Fishguard to get 2 hourly service from September

[Birdbrain]

Looks like good news for Fishguard. Using the 37's and 50's used to be the best way to get some extra day returns to Fishguard

 

[merlodlliw]

There has been a lot of preparation work carried out already. The vegetation has been cut back along the length of the old track bed, and the Cardiff crews have learned the District Line in preparation for the diverted services.

Work as also applied to the Wrexham/Saltney, both are key pinch points. Its up to the politicians to apply pressure.


Bob

 

[Greenback]

That re-doubling, as nice as it sounds could actually be completly un-necessary, and even detremental. Currently I think there are 1.5 trains per hour each way over that section. That is enough to have a service from each of the three west Wales brachces to Swansea every two hours. For Cardiff and Bridgend, it is faster via the Swansea district line, which could be in danger of cutbacks after Gowerton's re-doubled. With the current infrastucture, more 150s/153s and a larger number of 158s replacing our 175 fleet we probablly could have:

• 1tph express alternatly to Pembroke and Milford (via Swansea)
• 0.5tph stopper Swansea to Whitland, splitting to Milford and Tenby
• 0.5tph express Fishguard & Goodwick to Cardiff via Swansea district line
• More services via district line if there's enough demand

It would however be better to have Gowerton doubled, but only if it is not at the cost of the District line. You could then have the same service pattern, but with the stopper hourly from Whitland to Swansea instead of splitting.

I think that doubling the line through Gowerton is vital. It should never have been singled in 1986! The trouble is that any late running impacts on other services, and it is also cited as a reason that more calls cannot be made at Gowerton.

As an example, take the trains from Pembroke Dock. They have to pass at Tenby at the moment, a delay there can cause them to be 5 minutes late (7 today on one service), which emans that by the time they reach the single section east of Llandeilo Jct, they eithe rhave to wait for the xx00 service west to come through, thus meaning that any passnegers for the HST connection at Swansea are delayed, or they cause the westbound service to be delayed. Either way, there are knock on effects, both for the customer and for ATW in more delays further down the line at other single line sections.

Of course, I don't want to the Swansea District Line be downgraded, but at the moment it seems to be used for the oil trains, the Trostre trains, steam specials and the two passenger trains each way. There is a case for some faster direct services to Cardiff, but there is still a healthy market between Swansea (plus Neath and Gowerton) and Llanelli and points further west.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Of course, I don't want to the Swansea District Line be downgraded, but at the moment it seems to be used for the oil trains, the Trostre trains, steam specials and the two passenger trains each way. There is a case for some faster direct services to Cardiff, but there is still a healthy market between Swansea (plus Neath and Gowerton) and Llanelli and points further west.

What I always say to this is there should be no question of diverting any services away from Swansea (High Street) station, any district line services would be additional. However, there are two seperate markets for passengers heading out from west Wales, those headed for Swansea and those headed for Cardiff and beyond (well, that's a gross simplification, but I'm guessing it covers the bulk of scenarios). It may therefore be acceptable to require a change at Swansea on all services via there provided at least an hourly service (equivelent to the current quantity of change-free Carmarthen - Cardiff workings) was put on via the district line. I think it would be better to keep the via Swansea services direct though, as that means you can get away with testing the water with only 2-hourly via the district line instead of hourly and having the district line service miss out Port Talbot (although linespeed increases to save enough time to serve Port Talbot as well would be better).

Does anyone here happen to drive/staff/travel very regularly on the daytime Fishguard service? Particularly if you've ever taken a 158 on it? If so, I'd like to know what you think of the gap between the train and Fishguard & Goodwick's platform, and the curve of it. I've heard claims it might not work, but I don't think the curve of the station is any more severe than Milford Haven, Neath, Paddington, Swansea or Narberth, nor do I think the curve is of equal radius to that of the track, which means the gap will be less at one end of the platform than the other. They also talk about needing to relay the platform surface. Really, if you don't like plants growing on your platform (I think it makes the place more interesting myself) get the weedkiller out. Other than that, in my opinion all you need to do is stick a fence up round the building until the money can be found to restore it (which probablly won't be for many years:cry, open the gates to the site and tell the drivers they are now to stop at the station.

 

[Greenback]

You are right that there are several markets from West Wales. The most important markets from Llanelli, Gowerton and Burry Port are to and from Swansea, though there is a sizeable number of people going further east as well. In contrast, most passengers from west of Carmarthen on the Pembroke Dock line seem to be changing at Swansea - very few seem to exit the station there, most head straight over to platform 2.

I firmly believe that a half hourly service from Swansea to Carmarthen is required. The new timetable allows for soemthing very close to that during peak hours, and is a step in the right direction. 1.5 trains per hour is not enough, in my opinion.

 

[junglejames]

What I always say to this is there should be no question of diverting any services away from Swansea (High Street) station, any district line services would be additional. However, there are two seperate markets for passengers heading out from west Wales, those headed for Swansea and those headed for Cardiff and beyond (well, that's a gross simplification, but I'm guessing it covers the bulk of scenarios). It may therefore be acceptable to require a change at Swansea on all services via there provided at least an hourly service (equivelent to the current quantity of change-free Carmarthen - Cardiff workings) was put on via the district line. I think it would be better to keep the via Swansea services direct though, as that means you can get away with testing the water with only 2-hourly via the district line instead of hourly and having the district line service miss out Port Talbot (although linespeed increases to save enough time to serve Port Talbot as well would be better).

Does anyone here happen to drive/staff/travel very regularly on the daytime Fishguard service? Particularly if you've ever taken a 158 on it? If so, I'd like to know what you think of the gap between the train and Fishguard & Goodwick's platform, and the curve of it. I've heard claims it might not work, but I don't think the curve of the station is any more severe than Milford Haven, Neath, Paddington, Swansea or Narberth, nor do I think the curve is of equal radius to that of the track, which means the gap will be less at one end of the platform than the other. They also talk about needing to relay the platform surface. Really, if you don't like plants growing on your platform (I think it makes the place more interesting myself) get the weedkiller out. Other than that, in my opinion all you need to do is stick a fence up round the building until the money can be found to restore it (which probablly won't be for many years:cry, open the gates to the site and tell the drivers they are now to stop at the station.

Is it a serious proposal to reopen the station? Seems a no brainer to me. There is little point running more trains down to the harbour, if they dont also stop closer to the town.

 

[Rhydgaled]

I firmly believe that a half hourly service from Swansea to Carmarthen is required. The new timetable allows for soemthing very close to that during peak hours, and is a step in the right direction. 1.5 trains per hour is not enough, in my opinion.

I agree, I just don't think it is worth closing, or reducing the capacity of, the district line west Llandarcy.
The plans are here, which say they will be "reviewing the usage of the Swansea District Line,
west of Llandarcy, which requires major structural investment over the next five years" with the possible result of "rationalisation of the Swansea District Line west of Llandarcy" - nothing concrete but the government cutbacks will surely affect Network Rail, making them have to cutback too.

"Rationalisation of the Swansea District Line west of Llandarcy" could mean anything from wider signal spacing (hence reduced capacity) or reduced maintenance (and hence linespeed) to reducing it to single track or closing it altogether. Given that there are several routes radiating from Swansea Docks which could make for a great equivelent of the ValleyLines for Swansea, and that the district line is the only way of achiving the massive time savings needed to beat the M4, any cutbacks that could not be very cheaply reversed are unacceptable.

Is it a serious proposal to reopen the station? Seems a no brainer to me. There is little point running more trains down to the harbour, if they dont also stop closer to the town.

Sounds like they're looking into it. Why WAG rushed into providing extra trains without the station for them to serve I've no idea, maybe they (like me) can see no reason why you can't just fence off the building and throw open the gates. Network Rail seems to be making up expenses (eg. 'we'll have to straighten those curved platforms') just for the fun of it (or to pocket some profits, but they are a nationalised organisation aren't they so that can't be it)).

 

[junglejames]

I agree, I just don't think it is worth closing, or reducing the capacity of, the district line west Llandarcy.
The plans are here, which say they will be "reviewing the usage of the Swansea District Line,
west of Llandarcy, which requires major structural investment over the next five years" with the possible result of "rationalisation of the Swansea District Line west of Llandarcy" - nothing concrete but the government cutbacks will surely affect Network Rail, making them have to cutback too.

"Rationalisation of the Swansea District Line west of Llandarcy" could mean anything from wider signal spacing (hence reduced capacity) or reduced maintenance (and hence linespeed) to reducing it to single track or closing it altogether. Given that there are several routes radiating from Swansea Docks which could make for a great equivelent of the ValleyLines for Swansea, and that the district line is the only way of achiving the massive time savings needed to beat the M4, any cutbacks that could not be very cheaply reversed are unacceptable.



Sounds like they're looking into it. Why WAG rushed into providing extra trains without the station for them to serve I've no idea, maybe they (like me) can see no reason why you can't just fence off the building and throw open the gates. Network Rail seems to be making up expenses (eg. 'we'll have to straighten those curved platforms') just for the fun of it (or to pocket some profits, but they are a nationalised organisation aren't they so that can't be it)).

The curved platforms bit does sound odd. Must be something about it that NR dont like. Without speaking to them though, who knows why they have mentioned the curved platforms.
Just give me a couple of decent reputable men from one of NRs contractors, and I'll have the station ready for action! Wont be costing very much money either!

 

[Rhydgaled]

The curved platforms bit does sound odd. Must be something about it that NR dont like. Without speaking to them though, who knows why they have mentioned the curved platforms.
Just give me a couple of decent reputable men from one of NRs contractors, and I'll have the station ready for action! Wont be costing very much money either!

If I was actually capable of doing anything with bricks, concrete or wood I'd volunteer to help open the station during my summer holiday. I would be utterly useless though.

 

[merlodlliw]

.



Sounds like they're looking into it. Why WAG rushed into providing extra trains without the station for them to serve I've no idea, maybe they (like me) can see no reason why you can't just fence off the building and throw open the gates. Network Rail seems to be making up expenses (eg. 'we'll have to straighten those curved platforms') just for the fun of it (or to pocket some profits, but they are a nationalised organisation aren't they so that can't be it)).[/QUOTE]

Network Rail will make a meal of it, As a not for profit(supposed to be) Company,they have a habit of, inventing every expense possible, as NR are a monopoly shrouded in statutory thinking, nothing will ever be easy, I would suggest £1M plus will be the asking price, pity volunteers are not allowed to
take part. Well Ieuans push for votes in West Wales went tits up,it is typical of his legacy, trains without stations to stop at.

Bob

 

[tbtc]

Why WAG rushed into providing extra trains without the station for them to serve I've no idea

This is the same WAG which pushed for extra capacity on the Aberystwyth line without the extra trains to serve them... :roll:

 

[anthony263]

A consultation document is now on teh FGW coffee shop forum. I am going to fill it in a send it back to them as i am not happy with them re-timing the 15:14 swansealine and extending it to fishguard unless they can say what will replace the 17:10 swanline service (maybe even retiming the 17:55 departure to manchester to leave swansea at 17:45 to cover for it.)

 

[Rhydgaled]

This is the same WAG which pushed for extra capacity on the Aberystwyth line without the extra trains to serve them... :roll:

Well, there was an hourly service by 2011 included in WAG's National Transport Plan, so the infrastructure investment did have a point.

A consultation document is now on teh FGW coffee shop forum. I am going to fill it in a send it back to them as i am not happy with them re-timing the 15:14 swansealine and extending it to fishguard unless they can say what will replace the 17:10 swanline service (maybe even retiming the 17:55 departure to manchester to leave swansea at 17:45 to cover for it.)

Cheers for the tip-off.

Just in case some here don't read FGW Coffee shop, here's what I posted in reply over there:

I don't like the sound of the through trains to Manchester or provision of 175s. I thought they found when looking at a hourly Miford Haven services that the Manchester - Carmarthen couldn't extend further west and I wouldn't want to see the Milford branch loose any of it's current services. Add to that the fact that 175 booked services now see alarming numbers of class 150 substiutions (2 per day on the Holyhead - Cardiffs apparently, and before the new 175 CDF - Holyhead (WAG express 2) started up I saw a 150 on what must of been a train from Milford heading the other way as I was traveling from Cardiff to Haverfordwest) and I think this is a poor desion. Better to wait to December with no service, or a simple 153 shuttle from Fishguard to Carmarthen, to give them time to prepare some LHCS to free up some 158s for an improved Fishguard service from December than cause even more 150s to turn up on express routes. Which trains on the timetable are supposed to be 175s by the way?

I wonder if they will be using the through platforms for the trains that terminate at Whitland or using one of the bays, the Cardigan one needs fixing if they want to use that! Similarly, will they use the short bay at Camarthen at all?

Also, it is as I feared, one of our 5 extra services into Fishguard is essentially an ECS working (05:50 from Camarthen, I'd be supprised if enough passengers want to head west at that time to fill a taxi, let alone pay of any aspect of operating the train). The 20:26 departure from Fishguard is also of little use, but a bit more useful than the morning train I suppose. Is there permissive working at FGH? If they can run-round locos, I'd have thought there would have to be. If so, wouldn't the only problem with stabling the unit overnight at FGH be ensuring that you make sure either the driver or guard on the first and last service have a car driving licence? Alternativly, you could perhaps keep the 20:26 departure and couple the unit to the front of the night boat train on the way in, then leave that unit behind at FGH (provided of course both units are Sprinters).

 

[Greenback]

No units are stabled anywhere in West Wales except Carmarthen. This emans that all the lines require workings stock positioning movements at the start and end of the day's work. I'm not sure it would be feasible to elave stock overnight where there is no staff presence. What about cleaning, watering and fuelling?

 

[Rhydgaled]

No units are stabled anywhere in West Wales except Carmarthen. This emans that all the lines require workings stock positioning movements at the start and end of the day's work. I'm not sure it would be feasible to elave stock overnight where there is no staff presence. What about cleaning, watering and fuelling?

I'd be suprised if facilities for the latter were available at Carmarthen anyway, so would assume you'd need to ensure all units get to spend the next night (or possibly a few nights away, depending on how long a tank of fuel lasts) somewhere else. They do something with a hose, watering perhaps? in the short turn round at Aberystwyth, so could this be done elsewhere during the day if a unit was stabled at Fishguard? Cleaning might be a problem though, didn't think of that.

 

[Greenback]

I'm not sure what exactly happens overnight at Carmarthen, except for the fact that the units are cleaned. Every early morning service has been cleared of litter, with the seat backs and tables wiped down.

 

[merlodlliw]

I'm not sure what exactly happens overnight at Carmarthen, except for the fact that the units are cleaned. Every early morning service has been cleared of litter, with the seat backs and tables wiped down.

A service goes back to the garage at Chester every night from Carmarthen,arrives Chester early next day, presume its one of what is now becoming a rare breed of 175s. Carmarthen is a crew dept, so they may well have cleaning facilities. While we are in West Wales, anyone seen the stock on the new dawn patrol ATW Holyhead to Milford Haven
ex HDD around 0430, arrives Milford 1230 imagine eight hours on a 150 set.


Bob

 

[Rhydgaled]

A service goes back to the garage at Chester every night from Carmarthen,arrives Chester early next day, presume its one of what is now becoming a rare breed of 175s. Carmarthen is a crew dept, so they may well have cleaning facilities. While we are in West Wales, anyone seen the stock on the new dawn patrol ATW Holyhead to Milford Haven
ex HDD around 0430, arrives Milford 1230 imagine eight hours on a 150 set.


Bob

Where do all these 150s come from! Anyway, how do they expect to be able to make some of the new Fishguard sevices 175s to Manchester? I thought the 175 fleet was at, or beyond, full stretch. Also, can anyone shed some light on fueling and anything else that needs doing every day or two? And what about permissive working (or some other trick that's allowed) to allow a unit to be parked at FGH overnight?

 

[Greenback]

A service goes back to the garage at Chester every night from Carmarthen,arrives Chester early next day, presume its one of what is now becoming a rare breed of 175s. Carmarthen is a crew dept, so they may well have cleaning facilities. While we are in West Wales, anyone seen the stock on the new dawn patrol ATW Holyhead to Milford Haven
ex HDD around 0430, arrives Milford 1230 imagine eight hours on a 150 set.


Bob

I saw a Milford service yesterday at 1050 in Llanelli - would that be the early Holyhead train? On this occasion, it was a 175!

 

[merlodlliw]

I saw a Milford service yesterday at 1050 in Llanelli - would that be the early Holyhead train? On this occasion, it was a 175!

Yes that's it, ex Llanelli 1055. Thanks to our man on the spot. I presume it then goes to Masnchester?


Bob
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Where do all these 150s come from! Anyway, how do they expect to be able to make some of the new Fishguard sevices 175s to Manchester? I thought the 175 fleet was at, or beyond, full stretch. Also, can anyone shed some light on fueling and anything else that needs doing every day or two? And what about permissive working (or some other trick that's allowed) to allow a unit to be parked at FGH overnight?

Yes according to ATW staff all 175s are in use except for the one in Alstrom Manchester undergoing repairs.


Bob

 

[Greenback]

Yes that's it, ex Llanelli 1055. Thanks to our man on the spot. I presume it then goes to Masnchester?


Bob

Yes, it will bounce back from Milford on the next departure, which is I believe a Manchester service that gets to Llanelli at 1428.

 

[Pacerpilot]

Does anyone here happen to drive/staff/travel very regularly on the daytime Fishguard service? Particularly if you've ever taken a 158 on it? If so, I'd like to know what you think of the gap between the train and Fishguard & Goodwick's platform, and the curve of it. I've heard claims it might not work, but I don't think the curve of the station is any more severe than Milford Haven, Neath, Paddington, Swansea or Narberth, nor do I think the curve is of equal radius to that of the track, which means the gap will be less at one end of the platform than the other. They also talk about needing to relay the platform surface. Really, if you don't like plants growing on your platform (I think it makes the place more interesting myself) get the weedkiller out. Other than that, in my opinion all you need to do is stick a fence up round the building until the money can be found to restore it (which probablly won't be for many years:cry, open the gates to the site and tell the drivers they are now to stop at the station.

There isnt a problem with the curve of the problem. The problem that exists is simply that the running line isnt where it used to be. It was apparently re-aligned and pushed back towards the cliffs when the access roads to the Ferryport were improved.
Additionally, if 158s are used, they will not call at Clarby Rd (Up direction) due to guaging issues.

 

[anthony263]

Personally i cant really see a class 158 having a problem with the platform at Fishguard & goodwick station if they can get through Narbeth ok.

i have once been on a class 158 to Fishguard hbr back in early 2001 and it didnt have any problems then i did take a photo of it with my 1st digital camera, i will have too see if i still have it.

i am sure i have seen photo online somwhere which shows a class 150 passing through goodwick station , although the track does look to be a in a slightly different position now. If i do find it i will post a link.

 

[OxtedL]

The Fishguard Trains website from earlier in the thread is having some fun with the proposed timetable... http://fishguardtrains.info/

 

[merlodlliw]

The Fishguard Trains website from earlier in the thread is having some fun with the proposed timetable... http://fishguardtrains.info/

full marks to the amateurs for keeping an eye. I thought the new boss of WAGRAIL just moved from Rail Focus would have spotted it.



Bob

 

[anthony263]

yes i spotted that mistake, also that 06:42 from Cardiff to Fishguard/Pembroke dock, actually starts from Hereford at 05:25

 

[Rhydgaled]

There isnt a problem with the curve of the problem. The problem that exists is simply that the running line isnt where it used to be. It was apparently re-aligned and pushed back towards the cliffs when the access roads to the Ferryport were improved.
Additionally, if 158s are used, they will not call at Clarby Rd (Up direction) due to guaging issues.

The track was moved yes, my point was the radius of the curve on the current track alignment does not look like it is equal to the curve of the platform, meaning it should be nearer at one end of the curve. The question was, if you stop at the nearest point to the platform, is the gap small enough?

However, if you look at the fishguard trains site the article suggests that Network Rail will not allow the train to stop to serve the station on the curved bit of the platform. This sounds daft to me, many existing stations have platforms that are more severly curved, however just because this one happens to be closed it cannot be opened because of the curve according to Network Rail.

 

[anthony263]

I do admit network rail are being a bit stupid about the station at Fishguard & goodwick. As for cleaning the station up any chance that volunteers from the local community could be encouraged to help out?

I think it would also provide some more promotion of the service.

 

[Pacerpilot]

I worked through to Fishguard today and had a look out of the droplight whilst passing through Goodwick. The gap between the unit and the former platform certainly appears to be a far larger than I have experienced anywhere else. That was just with my calibrated eyeball though.

 

[Greenback]

Were you caught up in the disruption today? (Sorry, off topic!)