TfW new service between Bristol and Cardiff

[Grecian 1998]

AIUI Class 166s have 246 seats in theory, although the chances of seeing 6 average sized men occupying a 3+3 seating area seem pretty slim - it would be decidedly cosy if you were in the middle. I've very rarely seen all seats occupied and when I have, it's invariably groups who seem to know each other.

5 coach 80x AIUI have 290 standard class seats, but these are wide enough for all seats to actually be usable by adults which is a fairly big difference.

2 coach 175s I believe have 136 seats and 3 coach sets around 200, although I can't seem to find a vaguely reliable figure for the latter. Rather less than a 80x, but probably around the same as a 166 when you discount the fairly useless in practice middle seats on the latter.

I've used the 80x services from Bristol to Cardiff on many occasions and they're rarely anywhere near full except when either a) there's an event on or b) disruption. The 166 services to / from Portsmouth appear much busier, possibly due to having limited stops. Personally I'd always rather take a longer service with 2+2 seating and reliable aircon, but each to their own.

Whilst I see the long-term logic of running Bristol - Cardiff stopping services, at this point in time it seems sensible for TfW to use their 197s to stop short-forming on their key current routes, rather than sending them to duplicate existing services which aren't currently full. Admittedly, I travel on XC enough that my definition of 'full' may be skewed.

 

[zwk500]

AIUI Class 166s have 246 seats in theory, although the chances of seeing 6 average sized men occupying a 3+3 seating area seem pretty slim - it would be decidedly cosy if you were in the middle. I've very rarely seen all seats occupied and when I have, it's invariably groups who seem to know each other.

My experience is that at peak times it is very common to see 6 strangers in the bays of 3. I used to commute on the Severn beach line to Temple Meads and travel to Cardiff for work regularly. Yes it wasn't very common to see 6 average sized men in them but women do travel as well, and not all men are as big as the average.

 

[Snow1964]

My experience is that at peak times it is very common to see 6 strangers in the bays of 3. I used to commute on the Severn beach line to Temple Meads and travel to Cardiff for work regularly. Yes it wasn't very common to see 6 average sized men in them but women do travel as well, and not all men are as big as the average.

My experience to, if travel to/from Cardiff in peak, or in Bath area in morning peak or evening rush then all 6 seats commonly taken.

Many stations on Cardiff-Portsmouth line have very limited platform seating, so many have to stand waiting for train to arrive, so not surprising want to sit down, even if it is middle seats.

@Grecian 1998 in Cardiff-Newport and Bristol-Trowbridge area the middle seats definitely get used a lot (as it is only ones available, and train sways around a lot with all the curves on Avon valley)

 

[hwl]

Given the recent news of the Cl. 231 getting converted/upgraded to Cl. 756s how confident are people that in the medium term extra services (with 5 extra new station stops east of Cardiff) wouldn't be formed of 756s with significantly better acceleration (either or off the wires)?

 

[Parallel]

Given the recent news of the Cl. 231 getting converted/upgraded to Cl. 756s how confident are people that in the medium term extra services (with 5 extra new station stops east of Cardiff) wouldn't be formed of 756s with significantly better acceleration (either or off the wires)?

These (with the 5 new stations) are not the same services as the ones being proposed in the document.

 

[TUC]

So much for what will benefit passengers being the priority…

 

[The exile]

So much for what will benefit passengers being the priority…

That priority is for ORR to determine. If the existing operator considers that the introduction of new services will be detrimental to them or those existing services it is only right that they say so. Whether those objections are considered a) founded in fact and b) significant enough to influence the decision is for the regulator to decide - that’s why they’re there.

 

[jamieh27]

I don’t really see the need for 3 trains an hour between Cardiff Central and Bristol Temple Meads and I’d avoid the new service if it was a 2-car 197 - Do we know when the TfW service would slot in. If it’s a few minutes before or after the existing services, there’s not much need. As I understand it there was a Burns review completed last year which made recommendations for additional local stations between Cardiff and the Severn Tunnel which would presumably run into Temple Meads, but this proposal isn’t it? So I’m not really sure what the purpose is. The direct Bristol Temple Meads to West Wales market is likely to be minor. I think GWR are right to call this out, and they must have a good argument to unsettle the Welsh Government this much into going to the media.

Why not just proceed with the Burns review services which GWR are unlikely to object to? They have a clear propose and would serve new (genuine) markets.

To be honest theres hourly or more services to Cardiff Central from Bristol Temple Meads. Penznace to Cardiff and Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff, passengers can change for Bristol Parkway to get services to Cardiff. While it be different to have TfW run to Bristol should keep it hourly.

 

[zwk500]

To be honest theres hourly or more services to Cardiff Central from Bristol Temple Meads. Penznace to Cardiff and Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff, passengers can change for Bristol Parkway to get services to Cardiff. While it be different to have TfW run to Bristol should keep it hourly.

The option of changing at Bristol Parkway is very rarely worth it due to the time to change trains (you have to cross the bridge for both directions). The GWR Paddington service is usually followed almost immediately through the Severn Tunnel in each direction by the Cardiff-Bristol Temple Meads service, so if you are at Cardiff you'd just wait 5 minutes more for the direct service and if you're at Bristol you'd need to have only just missed one train to make it worth going up to Parkway rather than just waiting for the next direct train.

 

[Bald Rick]

So much for what will benefit passengers being the priority…

Depends what you mean “benefit passengers“.

Which passengers ?
And benefit in what terms?

 

[CdBrux]

I wonder how much of this is new, nationalist, Welsh ministers creating a grievance

 

[The exile]

I wonder how much of this is new, nationalist, Welsh ministers creating a grievance

And how much is social-media clickbait engendered "outrage".

 

[Krokodil]

I wonder how much of this is new, nationalist, Welsh ministers creating a grievance

The new, nationalist Welsh ministers would do well to have TfW keep its 197s on their existing routes rather than starting up new services into England while services within Wales run short.

 

[Meole]

It is the duty of Welsh ministers to get the best deal for Wales, clearly Cardiff - Bristol should be under WAG control so as to benefit Welsh passengers, there are very few commuting into Wales after all.

 

[coppercapped]

It is the duty of Welsh ministers to get the best deal for Wales, clearly Cardiff - Bristol should be under WAG control so as to benefit Welsh passengers, there are very few commuting into Wales after all.

I would have thought that it is the duty of Welsh ministers to make Wales an attractive place to set up and expand businesses so filling the WAG's coffers. This would encourage more people to travel to Wales to work and also increase the railways' revenue.

Who 'controls', i.e., pays for, the train service is irrelevant.

 

[Falcon1200]

there are very few commuting into Wales after all.

Which perhaps doesn't say a lot for Wales! And should Welsh Ministers really have making it easier for their constituents to work in England a priority?

 

[fishwomp]

I would have thought that it is the duty of Welsh ministers to make Wales an attractive place to set up and expand businesses so filling the WAG's coffers. This would encourage more people to travel to Wales to work and also increase the railways' revenue.

Exactly. Adding more rail services is easier that improving the M4 and the decades long debate/climate emergency/etc etc that stalled it last time is still in memory. Still takes a year or more on the railway to do anything (this, or say the new Oxford to Bristol services etc) due to processes like this ORR process and subsequent GWR objection..

Whether it boosts the coffers more than the cost is a different question - but any new or expanded businesses can be seen as improving the lot of the voters of Wales, and a move in the right direction - it _is_ doing the right thing in the most populous (ie. voter-heavy) area in Wales.

Which perhaps doesn't say a lot for Wales! And should Welsh Ministers really have making it easier for their constituents to work in England a priority?

Why not? Any job in England that pays salary to someone living in Wales has knock-on effects - the shop, the restaurant, the plumber, the builder, .. all of them make more money when people in the town or village have wages to spend.

 

[Snow1964]

there are very few commuting into Wales after all.

Basic economics, house prices are rather lower in say near Chepstow, than say near Yate. Both suitable for working in Bristol or North Bristol area. The commuter traffic on M48 (the old bridge) is crazy, towards England in morning, and about 5pm towards Wales

If your career is based in Cardiff, then much more likely to live in Vale of Glamorgan, than buy an expensive house in South Gloucestershire

 

[Dr Day]

The problems these services are trying to solve appear to be lack of direct connectivity between Bristol and west of Cardiff, and peak direction overcrowding between Cardiff and Bristol.

Taking a TOC agnostic perspective, which is what would now happen elsewhere in the country, couldn’t a solution be longer trains and extensions of the existing services? If TfW have spare rolling stock and can justify the additional operating costs eg drivers, maybe they should work together with GWR to between them find a solution that doesn’t require any additional capacity through the Severn Tunnel, which is busy enough already.

 

[zwk500]

Which perhaps doesn't say a lot for Wales! And should Welsh Ministers really have making it easier for their constituents to work in England a priority?

It will be better for Wales to have people working in Bristol living in Wales than living in England.

 

[Coleridge]

I know that friends and family who live in or near Swansea would very much like a direct service to Bristol, and I would welcome an alternative to GWR, whose trains are often overcrowded.

However, I'd prefer that TfW make its existing services more reliable before attempting to introduce new ones.

 

[Envoy]

If your career is based in Cardiff, then much more likely to live in Vale of Glamorgan, than buy an expensive house in South Gloucestershire

Average house price in the Vale of Glamorgan CF71 postcode - which covers a good chunk of the area around Cowbridge, is £507,540. This is higher than much of South Gloucestershire. (Google ‘House Price Dashboard’)

 

[Akela]

I wonder how much of this is new, nationalist, Welsh ministers creating a grievance

The same nationalist Welsh ministers which pledged to fund improvements to the Marches line in their manifesto (a rail line mostly in England)?

They want to improve connectivity between England and Wales because doing so will help improve the Welsh economy. Currently the south Wales to Bristol service is sub-par as anyone who’s taken the train from Cardiff would know and they believe running their own trains between the towns and cities across the coast will help supplement the existing service. It’s not about creating grievances or division.

 

[fishwomp]

The same nationalist Welsh ministers which pledged to fund improvements to the Marches line in their manifesto (a rail line mostly in England)?

They want to improve connectivity between England and Wales because doing so will help improve the Welsh economy. Currently the south Wales to Bristol service is sub-par as anyone who’s taken the train from Cardiff would know and they believe running their own trains between the towns and cities across the coast will help supplement the existing service. It’s not about creating grievances or division.

TBH, it'd be some new record for pace if the Welsh ministers could've submitted a proposal to ORR within 4 weeks of being sworn in and had the first objections. This is to me something that was evidently in progress prior to the election.

I hope Plaid do a good and _pragmatic_ job of running Wales. I often felt that Labour in Wales was trying to 'out-Plaid' Plaid in their policies as they saw them as the largest threat, rather than fighting it by being different.

 

[Starmill]

The application will probably be approved. The benefits of a through service from Bridgend, Swansea and elsewhere to Bristol (clearly Bristol Parkway is not especially relevant to this) will almost certainly outweigh the small negative performance impact.

You'd think if the Minister were minded to try to veto the service under the devolved agreement they would have already done so by now. They probably won't.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jun 2026 ==

Between Severn Tunnel Junction and Cardiff, the day return fare is £12.80. However, if passengers use the TFW contactless scheme & only travel on *their hourly service the return fare drops to £6. Clearly the Welsh Government run TFW are offering better fares to get people off the over crowded roads. *Also includes Cross Country trains that call twice a day.

An awful lot of people seem to tap and get the GWR train anyway to be honest. Which is a predictable outcome of this sort of London obsession with keeping its own revenue - it just leads to a massive spike in unwitting fare evasion. On many of the trains the conductor can barely get in and out of the cab let alone check tickets.

 

[Krokodil]

The application will probably be approved. The benefits of a through service from Bridgend, Swansea and elsewhere to Bristol (clearly Bristol Parkway is not especially relevant to this) will almost certainly outweigh the small negative performance impact.

Surely this objective could have been achieved with much less performance impact by combining the existing services that terminate in Cardiff from both directions as a through service, with joint crewing arrangements if necessary.

 

[JonathanH]

Surely this objective could have been achieved with much less performance impact by combining the existing services that terminate in Cardiff from both directions as a through service, with joint crewing arrangements if necessary.

Notwithstanding that there aren't enough 158s in GWR's fleet to do that and sending 197s to Portsmouth might be a bit challenging, running trains over too long a distance should really be accompanied with the opportunity to restart a service in the middle of the route to prevent delays being transmitted across a long distance. Connecting long distance trains to favour through passengers rather than having robust and reliable shorter distance operations is a balance.

 

[Bald Rick]

TBH, it'd be some new record for pace if the Welsh ministers could've submitted a proposal to ORR within 4 weeks of being sworn in and had the first objections. This is to me something that was evidently in progress prior to the election.

It’s been in progress for nearly a year.

will almost certainly outweigh the small negative performance impact.

Well that’s the killer question, as I mentioned up thread. What are the trade off parameters? How small is small? Who will stand up and say that *any* negative perfromance impact is acceptable in the current climate?

It would be interesting if ORR did say that a deterioration in performance was acceptable, given they recently put Wales & Western on the highest level of ‘naughty step’ for performance and have more recently refused applications elsewhere where performance was forecast to get worse.

 

[Krokodil]

Notwithstanding that there aren't enough 158s in GWR's fleet to do that

There are however 24 158s about to come off-lease with (as far as I'm aware) no certain home. Needs the ERTMS kit removing and the engines are non-standard but they should still be able to work with the rest of the GWR 158s just fine.

How TfW can possibly believe that they've got a 197 to spare for this, I'll never know. Using a sole two-car unit on an interregional service is ludicrous too.

 

[DS25]

There are however 24 158s about to come off-lease with (as far as I'm aware) no certain home. Needs the ERTMS kit removing and the engines are non-standard but they should still be able to work with the rest of the GWR 158s just fine.

How TfW can possibly believe that they've got a 197 to spare for this, I'll never know. Using a sole two-car unit on an interregional service is ludicrous too.

I think Northern want the TfW 158’s, but I think TfW should keep 158s for a bit longer if they have capacity issues, put them on Cardiff-Holyhead or West Wales routes and order a new fleet of Long Distance interregional units for Manchester-Swansea/Cardiff-Holyhead etc, which will allow TfW to get rid of the Mk4’s and then cascade 197s back to routes temporarily operated by 158’s , and the HoWL