Should Didcot to Oxford be electrified to release Turbos for work elsewhere?

[FlyingPotato]

Then adding on the journey to Didcot?

Surely that will mess around with timetabling

 

[mangyiscute]

I often travel on the Oxford to London trains. 5 coaches is not enough, often the train leaves oxford full and standing. Especially the ones that already have passengers on, they need a capacity boost. Hence why the 387s would be perfect, you can boost the capacity without using up valuable 9 coaches or 5 coaches. As for the pathing, I'm pretty sure the Oxford services leave Paddington just before the Heathrow Express services so that wouldn't be an issue - they can always leave a couple minutes earlier like they used to when they called at Slough (so leave at xx:20 rather than xx:22). I would imagine it could still get to Didcot before the Bristol train behind it catches up, but if its a huge issue it could probably be fit in on the relief lines west of Reading.

Also, on a side note, now that the oxford terminators call at Didcot, could you not remove the Didcot to Oxford shuttles on that side of the hour and then make the others all call at Appleford, Radley and Culham, since I don't think there's that much demand for Didcot to Oxford and the intermediate stations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Let's say some 800s get freed up, where would they actually go?

Is there any actual point to replacing the 800s with a few 387s

HST diagrams for one, which would allow HSTs to be replaced without short forming other services.

 

[JonathanH]

HST diagrams for one, which would allow HSTs to be replaced without short forming other services.

Other postings have indicated that there is already an 'allocation' of IETs to do this. It isn't a good use of expensive rolling stock to bail out a supplier (Hitachi) who can't provide the correct number of units each day.

 

[Energy]

Other postings have indicated that there is already an 'allocation' of IETs to do this. It isn't a good use of expensive rolling stock to bail out a supplier (Hitachi) who can't provide the correct number of units each day.

The allocation is the units freed from the Bristol superfasts, if they ever return then the IETs will be needed. Though by then I'd expect GWR to have their regional fleet replacement much further progressed which will be the long term rolling stock on the HST routes.

 

[mangyiscute]

Plus, aren't there currently some Bristol/Cardiff/Exeter services which are only 5 coaches (like diagrammed, not just short forms) which could be boosted

 

[JonathanH]

Plus, aren't there currently some Bristol/Cardiff/Exeter services which are only 5 coaches (like diagrammed, not just short forms) which could be boosted

They don't need to be boosted if the number of passengers using them doesn't warrant it. It is certainly possible that a short formation is all that is needed at the times they are diagrammed.

 

[mangyiscute]

They don't need to be boosted if the number of passengers using them doesn't warrant it. It is certainly possible that a short formation is all that is needed at the times they are diagrammed.

I can say, as a frequent user of the GWR network, that there are certainly times when a capacity boost is needed (mainly for the oxford services I've found but those are just the ones that I take the most frequently) having a 5 car that started in Oxford leave full and standing is not acceptable. I alighted at Reading where there were plenty of more passengers wishing to board the busy train.

 

[JonathanH]

I can say, as a frequent user of the GWR network, that there are certainly times when a capacity boost is needed (mainly for the oxford services I've found but those are just the ones that I take the most frequently) having a 5 car that started in Oxford leave full and standing is not acceptable.

I am not sure that we are talking about the same services though. I was merely making the point that there can be services where five cars are sufficient.

If a particular round trip from Paddington never fills to capacity with a five car unit, it should stay that way. If, as you say, the conditions are intolerable something should be done to make more capacity.

 

[JamesRowden]

80x units can do Paddington to Reading in 22/23 minutes, 387s do it in 25/26 minutes. The differential between Reading and Oxford is likely to be less significant.

The point is that with a three minute headway, 25 minutes to Reading is two 125mph paths.

Off-peak, the Oxford fast services are scheduled to arrive at Paddington behind a Didcot semi-fast which is behind a Heathrow express, and the Oxford fast services leave Paddington in front of a Heathrow express.

The 387 operated Newbury services have Paddington departure/arrival times which have a similar relationship to the Oxford services to the Heathrow Express and Didcot service departure/arrival times.

Looks to me like the Oxford fast services have been timetabled in such a way that conversion to 387 timings can be implemented as a minor timetable change without using up additional paths between Reading and Paddington.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Let's say some 800s get freed up, where would they actually go?

Is there any actual point to replacing the 800s with a few 387s

I'd say no as the higher speeds have enabled the current journey times.

 

[cactustwirly]

I'd say no as the higher speeds have enabled the current journey times.

Surely a slightly slower journey is preferable if it means a greater chance of a seat

 

[YourMum666]

Cardiff to Swansea should be considered as well

 

[stevieinselby]

Cardiff to Swansea should be considered as well

I can't see it being a high priority.
Between Swansea and Cardiff, GWR run an hourly London service using bi-modes, and TFW run 1 or 2 tph which will be using diesel Civity units and so unable to make use of the electrification.
The maximum linespeed is 90mph and that is for less than half of the route, most of it is 75mph.
Yes, in the fullness of time it would be good to see that line electrified (although it would have been better if that decision had been made before TFW made their ridiculous orders), but there are plenty of other lines that have a much stronger case, and with such limited resources we need to make sure that they are targeted at where they will have the greatest impact ... and that isn't here.

 

[YourMum666]

I can't see it being a high priority.
Between Swansea and Cardiff, GWR run an hourly London service using bi-modes, and TFW run 1 or 2 tph which will be using diesel Civity units and so unable to make use of the electrification.
The maximum linespeed is 90mph and that is for less than half of the route, most of it is 75mph.
Yes, in the fullness of time it would be good to see that line electrified (although it would have been better if that decision had been made before TFW made their ridiculous orders), but there are plenty of other lines that have a much stronger case, and with such limited resources we need to make sure that they are targeted at where they will have the greatest impact ... and that isn't here.

What about if the B&H wires is extended to west bury

 

[zwk500]

What about if the B&H wires is extended to west bury

Limited gains to Westbury, given little terminates there. Bedwyn makes a small amount of sense for the service turning back, but it's still very marginal.
After Didcot-Oxford, I'd say the focus should be on wiring Swindon-Gloucester-Cheltenham-Westerleigh and Chippenham-Bristol (+ Filton bank) for GW services. Bristol suburban would also rank higher than Westbury for me (Severn Beach, Portishead if it happens and maybe Weston-SM).

 

[route101]

When I pass Didcot heading North it looks like they started to wire the line towards Oxford? Was it scrapped?

 

[cle]

Limited gains to Westbury, given little terminates there. Bedwyn makes a small amount of sense for the service turning back, but it's still very marginal.
After Didcot-Oxford, I'd say the focus should be on wiring Swindon-Gloucester-Cheltenham-Westerleigh and Chippenham-Bristol (+ Filton bank) for GW services. Bristol suburban would also rank higher than Westbury for me (Severn Beach, Portishead if it happens and maybe Weston-SM).

I would think Westbury could have an hourly service though (vs Bedwyn) given the various connections - and that the Waterloo services were lost, and so those towns (Warminster, Bradford, Trowbridge, between them, good usage + Frome also) - are back to mainly connecting.

 

[zwk500]

I would think Westbury could have an hourly service though (vs Bedwyn) given the various connections - and that the Waterloo services were lost, and so those towns (Warminster, Bradford, Trowbridge, between them, good usage + Frome also) - are back to mainly connecting.

It's definitely one that should be on the list, but I'd expect Westbury to be part of electrification down to Taunton (unless by some miracle Southampton-Salisbury-Bristol happens earlier) rather than a high priority.

 

[mangyiscute]

I would think Westbury could have an hourly service though (vs Bedwyn) given the various connections - and that the Waterloo services were lost, and so those towns (Warminster, Bradford, Trowbridge, between them, good usage + Frome also) - are back to mainly connecting.

I'd like to see the London to Exeter services which call at Newbury, Pewsey, Westbury and Castle Cary made hourly, I reckon there would be enough end to end traffic plus connections at Westbury to make this feasible (and perhaps call at Hungerford as I expect that this is the most used on the Bedwyn bit)

 

[anthony263]

I can't see it being a high priority.
Between Swansea and Cardiff, GWR run an hourly London service using bi-modes, and TFW run 1 or 2 tph which will be using diesel Civity units and so unable to make use of the electrification.
The maximum linespeed is 90mph and that is for less than half of the route, most of it is 75mph.
Yes, in the fullness of time it would be good to see that line electrified (although it would have been better if that decision had been made before TFW made their ridiculous orders), but there are plenty of other lines that have a much stronger case, and with such limited resources we need to make sure that they are targeted at where they will have the greatest impact ... and that isn't here.

You'd be able to fit the 231s with pantograph so they can use the wires Bridgend to Severn Tunnel jct.

Swanline could go over to EMUs porterbrook could give use some nice class 350/2's

 

[Nick Ashwell]

You'd be able to fit the 231s with pantograph so they can use the wires Bridgend to Severn Tunnel jct.

Swanline could go over to EMUs porterbrook could give use some nice class 350/2's

I've been told on here the 231s will terminate at Cardiff from Cheltenham in future, and to be fair, as much as I disagree with this decision working in Bridgend and living in Monmouthshire, the weight added for Bridgend to Newport when they switch to running Maesteg to Ebbw Vale services may not be worth it.

 

[YourMum666]

Newbury - Exeter is such a good idea, for freight and passenger trains, as the an& H has a lot of freight and quite a curvy line in general. Electrification would bring up the line speed to its full 200km/hr and would slash journey times to Exeter. Truth is if Exeter is seeing wires, then it’s more likely to go via Bristol TM

 

[cle]

I'd like to see the London to Exeter services which call at Newbury, Pewsey, Westbury and Castle Cary made hourly, I reckon there would be enough end to end traffic plus connections at Westbury to make this feasible (and perhaps call at Hungerford as I expect that this is the most used on the Bedwyn bit)

Agreed - or at least to Westbury or Taunton in one hour and Exeter the other. Notably, these would also be good services for Wellington and Cullumpton. And Tiverton Parkway, lessening the need for Cornwall calls, being the same catchment.

And if hourly, the likes of Pewsey and Castle Cary could also drop off longer distance services.

But I think the ideal is three levels:
1tph Paddington - Westbury/Taunton (semi-fast)
1tph Plymouth alt/Paignton (a bit faster, cover Taunton, Devon calls inc Tiverton Parkway and Newton Abbott, Totnes when Plymouth)
1tph Penzance (fast Reading to Exeter, then to Plymouth (+Totnes if needed)

plus 1tph Bedwyn.

which might help the case for the electric B&H.

 

[anthony263]

I've been told on here the 231s will terminate at Cardiff from Cheltenham in future, and to be fair, as much as I disagree with this decision working in Bridgend and living in Monmouthshire, the weight added for Bridgend to Newport when they switch to running Maesteg to Ebbw Vale services may not be worth it.

Dont forget you might be able to run some local freights using electric locos will make them easier to path between passengers services. Plus emus on swanline will reduce journey times especially when swanline is picking up more stops from December

 

[zwk500]

Newbury - Exeter is such a good idea, for freight and passenger trains, as the an& H has a lot of freight and quite a curvy line in general. Electrification would bring up the line speed to its full 200km/hr and would slash journey times to Exeter. Truth is if Exeter is seeing wires, then it’s more likely to go via Bristol TM

Electrification by itself does not increase linespeed. The curves impose a natural limit - see the north WCML. Electrification to the quarries would certainly help the freight, assuming a shunting option is present to solve the loading under wires issue. 'Slashing' journey times may be overstating - the uplifts you'd be able to get as part of the project would be about the 7 minute mark. Not everywhere could reach 200kph and lots is already 100/110mph.

 

[Bald Rick]

Newbury - Exeter is such a good idea, for freight and passenger trains, as the an& H has a lot of freight and quite a curvy line in general. Electrification would bring up the line speed to its full 200km/hr and would slash journey times to Exeter. Truth is if Exeter is seeing wires, then it’s more likely to go via Bristol TM

Electrification by itself does not increase linespeed. The curves impose a natural limit - see the north WCML. Electrification to the quarries would certainly help the freight, assuming a shunting option is present to solve the loading under wires issue. 'Slashing' journey times may be overstating - the uplifts you'd be able to get as part of the project would be about the 7 minute mark. Not everywhere could reach 200kph and lots is already 100/110mph.

The linespeed on the B&H is more or less unimprovable due to alignment and several other factors. The late Phillip Rees as Civil Engineer (WR) squeezed everything he could out of that line in the late 70s / early 80s using exceptional curving rules.

Electrification would help with acceleration, line particularly for freights. For passenger services the journey time saving would be maybe a minute or two for the non-stop services, and perhaps 5 minutes for those that stop at Hungerford / Westbury etc. Freight would save big chunks of time, partly directly though better acceleration but mostly because they would not need to be looped so frequently.

However given that almost all the freight is on the section east of Merehead, that would seem to be the stretch to aim for.

 

[WAO]

When I pass Didcot heading North it looks like they started to wire the line towards Oxford? Was it scrapped?

I think that the correct word is "paused", although this was sine die - no date for resumption. As said elsewhere, much piling has been done and an ATS has been completed. Arguably the bridge replacement(s!) and platform 5 were needed first.

Cascading (there's a word from the past!) the turbo's from Paddington surburban services should be a no-brainer. The argument is nearly as strong for wiring to Bedwyn, if through stoppers from Paddington are to be resumed and WoE bi-modes are to travel a little further West under the wires.

Other wiring (eg to Westbury, Swansea etc) depends on how much actual use would be made of it by operators. I don't see many strong arguments yet.

WAO

 

[12LDA28C]

As isn't the future station project to build another through line from the western most bay?

The new through line will be on the Down side of the station with Platform 5 being round the back of Platform 4 where the old youth hostel and signalbox used to be. The Bay Platforms 1 and 2 are staying as they are.

 

[Benjwri]

The issue with the Western route is the half done electrification, there is no singular route that could be electrified and remove a diesel fleet. A lot of people talking about Oxford, but you still need at least one DMU for Banbury, unless you go all the way for just one train, and even then you aren’t actually cutting that many diagrams. Same with Bedwyn or to Westbury, you can eliminate a DMU with that but it’s only one diagram.

The strongest case might be to infil to Bristol Temple Meads from Chippenham and Stoke Gifford, maybe you’d be able to use 387s to Bristol, or remove some engines from the 802s and convert them to 801s, but that in itself is expensive. The whole thing is a lot of infill that comes out very expensive for the benefit.