OxRail 2040 - plan from Oxfordshire County Council

[PTR 444]

4½-5 mins

That’ll likely be a noticeable inconvenience to passengers already on board. How might it work pathing wise, say for example the stop was slotted into the hourly Paddington - Cheltenham service?

 

[cle]

Bicester is fairly sprawling re growth, and also has North; its fastest London service (2-3tph) and direct to Birmingham too. Put those together and the service is fairly good, and distributed.

Four tracking Didcot-Oxford is the only feasible way to increase all of this local service as discussed here. It would be very useful overall. Plus the Oxford works, wires, Cowley etc etc etc - plenty to do.

And lots of homes to build… Parkway should look like Reading Green Park or Cambridge North.

 

[The Planner]

That’ll likely be a noticeable inconvenience to passengers already on board. How might it work pathing wise, say for example the stop was slotted into the hourly Paddington - Cheltenham service?

You would most likely have to back time it to Cheltenham so it doesnt start messing about with Reading Paddington. Could cause a clash at Gloucester as they tend to cross there.

 

[Topological]

You would most likely have to back time it to Cheltenham so it doesnt start messing about with Reading Paddington. Could cause a clash at Gloucester as they tend to cross there.

Would adding a stop to the Cardiff-London mess things up too much? It has to negotiate crossing the Bristol-Gloucester paths at Parkway, but perhaps that is easier than the complexities of Gloucester reversal on Cheltenham services?

 

[PTR 444]

The GWML at Grove is quad tracked, so you could potentially loop a train stopped at a future station there.

Would it be easier to extend the Paddington - Didcot stoppers to Swindon and add an additional 2tph Reading - Oxford service (possibly as an extension of EWR or Banbury - Didcot trains)?

 

[autotank]

No mention for the Wallingford Branch either. I'm a volunteer there and we have been running more community services since the arrival of the 'Bubblecar' on loan a year ago with a reasonable degree of success. It might be a bit pie in the sky, but given that the Henley, Marlow and Windsor branches are all very useful and successful, could Wallingford ever run again? The station site isn't so much of an issue these days as the town comes out to meet the railway (it is only 10-15 minutes walk from the town centre anyway). Given it is only 2.5 miles long, a 25mph speed limit isn't actually that much of an issue, so it is concievable it could operate under the current LRO.

In fact Cholsey only gets mentioned twice in the report and nothing about improvements to improve accessibility - currently none of the platforms have step free access, and the underpass can best be described as tired.

 

[Farigiraf]

Considering that Corsham is also likely to get reopened at some point (it's got to be one of the largest settlements with a passenger rail line through the town but no station), would alternating calls with a new Wantage & Grove station on the London-Bristol IET be feasible? So something like xx00 = Paddington, Reading, Didcot, Wantage & Grove, Swindon, Chippenham, Bath Spa, Bristol TM and xx30 = Paddington, Reading, Swindon, Chippenham, Corsham, Bath Spa and Bristol TM. Of course the ideal service to both stations would be the Bristol-Oxford, but if you can't run that half-hourly and/or a London service is warranted, this would enable 2tph to both stations without having to run an additional local service on the line. Of course if electrification reaches Bristol/Oxford then a lot of options to run semifast services using 387s open up but currently it's almost exclusively IET services through Swindon which are focused on long-distance intercity passengers.

 

[The Planner]

Would adding a stop to the Cardiff-London mess things up too much? It has to negotiate crossing the Bristol-Gloucester paths at Parkway, but perhaps that is easier than the complexities of Gloucester reversal on Cheltenham services?

Not sure you would put a stop in those, the Cheltenham seems the more obvious one to me.

 

[cle]

Considering that Corsham is also likely to get reopened at some point (it's got to be one of the largest settlements with a passenger rail line through the town but no station), would alternating calls with a new Wantage & Grove station on the London-Bristol IET be feasible? So something like xx00 = Paddington, Reading, Didcot, Wantage & Grove, Swindon, Chippenham, Bath Spa, Bristol TM and xx30 = Paddington, Reading, Swindon, Chippenham, Corsham, Bath Spa and Bristol TM. Of course the ideal service to both stations would be the Bristol-Oxford, but if you can't run that half-hourly and/or a London service is warranted, this would enable 2tph to both stations without having to run an additional local service on the line. Of course if electrification reaches Bristol/Oxford then a lot of options to run semifast services using 387s open up but currently it's almost exclusively IET services through Swindon which are focused on long-distance intercity passengers.

The silly thing for Wantage is that changing at Didcot for London would seem most logical, but Bristol-Oxford bypasses Didcot so it wouldn't be immediately obvious what is best (backtrack via Swindon? go up to Oxford?)

I think some type of semi-fast 387 extension to Swindon or Bristol Parkway (in case of a Wooton Bassett) might be best, as well as the Oxford.

 

[irish_rail]

4½-5 mins

In the real world (I sign the route) that is incredibly optimistic. Driving the way GWR insist we drive, I reckon 6 minutes minimum with a 2 minute stop for station work. Of course on paper it may be possible in 5 minutes, just not realistic in practice. Whether or not the extra minute or so I'd add on makes any difference I don't know, though I fear we are set for a lot of extra stations on the Western, Wantage, Corsham, Wellington, Cullompton etc, and this is inevitably going to further slow down intercity services to the west for a rather negligible benefit.

 

[Topological]

The silly thing for Wantage is that changing at Didcot for London would seem most logical, but Bristol-Oxford bypasses Didcot so it wouldn't be immediately obvious what is best (backtrack via Swindon? go up to Oxford?)

I think some type of semi-fast 387 extension to Swindon or Bristol Parkway (in case of a Wooton Bassett) might be best, as well as the Oxford.

I was thinking about a 387 extension, the problem is it would have to be an extension and would presumably then kill the 387 service to Oxford (should Oxford be wired). There could be an EMU shuttle from Didcot (or even Reading?) as well in the event the wires reach Oxford.

 

[cle]

Or one hourly of each, could make sense, as it is 2tph now.

 

[stevieinselby]

No mention for the Wallingford Branch either. I'm a volunteer there and we have been running more community services since the arrival of the 'Bubblecar' on loan a year ago with a reasonable degree of success. It might be a bit pie in the sky, but given that the Henley, Marlow and Windsor branches are all very useful and successful, could Wallingford ever run again? The station site isn't so much of an issue these days as the town comes out to meet the railway (it is only 10-15 minutes walk from the town centre anyway). Given it is only 2.5 miles long, a 25mph speed limit isn't actually that much of an issue, so it is concievable it could operate under the current LRO.

Do you want the heritage railway to continue to exist as an attraction, or do you want to lose it and gain a national rail service? It's unlikely that you could have both.
Yes, you could very easily run a 30 minute frequency on the branch line, at 2½ miles you would still have excess slack in the schedule.
But with the 136 bus running from Wallingford town centre to Cholsey station every half hour and taking 10 minutes, I'm not sure how much benefit there would be from doing so.

Considering that Corsham is also likely to get reopened at some point (it's got to be one of the largest settlements with a passenger rail line through the town but no station), would alternating calls with a new Wantage & Grove station on the London-Bristol IET be feasible? So something like xx00 = Paddington, Reading, Didcot, Wantage & Grove, Swindon, Chippenham, Bath Spa, Bristol TM and xx30 = Paddington, Reading, Swindon, Chippenham, Corsham, Bath Spa and Bristol TM. Of course the ideal service to both stations would be the Bristol-Oxford, but if you can't run that half-hourly and/or a London service is warranted, this would enable 2tph to both stations without having to run an additional local service on the line. Of course if electrification reaches Bristol/Oxford then a lot of options to run semifast services using 387s open up but currently it's almost exclusively IET services through Swindon which are focused on long-distance intercity passengers.

With the potential for new local stations at Corsham, Wootton Bassett, Grove & Wantage, and potentially Milton Park and one or two on the outskirts of Swindon, there is a very strong case for adding a new local service along that corridor as well as the existing intercity services. I can't see intercity passengers being happy about that many extra stops being added. If continuing the electrification to Bristol isn't viable then it would be a prime candidate for battery bi-modes.

The silly thing for Wantage is that changing at Didcot for London would seem most logical, but Bristol-Oxford bypasses Didcot so it wouldn't be immediately obvious what is best (backtrack via Swindon? go up to Oxford?)

I think some type of semi-fast 387 extension to Swindon or Bristol Parkway (in case of a Wooton Bassett) might be best, as well as the Oxford.

Could a Bristol to Oxford service call at Didcot and reverse, instead of using the West Curve? That would allow the best of all worlds, a new service to provide that missing link as well as calling at the local stations along the way, and giving them optimal interchange for onward travel to Reading and London.

 

[BerkshireRails]

I was thinking about a 387 extension, the problem is it would have to be an extension and would presumably then kill the 387 service to Oxford (should Oxford be wired). There could be an EMU shuttle from Didcot (or even Reading?) as well in the event the wires reach Oxford.

I prefer a Didcot/Reading to Swindon 387 shuttle and running the Didcot stoppers to Oxford or Banbury, depending on how far electrification gets. A Reading to Swindon shuttle could operate on the Mains between Reading and Wantage Road, then on the Reliefs, between Wantage Road and Challow, then back on the Mains to Swindon. If you really want, it could split and join off the Newbury fasts at Reading. A possible calling Pattern could be from London Paddington to Swindon, Reading, Didcot Parkway and Wantage. The part of the National Electronic Sectional Appendix covers the Wantage area.

Line code key
UR = Up Relief
UM = Up Main
DM = Down Main
DR = Down Relief

 

[PTR 444]

Do you want the heritage railway to continue to exist as an attraction, or do you want to lose it and gain a national rail service? It's unlikely that you could have both.
Yes, you could very easily run a 30 minute frequency on the branch line, at 2½ miles you would still have excess slack in the schedule.
But with the 136 bus running from Wallingford town centre to Cholsey station every half hour and taking 10 minutes, I'm not sure how much benefit there would be from doing so.

With the potential for new local stations at Corsham, Wootton Bassett, Grove & Wantage, and potentially Milton Park and one or two on the outskirts of Swindon, there is a very strong case for adding a new local service along that corridor as well as the existing intercity services. I can't see intercity passengers being happy about that many extra stops being added. If continuing the electrification to Bristol isn't viable then it would be a prime candidate for battery bi-modes.

Could a Bristol to Oxford service call at Didcot and reverse, instead of using the West Curve? That would allow the best of all worlds, a new service to provide that missing link as well as calling at the local stations along the way, and giving them optimal interchange for onward travel to Reading and London.

With all the additional Oxford and Swindon services proposed, would it even be worth it to then mess up the paths with a direct Oxford - Bristol train. A simple change at Didcot would likely be just as effective as a direct (but less frequent) service via the West Curve.

 

[The Planner]

In the real world (I sign the route) that is incredibly optimistic. Driving the way GWR insist we drive, I reckon 6 minutes minimum with a 2 minute stop for station work. Of course on paper it may be possible in 5 minutes, just not realistic in practice. Whether or not the extra minute or so I'd add on makes any difference I don't know, though I fear we are set for a lot of extra stations on the Western, Wantage, Corsham, Wellington, Cullompton etc, and this is inevitably going to further slow down intercity services to the west for a rather negligible benefit.

You keep saying this. A Didcot stop costs 4 minutes, yet no one has ever said this doesn't work, so where does these massive time losses you state come from?

 

[PTR 444]

I prefer a Didcot/Reading to Swindon 387 shuttle and running the Didcot stoppers to Oxford or Banbury, depending on how far electrification gets. A Reading to Swindon shuttle could operate on the Mains between Reading and Wantage Road, then on the Reliefs, between Wantage Road and Challow, then back on the Mains to Swindon. If you really want, it could split and join off the Newbury fasts at Reading. A possible calling Pattern could be from London Paddington to Swindon, Reading, Didcot Parkway and Wantage. The part of the National Electronic Sectional Appendix covers the Wantage area.

Line code key
UR = Up Relief
UM = Up Main
DM = Down Main
DR = Down Relief

Would a train calling only at Reading, Didcot Parkway and Wantage carry enough passengers to be commercially viable? I’d personally have the train call additionally at the local stations between Reading and Didcot, or failing that, extend it to Bristol via Bath to provide more local journey opportunities.

 

[lachlan]

With all the additional Oxford and Swindon services proposed, would it even be worth it to then mess up the paths with a direct Oxford - Bristol train. A simple change at Didcot would likely be just as effective as a direct (but less frequent) service via the West Curve.

There isn't anything else that could call at a new Corsham station.

Wootton Bassett could be supported by the Melksham trains but they only run every two hours.

 

[PTR 444]

There isn't anything else that could call at a new Corsham station.

Wootton Bassett could be supported by the Melksham trains but they only run every two hours.

What about a Paddington or Reading to Bath/Bristol semifast, as has been suggested upthread?

 

[lachlan]

What about a Paddington or Reading to Bath/Bristol semifast, as has been suggested upthread?

That would be good, but I haven't seen any concrete proposal for a third train per hour to Bristol via Bath whereas they are talking about a regular service between Bristol and Oxford

 

[PTR 444]

That would be good, but I haven't seen any concrete proposal for a third train per hour to Bristol via Bath whereas they are talking about a regular service between Bristol and Oxford

Is the proposal for 1tph or 2tph between Bristol and Oxford? I feel that a new Grove & Wantage station would need a direct train to Didcot Parkway in addition to Oxford for connectivity purposes, so might be better if 1tph of those two went to Reading or Paddington instead.

 

[irish_rail]

You keep saying this. A Didcot stop costs 4 minutes, yet no one has ever said this doesn't work, so where does these massive time losses you state come from?

I've told you it doesn't work in reality. With the GWR professional driving policy, approaching the inevitable red at the end of platform 2 at Didcot, the approach alone costs a good 3 minutes. Then add 2 mins station time and accelerating back to linespeed. 4 minutes just isn't reality I'm afraid. Take it from me, I actually drive the route.

 

[67018]

Is the proposal for 1tph or 2tph between Bristol and Oxford? I feel that a new Grove & Wantage station would need a direct train to Didcot Parkway in addition to Oxford for connectivity purposes, so might be better if 1tph of those two went to Reading or Paddington instead.

The document itself doesn't specify a frequency for Oxford-Bristol, but does put Grove & Wantage down as 1tph. So presumably that would mean it would have to be either to Oxford or Didcot but not both, unless they alternate on a 2-hourly frequency which seems a bit unlikely.

 

[JamesT]

The document itself doesn't specify a frequency for Oxford-Bristol, but does put Grove & Wantage down as 1tph. So presumably that would mean it would have to be either to Oxford or Didcot but not both, unless they alternate on a 2-hourly frequency which seems a bit unlikely.

On page 17 they do have the line:

In Phase 1, the priority is delivering EWR on time and securing a permanent hourly Oxford–Bristol service to link science and technology clusters and cut road congestion.

 

[The Planner]

I've told you it doesn't work in reality. With the GWR professional driving policy, approaching the inevitable red at the end of platform 2 at Didcot, the approach alone costs a good 3 minutes. Then add 2 mins station time and accelerating back to linespeed. 4 minutes just isn't reality I'm afraid. Take it from me, I actually drive the route.

So how many schedules off RTT etc do I easily find to show it does? Juat becauae you drive the route doesn't mean its correct. If it didnt work it would be changed. What you are implying is that GWRs own train planners and performance people, alongside all the data are wrong.

 

[PTR 444]

The document itself doesn't specify a frequency for Oxford-Bristol, but does put Grove & Wantage down as 1tph. So presumably that would mean it would have to be either to Oxford or Didcot but not both, unless they alternate on a 2-hourly frequency which seems a bit unlikely.

Or reverse at Didcot, if paths allow for it.

 

[cle]

Well Oxford-Bristol is currently 2tpW (each way) and so I think getting to 1tph throughout the week would be a signficant victory. Does feel like it's achievable in the next few years, if they sort Oxford out.

But I would think that, as a regional service, would be best placed for any new/interim stations. It sounds like an eventual extension of a Didcot (maybe if Oxford is wired, 1x goes there and the other goes on to Bristol via Parkway, for example) - and that might enable some more of these local connections and also that Parkway link (the Ox-Bristol going via Bath). It could also go to Cardiff just as easily.

In the region, there are also potentially going to be additional Bristol-Westbury, Bristol-Moor St and Cardiff-Moor St services, so there will a lot of extra activity between certain stations.

All of this could enable some a few London calls to be trimmed (e.g. would anything need to call both Didcot and Swindon?) etc - could be explored.

 

[JamesT]

Well Oxford-Bristol is currently 2tpW (each way) and so I think getting to 1tph throughout the week would be a signficant victory. Does feel like it's achievable in the next few years, if they sort Oxford out.

But I would think that, as a regional service, would be best placed for any new/interim stations. It sounds like an eventual extension of a Didcot (maybe if Oxford is wired, 1x goes there and the other goes on to Bristol via Parkway, for example) - and that might enable some more of these local connections and also that Parkway link (the Ox-Bristol going via Bath). It could also go to Cardiff just as easily.

In the region, there are also potentially going to be additional Bristol-Westbury, Bristol-Moor St and Cardiff-Moor St services, so there will a lot of extra activity between certain stations.

All of this could enable some a few London calls to be trimmed (e.g. would anything need to call both Didcot and Swindon?) etc - could be explored.

Currently Oxford-Bristol direct is 0tpW. They're only restarting on the 20th. So something available throughout the year, not just dependent on spare stock would be a good start.

 

[PTR 444]

Well Oxford-Bristol is currently 2tpW (each way) and so I think getting to 1tph throughout the week would be a signficant victory. Does feel like it's achievable in the next few years, if they sort Oxford out.

But I would think that, as a regional service, would be best placed for any new/interim stations. It sounds like an eventual extension of a Didcot (maybe if Oxford is wired, 1x goes there and the other goes on to Bristol via Parkway, for example) - and that might enable some more of these local connections and also that Parkway link (the Ox-Bristol going via Bath). It could also go to Cardiff just as easily.

In the region, there are also potentially going to be additional Bristol-Westbury, Bristol-Moor St and Cardiff-Moor St services, so there will a lot of extra activity between certain stations.

All of this could enable some a few London calls to be trimmed (e.g. would anything need to call both Didcot and Swindon?) etc - could be explored.

Personally, I would remove the Didcot calls from the fast Bristol and South Wales services, to provide an even interval fast service for Paddington - Reading - Swindon.
Didcot - Swindon should remain served by the Cheltenham train, as well as a new semifast from Paddington to Bristol via Bath.

 

[cle]

Didcot will likely overtake Swindon eventually, in usage - and it is a far smaller settlement. Swindon actually has a really high population for its rail usage, it's something of a Northampton - a massively overgrown, but fairly nothing place.

But as well as a railhead and interchange (Swindon is a railhead too, both have excellent service) - Didcot is also something of a tech hub, there are a lot of science, research and development campuses in the hinterland. Many that one might assume to be closer to Oxford, indeed.

So again, I think with a semi-fast type of service linking both, you could choose either Didcot or Swindon on many of the IET services.