this is exactly why we need a "laugh react" button like they have on Facebook.....Apparently they are now going for electric bus routes on their web page, with trains later?
this is exactly why we need a "laugh react" button like they have on Facebook.....Apparently they are now going for electric bus routes on their web page, with trains later?
Will Go-Op go for rickshaws if their funders can’t afford buses?Apparently they are now going for electric bus routes on their web page, with trains later?
Or just lend people a pair of shoes?Will Go-Op go for rickshaws if their funders can’t afford buses?
The directors will come and pick you up on a tandem e-bikeOr just lend people a pair of shoes?
The London rickshaw trade is about to take a regulatory hit I understand, might be some going cheap?!The directors will come and pick you up on a tandem e-bike![]()
Track access contract between Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (Network Rail) and Go-op Cooperative Limited (Go-op) dated 28 April 2025
I am writing to notify you that the abovementioned track access contract, entered into by Network Rail and Go-op on 28 April 2025, has now lapsed in accordance with the following Clauses of the contract:
• 3.2(f) (Conditions precedent to clause 5);
• 3.3.2 (Obligations to satisfy conditions precedent to Clause 5);
• 3.4.1 (b) (Consequences of non-fulfilment of conditions precedent to Clause 5); and
• 3.5(a) (Expiry).
This is because ORR has not received the evidence that Go-op was required to produce under the terms of Clause 3.2(f) within 12 months of the contract being entered into as specified by Clause 3.3.2.
We thank you for your engagement with the process over the last 12 months and we remain available to answer any questions you may have about the track access application process in the future.
It would seem Go-op have never heard of the phrase "when in a hole, stop digging". The whole thing is as dead as a dodo (or "dead as some doo-doos" as Baldrick might say).I've had a go at summarising the published phased plan. As no doubt Sir Humpergy would have said, it's extremely brave and ambitious. The fact that it lacks even an indictive timeline is somewhat telling.
- Build four "charging hubs" (provisionally Worle, Taunton, Castle Cary and Frome) powered by renewable energy and balancing batteries built on railway land and existing car parking.
- Procure and operate a fleet of electric buses directly linking a number of Somerset towns with railway stations.
- Build a fleet of BEMU units converted from existing EMUs.
- Operate the BEMUs between Bristol Temple Meads and Westbury via Taunton (bypassing Weston-super-Mare). Use the charging hub infrastructure to charge both trains and buses.
- Secure external funding to build new stations and rail infrastructure. Extend to Swindon.
- Extend rail operation to branch line services, e.g. Yeovil, Minehead/WSR, and Shepton Mallet.
![]()
Also, the ORR formally wrote to Go-op on 28 April to confirm that their track access contract had lapsed. I assume this means they would have to start the process all over again.
Not the Goodies' trandem, then...?The directors will come and pick you up on a tandem e-bike![]()
It has been already been done!Surprised they haven't proposed a hybrid bus train
If it's silly season already, how about road-rail Land Rover (or any equivalent)?Surprised they haven't proposed a hybrid bus train
I'm guessing this is trying to imitate the successes of integrated rural transport networks elsewhere (Wales, Switzerland, plus the Peak District in a few years' time) but they really seem to be missing a few really quite important factors:I've had a go at summarising the published phased plan. As no doubt Sir Humpergy would have said, it's extremely brave and ambitious. The fact that it lacks even an indictive timeline is somewhat telling.
- Build four "charging hubs" (provisionally Worle, Taunton, Castle Cary and Frome) powered by renewable energy and balancing batteries built on railway land and existing car parking.
- Procure and operate a fleet of electric buses directly linking a number of Somerset towns with railway stations.
- Build a fleet of BEMU units converted from existing EMUs.
- Operate the BEMUs between Bristol Temple Meads and Westbury via Taunton (bypassing Weston-super-Mare). Use the charging hub infrastructure to charge both trains and buses.
- Secure external funding to build new stations and rail infrastructure. Extend to Swindon.
- Extend rail operation to branch line services, e.g. Yeovil, Minehead/WSR, and Shepton Mallet.
![]()
Also, the ORR formally wrote to Go-op on 28 April to confirm that their track access contract had lapsed. I assume this means they would have to start the process all over again.
Not sure what that is but it doesn't sound as if it will be very sympathetic to the Cotswold countryside!In Gloucestershire the 1980s Birdlip Bypass is shortly to be superseded by the A417 Missing Link project.
It's a basket case of a project. There's far better things to spend taxpayers' cash on.What I do hope though is that the idea doesn't die out. A GBR Western division should definitely add this to the (incredibly long) list of great projects that are worth doing.
Obviously downscale a lot of the unnecessary bits (e.g. direct trains from everywhere to everywhere, and shared bus & rail charging stations), but the rest - i.e. better frequencies between Swindon and Westbury/Taunton, plus bus integration - would likely be decently successful.
I tend to thinking along the same lines as Richard Bowker on this. There's an endless array of bad "good" ideas, just waiting for us to run out of sensible things to doWhat I do hope though is that the idea doesn't die out. A GBR Western division should definitely add this to the (incredibly long) list of great projects that are worth doing.
True, but I'm sure the people involved in this had the best of of intentions and sometimes, just sometimes, they are worth listening to.We need to stop pretending that everyone has a point worth listening to.
Indeed - the problem tends to be that too many people (when “speaking”) equate “listening” with “agreeing with me”. In this case - the idea was probably worth listening to but was probably allowed to rumble on for too long - especially as its various stages suggested that those responsible were /are more interested in making a point than actually serving a market. I’m basing that on the fact that the route to be served seems to have changed remarkably frequently - ie the emphasis is finding somewhere to launch a concept rather than finding a concept to serve an area.True, but I'm sure the people involved in this had the best of of intentions and sometimes, just sometimes, they are worth listening to.
About £300k each or thereabouts. Although they’d presumably lease them. It’d be the cost of the charging infrastructure that would be of greater concern!I feel the rail aspect of their plan is dead in the water. Buses might work depending on how expensive the assets and infrastructure get (I have no idea about the costs of busses)
They undoubtedly had/have the best of intentions, but that also needs to be accompanied with a firm grasp on reality if anything is to be achieved.True, but I'm sure the people involved in this had the best of of intentions and sometimes, just sometimes, they are worth listening to.
I've had a go at summarising the published phased plan. As no doubt Sir Humpergy would have said, it's extremely brave and ambitious. The fact that it lacks even an indictive timeline is somewhat telling.
- Build four "charging hubs" (provisionally Worle, Taunton, Castle Cary and Frome) powered by renewable energy and balancing batteries built on railway land and existing car parking.
- Procure and operate a fleet of electric buses directly linking a number of Somerset towns with railway stations.
- Build a fleet of BEMU units converted from existing EMUs.
- Operate the BEMUs between Bristol Temple Meads and Westbury via Taunton (bypassing Weston-super-Mare). Use the charging hub infrastructure to charge both trains and buses.
- Secure external funding to build new stations and rail infrastructure. Extend to Swindon.
- Extend rail operation to branch line services, e.g. Yeovil, Minehead/WSR, and Shepton Mallet.
![]()
Also, the ORR formally wrote to Go-op on 28 April to confirm that their track access contract had lapsed. I assume this means they would have to start the process all over again.
Also, the ORR formally wrote to Go-op on 28 April to confirm that their track access contract had lapsed. I assume this means they would have to start the process all over again.
Again though, the back office and logistical costs of being a functional TOC - even just with a couple of 153s and occasional services - are huge! You can’t just pitch up with a couple of units and a motley crew of retirees and crack on. Ultimately Go Op have a dream which exists only in an alternative reality, and just isn’t going to cut it on today’s railway. Ironically, given their latest round of ‘plans’, their best avenue by a long way might be to scrap the pipe dreams of operating a railway and turn their attention to some local bus operations, which would at least give them some tangible experience in a far more manageable arena.As I'm sure posters would have noticed I am a great supporter of Go-Op and really hoped they would succeed but if somebody had posted that they had heard a rumour that this was Go-Ops new plan I would say they were having a laugh.
I was going to post all the reasons why this is a a crazy idea but I'm not wasting hour's typing them all out.
The only crumb of comfort is they are now mentioning WSR (Minehead) and Shepton Mallet via - I assume the East Somerset railway? - though, I think I read somewhere that in the East the ESR railway is not physically connected to the network East of Cranmore at the quarry and in the West the nearest station to Shepton is Mendip Vale, which looking at Google maps seems to be a run round only with no car park so I would assume Cranmore would be the railhead?
The danger being that if you are going to drive all the way to Cranmore to get the train then why wouldn't you just drive to Castle Cary to get a mainline train or use the car for you're whole journey.
What Go-Op need to do is either go back too the original plan which they presented in late 2024 and add on Minehead and possibly Shepton Mallet services using standard unconverted to hybrid/battery 153s and working jointly with: WSR, GWR, XCountry, Butlins and the various local authorities in the region.
Or
If they cant raise the cash for that then start off smaller and simpler.
Get hold of a couple of 153s, again forget about electric/battery conversions. Some to run services and at least one spare, in case of breakdown or when they need servicing. Find a couple of near retirement/recently retired drivers and guards who want to earn a bit of pocket money but don't want to do full shifts so no training costs and then run morning and evening services between at least Minehed and Taunton and anywhere else that does not mean they have to pay for infrastructure, level crossings etc and again work in conjunction with WSR, GWR, XCountry, Butlins and the various local authorities.
What it would allow them to do is show they can run a basic service and then investors are more likely to invest and then they can build up to there original plans and then see where they can go from there.
Two questions I have about the track access:
1 - If Go-Op were miraculously to find the cash to do their original plan "today" how long would it take for them to go through the whole process again to get a fresh track access contract to be able to run trains?
2 - If Go-Op were to do a basic shuttle just between Minehead and Taunton as described above with ex-proper mainline trained staff is there a way that a new track access contract could be issued with less demands/hoops to jump through which would equal less cost and a quicker start?
Those already exist and are used in Scotland and elsewhere by NRIf it's silly season already, how about road-rail Land Rover (or any equivalent)?![]()
I've been in one in Network Rail service for engineering work.Those already exist and are used in Scotland and elsewhere by NR
I never once saw any details of how they would employ and train drivers, guards and supervisory staff, HR & payroll, and as for depot maintenance of rolling stock, with competent depot staff, a safety regime acceptable to the authorities, nothing seems publicised either. I cannot assume GWR would have helped them in any meaningful way, so just how was it going to work?Again though, the back office and logistical costs of being a functional TOC - even just with a couple of 153s and occasional services - are huge! You can’t just pitch up with a couple of units and a motley crew of retirees and crack on. Ultimately Go Op have a dream which exists only in an alternative reality, and just isn’t going to cut it on today’s railway. Ironically, given their latest round of ‘plans’, their best avenue by a long way might be to scrap the pipe dreams of operating a railway and turn their attention to some local bus operations, which would at least give them some tangible experience in a far more manageable arena.
OK, just for fun(!), let's do a quick "back of a fag packet " calculation of the staff costs for running a twice weekday service from Minehead to Taunton and return, one morning peak and one evening peak.2 - If Go-Op were to do a basic shuttle just between Minehead and Taunton as described above with ex-proper mainline trained staff is there a way that a new track access contract could be issued with less demands/hoops to jump through which would equal less cost and a quicker start?