What could an “ideal” Bristol service recast look like?

[Envoy]

I am with William3000 regarding connecting Cambridge & points east with direct services to Bath & Bristol - which also opens up the possibility of a quick change at Swindon for services to south Wales. People do not want the hassle of going via London and when new direct services are provided, it drives growth in passenger numbers.

A new all stops electric service should also be set up between Cardiff and Bristol TM. Cardiff > Newport > Bristol is really one big vast economic area and most people don't give a damn about the border.

Mention has been made of growth in the Frome area. Surely the route from Bristol down to Weymouth via Frome needs an hourly service?

 

[PTR 444]

I am with William3000 regarding connecting Cambridge & points east with direct services to Bath & Bristol - which also opens up the possibility of a quick change at Swindon for services to south Wales. People do not want the hassle of going via London and when new direct services are provided, it drives growth in passenger numbers.

A new all stops electric service should also be set up between Cardiff and Bristol TM. Cardiff > Newport > Bristol is really one big vast economic area and most people don't give a damn about the border.

Mention has been made of growth in the Frome area. Surely the route from Bristol down to Weymouth via Frome needs an hourly service?

In an ideal world, Bristol - Weymouth should be hourly, although Castle Cary - Dorchester is mostly single track so 1tp2h would have to suffice until upgrades to the Heart of Wessex Line come to fruition. In terms of Bristol connectivity, this is probably quite low down the pecking order since there are other capacity constraints in the area which are a bigger priority.

 

[Magdalia]

am with William3000 regarding connecting Cambridge & points east with direct services to Bath & Bristol - which also opens up the possibility of a quick change at Swindon for services to south Wales. People do not want the hassle of going via London and when new direct services are provided, it drives growth in passenger numbers.

But the number of people making those journeys is tiny. Through trains between not very big cities drive tiny passenger numbers by tiny amounts.

Whereas, for Cambridge-Oxford, and the intermediate stations, East West Rail will be driving big passenger numbers by big amounts, and that's why East West Rail is being built.

I discovered that I could download the Cambridge ODM data into a spreadsheet. Each station has a region tag so it is possible to aggregate to regional totals, and this is what I got for Cambridge in 2024/2025:

51.4% East of England
40.8% London
3.2% South East
1.2% East Midlands
0.8% Yorkshire and The Humber
0.7% South West
0.6% West Midlands
0.5% North West
0.4% Scotland
0.2% North East
0.1% Wales

Journeys outside East of England, London and south East are less than 5% of the total.

The notion that Cambridge-South Wales should be a priority really is absurd.

 

[Manutd1999]

Here is a revised proposal of mine, based on subsequent replies from this thread.

Intercity

• 2tph Bristol Temple Meads - London Paddington
• 1tph XC Newcastle - Plymouth
• 1tph XC Manchester - Bristol Temple Meads

Regional

• 1tph Cardiff Central - Portsmouth Harbour
• 2tph Swansea - Taunton via Weston-Super-Mare
• 1tph Great Malvern - Gloucester - Bristol
• 1tph Gloucester - Bristol - Frome, 1tp2h of which continues to Weymouth
• 1tph Bristol - Bath - Oxford
• 1tph Bristol - Salisbury stopping service
• 1tph Bristol - Plymouth. Fast to Taunton then semi-fast from there to Plymouth

MetroWest

• 2tph Portishead - Henbury via Filton Abbey Wood
• 1tph Weston-Super-Mare - Avonmouth - Severn Beach
• 1tph Weston-Super-Mare - Yate via Avonmouth and Henbury

I agree with most of this.

• I'm not sure there is space to extend the Taunton service to Swansea - probably best leaving this for TfW.
• The extra Bristol-Plymouth would be best done by extending the Manchester XC, but a separate service may work whilst XC has a lack of Voyagers.
• Instead of running MetroWest via Avonmouth to Yate I'd keep it simpler, 2ph Avonmouth, 2ph Henbury and 2ph to Yate via Filton.

To the east, maybe the better solution is indeed to remove this from the MetroWest concept and serve it only with regional trains. 2ph Gloucester-Bristol-Salisbury/Frome, calling all stations east of Bristol. Plus the Cardiff-Portsmouth as a semi-fast extra on top.

 

[Topological]

I agree with most of this.

• I'm not sure there is space to extend the Taunton service to Swansea - probably best leaving this for TfW.
• The extra Bristol-Plymouth would be best done by extending the Manchester XC, but a separate servcie may work whilst XC has a lack of Voyagers.
• Instead of running MEtroWest via Avonmouth to Yate I'd keep it simpler, 2ph Avonmouth, 2ph Henbury and 2ph to Yate via Filton.

To the east, maybe the better solution is indeed to remove this from the MetroWest concept and serve it only with regional trains. 2ph Gloucester-Bristol-Salisbury/Frome, calling all stations east of Bristol. Plus the Cardiff-Portsmouth as a semi-fast extra on top.

Plenty of space for Swansea extensions (except the hours where GWR use it to get back to Maliphant, that is more constrained), you just end up with a slightly slower path between Cardiff and Bridgend (see the scheduling of the approximately xx:20 from Cardiff, versus the approximately xx:40 standard hourly pattern).

I would love it if they would do something to allow slower trains to be overtaken, with Port Talbot being the obvious location, but that is another thread. For the purposes of an additional hourly Bristol train it would be very possible.

Please also remember that terminating trains at Cardiff Central is not ideal because everything has to cross the formation and wait in holding sidings for its slot to come back.

 

[mds86]

Sounds like the chicken and egg situation. The majority of people will always be put off from using the train if they've got to make 2 changes and travel across London verses a direct train. No, the journey numbers from west of Oxford to Cambridge are not suddenly going to jump up by millions of passengers a year when East West Rail opens but it will facilitate many intermediate journeys such as Bath to Bedford. Realistically there will only be 1 tph running from Bristol to Cambridge for example, with other trains providing more regular local services. So if your Cambourne to Cambridge train is cancelled because of an issue at Swindon, there will be a local train 10/15 minutes later that will get you to Cambridge.

 

[PTR 444]

I agree with most of this.

• I'm not sure there is space to extend the Taunton service to Swansea - probably best leaving this for TfW.

Ultimately, Bristol - Cardiff paths are constrained by the Severn Tunnel, so I’ve set my proposal at 3tph along this corridor. 1tph of those is the Cardiff - Portsmouth and 2tph is my proposed all shacks Swansea - Taunton service. I’m aware TfW have expressed interest in running Bristol - South Wales, so it may be better to let them run the above, and leave Taunton - Bristol as a standalone service.

• The extra Bristol-Plymouth would be best done by extending the Manchester XC, but a separate service may work whilst XC has a lack of Voyagers.

A separate service might also have a better chance of calling at Wellington and Cullompton than XC would.

• Instead of running MetroWest via Avonmouth to Yate I'd keep it simpler, 2ph Avonmouth, 2ph Henbury and 2ph to Yate via Filton.

That idea is based on providing a direct service between Avonmouth, Brabazon and Bristol Parkway. I’ve extended it to Yate to make use of the planned siding there.

To the east, maybe the better solution is indeed to remove this from the MetroWest concept and serve it only with regional trains. 2ph Gloucester-Bristol-Salisbury/Frome, calling all stations east of Bristol. Plus the Cardiff-Portsmouth as a semi-fast extra on top.

You ideally want as few reversing moves as possible at Temple Meads. I think the best compromise would be for 1tph Cardiff - Portsmouth and 1tph Gloucester - Frome/Weymouth

 

[Envoy]

But the number of people making those journeys is tiny. Through trains between not very big cities drive tiny passenger numbers by tiny amounts.

Whereas, for Cambridge-Oxford, and the intermediate stations, East West Rail will be driving big passenger numbers by big amounts, and that's why East West Rail is being built.

I discovered that I could download the Cambridge ODM data into a spreadsheet. Each station has a region tag so it is possible to aggregate to regional totals, and this is what I got for Cambridge in 2024/2025:

51.4% East of England
40.8% London
3.2% South East
1.2% East Midlands
0.8% Yorkshire and The Humber
0.7% South West
0.6% West Midlands
0.5% North West
0.4% Scotland
0.2% North East
0.1% Wales

Journeys outside East of England, London and south East are less than 5% of the total.

The notion that Cambridge-South Wales should be a priority really is absurd.

You agree that Cambridge to Oxford along with the intermediate stations will drive passenger numbers on the new East -West Rail route but appear to not see any point in extending services further. GWR are planning to introduce a Bristol to Oxford direct service and I contend that if passengers were able to use direct trains between Bristol and at least Cambridge, that this will drive numbers upwards even more.

The Cambridge data for people travelling to the south-west or Wales might be incorrect as it is cheaper to split tickets in London.

Driving between Cambridge and points west is a real nightmare with poor ‘A’ roads or the journey down the M11 to London and then the dreaded M25 around to the M4 junction near Heathrow - all over loaded routes. How many of these roads users would switch to rail if provided with through services?

I bet a lot of people with clever 18 year olds living in the west would advise them, given a choice, to plump for Oxford University rather than Cambridge due to the hassle of getting to Cambridge.

 

[The exile]

There are already 3 trains an hour (if rather badly spaced) eg from May timetable northbound at Trowbridge towards Bristol :
12:11 Westbury-Gloucester
12:18 Portsmouth-Cardiff
12:48 Salisbury-Bristol
13:13 Weymouth-Gloucester (not even at same minutes at previous hour)
intervals of 7min, 30min, 25min etc

Southbound from Trowbridge from May is :
12:22 Bristol-Salisbury
12:40 Gloucester-Weymouth
12:54 Cardiff-Portsmouth
13:22 Bristol-Salisbury
intervals of 18min, 14min, 28min etc.


Unless want Henbury to have an uneven service, going to have to do something fundamental as stoppers to Westbury are currently 18min and 42min intervals, each hour.

Timetable at Trowbridge is anything but customer friendly in its current form, more something bodged together for operational convenience.

Unless all services are going to have the same stopping pattern, then it is impossible to maintain even spacing over the any length of route - so it’s not so much operational convenience as inevitability.

 

[Magdalia]

You agree that Cambridge to Oxford along with the intermediate stations will drive passenger numbers on the new East -West Rail route but appear to not see any point in extending services further.

What I see is importing delays and disruptions for many in exchange for a tiny increase in long distance passengers. The costs far outweigh the benefits.

Driving between Cambridge and points west is a real nightmare with poor ‘A’ roads or the journey down the M11 to London and then the dreaded M25 around to the M4 junction near Heathrow - all over loaded routes. How many of these roads users would switch to rail if provided with through services?

The route from Cambridge to the west that avoids that is A14->M6->M42->M5. Almost nobody in Cambridge goes up the M11 to get to the M4, the A1(M) has been the preferred route for that since before the M11 and M25 were built. There are various different preferred routes to and from the A1(M), depending on the exact start point.

I bet a lot of people with clever 18 year olds living in the west would advise them, given a choice, to plump for Oxford University rather than Cambridge due to the hassle of getting to Cambridge.

For those in the west deciding on their university on the basis just of the travelling (do people really decide Oxford or Cambridge because of how easy the journey is?), the key factor is that Oxford is much nearer for people in the west.

 

[William3000]

But the number of people making those journeys is tiny. Through trains between not very big cities drive tiny passenger numbers by tiny amounts.

Whereas, for Cambridge-Oxford, and the intermediate stations, East West Rail will be driving big passenger numbers by big amounts, and that's why East West Rail is being built.

I discovered that I could download the Cambridge ODM data into a spreadsheet. Each station has a region tag so it is possible to aggregate to regional totals, and this is what I got for Cambridge in 2024/2025:

51.4% East of England
40.8% London
3.2% South East
1.2% East Midlands
0.8% Yorkshire and The Humber
0.7% South West
0.6% West Midlands
0.5% North West
0.4% Scotland
0.2% North East
0.1% Wales

Journeys outside East of England, London and south East are less than 5% of the total.

The notion that Cambridge-South Wales should be a priority really is absurd.

Yes but those numbers are driven by the inconvenience of rail to those other regions. If you look at road journeys on say the A14 - which is used by people travelling to the North, Midlands, Wales, and much of the South West, the numbers are significant. We don’t terminate cross country trains at Bristol - they carry on through to Plymouth, similar we don’t terminate them at Reading, they continue down to Southampton and Bournemouth.

If you look at the number of journeys between Ely and Cambridge and Huntingdon and Cambridge by rail, the numbers will be dwarfed by the former - that’s not because there isn’t demand from Huntingdon, but simply that Ely benefits from an excellent rail link and poor road to boot, while Huntingdon has a good road but circuitous rail route via Hitchin to render it effectively useless.

 

[Manutd1999]

Unless all services are going to have the same stopping pattern, then it is impossible to maintain even spacing over the any length of route - so it’s not so much operational convenience as inevitability.

A consistent service pattern would solve that, with half-hourly departures in both directions on the same stopping pattern, therefore same arrival spacing.

 

[Magdalia]

Yes but those numbers are driven by the inconvenience of rail to those other regions.

They are driven mainly by distance. The further apart places are, the fewer people travel between them.

If you look at road journeys on say the A14 - which is used by people travelling to the North, Midlands, Wales, and much of the South West, the numbers are significant.

For most long distance cross country journeys to/from Cambridge, road is going to be the preferred option irrespective of the standard of the train service, especially when the A14 and the A1 offer such good connectivity to large parts of the country. People in cars are at Kettering or Stamford before people in trains have got to Peterborough.

And just because there are lots of cars on the A14 doesn't mean they are travelling a long way. If the objective is to get people out of cars and into trains then a commuter line to Huntingdon and Kettering will do that far more effectively than more long distance service spreading contagious delays around a congested network.

We don’t terminate cross country trains at Bristol - they carry on through to Plymouth

We would have a better railway if we did! Looking at Exeter and Plymouth, both have Birmingham New Street as their biggest flow outside London or the South West, at 16k and 13k respectively. These numbers demonstrate that it is completely fanciful to imagine that more long distance connectivity is going to generate lots of traffic. The long distance connectivity is already there for Birmingham-Exeter/Plymouth and it manifestly doesn't. These are tiny numbers.

The Portishead and Brabazon/Henbury investments are much needed improvements in local connectivity, Bristol's equivalents of Cambourne and Tempsford. Temple Meads is going to be more congested, and long distance services import delays. Portishead and Brabazon/Henbury would have a much better prospect of success, to the benefit of the economy of Bristol, if they are not encumbered by delays resulting from running through trains Birmingham-Exeter/Plymouth for small numbers of people.

 

[PTR 444]

A consistent service pattern would solve that, with half-hourly departures in both directions on the same stopping pattern, therefore same arrival spacing.

Surely the best way would be to flight paths so you always have a stopper leave 3 minutes after a fast. You’d ideally run 4tph from Temple Meads - Bath non-stop, then another 4tph behind them calling at Keynsham and Oldfield Park (+ St Anne’s Park if that ever opens).

I understand that this would get more complicated if you run these services beyond Temple Meads however.

 

[NCT]

It is about hard headed decisions on what does most to contribute to economic growth. For Cambridge that's local connectivity, plus links with London and Oxford. Cambridge and Oxford aren't just two universities, they are 2 of the top 10 universities in the world, and they have global recognition, unlike most other UK universities.

What's naive is thinking that East West Rail is about long distance connectivity, it isn't.

That's an incredibly insular view.

 

[Magdalia]

That's an incredibly insular view.

Actually it is the opposite. I'm looking from the perspective of delivering economic growth and tax revenue that benefits the whole of the UK.

The insular view is to resist the economic growth, which would be much nicer because we wouldn't have hideous traffic congestion, we wouldn't have an overstretched healthcare service, and we would be giving up greenbelt land.

 

[Topological]

That's an incredibly insular view.

Agree.

There needs to be a Bristol service. Ideally, then continuing to South Wales.

The idea is to spread the prosperity and connect in, rather than reinforce.

Ultimately, if no one uses the extension, then it can be chopped. But not planning for one is naive at best.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

the best way would be to flight paths so you always have a stopper leave 3 minutes after a fast.

Headway is 4 minutes on that section but that’s very similar to what happens today with the stopper following out the xx.00 Paddington.

 

[brad465]

How easily could 8-car trains feature (using SDO where needed) if the future fleet order includes 4-car units? While some routes do need a higher frequency, others primarily could do with longer trains. I'm thinking the Bristol-Bath-Westbury corridor needs this most: if Cardiff-Portsmouth could be run with 8-car throughout this will be of huge help to this corridor, as longer trains would both hold more passengers and reduce dwell times through more doors provided, especially at stations like Bristol and Bath Spa.

If Bristol-Westbury locals could be 6-8 car, these could divide/join at Westbury to send/receive one unit to Salisbury, and another to/from Frome/Yeovil/Weymouth, which may allow these extensions to have a doubled service frequency while retaining the same frequency from Bristol-Westbury.

 

[William3000]

But the number of people making those journeys is tiny. Through trains between not very big cities drive tiny passenger numbers by tiny amounts.

Whereas, for Cambridge-Oxford, and the intermediate stations, East West Rail will be driving big passenger numbers by big amounts, and that's why East West Rail is being built.

I discovered that I could download the Cambridge ODM data into a spreadsheet. Each station has a region tag so it is possible to aggregate to regional totals, and this is what I got for Cambridge in 2024/2025:

51.4% East of England
40.8% London
3.2% South East
1.2% East Midlands
0.8% Yorkshire and The Humber
0.7% South West
0.6% West Midlands
0.5% North West
0.4% Scotland
0.2% North East
0.1% Wales

Journeys outside East of England, London and south East are less than 5% of the total.

The notion that Cambridge-South Wales should be a priority really is absurd.

And this really shows in microcosm the issues I’m identifying. Cambridge is very close to the East Midlands and yet currently because there are very limited (hourly 3-car) direct trains only to Stamford, Oakham, Melton Mowbray, Leicester. The fact it isn’t a huge city ignores the fact it is one of the fastest growing cities in the UK, has been identified by successive governments as being an area where growth should be turbo-charged, is already among the top 10 stations in England outside London - and that’s in spite of very poor long distance coverage, and a complete lack of services to the west. Cambridge has pretty good connections to other places in certainly the East Anglian part of the East of England such as King’s Lynn, Norwich, and Ipswich, but nothing linking similarly close East Midlands towns like Northampton, Kettering, Wellingborough, and only a very circuitous train to Leicester.

 

[Snow1964]

How easily could 8-car trains feature (using SDO where needed) if the future fleet order includes 4-car units? While some routes do need a higher frequency, others primarily could do with longer trains. I'm thinking the Bristol-Bath-Westbury corridor needs this most: if Cardiff-Portsmouth could be run with 8-car throughout this will be of huge help to this corridor, as longer trains would both hold more passengers and reduce dwell times through more doors provided, especially at stations like Bristol and Bath Spa.

The plans for extra stations along South Wales main line seem to have 170m platforms (good for 8-car 20m EMUs), although they wouldn't be long enough for 8x23m (which would need to be 189m long), although has been suggested any Bristol service would be class 197s

On Bristol-Westbury Corridor
Bristol Temple Meads platforms : 1 is 96m, 2 is 161m, 3 is 297m, 4 is 116m, 5 is 152m 6 is 168m, 7 is 154m, 8 is 147m, 9 is 232m, 10 is 161m, 11 is 223m, 12 is 162m, 13 is 281m 15 is 276m (so some can take 8car)
Keynsham platforms are both 209m
Oldfield Park platforms are both 129m
Bath Spa platforms 1 is 195m, 2 is 279m
Freshford platforms both are 121m
Avoncliff platforms 30m (operated as front door opening only)
Bradford on Avon platform 1 (northbound) is 120m, 2 is 133m
Trowbridge platform 1 (northbound) is 121m, 2 is 154m
Westbury platform 1 is 224m, 2 is 315m, 3 is 295m
....and for information (stations beyond Westbury)
Frome platform are only 109m
Dilton Marsh platforms only 27m
Warminster platforms 1 (northbound) is 128m, 2 is 121m

So some platforms could just about accommodate 8x20m, fewer can handle 8x23m without selective door. Some platforms can already take 8car trains. Wouldn't really be worth extending platforms at minor stations (Avoncliffe, Dilton Marsh, Freshford)

If Bristol-Westbury locals could be 6-8 car, these could divide/join at Westbury to send/receive one unit to Salisbury, and another to/from Frome/Yeovil/Weymouth, which may allow these extensions to have a doubled service frequency while retaining the same frequency from Bristol-Westbury.

Plenty of trains attach and detach units at Westbury, (often used to move extra units to/from Bristol, so not aware of any problems.

As can be seen from list above 6x23m (which requires 143m platforms) only requires a few short extensions to operate without selective door.

 

[Starmill]

It is about hard headed decisions on what does most to contribute to economic growth. For Cambridge that's local connectivity, plus links with London and Oxford. Cambridge and Oxford aren't just two universities, they are 2 of the top 10 universities in the world, and they have global recognition, unlike most other UK universities.

What's naive is thinking that East West Rail is about long distance connectivity, it isn't.


Tempsford only became the game changer at the 2023 route announcement.


Almost all of those journeys are local. Cambridge has 25 stations where the number of one way journeys were more than 50k in 2024/25, that's 100k two way journeys or 1% in comparison with the 10m total. All of those 25 stations are in the East of England (19) or London (6). The biggest outside East of England or London is Gatwick Airport at 39k, followed by Brighton at 27k and Birmingham at 19k. Oxford, at 17k, is 4th outside East of England and London, and the biggest that doesn't have direct trains.

Cambridge-Bristol is 8k and Cambridge-Bath is 5k. Even if those numbers trebled, which is unlikely, they would still be tiny, less than Brighton is now.

The numbers for long distance travel to/from Cambridge are a drop in the bucket compared to the London and local journeys. When East West Rail opens, all of Cambourne, Tempsford, Bedford and Oxford will go straight into the top end of the table of Cambridge's destination pairs, and possibly Bletchley too. But, whether there are through trains or not, it is going to take a lot of scrolling down to find Bristol and Bath.

You do rather like that data. In fact sometimes it seems like you rarely post about anything else. Ask yourself this though. If you take 100 people who live in Cherry Hinton or Kings Hedges today, and who need to visit the University of Bath for work later this week, or who want to go on a day out the coming Saturday and Bath is their preference, how many of them are likely to choose the train as their preference? 5? 10? Driving takes about the same amount of time, but is far far more comfortable and convenient. Very few people live in households without car access.

It has been pointed out to you several times that those data are not always applicable to the circumstances you are describing.

 

[William3000]

They are driven mainly by distance. The further apart places are, the fewer people travel between them.


For most long distance cross country journeys to/from Cambridge, road is going to be the preferred option irrespective of the standard of the train service, especially when the A14 and the A1 offer such good connectivity to large parts of the country. People in cars are at Kettering or Stamford before people in trains have got to Peterborough.

And just because there are lots of cars on the A14 doesn't mean they are travelling a long way. If the objective is to get people out of cars and into trains then a commuter line to Huntingdon and Kettering will do that far more effectively than more long distance service spreading contagious delays around a congested network.


We would have a better railway if we did! Looking at Exeter and Plymouth, both have Birmingham New Street as their biggest flow outside London or the South West, at 16k and 13k respectively. These numbers demonstrate that it is completely fanciful to imagine that more long distance connectivity is going to generate lots of traffic. The long distance connectivity is already there for Birmingham-Exeter/Plymouth and it manifestly doesn't. These are tiny numbers.

The Portishead and Brabazon/Henbury investments are much needed improvements in local connectivity, Bristol's equivalents of Cambourne and Tempsford. Temple Meads is going to be more congested, and long distance services import delays. Portishead and Brabazon/Henbury would have a much better prospect of success, to the benefit of the economy of Bristol, if they are not encumbered by delays resulting from running through trains Birmingham-Exeter/Plymouth for small numbers of people.

Yes car is currently preferred choice by many - but that excludes those 40% of us who don’t have cars. Furthermore there are reasons for that - cost, convenience, comfort, reliability, ease etc. Governments could - and the current one seems keen on encouraging shifts from car to rail - see changes by increasing reliability and services. For business use I much prefer to travel by train as it enables work to be done.

 

[Topological]

You do rather like that data. In fact sometimes it seems like you rarely post about anything else. Ask yourself this though. If you take 100 people who live in Cherry Hinton or Kings Hedges today, and who need to visit the University of Bath for work later this week, or who want to go on a day out the coming Saturday and Bath is their preference, how many of them are likely to choose the train as their preference? 5? 10? Driving takes about the same amount of time, but is far far more comfortable and convenient. Very few people live in households without car access.

It has been pointed out to you several times that those data are not always applicable to the circumstances you are describing.

The exact same would apply to Bristol.

I appreciate that the data can be put together when constructing journey pairs, but it would be possible that some people buy Cambridge - London and then London - Bath/Bristol tickets separately and do not get associated as a flow between the two.

 

[cle]

You do rather like that data. In fact sometimes it seems like you rarely post about anything else. Ask yourself this though. If you take 100 people who live in Cherry Hinton or Kings Hedges today, and who need to visit the University of Bath for work later this week, or who want to go on a day out the coming Saturday and Bath is their preference, how many of them are likely to choose the train as their preference? 5? 10? Driving takes about the same amount of time, but is far far more comfortable and convenient. Very few people live in households without car access.

It has been pointed out to you several times that those data are not always applicable to the circumstances you are describing.

I think the sample is probably 2 people. But yes the theory stands.

The fact is that despite modelling, re-openings can still surprise us in both popularity and in new patterns and suppressed demand.

I suspect EWR will see many new journeys which used to be car based as well as a rail option.

But I agree that Cambridge - Bath/Bristol is very edge. But it’s not just end to end, it’s Bedford-Swindon, MKC or Bicester - Bath etc etc - forget it all being around Cambridge. No-one travels Bedford - Brighton in any meaningful volume.

2tph to Ipswich and 3tph to Norwich and Peterborough and Lynn would change Cambridge rail use way more, I agree with that. And don’t think it needs a Birmingham service especially. But again, end to end and cumulative pairs.

 

[Starmill]

We would have a better railway if we did! Looking at Exeter and Plymouth, both have Birmingham New Street as their biggest flow outside London or the South West, at 16k and 13k respectively. These numbers demonstrate that it is completely fanciful to imagine that more long distance connectivity is going to generate lots of traffic. The long distance connectivity is already there for Birmingham-Exeter/Plymouth and it manifestly doesn't. These are tiny numbers.

This is complete nonsense. There's broad agreement on the economic value of through trains Exeter - Leeds, Bristol - Newcastle, Oxford - Sheffield, and so on. Your numbers have very little bearing on this, as that's not what they're designed to show.

Actually it is the opposite. I'm looking from the perspective of delivering economic growth and tax revenue that benefits the whole of the UK.

The insular view is to resist the economic growth, which would be much nicer because we wouldn't have hideous traffic congestion, we wouldn't have an overstretched healthcare service, and we would be giving up greenbelt land.

None of this follows from the data you supplied. Not even slightly. It's just you enjoying a Cambridge bias.

I think the sample is probably 2 people. But yes the theory stands.

The fact is that despite modelling, re-openings can still surprise us in both popularity and in new patterns and suppressed demand.

I suspect EWR will see many new journeys which used to be car based as well as a rail option.

But I agree that Cambridge - Bath/Bristol is very edge. But it’s not just end to end, it’s Bedford-Swindon, MKC or Bicester - Bath etc etc - forget it all being around Cambridge. No-one travels Bedford - Brighton in any meaningful volume.

2tph to Ipswich and 3tph to Norwich and Peterborough and Lynn would change Cambridge rail use way more, I agree with that. And don’t think it needs a Birmingham service especially. But again, end to end and cumulative pairs.

I wouldn't want to run through trains across Oxford either but not because they wouldn't add value. Either way any EWR services to Cambridge are many, many years off. The primary purpose of EWR was to run a fast, frequent service between Oxford and Milton Keynes, to serve Winslow and to improve connections at Oxford and Milton Keynes Central.

 

[Magdalia]

You do rather like that data.

The ORR dataset is based on a comprehensive administrative source, it is prepared by professional statisticians, and it is published as accredited official statistics. It is far superior as evidence to anything else we have.

In fact sometimes it seems like you rarely post about anything else. Ask yourself this though. If you take 100 people who live in Cherry Hinton or Kings Hedges today, and who need to visit the University of Bath for work later this week

I think the sample is probably 2 people.

I know both Kings Hedges and Cherry Hinton quite well. This is a good assessment of how many people we are likely to be talking about.

As it happens, I know someone from Histon who studied at Bath. They managed fine with travelling on the train via London, even though that was before the Elizabeth Line opened.

There's broad agreement on the economic value of through trains

The economic value is beneficial but its marginal. What's changed is the recognition that it is not as beneficial economically as local connectivity with the nearest fast growing big city, a relatively recent economic feature of the UK outside London.

Cambridge is very close to the East Midlands and yet currently because there are very limited (hourly 3-car) direct trains only to Stamford, Oakham, Melton Mowbray, Leicester.

What Stamford, Oakham and Melton Mowbray need is a decent train service to Nottingham, their nearest regional big city.

but nothing linking similarly close East Midlands towns like Northampton, Kettering, Wellingborough, and only a very circuitous train to Leicester.

East West Rail and decent connections at Bedford will provide this for all except Northampton.

No-one travels Bedford - Brighton in any meaningful volume.

Bedford has 17k journeys to Brighton and 25k to Gatwick in 2024/25. For Cambridge the figures are 27k and 39k. If Bedford-Brighton is not meaningful volume then neither is Birmingham-Exeter or Birmingham-Plymouth.

None of this follows from the data you supplied.

It is the commuter traffic coming into Cambridge by train that provides the employees that drive the economic growth that generates the tax revenue. Of the top 20 East of England stations with more than 50k journeys to Cambridge only Norwich is not in commuting range less than an hour journey time to/from Cambridge. The ORR data is the evidence of the significance of rail commuting for the Cambridge economy.

The same will happen in Bristol when Portishead and Brabazon/Henbury are delivered. It is already happening on some routes into Bristol: Bath-Bristol is one of only a few flows with both stations outside London that is bigger than Ely-Cambridge. To get back the topic, an ideal Bristol recast will put local connectivity as top priority to drive the city's economic growth.

 

[cle]

Gatwick is very different. But yes I doubt Birmingham - Exeter would justify its own service either. They are just one pair on a route which serves many… XC, if any route, is about the sum of parts.

I wouldn't want to run through trains across Oxford either but not because they wouldn't add value. Either way any EWR services to Cambridge are many, many years off. The primary purpose of EWR was to run a fast, frequent service between Oxford and Milton Keynes, to serve Winslow and to improve connections at Oxford and Milton Keynes Central.

Agreed. We don’t have any spades in the ground for Cambridge. And despite this last yard fumble of starting trains, it’s been built without Cambridge - other than a longer term aspiration (unfunded / un-Budget-promised at the time) - MKC / Bicester / Oxford arc - all with a ton of development, plus Winslow, was the initiator.

As it happens, I know someone from Histon who studied at Bath. They managed fine with travelling on the train via London, even though that was before the Elizabeth Line opened.

Ok so 1, and not 2 persons? That takes us from anecdata to ‘my mate’!

Fact is, students aren’t as huge a driver for regular services. They tend to travel the same weeks and weekends, they often are driven by parents, and they might do their journey 6-8 times a year. Many people do that a week. It’s just not a meaningful segment for route planning given how infrequent it is. When I was at uni, I did not travel that much. Also they have railcards and are unlikely to be in 1st, so less valuable to plan around.

But yes, someone travelling from Cambridge to Bath would indeed benefit from EWR. And that’s great. But they aren’t driving the service provision. It’s two different things. It would be hugely helpful for many, and make many marginal station pairs add up to full trains. And build out new commuting arcs / spheres in its three main cities (O, MK, C) which are much needed and very welcome to continue to encourage proper economic activity outside of London.

 

[Harpo]

There's broad agreement on the economic value of through trains Exeter - Leeds, Bristol - Newcastle, Oxford - Sheffield, and so on.

Huge societal value too - Avoiding the need to spend any time whatsoever on New Street station.

 

[Magdalia]

But yes, someone travelling from Cambridge to Bath would indeed benefit from EWR. And that’s great. But they aren’t driving the service provision. It’s two different things. It would be hugely helpful for many, and make many marginal station pairs add up to full trains. And build out new commuting arcs / spheres in its three main cities (O, MK, C) which are much needed and very welcome to continue to encourage proper economic activity outside of London.

What you call the commuting spheres are the priority, whether that's for Cambridge, Milton Keynes, Oxford or Bristol. If the services for commuters are dysfunctional, that constrains economic growth.