FGW 5 year direct award

[CC 72100]

To give North Devon a through service to London as wot it used to have?

However the main issue is that terminating the Barnstaple services at Exeter St Davids would cause outrage and massive loss of passengers as most passengers want to go to Exeter [Central] not a parkway station on the edge of town with a long walk uphill to the shops. Nice and out of the way may be operationally convenient but would be a revenue disaster.

Yes there would be some splitting and joining but half the waterloo - exeter trains are three coach west of Salisbury anyway and the joining and splitting could be done at Exeter Central well out of the way of Exeter St Davids.

Exeter central isn't blessed with platform space to do it - if any splitting and joining is going to occur then St Davids would be the place to do it.

 

[swt_passenger]

...Apparently they are going to go to EMT trains on London to Corby services once the class 700's arrive, so sorry you are getting the 30 year old 319s. Lets hope they clean them first!

That is not factual though, there is probably a lot less less evidence for it (i.e. the MML Corby services) than for the 387s going to the GW. It is also possible that the 387 fleet will be split up, or even more will be ordered using existing options.

I don't think it is a good idea to be too specific.

 

[47802]

No not wrong - I think you will find that the 387s will go to Southern with 377s being cascaded to Thameslink. They are being built for Govia Thameslink Railway. But Govia Thameslink Railway also includes Southern Railway where the units will be deployed.

They may be used on the half hourly Brighton to London Bridge services that will run during the Thameslink blockade and will be branded as Thameslink but won't go anywhere near the Thameslink route.

Apparently they are going to go to EMT trains on London to Corby services once the class 700's arrive, so sorry you are getting the 30 year old 319s. Lets hope they clean them first!

Would you like to back that statement up given that a press release from Porterbrook who are funding the purchase states that initially the 387's will work Thameslink services from January 2015.

Where they go after that well an official announcement on this FGW direct award may give us a clue.

 

[21C101]

Would you like to back that statement up given that a press release from Porterbrook who are funding the purchase states that initially the 387's will work Thameslink services from January 2015.

Where they go after that well an official announcement on this FGW direct award may give us a clue.

as I said, there will be "Thameslink" branded services running from London Bridge to Brighton from the December 2014 Timetable change which they may well run on, but I would be surprised if they go anywhere near the actual Thameslink route.

To do so would need a third stock type cleared for the Thameslink Core plus Cauldwell depot in Bedford tooled up for maintaining them, all for a handful of trains for two or three years. Does that make economic sense.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Exeter central isn't blessed with platform space to do it - if any splitting and joining is going to occur then St Davids would be the place to do it.

Exeter Central platforms not designed for splitting of trains, good one!

Actually, it would be very simple, even with the current track layout.

Trains would simply detatch the rear three or six coaches in the down platform at Central and proceed down the hill to St Davids and on to Barnstaple. The detached coaches would then proceed northwards and onto the up line at the existing crossover north of Central station then reverse back into the up platform to await the train from Barnstaple, join together and proceed to London.

If there was a long time and the detached bits might get in the way of Exmouth to Paignton trains then they could just proceed northwards from the down platform and reverse into Platform 3 (the now virtually disused old exmouth bay platform), stay there until the nominated time then head north over the crossover and reverse into the up platform. All very simple by Exeter Central standards!

 

[starrymarkb]

Once the stock becomes available upon electrification to release some 158s, the Barnstaple Branch will become class 158 circa 2016. Barnstaple services will no longer be able to serve Exmouth as a result.

(Source, see para 5.2 of this: http://www.tarkarail.org/aspirations.pdf)

Um 158s can go to Exmouth - I used to Commute on the things

 

[Manchester77]

They'll have to be cleared through the core since they'll need to get the units delivered to Bedford to Lovers Walk. They also will be entering service before December 2014 so they'll be operating through the core then!

 

[CC 72100]

Actually, it would be very simple, even with the current track layout.

Trains would simply detatch the rear three or six coaches in the down platform at Central and proceed down the hill to St Davids and on to Barnstaple. The detached coaches would then proceed northwards and onto the up line at the existing crossover north of Central station then reverse back into the up platform to await the train from Barnstaple, join together and proceed to London.

If there was a long time and the detached bits might get in the way of Exmouth to Paignton trains then they could just proceed northwards from the down platform and reverse into Platform 3 (the now virtually disused old exmouth bay platform), stay there until the nominated time then head north over the crossover and reverse into the up platform. All very simple by Exeter Central standards!

Or even simpler just to do it at St Davids. You say that you have the time now do that - is there not equally aspirations in the long term to improve the frequency on the Exmouth branch. That would make diagramming train movements a little more difficult.

I'm sorry, I just really don't see the advantage of combining the London and Barnstaple trains, doing more joining/splitting of trains and also transferring a whole line to a franchise that does not deal with other Devon branch lines. That's what it boils down to for me.

 

[swt_passenger]

They'll have to be cleared through the core since they'll need to get the units delivered to Bedford to Lovers Walk. They also will be entering service before December 2014 so they'll be operating through the core then!

They aren't going to be vastly different under the skin to 377s surely? (They were originally referred to as 377/8s IIRC). I doubt they'll be any more difficult to maintain than a 377/2 or 377/5; and I too think they'll see normal use through the core.

 

[455driver]

Um 158s can go to Exmouth - I used to Commute on the things

Let him go, just because he wants 159s to Barney he thinks all the other services should be altered to suit.

He hasnt mentioned how these Barney services are going to be crewed either, Salisbury to Barney and back to Salisbury is a long way!

 

[21C101]

Let him go, just because he wants 159s to Barney he thinks all the other services should be altered to suit.

He hasnt mentioned how these Barney services are going to be crewed either, Salisbury to Barney and back to Salisbury is a long way!

In much the same way as they were crewed to Plymouth and Paignton until those services were caped when the hourly west of Salisbury started.

And it's not me saying that the Barnstaple services are to be separated from the Devon Metro services, its the Tarka Rail Association:

"It is unlikely that any further rolling stock will become available until such time as the first stage of the Great Western electrification is completed, which should release Thames Turbos for use further west than the Thames Valley. At that time a number of options present themselves, among them, as currently being considered, is the introduction of Class 158s and the separation of the Barnstaple service from the linked Barnstaple - Exeter – Paignton group of services. This could potentially be beneficial in terms of choice of destination, provided the needs of regular commuters can be satisfactorily protected."


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They aren't going to be vastly different under the skin to 377s surely? (They were originally referred to as 377/8s IIRC). I doubt they'll be any more difficult to maintain than a 377/2 or 377/5; and I too think they'll see normal use through the core.

I'm sceptical, but if they do it will be interesting to see if they run them at 110mph on the Fasts.

I'm surprised the 700s are not going to allow for 110mph running, apparently 100mph max for those.

 

[swt_passenger]

...I'm sceptical, but if they do it will be interesting to see if they run them at 110mph on the Fasts.

It's highly unlikely, because running at 110 mph will not be required - the timetable will allow for a random mix of 319, 377 and 387.

But then why are we even discussing this under the heading 'FGW 5 year award' anyway. It's all been done before in the 387 thread...

 

[47802]

In much the same way as they were crewed to Plymouth and Paignton until those services were caped when the hourly west of Salisbury started.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I'm sceptical, but if they do it will be interesting to see if they run them at 110mph on the Fasts.

I'm surprised the 700s are not going to allow for 110mph running, apparently 100mph max for those.

Well for starters its not going to take 29 units to run a half hourly London Bridge to Brighton service is it.

I have already seen comments elsewhere that they will be limited to 100mph on Thameslink given that the 700's will be limited to 100mph

 

[21C101]

Well for starters its not going to take 29 units to run a half hourly London Bridge to Brighton service is it.

I have already seen comments elsewhere that they will be limited to 100mph on Thameslink given that the 700's will be limited to 100mph

No, but they may also get deployed on other Southern Services, displacing more 377s onto Thameslink, especially as they are being turned out in Southern not Thameslink livery. No Thameslink services are maintained at Lovers Walk AIUI, it is a Southern Depot.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's highly unlikely, because running at 110 mph will not be required - the timetable will allow for a random mix of 319, 377 and 387.

Not quite true. The timetable already has differential times for 319s and 377s between St P and St Albans northbound. 20 minutes for 319s and 18 minutes for 377s.

377s are on specific services only not mixed around (except for after major disruption)

110mph running won't be required, but it would be silly not to do it if the stock is capable, the linespeed is 125 and you are running late with an EMT IC125 bearing down on you and about to get delayed behind you...

 

[47802]

No, but they may also get deployed on other Southern Services, displacing more 377s onto Thameslink, especially as they are being turned out in Southern not Thameslink livery. No Thameslink services are maintained at Lovers Walk AIUI, it is a Southern Depot.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Not quite true. The timetable already has differential times for 319s and 377s between St P and St Albans northbound. 20 minutes for 319s and 18 minutes for 377s.

377s are on specific services only not mixed around (except for after major disruption)

110mph running won't be required, but it would be silly not to do it if the stock is capable, the linespeed is 125 and you are running late with an EMT IC125 bearing down on you and about to get delayed behind you...

I don't believe you are correct but we will see, and for the livery well its not full southern livery and I imagine that was decided upon before the winner of the Thameslink franchise was announced.

Getting back to the point hopefully when we get an official announcement it will either dispel or confirm rumours about 387's going to FGW

 

[21C101]

I don't believe you are correct but we will see.

Getting back to the point hopefully when we get an official announcement it will either dispel or confirm rumours about 387's going to FGW

It would be nice if they did deploy them on Bedford services as the ex Southern 377s are a bit grotty and the 387s will be all 2+2 seating, but I'm not hopeful.

I'm personally sceptical that they will end up on London to Corby services, as I would expect them to have 125mph capable stock on those, but they may well go north instead of to FGW. Certainly the original intention was for FGW to get 319s.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Or even simpler just to do it at St Davids. You say that you have the time now do that - is there not equally aspirations in the long term to improve the frequency on the Exmouth branch. That would make diagramming train movements a little more difficult.

I'm working on the basis that St Davids is a busy junction station so much better to do it out of the way at Central. 4PH to Exmouth would also impact St Davids unless they terminate the extra ones in the bay at Central.

I've already read elsewhere that the through lines at Exeter Central are to be reinstated as carriage sidings so that SWT will no longer have to pay FGW for carriage siding "rental" at St Davids.

I'm sorry, I just really don't see the advantage of combining the London and Barnstaple trains, doing more joining/splitting of trains and also transferring a whole line to a franchise that does not deal with other Devon branch lines. That's what it boils down to for me.

Basically I'm not looking at the Barnstaple line as a Branch line but as the end of a main line from Waterloo (which is historically what it is).

Usage is up nearly 300% since 2001, with another doubling expected in the next decade to over a million pax per year and, I think, North Devon deserves a through service to London (and should never have lost it in the first place). Running HSTs or loco hauled trains to Padd isn't practicable, but running to Waterloo is, especially as both lines will soon be running the same stock comprising 2 or 3 car DMUs.

 

[Bald Rick]

387s will be on Thameslink, almost certainly before the year is out. And they will be limited to 100mph as multi-pan operation is not approved on the MML above this speed.

 

[Rapidash]

Good news I feel. Purely on the local level around here they have been actively working with local groups to improve things, and have generally been pretty good for the last few years. Will be interesting to see what, if any changes there are to services in the agreement, or if its purely going off the ITT.

Have to say the '158's can't go to Exmouth] had me baffled, as I could have sworn blind I had done that very journey on one within the last year! Glad I wasn't the only one!

 

[Xavi]

Once the stock becomes available upon electrification to release some 158s, the Barnstaple Branch will become class 158 circa 2016. Barnstaple services will no longer be able to serve Exmouth as a result.

That leaves a situation where you have an hourly Barnstaple - Exeter class 158 service and an hourly Waterloo - Exeter Class 158/9 service, which clogs exeter up with terminating trains. Guess what the easy solution is.......


(Source, see para 5.2 of this: http://www.tarkarail.org/aspirations.pdf)

Incorrect - 158s used to operate several diagrams each day to Exmouth on Devon Metro before Pacers were brought in.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think I can see where you're going with this, but let's be honest, 6 coach 159s on the Barnstaple branch all stops is never going to be very practical, is it?

To be fair, any Barnstaple - Exeter service could use the bay platform 2, keeping it away from anything else or wasting one of the through platforms. It loses a tiny bit of operational flexibility (units are on occasions left in that platform for a few hours), but I'm sure that that won't be a big deal in the long run.

Using platform 2 would mean Barnstaple services didn't serve Exeter Central. Can't see that happening since it's the main destination station with passenger numbers booming and more to come with Cranbrook, a Newcourt and Marsh Barton opening.

 

[richw]

Have to say the '158's can't go to Exmouth] had me baffled, as I could have sworn blind I had done that very journey on one within the last year! Glad I wasn't the only one!

Just to settle my "I'm sure they can go to Exmouth" thoughts I looked on Flickr, and found 158751 at Exmouth in Sept 2007 and another of an unidentified 158 in Alphaline livery in August 2007

 

[HowardGWR]

Whether FGW get this contract or otherwise, i don't see how the foregoing discussion on through Barnstaple to Waterloo trains has anything to do with it, or those to Exmouth either?

I also did not follow the point that whether one company or another ran all or some 'branch' services in Devon was of any importance, as such.

 

[CC 72100]

Whether FGW get this contract or otherwise, i don't see how the foregoing discussion on through Barnstaple to Waterloo trains has anything to do with it, or those to Exmouth either?

I also did not follow the point that whether one company or another ran all or some 'branch' services in Devon was of any importance, as such.

Well, this is obviously a decision which impacts the future, and the future of some of these services is obviously coming into this = natural thread drift.

 

[30907]

Actually I'm not looking at the Barnstaple line as a Branch line but as the end of a main line from Waterloo (which is historically what it is).

I like the idea of a through service, but historically Plymouth was the main line and Bideford the branch, with only the ACE (and the summer Saturday trains) that didn't call at almost all stations beyond Exeter. Now don't let's start on Dawlish again....☺

 

[thelongestroad]

What's been done?

Removal of external vinyl and painted in the FGW blue livery.
New flooring throughout.
Roof repairs.
Driving cabs resprayed.

Maybe more...

 

[tbtc]

Good move by the DfT especially when you consider the disruption to the GWML over the next 5 years with IEP and Electrification far better to keep the existing team in place then get a new team in.

I agree.

I'm of the opinion that the railway will look good in five years time, once we've electrified another thousand miles of track/ built thousands of new EMUs/ delivered Crossrail/ delivered Thameslink 2000/ got IEP sorted out/ got bi-mode IEP sorted out/ eventually found stock for the Todmorden Chord/ started withdrawing the worst Pacers/ spades in the ground for HS2...

...the problem is that there are going to be a few "tight squeezes" between now and then - passenger numbers growing faster than "static" DMU numbers can cope with/ a few teething troubles with new trains/ a few teething troubles with new infrastructure/ many closures and diversions to permit electrification/ existing routes chopped up to suit electrification map...

...which makes me think that any stability in the next five years is A Good Thing - I'd happily put up with "the devil you know" on any franchises because this turbulent period would be a bad time to rock the boat. Boring answer, I know!

Basically I'm not looking at the Barnstaple line as a Branch line but as the end of a main line from Waterloo (which is historically what it is)

The important word in that quote is the final one. Is. It should be "was".

Morecambe was the holiday resort for thousands of people in Bradford each year.

Attercliffe Road was a busy Sheffield station in the days of mass employment in the Don Valley.

Nobody is suggesting twelve coach trains from Bradford to Morecambe on summer Saturdays, nobody is suggesting re-opening a station in the industrial wilderness, so I don't know why bringing back a link from Waterloo to Barnstaple seems such a fascination to people on this Forum.

If there were a Forum drinking game then I'd have "Waterloo - Barnstaple" up there with "fast services from Leeds to Glasgow via the S&C" and "putting 456s on the Lymington branch"

 

[455driver]

Removal of external vinyl and painted in the FGW blue livery.
New flooring throughout.
Roof repairs.
Driving cabs resprayed.

Maybe more...

I thought it was being made DDA (or whatever its called this week) compliant?

 

[TEW]

150261 hasn't but I believe future 150/2s to get the overhaul will be made DDA compliant.

 

[Rapidash]

Uh oh, is 455Driver soon to be PacerDriver? I'm having visions of Malcolm Tucker stomping around St Davids shouting at grockles!

 

[455driver]

Uh oh, is 455Driver soon to be PacerDriver? I'm having visions of Malcolm Tucker stomping around St Davids shouting at grockles!

I might go for donkeydriver!
Actually looking forward to it, I hear the passengers actually speak to to you, unlike the miserable Lundun commuters!

 

[fgwrich]

Just to settle my "I'm sure they can go to Exmouth" thoughts I looked on Flickr, and found 158751 at Exmouth in Sept 2007 and another of an unidentified 158 in Alphaline livery in August 2007

Agreed. Wessex Trains used to use Class 158s when they had a rather over plentiful fleet of them on the Devon Metro (Rather wasteful for a 90MPH unit!) which very narrowly continued on into the fringes of the FGW Franchise during the very early stages.

First ScotRail's 158741 Also made it onto the Devon Metro during the first few weeks of the FGW Franchise as a sort of preview unit to GW Commuters. Which was an odd ball - given it's ex NX ScotRail interior and Barbie colour scheme, but this was in the early day's of Alison Forster's (now NX) rather short-lived management reign.

Bringing back the 387 Argument for a moment, whilst the early batches are for use on Thameslink, there has just been another batch order committed taking the total number of units up to near 50. Co-incidental timing or the future of the Thames Valley? rather unfortunately, I'd say it's highly likely that's what will form the 165/166 replacement.

 

[bnm]

What's the point of franchising and signing contract terms if they can just be ignored?

To say nothing of First Group exercising their Greater Western contractual break clause 2 years ago and yet still keeping the keys for 7 years beyond the date when they those keys should have been re-tendered.

The mess may be of the DfT's making, but why does that mean the incumbent gets to carry on regardless?

I don't buy the argument either that major infrastructure changes should mean the incumbent gets to continue. Franchise dates were known. Infrastructure improvement dates were known.

What we have is the worst of all worlds. No competition to invigorate the Greater Western franchise. We should be having a franchise renewal precisely because there are major infrastructure and rolling stock changes. Get the competing interests bidding now to show what they can offer.