That was 15 years, 2 TOCs and 5 Senedds before the Welsh Government then bought the Valley lines under Mark Drakeford (when the very anti-devolution Tories were still in Westminster, mind), a situation quite seperated from the administration that rejected that proposal, which was back when the Senedd was smaller and had even less powers than it has now.
2005 was over two decades ago. Not really relevant to the wants of more recent Welsh Governments.
Tfw run into Manchester, Liverpool and Birmingham OK. Bristol is nearer to Wales than these three cities.
NR supporting the service for only 12 months sounds more liberal saying that both TOCs are right! TFW are right in that there are paths now; GWR are right that there soon won’t be!
In 12 months time TfW will exist and GWR won't.
If those paths have already (now) been committed elsewhere they can make as much fuss as they like- it’s then a simple “You were told they were only available for a year and chose to ignore us”.
Specifically the total number of trains trying to use it. There's already 4tph from GWR, then Lumo, the freight and now this TfW. And that's before the potential TfW services for the new stations and other OAO applications.
Travelling from the north extends journey times and means finding paths on the Westerleigh - Standish Jn sections (or via the Golden Valley [Kemble], which may well have weight limits but would need to confirm)
Not many, because there's already quite a lot of freight overnight and there's maintenance access requirements. Also remember that something arriving overnight at the Severn may well mean it's somewhere else at a rather busy time.
Depends on how the rights have been applied, whether they are firm, or contingent rights and for how long.
Sorry, I meant any train coming from the north would come down from the Birmingham area, and “turn right” at Gloucester and miss Westerleigh and the Severn Tunnel completely.
Apologies, misinterpreted your point. However, here's all the freight through the tunnel today:
Appreciate what you’re saying (which is why I expressed the pinch points as longer sections) but Filton Bank at least shouldn’t be an issue at present - IIRC there’s so far only been a net gain of 1 tph (passenger) in each direction since re-4-tracking. XC was already 2tph, as was Cardiff. The Filton shuttle is new but basically replaced the Weston - Parkway terminator. I realise that “when” is as important as “how many”. Temple Meads must be an issue, though.
2tph to Clifton Down (with single line constraint), 1tph but going to 2tph for Filton Abbey Wood/Henbury loop (with single line constraint), plus 1 or 2 tph Bristol-Cardiff, plus freight that takes a *very* long time up the hill when loaded due to it being just a tad steep.
How many 'hazardous' freight trains go through the tunnel daily? As I understand it, any train in the opposite direction is held outside the tunnel if one of those is currently passing through. This effectively consumes a path in each direction.
Correct.
No, Pilning Loops are long enough. However they also have very slow turnouts (20/30mph) and mean starting from a stand up a continuous 1:100 climb for trains towards England. The increase in the Runtime for looping in either direction is a quite glaring on the graph.
Quite, but remember the fuss over Avanti’s fast Manchester-Euston when the firm rights expired. Lumo completely legitimately bid into the spare capacity, leaving a firebreak path intact.
Or more accurately, here are the freight paths through the tunnel, (90% of which don’t appear to be running today.)
So you're not able to identify any path that can reasonably be diverted, with an alternative path forward when it rejoins the route and subject to all according gauge and RA/HAW restrictions?
vaildata.uk
That was a long-established service though.
How successful the service will be is a calculated guess at the moment. If run it for few weeks/months can test how popular it is.
Is there any update on Cardiff Parkway / the stations suggested by the Burns report?
Between Cardiff and Severn Tunnel Junction, yes, but I'd be surprised if TfW would be putting in the necessary infrastructure on the Bristol side. They don't even have it at their own stations in England eg Hereford and Lydney.
Of course I can’t identify alternative paths. I don’t work in the rail industry. There’s no need to be passive aggressive.So you're not able to identify any path that can reasonably be diverted, with an alternative path forward when it rejoins the route and subject to all according gauge and RA/HAW restrictions?
But fine, we'll move on to your deflection - which paths can be removed under the network code? Berth data and ORR Rights tables are publicly available:
Consolidated agreements | Office of Rail and Road
A consolidated (or conformed) agreement is a document incorporating all approved amendments to the existing approved agreement.www.orr.gov.uk
Network Rail's Network Code | Office of Rail and Road
The rules behind the contractual relationship between train operating companies and freight operating companies to run their trains on Network Rail infrastructure.Berth History - Vail Data
The berth history page allows you to view the historic descriptions/headcodes that where in a berth signalled by Network Rail, for up to the past 90 days.
And does removal of paths allow the freight that remains to operate within a useful passenger timetable?
