Electrification west of Newbury

[joeykins82]

Slight tangent: there's been talk in the thread of how bi-mode IEP will improve the service speeds etc but I thought that the main reason that electric services were faster was because they were significantly lighter due to not lugging around diesel engines and fuel. Surely the acceleration profile of a bi-mode IEP is going to be much worse than that of a solely electric train, possibly even to the point of wiping out all of the projected gains over the existing HST fleet?

 

[tbtc]

Slight tangent: there's been talk in the thread of how bi-mode IEP will improve the service speeds etc but I thought that the main reason that electric services were faster was because they were significantly lighter due to not lugging around diesel engines and fuel. Surely the acceleration profile of a bi-mode IEP is going to be much worse than that of a solely electric train, possibly even to the point of wiping out all of the projected gains over the existing HST fleet?

The main gain in speed for EMUs is the acceleration/ decelleration in an electric train is much simpler than in a diesel one - its nothing to do with weight.

Voyagers can match EMU acceleration/ decelleration, but this comes at the cost of being fairly "thirsty" in fuel terms.

 

[joeykins82]

Cheers for that. Explains why the Voyagers are at the naughty end of DafT's grammes of CO2 per passenger kilometre performance graph (electrification RUS, page 41)

 

[tbtc]

Cheers for that. Explains why the Voyagers are at the naughty end of DafT's grammes of CO2 per passenger kilometre performance graph (electrification RUS, page 41)

An example of their aceleration is the way that the flooding in Devon (etc) has meant XC diagrams have had to be rejigged (with many services going no further than Birmingham) which has seen XC HSTs working parts of a diagram that is normally Voyager run, and the HSTs cannot keen to the same times (because their acceleration is much poorer).

This obviously comes at the cost of the Voyagers being much thirstier (and more CO2)

 

[OxtedL]

A. Try some basic grammar, the extract below appears to refer to hourly express services which, given the thread, means the B&H services to Devon & Cornwall.

but if you can fill an hourly fast express why wouldn't you? Don't talk about populations please - the trains are full!

B. Of course it is, but too often population is used by some commentators / consultants to dismiss traffic levels on any route that doesn't directly serve large metropolitan areas. The express services to Devon & Cornwall are full and need to be fast through the day Taunton to Reading.

i. There is a distinct irony in anyone using grammar as an argument, in my opinion.

ii. In [B.] you seem to be both suggesting stopping and not stopping, quite possibly concurrently? Can you please clarify what you mean - your post seems too confrontational for it to not reasonably have some kind of actual underlying opinion in it?

Many thanks.

 

[Xavi]

What's empty about establishing that population in an area is relevant to the level of rail service it is likely to get?

And if FGW know they are going to fill all the seats on HSTs anyway - which appears to be the contention from all these posts about how busy the West Country trains are - then they wouldn't offer advances at all, just wait for people to turn up and pay full whack.

And if you don't believe me, you just try finding an advance fare on the Cotswold Line. FGW don't sell them - because they don't need to to fill the seats (and to be clear, I mean the stations west of Oxford - from Oxford there are bargain basement advance fares to take on the M40 coaches). You will find cheap advances from Hereford but they are all for travel changing at Newport, not direct via Worcester and Oxford.

Why don't you find the station usage figures yourself? It's not hard, just look at the Wikipedia pages for stations, as someone with a lot of time on their hands seems to have posted them for pretty much every station in Britain.

You'll find that the normal walk up fares to most Cotwold line destinations are so cheap in comparison to those on a trunk route like that via B&H that there's no point in offering Advance fares to save the odd quid. The standard fares are good value already.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

i. Can someone please point out to me

ii. In [B.] you seem to be both suggesting stopping and not stopping, quite possibly concurrently? Can you please clarify what you mean - your post seems too confrontational for it to not reasonably have some kind of actual underlying opinion in it?

Many thanks.

i. Exactly there was no error in the grammar, but someone couldn't work out that reference in the extract to 'express' on a thread concerning B&H meant the fast services to Devon & Cornwall.

ii. I'll spell it out. The context of the whole thread excluding the case for extended the wires beyond Newbury or not:

Some contributors dismiss the need for regular direct (via B&H) services to serve Somerset, Devon and Cornwall because the route does not serve populous metropolitan areas. However, considerable traffic is generated from a wide geographical area that easily justifies an hourly fast express service to London. It is regularly impossible to get a seat when joining London trains at the likes of Pewsey because of the traffic levels from further west. It therefore makes sense to provide separate fast and semi-fast services. The fast services will have to be hourly and the frequency of the slower stopping trains can be tailored to meet demand as hourly may not be justified.

Not sure what is controversial about any of this.

 

[TheWalrus]

Ok I'm not going to quote anything so I'm going to respond manually.

You mention FGW manage to fill seats on the cotswolds services. When I went on the 1022 HST to Hereford, there was only 68 people on board after Oxford. In my view this is not good use of an HST. However the later 1321 turbo to Great Malvern was busier with around 177 passengers aboard. Now they are paying for bigger and more expensive 180s and Hsts to run the route all day.

It has also been suggested that not many passengers would travel to westbound destinations from the B&H. Currently the service is VERY limited so you can't expect people to use it! I always used the westbound service from Bedwyn but since all the useful services have been axed, I never go from Bedwyn, as I can't use a service which doesn't exist! If there was an hourly service from Bedwyn to the west with good value fares, I would use it, and I'm sure many people would. You can never know the uptake until you actually provide a service.

 

[OxtedL]

Some contributors dismiss the need for regular direct (via B&H) services to serve Somerset, Devon and Cornwall because the route does not serve populous metropolitan areas. However, considerable traffic is generated from a wide geographical area that easily justifies an hourly fast express service to London. It is regularly impossible to get a seat when joining London trains at the likes of Pewsey because of the traffic levels from further west. It therefore makes sense to provide separate fast and semi-fast services. The fast services will have to be hourly and the frequency of the slower stopping trains can be tailored to meet demand as hourly may not be justified.

Not sure what is controversial about any of this.

It is mainly made controversial by the borderline confrontation being adopted in some posts' tone, hence my point on the whole grammar thing.

One difficulty with the line of argument you are giving is that generally (at the times you are referring to) trains into Paddington are crowded on a variety of routes.

A reduction in service on any route would always be controversial. This is essentially the central point of this thread - how far is it worth electrifying onto a less intensively served route in order to preserve service levels.

You propose removing stops from some services, but running extra services to mitigate this, to avoid the 'reduction' controversy. This increase in service might sometimes tricky to squeeze in further up the line where service increase priorities have to managed - here controversy will also be found.

We have also seen a huge variety of assertions on this thread, rarely backed up by evidence (this is fair enough since barely any useful evidence exists) and thus sometimes contradictory. No-one really seems sure whether or not it will be faster to run via Bristol post-upgrade, or how extending electrification further onto the B&H would affect this. This is central to the debate here, and particularly to the points you are making.

Included the list of other things we don't seem to know are:

• When new trains will start arriving- IEP, Thameslink,...
• What the eventual IEP fleet will look like
• What post-Crossrail service patterns look like - particularly how they interface with Reading, the Heathrow west extension and the electrification and upgrade of GW generally.
• How much electrification will actually be able to do in the coming years.
• How much the population of Bedwyn and similar towns rely on a 'good' train service.
• What a 'good' train service is for the population of Bedwyn, whether this will change in the coming years, and whether this is worth pushing for other other routes.

With so many unknowns, I hope you can understand why there is debate.

 

[jimm]

You'll find that the normal walk up fares to most Cotwold line destinations are so cheap in comparison to those on a trunk route like that via B&H that there's no point in offering Advance fares to save the odd quid. The standard fares are good value already.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


i. Exactly there was no error in the grammar, but someone couldn't work out that reference in the extract to 'express' on a thread concerning B&H meant the fast services to Devon & Cornwall.

ii. I'll spell it out. The context of the whole thread excluding the case for extended the wires beyond Newbury or not:

Some contributors dismiss the need for regular direct (via B&H) services to serve Somerset, Devon and Cornwall because the route does not serve populous metropolitan areas. However, considerable traffic is generated from a wide geographical area that easily justifies an hourly fast express service to London. It is regularly impossible to get a seat when joining London trains at the likes of Pewsey because of the traffic levels from further west. It therefore makes sense to provide separate fast and semi-fast services. The fast services will have to be hourly and the frequency of the slower stopping trains can be tailored to meet demand as hourly may not be justified.

Not sure what is controversial about any of this.

Well, for the umpteenth time, this someone was talking about population along the B&H line proper, NOT points further west and whether the population along the B&H line proper was such that it could sustain an hourly semi-fast, were all the West Country expresses to run non-stop between Taunton and Reading, thus loading all the costs of that semi-fast service on to local custom only.

You'll find that the normal walk up fares to most Cotwold line destinations are so cheap in comparison to those on a trunk route like that via B&H that there's no point in offering Advance fares to save the odd quid. The standard fares are good value already.

The fares are good value? That's a matter of opinion. If you use a railcard off-peak they might be, but with promotion of the Network Card near-zero, many people are paying a lot more than they would otherwise do. Peak fares, especially short-distance ones into Oxford, are punitive for the length of journey. If you use a Cotswold Railcard, the differential between some peak and an off-peak fares for the same journey is about 60 per cent.

You haven't actually addressed my point as to why advances are being sold from Plymouth if the West Country trains are all as full as you assert - FGW isn't a charity and needs every penny it can generate, so why are they doing it?

You mention FGW manage to fill seats on the cotswolds services. When I went on the 1022 HST to Hereford, there was only 68 people on board after Oxford. In my view this is not good use of an HST. However the later 1321 turbo to Great Malvern was busier with around 177 passengers aboard. Now they are paying for bigger and more expensive 180s and Hsts to run the route all day.

Ah yes, the off-peak Hereford trains - about the only ones where there are lots of empty seats and where advances would be a very good idea indeed - but FGW still won't offer them. Though the 15.14 forms the 17.31 from Oxford to Paddington, so there is no need to sell lots of seats cheap, as it fills very nicely there, thank you.

And it might not be a good use of an HST in your opinion - but would you want to spend three hours on a Turbo? Because without 180s, that was the only other option available - and even now, with only five 180s, they are being used to Worcester and Malvern to eliminate Turbos west of Moreton-in-Marsh (bar the morning stopper). And 180s offer only about 30 more seats (though they are real human-sized ones, rather than the Turbo 3+2 sardine seats) than a Class 166. Most of the 180 services are very cosy indeed between Oxford and London and often well used far up the line towards Worcester as well - again no need to sell dirt-cheap tickets.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It has also been suggested that not many passengers would travel to westbound destinations from the B&H. Currently the service is VERY limited so you can't expect people to use it! I always used the westbound service from Bedwyn but since all the useful services have been axed, I never go from Bedwyn, as I can't use a service which doesn't exist! If there was an hourly service from Bedwyn to the west with good value fares, I would use it, and I'm sure many people would. You can never know the uptake until you actually provide a service.

+1 --Totally agree --- Factor in the highly probable sparks effect and your argument gets even stronger.

 

[Zoe]

You haven't actually addressed my point as to why advances are being sold from Plymouth if the West Country trains are all as full as you assert - FGW isn't a charity and needs every penny it can generate, so why are they doing it?

If they didn't offer advance fares it's likely the trains wouldn't be anywhere near as busy, it's the advance fares that help make the trains as busy as they are. Walk-up fares have increased significantly in recent years and you'd end up with quite a few people not travelling by train rather than paying expensive walk-up fares.

 

[Xavi]

Well, for the umpteenth time, this someone was talking about population along the B&H line proper, NOT points further west and whether the population along the B&H line proper was such that it could sustain an hourly semi-fast, were all the West Country expresses to run non-stop between Taunton and Reading, thus loading all the costs of that semi-fast service on to local custom only.



The fares are good value? That's a matter of opinion. If you use a railcard off-peak they might be, but with promotion of the Network Card near-zero, many people are paying a lot more than they would otherwise do. Peak fares, especially short-distance ones into Oxford, are punitive for the length of journey. If you use a Cotswold Railcard, the differential between some peak and an off-peak fares for the same journey is about 60 per cent.

You haven't actually addressed my point as to why advances are being sold from Plymouth if the West Country trains are all as full as you assert - FGW isn't a charity and needs every penny it can generate, so why are they doing it?



Ah yes, the off-peak Hereford trains - about the only ones where there are lots of empty seats and where advances would be a very good idea indeed - but FGW still won't offer them. Though the 15.14 forms the 17.31 from Oxford to Paddington, so there is no need to sell lots of seats cheap, as it fills very nicely there, thank you.

And it might not be a good use of an HST in your opinion - but would you want to spend three hours on a Turbo? Because without 180s, that was the only other option available - and even now, with only five 180s, they are being used to Worcester and Malvern to eliminate Turbos west of Moreton-in-Marsh (bar the morning stopper). And 180s offer only about 30 more seats (though they are real human-sized ones, rather than the Turbo 3+2 sardine seats) than a Class 166. Most of the 180 services are very cosy indeed between Oxford and London and often well used far up the line towards Worcester as well - again no need to sell dirt-cheap tickets.

Advances from Plymouth, they are indeed available, just like there are from anywhere a similar distance from London in the UK on a mainline: ECML. MML. WCML...

The original paragraph about population was referencing express services. Not the stopping services.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It is mainly made controversial by the borderline confrontation being adopted in some posts' tone, hence my point on the whole grammar thing.

One difficulty with the line of argument you are giving is that generally (at the times you are referring to) trains into Paddington are crowded on a variety of routes.

A reduction in service on any route would always be controversial. This is essentially the central point of this thread - how far is it worth electrifying onto a less intensively served route in order to preserve service levels.

You propose removing stops from some services, but running extra services to mitigate this, to avoid the 'reduction' controversy. This increase in service might sometimes tricky to squeeze in further up the line where service increase priorities have to managed - here controversy will also be found.

We have also seen a huge variety of assertions on this thread, rarely backed up by evidence (this is fair enough since barely any useful evidence exists) and thus sometimes contradictory. No-one really seems sure whether or not it will be faster to run via Bristol post-upgrade, or how extending electrification further onto the B&H would affect this. This is central to the debate here, and particularly to the points you are making.

Included the list of other things we don't seem to know are:

• When new trains will start arriving- IEP, Thameslink,...
• What the eventual IEP fleet will look like
• What post-Crossrail service patterns look like - particularly how they interface with Reading, the Heathrow west extension and the electrification and upgrade of GW generally.
• How much electrification will actually be able to do in the coming years.
• How much the population of Bedwyn and similar towns rely on a 'good' train service.
• What a 'good' train service is for the population of Bedwyn, whether this will change in the coming years, and whether this is worth pushing for other other routes.

With so many unknowns, I hope you can understand why there is debate.

No extra capacity further east required - stoppers use the Bedwyn paths. I could go through your other points, which I am aware of, but got to get the one XC today out of Taunton to Birmingham. Not somthing I'm looking forward to!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It is mainly made controversial by the borderline confrontation being adopted in some posts' tone, hence my point on the whole grammar thing.

One difficulty with the line of argument you are giving is that generally (at the times you are referring to) trains into Paddington are crowded on a variety of routes.

A reduction in service on any route would always be controversial. This is essentially the central point of this thread - how far is it worth electrifying onto a less intensively served route in order to preserve service levels.

You propose removing stops from some services, but running extra services to mitigate this, to avoid the 'reduction' controversy. This increase in service might sometimes tricky to squeeze in further up the line where service increase priorities have to managed - here controversy will also be found.

We have also seen a huge variety of assertions on this thread, rarely backed up by evidence (this is fair enough since barely any useful evidence exists) and thus sometimes contradictory. No-one really seems sure whether or not it will be faster to run via Bristol post-upgrade, or how extending electrification further onto the B&H would affect this. This is central to the debate here, and particularly to the points you are making.

Included the list of other things we don't seem to know are:

• When new trains will start arriving- IEP, Thameslink,...
• What the eventual IEP fleet will look like
• What post-Crossrail service patterns look like - particularly how they interface with Reading, the Heathrow west extension and the electrification and upgrade of GW generally.
• How much electrification will actually be able to do in the coming years.
• How much the population of Bedwyn and similar towns rely on a 'good' train service.
• What a 'good' train service is for the population of Bedwyn, whether this will change in the coming years, and whether this is worth pushing for other other routes.

With so many unknowns, I hope you can understand why there is debate.

I totally accept the debate. Some of the items you mention have been covered. Here's a summary of what has been mentioned before:

- via Bristol will never be quicker and would be prone to delays as fast (linespeed increased to 125mph) tried to fit amongst the Weston and Taunton stoppers west of Bristol.
- the shape of the final IEP fleet is central to my point about why DfT / Network Rail are considering extending wires from Newbury to Westbury / Bathampton. With an alternate electric route from Bristol / South Wales, the all electric fleet could be increased, particularly as the Vale of Glamorgan line is also now being electrified. The surplus MTU engines could then be used as part of the option for a Devon and Cornwall bi-mode IEP fleet, which would be easier to justify given that the wires would go as far as Westbury. Further extensions west could happen in the years ahead.
- IF the above happened, it would then enable some of the Newbury / Bedwyn services to extend to Westbury and, quite possibly through to Bath / Bristol providing extra capacity required there (they are struggling to provide suitable turnback facilities in the Bath area for an increased service). The frequency would be tailored to meet demand.
- The 125mph Thames Valley EMU fleet that Informed Sources say the DfT is promoting would then be easier to justify and would provide these services if the wires went up.
- Fast running of most Devon & Cornwall services between Reading and Taunton would then be possible solving capacity issues east of Taunton. Traffic levels would probably also increase.

Sensible strategic optioneering. None of which may happen at all....

 

[tbtc]

When I went on the 1022 HST to Hereford, there was only 68 people on board after Oxford. In my view this is not good use of an HST

It's not good use of an HST, though I'd expect those in the opposite direction on Cotswold services at that time of day to be a little busier.

This is one thing in favour of IEP though, since the service can be easily detached at Oxford to allow only half of the train to go through to Worcester/ Hereford.

A HST is fairly inflexible in comparison.

 

[The Ham]

I totally accept the debate. Some of the items you mention have been covered. Here's a summary of what has been mentioned before:

- via Bristol will never be quicker and would be prone to delays as fast (linespeed increased to 125mph) tried to fit amongst the Weston and Taunton stoppers west of Bristol.

I agree in principal, although there maybe a case for some electric only services once the line to Cornwall is electrified (if the B&H isn't electrified along it's full length)

- the shape of the final IEP fleet is central to my point about why DfT / Network Rail are considering extending wires from Newbury to Westbury / Bathampton. With an alternate electric route from Bristol / South Wales, the all electric fleet could be increased, particularly as the Vale of Glamorgan line is also now being electrified. The surplus MTU engines could then be used as part of the option for a Devon and Cornwall bi-mode IEP fleet, which would be easier to justify given that the wires would go as far as Westbury. Further extensions west could happen in the years ahead.

The business case of any extensions west would need to be made, in which case it is likely that the B&H could have a lower business case than the rest of the route. As I've argued before it would be better to electrify from Bristol to Penzance/Newquay than the B&H. Not only would it shorten the amount of diesel running for the bi-models but it could mean that XC could run EMU services as well as local services (for example around Exeter) could change to EMU. Whilst the B&H would only shorten the amount of diesel running.

- IF the above happened, it would then enable some of the Newbury / Bedwyn services to extend to Westbury and, quite possibly through to Bath / Bristol providing extra capacity required there (they are struggling to provide suitable turnback facilities in the Bath area for an increased service). The frequency would be tailored to meet demand.

It would make good use of the path constants that there are.

- The 125mph Thames Valley EMU fleet that Informed Sources say the DfT is promoting would then be easier to justify and would provide these services if the wires went up.

Which could make the run to London from Bath a little slower than using the main line, but it could be made more attractive by selling cheaper advanced fares on the slower route, leaving more space for the turn up and go fares where the TOC would make more money.

- Fast running of most Devon & Cornwall services between Reading and Taunton would then be possible solving capacity issues east of Taunton. Traffic levels would probably also increase.

Given how long it takes to get to Cornwall, any journey time improvements would be welcomed by passengers. Add to that the possibility of IEP & electrification and the speed improvements they will provide over the IC125's and you could see a significant rise in passenger numbers.

 

[MarkyT]

With a major power feed to the Great Western electrification likely to be coming from the massive 300kV switching station near Melksham, one factor engineers may be looking at is how to equalise demand on the 3 phases available there. The additional electrification proposals could provide a way to assist this with the separate phases feeding:

1: Bradford on Avon line to Bath and Bristol
2: Thingley to Swindon
3: Westbury and Newbury line

 

[cle]

Could linespeed improvements come along the B&H where it isn't 125mph? Is that due to level crossings?

 

[TheWalrus]

Could linespeed improvements come along the B&H where it isn't 125mph? Is that due to level crossings?

Hopefully! We could save a significant amount of time on long distance services.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You'll find that the normal walk up fares to most Cotwold line destinations are so cheap in comparison to those on a trunk route like that via B&H that there's no point in offering Advance fares to save the odd quid. The standard fares are good value already.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


i. Exactly there was no error in the grammar, but someone couldn't work out that reference in the extract to 'express' on a thread concerning B&H meant the fast services to Devon & Cornwall.

ii. I'll spell it out. The context of the whole thread excluding the case for extended the wires beyond Newbury or not:

Some contributors dismiss the need for regular direct (via B&H) services to serve Somerset, Devon and Cornwall because the route does not serve populous metropolitan areas. However, considerable traffic is generated from a wide geographical area that easily justifies an hourly fast express service to London. It is regularly impossible to get a seat when joining London trains at the likes of Pewsey because of the traffic levels from further west. It therefore makes sense to provide separate fast and semi-fast services. The fast services will have to be hourly and the frequency of the slower stopping trains can be tailored to meet demand as hourly may not be justified.

Not sure what is controversial about any of this.

Well, for the umpteenth time, this someone was talking about population along the B&H line proper, NOT points further west and whether the population along the B&H line proper was such that it could sustain an hourly semi-fast, were all the West Country expresses to run non-stop between Taunton and Reading, thus loading all the costs of that semi-fast service on to local custom only.

You'll find that the normal walk up fares to most Cotwold line destinations are so cheap in comparison to those on a trunk route like that via B&H that there's no point in offering Advance fares to save the odd quid. The standard fares are good value already.

The fares are good value? That's a matter of opinion. If you use a railcard off-peak they might be, but with promotion of the Network Card near-zero, many people are paying a lot more than they would otherwise do. Peak fares, especially short-distance ones into Oxford, are punitive for the length of journey. If you use a Cotswold Railcard, the differential between some peak and an off-peak fares for the same journey is about 60 per cent.

You haven't actually addressed my point as to why advances are being sold from Plymouth if the West Country trains are all as full as you assert - FGW isn't a charity and needs every penny it can generate, so why are they doing it?

You mention FGW manage to fill seats on the cotswolds services. When I went on the 1022 HST to Hereford, there was only 68 people on board after Oxford. In my view this is not good use of an HST. However the later 1321 turbo to Great Malvern was busier with around 177 passengers aboard. Now they are paying for bigger and more expensive 180s and Hsts to run the route all day.

Ah yes, the off-peak Hereford trains - about the only ones where there are lots of empty seats and where advances would be a very good idea indeed - but FGW still won't offer them. Though the 15.14 forms the 17.31 from Oxford to Paddington, so there is no need to sell lots of seats cheap, as it fills very nicely there, thank you.

And it might not be a good use of an HST in your opinion - but would you want to spend three hours on a Turbo? Because without 180s, that was the only other option available - and even now, with only five 180s, they are being used to Worcester and Malvern to eliminate Turbos west of Moreton-in-Marsh (bar the morning stopper). And 180s offer only about 30 more seats (though they are real human-sized ones, rather than the Turbo 3+2 sardine seats) than a Class 166. Most of the 180 services are very cosy indeed between Oxford and London and often well used far up the line towards Worcester as well - again no need to sell dirt-cheap tickets.

You mention twice that Cotswolds services are busy between Oxford and London. This is very true but still means they may be running the majority of the journey to Worcester with lighter loadings. It's like the London-Bedwyns; busy ti Newbury, lightly loaded west of Newbury. Doesn't mean it's worth running a Hst full to Newbury then empty to Bedwy and back!
No I wouldn't want to spend 3 hours on a turbo, but then I wouldn't want to spend Bedwyn-London on a turbo either. But realistically, how many travel to Hereford via the Cotswolds Line?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Electrify to Newquay? For one carriage per 2 hours? Really?

 

[jimm]

Advances from Plymouth, they are indeed available, just like there are from anywhere a similar distance from London in the UK on a mainline: ECML. MML. WCML...

But if the trains are full anyway because of the level of demand for travel to/from the West Country which you insist is there, then there should be no need whatever to sell cheap tickets from Devon and Cornwall to fill those seats.

And if they didn't, then there might be more seats available for people along the B&H, which might be a more cost-effective way of serving those stations than setting up an expensive semi-fast operation, which neither BR, nor FGW since, has shown much inclination to do, beyond the odd train here and there.

You can get advances from places a similar distance from London isn't much of an answer is it?

Oxford isn't a long way from London but FGW sell advances. Virgin has to fill three 600-seat trains per hour between London and Birmingham and London and Manchester, so not exactly shocking they need to sell advances to help fill them. EC have an awful lot of trains running up and down too, so again lots of seats to fill, so they take steps to do that in the shape of advances, so do EMT.

By contrast, there aren't lots of West Country trains, they are very busy all the time apparently, so why on earth do FGW need to sell heavily-discounted fares?

You mention twice that Cotswolds services are busy between Oxford and London. This is very true but still means they may be running the majority of the journey to Worcester with lighter loadings. It's like the London-Bedwyns; busy ti Newbury, lightly loaded west of Newbury. Doesn't mean it's worth running a Hst full to Newbury then empty to Bedwy and back!
No I wouldn't want to spend 3 hours on a turbo, but then I wouldn't want to spend Bedwyn-London on a turbo either. But realistically, how many travel to Hereford via the Cotswolds Line?

It's not like London-Bedwyns - it takes about 75 minutes to get to Bedwyn. To Worcester is two hours plus, Hereford more. Newbury to Bedwyn is a dozen miles. Oxford is near-enough half way on a 120-mile journey between London and Worcester. And while Worcester and Hereford aren't huge places, they still beat population in B&H-land hands down, before you add in the Oxford and London commuter and leisure traffic at the eastern end of the line

Just over an hour on a 166, so long as it is not crush-loaded, is perfectly acceptable, though that's about the limit of their capabilities. That's why the return of the 180s was so popular - even if they still aren't reliable enough - they are pretty much the ideal train for off-peak and contra-peak work on the Cotswold Line, with a handy seating capacity, but not the overkill an HST represents at such times, and inter-city standard accommodation.

Many Cotswold Line trains have lighter loads west of Oxford, but some of the peak HSTs reach Oxford full off the Cotswold Line and leave Oxford full in the opposite direction in the late afternoon and early evening. Other services can also load heavily - I don't recommend the first off-peak train towards London if worked by a 166 in half-term. Getting on for 350 people on one arriving at Oxford is not nice.

You might be surprised how many people do go all the way to/from Hereford - at least in the peaks (and back to London on Sundays). No need to change, which you do at Newport, with the risks that banking on what are sometimes five-minute connections involves. Travel regularly on the 17.22, 17.50 and 18.22 Cotswold Line departures from Paddington or Oxford and it is obvious the first and last, which go all the way to Hereford, are always busier than the 17.50, which ends at Worcester. And the 19.22 has got busier since it also started running to Hereford, rather than turning back at Malvern.

 

[Xavi]

But if the trains are full anyway because of the level of demand for travel to/from the West Country which you insist is there, then there should be no need whatever to sell cheap tickets from Devon and Cornwall to fill those seats.

And if they didn't, then there might be more seats available for people along the B&H, which might be a more cost-effective way of serving those stations than setting up an expensive semi-fast operation, which neither BR, nor FGW since, has shown much inclination to do, beyond the odd train here and there.

You can get advances from places a similar distance from London isn't much of an answer is it?

Oxford isn't a long way from London but FGW sell advances. Virgin has to fill three 600-seat trains per hour between London and Birmingham and London and Manchester, so not exactly shocking they need to sell advances to help fill them. EC have an awful lot of trains running up and down too, so again lots of seats to fill, so they take steps to do that in the shape of advances, so do EMT.

By contrast, there aren't lots of West Country trains, they are very busy all the time apparently, so why on earth do FGW need to sell heavily-discounted fares?



It's not like London-Bedwyns - it takes about 75 minutes to get to Bedwyn. To Worcester is two hours plus, Hereford more. Newbury to Bedwyn is a dozen miles. Oxford is near-enough half way on a 120-mile journey between London and Worcester. And while Worcester and Hereford aren't huge places, they still beat population in B&H-land hands down, before you add in the Oxford and London commuter and leisure traffic at the eastern end of the line

Just over an hour on a 166, so long as it is not crush-loaded, is perfectly acceptable, though that's about the limit of their capabilities. That's why the return of the 180s was so popular - even if they still aren't reliable enough - they are pretty much the ideal train for off-peak and contra-peak work on the Cotswold Line, with a handy seating capacity, but not the overkill an HST represents at such times, and inter-city standard accommodation.

Many Cotswold Line trains have lighter loads west of Oxford, but some of the peak HSTs reach Oxford full off the Cotswold Line and leave Oxford full in the opposite direction in the late afternoon and early evening. Other services can also load heavily - I don't recommend the first off-peak train towards London if worked by a 166 in half-term. Getting on for 350 people on one arriving at Oxford is not nice.

You might be surprised how many people do go all the way to/from Hereford - at least in the peaks (and back to London on Sundays). No need to change, which you do at Newport, with the risks that banking on what are sometimes five-minute connections involves. Travel regularly on the 17.22, 17.50 and 18.22 Cotswold Line departures from Paddington or Oxford and it is obvious the first and last, which go all the way to Hereford, are always busier than the 17.50, which ends at Worcester. And the 19.22 has got busier since it also started running to Hereford, rather than turning back at Malvern.

FGW sell advances to Bristol and Cardiff where there are lots of trains just like Manchester / Birmingham in your example. So you think the Devon & Cornwall trains ought to be the only long distance express trains in the UK where there are no advance tickets sold?! Advance tickets are sold to maximise revenue, but your 'charity' argument that you have mentioned previously suggests the opposite. Or perhaps your theory concerning advance fares could be the answer to the pending rolling stock shortage: stop advance fares on ECML, MML, WCML and half the service. Problem solved!

 

[The Ham]

Electrify to Newquay? For one carriage per 2 hours? Really?

Yes for two reason:

Firstly it allows the summer XC services to be EMU (and by the time the Cornish Main line is being done most if not all of the XC network will be electric).

Secondly and more importantly part way along the line is a major power supply which could be used to supply the power for the Cornish Main Line. If you electrify to the power supply (the cost compared to running a supply from it to the main line probably wouldn't be much different) then the cost to finish it off to Newquay probably wouldn't be too much more.

 

[Xavi]

Yes for two reason:

Firstly it allows the summer XC services to be EMU (and by the time the Cornish Main line is being done most if not all of the XC network will be electric).

Secondly and more importantly part way along the line is a major power supply which could be used to supply the power for the Cornish Main Line. If you electrify to the power supply (the cost compared to running a supply from it to the main line probably wouldn't be much different) then the cost to finish it off to Newquay probably wouldn't be too much more.

The Paisley Canal electrification may be a pivotal moment in terms of the small extra schemes. The final cost was less than 50% of the Network Rail GRIP2 costing - they just let the engineers get on and design / deliver in the most efficient way possible. Windermere would be a good similar scheme and who knows, one day it could be Newquay.

 

[cle]

The other Cornish branches (St Ives, Falmouth, Looe) could also benefit from this. I guess Gunnislake and Paignton too - Dawlish is the main sticking point here.

Otherwise the region would be a good candidate to go all electric, creating a lot of journey time improvements which are needed to keep the South West competitive, and less air pollution (although people would complain about visual pollution)

 

[DXMachina]

I've always seen Dawlish as a block too but I recall a few months ago an authoritative-sounding post (possibly from one of our resident expert engineers) stating that several continental electrified routes have AC OHLE on sections at least as badly battered by weather - and cope well enough

 

[jimm]

FGW sell advances to Bristol and Cardiff where there are lots of trains just like Manchester / Birmingham in your example. So you think the Devon & Cornwall trains ought to be the only long distance express trains in the UK where there are no advance tickets sold?! Advance tickets are sold to maximise revenue, but your 'charity' argument that you have mentioned previously suggests the opposite. Or perhaps your theory concerning advance fares could be the answer to the pending rolling stock shortage: stop advance fares on ECML, MML, WCML and half the service. Problem solved!

Is this really so difficult to grasp?

If the West Country expresses are full all the time, so that no-one boarding at B&H stations can get a seat - as has been asserted here several times - then that suggests demand from the West Country is at such a high level that there is no need to offer discounts to get backsides on seats when the train is going to be full anyway, irrespective of the fares charged.

It is pretty obvious to me that the reason FGW is selling advances is that they need to do it to fill seats, because there is still spare capacity on West Country services - not because of how far from anywhere it may be. If so, then there is no reason that some of that capacity cannot be used, as it clearly is now, to carry people to and from B&H stations which are, in my estimation, going to struggle to support an hourly semi-fast service all by themselves if the West Country expresses sail past like bats out of hell between Reading and Taunton.

Of course FGW sell advances to Cardiff and Bristol - they have 500 or 580-seat HSTs running up and down every 30 minutes. That's a lot of seats to fill, especially off-peak, same as the Virgin and EC situations. There is essentially an hourly West Country service, which will be packed to the gunwales anyway, apparently. No need to sell advances, unless, as I say, the seats would otherwise be empty.