route:oxford
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 4,949
So just to be clear...
There are no absolutely no free paths for passenger services between Didcot & Swindon between 6am and 10pm daily?
-
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!
Go-Op developments...
- Thread starter saracen43
- Start date
- Status
So just to be clear...
There are no absolutely no free paths for passenger services between Didcot & Swindon between 6am and 10pm daily?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Wilts Wanderer
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2016
- Messages
- 2,488
That will most likely be the case from Monday 16th December, yes.
The problem is the huge speed differential between the 7x 125mph passenger trains per hour each way, and the 60/75mph freights which will be loop-hopping. It eats all the capacity (and proves why high-speed passenger traffic should be moved to dedicated segregated lines wherever possible - obviously not possible in this case.)
Extending the 4-track section all the way from Didcot to Swindon would help. Some slower passenger trains, perhaps with additional intermediate stops, might share the reliefs with the freights.
Brissle Girl
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 2,660
That’s hardly going to happen just on the off chance somebody wants to run a few open access services, or even open a couple of intermediate stations, given the price tag it would entail.
By "Didcot and Swindon" probably read "Didcot and Wootton Bassett" although you lose the Cheltenham service at Swindon.
I agree, but it might be justifiable on general capacity and flexibility grounds one day. A start was made in the 1990s with Wantage Road - Challow which, at around 4 miles long, was supposed to be 'dynamic' in the sense that a freight could enter the relief line at one end, be overtaken by an express, then exit immediately behind it without having to stop.
Brissle Girl
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 2,660
Though on completion another shorter loop elsewhere on the stretch was taken out of use, so it didn’t really progress four tracking very much. If it wasn’t justifiable when there was lots of coal traffic then I doubt it ever will.
True, but Uffington loops were too short to be of very much use.
coppercapped
Established Member
These infrastructure discussions about the Great Western really belong to another thread - if I've got the energy I might start one!
But first my tuppence. These proposed Go-Op trains will be crossing quite a lot of others on the flat, where they join the GW Main Line at Thingley Junction right through to the Didcot junctions. I would suggest that pathing issues at the junctions and platform occupancy are more critical than the occupancy of a two track main line - as long as the trains used are fleet of foot. Junctions in busy areas should be grade separated as this avoids perturbations in traffic in one direction affecting that in the opposite. This would suggest to me that Foxhall Junction at Didcot should be converted to a flyover or diveunder so that westbound trains could join the Down Main without additional delays waiting for a path between the stream of trains on the Up Main. I can't see that the traffic density at Thingley Junction requires grade separation but parallel moves and double track towards Melksham might be a good idea.
In the longer term there are proposals/suggestions/ambitions to re-open some at least of the stations between Didcot and Bristol - at this point some judicious extensions of the four tracking might be needed.
But first my tuppence. These proposed Go-Op trains will be crossing quite a lot of others on the flat, where they join the GW Main Line at Thingley Junction right through to the Didcot junctions. I would suggest that pathing issues at the junctions and platform occupancy are more critical than the occupancy of a two track main line - as long as the trains used are fleet of foot. Junctions in busy areas should be grade separated as this avoids perturbations in traffic in one direction affecting that in the opposite. This would suggest to me that Foxhall Junction at Didcot should be converted to a flyover or diveunder so that westbound trains could join the Down Main without additional delays waiting for a path between the stream of trains on the Up Main. I can't see that the traffic density at Thingley Junction requires grade separation but parallel moves and double track towards Melksham might be a good idea.
In the longer term there are proposals/suggestions/ambitions to re-open some at least of the stations between Didcot and Bristol - at this point some judicious extensions of the four tracking might be needed.
Mintona
Established Member
I think you’ll see Wootton Bassett and/or Didcot East Junctions grade separated an awful long time before you do Foxhall.
coppercapped
Established Member
Oh, quite! This was something for my, not yet written, GW infrastructure thread!
Where are the freights that use the line going from/to and how frequent are they on this stretch? Given that there are no intermediate stations at present, the 7tph passenger service alone wouldn't be enough to fill up a double track railway.
Shame, because I think having a passenger service direct from Swindon (and somewhere west thereof) to Oxford (and beyond) would be a good thing. My current thinking is that an hourly service using 387s serving Bristol Temple Meads, Keynsham, Oldfield Park, Bath Spa, Batheaston, Corsham, Chippenham, Wootton Bassett, Swindon, Radley, Oxford, Oxford Parkway, Bicester Town and all EWR stations to Milton Keynes would be the way to go though.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
These ideas make Yeowart's ideas seem positively sensible!
I'm not sure which enterprise is a bigger purveyor of b***s*** and wibble... Go-op or Gwyneth Paltrow's similarly-named goop (famed for selling expensive egg-shaped stones which are intended to be carried in an intimate place, as if you're trying to sneak them on Eurostar or something).
I'm not sure which enterprise is a bigger purveyor of b***s*** and wibble... Go-op or Gwyneth Paltrow's similarly-named goop (famed for selling expensive egg-shaped stones which are intended to be carried in an intimate place, as if you're trying to sneak them on Eurostar or something).
The hourly Bristol to Didcot service is timed to arrive at Didcot at the same time as the service to Oxford departs from the other side of the station, which means a 30 minute wait at Didcot and a total journey time of 1 hour 45 minutes. Do you really think a regional service would not be quicker?
From experience there are more passengers making this journey than you realise.
From experience there are more passengers making this journey than you realise.
pdeaves
Established Member
Not as many as you would think. The joint FGW/Thames Trains service around 2003/4-ish didn't seem to have that much custom.
coppercapped
Established Member
That was an infrequent 75mph service and did not go past Oxford. It did not run for long enough to build a clientele before it was abandoned as the stock was more usefully employed elsewhere. It is odd to read on a pro-railway forum that based on 15 year old evidence rail services between these places are not needed.
The market area being addressed by the Go-Op proposal makes travel across the radial routes from London easier on an axis which is not currently well served. There are similarities to the suggestions from East-West Rail for services which essentially connect the area south west of Bristol and South Wales to Swindon, Oxford, Bletchley (for Milton Keynes), Bedford, Cambridge and Norwich/Ipswich with all the connections possible at the interchange stations. The difference is that the Go-Op proposal is not dependent on the construction of a railway.
Few passengers will travel end-to-end - it will be more akin to CrossCountry with passengers making a series of overlapping journeys.
The question is whether the number of potential passengers will cover the operating costs including the infrastructure levy and whether the operation will be sufficiently capitalised to absorb the start up costs.
What's not to like? The DfT would never have come up with such a suggestion and no taxpayers money is at stake.
route:oxford
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 4,949
The outrageous prices of houses in Oxford has forced many to seek more affordable housing outside the City. The A420 is rammed every morning with people making the 30 mile drive from Swindon to the world's best city.
Now, the connection is great at Didcot. 45 minute journey including an 8 minute connection. Late evening journey times dropping to as little as 36 minutes. What's not to like?
Well the peak return fare is £48. That's really off-putting to many people who are forced to move due to the cost of living. Especially when you consider that a return journey of approximately half the length between Didcot and Oxford is just £7.50 peak.
I suspect a more realistically priced peak journey of, say, £16 return would result in a considerable modal shift.
But that might be disruptive to GWRs business model if passengers were to start splitting tickets at Diddyland.
Indeed, depending on the line/services some have seen a doubling of passengers in that timeframe, that could mean that a service which was carrying 55% of the passengers to breakeven could be making a profit now.
- Status