New Go-op train service between Swindon, Taunton and Weston-super-Mare approved by ORR - Access Rights now lapsed

[pokemonsuper9]

According to local Wiltshire newspaper (whose accuracy tends to be based on what they have been given and told, rather than investigated by old school reporter), have acquired some 769s

I would call their source into question.

than the two-car Class 150s previously proposed.

They were proposing 153s.

The Class 769 is a bi-mode train capable of operating at up to 90mph, and has four carriages, offering much more space both for passengers, bicycles and freight.

They can go at up to 100mph.

Go-op chair Alex Lowrie said: “One of the great strengths of the class 769 is that it can take advantage of renewable electricity to deliver zero emission transport on a significant part of our route.

“If the overhead line network is extended beyond Chippenham, or we get battery charging facilities in Somerset, we can get the benefits straight away.

Adding a 3rd voltage method to the already unreliably 769 is probably not a wise option

Go-op plans to start in December 2025 at the earliest and must do so no later than December 2026 in order to use the capacity that the independent safety and economic regulator for Britain’s railways, ORR, has granted.

That would be suprisingly fast.

 

[PG]

According to local Wiltshire newspaper (whose accuracy tends to be based on what they have been given and told, rather than investigated by old school reporter), have acquired some 769s


Suggests need to demonstrate to regulator by November it can proceed.

https://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/ne...e-train-operator-makes-launch-plans-progress/

Do the ORR have form for extending deadlines given in Track Access Applications? I'm guessing this is likely to be their (Go-op's) next ploy...

 

[Harpo]

Hopefully the route map will include Glastonbury symbolised by a mushroom. Magic!

 

[overthere 2]

Go-op Co-operative Limited​

10th May 2025

May: our last month on Crowdfunder​

First, let me thank you once again for showing your support for Go-op; and apologise for the length of time we (or rather, Crowdfunder) have held your funds for.

By now, you will have guessed that we are having real difficulty bringing this raise to a successful conclusion. Despite having fantastic publicity in December and January, exceeding all our expectations, the level of support has actually been much less than other community share issues have achieved.

There are many possible reasons for this. Ours is not a project that relies on capital assets; the relationship of open access operators to Great British Railways is complex and still a little unclear; we did not have the resources to sustain our social media presence; many investors have a reduced appetite for risk at present; there may be many other reasons. If you are already a Go-op member, having joined through our website, you'll be getting a newsletter that goes into more detail about this.

Our response has been to explore alternative methods that could be combined with Crowdfunder to meet the target - partnerships with other operators, more attractive terms for very large investors (there will be a new post on our website about this), and more active involvement in capital investments such as new stations. It is still possible that one or more of these may lead to a breakthrough in the next few weeks. We will be meeting with our members regularly to maintain their support for our plans.

However, it is increasingly likely that we will be obliged to close the offer without reaching our target, return all pledged funds, and put the project on pause while we reconsider our way forward. We would love you to continue to follow developments, and there is no better way than joining Go-op as a member (or you are welcome to check in by email for news at any time). Please be patient with us for another month, and be assured that we won't prolong the process unnecessarily.

Yours, Alex Lawrie

Chair, Go-op Co-op

Its a shame they did not make it as I think particularly if they had added Minehead to there plans then I think it might have worked.

However I may be clutching at straws but there "could" be a small ray of hope.

First of all they say "they are exploring alternative methods which includes partnerships with other operators". The thing is the route they propose is pretty much exclusively GWR territory so even if it didnt get anywhere they must have had at least some discussions with GWR therefore maybe the other operators is WSR for use of there tracks and XCountry for connecting services.

Secondly they say "more active involvement in capital investments such as new stations" but as far as I am aware at no point have station issues been raised, so it begs the question: That if you are struggling to raise the funds for the things you have got to do then why would you then want to spend even more money on things you dont?

The possible answer is to bring the WSR stations up to National rail standards signage, lighting etc. If this is the case then I hope a common sense approach is taken and instead of insisting potentially thousands of pounds are spent up front and then finding there is no demand so the money is wasted the bare minimum is spent on a two year experiment and if it is a success then the full alterations can be done.

 

[DDB]

Its a shame they did not make it as I think particularly if they had added Minehead to there plans then I think it might have worked.

However I may be clutching at straws but there "could" be a small ray of hope.

First of all they say "they are exploring alternative methods which includes partnerships with other operators". The thing is the route they propose is pretty much exclusively GWR territory so even if it didnt get anywhere they must have had at least some discussions with GWR therefore maybe the other operators is WSR for use of there tracks and XCountry for connecting services.

Secondly they say "more active involvement in capital investments such as new stations" but as far as I am aware at no point have station issues been raised, so it begs the question: That if you are struggling to raise the funds for the things you have got to do then why would you then want to spend even more money on things you dont?

The possible answer is to bring the WSR stations up to National rail standards signage, lighting etc. If this is the case then I hope a common sense approach is taken and instead of insisting potentially thousands of pounds are spent up front and then finding there is no demand so the money is wasted the bare minimum is spent on a two year experiment and if it is a success then the full alterations can be done.

No in messages to shareholders they think/have been told it would be easier to raise large suns of money if more was being spent on physical assets which have more obvious value rather than services access rights etc so it is building new stations on the national network. I assume they would be entitled to a return from any service using them if they built them or be able to sell them to the national network.

 

[duffield]

Its a shame they did not make it as I think particularly if they had added Minehead to there plans then I think it might have worked.

However I may be clutching at straws but there "could" be a small ray of hope.

First of all they say "they are exploring alternative methods which includes partnerships with other operators". The thing is the route they propose is pretty much exclusively GWR territory so even if it didnt get anywhere they must have had at least some discussions with GWR therefore maybe the other operators is WSR for use of there tracks and XCountry for connecting services.

Secondly they say "more active involvement in capital investments such as new stations" but as far as I am aware at no point have station issues been raised, so it begs the question: That if you are struggling to raise the funds for the things you have got to do then why would you then want to spend even more money on things you dont?

The possible answer is to bring the WSR stations up to National rail standards signage, lighting etc. If this is the case then I hope a common sense approach is taken and instead of insisting potentially thousands of pounds are spent up front and then finding there is no demand so the money is wasted the bare minimum is spent on a two year experiment and if it is a success then the full alterations can be done.

The WSR? There's no serious prospect of running services to Minehead, even as an experiment. Apart from anything else, it's a long slow line (probably more than two hours up and back, so needing extra units), and paying for all the signalboxes/crossings to be manned would be very expensive (the WSR volunteers are not going to be willing or able to do this for free). And the WSR would not want even the minimal changes to the stations needed to operate a national rail service - it's a *heritage* railway, it would spoil the atmosphere. Plus the heritage service operates on most days for parts of the year, so this would clash with the national rail service, with the line being single track. Finally there's the issue that currently for a national rail service to run onto the WSR a token has to be sent by taxi to Taunton!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The WSR? There's no serious prospect of running services to Minehead, even as an experiment. Apart from anything else, it's a long slow line (probably more than two hours up and back, so needing extra units), and paying for all the signalboxes/crossings to be manned would be very expensive (the WSR volunteers are not going to be willing or able to do this for free). And the WSR would not want even the minimal changes to the stations needed to operate a national rail service - it's a *heritage* railway, it would spoil the atmosphere. Plus the heritage service operates on most days for parts of the year, so this would clash with the national rail service, with the line being single track. Finally there's the issue that currently for a national rail service to run onto the WSR a token has to be sent by taxi to Taunton!

Frankly if the line becomes part of the national rail network (it won’t), it no longer matters what the WSR want, nor are NR services dictated by when and where WSR services currently run, because it will now be part of the national rail network and that will 100% become the main priority over a tourist attraction service.

 

[duffield]

Frankly if the line becomes part of the national rail network (it won’t), it no longer matters what the WSR want, nor are NR services dictated by when and where WSR services currently run, because it will now be part of the national rail network and that will 100% become the main priority over a tourist attraction service.

I'd assumed that the post I quoted was talking about an agreement with the WSR rather than it becoming part of the national network as in state owned. We're talking about Go-op, not a GBR or soon-to-be GBR service, so while the government could at least conceivably, in theory, "nationalise" a heritage railway for GBR to run services on it, it definitely would never "nationalise" the WSR so an open access operator can run services on it. So the only route would be for Go-op to come to an arrangement with the WSR, but that would then hit the barrier of heritage incompatibility amongst the other obstacles outlined.

 

[brad465]

The WSR? There's no serious prospect of running services to Minehead, even as an experiment. Apart from anything else, it's a long slow line (probably more than two hours up and back, so needing extra units), and paying for all the signalboxes/crossings to be manned would be very expensive (the WSR volunteers are not going to be willing or able to do this for free). And the WSR would not want even the minimal changes to the stations needed to operate a national rail service - it's a *heritage* railway, it would spoil the atmosphere. Plus the heritage service operates on most days for parts of the year, so this would clash with the national rail service, with the line being single track. Finally there's the issue that currently for a national rail service to run onto the WSR a token has to be sent by taxi to Taunton!

Minehead would have to be in really high demand to warrant the whole WSR becoming National Rail, and would likely involve almost all intermediate stations closing (like how none of the intermediate stations on the Dartmoor line were retained in 2021). At a stretch one of Williton or Blue Anchor may survive for the sake of having a passing loop and serving the holiday parks in that area.

I think there is a value in Bishops Lydeard-Taunton becoming NR however: some trains can turn around there instead of Taunton (which would block a platform) and housing developments in this area and Norton Fitzwarren can be served, reducing traffic into and out of Taunton. Somerset Council certainly think this is of value as they've tried to get approval, though are not having much success as things stand.

 

[Harpo]

Go-Op has dug a big enough hole already without adding Minehead to its fantasies.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Perhaps they could try a Radstock service!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Minehead would have to be in really high demand to warrant the whole WSR becoming National Rail, and would likely involve almost all intermediate stations closing (like how none of the intermediate stations on the Dartmoor line were retained in 2021). At a stretch one of Williton or Blue Anchor may survive for the sake of having a passing loop and serving the holiday parks in that area.

You’re comparing apples with oranges. Sampford Courtenay is hardly a shining example of a well used station. It’s also one singular station. It’s also extremely close to where they wanted to put a new parkway station anyway.

 

[SirDanielGooch]

The 769s are better suited to the line speeds of the routes they’re proposing at least, so that’s good.

All a bit pointless unless £2.5m magically appears. I still hope this happens as it would be a great benefit for this local area, but I’d be utterly shocked if it did.

 

[Starmill]

They were proposing 153s.

Actually, they were looking at a choice of different Sprinter options, and one of them was an ex TfW class 150.

What might our trains look like? One option we're looking at very seriously is class 150 units, currently in service with Transport for Wales but due to come off lease in about a year. These have the advantage of being economical to run and compliant with our route. They are very much a tried and tested option - not perhaps the modern, zero-emissions option we aspire to, but a good place to begin.

See Mark Coyle FCIRO’s activity on LinkedIn

Sign in or join now to see posts like this one and more.

www.linkedin.com

 

[Towers]

Actually, they were looking at a choice of different Sprinter options, and one of them was an ex TfW class 150.

See Mark Coyle FCIRO’s activity on LinkedIn

Sign in or join now to see posts like this one and more.

www.linkedin.com

As in the ones that are life expired and being withdrawn when a major overhaul is due?!

 

[dgl]

As in the ones that are life expired and being withdrawn when a major overhaul is due?!

And as I understand need a serious overhaul to remain in service, with a lot of rot removal that I think has not been done to the level the GWR units have been.

 

[Killingworth]

And as I understand need a serious overhaul to remain in service, with a lot of rot removal that I think has not been done to the level the GWR units have been.

These rolling stock plans to run a new service with a changing variety of clapped out units gives a brave proposition a look of farce, a triumph of optimism over practical operational realities.

The 21st Century equivalent of the Titfield Thunderbolt service under construction. It could make a good film.

 

[dgl]

These rolling stock plans to run a new service with a changing variety of clapped out units gives a brave proposition a look of farce, a triumph of optimism over practical operational realities.

The 21st Century equivalent of the Titfield Thunderbolt service under construction. It could make a good film.

Gives some parallels to the dodgy bus operators of old, routes that a big operator couldn't make pay, run with vehicles that would have been considered life expired a good few years ago who then run the service for a couple of months, realise it's not viable and just shut up shop with little warning.
Of course you'd hope the likes of Go-Op are a bit more professional but once the money runs out that's it, drivers, maintenence, track access charges and diesel are not free and will need paying for.

 

[Bertie the bus]

All a bit pointless unless £2.5m magically appears. I still hope this happens as it would be a great benefit for this local area, but I’d be utterly shocked if it did.

They don't need £2.5 million. They needed £2.5 million by March. In total they need around £7-8 million to begin operating services.

 

[Goop Coop]

Gives some parallels to the dodgy bus operators of old, routes that a big operator couldn't make pay, run with vehicles that would have been considered life expired a good few years ago who then run the service for a couple of months, realise it's not viable and just shut up shop with little warning.
Of course you'd hope the likes of Go-Op are a bit more professional but once the money runs out that's it, drivers, maintenence, track access charges and diesel are not free and will need paying for.

Yes, these are all real challenges that face us - a good brisk tour of our chamber of horrors.
Some of the risks that people have highlighted on this thread are, I should say, risks that we are very happy to take. Yes, we may fail to raise the money required and have to retreat in embarrassment. Yes, we may end up operating with rolling stock that some would feel looks antiquated or eccentric. Yes, we may launch with a route that serves a niche market and accounts for only a tiny fraction of passengers on the network. All of these things we would consider entirely honourable consequences of what is by any standards a challenging thing to attempt; they're also all things we can learn from and hope to improve upon.
'Shutting up shop with little warning' is, however, in a different category. Along with compromised safety or unreliable operations, it's an unacceptable outcome - we'd rather not launch at all than launch an untrustworthy service. Without trust, we've got nothing. This is not something we're doing to prove a point, or indulge a whim: we intend to make a lasting improvement on transport in Somerset and Wiltshire, and if we aren't 100% confident that'll be the outcome we will leave the tracks clear for someone else to try.
So yes, professionalism really does matter to us. We are creative and ambitious in trying to solve problems around costs, engineering and timetabling, but we absolutely are not crossing our fingers and hoping for the best. £2.6M may meet the threshold set by the ORR to prove we can run the first train, but we are fully aware that it is, at most, just half of the total capital requirement once early years losses are accounted for. We need to not only meet that target, but also have a realistic plan for where the rest is going to come from as well.

 

[Class15]

Yes, these are all real challenges that face us - a good brisk tour of our chamber of horrors.
Some of the risks that people have highlighted on this thread are, I should say, risks that we are very happy to take. Yes, we may fail to raise the money required and have to retreat in embarrassment. Yes, we may end up operating with rolling stock that some would feel looks antiquated or eccentric. Yes, we may launch with a route that serves a niche market and accounts for only a tiny fraction of passengers on the network. All of these things we would consider entirely honourable consequences of what is by any standards a challenging thing to attempt; they're also all things we can learn from and hope to improve upon.
'Shutting up shop with little warning' is, however, in a different category. Along with compromised safety or unreliable operations, it's an unacceptable outcome - we'd rather not launch at all than launch an untrustworthy service. Without trust, we've got nothing. This is not something we're doing to prove a point, or indulge a whim: we intend to make a lasting improvement on transport in Somerset and Wiltshire, and if we aren't 100% confident that'll be the outcome we will leave the tracks clear for someone else to try.
So yes, professionalism really does matter to us. We are creative and ambitious in trying to solve problems around costs, engineering and timetabling, but we absolutely are not crossing our fingers and hoping for the best. £2.6M may meet the threshold set by the ORR to prove we can run the first train, but we are fully aware that it is, at most, just half of the total capital requirement once early years losses are accounted for. We need to not only meet that target, but also have a realistic plan for where the rest is going to come from as well.

You have a great vision and I very much hope you can achieve it. I don’t agree with many of the comments by others in this thread.

 

[BRX]

Yes, these are all real challenges that face us - a good brisk tour of our chamber of horrors.
Some of the risks that people have highlighted on this thread are, I should say, risks that we are very happy to take. Yes, we may fail to raise the money required and have to retreat in embarrassment. Yes, we may end up operating with rolling stock that some would feel looks antiquated or eccentric. Yes, we may launch with a route that serves a niche market and accounts for only a tiny fraction of passengers on the network. All of these things we would consider entirely honourable consequences of what is by any standards a challenging thing to attempt; they're also all things we can learn from and hope to improve upon.
'Shutting up shop with little warning' is, however, in a different category. Along with compromised safety or unreliable operations, it's an unacceptable outcome - we'd rather not launch at all than launch an untrustworthy service. Without trust, we've got nothing. This is not something we're doing to prove a point, or indulge a whim: we intend to make a lasting improvement on transport in Somerset and Wiltshire, and if we aren't 100% confident that'll be the outcome we will leave the tracks clear for someone else to try.
So yes, professionalism really does matter to us. We are creative and ambitious in trying to solve problems around costs, engineering and timetabling, but we absolutely are not crossing our fingers and hoping for the best. £2.6M may meet the threshold set by the ORR to prove we can run the first train, but we are fully aware that it is, at most, just half of the total capital requirement once early years losses are accounted for. We need to not only meet that target, but also have a realistic plan for where the rest is going to come from as well.

I wish you the best of luck, and hope you succeed. If you do, it will give others the confidence to try similar initiatives in other places. If you don't, then at least you tried.

 

[tfw756rider]

Working with old rolling stock

Yes! You actually explicitly said old and not "older" or "legacy". I like this operator already.

 

[overthere 2]

The WSR? There's no serious prospect of running services to Minehead, even as an experiment. Apart from anything else, it's a long slow line (probably more than two hours up and back, so needing extra units), and paying for all the signalboxes/crossings to be manned would be very expensive (the WSR volunteers are not going to be willing or able to do this for free). And the WSR would not want even the minimal changes to the stations needed to operate a national rail service - it's a *heritage* railway, it would spoil the atmosphere. Plus the heritage service operates on most days for parts of the year, so this would clash with the national rail service, with the line being single track. Finally there's the issue that currently for a national rail service to run onto the WSR a token has to be sent by taxi to Taunton!

I would say there is a "great" prospect if the relevant stake holders came together: WSR - track, GO-OP - rolling stock/on train crew, GWR/X Country - connections, Network Rail - Signalman and other staff if necessary, Butlins - publicity/encouraging its customers to travel by train, Local Councils/authorities - championing the cause and somebody to put up a modest amount of cash (if needed) - Government most likely?


The rolling stock that would be used is relatively new so it would have better acceleration and braking than a steam engine or an old diesel so could traverse the line quicker and while Im not saying that you run at 60 - 80 mph Im sure a compromise could be found so trains could run at 40mph also as I said in post #356 the trains would only stop at a few WSR stations so I reckon it would be a competitive alternative to the car


Depending on the timetable you might only need "one engine in steam" so the line could be operated as just one long siding so no need for signalman, if however you do want to run more than one train then either you offer to pay current volunteer WSR signalman to work mornings or evenings on a two year contract or get some Network Rail signalman to do it.


If after for two years it is loss making then scrap it but if it is breaking even or making a profit then see about automating so from start of service till 10 and from 17.00 till end of service it is all automated but from 10.00 till 17.00 you have a bloke pulling levers so it keeps the visitors happy.


Next time you visit a stately home or any other historic building open to the public look around FORENSICALLY and after a while you will start to notice the Fire Exit signs, Fire extinguishers and all the other host of Health and Safety stuff you need to have to be open to the general public. The reason why I emphasize forensically is because a way has been found to put in the stuff that is needed but at the same time keep everything the same as it would have been in the past.


Also I saw a TV show where the presenter went to this castle and interviewed the bloke who owned it and he said that back in the day his Dad/Grandad brought the castle and literally threw the doors open to the public so he had people walking along the ramparts where they could have fallen off or going to the top off towers where they could have toppled over the edge. Obviously today with modern H a S there is now way that could carry on so now they have a simple single metal rail along the ramparts and at the top of the towers and 99% of the visitors would either not notice or assume the railing was there when the castle was built.


My point is that WSR and Network Rail could work together to do only what is absolutely necessary while at the same time keeping the atmosphere so the vast majority of visitors would not even notice (for example if lighting is needed then just put in some Victorian lampstands) also the modern stuff would only be at a couple of stations so the rest could keep the oldy woldy "atmosphere".


Also I while ago the WSR was on the verge of financial collapse and while I dont know what there finances are like today Im guessing they are still watching the pennies. So, Im not saying that WSR let GO-OP or anybody else use their infrastructure for free what I am saying is that WSR have a "pile of old rope" (track,stations) they are not doing anything with most of the time so if somebody wants to "rent" a bit of that rope why not let them or take a cut of the tickets sold and then plough it back in to the railway so they have a railway in the first place.


Post #356 covers this, The public service would be mornings and evenings only. But if WSR do want to do occasional evening stuff then a rail replacement bus every so often would not be the worst compromise in the world.


Having to take a token to Taunton is not ideal but as I say live with it for two years and if it is a success do whatever you need to do with the signaling so trains can rum seemlessly between WSR and Network rail.


This could also be a good earner for GO-OP because all over the country there are heritage railways that are either connected or want to extend to connect with the national network but would not want the hassle and hoops to jump through/be able to run there own passenger service so what GO-OP could do is be one stop shop for a heritage railway by offering a train, crew and doing all the paperwork for them in one package with the heritage railway just sitting back and collecting rent or a cut of the tickets.


Finally, virtually all heritage railways were set up initially with the idea of restoring passenger services and possibly freight and while most have had to modify there plans and chase the tourist market to cover day to day running costs the idea/hope is still there also the amount of threads where people talk about how much they wish So and So heritage railway would extend to meet up with the network is infinite, the problem is that where ever you came from on this issue you always run into the same 5 letter word and that word is MONEY or to be more precise lack of.


So if this idea was tried and worked then it could be rolled out across the country for example Ive already said about Swanage Swanage Railway recruiting a Chief Executive | RailUK Forums post #107 but also who fancys a steam/heritage diesel ride from Broadway to Honeybourne on an extension payed for by a Broadway or possibly Toddington, Winchcombe to Birmingham commuter GWSR Broadway to Honeybourne redundant track bed | RailUK Forums or being able to arrive on a steam train at Padstow payed for by a Bodmin - Plymouth/London commuter?

 

[Bald Rick]

If after for two years it is loss making then scrap it

And who picks up the losses?

 

[30907]

Post #356 covers this, The public service would be mornings and evenings only. But if WSR do want to do occasional evening stuff then a rail replacement bus every so often would not be the worst compromise in the world.....

Mornings and evenings only? Look at the timetable of the 28 bus and it's more frequent during the day than in the "peaks"! Which suggest to me that the demand for a commuter-type service on the WSR is limited.

As you said in post #356, a key target would be longer-distance (Butlins) holiday traffic, and those customers need to leave Minehead around 1000 and arrive there from 1600 which doesn't fit well with the heritage operation. The catchment area for day-trips to the North Somerset coast is limited (Greater Bristol would be the nearest conurbation, then Exeter - but Exeter has Torbay on the doorstep!)
Not saying it couldn't be done - but the Swanage struggled to find a sensible timetable to fit the needs of day-trippers and long-distance travel.

As my avatar might show, I am reasonably familiar with the KWVR which of all the heritage lines could plausibly offer a commuter service and already has a main-line connection. It hasn't been seriously suggested for years AFAIK, certainly not from within, despite the development of housing in Haworth (and Ingrow), and it would certainly be a more straightforward project than Minehead.

In terms of the actual potential for Taunton-Minehead, day-trippers and holidaymakers, we certainly do well with the former (we have an ideal catchment area in West Yorkshire-York and a major cultural destination) but only a handful a day use it for one-way trips from/to Haworth. It's the day-trips that make it work.

 

[-Colly405-]

The catchment area for day-trips to the North Somerset coast is limited (Greater Bristol would be the nearest conurbation, then Exeter - but Exeter has Torbay on the doorstep!)

Greater Bristol already goes to Portishead, Clevedon, Weston-super-Mare, Brean and Burnham. Can't see them going past all those via Taunton for a day trip to Minehead.

For Bristolians, Minehead is a holiday to Butlins.

 

[The exile]

Greater Bristol already goes to Portishead, Clevedon, Weston-super-Mare, Brean and Burnham. Can't see them going past all those via Taunton for a day trip to Minehead.

For Bristolians, Minehead is a holiday to Butlins.

Well, it goes down Weymouth as well!

 

[-Colly405-]

Indeed it does. But I would suggest that is more as a holiday than a day trip.

 

[The exile]

Indeed it does. But I would suggest that is more as a holiday than a day trip.

Plenty of day trippers as well - at least in the days when the railway ran trains that could accommodate them.