuter into Paddington, but that doesn't stop me trying to fight their corner. Sadly this country feels more and more like the Thatcher era of the 1980s , all about money wealth creation and nothing else. Sadly we are stuck with this vile government until January 2025 as well......note to self, stop giving a toss, I have a seat at the front I really shouldn't care!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
But those standees are almost certainly seated after Charlbury. So about 20 minutes. How often have passengers been left behind at Oxford heading west since IETs arrived? Even on a 5 car id say actually being physically unable to board on these services where there is generally no luggage etc to worry about is pretty unheard of. No space for a bike is perhaps more of an issue ill accept.
Edit, I've just re read this , you are probably referring to Eastbound. If so, then at least there is the option of a stopper to Didcot to board an IET or else the half hourly XC to Reading, again to board an IET onto Paddington. Obviously not ideal, but we are talking about a relatively small inconvenience, compared with a passenger heading to Devon or Cornwall who's wait will be at least an hour generally.
Which seems an awfully long way to say, once again, that you don't care about passengers anywhere other than between London and the West Country - whether they are on GWR's 'commuter' routes to places like Gloucestershire, Worcestershire, Bristol and Cardiff - in many cases with journey times comparable to those in the saintly South West and lots of passengers too - or on LNER, where their dozen (because that is all they have in reality) 9-car bi-modes spend most of their lives on nice short commuter runs like London or Leeds to Aberdeen or Inverness. Duties which on your 'it's a very long way to Penzance so it must be a 9-car all the way' methodology must surely qualify for a 9-car set?
Someone must have forgotten to tell all the tourists visiting the Cotswolds that they aren't allowed to bring any luggage with them.
Yes, you raise a good point here and it’s certainly better to short form a Hereford train than a Penzance one. However, it is certainly not an exclusively commuter line, a large proportion of travellers beyond Moreton-in-Marsh are families, and with many services booked as 5 cars it’s often straight to cancellations. Combined with the (relatively) infrequent trains and inadequate buses the Cotswold Line is not one to cancel trains on to bolster the South Western services.
Still, we shouldn’t have to consider this of course, no utilisation of the current fleet is going to be pretty and I fully accept that keeping trains running on the Cotswold Line is going to mean a lot of pain for passengers on the Devon/Cornwall trains. But it would be considerably less than what would result from seeing towns left without any useful outside connections.
Cancellations on the Cotswold Line are rare these days - having a GWR drivers' depot at Worcester has helped massively in this regard and the cancellations that do happen tend to be an issue with the train. Nor is running trains on the Cotswold Line (or services to Cheltenham, Bristol/Weston, Cardif, Swansea/Carmarthen) causing pain to passengers to the West Country.
irish_rail and Master29 like to pretend that I have some pathological hatred of services to the West Country.
What I dislike is the insistence that this route has some superior claim on all rolling stock resources, notably 9-car IETs/Azumas, whether allocated to GWR, or in the hands of LNER, whether or not there is any rational basis for this. And that people using this route are in some way different and have some special status above those on other routes.
Everyone knows that a 9-car train running through Cornwall for much of the year is at least as empty as those at the extremities of other GWR high speed services routes (in spite of the now apparently endless holiday season in the South West filling the trains from 6m until midnight). And never mind the half-hourly service frequency along the main line in Devon and Cornwall that other areas can only dream of having.
And pretty much ever since the services plans for IETs began to emerge six or even years ago, irish_rail has had a fixation on the use of 9-car sets on the Cotswold Line (not forgetting Cheltenham, Bristol and South Wales), no matter that no more than 30% of Cotswold Line services each week were ever projected to get a 9-car IET, with those concentrated in the peak travel periods (both weekday and weekend) or on mid-day workings from London that reached Oxford in the afternoon peak period on their way back, then formed a busy peak working back out of Paddington to the Cotswold Line or somewhere else. And that figure is now down to 20% after the May timetable changes - squadrons of 9-car IETs are not running nose to tail out to Hereford around the clock. Never did, never will. Yet irish_rail is still goes on and on about Hereford and the Cotswold Line as though this is what's happening, for reasons that escape me.
Because the units are now there to do it, thanks to the super fasts getting binned and formation changes on shoulder peak workings. The fleet can be rebalanced to push more 9 cars into Cornwall.
The problem before was justifying the cost of the extra cars for the total GWR 802 fleet. Not a problem now, until those punters come back on the other services.
Which proves what exactly? If you're saying that your "gold plated" Cotswolds area has more or a similar number of 2nd homes compared to Devon and Cornwall please show me some evidence.
irish_rail and Master29 like to pretend that I have some pathological hatred of services to the West Country.
What I dislike is the insistence that this route has some superior claim on all rolling stock resources, notably 9-car IETs/Azumas, whether allocated to GWR, or in the hands of LNER, whether or not there is any rational basis for this. And that people using this route are in some way different and have some special status above those on other routes.
Everyone knows that a 9-car train running through Cornwall for much of the year is at least as empty as those at the extremities of other GWR high speed services routes (in spite of the now apparently endless holiday season in the South West filling the trains from 6m until midnight). And never mind the half-hourly service frequency along the main line in Devon and Cornwall that other areas can only dream of having.
And pretty much ever since the services plans for IETs began to emerge six or even years ago, irish_rail has had a fixation on the use of 9-car sets on the Cotswold Line (not forgetting Cheltenham, Bristol and South Wales), no matter that no more than 30% of Cotswold Line services each week were ever projected to get a 9-car IET, with those concentrated in the peak travel periods (both weekday and weekend) or on mid-day workings from London that reached Oxford in the afternoon peak period on their way back, then formed a busy peak working back out of Paddington to the Cotswold Line or somewhere else. And that figure is now down to 20% after the May timetable changes - squadrons of 9-car IETs are not running nose to tail out to Hereford around the clock. Never did, never will. Yet irish_rail is still goes on and on about Hereford and the Cotswold Line as though this is what's happening, for reasons that escape me.
Now who's using names? You certainly seem to have a pathological dislike for anyone who doesn't agree with your points regarding the said area. Personally we're seeing plenty of 9 car IET's down in Devon and Cornwall so I don't see why why you had to mention my name as such. By the way, I don't mind if you do of course. Of course the Cotswolds and Hereford have plenty of visitors and probably comparable with Devon and Cornwall during quieter months but certainly not now. The Oxford and Cotswolds line was originally getting the 7 extra 9 cars 802`s and originally the Penzance route was never going to see any 9 cars at all. That is what started all this in the first place Irishrail, myself and others pointed out how bloody silly this was going to be in the summer months and lo and behold. Or did none of this happen?
You were throwing figures around and using them for creating a point about comparisons being pointless when you seem to have little knowledge of the Western part of the country, it's rail network and rail usage preferring to use population figures to justify a point.
Which proves what exactly? If you're saying that your "gold plated" Cotswolds area has more or a similar number of 2nd homes compared to Devon and Cornwall please show me some evidence.
Now who's using names? You certainly seem to have a pathological dislike for anyone who doesn't agree with your points regarding the said area. Personally we're seeing plenty of 9 car IET's down in Devon and Cornwall so I don't see why why you had to mention my name as such. By the way, I don't mind if you do of course. Of course the Cotswolds and Hereford have plenty of visitors and probably comparable with Devon and Cornwall during quieter months but certainly not now. The Oxford and Cotswolds line was originally getting the 7 extra 9 cars 802`s and originally the Penzance route was never going to see any 9 cars at all. That is what started all this in the first place Irishrail, myself and others pointed out how bloody silly this was going to be in the summer months and lo and behold. Or did none of this happen?
You were throwing figures around and using them for creating a point about comparisons being pointless when you seem to have little knowledge of the Western part of the country, it's rail network and rail usage preferring to use population figures to justify a point.
I wouldn't even rise to replying. Jimm just cannot accept that passengers standing for 3 hours is worse than passengers standing for half an hour, and until he is able to accept that a full and standing train on the Wofe is worse than a full and standing train on the cotswold we are wasting our time.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
And why are you asking about where the Cotswold Line runs, when you have previously assured us many times that you know all about it? Even if you cannot actually tell us how...
You were throwing figures around and using them for creating a point about comparisons being pointless when you seem to have little knowledge of the Western part of the country, it's rail network and rail usage preferring to use population figures to justify a point.
So what did I ‘make up’? The stats I cited were all correct. And again it wasn’t me who initially raised the comparisons - I was responding to another poster.
Amazingly enough, tourists from the UK and abroad who are visiting the Cotswolds have also been known to take to odd day trip to the likes of Oxford while in the area - just like people visiting other parts of the country may use the train for a day out.
What are you on about?
Cancellations on the Cotswold Line are rare these days - having a GWR drivers' depot at Worcester has helped massively in this regard and the cancellations that do happen tend to be an issue with the train. Nor is running trains on the Cotswold Line (or services to Cheltenham, Bristol/Weston, Cardif, Swansea/Carmarthen) causing pain to passengers to the West Country.
This is what I was saying about cancellations, the only reason for a cancellation on the Cotswold route is usually train related, and trains on the Cotswold Line are trains that could be used to lengthen WoE services, not that I am suggesting they should be used for that, however, which is what I was explaining.
As for the first bit, yes, of course. I have done so myself. But saying that there is a particular tendency for frequent travel like this in one area doesn't mean it never happens elsewhere.
I wouldn't even rise to replying. Jimm just cannot accept that passengers standing for 3 hours is worse than passengers standing for half an hour, and until he is able to accept that a full and standing train on the Wofe is worse than a full and standing train on the cotswold we are wasting our time.
So what - people also visit other parts of the country over an extended period now, and even at Christmas and New Year. TOCs run advertising campaigns encouraging leisure travel year round.
I don't think @jimm is suggesting that but is rightly annoyed about some viewing the Cotswold line as a lower priority and that other services should always be 9 cars at its expense.
A quick look at Plymouth on RTT shows predominantly 9 cars with the odd 10 car while Honeybourne and Gloucester are majority 5 car with the odd 9 car. The Cotswolds have already got the short straw, and have done for years with HSTs always serving Bristol, WoE etc. at the expense of the Cotswolds getting substituted 165/166s.
I don't think @jimm is suggesting that but is rightly annoyed about some viewing the Cotswold line as a lower priority and that other services should always be 9 cars at its expense.
A quick look at Plymouth on RTT shows predominantly 9 cars with the odd 10 car while Honeybourne and Gloucester are majority 5 car with the odd 9 car. The Cotswolds have already got the short straw, and have done for years with HSTs always serving Bristol, WoE etc. at the expense of the Cotswolds getting substituted 165/166s.
Don't forget the Cotswold was 150s and 166s in the 90s. I think it has done rather well out of the past few years and rightly so. A 5 car IET is a big step up on what they had before, perhaps the 2010s there was a bit of overprovision with all the HSTs going down there, but historically, a 5 car IET suits the line well, with standing only ever likely for very short periods. On the WofE , standing is often in excess of 2 to 3 hours. This is morally not acceptable in my view, though I take the point on board that commercially its not always the best thing to do. Id argue there is a fine line between commercial profit and moral provision of an essential service, although I suppose it is a grey area.
So what did I ‘make up’? The stats I cited were all correct. And again it wasn’t me who initially raised the comparisons - I was responding to another poster.
I know. It wasn't so much of the stats as the dynamics involved. i.e changing population and nature of area. West and North Yorkshire doesn't have the same seasonal population shift level and when it does a good percentage would be going to the west anyway.. We can talk about population numbers of the said areas until we are blue in the face. You omitted to mention this. It's all down to ratios.
And that’s the problem, there is not always enough stock of the correct type on most of the Western and Wales areas for all trains and for all stations. Hence the reason that GWR is doing a juggling act.
Arguing on which route/train/station should have a nine car is not helping. IMHO most long distance trains where there is sufficient demand should all be nine car sets. Or maybe if the number of passengers increases, longer still (but not a five+five).
And who cares if a nine car is carrying mostly “fresh air”. Who do you think is in the ECS moves? How full do you think the peak time trains are between Bristol and London Paddington? I was on one the other day and there was five people in the coach I was in…
If we had more OLE over more route miles, the cost of operating a train, whether empty of full would be less compared to an equivalent diesel train.
In my job, longer trains are far better than shorter trains which may be shunted back and forth as they couple or uncouple.
However, until our government stops making a complete mess of the country’s finances, the railways are not going to get much, if any more, money. Indeed, currently the government is actively trying to reduce the level of funding. We are currently going towards storing up lots of trouble for the future.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Except that under government control, it’s not really a normal commercial decision. If a normal commercial company provided a poor customer service, it would either loose customers or find lots of complaints making it into the media and hence tarnishing its reputation.
But as it is now, the government doesn’t care or appear to care.
Don't forget the Cotswold was 150s and 166s in the 90s. I think it has done rather well out of the past few years and rightly so. A 5 car IET is a big step up on what they had before, perhaps the 2010s there was a bit of overprovision with all the HSTs going down there, but historically, a 5 car IET suits the line well, with standing only ever likely for very short periods. On the WofE , standing is often in excess of 2 to 3 hours. This is morally not acceptable in my view, though I take the point on board that commercially its not always the best thing to do. Id argue there is a fine line between commercial profit and moral provision of an essential service, although I suppose it is a grey area.
I see what you mean but why should commercial viability be an acceptable norm when most of the current catastrophe is down to government mismanagement rather than a random element. That's the point many members just don't see. You and I aren't expecting a golden Utopia for the W of E ( although you would think so from some of these replies) just a bit of sense.
I know. It wasn't so much of the stats as the dynamics involved. i.e changing population and nature of area. West and North Yorkshire doesn't have the same seasonal population shift level and when it does a good percentage would be going to the west anyway.. We can talk about population numbers of the said areas until we are blue in the face. You omitted to mention this. It's all down to ratios.
Someone said that the population profile of routes served by LNER was the same as GWR (again not something raised by me). I disagreed. Not sure how that is omitting facts.
I don't think @jimm is suggesting that but is rightly annoyed about some viewing the Cotswold line as a lower priority and that other services should always be 9 cars at its expense.
A quick look at Plymouth on RTT shows predominantly 9 cars with the odd 10 car while Honeybourne and Gloucester are majority 5 car with the odd 9 car. The Cotswolds have already got the short straw, and have done for years with HSTs always serving Bristol, WoE etc. at the expense of the Cotswolds getting substituted 165/166s.
Don't forget the Cotswold was 150s and 166s in the 90s. I think it has done rather well out of the past few years and rightly so. A 5 car IET is a big step up on what they had before, perhaps the 2010s there was a bit of overprovision with all the HSTs going down there, but historically, a 5 car IET suits the line well, with standing only ever likely for very short periods. On the WofE , standing is often in excess of 2 to 3 hours. This is morally not acceptable in my view, though I take the point on board that commercially its not always the best thing to do. Id argue there is a fine line between commercial profit and moral provision of an essential service, although I suppose it is a grey area.
No, 5 cars do not suit the North Cots well - that’s the mistake the Government made when it drew up the IEP timetable and the unit diagrams. When you compared them with the loadings west of Oxford, it was quite apparent they were under providing, hence the need to get them out of trouble by ordering some 802 9 cars in the first batch to recover the situation.
Back in the day, it was quite simple to see which services needed the 9 cars, I just looked at the then current all day loadings. The DfT were misled by MOIRA and its formula based load spreading. They also used a base year way before the demand had shot up to its then levels, so MOIRA also screwed up on a lower base figure! Idiots.
When I speak of making a decision now on commercial grounds, I am talking about the need to maximise the buck for the Treasury, just like we did in BR days. Morality really doesn’t come into it when you are effectively working for those guys. Less important punters stand.
If you were open access, you would either buy more units or jack the fares to price off the excess demand because, with OA, you have to take your business reputation into account when looking at overcrowding.
Don't forget the Cotswold was 150s and 166s in the 90s. I think it has done rather well out of the past few years and rightly so. A 5 car IET is a big step up on what they had before, perhaps the 2010s there was a bit of overprovision with all the HSTs going down there, but historically, a 5 car IET suits the line well, with standing only ever likely for very short periods.
The 9 car units are still needed for peak time loads. I wouldn't be against HS1 style operation with units joined up at peak times and all 9 cars instead of the 9/10 mix on the WoE, particularly if it allowed the kitchens to be removed on the 5 car sets.
I have no idea on the number of units needed for each route so no idea if the numbers match up.
The North Cots was difficult because of some off peak and shoulder peak loadings west of Oxford - posters on here are tending to think only in terms of peak loads when looking at the all the year round base diagrams. There are other trains where you had to go load 9 and then you had to diagram the balances and any inter working with other routes. The North Cots is not quite as simple as it seems.
In other words it's everyone else's fault. The joys of gangland privatisation with middle men taking the cream. The perfect scenario for pull up the ladder jack...At least your posts show us how it really is CL. Inciteful but sad at the same time.
It’s not so much privatisation but it is what happens when the money gets tight with any industry that needs so much government support. It was the same in BR days.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
