New TOC: Three Counties?

[Class172]

With my local station not having a service to London, and the others in the area have, I was just thinking of a new TOC that would operate in the Worcestershire, Herefordshire and Gloucesteshire areas - it could be called 'Three Counties Railways' (that's what the area is collectively known as).

The lines they could operate would be:
London Paddington - Worcester - Hereford(via Oxford)
London Paddington - Worcester - Birmingham Snow Hill(via Oxford)(like the old Oxford, Worcester & Wolverhampton Railway)
Birmingham New St. - Hereford (via Bromsgrove)
Birmingham Snow Hill - Worcester - Evesham/Gloucester
Birmingham Snow Hill - Droitwich Spa - Birmingham New St.
Birminham Snow Hill/New St. - Worcester - Gloucester - Stroud - Swindon
+ Variations on these

It would be based in Worcester and operate a variety of stock (inherited from previous TOC's and a few more)- all diesel:
Class 153
Class 158
Class 165
Class 166
Class 170
Class 172
Class 43 HST
Class 67
MK3 coaches

I would like to know what people think about this idea - give suggestions - maybe one day it might become reality

 

[OMGitsDAVE]

I like the routes, but why not have a Uniform fleet so that you can at least use them in multiple, or cascade them to other lines in case of unavailability?

 

[philjo]

Presumably the Paddington routes will require IEP bi-modes to use electric traction between Paddington & Oxford?

The name could also be a bit confusing to anyone not local to the area. BBC Three Counties Radio covers Beds, Herts & Bucks!

 

[Class172]

The name could also be a bit confusing to anyone not local to the area. BBC Three Counties Radio covers Beds, Herts & Bucks!

That's a point, I didn't know that
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I like the routes, but why not have a Uniform fleet so that you can at least use them in multiple, or cascade them to other lines in case of unavailability?

If you could make a more uniform fleet, I would keep the 158's, 153's and 172's - still not uniform but they can work in multiple (as they have gangways). I'd still keep the HST's though for the long distance London services
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Presumably the Paddington routes will require IEP bi-modes to use electric traction between Paddington & Oxford?

I forgot about the Oxford electrification: services from Paddington terminating at Oxford should use electric traction, I don't know what though

 

[sprinterguy]

There are more types of rolling stock listed in the OP than there are routes that they would operate on. hock:

The main problem I foresee is one of capacity: Routing services from Birmingham Snow Hill via Stourbridge would be slower than the competing London Midland services to Worcester from New Street, and the XC services to Cheltenham and Gloucester, as they would have to be pathed amongst the regular suburban passenger services on the Snow Hill lines. Paths between the existing services would be restrictive, especially between Stourbridge and Snow Hill.

Trains travelling to Gloucester from Birmingham would be duplicating the existing XC services, albeit with a different calling pattern.

There are some good ideas there IMO though: I like the idea of a Birmingham-Worcester-Gloucester-Swindon service, and a Birmingham-Worcester-Evesham service. Maybe one way to reduce the pathing issues at the Birmingham end would be to make use of the Camp Hill line, which AFAIK currently only sees one XC passenger service an hour, and avoids the most congested section of the Cross City south route, rejoining it at Kings Norton where the formation becomes four track.

Routing via Stourbridge, despite the acute pathing conditions which may prevail, would offer access to a greater range of destinations if intermediate stops at key points along this section were incorporated (Cradley Heath, Stourbridge Junction and Kidderminster as examples).

This looks more like an open access supposition than a franchised TOC: I don’t think the DfT would be agreeable towards the duplication of franchises on certain route sections, or the increase in the number of operators out of Paddington.

While I know that it would now be impossible as the production lines have long since closed down and the trains themselves have far from proven their worth, I’d advocate six carriage class 180 Adelantes on the longer distance services and three carriage class 175s on the shorter distance workings with more intermediate stops.

 

[Class172]

There are more types of rolling stock listed in the OP than there are routes that they would operate on. hock:

The main problem I foresee is one of capacity: Routing services from Birmingham Snow Hill via Stourbridge would be slower than the competing London Midland services to Worcester from New Street, and the XC services to Cheltenham and Gloucester, as they would have to be pathed amongst the regular suburban passenger services on the Snow Hill lines. Paths between the existing services would be restrictive, especially between Stourbridge and Snow Hill.

Trains travelling to Gloucester from Birmingham would be duplicating the existing XC services, albeit with a different calling pattern.

There are some good ideas there IMO though: I like the idea of a Birmingham-Worcester-Gloucester-Swindon service, and a Birmingham-Worcester-Evesham service. Maybe one way to reduce the pathing issues at the Birmingham end would be to make use of the Camp Hill line, which AFAIK currently only sees one XC passenger service an hour, and avoids the most congested section of the Cross City south route, rejoining it at Kings Norton where the formation becomes four track.

If it was to be a proper TOC, then the London Midland services would become part of this one, so there'd be less competition.

But, it would still work well as an open access operator; especially the longer distance and better routes - FGW should give up the Cotswold line. However I can't operate an open access company, I'm only 14.

I'll be glad when the Camp hill line opens, more services for Droitwich (if they double the line between Droitwich and Bromsgrove.

Personally, I hate going on the snow hill line, much slower than the new st. route, it was just so pressure could be taken off new st.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
By the way the poll is multiple choice so choose as many as you want

 

[sprinterguy]

The Camp Hill line already is open, what it needs is a chord allowing trains to run into the bays at Moor Street to terminate, rather than taking up more space at New Street (Admittedly not the direction that the chord currently advocated is intended to face). If/when the Cross-city electrification is extended down to Bromsgrove, which will be into the CP5 period at the earliest now, I’d like to see it extended all the way into Worcester, as, as you say, the Stourbridge route from Worcester to Birmingham is tediously slow, and a greater number of faster services via Barnt Green is what is needed really.

 

[Blindtraveler]

The Camp Hill line already is open, what it needs is a chord allowing trains to run into the bays at Moor Street to terminate, rather than taking up more space at New Street (Admittedly not the direction that the chord currently advocated is intended to face). If/when the Cross-city electrification is extended down to Bromsgrove, which will be into the CP5 period at the earliest now, Id like to see it extended all the way into Worcester, as, as you say, the Stourbridge route from Worcester to Birmingham is tediously slow, and a greater number of faster services via Barnt Green is what is needed really.

i'd be more enclined to apply to dft to remove said runs from lm/fgw. I'd also use 6 car bi-mode addapted voyagers from virgin for longer runs,ordering them a load 6 car 390s as replacement.

For shorter trips i'd transfer from fgw some turbos.

 

[Class172]

Ideally I would want bothe lines to Worcester electrified but it won't happen on the snow hill lines for a while considering a load of 172's are about to enter service. I think that the XC line should be quadrupled from longbridge to Stoke Works (jct with Droitwich Line) - in the long run droitwich to worcester should be quadrupled as it is sure to become a bottleneck in the future (but this is unlikely)

Also, who voted for pacers in the poll?:-x

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Also, who voted for pacers in the poll?:-x

Are people not allowed to vote for what they want?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Also, who voted for pacers in the poll?:-x

you put the option there

(i didn't btw i think turbostars are the best option)

 

[Popper]

It would be nice if whoever voted pacer would explain their reason for doing so, I'd be quite interested.

 

[Class172]

It would be nice if whoever voted pacer would explain their reason for doing so, I'd be quite interested.

Exactly why I asked who did it

I put them on the poll so each type had a fair chance

 

[Ivo]

The name could also be a bit confusing to anyone not local to the area. BBC Three Counties Radio covers Beds, Herts & Bucks!

This would have been my point exactly. The other issue I would raise is that the number of services is probably too few to justify a new franchise; only Merseyside, LTS and the Island Line could really survive on their own (and two of those are franchises; the other was).

Anyway, the question. I would probably advocate a fleet of exclusively Class 170 units if possible; specifically, the two-car units currently operated by XC and LM and also the three-car units currently operated by LM (guess which route they would run? ). I would also suggest a name that is easier for "outsiders" to accept, such as the Severn franchise.

 

[martinsh]

I would also suggest a name that is easier for "outsiders" to accept, such as the Severn franchise.

That was my first thought too. Here are a few suggestions

Gloucestershire & Worcestershire Railway ( = G & WR !!)
West Midlands Railway (historically this was the name adopted when the OW&W merged with the Worcester & Hereford)
Mid Western Railway
Thames & Severn

I'll have a further think about the services and stock.

 

[Class172]

That was my first thought too. Here are a few suggestions

Gloucestershire & Worcestershire Railway ( = G & WR !!)
West Midlands Railway (historically this was the name adopted when the OW&W merged with the Worcester & Hereford)
Mid Western Railway
Thames & Severn

I'll have a further think about the services and stock.

I like them, the first is very ingenious

What if this was to be an open access operator that focused on the Paddington-Worcester-Birmingham and Birmingham-Worcester-Gloucester-Swindon routes. Although I'd like FGW to give up the Paddington-Worcester-Hereford service; this could then become part of the company (whatever name it's going to have now)

 

[Popper]

That was my first thought too. Here are a few suggestions

Gloucestershire & Worcestershire Railway ( = G & WR !!)

Erm.. I'm not sure how many of you users are heritage fans but doesn't it strike you that this name would be confused with the heritage railway? The rest of the names were good though.

Also Pacers.... This is getting ridicuolus!

 

[HST Power]

Doesn't make any difference to me. As my username will confirm, it's HST's all the way!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I love how pacers are on par with HSTs...

 

[Class172]

Turbostars are clearly everyone's favourite choice, followed by HST's. Notice I ignored pacers, not because I don't like them (I actually think there quite good when used correctly) but because they would be completely inadequate for any of the services: Pacers operating over 100miles in one trip (without breaking down) on a line that is currently operated by HST's and Class 166's (Cotswold line I'm talking about here), interesting...

 

[OMGitsDAVE]

Could always pimp out a 142, make them all leather seated (with room for suspension), tinted windows, nice little shop next to the toilet!

On a serious note, I think 172/3s will be good for your route(s)

 

[merlodlliw]

Presumably the Paddington routes will require IEP bi-modes to use electric traction between Paddington & Oxford?

The name could also be a bit confusing to anyone not local to the area. BBC Three Counties Radio covers Beds, Herts & Bucks!

The three Counties show ground is at Malvern,covering the Counties the op states,this name was there many decades before the BBC.Just out of interest.

http://www.threecounties.co.uk/

 

[Class172]

The three Counties show ground is at Malvern,covering the Counties the op states,this name was there many decades before the BBC.Just out of interest.

http://www.threecounties.co.uk/

Thats how the name came around originally

 

[HST Power]

Funnily enough, I still went for the Turbostar!

 

[Class172]

From the results so far, taking it as it would be an open access operator, I think it would be HSTs on the Birmingham-Worcester-London service and Turbostars on the Birmingham-Worcester-Swindon service; this could even be extended via Reading to Brighton: creating a B'ham-Brighton route which would probably be popular

Going more in-depth, even though this is still ideas, this could be a possible operation timetable:

London Paddington-Slough-Didcot Parkway-Oxford-(All stations from here to Worcester - some request stops)-Worcester Shrub Hill-Droitwich Spa-
This will be an hourly service, then alternating service each hour on
these two routes:
Droitwich Spa-Kidderminster-Blakedown-Hagley-Stourbridge Jct.-Smethwick Galton Bridge-The Hawthorns-Birmingham Snow Hill
Droitwich Spa-Bromsgrove-Camp Hill Line-Birmingham Moor St. or Birmingham New St.


Birmingham Moor St or Snow Hill-Same pattern as in previous (in reverse) until Droitwich Spa then hourly service. Droitwich Spa -Worcester Shrub Hill-Ashchurch for Tewkesbury-Cheltenham-Gloucester-Stroud-All stations from here to Swindon-Swindon

Hopefully you can understand what it says. Of course this would have to depend on certain improvements: Doubling of cotswold line (in progress); construction of Bordesley chords to allow traffic from Camp Hill line (from/to south) into Moor St. and most likely some signalling improvements to allow greater volumes of traffic. Please forgive me if I have got anything wrong as I was doing this all from memory.
Any views?

 

[HST Power]

And the HST wins again!

 

[Popper]

HSTs released from IEP? (if it ever happens!)

 

[tbtc]

Is this an idea for an Open Access Operator to replace existing TOC services? Or about extending existing services to Droitwich? And (given the choice of Virgin, London Midland and Chiltern) would anyone go from London to Birmingham via Worcester?

I'm a bit confused, tbh

 

[Popper]

Well best luck with your OAO when you get old enough the run it!

 

[Class172]

Is this an idea for an Open Access Operator to replace existing TOC services? Or about extending existing services to Droitwich? And (given the choice of Virgin, London Midland and Chiltern) would anyone go from London to Birmingham via Worcester?

I'm a bit confused, tbh

Well, the first route is more of a personal thing as every station in the county has a long distance service apart from Droitwich, the London-Birmingham route would rely on FGW giving up the majority of the Cotswold line, so this cannot be really counted as open access. Still the route wouldnt be too slow at 2 1/2 hours which is still a bit less than by car.

But the second route (Birmingham-Worcester-Swindon) would definitely be open access and would benefit lots of places. It would be even better if it could be extended to Brighton, giving the midlands a direct route to the South-east coast. There is currently no other route that is similar.

Now you see the dilemma: should it be a TOC, which it is too small for and requires a lot more hassle; or an open access operator where it actually operates one of the routes. Remember this is not actually set to happen, it's only an idea for the future.

Anyway I've decided that it should be called the 'Severn & Thames Railway' (STR) in stead of 'Three Counties' as this causes much less confusion and reflects the areas which it serves.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
@Popper - thanks, though that won't be for ages, and I'll need a lot if money