Future of the Intercity 125s

[Kali]

EXD-PAD stopper takes about 2:30ish via Westbury - with a similar number of stops via Bristol it's almost 3 hours ( I can't find a faster comparison - I doubt anything is going to bypass Bristol if it goes that way anyway ). Both would benefit the same from more rapid acceleration. Assuming every 100+ section between Bristol & Bridgewater gets bumped up to 125, that will cut about two minutes off; I remain unconvinced.

 

[starrymarkb]

Plus would you be able to get journey times down to the far SW if going via Bristol. The aspiration is < 3hrs to Plymouth

 

[The Ham]

Yes, but electrification of the B&H is going to be rather more expensive than simply tacking onto the XC project to reach Taunton.
You can have electrics as far as Plymouth via the B&H or you can have electrics all the way to Penzance via Bristol.

I think the latter is the better choice.

Then possibly run bi-model trains as a stopping service to Plymouth via the B&H and then run the trains via Bristol to call at key stations only (after the B&H line joins) before running on into Cornwall.

I'll leave it up to your imagination as to which stations are key!

 

[Kali]

Plus would you be able to get journey times down to the far SW if going via Bristol. The aspiration is < 3hrs to Plymouth

How? relay the ( Bristol ) route as LGV?

 

[The Ham]

EXD-PAD stopper takes about 2:30ish via Westbury - with a similar number of stops via Bristol it's almost 3 hours ( I can't find a faster comparison - I doubt anything is going to bypass Bristol if it goes that way anyway ). Both would benefit the same from more rapid acceleration. Assuming every 100+ section between Bristol & Bridgewater gets bumped up to 125, that will cut about two minutes off; I remain unconvinced.

Skipping Swindon out of calling pattern of the Cornish trains would cut a good few minutes off the journey time and wouldn't upset too many people (as it's not a direct service at present). An IEP passing through Swindon at 75mph is going to take less time to slow down and less time to get back to maximum running than one that is stopping.

Also the journey time from London to Exeter is almost three hours, but then about 20 minutes of that is change time at Bristol.

 

[Zoe]

it's not a direct service at present

The services that currently run to/from Penzance via Bristol (two up and one down) call at Swindon.

 

[The Ham]

The services that run to/from Penzance via Bristol (two up and one down) call at Swindon.

OK, so for a few services a day it will take a little longer to allow a stop at Swindon.

Otherwise using current timings a train from London to Bristol Parkway is 1 hour 20 minutes (including a stop at Swindon) and a train from Bristol Parkway to Exeter St David's is 1 hour 15 minutes (there is one that does it in 1 hour 10 minutes). That is 2 hours 35 minutes which compares with 2 hours 15 (there are a two which do it in just over 2 hours but they only call at Reading & Exeter) via B&H.

 

[Xavi]

You will never get to Taunton as quick via Bristol as via Newbury fact.

Neither will you have the capacity to fit in more non-stop services via Bristol TM in amongst the stoppers to Taunton and Weston as well as XC services. The knock-on effect of delays would bring utter chaos.

B&H route has a bright future.

Also, all this stuff about not investing in wires west of Newbury / Bristol in CP6/7. Where else would you go if there's a rolling electrification programme given that it's pretty much a done deal that Sheffield - Leeds / Doncaster and Derby - Westerleigh / Severn Tunnel Jnc is a certainty to follow committed schemes?

 

[JamesRowden]

Also, all this stuff about not investing in wires west of Newbury / Bristol in CP6/7. Where else would you go if there's a rolling electrification programme given that it's pretty much a done deal that Sheffield - Leeds / Doncaster and Derby - Westerleigh / Severn Tunnel Jnc is a certainty to follow committed schemes?

The Electric Spine (including MML electrification) is not yet a committed scheme.

 

[HSTEd]

You will never get to Taunton as quick via Bristol as via Newbury fact.

You can erase the B&H's time advantage relatively easily through the use of fast accelerating pure electric train instead of a rather slovenly HST and through the deployment of 140mph running between London and Bristol and 125mph running on parts of the Bristol to Taunton Line.

You save something on order of £200m by not electrifying the B&H. (Its 88 miles from Newbury to Taunton)
That is a lot of money to spend on speed enhancements between Plymouth and Bristol, enhancements which are also of use to the XC system as well as Plymouth trains.
You should be able to purchase the 10-15 minutes necessary with that much money if the first few minutes are earned by the already proposed upgrades on the GWML.

Neither will you have the capacity to fit in more non-stop services via Bristol TM in amongst the stoppers to Taunton and Weston as well as XC services. The knock-on effect of delays would bring utter chaos.

B&H route has a bright future.

Knock on from delays are always chaos.

 

[Xavi]

You can erase the B&H's time advantage relatively easily through the use of fast accelerating pure electric train instead of a rather slovenly HST and through the deployment of 140mph running between London and Bristol and 125mph running on parts of the Bristol to Taunton Line.

You save something on order of £200m by not electrifying the B&H. (Its 88 miles from Newbury to Taunton)
That is a lot of money to spend on speed enhancements between Plymouth and Bristol, enhancements which are also of use to the XC system as well as Plymouth trains.
You should be able to purchase the 10-15 minutes necessary with that much money if the first few minutes are earned by the already proposed upgrades on the GWML.



Knock on from delays are always chaos.

These thoughts are locked in the age of rail decline. Do you seriously think in an age when expansion with schemes like Oxford to Bedford, HS2 and electrification on a scale never previously dreamt of, that government would take a decision to effectively remove a mainline from the network?! There has never been a period of growth like the present for rail travel and this during a period of economic stagnation.

You can chase lost time down B&H, but via Bristol you'll run into back of the Taunton stopper. Big performance and journey time difference. Also, you can't use the electric performance argument for one route when wires on the other give similar gains. Is 1 hr 50 to Exeter via B&H or 2 hr 20 (not sure it could be done) via Bristol preferred?

You talk about 88 miles of wiring like it's some huge distance; it will be be relatively cheap to wire once efficiencies of CP5 schemes bed in. Construction costs have been decline for some time and, in current climate, will continue to fall making electrification even more attractive.

 

[LE Greys]

These thoughts are locked in the age of rail decline. Do you seriously think in an age when expansion with schemes like Oxford to Bedford, HS2 and electrification on a scale never previously dreamt of, that government would take a decision to effectively remove a mainline from the network?! There has never been a period of growth like the present for rail travel and this during a period of economic stagnation.

You can chase lost time down B&H, but via Bristol you'll run into back of the Taunton stopper. Big performance and journey time difference. Also, you can't use the electric performance argument for one route when wires on the other give similar gains. Is 1 hr 50 to Exeter via B&H or 2 hr 20 (not sure it could be done) via Bristol preferred?

You talk about 88 miles of wiring like it's some huge distance; it will be be relatively cheap to wire once efficiencies of CP5 schemes bed in. Construction costs have been decline for some time and, in current climate, will continue to fall making electrification even more attractive.

Also, let's bear in mind the ultimate target for what I call CPX, a 100% electrified railway. Maybe there are a few practical exceptions, it would be hard to justify for the Far North for instance, so let's bring it down to a 100% electrified Inter-City network with a general running speed of 125 mph and 100% of all suburban services electrified with a general running speed of 100 mph. Regional routes will remain diesel only when electrification is totally unjustified, so by default they would get wires. I count TPX, XC and Scotrail Express as Inter-City, plus a few former NSE routes.

I rather doubt this is going to happen, but I believe it is what we should be aiming for.

 

[HSTEd]

These thoughts are locked in the age of rail decline. Do you seriously think in an age when expansion with schemes like Oxford to Bedford, HS2 and electrification on a scale never previously dreamt of, that government would take a decision to effectively remove a mainline from the network?! There has never been a period of growth like the present for rail travel and this during a period of economic stagnation.

You can chase lost time down B&H, but via Bristol you'll run into back of the Taunton stopper. Big performance and journey time difference.

Firstly this scale of electrification has been seriously proposed at-least once before that I know of.
A report by the Committee for Nationalised Industries in 1979 suggested a massive rolling electrification scheme that would have resorted in a mostly electrified railway by 2000.
We all know how that went.

And the rolling BR plan of the 80s and 90s would probably be ahead of where we will be after CP5 if it had continued as it had done (and there is no reason to assume that it would not have).

And you seem to be suggesting that we must never reduce the importance of any railway lines simply because of "growth".
What about efficiency?
The massively expensive upgrades on the GWML should largely remove the capacity bottlenecks and the probable increases in speed will probably make it more efficient to expend our limited resources on the via Bristol route than the route via the B&H.

uAlso, you can't use the electric performance argument for one route when wires on the other give similar gains. Is 1 hr 50 to Exeter via B&H or 2 hr 20 (not sure it could be done) via Bristol preferred?

You can when there is no business case to electrify the B&H when there is certainly a business case to electrify the line via Bristol thanks to the XC route sharing the line (XC-to-Plymouth route has an enormous BCR even without moving the Plymouth-London services onto it).

It is a choice between electrifying the B&H or spending the money on speed enhancements on the line via Bristol.

You talk about 88 miles of wiring like it's some huge distance; it will be be relatively cheap to wire once efficiencies of CP5 schemes bed in. Construction costs have been decline for some time and, in current climate, will continue to fall making electrification even more attractive.

I've been just told that going to Penzance, Newquay and the other branches, which comes out at roughly 90 miles of double track equivalent, is an awful long way.

Planning things based upon expected reductions in costs is always a dangerous thing to do.

EDIT:
I agree that the objective should be a fully electrified railway, but we have to question what order this will occur in and the quality of equipment that will be deployed on routes.

<90mph electrification equipment suitable for short regional EMUs is going to be a lot cheaper than InterCity standard equipment.
There is also no pressing need for this equipment to be installed right now.

 

[Kali]

Skipping Swindon out of calling pattern of the Cornish trains would cut a good few minutes off the journey time and wouldn't upset too many people (as it's not a direct service at present). An IEP passing through Swindon at 75mph is going to take less time to slow down and less time to get back to maximum running than one that is stopping.

Also the journey time from London to Exeter is almost three hours, but then about 20 minutes of that is change time at Bristol.

Admittedly there seems to be 6 mins wait at Bristol and a stop at Chippenham in the Paignton direct I looked at, but you're still trying to dig a huge amount of time up just to equal the current route - and I presume there'll be no more 2hr fast Reading only service?

HSTEd: What is £200m going to do between Bristol and Plymouth? other than a couple of minutes across the Somerset levels, I don't see where you're going to find any significant time cuts in the existing route unless there's a bottleneck somewhere, unless you want to spend it on tilting trains. 15 mins? maybe if you drove a straight line under Dartmoor...

 

[LE Greys]

What about efficiency?
The massively expensive upgrades on the GWML should largely remove the capacity bottlenecks and the probable increases in speed will probably make it more efficient to expend our limited resources on the via Bristol route than the route via the B&H.

What about the efficiency of what will be by then a shrinking fleet of ageing DEMUs being redeployed around the country to fill in the gaps? What about the costs of keeping DMU maintenance facilities at depots open? What about fuel and fuelling points? What about spares? What about training drivers and fitters for the different traction? If we're not to end up with another Marshlink, then this needs to be considered. Small diesel fleets are a drain on resources, and although I can't speak for all passengers, would probably put quite a few people off travelling. I've often rejected a Voyager in favour of a Pendy.

 

[HSTEd]

What about the efficiency of what will be by then a shrinking fleet of ageing DEMUs being redeployed around the country to fill in the gaps? What about the costs of keeping DMU maintenance facilities at depots open? What about fuel and fuelling points? What about spares? What about training drivers and fitters for the different traction? If we're not to end up with another Marshlink, then this needs to be considered. Small diesel fleets are a drain on resources, and although I can't speak for all passengers, would probably put quite a few people off travelling. I've often rejected a Voyager in favour of a Pendy.

The B&H would hardly be a diesel "island".... It is attached to the Wessex Main Line and the Heart of Wessex lines.

And what is especially wrong with Marshlink?
We will have "ageing" DEMUs or even DMUs to spare for the time necessary to ensure that we get the important routes first.
B&H will get its electrics.

But there is no reason to bump it ahead of the proper InterCity routes when it is effectively a duplicate route.

HSTEd: What is £200m going to do between Bristol and Plymouth? other than a couple of minutes across the Somerset levels, I don't see where you're going to find any significant time cuts in the existing route unless there's a bottleneck somewhere, unless you want to spend it on tilting trains. 15 mins? maybe if you drove a straight line under Dartmoor...

There are plenty of stretches of running at 100mph or 110mph that could be 125mph by the looks of it, and maybe even stretches of 140mph (since it seems likely that the projected electric XC stock will have the capability) especially north of the final curve into Taunton.

And yes, there is always the possibility of realignments to consider.
And tilting trains are something that will have to be assessed based on the time savings they could generate.

EDIT:

Fastest FGW train that I can find covers Bristol to Taunton in roughly 33 minutes with no intermediate stops.
You could almost save six or seven there with a fast accelerating EMU and the aforementioned 140mph.

 

[LE Greys]

The B&H would hardly be a diesel "island".... It is attached to the Wessex Main Line and the Heart of Wessex lines.

And what is especially wrong with Marshlink?
We will have "ageing" DEMUs or even DMUs to spare for the time necessary to ensure that we get the important routes first.
B&H will get its electrics.

But there is no reason to bump it ahead of the proper InterCity routes when it is effectively a duplicate route.

The Berks & Hants is not a 'proper' Inter-City route? Is that to be the fate of the southern ECML if HS2 nicks all its through passengers? Sending all traffic via the Great Way Round is a major backward step. Besides, the two other routes you mention are obvious next targets for regional electrification. I'm not so sure about the Heart of Wessex, but the WML would be about 50% electric even without the B&H being done (Southampton-Portsmouth already, Cardiff-Bath soon for definite, and Salisbury-Southampton probably).

As for what's wrong with Marshlink, I include Uxbridge as well. We have a few small sections of diesel-worked railway deep in Southern Electric territory, with a small fleet of DMUs serving them. That means a full maintenance tail for the units at Selhurst just for forty-four vehicles. Surely, that's wasteful.

There are plenty of stretches of running at 100mph or 110mph that could be 125mph by the looks of it, and maybe even stretches of 140mph (since it seems likely that the projected electric XC stock will have the capability) especially north of the final curve into Taunton.

And yes, there is always the possibility of realignments to consider.
And tilting trains are something that will have to be assessed based on the time savings they could generate.

EDIT:

Fastest FGW train that I can find covers Bristol to Taunton in roughly 33 minutes with no intermediate stops.
You could almost save six or seven there with a fast accelerating EMU and the aforementioned 140mph.

I can see where you're coming from, though. In some ways, it does make sense to focus funds on fewer routes. However, I don't especially like having to leave some routes out just to make the numbers add up.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Yeah that's the one. It's got a "St Pancras trainshed" sort of a feel to it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't think that the difference in conditions between Dawlish and Saltcoats is that marked that what works for one location wouldn't work for the other. The wires and catenary at Saltcoats still gets a damn good soaking in salt water:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pic...avy-rain-batter-parts-of-Britain.html?image=4


Googling a couple of images suggests that they have installed some sort of continuous covering within the four foot, with ballast still used in the cess and the six foot. I wonder whether it is a form of slab track, or just some sort of protective covering in an attempt to stop ballast being washed out from between the sleepers?

Last time I was in that part of the world, about three years ago, the ballast (when dry!) was covered with some kind of shiny stuff like glue. Obviously it is a perpetual headache. The location is very exposed from the south-east. You can get soaked standing on the up side platform at Dawlish.

 

[starrymarkb]

Assuming 140mph running all the way from Bristol to Taunton (not accounting for acceleration and braking) you'd save 10 mins on Bristol-Taunton compared with running at 100mph

Though running at 125 saves about 6 mins. Is it worth the extra cost to run at 140?

Thinking - further isn't there a restriction on passing an open platform at speeds greater then 125? All non stop trains on HS1 are routed on through lines with the platforms on loops. Unless you rebuild Nailsea and Backwell, Yatton, Worle, Highbridge and Burnham and Bridgwater with loops you are going to have to slow down and accelerate again to pass each station reducing the time saved by running at 140... And then pathing the stoppers is going to be trickier...

 

[Martin222002]

I don't think I've seen anyone mention the fact that not electrfying the B&H route would result in the loss of fast InterCity services for Westbury, which would either be degraded to a extended Bedwyn semi fast service using bi-mode IEP's or a diesel stopping service to Reading. The same could also be said for Castle Cary as well.

 

[starrymarkb]

I don't think I've seen anyone mention the fact that not electrfying the B&H route would result in the loss of fast InterCity services for Westbury, which would either be degraded to a extended Bedwyn semi fast service using bi-mode IEP's or a diesel stopping service to Reading. The same could also be said for Castle Cary as well.

True. Especially as Castle Cary, Westbury and to a lesser extent Pewsey have quite large catchment areas and serve as parkway stations. Though an hourly semi fast might be preferable. Depends if the locals want to trade speed for frequency.

 

[D365]

Assuming 140mph running all the way from Bristol to Taunton (not accounting for acceleration and braking) you'd save 10 mins on Bristol-Taunton compared with running at 100mph

Though running at 125 saves about 6 mins. Is it worth the extra cost to run at 140?

Thinking - further isn't there a restriction on passing an open platform at speeds greater then 125? All non stop trains on HS1 are routed on through lines with the platforms on loops. Unless you rebuild Nailsea and Backwell, Yatton, Worle, Highbridge and Burnham and Bridgwater with loops you are going to have to slow down and accelerate again to pass each station reducing the time saved by running at 140... And then pathing the stoppers is going to be trickier...

Yes, this rule is true. Closing off fast platforms or extra tracks through stations will be needed to keep 140mph up.

 

[The Ham]

The argument for going via Bristol isn't that we shouldn't be electrifying the B&H, rather if we lower the priority of the B&H and electrify the Cornish main line before it (given we can run bi model trains along the B&H anyway) so we can run EMU's the full way. In doing so, although there'll be some time disadvantage by going around, the route can all electric sooner. It also justifies the costs of increasing speeds on the line as there will be several intercity services.

If you then electrify the line from Exeter to Basingstoke then you do not need the B&H line as a diversion route, or if you do it can be run by bi-model services.

There will then become a time when the GWML needs more capacity because of the traffic along it; remove the EMU Cornish services back to the B&H line which gets electrified (probably only Westbury to Taunton). Which would then be justified as it would be cheaper than providing more capacity along the GWML. You could also, because of the likely increase in of services, justify speed increases along the B&H.

In doing it like that, you end up with all the electrification AND better speed enhancements, which might not have been so easy to justify if it was just the current service patterns which it was being based upon.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't think I've seen anyone mention the fact that not electrfying the B&H route would result in the loss of fast InterCity services for Westbury, which would either be degraded to a extended Bedwyn semi fast service using bi-mode IEP's or a diesel stopping service to Reading. The same could also be said for Castle Cary as well.

If you ran Paddington, Reading, Newbury and then all stations to Exeter as bi-model (electric to Westbury) the journey times are likely to still be nearly as quick between Pewsey & London as they currently are using IC125's. As the acceleration of the new trains would be better and the potentially higher line speeds between Reading & London.

In time it is likely that they'd get their intercity services back, but with a truly hourly service and the regular service to more places (i.e. although currently there are 8 direct trains between Westbury & Newbury 3 of these are in the morning between 6&7), I'd have thought that it would be worth the extra few minutes.

 

[swt_passenger]

Yes, this rule is true. Closing off fast platforms or extra tracks through stations will be needed to keep 140mph up.

To clarify slightly, the group standard refers to 'closing off fast platforms to passenger access' rather than permanently removing them from use.

So a gated 'mid island barrier' as seen at some Brighton line stations would do the job normally.

 

[D365]

To clarify slightly, the group standard refers to 'closing off fast platforms to passenger access' rather than permanently removing them from use.

That's what I meant; would be somewhat of a waste if they were left to rot.

 

[Xavi]

Well done to those who realise that flying from Bristol to Taunton at 125mph + and relying on those speeds to keep the journey time down will run into all sorts of problems the moment there's any delay and a Weston or Taunton stopper goes out in front. Unless you spend a lot more than the cost of wiring Newbury to Taunton on a load of station and loop rebuilds...

As for the B&H not being a proper Inter City route you want to take the likes of the 1506 off Paddington and you'll find very high passenger levels, full on departure and first advertised stop Taunton. Long distance Inter City at its finest. Or try the 1803 or 1903 and sample the only full restaurant services remaining in the UK. Perhaps it is a secondary route that should be grouped with the Heart of Wessex line!?

 

[tbtc]

Am confused by the idea of electrifying the Newquay branch but not the B&H?

 

[HSTEd]

Am confused by the idea of electrifying the Newquay branch but not the B&H?

What do you gain by wiring between Newbury and Taunton?
Most of the services are either through to Cornwall which could be diverted by Bristol or already pencilled in for bi-mode stock.

Extending to Newquay and Penzance from Plymouth allows you to convert the entire XC fleet used in the South West to electric operation without surrendering the excursion trains to Newquay or the regular extensions to Penzance.

Additionally the line speeds on the Newquay branch would make it suitable for trolley wire type equipment that would be rather cheaper than the equipment necessary on the Berks and Hants.

And the line goes within a few hundred yards of a multiple 400kV circuit substation at Quintrell Downs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well done to those who realise that flying from Bristol to Taunton at 125mph + and relying on those speeds to keep the journey time down will run into all sorts of problems the moment there's any delay and a Weston or Taunton stopper goes out in front. Unless you spend a lot more than the cost of wiring Newbury to Taunton on a load of station and loop rebuilds...

Well the station at Weston is already on a loop..... as to the stoppers getting in the way, if the stopping trains were fast accelerating EMUs (shortened Cl395s) this problem could reduced markedly, and loop platforms will be useful from a capacity increase standpoint as well.

EDIT:
I make it five stations as the first two out of Bristol are so close to TM that the train is unlikely to have even obtained 140mph by the time it passes them even assuming it could simply accelerate straight to full speed.

And Bedminster already has three platforms and a carriage siding on a platform face available.
Could easily close of the two platforms on the mains and use the remaining two for stoppers.

And if these stations in question are infeasible to rebuild, there is also rope style "PEDs" used at that station in South Korea where the ropes lift out of the way to allow access to the train and then drop down again.
Since the posts supporting them are negligibly wide compared to the span you don't have to worry about doors being occluded.

And 125mph is probably good enough come to think of it....

EDIT #2:
DfT Claims that the IEP will reduce London-Bristol travel times by 22 minutes, which would reduce the typical travel time to somewhere in the vicinity of 80 minutes.

Even with no improvements between Bristol and Taunton, this means that we are looking at 112 minutes for London-Taunton via Bristol, which is something like 1hr 52.

Typical journey times to Taunton now are something on order of 1hr 43.

So with £200m (since this would spend absolutely no money on Bristol-Taunton as electrification would be covered by XC, atleast as far as Plymouth), can you squeeze out ten minutes on Bristol-Plymouth journey times?

I think the answer is yes.

 

[Xavi]

What do you gain by wiring between Newbury and Taunton?
Most of the services are either through to Cornwall which could be diverted by Bristol or already pencilled in for bi-mode stock.

Extending to Newquay and Penzance from Plymouth allows you to convert the entire XC fleet used in the South West to electric operation without surrendering the excursion trains to Newquay or the regular extensions to Penzance.

Additionally the line speeds on the Newquay branch would make it suitable for trolley wire type equipment that would be rather cheaper than the equipment necessary on the Berks and Hants.

And the line goes within a few hundred yards of a multiple 400kV circuit substation at Quintrell Downs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Well the station at Weston is already on a loop..... as to the stoppers getting in the way, if the stopping trains were fast accelerating EMUs (shortened Cl395s) this problem could reduced markedly, and loop platforms will be useful from a capacity increase standpoint as well.

EDIT:
I make it five stations as the first two out of Bristol are so close to TM that the train is unlikely to have even obtained 140mph by the time it passes them even assuming it could simply accelerate straight to full speed.

And Bedminster already has three platforms and a carriage siding on a platform face available.
Could easily close of the two platforms on the mains and use the remaining two for stoppers.

And if these stations in question are infeasible to rebuild, there is also rope style "PEDs" used at that station in South Korea where the ropes lift out of the way to allow access to the train and then drop down again.
Since the posts supporting them are negligibly wide compared to the span you don't have to worry about doors being occluded.

And 125mph is probably good enough come to think of it....

EDIT #2:
DfT Claims that the IEP will reduce London-Bristol travel times by 22 minutes, which would reduce the typical travel time to somewhere in the vicinity of 80 minutes.

Even with no improvements between Bristol and Taunton, this means that we are looking at 112 minutes for London-Taunton via Bristol, which is something like 1hr 52.

Typical journey times to Taunton now are something on order of 1hr 43.

So with £200m (since this would spend absolutely no money on Bristol-Taunton as electrification would be covered by XC, atleast as far as Plymouth), can you squeeze out ten minutes on Bristol-Plymouth journey times?

I think the answer is yes.

The infrastructure equivalent of IEP.

 

[tbtc]

DfT Claims that the IEP will reduce London-Bristol travel times by 22 minutes, which would reduce the typical travel time to somewhere in the vicinity of 80 minutes.

Even with no improvements between Bristol and Taunton, this means that we are looking at 112 minutes for London-Taunton via Bristol, which is something like 1hr 52.

Typical journey times to Taunton now are something on order of 1hr 43.

So with £200m (since this would spend absolutely no money on Bristol-Taunton as electrification would be covered by XC, atleast as far as Plymouth), can you squeeze out ten minutes on Bristol-Plymouth journey times?

I think the answer is yes.

All of these ideas assume that there will be absolutely no money spent on the B&H at the same time, hence no improvements in the times that you want to spend huge sums of money on the Bristol route to compete against.