Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
With the cost of rail reopening often prohibitive, I wonder if better advertised and marketed rail-buses could provide much enhanced connectivity to areas cut off from the rail network or between missing links.
Peterborough station has a bus route that runs to link the city with Wisbech, King’s Lynn, Swaffham, Dereham and Norwich broadly running along an old railway route. Could this sort of thing be replicated.
Could for example a series of high quality GBR rail branded buses timed where possible to provide interchange with key trains to help towns cut off from the network, with regular buses.
These could be clearly shown on rail maps and bus stops could be given high quality treatment. Bus stops could be labelled with letters A,B, C etc to distinguish from railway platforms but the information would be shown on departure boards.
Examples I can think of that could be helpful could be:
Audley End to Saffron Walden
Hitchin to Luton Airport to Luton (Town)
Colne to Skipton
March to Wisbech
Abingdon to Radley
Kemble to Cirencester
There are definitely some routes where proper integration with the bus network would offer benefits, though these are not necessarily related to where railways used to run.
And it'd need to be careful to avoid a worst of both worlds situation, where you'd be subject to the whims of the road traffic and not actually serve the places that people want to go (e.g. if stations aren't well located). For example an express bus between out of town parkway stations that doesn't stop anywhere else probably won't help much...
In the other thread there's mention of the Hitchin to Luton bus, which runs pretty often but doesn't serve Hitchin station - in a public transport utopia world that would have an integrated ticket and run to and from the stations in addition to the other places it serves.
This is really what should be done on numerous routes especially given the cost of even short rail branches due to how built up the land is. The St Andrews rail link thread highlighted how a 1 stop branch can cost around £600m for a 2tph train service that is at most 5 minutes faster than the bus. This is where integrated feeder buses work best - good examples are TrawsCymru and Switzerland's Postbus. I think Translink in Northern Ireland are quite good at having buses depart shortly before and after a rail departure too.
Generally, with the exception of towns located a long way away from other population centres, if said feeder bus takes over 30mins (arbitrary number but it's worth drawing the line somewhere) then a rail link is justified. Good examples of this in Northeast Scotland and North Devon. Otherwise even a non-stop bus connecting with a rail service (e.g. at Okehampton Interchange from Bude) can be slower than driving the whole way.
There are many places where a dedicated bus timed to connect with trains would work fairly well in lieu of a rail link. List would be quite long (perhaps worth a separate 'Trivia' thread?)
An achievable way of getting this would be for GBR to franchise certain integrated bus routes out to bus operators, and for a combined rail+bus PAYG system. Much harder in the UK with its complex rail ticketing and inconsistent bus fares compared to say the Netherlands, but a trial somewhere in the East or Southeast (potentially King's Lynn - Hunstanton, as that's already timed around rail arrivals) could be worth a try.
Such a system would also work well with 'gaps' in the rail network, such as an east-west railway through Hertfordshire (which includes Hitchin-Luton) provided the same integration measures are taken. However, low-capacity buses over regular roads are never going to be as fast or convenient as a train so there's still a reason to build new railway lines. East West Rail shows this, as I'm sure it'll be much busier than the X5 bus.
It's certainly a good idea to have better coordination between buses and trains – but the privatised bus industry doesn't make it easy to achieve.
Heck, in a lot of towns and cities, buses often don't even serve the railway station! Let alone thinking about timetables coordinated with train arrivals and departures, or integrated timetabling or fares.
What we don't want to do is to set up too prescriptive a system with lots of rules that will just get in the way of a better system.
For example – requiring bus stops to be lettered in a certain way will break the existing bus stop labelling system that councils already have in place. Better signage to direct people to the right bus stop would be fine.
For example – many routes already have sufficient bus provision that either does the job perfectly well or could be tweaked to do so. Duplicating these with additional GBR services would be wasteful and unnecessary, and would put the viability of the existing services at risk.
What we do want is an easier system and greater incentives for bus companies to improve connections between their buses and the rail network (so that they aren't worried about losing out when passengers choose to make a short bus ride to connect onto a train, rather than making the whole journey by bus, which is what the bus companies would obviously prefer) and to get their services included in the National Rail Timetable. Ensuring that drivers are aware of ticket validity and acceptance is a key step to this!
In my view the "missing links" which don't perhaps warrant the cost of (re-)building of a railway but are nevertheless desirable extensions to the rail network should not be in the form of normal stage-carriage bus services, but rather as "virtual trains" operated by or on behalf of the Railway, with Railway ticketing and timetabling, and not subject to the stage carriage rules about punctuality nor route. They will always start at or call at an actual railway station with the primary intention of carrying (what would otherwise be) rail passengers whether by connection or in isolation. They will run very limited stop (much as real trains do).
Perhaps a good example might be Barton On Humber to Hull to connect with trains at Barton, with through ticketing and probably without any stops en route. Or Scarborough to Whitby via Cloughton, Robin Hood's Bay.
This to occur regardless of any existing commercial or supported regular buses. Thus they can be wholly integrated as if they were trains. In other words, almost exactly as if a rail line were (re-)built.
In my view the "missing links" which don't perhaps warrant the cost of (re-)building of a railway but are nevertheless desirable extensions to the rail network should not be in the form of normal stage-carriage bus services, but rather as "virtual trains" operated by or on behalf of the Railway, with Railway ticketing and timetabling, and not subject to the stage carriage rules about punctuality nor route. They will always start at or call at an actual railway station with the primary intention of carrying (what would otherwise be) rail passengers whether by connection or in isolation. They will run very limited stop (much as real trains do).
Perhaps a good example might be Barton On Humber to Hull to connect with trains at Barton, with through ticketing and probably without any stops en route. Or Scarborough to Whitby via Cloughton, Robin Hood's Bay.
If you run new services parallel to existing services, especially if they are quicker because they miss out intermediate stops, then those existing services will wither away, potentially leaving passengers who use those intermediate stops with little or no service, and putting the pressure onto local councils to spend money subsidising routes that would be commercially viable if GBR hadn't just swiped most of the passengers.
Scarborough to Whitby already has a very good service, running 7 days a week, hourly through the winter and half-hourly from the start of April to the end of October. That section of the route has about 45 stops along it. Your new GBR bus will follow the exact same route, but missing out most of those stops. But the existing buses continue on to Middlesbrough. How do you think the economics of the Arriva service will fare under your plan? What will happen to the passengers using the 40 stops that you aren't serving any more, or the passengers making through journeys from Middlesbrough to Robin Hood's Bay and Scarborough?
Yes, there will be some cases where putting on new services running a limited stop route would be beneficial, but in many more cases all you would be doing would be jeopardising existing services and reducing journey opportunities for more people than you would be helping.
For example – many routes already have sufficient bus provision that either does the job perfectly well or could be tweaked to do so. Duplicating these with additional GBR services would be wasteful and unnecessary, and would put the viability of the existing services at risk.
In many cases, the 'GBR Bus' could just be the existing express buses operating on routes with potentially fewer stops (so just town centres and railway stations). Where there isn't one already, the 'GBR Bus' should operate as the express bus, and due to limited capacity, should only be used by people connecting onto the rail network. Then the existing bus service run by a private operator could continue its many-stops services round the houses between places. Ideally these could connect in town centres for the 'GBR Bus' for a seamless journey, though in smaller settlements a decent bike or foot path with bike storage facilities at the 'GBR Bus' stop would suffice. Then the private operators wouldn't need to fear about losing custom - if there's a market for a town to town express bus alongside the many-stops service, then you can run that as a separate local link, with GBR catering to the railway passengers.
In my view the "missing links" which don't perhaps warrant the cost of (re-)building of a railway but are nevertheless desirable extensions to the rail network should not be in the form of normal stage-carriage bus services, but rather as "virtual trains" operated by or on behalf of the Railway, with Railway ticketing and timetabling, and not subject to the stage carriage rules about punctuality nor route. They will always start at or call at an actual railway station with the primary intention of carrying (what would otherwise be) rail passengers whether by connection or in isolation. They will run very limited stop (much as real trains do).
Other than ticketing which is a complicated matter to resolve, this is all quite achievable with enough co-ordination - something GBR combined with more Bee Network style combined authority bus networks paths the way for. Early stages, all you really need is a decent, high capacity, comfortable bus (like the 36 Leeds-Ripon) and a timetable centred around the railway timetable (including waiting for delayed trains) and it'd work fantastically.
For example – requiring bus stops to be lettered in a certain way will break the existing bus stop labelling system that councils already have in place. Better signage to direct people to the right bus stop would be fine.
The average new railway station nowadays is not much more than a ticket machine and a few shelters anyways. Provided the bus is frequent, a simple shelter or two with a departure board, ticket machine and a clear indicator that the Rail-bus stops here (like the Superloop roundel at London bus stops) would work OK. However, a double-decker bus still has less capacity than a train, so frequency would need to be high enough on the route to prevent overcrowding at the GBR bus stop.
I really applaud what GWR has done in its region with bus integration. It calls the buses, rail link routes.
Some of these include: Tavistock to Okehampton, Totnes to Salcombe, Okehampton to Bude, Bodmin Parkway to Padstow, Taunton to Minehead and 2 routes in Barnstaple, 1 to Lynmouth and 1 to Ilfracombe. All of these routes are clearly branded, include combined ticketing and are timed connections in both directions.
The only thing I've seen that is remotely similar is in Wales with its Traws Cymru routes.
Would be great to see more areas across the country adopt this sort of way integrating bus and train, there are some truly awesome regional bus routes in this country that follow former rail routes, 36 Leeds to Ripon and 840/3 Leeds to Scarborough/ Whitby are widely praised, but imagine if routes like this formally extended the reach of the railway, could be something amazing.
I really applaud what GWR has done in its region with bus integration. It calls the buses, rail link routes.
Some of these include: Tavistock to Okehampton, Totnes to Salcombe, Okehampton to Bude, Bodmin Parkway to Padstow, Taunton to Minehead and 2 routes in Barnstaple, 1 to Lynmouth and 1 to Ilfracombe. All of these routes are clearly branded, include combined ticketing and are timed connections in both directions.
That's excellent for people who will be taking public transport anyway, but both the railway lines and bus services are quite slow in the area, making those routes still not very competitive with the private car. Due to (I presume) slow roads in the area, some routes are not actually that much slower with bus+train, like Bude-Exeter, (1h30 drive, 1h45 bus+train) but 1 hour on a local bus from Bude to Okehampton stopping everywhere would still put a number of people off making this journey. You could shave off up to 15 minutes by making the bus run Bude-Holsworthy-Okehampton Interchange only, but that's still long for what's supposed to be a feeder bus. Probably one of the more feasible places for an entirely new rail link.
That's excellent for people who will be taking public transport anyway, but both the railway lines and bus services are quite slow in the area, making those routes still not very competitive with the private car. Due to (I presume) slow roads in the area, some routes are not actually that much slower with bus+train, like Bude-Exeter, (1h30 drive, 1h45 bus+train) but 1 hour on a local bus from Bude to Okehampton stopping everywhere would still put a number of people off making this journey. You could shave off up to 15 minutes by making the bus run Bude-Holsworthy-Okehampton Interchange only, but that's still long for what's supposed to be a feeder bus. Probably one of the more feasible places for an entirely new rail link.
I think that would be a mistake, the villages on the way need public transport too and why not build the system in a way that encourages people to visit and ensures rural areas are not stuck fully reliant on their cars? If we are solely concerned with speed, a train will always be faster. But as a country, we need to remember how to build infrastructure again.
I've been on 2 of these routes, Tavistock to Okehampton which had very few settlements on the way as much of it goes through Dartmoor, a very nice journey and Taunton to Minehead, that one was much busier and not ideal for people with luggage. The latter either needs the train back or coaches on the bus route instead.
I look at how coaches serve rural areas in Scotland (Citylink/ Ember) and Ireland (Bus Eireann/ Expressway) and wonder if that would be a good solution down here too. I think raising the profile of everywhere that is possible by combination of train and coach/ bus would be a good first step, then think about any express routes. Many rural buses only stop once or twice in a village anyway. Noticed that when using the 840 from Whitby to Malton Station.
I think that would be a mistake, the villages on the way need public transport too and why not build the system in a way that encourages people to visit and ensures rural areas are not stuck fully reliant on their cars? If we are solely concerned with speed, a train will always be faster. But as a country, we need to remember how to build infrastructure again.
Indeed the villages do need a connection too, but the majority of passengers will be coming from the towns and by running slow all-stop 1hr+ routes you're inconveniencing the majority to help the minority. As I suggested in a previous post, most of these routes justify both a limited-stop GBR bus (for the towns) and an all-stops local bus (for the villages). Both could connect with trains but of course the express bus would get the full GBR branding and treatment, as if a rail route was built, there wouldn't be stops in every village either.
There are very few cases where a rail-link bus would entirely replace a local bus, such as in the Highlands where there really are very few people living between the town and the rail station - justifying at most a hail&ride system along the route, or requiring prebooking a stop like Ember do on their rural coach routes.
Would be great to see more areas across the country adopt this sort of way integrating bus and train, there are some truly awesome regional bus routes in this country that follow former rail routes, 36 Leeds to Ripon and 840/3 Leeds to Scarborough/ Whitby are widely praised, but imagine if routes like this formally extended the reach of the railway, could be something amazing.
And therein lies the problem ... for at least part of those routes, Transdev are competing with the railway, so while extending the railway sphere to Ripon, Tadcaster and Pickering/Whitby is definitely a laudable aim, having rail-link buses running parallel to actual trains between Harrogate and Leeds, and between Scarborough, Malton, York and Leeds, is going to be problematic.
Interestingly, the Coastliner 840 is still included in RTT as a bus service calling at Whitby Bus Station, Pickering, Eden Camp and York Station – but no mention of the fact that it also calls at Malton Station or continues to Leeds – and it doesn't come up as an option in any of the online journey planners, which I assume means there are no longer fares available for it.
I'm afraid much of the discussion here is completely pie-in-the-sky and will remain so as long as deregulation of buses remains on the statute book. But an improvement that can be done here and now is the improvement of information provision.
Harrogate has already been mentioned; with the local bus fleet having been almost completely replaced in the last year or so nearly all buses now provide information on potential connections as they approach the town's bus station. But arrive by train and you could easily miss the existence of the bus station 2 minutes walk away. A summary real-time display of bus departures in the railway station booking hall should not be difficult to provide. Anyone who has visited the Wigan Central bar will know said establishment has departure screens for both the town's nearby stations. "Remote" information displays should be much more common and would surely help in improving the confidence of passengers making multi-modal public transport journeys.
I often imagine a case study around the closed railways in Dorset whenever this subject comes up.
I believe that such bus links could have the potential to form long-distance coach routes in addition to local railway feeders. Take Bournemouth to Bristol for example, two major conurbations without a direct rail link. You could run a GBR bus to cater for this market, many of whom would prefer a one-seat ride to a change at Southampton Central.
Such a route would call at the following stations, or town centres where there is no station:
Bournemouth Town Centre - Poole - Wimborne - Blandford - Shaftesbury - Gillingham - Mere - Frome - Bath - Bristol
Other ideas for long-distance rail connecting coach routes could include:
Poole - Bere Regis - Dorchester - Bridport - Lyme Regis - Axminster - Honiton - Exeter
You may notice that there is some duplication with railway routes, but I would see this as enhancing provision along the corridor, especially if the existing railway line has an infrequent service or limited connectivity. The Poole - Exeter example fills a glaring gap in the rail network, while Wimborne - Southampton could work as a commuter option to relieve traffic on the busy A31 through the New Forest.
If you run new services parallel to existing services, especially if they are quicker because they miss out intermediate stops, then those existing services will wither away, potentially leaving passengers who use those intermediate stops with little or no service, and putting the pressure onto local councils to spend money subsidising routes that would be commercially viable if GBR hadn't just swiped most of the passengers.
Sure. But (and this is the point) IF it had a sufficient Business Case and a railway was (re)opened, the same would be true. And if it were, then (a) ENCTS or other national equivalents would not be valid, and (b) local fares for others would likely exceed those charged by buses.
Other than ticketing which is a complicated matter to resolve, this is all quite achievable with enough co-ordination - something GBR combined with more Bee Network style combined authority bus networks paths the way for. Early stages, all you really need is a decent, high capacity, comfortable bus (like the 36 Leeds-Ripon) and a timetable centred around the railway timetable (including waiting for delayed trains) and it'd work fantastically.
The "problem" with using conventional/existing bus routes to fill the gap is the regulation surrounding them and their routes, timetables, punctuality and so on - meaning that they absolutely cannot be relied upon to connect with trains if late. If they run late as a consequence of so doing, the operator can be penalised as far as having licences removed. And as such services are largely operated at the "whims" of private bus operators who can and indeed do choose to re-route them, slow them down, cancel them and so on with only 6 weeks' notice to the traffic commissioners as a mere formality, they can't be relied upon. Whereas a "virtual train" would (or should) operate using a railway model, and always fully integrated ticketing and timetabling.
And therein lies the problem ... for at least part of those routes, Transdev are competing with the railway, so while extending the railway sphere to Ripon, Tadcaster and Pickering/Whitby is definitely a laudable aim, having rail-link buses running parallel to actual trains between Harrogate and Leeds, and between Scarborough, Malton, York and Leeds, is going to be problematic.
They serve a lot of smaller places that aren't served by trains at all though. The line from Scarborough to York has just 2 intermediate stops, looking on Rail Map Online, shows there used to be 9 stops including halts between Malton and York alone, including Haxby which is supposed to be reopened and interestingly, Castle Howard, which I wonder how often that was ever used! Now there is none, just Malton then York. So I wouldn't say the bus is competing with the train at all. If anything, the bus route fills in a substantial gap in the public transport's provision in this part of Yorkshire.
Ironically when me and Mum were on holiday a few years ago, we stayed in Malton and used this bus to go to Scarborough and York on different days. Why? The train was cancelled when we wanted to use it and by sheer luck it was only a 10 minute wait for a bus that runs every half hour, whilst that line only runs every hour. Going to York, the bus was pretty much full, showing the demand for what are just villages! Even with the section when the bus goes to Leeds, Tadcaster the main town is no where near the railway. I'd say if anything the buses there add a lot of flexibility to using public transport at all. I thought that when using buses and trains out of Norwich too.
And I think the idea of bus and rail competing with each other should be dismissed, whilst trains lack level boarding and require assistance to be booked in advance, those people affected will always prefer the bus. Others prefer the bus for where they go and some it's just more affordable, especially with the fare cap.
Interestingly, the Coastliner 840 is still included in RTT as a bus service calling at Whitby Bus Station, Pickering, Eden Camp and York Station – but no mention of the fact that it also calls at Malton Station or continues to Leeds – and it doesn't come up as an option in any of the online journey planners, which I assume means there are no longer fares available for it.
An overhang from the St Andrews thread but noticed the same thing when looking up the departures for Leuchars. It shows a bus every 8 minutes, but doesn't tell people it goes to Dundee, just St Andrews!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
You may notice that there is some duplication with railway routes, but I would see this as enhancing provision along the corridor, especially if the existing railway line has an infrequent service or limited connectivity. The Poole - Exeter example fills a glaring gap in the rail network, while Wimborne - Southampton could work as a commuter option to relieve traffic on the busy A31 through the New Forest.
I really like your idea, with my family living in Plymouth but like going to Dorset, we always say how awkward it is to get there without a car! The line from Bristol to Weymouth is very infrequent and because of single track section, pretty unreliable, Bristol to Southampton and Portsmouth is sadly not much better. Coordination of buses both from Exeter and Bristol would be an ideal solution in a lower populated area like Dorset, at least until someone can be bothered to sort out Yeovil's stations, a bus would be the easier solution. Interestingly, a bus runs from Axminster to Dorchester and Weymouth, which if coordinated with the trains would really fix a gap in that part of the country.
I do wonder how possible ideas like this are unless buses are at least universally franchised and National Express is renationalised.
They serve a lot of smaller places that aren't served by trains at all though. The line from Scarborough to York has just 2 intermediate stops, looking on Rail Map Online, shows there used to be 9 stops including halts between Malton and York alone, including Haxby which is supposed to be reopened and interestingly, Castle Howard, which I wonder how often that was ever used! Now there is none, just Malton then York. So I wouldn't say the bus is competing with the train at all. If anything, the bus route fills in a substantial gap in the public transport's provision in this part of Yorkshire.
Ironically when me and Mum were on holiday a few years ago, we stayed in Malton and used this bus to go to Scarborough and York on different days. Why? The train was cancelled when we wanted to use it and by sheer luck it was only a 10 minute wait for a bus that runs every half hour, whilst that line only runs every hour. Going to York, the bus was pretty much full, showing the demand for what are just villages! Even with the section when the bus goes to Leeds, Tadcaster the main town is no where near the railway. I'd say if anything the buses there add a lot of flexibility to using public transport at all. I thought that when using buses and trains out of Norwich too.
Many/most of the people on the Coastliner bus are not travelling to/from intermediate villages that don't have a station, they're making long-distance journeys on the bus because it is much cheaper than the train (or free, for ENCTS holders). It's undoubtedly a valuable service, both for the places it serves that the railway doesn't, and for offering a cheaper option than the train – and there is evidently enough demand to justify both.
To be clear, I'm not in any way suggesting that the existing services should be run down, but I'm concerned that express GBR buses are at risk of abstracting so many passengers from the existing services that they stop being viable. I guess one way around that would be for the GBR buses to charge train-level fares instead of bus-level fares, and not to allow ENCTS holders to travel free, so that passengers have to pay higher fares – or at least, fares that are between train and bus fares, to reflect the fact that the service won't be up to the same standard as an actual train – but then you run the risk that most passengers eschew the GBR bus and stick with the regular service bus as it's cheaper and not significantly worse even if slower, and then you're wasting a lot of money running buses that are barely used.
Found this map on the GWR website, doesn't show every bus route they are promoting on their website but certainly beefs up the map a bit in the South West! Several Oxfordshire buses are also mentioned on the website. Also for once, Plus Bus is promoted, something that certainly needs a major raising of awareness as it's useful for local and urban onward travel.
TfW already franchises a number of 'Traws Cymru' coach services that shadow former rail routes such as Barmouth -Wrexham, Bangor - Aberytwyth - Carmarthen, etc. the services seem pretty popular and are generally timed to connect to rail services.
