Paddington-Newbury - irregular off peak service

[nw1]

Arising from another thread I decided to look up the current service pattern on the Paddington-Newbury route.

It looks like Newbury to London is considerably less clockface than I would expect for a service in ex-NSE territory, e.g in the late morning/lunchtime period there are departures at 0952, 1021, 1125*, 1155, 1225, 1333*, 1356, 1425 (* from Exeter). The Readings, while always at around xx10, also do not form a consistent clockface pattern.

Same goes for down services too, the path used for the Newbury service doesn't seem to be the same each hour, e.g. 1112, 1213 (but looks like it would be slightly later on the WTT, as there is a Cardiff at 1213 which arrives Reading 3 mins earlier), 1305, 1406 and 1512.

Likewise the Cardiff service doesn't always use the same path (e.g xx13 and xx16 both used). What's the cause of the complex timetabling for the Newbury route I wonder? Operationally I'd have thought it would be simpler now with all services capable of 110mph+, whereas in the past there was a mixture of HSTs, 180s, Turbos and/or classic loco-hauled services on the mainline at different times.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

What's the cause of the complex timetabling for the Newbury route I wonder? Operationally I'd have thought it would be simpler now with all services capable of 110mph+, whereas in the past there was a mixture of HSTs, 180s, Turbos and/or classic loco-hauled services on the mainline at different times.

I suspect it may be something to do with the freight paths to and from the western quarries and Theale. There's also the current Newbury - Bedwyn shuttle to work around which affects platform occupancy and probably will continue to do so until such time as through workings are restored either through greater IET availability or - unlikely in the present financial and political climate but which would be ideal - an extension of the wires.

 

[nw1]

I suspect it may be something to do with the freight paths to and from the western quarries and Theale. There's also the current Newbury - Bedwyn shuttle to work around which affects platform occupancy and probably will continue to do so until such time as through workings are restored either through greater IET availability or - unlikely in the present financial and political climate but which would be ideal - an extension of the wires.

Ah ok - that could make sense, mind you hasn't freight always been a significant factor on that route? The predecessor through Bedwyns were clockface from Paddington: xx18 if I remember right in the all-diesel era, and I believe in the 2019 timetable which sadly was cut short, they were always at xx07.

I guess the extra complexity of running the Bedwyn as a separate shuttle means that it could be more affected by freight and that has a knock-on effect in terms of preserving connections from the London direction.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I guess the extra complexity of running the Bedwyn as a separate shuttle means that it could be more affected by freight and that has a knock-on effect in terms of preserving connections from the London direction.

That is my guess - because of the lack of any west facing bays at Newbury these days, the Bedwyn shuttle usually turns around in the up main platform.

 

[nw1]

That is my guess - because of the lack of any west facing bays at Newbury these days, the Bedwyn shuttle usually turns around in the up main platform.

Ah ok, I don't think I realised there was no western bay at Newbury, it was always my assumption there was. I have to confess I've only been through Newbury a few times, 2001 (non-stopping, impromptu diversion of a Paddington-Bristol service), 2003 (to Kintbury, returning from Bedwyn) and 2015 (to and from Bedwyn), and cannot recall if there were any bays.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Ah ok, I don't think I realised there was no western bay at Newbury, it was always my assumption there was. I have to confess I've only been through Newbury a few times, 2001 (non-stopping, impromptu diversion of a Paddington-Bristol service), 2003 (to Kintbury, returning from Bedwyn) and 2015 (to and from Bedwyn), and cannot recall if there were any bays.

There used to be, but when the Lambourn Valley was closed, the bays were taken out of use. They're now part of the car parks. There is one eastern end bay which is used for terminating some services from Paddington and Reading - and of course in the absence of the through Bedwyn service, some of those have to turn around in one or the other of the main platforms as well, which doesn't help the pathing much either.

 

[brad465]

I don't know how many IETs are being freed up by the 175 cascade, but I suspect there won't be enough to reinstate through services from London-Bedwyn, as further up the queue is the Bristol-Oxford service and reducing short-formations on London-Bristol/South Wales' services. I have wondered why electrification was planned to stop at Newbury (even with the massive cutback from the original spec Newbury was the planned limit on this route), as doing this through to Bedwyn would have allowed 387s could have taken over the service in full.

 

[JonathanH]

I have wondered why electrification was planned to stop at Newbury (even with the massive cutback from the original spec Newbury was the planned limit on this route), as doing this through to Bedwyn would have allowed 387s could have taken over the service in full.

Quite a lot of bridge work needed to get electrification from Newbury to Bedwyn.

 

[nw1]

I don't know how many IETs are being freed up by the 175 cascade, but I suspect there won't be enough to reinstate through services from London-Bedwyn, as further up the queue is the Bristol-Oxford service and reducing short-formations on London-Bristol/South Wales' services. I have wondered why electrification was planned to stop at Newbury (even with the massive cutback from the original spec Newbury was the planned limit on this route), as doing this through to Bedwyn would have allowed 387s could have taken over the service in full.

Out of interest, given that quite a few IET diagrams were taken out by the withdrawal of the London-Bristol Parkway-Bristol superfasts, you'd think there would be more than enough even with the Oxfords in place. What's the reason for the discrepancy?

I wonder if they could run IETs down to Bedwyn in the middle part of the day, when there might be more slack in the fleet? So you could have an hourly service from say 0907 to 1507, the final service could then presumably get down to Bedwyn and back in time to form an 18xx peak service out of Paddington, let's say the existing 1807-ish to Frome.

The challenge would be shoulder-peak or early peak: you couldn't have a 1607 or 1707 through service as these wouldn't get back to Paddington in time for a later peak service, but I guess the 1737-ish to Exeter (?) could stop additionally at stations to Bedwyn. Then the 1807-ish to Frome already provides a Bedwyn service so you'd have a couple of evening peak services.

It's not ideal due to the shoulder-peak "holes" but I guess it's one way of restoring a through service for at least part of the day, perhaps.

 

[brad465]

Out of interest, given that quite a few IET diagrams were taken out by the withdrawal of the London-Bristol Parkway-Bristol superfasts, you'd think there would be more than enough even with the Oxfords in place. What's the reason for the discrepancy?

I don't know for sure, but Cardiff-Exeter/Penzance is a route that pre-covid was not IET and is today, with no plans to change this. They also feature on Bristol-Worcester local services, though this might change with the 175-induced cascade.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Out of interest, given that quite a few IET diagrams were taken out by the withdrawal of the London-Bristol Parkway-Bristol superfasts, you'd think there would be more than enough even with the Oxfords in place. What's the reason for the discrepancy?

I wonder if they could run IETs down to Bedwyn in the middle part of the day, when there might be more slack in the fleet? So you could have an hourly service from say 0907 to 1507, the final service could then presumably get down to Bedwyn and back in time to form an 18xx peak service out of Paddington, let's say the existing 1807-ish to Frome.

The superfasts were off peak so taking units out for HST replacement was mainly achieved by reductions in formation as well as all the Bedwyn changes. There isn’t that much slack in the fleet inter-peak as that is when quite a few mandatory maintenance windows have to be taken.

The 175 introduction will allow GWR to reverse the position and re-introduce the Bedwyns as IET but there will still be issues with the freights which will affect the stoppers, as they always have done.

 

[nw1]

I don't know for sure, but Cardiff-Exeter/Penzance is a route that pre-covid was not IET and is today, with no plans to change this. They also feature on Bristol-Worcester local services, though this might change with the 175-induced cascade.

Ah ok - I think I expected that route to go over to 175s but evidently not.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Ah ok - I think I expected that route to go over to 175s but evidently not.

Cardiff to Exeter stays as 80x

175s are destined for Exeter to Penzance and local services in Devon and Cornwall; this will release 80x and 158s from these areas along with some 16x for Bristol Metro enhancements.

 

[Snow1964]

Cardiff to Exeter stays as 80x

175s are destined for Exeter to Penzance and local services in Devon and Cornwall; this will release 80x and 158s from these areas along with some 16x for Bristol Metro enhancements.

Cardiff-Exeter is keeping 80x, but the longer, and arguably more busy Cardiff-Portsmouth will move to mainly 158s.

I believe the curved Hamble viaduct (which is actually series of straight spans) is not suitable for 26m vehicles.

Additional stations are being opened / reopened Taunton-Exeter, although not sure if the 802s on Cardiff-Exeter will serve these. At the moment I don't think plan is to clear the 175s to Taunton, or Axminister so they won't be able to cover these routes if a train fails and needs cover in Exeter area.

 

[nw1]

Cardiff-Exeter is keeping 80x, but the longer, and arguably more busy Cardiff-Portsmouth will move to mainly 158s.

The Turbos thus displaced presumably then intended for Portishead etc when they open I guess?
Presumably as the route has seen double Turbos in recent years with 5-car formations, it'll go over to double 158s (versus the single 158s commonplace in the past)?

So for clarification, there aren't through Cardiff-Plymouth/Penzance services anymore, but rather separate Exeter-Cardiff and Exeter-Plymouth-Penzance stopping services?

 

[cactustwirly]

The superfasts were off peak so taking units out for HST replacement was mainly achieved by reductions in formation as well as all the Bedwyn changes. There isn’t that much slack in the fleet inter-peak as that is when quite a few mandatory maintenance windows have to be taken.

The 175 introduction will allow GWR to reverse the position and re-introduce the Bedwyns as IET but there will still be issues with the freights which will affect the stoppers, as they always have done.

I am I interpreting correctly that Bedwyn direct is confirmed?

 

[Kite159]

Isn't one issue with Paddington - Bedwyn services using IET require guards, whereas the split 387s Newbury - Paddington & 165 between Bedwyn - Newbury are DOO?

 

[Parallel]

Isn't one issue with Paddington - Bedwyn services using IET require guards, whereas the split 387s Newbury - Paddington & 165 between Bedwyn - Newbury are DOO?

I believe so. The Oxford terminating IETs are DOO but they call at stations that have dispatch staff available. I believe Theale, Thatcham and certainly Kintbury, Hungerford and Bedwyn do not have any platform staff. However it does mean that GWR can potentially save some driver resource through reduced turnarounds at Newbury of both services, whilst freeing up a probably much needed Turbo for use elsewhere.