Newbury to Paddington timetable

[cactustwirly]

Just wondering what is going on with this

Monday to Friday there is a lopsided service of 2 services on even hours and then nothing for the odd hours? Pre COVID there was an hourly service from Bedwyn which was much more useable, I was under the impression that this was just replaced by 387s from Newbury

Saturday is an evenly spaced hourly timetable

Why is there such a difference?

Realtime Trains | Departures from Theale all day on 31/01/2025

Train information at Theale all day on 31/01/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Realtime Trains | Departures from Theale all day on 01/02/2025

Train information at Theale all day on 01/02/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

On Saturdays at Newbury the inbound arrival from Paddington at roughly xx58 is able to form the outbound departure at roughly xx08. This dovetails quite nicely with the Bedwyn shuttle although the connections are tight and potentially prone to being missed.

On Mon-Fridays the inbound arrival from Paddington is generally later because there is more freight and it has to run in a later path from Reading. The departure from Newbury is therefore earlier in order to maintain the service at the London end, but this costs an additional train set and means the Bedwyn shuttle can’t connect. As a result there are additional Newbury stops in selected WoE-Paddington services, and where this isn’t possible the shuttle connects with the local train to Reading which isn’t ideal. It makes for a messier timetable and illustrates why the Berks & Hants route desperately needs investment, be it electrification or more loops (or ideally both) to allow the Mendip freights to be accelerated and the passenger service to be enhanced.

 

[cactustwirly]

On Saturdays at Newbury the inbound arrival from Paddington at roughly xx58 is able to form the outbound departure at roughly xx08. This dovetails quite nicely with the Bedwyn shuttle although the connections are tight and potentially prone to being missed.

On Mon-Fridays the inbound arrival from Paddington is generally later because there is more freight and it has to run in a later path from Reading. The departure from Newbury is therefore earlier in order to maintain the service at the London end, but this costs an additional train set and means the Bedwyn shuttle can’t connect. As a result there are additional Newbury stops in selected WoE-Paddington services, and where this isn’t possible the shuttle connects with the local train to Reading which isn’t ideal. It makes for a messier timetable and illustrates why the Berks & Hants route desperately needs investment, be it electrification or more loops (or ideally both) to allow the Mendip freights to be accelerated and the passenger service to be enhanced.

How did the Bedwyn service work when it ran through to Paddington?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

How did the Bedwyn service work when it ran through to Paddington?

In the Up it ran in a different path and there were no connectional considerations. In the down, a similar freight impact meant that on Saturdays the journey time was 5-10 mins quicker than Mon-Fri.

 

[800301]

How did the Bedwyn service work when it ran through to Paddington?

When it was a Turbo or 800 it wasn’t an issue

 

[317362]

Newbury isn't brilliantly set up to allow for turning a shuttle to Bedwyn, although I'd rather see through trains again than that being sorted. Newbury station looks simple but is now operationally quite complex when busy and effects ripple out.

 

[800301]

Newbury isn't brilliantly set up to allow for turning a shuttle to Bedwyn, although I'd rather see through trains again than that being sorted. Newbury station looks simple but is now operationally quite complex when busy and effects ripple out.

Newbury Station is quite poorly set up in general, it needs ideally a crossover in the west to allow Up trains into P1 and in the East a 40mph crossover from P1 to the Up Westbury as you currently have to depart at 25 mph until past the racecourse where you cross over to the Up Westbury, but I don’t think either of these will come anytime soon and alas we will have to put up with the current situation which is less than ideal

 

[Chingy]

One big issue which can quickly cause “bunching” are the 3 road crossings (Thatcham, Colthorp & Midgham), between Newbury & Theale. Getting the barriers up at certain times of the day can prove quite tricky without cautioning or holding trains. Thatcham in particular is a very busy road crossing with quite a long signal section on the Up Westbury prior to it. To have a clear, green run you have to receive a green at Newbury Racecourse, which for stopping trains in particular, & freight, is a good few minutes away.

Not sure additional freight loops will prove much use, especially between Newbury & Southcote where the main capacity issues are on the B&H, due to the slow approach freight has to take to enter loops (normally 25mph approach controlled signals). A class 6 freight is probably just as quick as a stopping service anyway. I know from experience that a class 6 freight often goes just in front of the Bedwyn stopper, especially in the down direction, and said Bedywn stopper doesn’t get affected by it.

A “remodelling” of the Newbury/Newbury Racecourse area and the removal of the road crossings would see some notable improvements IMO.

 

[anthony263]

Fit batteries to soem 387s if they got enough range maybe wire the turnback siding at Bedwyn too and reinstate the direct london to bedwyn service

 

[sjoh]

Fit batteries to soem 387s if they got enough range maybe wire the turnback siding at Bedwyn too and reinstate the direct london to bedwyn service

I was always a bit perplexed at why they chose Newbury rather than Bedwyn or Westbury as the initial electrification limit. It only served to play havoc with the service possibilities (looking at you as well Didcot...).
Would it really have cost THAT much more to continue on? What's certain is that it'll definitely cost more now than it would have then...

 

[JonathanH]

Fit batteries to soem 387s if they got enough range maybe wire the turnback siding at Bedwyn too and reinstate the direct london to bedwyn service

Still not a panacea as the siding can't take an 8-coach 387.

 

[brad465]

Fit batteries to some 387s if they got enough range maybe wire the turnback siding at Bedwyn too and reinstate the direct london to bedwyn service

In the thread about small electrification schemes that would have the best gains, I suggested Newbury-Bedwyn so that the option of a 387 service all the way through from London could happen, which would improve resilience, free up platform capacity at Newbury and give Exeter and beyond services more wires to utilise.

Still not a panacea as the siding can't take an 8-coach 387.

Does the current Newbury terminator need to be 8-cars? The siding would fit a 4-car and the London-Bedwyn services ran 3-car Turbo for many years, before a brief pre-covid stint of 5-car IET. If Newbury needs 8-car then maybe a split/attachment at Newbury could be made so 4 carriages carry onto Bedwyn if electrified, with the other 4 terminating and joining the next up service.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Feb 2025 ==

I was always a bit perplexed at why they chose Newbury rather than Bedwyn or Westbury as the initial electrification limit. It only served to play havoc with the service possibilities (looking at you as well Didcot...).
Would it really have cost THAT much more to continue on? What's certain is that it'll definitely cost more now than it would have then...

Newbury was actually the only endpoint that was in the scheme from the outset. That's to say even the 2009 proposal going to Bristol, Oxford and South Wales included Newbury as the western end on the B&H.

 

[317362]

There aren't many bridges, one of them was refitted to be electrically cleared anyway, the Bedwyn siding is big enough for a 4x387, makes Newbury work far better, reduces delay, restores services lost due to the 800 crack issue 4 years ago, might even get a more than every 2 hour train on a Sunday, would be delightful. Sigh.

 

[Horizon22]

The 5-car to Bedwyn really did work out suitable for almost all needs and seemed to prevent fiddly operations at Newbury. Maybe it will come back, but given how the IETs are being used for other services this doesn't seem likely in the near term.

 

[Siemens Staines]

Does the current Newbury terminator need to be 8-cars? The siding would fit a 4-car and the London-Bedwyn services ran 3-car Turbo for many years, before a brief pre-covid stint of 5-car IET. If Newbury needs 8-car then maybe a split/attachment at Newbury could be made so 4 carriages carry onto Bedwyn if electrified, with the other 4 terminating and joining the next up service.

The majority of the weekday services are now 4-cars to Newbury;

1K02 0703 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K04 0805 Paddington - Newbury (8)
1K06 0906 Paddington - Newbury (8 to Reading, 4 to Newbury)
1K08 1012 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K10 1112 Paddington - Newbury (8)
1K12 1213 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K14 1305 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K16 1406 Paddington - Newbury (8)
1K18 1512 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K20 1605 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K22 1705 Paddington - Newbury (8)
1K28 2005 Paddington - Newbury (4)

 

[brad465]

The 5-car to Bedwyn really did work out suitable for almost all needs and seemed to prevent fiddly operations at Newbury. Maybe it will come back, but given how the IETs are being used for other services this doesn't seem likely in the near term.

The 175s should create a wide-ranging internal cascade, however the IET displacement from memory is at the back, where replacing HSTs and allowing 158s and Turbos to move around are at the front. Then of course there's the question of whether any IETs displaced by 175s actually are free to reinstate Paddington-Bedwyn services, given other priorities also exist, such as preventing short-formed services on other busier routes.

 

[nw1]

It's surprising to me that they didn't electrify to Bedwyn from the off, so to speak.

Through Bedwyn services have been a thing since (I think) 1993, so it would have surely made sense for the electrification to go there given that, by the time of electrification, the Bedwyn through service had been going for more than 20 years. Same with Oxford, would have allowed additional EMU 'crowdbusters' terminating at Oxford in the peak, relieving pressure on the Cotswold services. (Indeed, the initial draft of the electrification timetable showed precisely that, 3tph Paddington-Oxford fasts in the peak, one Cotswold, two Oxford terminators).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 May 2025 ==

The majority of the weekday services are now 4-cars to Newbury;

1K02 0703 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K04 0805 Paddington - Newbury (8)
1K06 0906 Paddington - Newbury (8 to Reading, 4 to Newbury)
1K08 1012 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K10 1112 Paddington - Newbury (8)
1K12 1213 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K14 1305 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K16 1406 Paddington - Newbury (8)
1K18 1512 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K20 1605 Paddington - Newbury (4)
1K22 1705 Paddington - Newbury (8)
1K28 2005 Paddington - Newbury (4)

Presumably they keep one 8-car diagram out all day because it's timed to run both a morning peak and an evening peak service. The Reading split is interesting, IMX they have tried to avoid Reading splits and joins over the years, presumably due to the busyness of the station. The only cases I remember (in 117 days in the 80s) were two consecutive Paddington-Reading locals combining on say Platform 9 to run back up for the peak, with an additional unit or units coming out of the depot to provide the return working of the first down service.

Looks like they've abandoned consistent clockface timings off-peak. Reminds me of the mid-to-late 80s out of Paddington, when for a few years there was a lot of off-peak inconsistency. Even Bristol services were not always at the same time each hour. The BR Coaching Stock groups.io group has a lot of old CWNs, departure books, etc, with Paddington especially well-represented with many departure books from the 70s and 80s. It can be seen that while for much of the 70s and 80s, consistent clockface departures were the norm, this was much less the case in the mid-80s as seen in the 1985 departure book.

 

[Horizon22]

I imagine the Reading split is to allow a unit into Reading TCD post-peak.

 

[nw1]

I imagine the Reading split is to allow a unit into Reading TCD post-peak.

True, it makes a lot of sense and I've certainly seen it elsewhere on the network - Guildford being a good example. What's interesting is they have the platform capacity to allow it. Was it ever done in Turbo days, e.g. with Bedwyns and Oxfords? I never saw an Oxford split in 117 days (Bedwyns were not a thing then, of course), that's not to say it never happened. I never spent the day at Reading in Turbo days though frequently changed trains there - and never remember seeing it.

 

[zwk500]

Does the current Newbury terminator need to be 8-cars? The siding would fit a 4-car and the London-Bedwyn services ran 3-car Turbo for many years, before a brief pre-covid stint of 5-car IET. If Newbury needs 8-car then maybe a split/attachment at Newbury could be made so 4 carriages carry onto Bedwyn if electrified, with the other 4 terminating and joining the next up service.

Newbury is not really set up for this type of working. The optimum way to do it would be for the down train to cross to the Up platform, detach and then cross back but that requires fairly long gaps between fast up trains and no other up trains wanting to stop before the next train from Bedwyn can pick up the unit. Otherwise, you'll need a driver to shunt the unit across at Newbury and similar concerns about crossing the fasts and not blocking the up platform for too long.

The 5-car to Bedwyn really did work out suitable for almost all needs and seemed to prevent fiddly operations at Newbury. Maybe it will come back, but given how the IETs are being used for other services this doesn't seem likely in the near term.

GWR procuring a 5-Car EMU (even by swapping some 387s for dual-voltage 377s) would seem one solution if wires are extended to Bedwyn or a BEMU used. Alternatively, put a footbridge up for the crossing and allow the siding to be extended to 8-car length.

 

[nw1]

Newbury is not really set up for this type of working. The optimum way to do it would be for the down train to cross to the Up platform, detach and then cross back but that requires fairly long gaps between fast up trains and no other up trains wanting to stop before the next train from Bedwyn can pick up the unit. Otherwise, you'll need a driver to shunt the unit across at Newbury and similar concerns about crossing the fasts and not blocking the up platform for too long.

GWR procuring a 5-Car EMU (even by swapping some 387s for dual-voltage 377s) would seem one solution if wires are extended to Bedwyn or a BEMU used. Alternatively, put a footbridge up for the crossing and allow the siding to be extended to 8-car length.

To avoid new types of unit or extensions of the siding, could they also do something similar to the setup in Turbo days, but electric?

What I mean by that, is run all Bedwyns as 4-car 387s, and in the peak, stop an IET (e.g. a slower Exeter) at Kintbury, Hungerford and Bedwyn additionally to provide a peak extra?
Maybe also have extra Paddington-Newbury services in the peak, to relieve pressure on the Bedwyns?

 

[JonathanH]

What I mean by that, is run all Bedwyns as 4-car 387s, and in the peak, stop an IET (e.g. a slower Exeter) at Kintbury, Hungerford and Bedwyn additionally to provide a peak extra?

Not without fitting batteries to the 387s, or wiring beyond Newbury.

 

[nw1]

Not without fitting batteries to the 387s, or wiring beyond Newbury.

That was what I was assuming to be fair.

 

[Horizon22]

Newbury is not really set up for this type of working. The optimum way to do it would be for the down train to cross to the Up platform, detach and then cross back but that requires fairly long gaps between fast up trains and no other up trains wanting to stop before the next train from Bedwyn can pick up the unit. Otherwise, you'll need a driver to shunt the unit across at Newbury and similar concerns about crossing the fasts and not blocking the up platform for too long.

GWR procuring a 5-Car EMU (even by swapping some 387s for dual-voltage 377s) would seem one solution if wires are extended to Bedwyn or a BEMU used. Alternatively, put a footbridge up for the crossing and allow the siding to be extended to 8-car length.

Well if it was wired you’d just run a 4-car 387 Reading-Bedwyn (or 8 through to Paddington with a split/join at Reading) train. No need for new stock.

 

[Kite159]

Well if it was wired you’d just run a 4-car 387 Reading-Bedwyn (or 8 through to Paddington with a split/join at Reading) train. No need for new stock.

Or even extend the Reading - Newbury stopper to Bedwyn keeping the Paddington - Newbury as a semifast with 8 coaches. Maybe at a cost of one extra 387 depending on the timings

 

[800301]

Or even extend the Reading - Newbury stopper to Bedwyn keeping the Paddington - Newbury as a semifast with 8 coaches. Maybe at a cost of one extra 387 depending on the timings

Doesn't work with the pathing. The best option is just to have IET's doing the bedwyns which they keep hinting at doing when the magical 175's come into service

 

[Zomboid]

The best option is just to have IET's doing the bedwyns

The best option is electrifying to Bedwyn. If 800s are available to operate the trains I'm sure the population of the area will be quite happy with that arrangement, but 387s would do just as well.

 

[800301]

The best option is electrifying to Bedwyn. If 800s are available to operate the trains I'm sure the population of the area will be quite happy with that arrangement, but 387s would do just as well.

Ideally, the entire GWR network would be electrified, but we all know that isn't going to happen at the drop of a hat, the easist solution is just to run IET's because they made such a drama to get them running on the route in the first place, the cost and disruption of electrifying Newbury to Bedwyn will way outweigh any benfiits it would bring esp if you compare it to the Didcot to Oxford section will would bring a lot of meaning full benefits

 

[Zomboid]

Ideally, the entire GWR network would be electrified, but we all know that isn't going to happen at the drop of a hat, the easist solution is just to run IET's because they made such a drama to get them running on the route in the first place, the cost and disruption of electrifying Newbury to Bedwyn will way outweigh any benfiits it would bring esp if you compare it to the Didcot to Oxford section will would bring a lot of meaning full benefits

This is true, and it always seemed bizarre that Bedwyn wasn't part of the plan - at least it was supposed to get to Oxford, and that will bring greater benefits than Bedwyn would. I'm pretty sure that Oxford will get wired eventually, but if BEMUs come on stream in reasonable numbers Bedwyn might have to wait a while.

 

[nw1]

but if BEMUs come on stream in reasonable numbers Bedwyn might have to wait a while.

Though if battery EMUs do indeed come on stream then they can presumably do through Bedwyn services, I guess.