How can Paddington - Penzance services be sped up

[Irascible]

Looking at each leg on 1A88, we have:

• Penzance to Plymouth (79 miles) = 120 mins, including 6 mins at Plymouth
• Plymouth to Exeter (52 miles) = 60 mins, including 3 mins at Exeter
• Exeter to London Paddington (173 miles) = 136 mins, including 4 mins at Reading

I think trying to squeeze extra minutes out of the Exeter-London leg doesn't make much sense, as it is already far quicker on average (76.5 mph vs 52 mph and 39.5 mph). I agree with those others that thing the Cornwall portion needs to be sped up, but I don't think removing stops is the right solution. Would infrastructure upgrades (electrification on grades, linespeed increases) even be able to shave off any time? Would the people of cornwall accept having to get on a local train to reach the London express that no longer stops at their station, which may well increase times and completely drive them away from rail for this jouney? Or would a more resilient, regular and commodious service attract greater numbers of people onto the service from presently-quiet Cornish stations?

Of course, if you make the service from Cornwall too attractive, how do you supply extra demand to Devonians and those thereafter who currently use it and may find their seat taken by someone eating their scones incorrectly )). It's up to GWR/NR to decide who takes priority, I suppose...

The only sane way to speed up Exeter-London is to skip stops - Taunton-Westbury-Reading is fine honestly, it feels quite fast. Even with the lack of motorway, Exeter-Plymouth is rather less competitive, and by the time you get a distance into Cornwall you start understanding why you can still fly from London. On the other hand Plymouth by itself is roughly half the population of Cornwall, so I tend to compare service in Cornwall to going beyond Edinburgh or Glasgow.

As for Devon - we have ( technically ) three routes to London with a choice of two termini, the obviously underused one is begging for investment - if having somewhat problematic catchement areas - and a route to the north which could also stand some investment and which could be used as part of another route to London if that was necessary - I think Taunton-Birmingham needs more discussion honestly, but the topic of this thread is London. And Exeter was rebuilt in a time the railway was in one of it's low patches & lacks some flexibility.

 

[The Ham]

There isn’t a proposed Dawlish Avoiding Line.

Indeed, I was using it as short hand for the versions of the DAL listed in the report of options.

 

[cle]

The only sane way to speed up Exeter-London is to skip stops - Taunton-Westbury-Reading is fine honestly, it feels quite fast. Even with the lack of motorway, Exeter-Plymouth is rather less competitive, and by the time you get a distance into Cornwall you start understanding why you can still fly from London. On the other hand Plymouth by itself is roughly half the population of Cornwall, so I tend to compare service in Cornwall to going beyond Edinburgh or Glasgow.

As for Devon - we have ( technically ) three routes to London with a choice of two termini, the obviously underused one is begging for investment - if having somewhat problematic catchement areas - and a route to the north which could also stand some investment and which could be used as part of another route to London if that was necessary - I think Taunton-Birmingham needs more discussion honestly, but the topic of this thread is London. And Exeter was rebuilt in a time the railway was in one of it's low patches & lacks some flexibility.

Is Taunton-Birmingham a meaningful market? I would have thought the main purpose and demand-generator of that corridor is Bristol itself. And possibly another Bristol-Exeter frequency in future could mop up calls at the newcomer stations, and give a solid 2tph on the route with the Cardiff. It'd cater for all local demand and so allow more skip stops on longer distance if needed. More so if extended to Paignton.

 

[Irascible]

Is Taunton-Birmingham a meaningful market?

Not in itself ( I suspect ) but the SW-NW is, although it's a bit hard to pick out actual traffic because I suspect split ticketing might be ending journeys at Birmingham in the stats when they're really carrying on. Any talk about the route & services tends to get lost in general Woe-is-XC chatter.

 

[irish_rail]

Not in itself ( I suspect ) but the SW-NW is, although it's a bit hard to pick out actual traffic because I suspect split ticketing might be ending journeys at Birmingham in the stats when they're really carrying on. Any talk about the route & services tends to get lost in general Woe-is-XC chatter.

Indeed I suspect split ticketing has a lot to answer for in hiding the statistics of where people are actually travelling. Anyone travelling from South west to North of Birmingham would be mad not to split ticket at likes of Taunton and Cheltenham.

 

[Xavi]

Indeed I suspect split ticketing has a lot to answer for in hiding the statistics of where people are actually travelling. Anyone travelling from South west to North of Birmingham would be mad not to split ticket at likes of Taunton and Cheltenham.

Spot on. Through prices on XC are a joke. Split ticketing also results in other TOCs picking up a share of revenue where they ought not to. Suits the DfT narrative though.

 

[Trainbike46]

The only sane way to speed up Exeter-London is to skip stops - Taunton-Westbury-Reading is fine honestly, it feels quite fast. Even with the lack of motorway, Exeter-Plymouth is rather less competitive, and by the time you get a distance into Cornwall you start understanding why you can still fly from London. On the other hand Plymouth by itself is roughly half the population of Cornwall, so I tend to compare service in Cornwall to going beyond Edinburgh or Glasgow.

As for Devon - we have ( technically ) three routes to London with a choice of two termini, the obviously underused one is begging for investment - if having somewhat problematic catchement areas - and a route to the north which could also stand some investment and which could be used as part of another route to London if that was necessary - I think Taunton-Birmingham needs more discussion honestly, but the topic of this thread is London. And Exeter was rebuilt in a time the railway was in one of it's low patches & lacks some flexibility.

Would you not consider speeding up the service by increasing accelleration through electrification a sane way to speed up journeys?

Not in itself ( I suspect ) but the SW-NW is, although it's a bit hard to pick out actual traffic because I suspect split ticketing might be ending journeys at Birmingham in the stats when they're really carrying on. Any talk about the route & services tends to get lost in general Woe-is-XC chatter.

Most suggestions for changes to XC I see come down to ways to serve LESS of the country, usually in an attempt to provide longer units for certain stretches - which I always find rather defeatist.

It's certainly true that split ticketing is making it harder to see in the statistics what journeys people are actually making, across many operators

 

[stuu]

Indeed I suspect split ticketing has a lot to answer for in hiding the statistics of where people are actually travelling. Anyone travelling from South west to North of Birmingham would be mad not to split ticket at likes of Taunton and Cheltenham.

Bristol is the key split in my experience - tickets to destinations north of Bristol from the SW are noticeably more expensive than splits

 

[irish_rail]

Bristol is the key split in my experience - tickets to destinations north of Bristol from the SW are noticeably more expensive than splits

Question is, can anything be done about it short of banning split ticketing (which would be undesirable and impossible to do anyway). One wonders if Dft actually knew the statistics, maybe we would see destinations like Liverpool or the WCML returned to the XC franchise map....

 

[Trainbike46]

Question is, can anything be done about it short of banning split ticketing (which would be undesirable and impossible to do anyway). One wonders if Dft actually knew the statistics, maybe we would see destinations like Liverpool or the WCML returned to the XC franchise map....

I suspect not, because that would assume DfT means to do the right thing...

 

[Irascible]

Would you not consider speeding up the service by increasing accelleration through electrification a sane way to speed up journeys?

Of course - if it actually does to any meaningful extent. There are drivers here who can fully answer that one - if GWR were still using HSTs the beneftis would be clear, but I think it's rather murkier with the current stock. That's a very narrow view of the benefits of electrification though.

For the record I'm unquestionably in favour of some form of electrification of the entire region. I'm also not convinced I'll be alive to see it.

 

[Trainbike46]

Of course - if it actually does to any meaningful extent. There are drivers here who can fully answer that one - if GWR were still using HSTs the beneftis would be clear, but I think it's rather murkier with the current stock. That's a very narrow view of the benefits of electrification though.

For the record I'm unquestionably in favour of some form of electrification of the entire region. I'm also not convinced I'll be alive to see it.

Obviously faster accelleration is only one of many benefits of electrification.

I thought the 80x were specced to match HST timings on diesel, and are faster on electric - though I could be wrong there.

@irish_rail In your experience, do the 80x accelerate differently when on electric versus when on diesel?

 

[irish_rail]

Obviously faster accelleration is only one of many benefits of electrification.

I thought the 80x were specced to match HST timings on diesel, and are faster on electric - though I could be wrong there.

@irish_rail In your experience, do the 80x accelerate differently when on electric versus when on diesel?

80x are very quick on electric, on diesel they are reasonably quick to about 50mph ish then they tail off. Acceleration on diesel above 80ish is very sluggish, whereas on electric it is quick throughout the speed range.

An 80x on diesel will accelerate quicker than a HST up to about 40mph, but after that the HST will be faster and accelerate better, especially at the higher end of the speed range. So in Cornwall for example, 80x are a reasonable replacement speed wise for HSTs where speeds are low, but on the B and H , the HSTs where better performers than 80x by far.

 

[Trainbike46]

80x are very quick on electric, on diesel they are reasonably quick to about 50mph ish then they tail off. Acceleration on diesel above 80ish is very sluggish, whereas on electric it is quick throughout the speed range.

Thank you

That does sound like electrification at key places could help reduce journey times!

 

[Irascible]

That it does - probably all the way to Exeter. I had thought the GW IETs were a little better than that, but then again they don't seem to have all their installed power available a lot of the time anyway.

 

[devon_belle]

So would electrification on hills and around stations (for acceleration benefits) be a good first step?

 

[AndrewE]

So would electrification on hills and around stations (for acceleration benefits) be a good first step?

I would imagine that the logistics are such that when you are doing an area you might as well do the whole line. Hence the prioritisation of lines (e.g. Bristol to Plymouth) or areas (Bristol conurbation and a bit wider.)

 

[cle]

I would imagine that the logistics are such that when you are doing an area you might as well do the whole line. Hence the prioritisation of lines (e.g. Bristol to Plymouth) or areas (Bristol conurbation and a bit wider.)

In this case, the furthest it goes is Newbury really. The Chippenham situation is its own drama and doing the Bristol area would relegate this project.

Bristol doesn't connect to anything electric else other than Parkway - but that has no real service. Whereas going via Bedwyn/Taunton would mop up the Bedwyn services as well as a large chunk of the route to Exeter. It's windier - the Bristol routes are very straight and the 125 sections are largely all wired.

 

[Irascible]

IMO Bristol TM ought to be part of extending the wires on the cross-country route, but on the other hand I'd just like the GWML job finished.

Wiring the B&H might pick up the stone traffic ( I can't remember where it all ends up at ) so it'd at least not just be about passengers like upgrading the entire WoE route. On the other hand if Paddington is already getting full then making the route more popular is actually a problem

We've talked about the state of Exeter's signalling a few times over the last couple of years, but what state is Taunton in? that was done about the same time.

 

[devon_belle]

We've talked about the state of Exeter's signalling a few times over the last couple of years

out of interest could you link these threads, if it's not too much trouble? Slightly OT I'm just curious.

 

[Irascible]

out of interest could you link these threads, if it's not too much trouble? Slightly OT I'm just curious.

Oof, if I can remember! iirc the summary is Exeter area's equipment manufacturer went out of business very shortly after the kit was installed, and it's not flexible enough to allow any additional signalling ( as opposed to reconfiguring ). Exeter's track rationalisation in the 80s has left it with some awkward inflexibilities and of course the kit 40 years old too. Pretty sure one of the local S&T staff can give a better summary.

 

[cle]

IMO Bristol TM ought to be part of extending the wires on the cross-country route, but on the other hand I'd just like the GWML job finished.

Wiring the B&H might pick up the stone traffic ( I can't remember where it all ends up at ) so it'd at least not just be about passengers like upgrading the entire WoE route. On the other hand if Paddington is already getting full then making the route more popular is actually a problem

We've talked about the state of Exeter's signalling a few times over the last couple of years, but what state is Taunton in? that was done about the same time.

Bristol is its own crazy, similar to Oxford. But I agree that Chippenham-Bristol TM at bare minimum should be done, but to Parkway / Filton also. The superfasts are dead for now, and via Bath is generally more useful - but the odd peak one-off might be worth revisiting in future.

 

[Anonymous10]

Interesting because I've always thought of this as a route where potential time savings could be made, but how? Some people will be along to point out the conflicts on the route I haven't had a chance to look at yet, and why most of these probably cannot be done, but initial thoughts simply based off of 1A84 as the quoted train and not yet researching further:

-There is a 5 min dwell at Reading. This could be reduced but probably has conflicting moves
-You could reduce the number of stops along the whole route. Since we're in the speculative section, you could reduce it drastically to call Penzance - Truro - Plymouth - Exeter - Reading - London. However, this removes some useful interchange stations, such as St Erth, Par, Liskeard and Newton Abbot. Add those in and the only stops you are omitting are Camborne, Redruth, St Austell, Totnes and Taunton. For the Cornwall stations at least this removes the ability to maintain a clockface timetable. I would actually quite like to see an express of this kind but again some of the intermittent stops are useful
-You could I suppose take out the performance allowances. However, along the entire route this is only 8 mins of performance allowance across 5h7m - EMR trains between St Pancras and Luton Airport Parkway on a Sunday morning have more than this just between their first two stations! If you take out performance allowance this train will regularly be late into Paddington
-Infrastructure wise, the section between Exeter and Plymouth isn't the fastest. I haven't been following the Tavistock developments but diverting another way I don't think will reduce these times considerably?

There's at least one member on here driving this route who I'd be interested to hear from as to whether more could be done. The most important thing right now I think is to ensure that capacity between PAD and Plymouth at the very least is maintained at a level suitable for the number of travellers, so I imagine speeding up this service is not at the top of the priorities list.

I would argue it should stop Penzance, St Erth, Truro, Par, Liskeard, Plymouth, Exeter (connections similar to Newton Abbot) Tiverton Parkway and Taunton then non stop to London, with a two hourly service for Bodmin Parkway. I think this would give a good level of connection and service to key stations while speeding the services up to a degree.

 

[class26]

I would argue it should stop Penzance, St Erth, Truro, Par, Liskeard, Plymouth, Exeter (connections similar to Newton Abbot) Tiverton Parkway and Taunton then non stop to London, with a two hourly service for Bodmin Parkway. I think this would give a good level of connection and service to key stations while speeding the services up to a degree.

Missing out St Austell ?

 

[Anonymous10]

Missing out St Austell ?

Sorry yes I would miss St austell same as Camborne and Redruth. I believe leaving the Plymouth to penzance along with cardiff penzance trains to cover these would provide a semi reliable service. Alternatively a alternating fast and slow service could be introduced.

 

[brad465]

If/when Didcot-Swindon is quadrupled, and if Chippenham-Trowbridge is doubled, could some of the Mendip freight go that way to allow faster running via Newbury through easier pathing, or is Swindon-Chippenham and Trowbridge-Westbury busy enough? Either that or put some dynamic loops in where the space exists, such as greatly lengthening the Woodborough loops in a similar way to the loops between Didcot and Swindon currently.

 

[cle]

Sorry yes I would miss St austell same as Camborne and Redruth. I believe leaving the Plymouth to penzance along with cardiff penzance trains to cover these would provide a semi reliable service. Alternatively a alternating fast and slow service could be introduced.

St Austell is busier than Par and Newquay put together. And busier than Bodmin, or about the same as Liskeard + Looe. This is a miss.

 

[AM9]

St Austell is busier than Par and Newquay put together. And busier than Bodmin, or about the same as Liskeard + Looe. This is a miss.

But what proportion of St Austell traffic needs direct trains to London or Reading compared to Par and Liskeard?

 

[Anonymous10]

St Austell is busier than Par and Newquay put together. And busier than Bodmin, or about the same as Liskeard + Looe. This is a miss.

My logic was to provide connectivity to the branches for the summer season. Worth remembering the service in Cornwall is still quite good.

 

[cle]

But what proportion of St Austell traffic needs direct trains to London or Reading compared to Par and Liskeard?

I have no idea. Why does it matter. Everywhere in Cornwall is a railhead. And often the branches aren't even used by Newquay and Looe passengers - taxis/pick ups prevail. The Newquay branch is painfully slow especially. Falmouth is much better used - because of the student (i.e. year round demand) - vs the summer season, which we can't fully scope a mainline railway for.

But yes that has more of a local market, like Truro and they most likely head to London over Cardiff.