Bustitution on Cambrian to accommodate private charter

[Bertiethebobby]

Apologies if this has been mentioned elsewhere.

Today, TFW substituted a bus service from Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth and return to create a path for the Pathfinder (very apt) railtour from Reading to Pwllheli.

I'd be very interested to know who would need to sign that off or are TFW in control of the track and trains so they can do what they like? I've not heard of this happening anywhere else before, just wondering if it would have needed the ORR to give the OK.

On a personal note, I'd be mightily pissed off if I'd been shoved onto a bus all the way to Aberystwyth so that a special could run.

 

[Llandudno]

Apologies if this has been mentioned elsewhere.

Today, TFW substituted a bus service from Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth and return to create a path for the Pathfinder (very apt) railtour from Reading to Pwllheli.

I'd be very interested to know who would need to sign that off or are TFW in control of the track and trains so they can do what they like? I've not heard of this happening anywhere else before, just wondering if it would have needed the ORR to give the OK.

On a personal note, I'd be mightily pissed off if I'd been shoved onto a bus all the way to Aberystwyth so that a special could run.

Too right - if true!

 

[hexagon789]

Apologies if this has been mentioned elsewhere.

Today, TFW substituted a bus service from Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth and return to create a path for the Pathfinder (very apt) railtour from Reading to Pwllheli.

I'd be very interested to know who would need to sign that off or are TFW in control of the track and trains so they can do what they like? I've not heard of this happening anywhere else before, just wondering if it would have needed the ORR to give the OK.

On a personal note, I'd be mightily pissed off if I'd been shoved onto a bus all the way to Aberystwyth so that a special could run.

Just as well you didn't try and travel to/from Largs by train on Easter Sunday afternoon there!

 

[JonathanH]

Happening four more times later in the year as well.

On a personal note, I'd be mightily pissed off if I'd been shoved onto a bus all the way to Aberystwyth so that a special could run.

In practice you would just get the train an hour later, rather than a bus. In a way, how different is it to the situation where a train is cancelled due to lack of train crew?

 

[Bertiethebobby]

Happening four more times later in the year as well.


In practice you would just get the train an hour later, rather than a bus. In a way, how different is it to the situation where a train is cancelled due to lack of train crew?

Yes indeed, essentially no different in the end result.
For me it's the principle of it.
Also I'd genuinely like to know whether TFW's network is their train set to play with and they can do what they like or if other bodies need to be involved. Otherwise this could happen anywhere and we could have steam specials everywhere. No path? No problem, just stick a bus service on!

 

[Dr Day]

It is still Network Rail's network (outside the Core Valleys Lines).

 

[JonathanH]

Also I'd genuinely like to know whether TFW's network is their train set to play with and they can do what they like or if other bodies need to be involved. Otherwise this could happen anywhere and we could have steam specials everywhere. No path? No problem, just stick a bus service on!

Network Rail. In this instance, TfW have introduced an extra service to the main two hourly pattern at 1029 from Shrewsbury which means there is no path for charters. On five occasions this year, that extra train will not run by agreement with TfW and instead the charter does.

The particular circumstances here are that charters can't otherwise run now that TfW have taken essentially the only available slot for them. It might be noted that none of the five charters are in the peak Summer months.

 

[Bertiethebobby]

It is still Network Rail's network (outside the Core Valleys Lines).

Thanks, yes that what I thought.
Which leads me to the logical conclusion that NR have agreed the pathing and asked/told TFW to put on a bus which presumably they were happy to do as it's cheaper and anyway NR would pay.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Yes indeed, essentially no different in the end result.
For me it's the principle of it.
Also I'd genuinely like to know whether TFW's network is their train set to play with and they can do what they like or if other bodies need to be involved. Otherwise this could happen anywhere and we could have steam specials everywhere. No path? No problem, just stick a bus service on!

It's Network Rail's railway infrastructure. From an operational perspective, TfW are not obliged to run a train just because they have a path. Lots of paths exist which are essentially theoretical and are never or very rarely used, especially freight.

I suspect Welsh Government will have approved/reviewed this, probably calculated to be the greater good at promoting tourism/enhancing business. TfW won't have unilaterally decided not to run a train service without some serious senior approval. However, I don't think it's a major issue anyway. Timetables reflect this way in advance, there's alternative services within a reasonable timeframe and ultimately somewhere else probably benefited from an extra unit.

 

[Bertiethebobby]

Network Rail. In this instance, TfW have introduced an extra service to the main two hourly pattern at 1029 from Shrewsbury which means there is no path for charters. On five occasions this year, that extra train will not run by agreement with TfW and instead the charter does.

The particular circumstances here are that charters can't otherwise run now that TfW have taken essentially the only available slot for them. It might be noted that none of the five charters are in the peak Summer months.

That implies that TFW have only been "lent" the paths on the understanding that NR can have them back as and when required. If that's the case then the trains that were replaced should be shown as such in the TT, something like "this train may be a bus service"

 

[JonathanH]

Which leads me to the logical conclusion that NR have agreed the pathing and asked/told TFW to put on a bus which presumably they were happy to do as it's cheaper and anyway NR would pay.

There will have been negotiations between the railtour operator, Network Rail and Transport for Wales to agree how to accommodate the charter. If the charter operator can fill a train with 400 people heading to the Cambrian Coast and Transport for Wales were going to carry 100 people who can be accommodated on an earlier or later train, there is economic worth in allowing the charter to run.

 

[Bertiethebobby]

There will have been negotiations between the railtour operator, Network Rail and Transport for Wales to agree how to accommodate the charter. If the charter operator can fill a train with 400 people heading to the Cambrian Coast and Transport for Wales were going to carry 100 people who can be accommodated on an earlier or later train, there is economic worth in allowing the charter to run.

yes I can see that would be true economically.
I'm not sure about the people being able to be accommodated on other services, it's only a 2 hourly service most of the day and the trains are usually a 2 car.

 

[yorkie]

Network Rail. In this instance, TfW have introduced an extra service to the main two hourly pattern at 1029 from Shrewsbury which means there is no path for charters. On five occasions this year, that extra train will not run by agreement with TfW and instead the charter does.

The particular circumstances here are that charters can't otherwise run now that TfW have taken essentially the only available slot for them. It might be noted that none of the five charters are in the peak Summer months.

A good decision; refreshing to see in this day and age!

I suspect Welsh Government will have approved/reviewed this, probably calculated to be the greater good at promoting tourism/enhancing business.

Absolutely.

TfW won't have unilaterally decided not to run a train service without some serious senior approval. However, I don't think it's a major issue anyway. Timetables reflect this way in advance, there's alternative services within a reasonable timeframe and ultimately somewhere else probably benefited from an extra unit.

Unfortunately, it's not entirely clear from the opening post, but from what you are saying, it sounds like the services in question weren't actually cancelled, and were never planned to run? If so, I don't see what the issue is.

 

[The Planner]

There will have been negotiations between the railtour operator, Network Rail and Transport for Wales to agree how to accommodate the charter. If the charter operator can fill a train with 400 people heading to the Cambrian Coast and Transport for Wales were going to carry 100 people who can be accommodated on an earlier or later train, there is economic worth in allowing the charter to run.

This. It would have been a unilateral agreement.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

In practice you would just get the train an hour later, rather than a bus. In a way, how different is it to the situation where a train is cancelled due to lack of train crew?

Wait, we're suddenly ok with trains being cancelled?

 

[james_the_xv]

This. It would have been a unilateral agreement.

And access rights would have been agreed and sold with this in mind. This isn't NR pulling anything from under TfW's feet.

Wait, we're suddenly ok with trains being cancelled?

The train wasn't cancelled, it didn't exist to begin with.

 

[yorkie]

Wait, we're suddenly ok with trains being cancelled?

Do we actually have a source that states the trains in question (which don't appear to be detailed in this thread) were actually cancelled?

I'm not saying they weren't, but the opening post doesn't cite any sources, and I do know @Tazi Hupefi has some industry-insider sources, so in the absence of a source to demonstrate trains were cancelled, I don't think we can conclude that any services were actually cancelled (yet).

 

[ashley84]

Could an alternative option have been that the charter would be required to carry passengers on normal tickets and stop at the normal stopping patterns that the regular train would otherwise have run in?

 

[james_the_xv]

Do we actually have a source that states the trains in question (which don't appear to be detailed in this thread) were actually cancelled?

The services removed are part of the WTT, but were cancelled 'PD - not planned to operate' today. Can't say I'm familiar with how far in advance this is done but I'd imagine well in advance to not interfere with journey planners etc.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Do we actually have a source that states the trains in question (which don't appear to be detailed in this thread) were actually cancelled?

I was replying specifically to a poster who said "In a way, how different is it to the situation where a train is cancelled due to lack of train crew?", which struck me as a weird argument. A train being cancelled due to lack of train crew is not good!

FWIW, the 1029 from Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth, which ran as a bus today, is clearly shown as a train in the current TfW timetable (page 18) with no footnote to say "this may run as a bus if something more important turns up". But I realise that the rail industry thinks that, as per Transpennine Express's spree of night-before cancellations, the timetable is a metaphysical construct rather than an actual list of trains which a passenger can use to plan their journey with some degree of confidence.

 

[yorkie]

Could an alternative option have been that the charter would be required to carry passengers on normal tickets and stop at the normal stopping patterns that the regular train would otherwise have run in?

It's possible, but if the above post by @Tazi Hupefi is correct, the service train was never planned to run, in which case I'd say it's unlikely. But I'll bow to the knowledge of others!

I have asked a top industry insider for their opinion of the claims being made in this thread, and will post an update when I have one.

I was replying specifically to a poster who said "In a way, how different is it to the situation where a train is cancelled due to lack of train crew?", which struck me as a weird argument. A train being cancelled due to lack of train crew is not good!

Fair point; i.e. dealing with the hypothetical posed above, rather than what may or may not have actually happened today. I take your point and I also think it is a false equivalence.

 

[laseandre]

A good decision; refreshing to see in this day and age!

I'm sorry, but the entire point of a public railway is to move people, and not to be a train set for people who can afford it. Let charter operators run where paths allow, but they shouldn't have priority over the actual operator of services along a line where conflicts arise.

 

[yorkie]

I'm sorry, but the entire point of a public railway is to move people...

So no-one should travel for pleasure?

and not to be a train set for people who can afford it.

By that logic, a lot of trains shouldn't be running!

Let charter operators run where paths allow

Isn't that what happened here; agreement was made to allow charter paths?

but they shouldn't have priority over the actual operator of services along a line where conflicts arise.

Are you saying you don't think charters should operate on this line any more?

 

[laseandre]

Are you saying you don't think charters should operate on this line any more?

If charters running on this line means that a train listed in the public timetable doesn't run, then yes.

 

[james_the_xv]

If charters running on this line means that a train listed in the public timetable doesn't run, then yes.

The TfW train was never planned to run today. There was nothing to remove.

 

[Bikeman78]

The train wasn't cancelled, it didn't exist to begin with.

That doesn't appear to be true. RTT shows it booked to run Mondays to Fridays from 11/12/23 to 31/05/24. Looking at today, it is clearly shown as a cancellation. No doubt unit and train crew diagrams were altered to reflect the amendment for today.

 

[laseandre]

The TfW train was never planned to run today. There was nothing to remove.

So why then is there no note next to these trains in their timetable that their running is subject to not being pre-cancelled for a charter? Surely, if that's part of the agreement, you should tell the public well in advance?

 

[Bikeman78]

The TfW train was never planned to run today. There was nothing to remove.

You could apply that logic to any service on any day.

 

[yorkie]

There appear to be two separate issues here

1) Do people agree with the agreement which enabled TfW to increase frequency but to protect some charter paths, or do people believe charters should cease on this line?
2) Was sufficient notice given regarding the cancellation (if there was a cancellation)?

For 1), while people have the right to want charters banned, I personally don't agree with that, but I have no desire to go round in circles on that; I will agree to disagree!

For 2), does anyone actually have the relevant information to hand? We still have not had the details posted regarding which trains were allegedly cancelled or when this was done.

Edit: Someone has told me that the affected trains were:

• 10:29 from Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth (service removed from timetable on 28/02/24)
• 12:30 Aberystwyth to Shrewsbury (service removed from timetable on 20/02/24)

That's a lot more notice than is given by certain operators on a regular basis these days, however I personally feel that 5-6 weeks is not ideal. It's not terrible by any means. It's unclear to me if reservations were already open or not, at the time of cancellation; if not, then again that's a mitigating factor.

A lot of other trains were also removed from the timetable today; it is unclear what the reason for those removals is. Perhaps someone can enlighten us? Could whatever have caused those trains to be removed have ultimately resulted in the removal of the aforementioned 10:29/12:30 services, notwithstanding the charter operation?

 

[Watershed]

The TfW train was never planned to run today. There was nothing to remove.

That is not the case - see the Timetable History listing for one of the affected services (10:29 Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth).

It was published as part of the normal December timetable on 19 September last year, along with the rest of the Cambrian line service. Only on 28 February - 5 weeks beforehand - was the train cancelled.

That's considerably later than the normal engineering work alterations, even with the continuing shorter-than-usual timescales of roughly T-8 that NR and the TOCs are working to.

It's entirely plausible that people would have bought tickets - indeed perhaps even Advances - for the 10:29 etc. between 19 September and 27 February in the expectation that the train would run, as published. As a minimum, any such passengers should be able to claim Delay Repay based on any 15+ minute delay experienced.

Of course the industry sees it otherwise and a claim for Delay Repay would undoubtedly be rejected on the spurious grounds that the train was "never planned to run", as you have suggested.