Should more XC services call at Gloucester?

[Trainguy34]

Why does the shuttle have to go to Cheltenham though? It should be from Cheltenham. It's insulting to Gloucester people that they have to go to the smaller town to catch a train. They should be there to serve the bigger places with the bigger populations.

They would probably rather that then nothing at all unless other ideas come to fruition.

 

[cle]

I think we have a sense here of all population is equal. And size should relate to demand. Guess what - it doesn't. Bradford is much bigger than most places, and has very little rail demand in a national sense, and compared to similar sized places. Rail network / supply is one factor of course, but the economy of a place is greater (and arguably one has fueled the other over time)

On a typical Cheltenham to London service, more people will board at Gloucester rather than Cheltenham though, so by removing the stop you're not going to increase the number of people travelling out of Cheltenham, you're encouraging more people to use their cars, because for that journey length people aren't going to be willing to get a train into Cheltenham, mess around changing trains and then travel the exact same 5.5 miles back to Barnwood Junction/Gloucester. That will increase their journey times and also remove a key service from Gloucester to Cheltenham that currently connects very well onto the XC long distance services..

How about the people who don't take the train because the journey is slower/indirect and awkward? I personally think two services would be best. 1tph direct to Gloucester and maybe on to Newport/Cardiff, and 1tph direct to Cheltenham and on to Worcester. Would negate this.

Swindon point is not just journey times, but frequency. Swindon is practically turn up and go. If you have a season ticket, it's freedom.

It actually makes me happy that snobs from Cheltenham have to sit and wait in Gloucester for almost ten minutes. And the fact that they'd rather drive to Swindon than do as such proves my point!

And here we have it. This is based on parochial grievance. I figured it might be the case ("Cheltenham has no appeal etc,", when the reasons for in and out-bound demand are very obvious - plus it is on the mainline and that isn't changing!) - but this confirms that. I think we're done here.

 

[tigerroar]

Imagine what it would be like had they kept St James and closed Lansdown!

 

[GoneSouth]

I’m not from either but I find both Cheltenham and Gloucester have a ridiculous attitude to each other. Chippy Gloucester vs snooty Cheltenham, it’s just ridiculous. Some of the comments on both sides are a bit silly too.

Someone was spouting about Gloucester station having a small car park, poor bus services etc. I have to say that compared to Cheltenham it’s got amazing bus connections, have any of you tried using the one unreliable service that stops by Cheltenham station, it’s painful. Gloucester’s new bus station with connections to all suburbs (some stops on the streets surrounding the station) and longer distance services to the Forest Of Dean, Tewkesbury, Stroud valleys etc is right next to the rail station, so much more convenient for bus users than Cheltenham.

Both stations could do with some work, Cheltenham feels dirty, whereas Gloucester has the filthy subway to the hospital.

I think the good folk who live in both towns will have to set aside their differences and make do with what they’ve got for many years to come.

In fact if current house building trends continue as they are then the 2 urban areas will become 1 soon enough. Maybe then they could build a giant new station on the site of the airport and have fast, cheap, frequent trams from the site to all suburbs of both towns. Or maybe not!

 

[py_megapixel]

to be fair, the only people that would see this as a negative are those that live within easy walking distance of the railways station. Car or bus to the parkway works for the majority.

I'm not sure about that. For a start, what about people travelling to Gloucester?

Besides, the current Gloucester station is located right next to a large bus station. There is no way Waterwells or Worcestershire Parkway will have that range of bus services.

Why does the shuttle have to go to Cheltenham though? It should be from Cheltenham.

Because serving Gloucester is a diversion from the main line and serving Cheltenham isn't. Gloucester is effectively on a branch line - albeit one that is connected to the main line in two places, meaning trains can approach it on the main line from either direction.

It's insulting to Gloucester people that they have to go to the smaller town to catch a train. They should be there to serve the bigger places with the bigger populations.

I don't understand this comment at all. I've travelled from Gloucester to the north via Cheltenham several times before and at no point have I felt "insulted" by the idea.

If people from Gloucester feel insulted by having to change in Cheltenham, imagine how insulted people from Birmingham would feel by having to change at Waterwells...

 

[Whistler40145]

It's okay for the Cardiff Central services to call at Gloucester, but the longer distance services would be hampered with a reversal in both directions, thus adding unnecessary journey time

 

[lrailadventure]

Someone was spouting about Gloucester station having a small car park, poor bus services etc. I have to say that compared to Cheltenham it’s got amazing bus connections, have any of you tried using the one unreliable service that stops by Cheltenham station, it’s painful.

My point about Gloucester's buses (and Cheltenhams) was that they're both run by Stagecoach, who not that long ago made sweeping cuts to routes and reducing frequencies, even on some of their more popular routes like the 94. They don't have the staff to run their full services, and it's not unknown for some buses to be cancelled frequently. On paper they might have great buses services, but in reality they're unreliable and not what the used to be.

Both stations could do with some work, Cheltenham feels dirty, whereas Gloucester has the filthy subway to the hospital.

The subway is currently being worked on so that may improve things on that front, but both stations could do with a proper facelift. There were plans in place for this at Gloucester, they started with the car park & creating an additional exit but seem to have gone very quiet on other works.

In fact if current house building trends continue as they are then the 2 urban areas will become 1 soon enough. Maybe then they could build a giant new station on the site of the airport and have fast, cheap, frequent trams from the site to all suburbs of both towns. Or maybe not!

Trams would be great around here, but somehow I don't see that ever happening. There have been talks of Gloucester and Cheltenham merging through new housing at Churchdown and basically ending up as a 'super city'. Again don't know what's happening with that as much of the housing developments (at least that I know of) are focusing on the brownfield sites in Gloucester's city centre and south of Gloucester in areas like Kingsway and Quedgeley.

I don't understand this comment at all. I've travelled from Gloucester to the north via Cheltenham several times before and at no point have I felt "insulted" by the idea.

If people from Gloucester feel insulted by having to change in Cheltenham, imagine how insulted people from Birmingham would feel by having to change at Waterwells...

I didn't understand that point, I've never met someone whose insulated by the idea of changing trains at Cheltenham. I do it frequently. Same as if I want to use XC services southbound, I'll just change at Bristol Parkway/Temple Meads. What an odd statement is was to make.

 

[tigerroar]

In fact if current house building trends continue as they are then the 2 urban areas will become 1 soon enough. Maybe then they could build a giant new station on the site of the airport and have fast, cheap, frequent trams from the site to all suburbs of both towns. Or maybe not!

GOD, NO!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==

I'm not sure about that. For a start, what about people travelling to Gloucester?

They would go to Gloucester (Central) as per normal. Waterwells would be for people from Gloucester, Stonehouse, Stroud and Dursley to go up north or to the south west on XC.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==

If people from Gloucester feel insulted by having to change in Cheltenham, imagine how insulted people from Birmingham would feel by having to change at Waterwells...

why would Brummies have to change at Waterwells? XC would just stop there en route to wherever they're going in the SW.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==

It's okay for the Cardiff Central services to call at Gloucester, but the longer distance services would be hampered with a reversal in both directions, thus adding unnecessary journey time

The Cardiff trains aren't relevant to my point. Why is reversing at Gloucester hampering services yet reversing at Reading not? They could go direct onto the Basingstoke line and stop at either of the two Reading stations there.

 

[Whistler40145]

GOD, NO!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==


They would go to Gloucester (Central) as per normal. Waterwells would be for people from Gloucester, Stonehouse, Stroud and Dursley to go up north or to the south west on XC.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==


why would Brummies have to change at Waterwells? XC would just stop there en route to wherever they're going in the SW.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==


The Cardiff trains aren't relevant to my point. Why is reversing at Gloucester hampering services yet reversing at Reading not? They could go direct onto the Basingstoke line and stop at either of the two Reading stations there.

It must be at least 20 years ago since CrossCountry services called at Gloucester and would've been loco hauled, the powers that be must've decided to remove the reversal for a valid reason, most likely to speed up the service

 

[The Planner]

The Cardiff trains aren't relevant to my point. Why is reversing at Gloucester hampering services yet reversing at Reading not? They could go direct onto the Basingstoke line and stop at either of the two Reading stations there.

XC put a higher value on Reading, any journey time penalty and its connections. Simple as.

 

[tigerroar]

XC put a higher value on Reading, any journey time penalty and its connections. Simple as.

OK, any of the stations from Bournemouth to Reading on XC, where would you go to by changing at Reading that you couldn't anywhere else? It would be a very niche group. And southbound too. They could easily call at Reading West and save ten minutes. There, I could be a planner at XC. I don't come cheap mind!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==

It must be at least 20 years ago since CrossCountry services called at Gloucester and would've been loco hauled, the powers that be must've decided to remove the reversal for a valid reason, most likely to speed up the service

And the rest. But what a great time. 50's, 47's. Runaround or change engines. Sat on the tump watching it all!

 

[GoneSouth]

GOD, NO!

Feeling a little threatened by Cheltenham for some reason?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==


They would go to Gloucester (Central) as per normal. Waterwells would be for people from Gloucester, Stonehouse, Stroud and Dursley to go up north or to the south west on XC.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==

Except the would require a large proportion of the population of the city to travel south several miles in order to catch the train to travel north! Or would you expect them to catch the stopper from Bristol to Cheltenham and change there… oh, hang on, they can’t do that can they as XC won’t stop at Cheltenham!

People from Stroud, Storehouse and Kemble already have a single change into Northbound XC via the Padd to Cheltenham service. Stroud to SW bound XC isn’t straightforward I must admit, but maybe easier via Swindon

It must be at least 20 years ago since CrossCountry services called at Gloucester and would've been loco hauled, the powers that be must've decided to remove the reversal for a valid reason, most likely to speed up the service

They were often 125 sets when I used them.

OK, any of the stations from Bournemouth to Reading on XC, where would you go to by changing at Reading that you couldn't anywhere else? It would be a very niche group. And southbound too. They could easily call at Reading West and save ten minutes. There, I could be a planner at XC. I don't come cheap mind!

Thank god you’re not, especially for those travelling from anywhere north of Reading to Gatwick Airport or those wanting intermediate stops betweenReading and Paddington!

 

[cle]

Reading is arguably the most important interchange/junction in the South East (aside from Clapham and Stratford, if we're including London) - skipping it would be insane, and I suspect more folks rotate/churn there on the XC services than ride through.

 

[tigerroar]

Feeling a little threatened by Cheltenham for some reason?

Yeah, who wouldn't. It's a wart on the arse of humanity

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jul 2023 ==

Thank god you’re not, especially for those travelling from anywhere north of Reading to Gatwick Airport or those wanting intermediate stops betweenReading and Paddington!

Aren't there Oxford to Paddington trains that provide that service though?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jul 2023 ==

Reading is arguably the most important interchange/junction in the South East (aside from Clapham and Stratford, if we're including London) - skipping it would be insane, and I suspect more folks rotate/churn there on the XC services than ride through.

but pretty much anywhere north of Reading can get to where they need to go from Birmingham, Coventry, Leamington Spa, Banbury, Oxford etc without the need to change at Reading itself. Anyone wanting the Newbury line could change at Reading West.

 

[cle]

Yeah, who wouldn't. It's a wart on the arse of humanity

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jul 2023 ==


Aren't there Oxford to Paddington trains that provide that service though?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jul 2023 ==


but pretty much anywhere north of Reading can get to where they need to go from Birmingham, Coventry, Leamington Spa, Banbury, Oxford etc without the need to change at Reading itself. Anyone wanting the Newbury line could change at Reading West.

That isn't true at all.

'The Newbury line' includes semi-fasts to Bedwyn, Exeter and the fasts to Devon and Cornwall. None of those call at Reading West - which is a tiny station with only two platforms, either side of a road. It's not set up for interchanging.

Reading also connects to Crossrail, to the Windsor lines, to Guildford and Gatwick (and the Southern region), to Paddington in 23 mins... plus all the fasts (but many not calling) Didcot) much more. It is also a big place with tons of employment, a uni and generally an important regional centre.

If this was viable, it would already be happening. And people going from Southampton to Leamington will be a fraction of those going Southampton-Reading or Leamington-Reading, so it's correct as is. Not a Gloucester case at all.

 

[voyagerdude220]

Have
- 2 fast tph nonstop between BHM - BPW (the current southwest-north XC)
- 2 tph BHM - CDF, giving CNM and GCR fast services from Birmingham
- 2 tph BHM - WOS - CNM - GCR - BRI, serving stops like UNI, BMV and ASC, but fast between GCR and BPW.

Obviously through running at New Street to somewhere else.

I know: no capacity at New Street and no money; but it could be the timetable a Swiss planner would propose

I seem to remember Virgin in around maybe 2004/2005 made their Scotland/Preston to Plymouth/Penzance (Southbound left Birmingham New Street xx12 past every hour) trains miss out Cheltenham Spa, but the Newcastle to Bristol Temple Meads ones (which left Birmingham New Street at xx42 minutes past every hour) still called at Cheltenham Spa.

I seem to remember they also alternated between missing out Wigan and Warrington every other train, so some did Preston-Wigan-Crewe, with others doing Preston-Warrington-Crewe, but that's miles off topic, apologies!

 

[tigerroar]

It's not off topic. It's curious how a company that makes money by moving passengers around deliberately misses out large population centres. It's as though they don't want them.

 

[GoneSouth]

It's not off topic. It's curious how a company that makes money by moving passengers around deliberately misses out large population centres. It's as though they don't want them.

You’re right, they don’t want them. If XC had their way they would run services based on an X with Manchester, Exeter, Reading and York at each corner. They’ve already made attempts to trim Paignton and Cornwall from their map, and I think have almost killed the Glasgow service?

Anyway the point is that your love of Gloucester isn’t shared by anyone running Cross Country and it’s probably time to get over it. Cheltenham is on the main line so acts as a hub for the county.

If I recall correctly, XC did try to accommodate Gloucester better in the early days of the voyager by running Cardiff to Leeds, they’ve since found that limited resources have to be used efficiently which sadly means turning around at Gloucester isn’t going to work. They can squeeze more out of what they have, more reliably without wasting 15 mins turning around at a cattle market with a Cathedral!

 

[Dr Day]

It's as though they don't want them.

They don't, probably because they (XC, and probably BR from a 'whole industry' perspective before them) have done the sums and the extra cost (including any extra trains or train crew they would need) doesn't justify the extra revenue they would get. On the other hand, GWR have probably done similar analysis and concluded that for the London/Swindon service, the reversal is worthwhile. Clearly demand changes over time, and this might be the kind of thing the GBR revisit to once again consider the whole industry perspective rather than each TOC looking to maximise its own net revenue. But any decision would be evidence-based - including different populations' propensity to use the train. So yes, maybe the more wealthy Cheltenham does generate more revenue per person than Gloucester, but the industry won't use that as a reason not to call at Cheltenham.

 

[tigerroar]

You’re right, they don’t want them. If XC had their way they would run services based on an X with Manchester, Exeter, Reading and York at each corner. They’ve already made attempts to trim Paignton and Cornwall from their map, and I think have almost killed the Glasgow service?

Anyway the point is that your love of Gloucester isn’t shared by anyone running Cross Country and it’s probably time to get over it. Cheltenham is on the main line so acts as a hub for the county.

If I recall correctly, XC did try to accommodate Gloucester better in the early days of the voyager by running Cardiff to Leeds, they’ve since found that limited resources have to be used efficiently which sadly means turning around at Gloucester isn’t going to work. They can squeeze more out of what they have, more reliably without wasting 15 mins turning around at a cattle market with a Cathedral!

cattle market shut years ago, it's a huge B&Q now

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Jul 2023 ==

more wealthy Cheltenham

why do people spout this nonsense about Cheltenham? Have you ever been? The dangerous thing is that decisions like those made by XC are done this way too.

 

[deltic08]

It wouldn't be, it would be replacing a stop by whizzing through Cheltenham.

Whizzing is not a term I would use with a 40mph speed restriction because of curvature. That is why so little time is lost by stopping at Cheltenham. Waterwells is on a 100mph section.

Imagine what it would be like had they kept St James and closed Lansdown!

When I was at school in Lydney in the 50s/60s, we often took the train to Cheltenham even though we had a car as St James station was in the middle of town. My descendants who still live there wouldn't dream of doing that now as Lansdown is too far out. Even then, the train to St James with stops at Grange Court, Gloucester Central, sometimes Churchdown, and Cheltenham Malvern Road was faster than it is now by car. The London trains also terminated at St James. Much more convenient for passengers. Now it is for the convenience of the train operators

If I recall correctly, XC did try to accommodate Gloucester better in the early days of the voyager by running Cardiff to Leeds, they’ve since found that limited resources have to be used efficiently which sadly means turning around at Gloucester isn’t going to work. They can squeeze more out of what they have, more reliably without wasting 15 mins turning around at a cattle market with a Cathedral!

Gloucester hasn't had a cattle market since foot and mouth outbreak in 2003 so no need to call it that. The original cattle market was right outside Central station as cattle arrived by train.

 

[Purple Train]

Leeds, as a major population centre I get, but Reading? Why can't XC just stop at Reading West or the new Green Park station? Who exactly would use XC from where to make a connection at Reading?

Me?

That isn't true at all.

'The Newbury line' includes semi-fasts to Bedwyn, Exeter and the fasts to Devon and Cornwall. None of those call at Reading West - which is a tiny station with only two platforms, either side of a road. It's not set up for interchanging.

Reading also connects to Crossrail, to the Windsor lines, to Guildford and Gatwick (and the Southern region), to Paddington in 23 mins... plus all the fasts (but many not calling) Didcot) much more. It is also a big place with tons of employment, a uni and generally an important regional centre.

If this was viable, it would already be happening. And people going from Southampton to Leamington will be a fraction of those going Southampton-Reading or Leamington-Reading, so it's correct as is. Not a Gloucester case at all.

The prospect of interchanging at Reading West genuinely scares me. The hordes of people that come off South Coast-Manchester trains, all descending on those tiny platforms, about the width of a bench... no thanks.

I've seen nothing here to convince me that it wouldn't be better if Gloucester had a station at Waterwells with two island platforms for up and down London and up and down Bristol routes, having all XC services stop there, bypassing Cheltenham if it caused a time penalty although they're far enough apart to stop at both. If not, bypass Cheltenham and call at Worcestershire Parkway instead, providing two Cities with nationwide direct connections rather than a conurbation of council estates with a few posh shops.

Much as I love the British definition of a city, whether a place has city status or not really shouldn't be relevant. By your logic, we should be building a new high-speed railway to St Davids, introducing a fast link between Southend and Colchester, having long-distance trains call at Lincoln, etc.
So you would bypass Cheltenham - used by 2.6 million people pre-COVID? Really? If all those 2.6 million people only use it because it has 3tph more than Gloucester, they must be excessively strange people. It makes absolutely no sense to serve Gloucester in preference to Cheltenham, at least to people who aren't snobbish.

Why does the shuttle have to go to Cheltenham though? It should be from Cheltenham. It's insulting to Gloucester people that they have to go to the smaller town to catch a train. They should be there to serve the bigger places with the bigger populations.

So it's insulting to Mansfield people that they have to go to Alfreton to catch a longer-distance train, for instance? Or are Gloucester people just peculiarly snobbish?

It's only busier because it gets more trains. Take those trains away and the numbers would drop significantly. Why can't you understand this? It's simple.

It has an inconsequentially-greater amount of trains. Why can't you understand this? It's simple.
Take those trains away and the numbers would drop significantly... yes, because things would get desperately inconvenient for people from Cheltenham. If you insist on treating Cheltenham like a small village, feel free.

It actually makes me happy that snobs from Cheltenham have to sit and wait in Gloucester for almost ten minutes. And the fact that they'd rather drive to Swindon than do as such proves my point!

The snobs are from Cheltenham? You don't say. Are you planning on retiring to Frinton-on-Sea?
And whatever point you had is not proven - some may prefer Swindon to get a faster service, given all the Cheltenhams stop at Didcot Parkway.

It wouldn't be, it would be replacing a stop by whizzing through Cheltenham.

Do enlighten us as to why you have developed this irrational hatred of Cheltenham and its people. If it is due to their perceived snobbery, I would suggest stopping looking in the mirror.

I genuinely don't know whether you're being serious at this point.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

In an ideal world there would be a station at Waterwells, as indeed there would be at Churchdown and Stoke Orchard/Bishops Cleeve, and as there will be in Charfield.

I'm failing to see how going on some sort of bizarre anti-Cheltenham rant is the most effective way to achieve that though.

 

[cle]

Much as I love the British definition of a city, whether a place has city status or not really shouldn't be relevant. By your logic, we should be building a new high-speed railway to St Davids, introducing a fast link between Southend and Colchester, having long-distance trains call at Lincoln, etc.

City status is definitely on the forum bingo. Along with population size = proportionate demand, and of course, the critical ancient county town!

 

[GoneSouth]

Gloucester hasn't had a cattle market since foot and mouth outbreak in 2003 so no need to call it that. The original cattle market was right outside Central station as cattle arrived by train.

I guess the cattle no longer arriving by train could count as a reduction in passenger numbers. I have no idea how many cattle we are talking about here but it could go some way to explaining the difference in passenger numbers between Cheltenham and Gloucester

 

[cle]

And the mating rituals / supply in each town.