Go-Op developments...

[Kingfisher200262]

Will the Co-operative Bank be involved as the chosen financial partner to this proposed enterprise?

You'd like to think so, but I guess like any bank, they have a credit committee and the numbers will need to stack up to support them taking on risk.

 

[route:oxford]

I think a 3 carriage set would be better, considering the ammount of passengers they are likley to get, particulary from Melksham which only has the 2 trains in each direction per day.

I think it would be very popular with people wanting a dayout to Oxford as well

3 Carriages - 5 or 6 car minimum!

Whilst at the "end of the line" they may be a bit quieter... They'll be offering a direct route between Oxford and Swindon as well as offering regular travellers between Oxford & the West Midlands (ie Birmingham) a relief from the heavily congested XC Voyagers.

 

[TheWalrus]

How many seats to a 2car 170? And im sure that wont be full! Maybe north of oxford but certainly not south of swindon!

 

[The Planner]

If it ever does get anywhere then it will have odd times at the Brum end as they will have to weave into any spaces left by Chiltern, LM, XC and the freight. Oxford is a bugger to get into aswell with the shunt moves all over the show.

 

[TheWalrus]

The planner do you think longer than 2car is necessary? At least not south of oxford…

 

[route:oxford]

The planner do you think longer than 2car is necessary? At least not south of oxford…

Probably best way to look at it is...

A "clockface" timetable has been mentioned, so let's assume the best case of one service an hour in each direction on the core route.

Then ask yourself. "How many carriages should a XC Voyager have between Reading & Birmingham New Street?"

Subtract the current rammed Voyager coaches which are on average a 5 car and 4 car per hour from how many coaches you think an XC Voyager should have x 2.

Then voila! The exact number of coaches a GoCo service should have.

 

[starlightEXPRESS]

...as well as offering regular travellers between Oxford & the West Midlands (ie Birmingham) a relief from the heavily congested XC Voyagers.

If you wanted to relieve the overcrowding on the XC voyagers, would it not be better to combine the Chiltern 1tp2h Moor Street -> Leamington Spa with the 1tp2h stopping FGW Oxford -> Banbury service into a single through service from Moor Street to Oxford?

 

[TheWalrus]

...as well as offering regular travellers between Oxford & the West Midlands (ie Birmingham) a relief from the heavily congested XC Voyagers.

If you wanted to relieve the overcrowding on the XC voyagers, would it not be better to combine the Chiltern 1tp2h Moor Street -> Leamington Spa with the 1tp2h stopping FGW Oxford -> Banbury service into a single through service from Moor Street to Oxford?

Theres an idea! Electrify oxford-coventry and snow hill lines and extend a worcester-dorridge to oxford 1tp2h axing the chiltern leamington- moor st. And oxford-banbury stoppers

 

[anthony263]

Theres an idea! Electrify oxford-coventry and snow hill lines and extend a worcester-dorridge to oxford 1tp2h axing the chiltern leamington- moor st. And oxford-banbury stoppers

Electrify Coventry - Oxford & Reading - Bassingstoke and you could order soem new dual voltage trains to work the Manchester - Bournmouth service how about some Traxx loco with MK3 carriages with the voyagers boosting capacity elsewhere on the crosscountry network

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Electrify Coventry - Oxford & Reading - Bassingstoke and you could order soem new dual voltage trains to work the Manchester - Bournmouth service how about some Traxx loco with MK3 carriages with the voyagers boosting capacity elsewhere on the crosscountry network

There are currently no spare Mk III coaches, although I suspect there may be a number of HST trailers floating around as IEP (or a "credible alternative" - ever the optimist ) come on stream. That will not be for quite some time and I suspect "Traxx II" (or a "credible alternative" ) may be in production by then.

 

[sprinterguy]

If you wanted to relieve the overcrowding on the XC voyagers, would it not be better to combine the Chiltern 1tp2h Moor Street -> Leamington Spa with the 1tp2h stopping FGW Oxford -> Banbury service into a single through service from Moor Street to Oxford?

That would be a really good idea. It certainly encourages the case for an even more expansive Great Western franchise encompassing the Chiltern lines.

 

[starlightEXPRESS]

If you wanted to relieve the overcrowding on the XC voyagers, would it not be better to combine the Chiltern 1tp2h Moor Street -> Leamington Spa with the 1tp2h stopping FGW Oxford -> Banbury service into a single through service from Moor Street to Oxford?

That would be a really good idea. It certainly encourages the case for an even more expansive Great Western franchise encompassing the Chiltern lines.

Well actually I was thinking you could just hand over Oxford-Banbury to Chiltern either at the start of the new Greater Western franchise or once electrification to Oxford is complete. (You may remember that Chiltern were invited to bid to run the Snow Hill lines as part of the current London Midland franchise tender.)

If you tried to run Oxford <-> Moor Street hourly, you could alternate stops at Tackley/Heyford and Lapworth/Hatton, to achieve a reasonable end to end journey time. (So that TAC, HYD, HTN and LPW were served every two hours and the main stations every hour. I think this is called a skip-stop pattern?)

 

[route:oxford]

Well actually I was thinking you could just hand over Oxford-Banbury to Chiltern either at the start of the new Greater Western franchise or once electrification to Oxford is complete. (You may remember that Chiltern were invited to bid to run the Snow Hill lines as part of the current London Midland franchise tender.)

If you tried to run Oxford <-> Moor Street hourly, you could alternate stops at Tackley/Heyford and Lapworth/Hatton, to achieve a reasonable end to end journey time. (So that TAC, HYD, HTN and LPW were served every two hours and the main stations every hour. I think this is called a skip-stop pattern?)

For a faster route into Birmingham, National Rail often recommends switching from the XC service onto a Chiltern Stopper at Leamington.

 

[exile]

A town of 20,000 is unlikely to generate more than 200,000 journeys a year even with a frequent service.

 

[route:oxford]

A town of 20,000 is unlikely to generate more than 200,000 journeys a year even with a frequent service.

Bridge of Allan, a small town with a population of 4800, had a usage of 0.238M for the year 2008/2009.

Alloa, a town with a population of around 20,000 had a usage of 0.39M with an hourly service.

Dunblane, a cathedral city with a population of 9000, had a usage of 0.557M for the year 2008/2009.

What makes you think that an English town with a population of around 20,000 would make so few journeys compared to their Scottish counterparts?

 

[Eagle]

A town of 20,000 is unlikely to generate more than 200,000 journeys a year even with a frequent service.

If you're referring to Melksham, remember that it doesn't serve just the town but the surrounding rural area as well as a potential railhead for Devizes. I estimate the catchment area for Melksham is probably nearer 50,000.

 

[GNERman]

We are in ongoing negotiations about our proposals with Network Rail, which has expressed a willingness to reach a 10-year Track Access Agreement. As members will know, the proposed service offers up to eight trains each way per day between Westbury and Birmingham, serving Trowbridge, Melksham, Chippenham, Swindon, Oxford, Banbury, Leamington Spa, Warwick and Solihull.

Two-hourly clockface departures 06:00 to 20:00 on weekdays, with additional services on Fridays.

Hourly departures in peaks; tidal flow from South in morning, returning from the Midlands in the evening.

Weekend services to Weymouth in the summer months.

In addition we are tendering to run a Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF) supported service between Salisbury and Westbury. This, combined with the above service, meets Wiltshire County Council’s outputs. The proposed service has been assessed by a reputable independent consultancy as required by the Regulator. The following features have been identified:

The service is not ‘primarily abstractive’: an acceptable proportion of the revenue will be generated by new passengers and not taken from existing franchised operators.

The proposed service would provide economic benefits of at least £5 million (2002 prices) per annum in a range of areas (such as congestion reduction) as defined by the DfT’s own formulae (RailTAG).

What’s next?

Supporters have provided us with funds of £400,000 to develop the proposals. We are close to launching our public share offer, at which point we will also be inviting further investment from you, our members.

We will be leasing new rolling stock. The trains will be built overseas, but at least 30% of their value will be UK-sourced, and they will be maintained in the UK, creating new employment. We aim to be signing contracts in June 2012 and the service is planned to commence in the second quarter of 2014.

Capital requirements of £3m (mobilisation and capital costs plus working capital) will be raised from a mix of existing investors, financial institutions and bank borrowing.

We expect the financial performance to be in line with other rail operators, with an average net operating margin of 3–4% over the 10 years. We anticipate being profitable in Trading Year 3 with an average turnover of at least £7 million p.a.

During the first five years additional routes are planned. This will increase profitability, as approximately 20% of the costs of Route 1 are fixed, thus allowing GO-OP to reinvest and expand.

Things look to be progressing for GO-OP! If you read the spring newsletter, you'll see that Go Compare threatened legal action with the name Goco, so GO-OP! is now the official name.

No track access application has been put to the ORR yet, but interesting to see the leasing of overseas built rolling stock, when Bombardier makes the perfectly suitable Class 172... Are we looking at an order from CSRE, Siemens?

 

[Ivo]

An evolution of the Class 185 anyone? A Class 195 maybe?

What would become of Melksham if this is successful? Would FGW still be expected to maintain their present service levels?

 

[Wath Yard]

A development would be getting a track access agreement or ordering the rolling stock. Neither has happened at the moment and although they say they intend to order the stock in June I can't see any ROSCO being prepared to finance it without a long term track access agreement in place. They also only have a fraction of the required funding in place.

They are currently 3 years behind schedule, initially stating they would provide a service from Dec 2011 and this has now been put back until 2014.

 

[317666]

Like Ivo says, I think a Class 185-style DMU would be much more suitable than a Class 172 (as the latter is designed more for commuter units with their fairly basic interiors, no armrests/tables).

 

[route:oxford]

Are there any Co-op owned rolling stock manufacturers anywhere in Europe/Rest of World?

It's not a massive risk for a bank to finance rolling stock in this country.

If 125mph inter-city rolling stock is ordered, then it would be snapped up by an alternative venture should Goop fail.

Likewise, if 100mph inter-city stock is ordered, you can be sure it wouldn't be in the sidings long before they were on lease with somebody else.

 

[GNERman]

Also to note, the use of the PPM on the Mid Hants has been rejected, use of a Class 141 is now been looked into, see the spring newsletter on their website...

 

[Wath Yard]

If 125mph inter-city rolling stock is ordered, then it would be snapped up by an alternative venture should Goop fail.

Likewise, if 100mph inter-city stock is ordered, you can be sure it wouldn't be in the sidings long before they were on lease with somebody else.

Just like numerous 180s were either stuck in sidings or hired out short term by Northern.

It is a massive risk to speculatively order rolling stock for a TOC that will probably never run a service.

What services would these 100 or 125 mph trains, that probably won't be compatible with anything else on the network, operate? Paths on main lines don't just appear by magic.

 

[Ivo]

Also to note, the use of the PPM on the Mid Hants has been rejected, use of a Class 141 is now been looked into, see the spring newsletter on their website...

A 141?! Are they mad?

Where would they find such a thing? Chappel? Keith? IRAN?!

 

[GNERman]

A 141?! Are they mad?

Where would they find such a thing? Chappel? Keith? IRAN?!

To quote...

We were disappointed when the Mid-Hants railway rejected our use of a Parry People Mover (PPM). However, they have indicated that use of a Pacer 141 may be acceptable. Based on this, we have submitted a revised business plan to Mid-Hants railway, and are currently awaiting their response.

Doesn't mention where from. Wonder why they rejected the PPM...

 

[ralphchadkirk]

A PPM simply isn't suitable for a line like the Mid-Hants.

 

[GNERman]

A PPM simply isn't suitable for a line like the Mid-Hants.

Why? If I may ask...

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Why? If I may ask...

Long, steep gradients, amongst other things. It would be run into the ground. The trials proved that much. I did hear that if they changed it to diesel rather than LPG then that would improve things.

 

[tbtc]

GO-OP may claim that their proposals are "not primarily abstractive", of course they will - but I'd back their plans more if they were only planning on running Westbury - Oxford (Oxford - Birmingham already has a half hourly service, that's a long distance to duplicate existing services over, New Street isn't a place to terminate services...).

Westbury - Oxford sounds like a "gap in the market" between existing FGW services (though I suspect it may only be a small market)

What would become of Melksham if this is successful? Would FGW still be expected to maintain their present service levels?

From discussions about Denton/ Reddish, it's been said that a TOC cannot "subcontract" their franchise requirement to serve stations to an Open Access company (e.g. if there was a Huddersfield - Stalybridge - Stockport - London Open Access service that wouldn't absolve Northern of the need to run their current weekly Denton service).

It's not a massive risk for a bank to finance rolling stock in this country

Yes is it, if you don't have a proven business model/ long term guarantees of staying in business. If Northern cannot justify brand new stock for long established services (which they had a franchise to operate) then good luck getting your bank to lend you money to run a brand new service that could have the plug pulled at any time

It is a massive risk to speculatively order rolling stock for a TOC that will probably never run a service.

What services would these 100 or 125 mph trains, that probably won't be compatible with anything else on the network, operate? Paths on main lines don't just appear by magic.

Exactly - ordering additional units in an existing class (e.g. more 172s) is one thing, but a tiny class of non-compatible units? No chance.

 

[34D]

From discussions about Denton/ Reddish, it's been said that a TOC cannot "subcontract" their franchise requirement to serve stations to an Open Access company (e.g. if there was a Huddersfield - Stalybridge - Stockport - London Open Access service that wouldn't absolve Northern of the need to run their current weekly Denton service).

You miss the point. If someone operated thus, then yes Northern would need to operate their franchise commitment, but it would be a simple matter for DfT to change the franchise spec, as it wouldn't involve going through a closure procedure.