hexagon789
Veteran Member
£82.90 Advance Single all the way for the first day it operates under the new timetable currently, I've not tried splitting though.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!
Paddington to Plymouth in 2.5 hours?
- Thread starter Jamesrob637
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I'm slightly puzzled why the topic of getting to Plymouth quicker keeps coming up. It's not a particularly busy station, and the train service is already far quicker than any alternative means of transport. Why do other places deserve a worse service in order to get there marginally quicker?
I'm slightly puzzled why the topic of getting to Plymouth quicker keeps coming up. It's not a particularly busy station, and the train service is already far quicker than any alternative means of transport. Why do other places deserve a worse service in order to get there marginally quicker?
Thank you, Stuu, for responding to my observation (#12) in more detail!
Thank you, Stuu, for responding to my observation (#12) in more detail!
Are you going to split at a station where you can't be set down?
Last edited:
hexagon789
Veteran Member
Hastily typed, what I actually meant was a splitting site like the forum, because it'll sometimes produce a cheaper fare option, which it has.
London Terminals to Exeter St David's £61.50 vs the higher fare for a Paddington to Exeter St D's Advance that GWR's website will offer.
I agree. If you extrapolate data, Cornwall is far busier than Plymouth given the seasonality. Plymouth is a small market itself - it's just the biggest thing around. A Norwich type service place. To me there are a few goals with this service:
Lessen the appeal of London-Newquay flights.
Increase appeal of domestic tourism (speed and experience) for D/C economies (also green)
Business goals - London-Exeter pair especially, but Plymouth plays a part here
Quicker connectivity to London for Cornwall (deprived/isolated) - economic access
And a second hourly pattern (as mentioned, could go to Paignton) could cover many of the important stations - so I would end up with three:
[fast] London - Reading - Exeter - Totnes - Plymouth - stations to Penzance/Newquay
[semi-fast] London - Reading - Westbury - Castle Cary - Taunton - Tiverton - Exeter - stations to Paignton. Covers Newton Abbot.
[outer] London - Reading - Newbury - typical stations to Westbury, covers Pewsey. Could be Frome for the odd peak.
irish_rail
Established Member
You correctly state how busy Cornwall is, and that's precisely why faster trains are needed between London and Plymouth as this in turn speeds up the journey to Cornwall. The losers are mid Devon and parts of Somerset. But if this means the south west's biggest city, West Devon and ALL of Cornwall have a quicker service to London then in my view it's a price worth paying. Asking say Totnes passengers to make a same platform interchange at Exeter isn't really the end of the world and it may well really grow the patronage from places West thereof. Population of Plymouth + Cornwall is greater than the Liverpool City region, and yet places like Liverpool get decent quick trains to London that don't stop everywhere (and rightly so).
Oh and comparing Plymouth to Norwich is utterly laughable. Plymouth population is around twice that of Norwich and its far more important in terms of the Port and Millitary.
Mcr Warrior
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 12,245
From where to where and on what date? If we're still talking about London Paddington to Plymouth journeys, couldn't find £82.90 as a (Std) Advance Single fare tier.
I agree with the first half of the first half.
Norwich is a far larger rail market than Plymouth (see the stats) - I don't think the port or military has any bearing on this conversation - but clearly don't contribute much to rail demand. And as for the function (outsized service town for the broader region) - I think you get the parallel. Chester is another - does something bigger than itself.
I'd say actually Exeter is the Norwich/Chester/Inverness - punching above. Plymouth is closer to a Portsmouth, Sunderland, Bradford. Larger, but less dynamic.
Totnes has a good proportion of long distance passengers like some Cornish stations due to holidaying, second homes and many arts, media and business types living in the trendy town and its picturesque South Hams hinterland, who often have to make frequent trips to London & SE or The North. Notably, almost every service has come to call there in recent years as modern traction allowed it with far less time penalty than with steam or early diesel haulage, so it must be a lucrative stop. That means the service frequency to Plymouth and Newton Abbot, mostly comprising these longer distance trains, is excellent even into the evenings. Start skipping stops on varying stopping patterns and the convenience for many passengers starts to evaporate. Proposals to back fill connectivity with additional local trains often don't stack up from a resource, pathing and economic perspective and the expense tends to lead to sharp reductions in service at times of lower local demand, again eroding convenience, or operators just put all the stops back in on the expresses in the evenings and make the timings and departure minutes completely different to daytime. Please note I'm not saying a handful of additional or varied 'out of regular pattern' trains aren't ever justified at times of super peaks for that traffic, especially on one of the busiest UK summer routes.
hexagon789
Veteran Member
3rd June. I didn't actually check that it was a Paddington to Penzance advance GWR was offering, but the forum was definitely offering a London Terminals one at a cheaper price than whatever GWR listed.
why can’t GWR run the 12.03 and 12.05 on Saturdays as well? as just 12.03 runs on Saturdays with usual schedule, and no relief train, when trains are likely busier than a weekday.
I think the only practical way to really speed up the London-Penzance route, would be using a diesel or Bi Mode tilting train, with 8-9 degrees tilt like the Pendolino, and some slewing of track, could give speeds like this:
London-Reading same as now,
Readiing-Heywood Junction 100-125 mph,
Heywood Junction-Exeter 110-125 mph,
Exeter-Starcross 125 mph,
Starcross-Penzance 80-105 mph.
I have used generally 25 mph extra round curves for tilting train with 8-9 degrees tilting, but beyond Exeter the line is so twisting that I thought say 115 between Teignmouth and Newton Abbott be bit high so stuck with 105 mph max after Exeter. i dont know if tilting 8-9 degrees Diesel or Bi Mode exists, and didn’t use Super Voyager as they only tilt to 6 degrees so would be slower round the curves. I don’t see this as likely to happen, as still be probably high hundreds of millionsi if not billions, but still possible unlike making this line 125 mph using conventional trains which would be prohibitively expensive and disruptive.
I think the only practical way to really speed up the London-Penzance route, would be using a diesel or Bi Mode tilting train, with 8-9 degrees tilt like the Pendolino, and some slewing of track, could give speeds like this:
London-Reading same as now,
Readiing-Heywood Junction 100-125 mph,
Heywood Junction-Exeter 110-125 mph,
Exeter-Starcross 125 mph,
Starcross-Penzance 80-105 mph.
I have used generally 25 mph extra round curves for tilting train with 8-9 degrees tilting, but beyond Exeter the line is so twisting that I thought say 115 between Teignmouth and Newton Abbott be bit high so stuck with 105 mph max after Exeter. i dont know if tilting 8-9 degrees Diesel or Bi Mode exists, and didn’t use Super Voyager as they only tilt to 6 degrees so would be slower round the curves. I don’t see this as likely to happen, as still be probably high hundreds of millionsi if not billions, but still possible unlike making this line 125 mph using conventional trains which would be prohibitively expensive and disruptive.
Do they even carry a train's worth per day? Eastern's ATR to Gatwick drones past twice a day, those things take 70ish passengers.
About - a bit over iirc - a million and a half passengers a year between Taunton & Tiv PW vs 2.3m for Plymouth. From readily available stats a lot of Plymouth journeys apparently don't go out of Devon ( unless the actual journey is lost in split ticketing again ), meanwhlie most of TPWs are to London, and Taunton seems split between Bristol & London.
I wonder what the effect on numbers of passengers would be if journeys to Cornwall got speeded up by 15 minutes vs journeys to Taunton and Tiverton getting much slower (which they would if they all went to Westbury etc.). Positive or negative? Both in passenger numbers and revenue
irish_rail
Established Member
Well the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. If the 1203 proves to be a big success and is regularly packed out, it rather confirms the need for more faster Westcountry trains.
Norwich has two trains an hour, both taking about 2 hours to London. Does it really surprise you that it has more London traffic than Plymouth when a daytrip is easily doable. You are comparing apples and oranges I'm afraid. Norwich and Plymouth are two completely different markets, one intercity, one "network southeast" (even if it was considered intercity in BR days.
Well yes, you would be slowing down the Taunton and Tiverton journey by about 15 minutes. But do you really think that would prompt passengers to abandon the train and drive to London instead, with all the parking hassle etc that would bring. The vast majority would stick with the railway I'm confident of that. But the true intercity journey to Cornwall , if speeded up would grow traffic on that route, so it's a catch 22. I'm of the opinion that we should be concentrating on the really long journeys, trying to make places in the far south west far more accessible I the same way Scotland has lots of quick trains to London.
Last edited:
Yes they are different markets. But both isolated, 'regional capitals' and I think there are some fair parallels. They both have local legacy rail networks still. Exeter too.
Yes, Norwich is closer to London, and more affluent economically. Plymouth has a higher population but far less rail demand - why is that? Not just because of trains per hour to London. But being a less important place, economically. And it's not the way to Cornwall. Norwich isn't really somewhere anyone passes through - Norfolk Coast visitors overwhelmingly drive (residents commute/travel to Norwich)
Jamesrob637
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2016
- Messages
- 5,325
Most UK cities are more affluent than Plymouth, including most of the North.
Many places are closer to London and also don't thrive. It's a seaside / maritime thing, frankly - most larger places all around our coast are deprived and fairly stagnant economically - some have some navy, some have some ferries. But also all the typical problems.
The actual trade, i.e, freight out of Felixstowe and Thames/Tilbury isn't really defining to those places, any more.
The actual trade, i.e, freight out of Felixstowe and Thames/Tilbury isn't really defining to those places, any more.
Coastal towns have only half the 'catchment area' of inland towns (the other half being sea!), and that is up-the-line from the coast, e.g Much of Devon is closer/ more accessible to Exeter and Tiverton Parkway than Plymouth. That's geography, and economic geography that's very hard to change! It may be different for 'the seaside' (for six weeks a year anyway). The Withered Arm comes to mind.
irish_rail
Established Member
This is very true. I do wander if "levelling up" should be refocused to "bringing up our coastal cities" (obviously with a more catchy name). It is a UK wide issue, look at how Liverpool is less successful economically than Manchester just down the road.
This 100 percent.
Topological
Member
Is that Liverpool, one of many large settlements within reasonable distance of Manchester, versus Manchester which is central to a large set of conurbations and has a major international airport?
Interestingly the same Taunton and Tiverton passengers who would lose the fast train but be ok with it, would presumably be put out massively by calling at Old Oak Common?
It will be interesting to see what happens with this faster train. It reminds of Virgins first stop Preston on the WCML, but those had Glasgow as a destination.
irish_rail
Established Member
OK so you feel the need to make a sarcastic comparison with Glasgow. Well combined population of Plymouth, west Devon and all of Cornwall is around about a million. So not overly dissimilar to the Glasgow area, and probably more tourist potential. I'm sorry that it seems to upset so many on here, but the reality is, if Totnes and Tiverton where "inconvenienced" by being removed from the fasteat services, a far better intercity service could be provided to a far greater number of people for a fairly minimal "opportunity cost".
Topological
Member
I am a little confused... My comment that Glasgow is a more meaningful destination than Penzance stands? In the case of the old Virgin timetables the stops were Preston, Carlisle then Glasgow (read Exeter, Plymouth then...). I suspect Plymouth does stand up relative to Carlisle in that regard.
GWR must feel that the train is worthwhile, time will tell.
I do believe that GWR serving Old Oak Common will be progress and that the time elasticity gets weaker as the distance increases.
The first stop Preston WCML trains have been gone a long time I believe.
irish_rail
Established Member
The difference being there is decent custom from Plymouth right through Cornwall which easily rivals that of the singular destination of Glasgow when looked at in total. Penzance is just a small part of that overall picture. I'm not suggesting removing stops in Cornwall.
The first stop Preston stuff may have ended, but the reality is the first stop Plymouth service will be very popular. Preston is a much smaller place than Plymouth for one thing and less of a destination.
FlyingPotato
Member
While this is getting off topic
Preston is the major junction for places like Blackpool and Blackburn while Plymouth doesn't have that junction needs
I think for faster journey you need to increase speeds which is probably not possible without a new line
Preston has nearly double the rail users as Plymouth. It may not be the most beautiful place, but it's a very connected one - and it's certainly more of a 'destination' in rail terms - which is why we are all on RailUKForums - than Plymouth is.
irish_rail
Established Member
Again, the chicken and egg argument exists, is it because Plymouth has a relatively poor offering in terms of long distance trains that is suppressing passenger numbers. Living in the city, it is amazing how many people you talk to who say they want to go to London but that it is too expensive. With a better service, more cheap advances fares could be available which would help tap some of the untapped growth.
If a better service costs more to provide, why would there be 'more cheap advances'. GWR have generally stopped selling 'cheap advances' in any case.
The railway is never going to get approval to add more services to run a greater loss.
The current timetable is, as far as I'm aware, the most frequent the SW has ever had. Have prices gone down?
Topological
Member
The chicken in that case would have to be the industrial revolution, since Preston connects to the mill towns of Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley, whilst also linking to the major seaside destinations of Southport and Blackpool. No one would say that Plymouth does not offer connections to nice seaside, arguably Newton Abbott and Exeter are the actual connection points (or stations west of Plymouth).
It would be great if there were more trains to everywhere, but I suspect that Plymouth is not top of the untapped market list. I hope I am wrong though and GWR do start adding more fast services rather than take this one away again.