Conwy Valley Line - Time to say good bye?

[Belperpete]

So are you going to canvas the locals or not? I look forward to hearing your findings.

If you are so keen, why don't you do one?

So many that the bus service was later deemed uneconomic by the operator and withdrawn.

My recollection, as Bletchlyite, was that it ceased with the collapse of Express Motors.

Understanding from where? Is this supposed rule written down somewhere?

My recollection is that this was the reason given at the time for the cutting of the two train service.

What was the service cut from? When was a two-train service actually run (not counting excursions, charters or Eisteddfod extras)? Have you got an old timetable showing a two-train service running all day (swapping 101s between the Holyhead stopper and the Branch once per day doesn't count)?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jul 2026 ==

The two train service had passenger trains crossing at Llanrwst. However, it wasn't a regular 90 minute service. As Bletchlyite says, there were gaps.

The one suggesting running into the former bay platforms 3A/4A at Junction?

Correct. The same one that also suggested running the trams to Llandudno.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jul 2026 ==

Untrue. The main reason the locals deserted the railway for the X1 was that they were largely passholders (most who could afford cars would simply drive anyway) and passes were valid on the X1 but not the railway. When they made passes valid on the railway, loads switched back, and as a result the X1, which was only really propped up by passholder travel, seriously retrenched, though if I recall it didn't entirely go away until Express Motors collapsed in a heap. There was a LOT of moaning about this by Express's owners at the time.

That was indeed part of the reason, however certainly not all the X1 passengers were pass holders (I wasn't at the time). The bus had much more convenient pick up and drop off points in Llandudno, for example. And by running through to and from Porthmadog, it had a much larger customer base. That would be even more true these days, as Porthmadog has became a significant bus interchange point, with services from Barmouth, Criccieth, Dolgellau, Pwllheli, Beddgelert all feeding in.

The X1 caused great consternation in political circles, as it was run in direct competition with the train, with the morning and afternoon services running almost in parallel. It was the reason that concessionary pass holders were given free travel on the Conwy Valley all year, rather than just outside the tourist season as with the Cambrian and HoW lines.

Nowadays, of course, the bus fare cap would make a bus more attractive to ordinary fare paying passengers.

While the economics of the Express Motor operation may be questionable, what the X1 service proved by passenger numbers is that there is certainly a demand for a through Porthmadog to Llandudno service. And as I noted above, that was before Porthmadog had become the transport hub it is now, the demand would surely be even larger nowadays.

Having said that, the X1 was (as with everything Express did) a very poor quality operation. A Trawscymru spec electric double decker might see different results.

While the Express Motor operations could certainly be questionable, they weren't as bad as you seem to make out. After their initial teething troubles after they took over from Crosvile, I rarely had many issues with them. But agreed, a service run to TrawsCymru spec and integrated into that network would be very attractive.

 

[Krokodil]

If you are so keen, why don't you do one?

What makes you think that I am keen on your idea? It's on you to demonstrate that it would be popular.

My recollection, as Bletchlyite, was that it ceased with the collapse of Express Motors.

The Blaenau-Llandudno bus service (latterly under the T19 number lasted until circa 2019.

My recollection is that this was the reason given at the time for the cutting of the two train service.

Have you got anything in writing to that effect? I can find nothing in the timetable planning rules. I did however find an interesting restriction on the Conwy Tubular Bridge, to the effect that a steam train must have nothing following it for 30 minutes to allow time for the bridge to be inspected.

The two train service had passenger trains crossing at Llanrwst.

The Holyhead stopper did swap with the Conwy Valley unit, passing at Llanrwst at least once to do so. Once per day is not the same as a regular two train service.

However, it wasn't a regular 90 minute service. As Bletchlyite says, there were gaps.

So how many trains per day were there between Llandudno Junction and Blaenau Ffestiniog in what year?

If you think about it, when the flasks were still running there couldn't have been paths for more than eight passenger trains per day, and given that old hand drivers have told me that they could head down in an earlier slot if they loaded quickly then there must have been fewer than that.

 

[al78]

I have to laugh when I see threads like this, it reinforces my analogy of the UK being like a Britannia hotel.

I can see the arguments for keeping the line open regarding demand and usefulness to the local communities, but if it is as bad as implied in the OP, it needs some investment to at least reduce the worst of the failure points, if it really is essential to keep it open, it is worth improving.

 

[Krokodil]

Cycling on the main road there is grim, so it would have significant value in that form.

The worst bit of the A470 to cycle on is between Glan Conwy and Tal-y-Cafn.

 

[Belperpete]

I have to laugh when I see threads like this, it reinforces my analogy of the UK being like a Britannia hotel.

I can see the arguments for keeping the line open regarding demand and usefulness to the local communities, but if it is as bad as implied in the OP, it needs some investment to at least reduce the worst of the failure points, if it really is essential to keep it open, it is worth improving.

Except that all the arguments for keeping the line open seem to be about its historic and cultural value, scenic vistas, tourist potential, carrying people's cycles for their Sunday cycle, etc etc.

What local people, such as myself, want is a service that will get me to and from my hospital appointment, shopping, work, etc. And the service offered by the Conwy Valley is next to useless for those kind of journeys. I used to travel to Llandudno fairly regularly using the X1 bus link. But nowadays journey planners almost invariable show that it is quicker to get to Llandudno by going via Bangor rather than the Conwy Valley!!

The idea of improving the Conwy Valley line to the kind of level that it would be useful is pie-in-the-sky. It is never going to happen, for the simple reason that the local population is so small that it is never going to generate the level of ridership that would justify that level of investment in rail infrastructure.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The worst bit of the A470 to cycle on is between Glan Conwy and Tal-y-Cafn.

Yes, but I'd not advocate closing the upper section.

 

[Belperpete]

What makes you think that I am keen on your idea? It's on you to demonstrate that it would be popular.

I would have thought it self-evident that a regular, hourly-interval service would be more popular than a very limited service with three-hour gaps. And as I have already pointed out, the X1 service demonstrated its potential popularity.

The Blaenau-Llandudno bus service (latterly under the T19 number lasted until circa 2019.

As Bletchleyite has already pointed out, the T19 was a short-lived failure. It only ran to/from Blaenau. The far more successful X1 was a through service to/from Porthmadog (via Blaenau), and therefore had a significantly greater population to draw on.

And in those days, the local bus services were a rag-bag of inconsistent and irregularly timed services. TfW has been steadily transforming them into almost regular hourly-interval services. So these days there would be even more potential for connecting journeys to feed into an hourly through service to Llandudno.

Have you got anything in writing to that effect?

You are sounding like a barrack room lawyer.

The Holyhead stopper did swap with the Conwy Valley unit, passing at Llanrwst at least once to do so. Once per day is not the same as a regular two train service.

Obviously, they crossed at Llanrwst more than once a day. I can certainly recall them crossing in both the morning and afternoon.

So how many trains per day were there between Llandudno Junction and Blaenau Ffestiniog in what year?

Do you keep that kind of old timetable information to hand? If so, perhaps you could provide a detailed analysis of the service levels on the Conwy Valley over the last 50 years.

If you think about it, when the flasks were still running there couldn't have been paths for more than eight passenger trains per day, and given that old hand drivers have told me that they could head down in an earlier slot if they loaded quickly then there must have been fewer than that.

You are working under a false assumption - just because it was operated by two trains doesn't necessarily mean there were significantly more services. I can recall trains stood idle at Llandudno for significant times between services. I also recall trains being shunted out of the way at Blaenau for a flask train to pass.

 

[Krokodil]

Except that all the arguments for keeping the line open seem to be about its historic and cultural value, scenic vistas, tourist potential, carrying people's cycles for their Sunday cycle, etc etc.

The residents of Blaenau who use the 08:38 clearly see the value of the service.

I would have thought it self-evident that a regular, hourly-interval service would be more popular than a very limited service with three-hour gaps.

Only if the people you canvas for their support to close the line above Betws and bustitute it trust that a bus service will stick around. Bus services are very impermanent, they can be withdrawn or diverted at the drop of a hat. Their ability to carry wheelchairs, pushchairs, bicycles and luggage is extremely limited. My village had two buses an hour when I first moved in, it was handy. Then a couple of years ago, Arriva diverted the lot of them down the main road with no warning or consultation. After much protest we now have a token seven buses per day, if they turn up at all or remember to turn down the right road. Who would arrange their lives around that?

And as I have already pointed out, the X1 service demonstrated its potential popularity.

So popular that Arriva Buses ditched the service.

the T19 was a short-lived failure

The T19 was a rebrand of the X19 which also lost money - Gwynedd Council having to bail it out at one point to avoid schoolkids being stranded.

You are sounding like a barrack room lawyer.

And you're sounding like the bloke down the pub who picks up some rumour and repeats it without checking its veracity. It's a serious question. There is no mention of any such restriction in the Timetable Planning Rules. So as far as I'm concerned no such rule exists, unless you can find something in writing.

Do you keep that kind of old timetable information to hand? If so, perhaps you could provide a detailed analysis of the service levels on the Conwy Valley over the last 50 years.

Old timetables are online for those wishing to pay for them.

You are working under a false assumption - just because it was operated by two trains doesn't necessarily mean there were significantly more services. I can recall trains stood idle at Llandudno for significant times between services. I also recall trains being shunted out of the way at Blaenau for a flask train to pass.

Which rather contradicts the claim that services were cut due to the state of the signalling at Llanrwst. Looks like there never was a more intensive passenger service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As Bletchleyite has already pointed out, the T19 was a short-lived failure. It only ran to/from Blaenau. The far more successful X1 was a through service to/from Porthmadog (via Blaenau), and therefore had a significantly greater population to draw on.

The X1's success was passholders. Once they switched to the train when passes became valid, it started to die.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jul 2026 ==

Which rather contradicts the claim that services were cut due to the state of the signalling at Llanrwst. Looks like there never was a more intensive passenger service.

There has I believe been a short lived full two train service, but mostly it's been roughly what it is now, albeit on some occasions interworked with the Holyhead stopper and thus with slightly more useful timings (e.g. both a school train and an evening commuter train being feasible).

I seem to recall two hourly from Junction with a single unit was briefly trialled (no through service to Llandudno) but was too tight to work.

 

[RT4038]

You are working under a false assumption - just because it was operated by two trains doesn't necessarily mean there were significantly more services. I can recall trains stood idle at Llandudno for significant times between services. I also recall trains being shunted out of the way at Blaenau for a flask train to pass.

The Winter 64/65 service had 6 trains per day each way. There was an overlap in the morning 'peak' with the 07h13 from Blaneau crossing the 07h30 from Llandudno at Tal-y-Cafn. Rest of the day was one passenger train working. The first train 5h05 from Llandudno Junction did a 'swinger' back to Dolwyddelen on Mo.-Fr. prior to returning from Blaneau at 07h13

Summer 1956 service had 9 weekday trains each way over the whole branch, plus 3 short workings to Betws-y-Coed (and a further one on a Thursday evening, one way only). On Saturdays this was 10 return trips over the whole branch, plus two shorts, plus a 22h50 from Llandudno to Blaneau one way only. Trains crossed at Tal-y-Cafn, Llanwrst, Betws and Dolwyddelen.

 

[Belperpete]

I'm fairly sure the service went down to a single dedicated unit when the 175s arrived and the Holyhead stopper was binned off. 175s don't fit on the branch. There would (aside from any passing loop issues, which I have heard before) be scope to reverse that once (almost) everything uses 197s.

I am glad that I am not the only one to recollect the passing loop issue. Thinking about it further, I think the no-crossing issue dates back to then. I heard it from someone who was professionally involved in bus/train timetable integration in the area at the time, as being what BR/NR (whoever was in charge at the time) gave as the reason. Unfortunately, he is no longer available to consult with, and silly me, I didn't get him to give me a signed affidavite to satisfy the doubting Thomases.

As I recall, the signalling at Llanrwst had got to a state where it was determined that the points were no longer safe to use, and so they proposed to close Llanrwst box and make the line one long single-line section all the way through to Blaenau. The councils and locals were of course up in arms about this, and so the loop was retained and trailable points fitted. This saved having to renew all the point rodding and associated mechanical fittings. As I recall, at one time some parts of BR were so short of mechanical locking fitters that they would do almost anything to avoid new mechanical work. It may also have been done with one eye to future RETB fitment. In the interim, they clipped all the points as a short-term measure, when of course crossing trains would have been impossible.

Fitting the trailable points also meant that the trap points at the ends of the loops had to be taken out of use. This would have meant that it was no longer possible to admit up and down trains simultaneously. Did they make the necessary locking changes, or did they impose this by signaller's instruction? I wouldn't have thought there would have been many staff around with the expertise to add extra locking onto a LNWR stirrup frame. If it were done by instruction, then it may have been decided that it was no longer acceptable to have trains routinely crossing there.

The other thing that I remember about trains crossing at Llanrwst, was that if the train from Llandudno arrived first, it would drop off the train-staff at the signalbox, then pull forward into the platform to allow passengers to alight. The driver would then propel the train back up the loop to the signalbox, ready to collect the staff for the forward section once the train from Blaenau had arrived. This saved the train setting off from Llanrwst with passengers attempting to cross the tracks on the boardwalk immediately in front of the train (I can recall several hairy moments there when the driver had to slam the brakes on when people stepped out without looking). I doubt this kind of propelling maneuver would be acceptable these days.

Was there even a signal or stop board at the wrong-end of the loop to act as a limit for this propelling move? Was Llanrwst loop reversibly signalled? Certainly I don't recall a Blaenau-bound train using the station-side platform when trains were not crossing, even though that would have been both more convenient for the passengers, and much safer.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am glad that I am not the only one to recollect the passing loop issue. Thinking about it further, I think the no-crossing issue dates back to then. I heard it from someone who was professionally involved in bus/train timetable integration in the area at the time, as being what BR/NR (whoever was in charge at the time) gave as the reason. Unfortunately, he is no longer available to consult with, and silly me, I didn't get him to give me a signed affidavite to satisfy the doubting Thomases.

I am almost certain that the passing loop being taken out of use for passing in-service passenger trains happened after the service pattern changed (as a result of there only being one 150/153 up there so there couldn't be a two train service) rather than the other way round. That is, because the intention was to operate a single train service for the foreseeable future, it was not seen as worth doing the work to fix it.

It was well into privatisation, not BR days.

The1 other thing that I remember about trains crossing at Llanrwst, was that if the train from Llandudno arrived first, it would drop off the train-staff at the signalbox, then pull forward into the platform to allow passengers to alight. The driver would then propel the train back up the loop to the signalbox, ready to collect the staff for the forward section once the train from Blaenau had arrived. This saved the train setting off from Llanrwst with passengers attempting to cross the tracks on the boardwalk immediately in front of the train (I can recall several hairy moments there when the driver had to slam the brakes on when people stepped out without looking). I doubt this kind of propelling maneuver would be acceptable these days.

I never saw that when riding the line myself in the First North Western Class 101 days, and it was normally the early afternoon train I'd end up on which was one of the ones that did pass at Llanrwst (enabling there being both a school and a commuter run) so I saw a passing pretty much every time.

Does anyone know how charters get there now? Are they flighted, i.e. sent in front of the service train and back out behind it so no passing is necessary?

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

I know this is extremely speculative and will never happen - but I wonder if there would be any cost savings by handing the operation of the branch over to the Ffestiniog Railway and giving them the funding that would have gone to TfW (probably less funding as likely to be materially cheaper in the long run, once infrastructure is converted). Run the entire branch as a tourist railway - but with "normal" carriages attached. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with a tourist first approach, and some scenic and interesting lines around the world operate in this fashion. Potentially could bring quite significant economic benefits.

Yes there would be a lot of work for the FR to come up to scratch and convert the branch to narrow gauge - but it could genuinely be a world heritage type line.

Even without the FR - I think TfW is missing a trick here in not running an expensive /luxury panoramic style service (again with a normal/current prices coach in the consist) like Glacier Express, same for Heart of Wales line. Given TfW already has the first class catering logistics and resources too!

Presumably there is no space/capacity for an Open Access operator to step in here, similar to the Jacobite arrangement.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes there would be a lot of work for the FR to come up to scratch and convert the branch to narrow gauge - but it could genuinely be a world heritage type line.

They've already got one - the WHR(C). I'm not sure another one would be that useful, and the tunnel is the main risk to continued operation now the flooding damage issue has been resolved since those rocks were added by the often-flooded section of line (there hasn't been a long term closure since that and there have been floods!)

Even without the FR - I think TfW is missing a trick here in not running an expensive /luxury panoramic style service (again with a normal/current prices coach in the consist) like Glacier Express, same for Heart of Wales line.

I suppose you could do that with a dedicated 3 car 197, maybe get enough seats to do it by converting a couple of other 3-cars to Standard only and putting the now-unnecessary first class seats in a full vehicle of that unit? I'm not sure how much of a market there is for it with that market saturated by the Ffestiniog and WHR(C) though, it's more something I think ScotRail needs to do on the West Highland and Kyle lines.

The 197s are actually quite good for this (much better than the terrible 150s which are the worst possible thing to use) - the windows are big, the slight bodyside taper gives a good view up as well as out and there are a fairly large proportion of seats aligned to the windows.

 

[Krokodil]

silly me, I didn't get him to give me a signed affidavite to satisfy the doubting Thomases.

No one asked you for one, no need for hysteria. If there is a currently active restriction on passing trains at Llanrwst it will be documented somewhere. Timetable Planning Rules, Sectional Appendix, Local Instructions. No such instruction has surfaced.

Tales about the situation 20 years ago are all very interesting, but they belong in the "History and Nostalgia" section. This is a discussion about the present day. It may shock you but Network Rail do occasionally repair their pointwork. Even if it took them 18 months to get around to replacing the crossing on the points between the Up & Down Passenger Loop and the Up Main at Llandudno Junction...

Does anyone know how charters get there now? Are they flighted, i.e. sent in front of the service train and back out behind it so no passing is necessary?

Charters, test trains, engineering trains etc. regularly pass service trains at Llanrwst. There are no issues with passing trains at Llanrwst, no matter what state of repair the points might have been in 20 years ago.

A pair of 66s with an engineering train were booked to pass the evening train there on Monday, though the passenger services ended up getting pulled anyway to release the unit to cover for class 158 pressure cookers.

When the Britannic Explorer stabled at Llanrwst (Cambrian must have been closed) it shuffled several times around the loop to allow service trains to pass in each direction before the passengers were up and breakfasted (after breakfast the train went to Llandudno Junction, transferred the passengers to local attractions on tour buses, and stabled in the aggregate siding for the day).

I'm on an Up train now. There was a healthy load on (as usual for a train which is not at silly o'clock in the morning/evening) when it arrived in Betws from the Blaenau direction. Certainly not one man and his dog. What this line needs are more trains, not fewer.

 

[Belperpete]

I know this is extremely speculative and will never happen - but I wonder if there would be any cost savings by handing the operation of the branch over to the Ffestiniog Railway and giving them the funding that would have gone to TfW (probably less funding as likely to be materially cheaper in the long run, once infrastructure is converted). Run the entire branch as a tourist railway - but with "normal" carriages attached. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with a tourist first approach, and some scenic and interesting lines around the world operate in this fashion. Potentially could bring quite significant economic benefits.

Yes there would be a lot of work for the FR to come up to scratch and convert the branch to narrow gauge - but it could genuinely be a world heritage type line.

I can't see the FR or any other preserved railway touching it with a barge pole, with the sums of money the line is capable of sinking. Preserved railway economics are currently such that we are likely to see contraction in the sector, not more lines opening.

Even without the FR - I think TfW is missing a trick here in not running an expensive /luxury panoramic style service (again with a normal/current prices coach in the consist) like Glacier Express, same for Heart of Wales line. Given TfW already has the first class catering logistics and resources too!

Presumably there is no space/capacity for an Open Access operator to step in here, similar to the Jacobite arrangement.

I would dearly love to see the line's original observation car (that is currently on the Bluebell) brought back. It would obviously need to be passed for mainline use, and most likely also fitted with air brakes. However, the idea of TfW or anyone else commissioning a new observation car or panoramic coach must be negligible. The development and acceptance costs for what would be a very limited run of vehicles would be out of all proportion.

Unfortunately the current 197s are abominations. The first time I travelled on a 197 to Blaenau, I had to ask the guard if there was something wrong with the unit. At many rail joints I was getting a kicking sensation in the small of my back, leaving me with a sore back the next day. They were obviously built for jointless track, and unfortunately the Conwy Valley still has a lot of jointed. They are okay on the North Wales Coast, but I am dreading their introduction on the Cambrian Coast, which also still has much jointed track. I would take an Express Motors minibus over a 197 any day.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jul 2026 ==

No one asked you for one, no need for hysteria. If there is a currently active restriction on passing trains at Llanrwst it will be documented somewhere. Timetable Planning Rules, Sectional Appendix, Local Instructions. No such instruction has surfaced.

Which doesn't mean that it doesn't, or didn't, exist. Can you show that no such instruction has ever existed?

It may shock you but Network Rail do occasionally repair their pointwork.

Why would that shock me? What I have I ever said that would lead anyone to think that?

Charters, test trains, engineering trains etc. regularly pass service trains at Llanrwst.

And I have never said they aren't allowed to.

The first time I learnt that a charter was due to pass at Llanrwst, I asked "hang on, I thought trains weren't allowed to pass there". And the response I was given was that there is a big difference between occasional, specially-timetabled trains, and routine day-in day-out crossing of passenger trains.

 

[Krokodil]

Which doesn't mean that it doesn't, or didn't, exist.

I don't care about "didn't". As for "doesn't" then it would be very careless if the railway had some kind of safety-related rule that wasn't actually documented anywhere, wouldn't it? What happens when a planner retires and takes the memory with them?

Can you show that no such instruction has ever existed?

Again, I don't care what might have been an issue 20+ years ago. It's irrelevant if Railtrack/Network Rail briefly suspended the use of the loop because it needed repairs and the TOC wasn't using it anyway. The loop is perfectly serviceable now.

And the response I was given was that there is a big difference between occasional, specially-timetabled trains, and routine day-in day-out crossing of passenger trains.

What is that difference? Specifically as relates to the passing loop at Llanrwst.

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the only reason that there isn't currently a two train service on the line is that TfW don't want to run one.

 

[BenBracken]

My impression from reading this forum was that hardly anyone uses the Conway Valley Line south past Betws, but the most recent OBR stats for Blaenau state about 45k passengers a year use that station?

 

[Krokodil]

My impression from reading this forum was that hardly anyone uses the Conway Valley Line south past Betws, but the most recent OBR stats for Blaenau state about 45k passengers a year use that station?

It's almost as if the plural of "anecdote" is not "data".

 

[35B]

It's almost as if the plural of "anecdote" is not "data".

And the data suggests that both could have truth. 45,000 passengers per year = 124 passengers per day (assuming 363 days/year). That equates to 20 passengers per train (6 trains per day).

Now that's a mean average, and won't fully reflect the real usage - nor the usage further down the valley. But that average of 20 passengers per train is 10 per carriage - which is uncomfortably close to "hardly anyone".

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suspect in reality you've got a split. North of Betws is busy on a Saturday and Sunday, with south of it very quiet. Whereas on a weekday the "school trains" will be busy and the other ones quiet.

 

[Krokodil]

And the data suggests that both could have truth. 45,000 passengers per year = 124 passengers per day (assuming 363 days/year). That equates to 20 passengers per train (6 trains per day).

Now that's a mean average, and won't fully reflect the real usage - nor the usage further down the valley. But that average of 20 passengers per train is 10 per carriage - which is uncomfortably close to "hardly anyone".

They're not evenly spread. The 05:15 ex-Llandudno Junction is as good as an ECS positioning move that just happens to carry the occasional passenger. The 11:38 from Blaenau however is a popular train. Besides, lack of usage doesn't automatically mean a lack of potential demand. The present sparse timetable doesn't lend itself to working people, nor to school runs. That TfW seems to be incapable of reliably resourcing the service doesn't help attract passengers who have an alternative either. Despite the love of buses some on this forum have, bustitution is extremely unpopular with the public.

I suspect in reality you've got a split. North of Betws is busy on a Saturday and Sunday, with south of it very quiet. Whereas on a weekday the "school trains" will be busy and the other ones quiet.

There are no "school trains" to speak of. They haven't really been a thing since the end of the 101s. If you compare the morning arrival times at Llanrwst (for Ysgol Dyffryn Conwy, Welsh medium), and Llandudno (for Ysgol John Bright, English medium) and the afternoon departure times you can see that kids would either arrive very early, or late. A two-train timetable would bring back the busy local traffic that existed up until the turn of the millennium.

The 11:38 is the busiest Up train, and is particularly popular on Saturdays. The 16:10 is the busiest return.

 

[35B]

They're not evenly spread. The 05:15 ex-Llandudno Junction is as good as an ECS positioning move that just happens to carry the occasional passenger. The 11:38 from Blaenau however is a popular train. Besides, lack of usage doesn't automatically mean a lack of potential demand. The present sparse timetable doesn't lend itself to working people, nor to school runs. That TfW seems to be incapable of reliably resourcing the service doesn't help attract passengers who have an alternative either. Despite the love of buses some on this forum have, bustitution is extremely unpopular with the public.

I'm making no observation as to what is right to do with the branch in the long term, and fully realise that mean averages obscure as much as they tell.

However, by breaking the numbers down in this way, it becomes possible to see how both the "no one travels south of Bettws" and "the trains are busy" messages can emerge.

Thinking to the future, I'm quite sure that the present timetable does not encourage travel. I'm less confident that, if the timetable were increased to a two train service, it would deliver an increase in fare income equal to the additional cost of running those trains - an outcome that would mean the subsidy would increase, on both an absolute and a per passenger basis.

As for bustitution, I just note that the discussion over the previous routes paralleling the line makes clear that public transport provision in such deeply rural areas is always precarious at best.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have in the past come up with (it'll be on here somewhere) a timetable that reduced the number of round trips by one and would be more useful by targetting specific trips at specific groups. Two trains isn't necessary to do that, and the TfW proposals to keep it 3 hourly clockface but just shift it by an hour don't do that. It mirrored the COVID era single unit Marston Vale timetable in this regard (which was quite well designed). This would also be more resilient due to longer layovers.

The one thing it couldn't do is both school and work evening commuter trips with one unit - if I recall rightly I proposed a single bus round trip that would do the afternoon school run and a service back up, on the basis that kids are less picky about buses than adults.

 

[BenBracken]

I live in west Wales, so for comparison we can look at the Fishguard branch, which has no intermediate stops after Clarbeston Road and the main stop is Fishguard and Goodwick, which last OBR data has 18k passengers in a year. So I’d say Blaenau is doing pretty well in comparison!

 

[stevieinselby]

I live in west Wales, so for comparison we can look at the Fishguard branch, which has no intermediate stops after Clarbeston Road and the main stop is Fishguard and Goodwick, which last OBR data has 18k passengers in a year. So I’d say Blaenau is doing pretty well in comparison!

I guess one difference is that the Conwy Valley line is long-established, whereas regular passenger services to Fishguard (beyond the one or two a day that were timed around the ferries) have only been back for around 15 years. While the sounds like a long time, it won't be enough to undo a lifetime of reliance on road. Plus, Fishguard isn't that much of a draw compared to Blaenau Ffestiniog!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I guess one difference is that the Conwy Valley line is long-established, whereas regular passenger services to Fishguard (beyond the one or two a day that were timed around the ferries) have only been back for around 15 years. While the sounds like a long time, it won't be enough to undo a lifetime of reliance on road. Plus, Fishguard isn't that much of a draw compared to Blaenau Ffestiniog!

Describing Blaenau Ffestiniog as a draw is being rather kind. There's the Ffletiniog Railway, sure, but most go from the other end. Apart from the scenery it's more a locals place really, and the traffic is probably mostly locals.

Betws is the main tourist draw. Probably Llanrwst to some extent too though I find that's more of a locals place, though it's not unpleasant.

 

[gazthomas]

I'm at Blaenau now waiting for the 11.38 to Llandudno. As others have said it can quite busy, with at least 20 waiting to get on. Even more got off the arriving service. I was meeting my wife who said it was full and standing to Betws-y-Coed