TFW To Shake Up Rail Timetables

[Topological]

All I know is that the 175s worked well in previous years and the ORR have issued a notice. It is not for me to speculate on the precise reasons the 175s have been so unreliable since Chester started handling the 197s. Of course it could all be pure correlation.

But let's not revise history, the ORR would not issue that notice if there was nothing to issue a notice about. It was all over this forum that the maintenance had been reduced in the period before the fires.

Trying to ask outsiders to say which particular issue was the problem, or which particular check was missed serves only to give TfW a free pass. I am certainly not about to make any specific allegation and I doubt anyone else would either.

Maybe someone from TfW will justify why the ORR made a mistake, but it has not happened.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Where is this excess capacity? It's not in the North, everything I see is running around full (unless you count the Bidstons but you're not going to redeploy the 230s elsewhere). Full & standing reports often come in as far west as Bangor. Guards are refusing to take certain trains if they get short-formed on the basis that it's not safe.
- Shrewsbury-Birmingham is often pretty wedged too from what I gather, and anything heading towards Barmouth will be like the black hole of Calcutta in the summer. You can't reasonably thin out the two-hourly service on the Pwllhelis without the politicians kicking up an almighty stink - particularly as many of those trains are school trains.
Full & standing on the Marches. In fact, scrolling through Twitter it's just a long stream of complaints about two-car DMUs.

One obvious tactic would be to combine services and split en route.
Cardiff-Manchester/Holyhead could be combined and split at Shrewsbury.
Holyhead-Manchester/Birmingham ditto, splitting at Chester.
But you need a consistent fleet to do any of that.

My experience of TfW overcrowding is that it is only at certain times of day on certain routes.
TfW does carry plenty of fresh air at times (eg westbound in North Wales in the morning, eastbound in the evening).
I bet Anglesey doesn't warrant the capacity it gets, especially if you add in Avanti's contribution.

 

[Envoy]

I really wonder how they can figure out the flows of passengers at the moment as surely, many have deserted the trains?

I think that the planned every other hour Cardiff to Liverpool service will be very popular and generate new customers. These could come not only from the big populations at either end but also intermediate stations like Hereford, Shrewsbury & Wrexham doing day returns to Liverpool - assuming the schedule favours this. The service is also likely to attract passengers travelling between Liverpool and Bristol via a change at Newport - providing they are not rammed on a 2 car 197.

The Vale of Glamorgan Line desperately needs a half hourly service - not least because of all the new housing at Rhoose and Llantwit Major but also to provide a faster link between Barry and Bridgend for places west thereof.

Perhaps the Cheltenham to Cardiff services could be extended via the VOG to Bridgend (bay platform) as this would help solve the problem of terminating at Cardiff. It would also might induce people in Cheltenham & Gloucester to consider using Cardiff Airport instead of Bristol or Birmingham.

 

[Steve B]

People prefer a shorter journey time without stopping at all the stations to Wolverhampton.

In addition to which there is a TFW only fare that is cheaper. And go to International.

 

[craigybagel]

I still can't work out where that would be though. The only place where train lengths were due to increase was the Marches and that's unlikely to change. Otherwise, I can't think of what enhancements on the mainline might be binned. Liverpools are here to stay, though maybe they'll knock the through trains to Cardiff on the head. Would they abandon the hourly service on the Cambrian main line?

I'm not convinced 5 cars is really necessary on every Manchester service - especially if the Liverpool Cardiff service goes ahead. There was a plan for a peak 6 car between Chester and Manchester - again, is that really necessary? It wouldn't surprise me if they're looking at capacity rather than frequency cuts.

Only thing that I can think of is the South Wales commuter routes, but that won't yield rolling stock for elsewhere - unless the plan is to free up FLIRTs to displace the remaining 153s from service in West Wales.

If you could get a few FLIRTs released for Swanline, that would in turn release 197s for HOWL to replace the 153s. That would see an end to bike car 153 project though.

There's definitely no obvious answers. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with

 

[Steve B]

Regardless of any changes that are made to the services, TFW really needs to get it's act together as far as giving up to date and accurate information to it's passengers. For instance as I write the "Live route status" and the "Journey check" pages of their website make no mention that there are bus replacement services all weekend for stations between Shrewsbury and Chester (although services are being diverted via Crewe, so Shrewsbury to Chester is still possible by train, but not if you want to get off at Gobowen, Chirk etc), and also Buses replace trains on the Wrexham - Bidston line. This is all due to planned engineering work.

You can only find this out from the TFW website or app if you try and buy a ticket.

I've long given up on trusting TFWs "Live service status" page - saying that a line has a "good service" when they are not even trying to run trains is a joke, and a very inconvenient one if you have mobility issues or want to take your bike with you and are faced with a less than accessible bus. For much of this week Wrexham - Bidston has been shown as having a "Good service" when in reality some of the trains are up to 30 mins late, or being cut short or cancelled

I get it that TFW have huge problems delivering their services at the moment, and some of these problems are not under their control, but if they want to keep their passengers and encourage others to use their services proper information is essential. This is a fix that is quite easy, and not expensive. So why not?

Steve B

 

[markymark2000]

Regardless of any changes that are made to the services, TFW really needs to get it's act together as far as giving up to date and accurate information to it's passengers. For instance as I write the "Live route status" and the "Journey check" pages of their website make no mention that there are bus replacement services all weekend for stations between Shrewsbury and Chester (although services are being diverted via Crewe, so Shrewsbury to Chester is still possible by train, but not if you want to get off at Gobowen, Chirk etc), and also Buses replace trains on the Wrexham - Bidston line. This is all due to planned engineering work.

You can only find this out from the TFW website or app if you try and buy a ticket.

And you're lucky that the buses show up on there. A lot of the time, buses don't show or have wrong information on national rail/tfw site/Trainline (I know it's all the same data). TFW also don't do the same as Cross Country by putting emergency buses into the system, services just show cancelled, maybe there is a bus, maybe there isn't. Who knows? No one knows.

I get it that TFW have huge problems delivering their services at the moment, and some of these problems are not under their control, but if they want to keep their passengers and encourage others to use their services proper information is essential. This is a fix that is quite easy, and not expensive. So why not?

Steve B

Because it's effort. Even when they are alerted to the errors, they don't fix them. Pure laziness

 

[allaction]

A simple step - but admittedly not one that will add any services to the schedules - would be for TfW to have one spokesperson to lead the way on daily communications issues with the travelling public.

There is no doubting that the company has significant problems at present. Whether TfW are the victims of outside circumstances or internal failings is not the concern of the vast majority of travellers (but keeps us us occupied here and should be the subject of thorough Welsh Government investigation.)

What passengers want, right now, is a clear flow of honest information, centrally and clearly provided, about what is happening with their services (which will be sweetened, of course, with promises of jam tomorrow - or ice cream today if their stunt of handing out cartons at affected Valley Lines stations this week is anything to go by.)

TfW has no identifiable face doing this, and a patchy record in communicating on a day to day basis. It’s not helping.

 

[Krokodil]

One obvious tactic would be to combine services and split en route.

But you need a consistent fleet to do any of that.

Ideally one which will uncouple on the first attempt.

TfW does carry plenty of fresh air at times (eg westbound in North Wales in the morning, eastbound in the evening).

Not in my experience. The 0721 from Chester to Holyhead is busy enough. There aren't many public railway services in the world that don't carry fresh air around at some point in the day, only cherry-pickers like Lumo will be consistently full.

I bet Anglesey doesn't warrant the capacity it gets, especially if you add in Avanti's contribution.

In years gone by, the timetable to Holyhead was almost entirely organised around the ferries. There are quiet trains now between the ferries, but they fill right up as soon as they get to Bangor.

I'm not convinced 5 cars is really necessary on every Manchester service

If I was procuring the rolling stock, I'd have gone for fixed-formation four car units for class 1 work. Not many fewer seats than a 2+3 and a lot cheaper to build.

There was a plan for a peak 6 car between Chester and Manchester

As far as I'm aware the intention was always to run five cars in the peak. As above fixed formation four car units would be ideal. They need to carry on down the coast though, not split at Chester.

 

[Llandudno]

Which is why hopefully this review will see excess capacity taken from routes that don't need it to routes that do.

Or perhaps a precursor to remove all trains on the Heart of Wales/Conwy Valley/Borderlands and redeploy them elsewhere to grow the market and increase revenue on the Marches, Shrewsbury-Birmingham, north Wales - Manchester etc…

 

[Krokodil]

Or perhaps a precursor to remove all trains on the Heart of Wales/Conwy Valley/Borderlands and redeploy them elsewhere to grow the market and increase revenue on the Marches, Shrewsbury-Birmingham, north Wales - Manchester etc…

No chance, even if it was politically possible you'd have to go through closure proceedings for that.

 

[Dai Corner]

No chance, even if it was politically possible you'd have to go through closure proceedings for that.

I'm not suggesting TfW are going to do so, but you can get away with running a train (or even a bus) once a week in one direction only instead of going through closure proceedings. Chiltern Railways do just that between West Ealing and West Ruislip, for example.

Edit: TfW are almost there, serving Newport-Pye Corner on Sundays only.

 

[Krokodil]

Edit: TfW are almost there, serving Newport-Pye Corner on Sundays only.

Given that there's an hourly service to Cardiff, they're hardly cutting off a community on the other six days, are they? Many of the places served by the rural branch lines of which you speak have no alternative public transport at all. What buses do exist take more than twice as long. There's a reason that these lines survived Beeching.

 

[Dai Corner]

Given that there's an hourly service to Cardiff, they're hardly cutting off a community on the other six days, are they? Many of the places served by the rural branch lines of which you speak have no alternative public transport at all. What buses do exist take more than twice as long. There's a reason that these lines survived Beeching.

The urban Valleys of south Wales arguably have enough demand to justify a duplicate transport infrastructure. The rural areas served by the branch lines in question don't and the lines only remain open for political reasons in the main. Imagine how much better those isolated communities (and others not lucky enough to still have a station) could be served by bus if the railways were closed and the money spent on road improvements and operating subsidies instead. Logically, devolution of rail infrastructure and an integrated public transport policy for Wales would involve doing just that. I wonder if the political will is there?

We're going off topic for this thread though.

 

[Krokodil]

Imagine how much better those isolated communities (and others not lucky enough to still have a station) could be served by bus if the railways were closed and the money spent on road improvements and operating subsidies instead.

They wouldn't. If you look at the Wrexham-Bidston threads the replacement buses take 2.5 hours instead of the hour the train takes.

In the Conwy Valley meanwhile, there are many people (whether locals or tourists) who use the train but wouldn't consider the bus. Withdraw the trains and they will either drive (adding to congestion) or just not travel (letting the local economy suffer). Conwy Valley trains are often full at the moment, I will be interested to see the station usage statistics when they are released in November, I suspect that certain stops will see significant increases compared with 2019 [edit: 2018, the 2019 figures having already been surpassed as that was a bad year for disruption].

the lines only remain open for political reasons

These railways are social railways. Some communities would end up cut off without them, just like those in the Esk Valley.

 

[Dr Day]

In the Conwy Valley meanwhile, there are many people (whether locals or tourists) who use the train but wouldn't consider the bus.

Maybe not the current bus offering, but would they consider, say, a half hourly frequency comfortable leather seat type bus between the major stations with journey times similar to or faster than the train, with, say, an hourly service for the smaller stations? With lower fares? I'm sure there is a tipping point at which a decent bus offering is more attractive for getting folks out of their cars than a poor train one. TfW are a multi -modal transport authority, not just focused on trains, so can take a more strategic look at where rail makes the most sense.

If the cost of providing a really attractive bus service is lower than the cost of a mediocre train service, TfW may consider it worthwhile to deploy their rail resources somewhere else where there is a more substantial potential market to go at eg strengthening Cardiff -Manchester, Chester-Manchester, Shrewsbury -Birmingham or even bagging any remaining capacity in the Severn Tunnel to go at the Cardiff -Bristol market.

 

[markymark2000]

Maybe not the current bus offering, but would they consider, say, a half hourly frequency comfortable leather seat type bus between the major stations with journey times similar to or faster than the train, with, say, an hourly service for the smaller stations?

Have you taken a look at the route on the map? The smaller stations are all on the main road anyway or you have zero chance of getting anything bigger than a taxi down the roads. Even rail replacement, the rules are all stops on the main road except Llanwrst and Betws-Y-Coed where you pull closer to the station (and of course Junction and Blaneau where you stop in the bus stop in the car park or in the bus interchange respectively. You would run one single bus service, not one for big stops, one for the small ones.

 

[Kite159]

Have you taken a look at the route on the map? The smaller stations are all on the main road anyway or you have zero chance of getting anything bigger than a taxi down the roads. Even rail replacement, the rules are all stops on the main road except Llanwrst and Betws-Y-Coed where you pull closer to the station (and of course Junction and Blaneau where you stop in the bus stop in the car park or in the bus interchange respectively. You would run one single bus service, not one for big stops, one for the small ones.

Or for some of the smaller stations, a 15 seated minibus as some are not that well-used (on the southern half of the line, i.e. Roman Bridge)

 

[Krokodil]

Maybe not the current bus offering, but would they consider, say, a half hourly frequency comfortable leather seat type bus between the major stations with journey times similar to or faster than the train, with, say, an hourly service for the smaller stations?

How would they know that the bus has "comfortable leather seats" when a large segment of the population wouldn't even consider the bus long enough to look inside? Tourists who don't drive just wouldn't go to Betws, they'll find somewhere else to go that they can access by train (or close enough to a station for a taxi not to be extortionate).

Other tourist honeypots such as Llanberis and Beddgelert are not served by the national network (though the latter can be accessed by steam train from Caernarfon or Porthmadog). I've used the Sherpa buses enough to know that tourists using the bus to access these villages are very much the exception - virtually everyone drives, adding to the congestion within the National Park.

Even before their bus passes were accepted on the train, most pensioners along the valley used the train rather than the bus. Llew Jones has now withdrawn the T19 bus because of lack of patronage, leaving the train as the only link between Blaenau and the north. If you permanently replace the train with a bus, you will just force many passengers into their cars. As for running multiple buses an hour - purlease!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I've no idea what things are like on the Valley Lines these days. But even if the Valleys are less busy than they used to be, you can't exactly poach class 398s to strengthen the Marches like you can with 150s.

Good.

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

Where’s the roughly 8am Holyhead to Cardiff gone? I can’t find it in journey planners this morning.

 

[Dai Corner]

has now withdrawn the T19 bus because of lack of patronage,

I think it was more because the local authorities wouldn't offer a subsidy deal which worked for the operator. See the statement from them quoted in this post

Trawscymru Service News

Hi all Does anyone have any further news or details regarding the sad recent announcement from Llew Jones that route T19 is being withdrawn? Unfortunately, Llew Jones Coaches have announced that they will no longer operate the TrawsCymru T19 service which runs between Blaenau Ffestiniog and...

www.railforums.co.uk

Meanwhile, the rail line has had comparatively vast sums spent on it to provide shiny new trains and repair the damage that occurs every time it floods at Llanwrst.

If those pensioners used the bus the reimbursement for their concessionary passes might even enable it to operate without further subsidy.

On the infrastructure side, the savings from not having to maintain the railway would pay for, say, a new bridge for motor traffic at Llanwrst leaving the existing narrow, dangerous one for pedestrians and cyclists.

These are the sort of things an integrated public transport authority like TfW would/should be addressing, though the situation is skewed at the moment as the rail infrastructure is maintained free of charge from the Welsh
Government's point of view.

Returning to my original point, the large cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham, Cardiff and Bristol have the density of population to justify a duplicate transport infrastructure but the Conwy Valley, Central Wales line and lines west of Carmarthen don't.

This is all speculative though, and we should start a new thread in the appropriate forum if we want to discuss it further.

 

[Snow1964]

Or perhaps a precursor to remove all trains on the Heart of Wales/Conwy Valley/Borderlands and redeploy them elsewhere to grow the market and increase revenue on the Marches, Shrewsbury-Birmingham, north Wales - Manchester etc…

Don't think that would happen.

But where we are now, has sort of evolved over decades, and lot of the current timetable is not really based what the market needs in mid 2020s, but what was convenient operationally few years ago.

There are far too many services terminating at Cardiff (a through station, not a terminus), really need to get more services linked and running across, if only to avoid turning so many trains there.

The Welsh marches line has huge mix of train length and quality. It is usually much cheaper than using XC between Bristol and Birmingham but never really harnessed it as a key north-south leisure route. It ought to be a money spinner, but instead seems to have a service that is an afterthought of when other services just happen to be timed to pass along the line, rather than a regular fast core service that extends to other places.

Perhaps whole timetable needs to be rewritten around the new core flows even if branch lines then need a timetable change to connect.

My gut feeling is what is deemed a primary passenger service, secondary line, commuter line, branch line for service levels might be out of date. To some extent the 197s are wrong train for some of the long regional services, probably need to lengthen the 3car to 4car as a stopgap.

 

[Western 52]

I agree more services should operate through Cardiff rather than terminate. Often ECS off services seem to block platforms causing later trains delays waiting for a platform. This is especially the case with down mainline trains when platforms 3 and 4 are full. This is not good for passengers due to missed connections. There's no space to add more platforms, so more efficient use of the existing 8 platforms is key.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Where’s the roughly 8am Holyhead to Cardiff gone? I can’t find it in journey planners this morning.

RTT says 1V94 terminating at Chester, nothing forward from there.
Just for today, apparently.

1V95 (1040 Holyhead-Cardiff, 175 112) has run via Crewe, so the route via Wrexham must still be blocked around mid-day.
1I18 (1I48 Holyhead-Birmingham Int) has run via Wrexham, though over an hour late.

1V91 (Gerald), involved in this morning's incident, is now 5V91 Gobowen-Chester-Crewe-Cardiff Canton and has just reached Crewe.

Realtime Trains | 5V91 1330 Gobowen to Cardiff Canton Sidings | 24/07/2023

Real-time train running information for 5V91 1330 departure from Gobowen to Cardiff Canton Sidings on 24/07/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

RTT says 1V94 terminating at Chester, nothing forward from there.
Just for today, apparently.

Maybe it’s to do with Royal Welsh Show alterations.

 

[SuperLuke2334]

1V91 has apparently struck a cow at Wrexham and the line is currently blocked.

 

[Dai Corner]

Maybe it’s to do with Royal Welsh Show alterations.

The Royal Welsh Show extras aren't running, due to shortage of train crew, according to Journeycheck.

 

[Krokodil]

I think it was more because the local authorities wouldn't offer a subsidy deal which worked for the operator. See the statement from them quoted in this post

If more than a handful of people wanted to use the bus, it wouldn't need a subsidy. There's a long history of branch lines being replaced by buses, which are then cut in turn because the passengers have deserted.

Meanwhile, the rail line has had comparatively vast sums spent on it to provide shiny new trains and repair the damage that occurs every time it floods at Llanwrst.

And now that this money has been spent on resilience (it was the insurer who paid for the repairs), you want to abandon the robust railway that has resulted? It doesn't wash out any more, the rock armour protects the embankments when the water recedes.

The railway is an important link for the community and really should have the service enhanced, not cut. I do find it amazing how many posters on a railway enthusiast forum are fans of Serpell.

 

[Dai Corner]

If more than a handful of people wanted to use the bus, it wouldn't need a subsidy. There's a long history of branch lines being replaced by buses, which are then cut in turn because the passengers have deserted.


And now that this money has been spent on resilience (it was the insurer who paid for the repairs), you want to abandon the robust railway that has resulted? It doesn't wash out any more, the rock armour protects the embankments when the water recedes.

The railway is an important link for the community and really should have the service enhanced, not cut. I do find it amazing how many posters on a railway enthusiast forum are fans of Serpell.

If the railway hadn't survived (was that because of traffic for the long closed Trawsfyndd power station?) there probably would be more than a handful of people using the bus. Why should the Conwy Valley have the luxury of a train service when, say, the Rhondda Fach or Sirhowy valleys in the south have to make do with buses (which are quite busy and mostly run commercially at no cost to the taxpayer)?


I didn't know Network Rail insured their assets. A Welsh Government with control of the rail infrastructure would, quite rightly, have had to decide whether to repair Llanwrst or, say, reopen Aberdare to Hirwaun.

 

[markymark2000]

Or for some of the smaller stations, a 15 seated minibus as some are not that well-used (on the southern half of the line, i.e. Roman Bridge)

Roman Bridge passengers would be no better served by a 15 seat minibus versus the bus serving the stops on the A470. Dolwyddelan perhaps a bus could better serve the village versus being on the main road. Pont-y-pant I think the biggest vehicle that you would send there is a taxi.

I think it was more because the local authorities wouldn't offer a subsidy deal which worked for the operator. See the statement from them quoted in this post

It was a combination of the two. Low patronage means the core service was unviable and they were using the school journeys to cover the costs of running the rest of the service but Conwy Council were still paying the same for school kids as they were 4 years ago (so a very unfair price by todays standards) which made everything unviable with the vastly increased costs in the past 18 months.

If more than a handful of people wanted to use the bus, it wouldn't need a subsidy. There's a long history of branch lines being replaced by buses, which are then cut in turn because the passengers have deserted.

The bus was never in the railway systems though, that would be the main difference between the T19 and what Dai Corner is suggesting. Until rather recently, there was also no cross ticket acceptance so it's not really a fair comparison.

It's worth noting as well that Dai hasn't said that the bus would be viable, they have said that instead of throwing subsidy at the railway line, instead putting that money into a bus service. Based off the T19 journey times, to run hourly, you would be looking at 3 buses which would cost around £450,000 (figure is just cost). With a bus, you can satisfy at least 2 school bus flows (Ysgol Dyffryn Conwy heading south and Llandrillo College) and so you would probably save around £60-90k in school transport). As soon as you take into account the school bus movements and the fares/concessionary reimbursement, the net cost won't be anywhere near that high.