Quicker to Yeovil by FGW

HowardGWR · 19 Jan 2014

I notice on the first day of HSTs taking the Honiton route that the 1028 ex PAD took 2 hrs 12 mins to Yeovil Jcn (including a useful stop at Pen Mill, so even faster to centre of Yeovil) whereas the SWT normal time from WAT to Yeovil Jcn is 2hrs 20 mins. This on a Sunday timing to boot.

Why is not FGW allowed to compete with SWT (also from Weymouth to PAD) as in the old days? If the Honiton line was redoubled throughout, this would easily be possible.

SWT lands Yeovil pax in the Dorset countryside (that's where the junction is).

RailUK Forums

yorkie · 19 Jan 2014

HowardGWR said:
Why is not FGW allowed to compete with SWT (also from Weymouth to PAD) as in the old days?

Are you asking "why is there not a service from Paddington to Weymouth via Yeovil not in the franchise specification?"

swt_passenger · 19 Jan 2014

HowardGWR said:
I notice on the first day of HSTs taking the Honiton route that the 1028 ex PAD took 2 hrs 12 mins to Yeovil Jcn (including a useful stop at Pen Mill, so even faster to centre of Yeovil) whereas the SWT normal time from WAT to Yeovil Jcn is 2hrs 20 mins. This on a Sunday timing to boot.

The wait at Yeovil Jn on that service is not a public call, it is to await the timetabled path. The temporary FGW timetable shows a few booked calls at SWT stations, but only when the relevant SWT service has been withdrawn to make room for FGW.

Exactly the same as when the big Reading blockade was on and the calls at Banbury to reverse were not open to the public.

Presumably someone has determined that with long distance paths in and out of Paddington being at a premium, it is better to run to Devon and Cornwall via Taunton and Exeter regularly, than to divert the scarce rolling stock to Weymouth...

HowardGWR · 19 Jan 2014

swt_passenger said:
The wait at Yeovil Jn on that service is not a public call, it is to await the timetabled path. The temporary FGW timetable shows a few booked calls at SWT stations, but only when the relevant SWT service has been withdrawn to make room for FGW.

Exactly the same as when the big Reading blockade was on and the calls at Banbury to reverse were not open to the public.

Yes, I did think I made clear that I was talking about the potentially faster service. I think that if we did not have the current franchise set-up (see other poster's question) we would not have the situation that competitive services cannot be proposed because the institutions created do not allow them to be.

If we contrast this line with the Chiltern line, the point is proved, I think. Look at the chord between Yeovil Jcn and the Weymouth line (formation still extant) that would allow through trains from Exeter to Weymouth / Bournemouth (plonked in every succeeding Dorset Local Transport Plan as an aspiration) and think about the possibility of Bristol to Weymouth services calling at Yeovil Jcn with the useful connections that makes possible and this can be compared with the enterprising developments by Chiltern with its chord to Bicester.

swt_passenger · 19 Jan 2014

I don't think you were clear, you mentioned the useful call at Pen Mill at the same time, and that wasn't public either.

Chiltern is not the same, they were obliged by their franchise agreement to develop new services which turned out to be the Evergreen phases. Had they not proposed Oxford to Bicester (or some similar alternative) to DfT's satisfaction they would not have had their final extension.

That cannot be compared to hypothetical Bristol to Weymouth services, that you've been banging a drum for for quite a few years here, that are completely unrealistic.

HowardGWR · 19 Jan 2014

swt_passenger said:
I don't think you were clear, you mentioned the useful call at Pen Mill at the same time, and that wasn't public either.

Chiltern is not the same, they were obliged by their franchise agreement to develop new services which turned out to be the Evergreen phases. Had they not proposed Oxford to Bicester (or some similar alternative) to DfT's satisfaction they would not have had their final extension.

That cannot be compared to hypothetical Bristol to Weymouth services, that you've been banging a drum for for quite a few years here, that are completely unrealistic.

A somewhat aggressive reply - I don't know why, but I apologise if I was not clear. I have only been corresponding here for (I think) less than a year so I think the second aggressive remark was also uncalled for (even if I had been).

Indeed you are correct, these are unadvertised calls. I merely wished to open the question of what could be done. If one disagrees, then please feel free, that's IMO, what the site is for.

455driver · 19 Jan 2014

So because FGW are a whole 8 minutes quicker to Yeovil you think that is reason enough to start running a service that way! :lol:

Where (when FGW are running their normal timetable) are the available trains and paths coming from?
What sort of train will operate on the route?
What sort of passenger loadings do you think the trains will run at?
How many of these passengers will be new to rail and how many will defect from the SWT service?

Captain Chaos · 19 Jan 2014

Isn't there a huge difference in price between the two to London though? For a whole 8 minutes, who is going to even use it? Waste of time if you ask me!

Muzer · 19 Jan 2014

I do think that it might be a good idea to look seriously at reinstating the chord from Yeovil Junction to the Weymouth line so that the Bristol-Weymouth stoppers can reverse and make a call useful for interchange purposes. Though I don't know how many people would use said interchange in practice, or whether it would be faster than alternatives - hence why I said "look seriously" rather than "do it without question"

.

I'm guessing the signalling situation might need improving, and you'd probably have to do something about the junction layout at Yeovil if you want to avoid having to try to take over one of the heritage platforms...

455driver · 19 Jan 2014

HowardGWR said:
I merely wished to open the question of what could be done.

Nothing could be done, there are no paths, no trains and no requirement/ business case!

HowardGWR said:
If one disagrees, then please feel free, that's IMO, what the site is for.

You have been answered, I dont think anyone has been aggressive in their replies either, maybe a little short but not aggressive.

D1009 · 19 Jan 2014

It's certainly quicker today with Waterloo to Exeter reduced to a 2 hourly service via Staines!

Personally with more double track west of Salisbury I'd rather see faster trains from Waterloo to Yeovil Jn and stations west thereof, I think the existing service serves too many places and is therefore too slow. Very difficult to change anything though due to pathing reasons at the London end.

HowardGWR · 19 Jan 2014

Muzer said:
I do think that it might be a good idea to look seriously at reinstating the chord from Yeovil Junction to the Weymouth line so that the Bristol-Weymouth stoppers can reverse and make a call useful for interchange purposes. Though I don't know how many people would use said interchange in practice, or whether it would be faster than alternatives - hence why I said "look seriously" rather than "do it without question" .

I'm guessing the signalling situation might need improving, and you'd probably have to do something about the junction layout at Yeovil if you want to avoid having to try to take over one of the heritage platforms...

I agree, the necessary feasibility studies need doing, but I believe the fragmentation of the present arrangements prevent even that. NR does not look at it in its RUS and seems to accept that there will always be a franchise set up like we have now -wrong thinking, IMO.

I am convinced double tracking between Salisbury and Exeter would open up - first, much better SWT services (which would be used to the full), and second, I think the 'GW' connections and improvements I mentioned above would eventually follow.

My reasoning is that what is happening elsewhere will also happen on that stretch and is just a question of time and priorities. The railways are expanding and we should all welcome that. I guess 'competition' and 'privatisation' cloud the issue of expansion. Thankfully, with HS2 it's not the case (yet).

PHILIPE · 19 Jan 2014

Muzer said:
I do think that it might be a good idea to look seriously at reinstating the chord from Yeovil Junction to the Weymouth line so that the Bristol-Weymouth stoppers can reverse and make a call useful for interchange purposes. Though I don't know how many people would use said interchange in practice, or whether it would be faster than alternatives - hence why I said "look seriously" rather than "do it without question" .

I'm guessing the signalling situation might need improving, and you'd probably have to do something about the junction layout at Yeovil if you want to avoid having to try to take over one of the heritage platforms...

And how much longer would it take to get to Weymouth ?

Muzer · 19 Jan 2014

PHILIPE said:
And how much longer would it take to get to Weymouth ?

I wouldn't have thought it would add too much to the journey time - correct me if I'm wrong. It would certainly be worth it for the flexibility in my own opinion - but maybe regular users of the line would disagree.

However, I wouldn't have thought a reversal in a 158 would take too long.

Morgsie · 19 Jan 2014

Is the line single tracked between Dorchester and Castle cary?

Doubling if so

Muzer · 19 Jan 2014

With passing loops at Maiden Newton and Yeovil Pen Mill, yes it's singled.

Oliver · 19 Jan 2014

Given that the current Waterloo to Exeter service offers an hourly service, many of which are formed of only three coaches, it's very difficult to see why further re-doubling is warranted. If more capacity was needed the first step would be to run longer trains.

Likewise, journey times could be reduced if some stops were omitted, but there would be winners and losers, and little overall gain. The current service is generally fit for purpose, and it's hard to see much change over the next few years. Extending the last down service (21.20 ex-Waterloo - Yeovil) through to Exeter would be a start.

Morgsie · 19 Jan 2014

The Yeovil to Exeter line has to be re-doubled because it is an important diversionary route which recent floods proved.

HowardGWR · 19 Jan 2014

Morgsie said:
Is the line single tracked between Dorchester and Castle cary?

Doubling if so

Of course it would be re-doubling, but I expect you were aware of that. Others might not be so that's why I've replied.

Both routes suffer reliability problems at present and on the Honiton line, it has to be remembered, the planned new suburban service planned to run between Axminster and Exeter including the new town at Cranbrook.

yorksrob · 19 Jan 2014

HowardGWR said:
Of course it would be re-doubling, but I expect you were aware of that. Others might not be so that's why I've replied.

Both routes suffer reliability problems at present and on the Honiton line, it has to be remembered, the planned new suburban service planned to run between Axminster and Exeter including the new town at Cranbrook.

If they're planning a suburban service to Axminster, perhaps they could extend it just a little further to Lyme Regis :idea:

455driver · 19 Jan 2014

Morgsie said:
The Yeovil to Exeter line has to be re-doubled because it is an important diversionary route which recent floods proved.

Not a good enough reason!

If there was enough money to redouble routes 'just in case' there would certainly be enough money to ensure services were run with suitable units with more than enough capacity and all the Pacers would have long since been scrapped.
Unfortunately that isnt the case.

Muzer · 19 Jan 2014

In all seriousness, I haven't seen any real proposals for the Lyme Regis line for some time. I wonder how successful it would be. I wouldn't hold out much hope

455driver · 19 Jan 2014

yorksrob said:
If they're planning a suburban service to Axminster, perhaps they could extend it just a little further to Lyme Regis

The plan is (I think) to run a Barnstaple to Axminster service using 158s cascaded from Bristol when they get the 165/166s.

yorksrob · 19 Jan 2014

Muzer said:
In all seriousness, I haven't seen any real proposals for the Lyme Regis line for some time. I wonder how successful it would be. I wouldn't hold out much hope

Neither do I for this one to be honest ! Still, hope springs eternal

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

455driver said:
The plan is (I think) to run a Barnstaple to Axminster service using 158s cascaded from Bristol when they get the 165/166s.

That might be the additional impetus required to redouble at least to Axeminster.

D1009 · 19 Jan 2014

I can't see any wholesale redoubling in the foreseeable future. They are seriously looking at a long passing loop in the Whimple area so trains can pass each other without stopping. I'd like to see something similar at Tisbury.

Parallel · 19 Jan 2014

I'm not sure about competing FGW services, however it could be good if some SWT trains called at both Yeovil Pen Mill and Yeovil Junction, Yeovil Pen Mill is a lovely station that is definitely underused in my opinion and doesn't see enough services.

I'd potentially look at putting a two hourly service from Weymouth to Westbury on to run alternatively to the two hourly service that already exists from Weymouth to Bristol/Gloucester, and with some SWT services calling there too it could attract passengers as it would have far better connections. Perhaps Sprinters could run Westbury-Weymouth and when it becomes available, different stock could run Gloucester-Weymouth. I'm not sure if it would actually work but it also strengthens Heart of Wessex connections at Westbury and Castle Cary, and would give Frome more services too.

starrymarkb · 19 Jan 2014

How would SWT call without reversing twice (and calling at Junction twice)

Parallel · 19 Jan 2014

starrymarkb said:
How would SWT call without reversing twice (and calling at Junction twice)

Ahh, I'm not that familiar with the line SWT uses, I just assumed there was a through line!

Perhaps FGW could offer services to Exeter St. Davids via Axminster then? It could be incorporated with a two-hourly Westbury-Weymouth service and could consist of a 150 two car unit and a 153 that would split at Yeovil Pen Mill with the 153 continuing down to Weymouth and the 150 continuing to Exeter St Davids? Just playing with ideas.

Muzer · 19 Jan 2014

The current line looks something like this (sorry for the terrible ASCII drawing):

Code:

                   ^ to Castle Cary
                   |
                  PM
                  /|
                 / |
to Exeter <---JN---|----------------> to Salisbury
                   |
                   |
                   v to Dorchester West

There was once a curve between Junction and the line towards Dorchester as well as the existing Jn-Pen Mill curve (used only during diversions).

Eagle · 19 Jan 2014

yorksrob said:
If they're planning a suburban service to Axminster, perhaps they could extend it just a little further to Lyme Regis

Not sure where you'd actually put a station in Lyme Regis; the old station has been totally redeveloped (predictably) and was way out of town to the north anyway, because the whole town is situated on a pretty steep incline. Any other station site would have to be similarly far out of town for the same reason.

According to OS mapping the old station was about 90 metres (300 feet) above sea level; I think that may be a record for a seaside town :lol:

Quicker to Yeovil by FGW

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member