My idea for a new GWR Salisbury - Great Malvern service via Swindon (and associated changes)

[PTR 444]

Here is an idea of mine for a new hourly service between Salisbury and Great Malvern. It will absorb the existing irregular Westbury - Swindon Transwilts service, before reversing at latter station to provide an additional hourly service on the Golden Valley Line. From Salisbury, the calling pattern will be as follows:

Warminster
Dilton Marsh
Westbury
Trowbridge
Melksham
Chippenham
Swindon (reversal)
Kemble
Stroud
Stonehouse
Cheltenham Spa
Ashchurch for Tewkesbury
Worcester Shrub Hill
Worcester Foregate Street
Malvern Link
Great Malvern

I’ve always thought that the current Transwilts service should be extended to Salisbury and increased to 1tph throughout the day since it would then give you 2tph on the entire length of the Wessex Main Line south of Bath. This would consist of 1tph Portsmouth - Cardiff, 1tph Westbury - Gloucester and my proposed 1tph Salisbury - Great Malvern.

As a consequence of this new service, the Great Malvern extensions on the existing Weymouth/Westbury - Gloucester service would no longer operate as these would now be provided on the new service via Swindon. Passengers wishing to travel between Gloucester and Worcester would be catered for by an extension of the TfW Maesteg service terminating at Foregate Street. Additionally, since there would now be 2tph on the Golden Valley Line, the existing London - Cheltenham service would be cut back to Gloucester, eliminating the need for a reversal at that station.

 

[swt_passenger]

Here is an idea of mine for a new hourly service between Salisbury and Great Malvern.

[…]

I’ve always thought that the current Transwilts service should be extended to Salisbury and increased to 1tph throughout the day since it would then give you 2tph on the entire length of the Wessex Main Line south of Bath. This would consist of 1tph Portsmouth - Cardiff, 1tph Westbury - Gloucester and my proposed 1tph Salisbury - Great Malvern.

The local council preference seems to be to extend the SWR Romsey service to Swindon every 2 hours. Apparently it could be done using the existing SWR/GWR stock used on the routes at the expense of the random GWR extensions to Southampton. AIUI if another 158 can be found then the service can run north of Salisbury every hour.

I guess there’s loads of different permutations to link services in the Westbury area...

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Firstly you would need funding for providing some double track on the Melksham branch - the reason there is the current irregular service is the line pretty much runs at capacity during the day.

Apparently it could be done using the existing SWR/GWR stock used on the routes at the expense of the random GWR extensions to Southampton.

Stock is the easy part, insufficient track is the more expensive and difficult bit. The councils often overlook the Mendips freight traffic which runs via Melksham.

the existing London - Cheltenham service would be cut back to Gloucester, eliminating the need for a reversal at that station.

Why would you cut out the biggest traffic objective on the line after Swindon by no longer giving Cheltenham a direct service to London?

Your proposal would also cut the direct trains between Worcester and Bristol. Madness when it comes to established traffic flows.

 

[PTR 444]

The local council preference seems to be to extend the SWR Romsey service to Swindon every 2 hours. Apparently it could be done using the existing SWR/GWR stock used on the routes at the expense of the random GWR extensions to Southampton.

On a side note, if such a service did come to fruition, would it be operated by SWR or GWR?

Your proposal would also cut the direct trains between Worcester and Bristol. Madness when it comes to established traffic flows.

But Bristol to Worcester is currently only served by 1 train every two hours. Under my new proposal, there would be 2tph between Worcester and Cheltenham so it would just be a case of changing onto a southbound XC service to Bristol at the latter station.

 

[anthony263]

Personally i think there should be a passing loop built around Melksham and perhaps the junctions at either end if the single track also need looking at as I suspect they restrict capacity also.

Gwr are supposed to be looking at replacing vlass 158s in Cornwall with their castle hsts plus the tfw exams are being replaced soon so there should be more 158s available.

Extending the swr service to Swindon also provides Swindon with a service to Southampton as well as Southampton Airport and access to the Isle of Wight etc

 

[swt_passenger]

On a side note, if such a service did come to fruition, would it be operated by SWR or GWR?

I don’t think that was ever mentioned. I’d suppose SWR if they provided the stock, based on Salisbury for convenience, but I expect you could just as easily transfer a few 158s to GWR and let them run it.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

On a side note, if such a service did come to fruition, would it be operated by SWR or GWR?

But Bristol to Worcester is currently only served by 1 train every two hours. Under my new proposal, there would be 2tph between Worcester and Cheltenham so it would just be a case of changing onto a southbound XC service to Bristol at the latter station.

I’m not sure all those trains would fit into Worcester Shrub Hill though bearing in mind you’ve only two platforms along with a departure only bay platform that is fiddly to shunt into.

 

[geoffk]

Here is an idea of mine for a new hourly service between Salisbury and Great Malvern. It will absorb the existing irregular Westbury - Swindon Transwilts service, before reversing at latter station to provide an additional hourly service on the Golden Valley Line. From Salisbury, the calling pattern will be as follows:

Warminster
Dilton Marsh
Westbury
Trowbridge
Melksham
Chippenham
Swindon (reversal)
Kemble
Stroud
Stonehouse
Cheltenham Spa
Ashchurch for Tewkesbury
Worcester Shrub Hill
Worcester Foregate Street
Malvern Link
Great Malvern

I’ve always thought that the current Transwilts service should be extended to Salisbury and increased to 1tph throughout the day since it would then give you 2tph on the entire length of the Wessex Main Line south of Bath. This would consist of 1tph Portsmouth - Cardiff, 1tph Westbury - Gloucester and my proposed 1tph Salisbury - Great Malvern.

As a consequence of this new service, the Great Malvern extensions on the existing Weymouth/Westbury - Gloucester service would no longer operate as these would now be provided on the new service via Swindon. Passengers wishing to travel between Gloucester and Worcester would be catered for by an extension of the TfW Maesteg service terminating at Foregate Street. Additionally, since there would now be 2tph on the Golden Valley Line, the existing London - Cheltenham service would be cut back to Gloucester, eliminating the need for a reversal at that station.

What's needed is a service from Ashchurch to Birmingham.

 

[PTR 444]

What's needed is a service from Ashchurch to Birmingham.

Don’t see why XC can’t add a call there on their Cardiff - Nottingham service.

 

[geoffk]

Don’t see why XC can’t add a call there on their Cardiff - Nottingham service.

Have tried that one. "Don't have time", then they added calls at Chepstow and Lydney! Now the opening of Worcestershire Parkway makes Ashchurch calls even less likely. Sorry digressing.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Personally, I would consider something vastly better.

- Keep the existing Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central service, with improved stopping patterns for more commuter-centric flows in the Southampton area. This means Harbour, Southsea, Fratton, Cosham, Fareham, Swanwick, Southampton Central, Romsey, Salisbury, Warminster, Westbury, Trowbridge, Bradford, Bath, Temple Meads, Filton, Newport, Cardiff Central.

- Assuming the Waterside line is almost certain to open, operate a service from Romsey to Marchwood and Hythe with stops at Chandlers Ford, Eastleigh, Airport Parkway, Swaythling, St Denys, Central, Millbrook, Redbridge, Totton, Marchwood and Hythe; with an estimated journey time I understand of around 44 minutes. If you add in a couple of pathing minutes, you can just add a bit of time to the schedule to allow an additional service on the Waterside line so it is half-hourly as desired. This would be a Winchester to Hythe, using the Baltic Siding to reverse but also giving Swaythling and St Denys a half-hourly service.

- Add a new hourly path from Southampton Central (Bay platform) to Salisbury, stopping at Millbrook, Redbridge, Romsey, Dunbridge, Dean and Salisbury. Every two hours, project it forward to Swindon calling at Warminster, Dilton, Westbury, Trowbridge, Melksham, Chippenham and Swindon meaning there's a standard two-hourly slot at Melksham and opening up connections at Swindon; and every two hours also extend to Yeovil Junction. This takes advantage of available line capacity west of Salisbury, and the new crew depot at Yeovil, and therefore adds some crucial extra capacity onto the West of England. At Junction, if time exists during turnaround, you can swap ends and go to Pen Mill to give more connections.

- The TransWilts partnership would be sooner happier (personal experience as a Stakeholder Manager of theirs says this!) with a standard two-hourly slot from Swindon to the likes of Westbury, Salisbury and Southampton and all of that connectivity that exists; especially as the general depth of feeling is people would rather have an hourly service from London to Cheltenham along the Golden Valley. That said, it would be jolly decent to see a two-hourly extension to Worcester as the rolling stock is clear, there's a train crew depot there and you'd bring Ashchurch into the fold with a London service and open connectivity up from Worcester to Swindon. That can continue to Malvern or Foregate Street as appropriate.

- The idea of extending the Transport for Wales service to Foregate Street is absurd. Bristol to Worcester being every two hours could be easily overcome by supplying the half-hourly MetroWest service between Bristol and Gloucester, connecting into CrossCountry's hourly service to Worcestershire Parkway; or a two-hourly IEP to Worcester as described above (well, that would be connected via Cheltenham using XC then GW).

- Off topic perhaps, Ashchurch to Birmingham is a nice idea but given London Midland used to operate to Gloucester, you could possibly do a couple of things. Assuming you keep a two-hourly service from Paddington to Hereford via Evesham, and an additional hourly service to Shrub Hill only, you have limited capacity via Foregate Street. So, you then have an hourly New Street to Hereford via Bromsgrove which goes through Foregate Street; and a half-hourly service via Kidderminster to Foregate Street.

Looking at all that above (^), you could use the Malvern path that is sometimes used by GWR for local services to allow a Kidderminster-line service to extend forward; and then the other hourly service could be extended to Gloucester. This would give Ashchurch its direct service, albeit with a 'fast' path via Kidderminster, with flighted departure times optimised to allow a Kidderminster slow starter to come out right behind and pick up those smaller stations.

Sorry for the explanations and options but suffice to say a Southampton - Malvern via Swindon is not a good option.

 

[SoccerHQ]

Have tried that one. "Don't have time", then they added calls at Chepstow and Lydney! Now the opening of Worcestershire Parkway makes Ashchurch calls even less likely. Sorry digressing.

When I last travelled from Brum to Cardiff there was around a 5 minute lag time at Gloucester. Might also have been a few minutes spare at Cheltemham aswell. This was before Worcs Parkway opened so that would obviously eat a few minutes into the schedule.

 

[anthony263]

Dont forget there are people who want crosscountry to serbe Bromsgrove so they got direct services to Cheltenham and Gloucester eyc

 

[Doctor Fegg]

- The idea of extending the Transport for Wales service to Foregate Street is absurd. Bristol to Worcester being every two hours could be easily overcome by supplying the half-hourly MetroWest service between Bristol and Gloucester, connecting into CrossCountry's hourly service to Worcestershire Parkway; or a two-hourly IEP to Worcester as described above (well, that would be connected via Cheltenham using XC then GW).

Call me a simpleton, but my favoured way of solving Bristol to Worcester being every two hours would be to make the existing service hourly.

I'm not convinced that Ashchurch-London or Worcester-Swindon are significant enough flows to merit extending the South Cotswolds IEPs from Cheltenham to Worcester.

 

[ABB125]

Alternatively, make the current Bristol to Worcester service hourly (which I believe was part of the most recent direct award) and run this new Swindon service from Gloucester instead where there is more space available.
Then run an extra Birmingham to Cardiff service, with the now 2tph covering additional stops along the route between them.
I would possibly extend the London trains to Worcester (although this would require an extra diagram and probably won't be necessary when (if) the line via Evesham goes to 2tph).

 

[mds86]

Call me a simpleton, but my favoured way of solving Bristol to Worcester being every two hours would be to make the existing service hourly.

I'm not convinced that Ashchurch-London or Worcester-Swindon are significant enough flows to merit extending the South Cotswolds IEPs from Cheltenham to Worcester.

I agree. The logical option is to make the Bristol - Worcester/Malvern service hourly when the Metro West phase 2 begins if I remember correctly with additional Bristol - Gloucester hourly service.

My idea would be to add a hourly Gloucester to Birmingham local service calling at Cheltenham, Ashchurch, Worcestershire Parkway, Bromsgrove, University and New Street to restore the services some of these stations have lost with XC.

This would then give Ashchurch a half hourly / 2 tph service northbound and southbound to connect into services like the London train at Cheltenham

 

[ABB125]

I agree. The logical option is to make the Bristol - Worcester/Malvern service hourly when the Metro West phase 2 begins if I remember correctly with additional Bristol - Gloucester hourly service.

My idea would be to add a hourly Gloucester to Birmingham local service calling at Cheltenham, Ashchurch, Worcestershire Parkway, Bromsgrove, University and New Street to restore the services some of these stations have lost with XC.

This would then give Ashchurch a half hourly / 2 tph service northbound and southbound to connect into services like the London train at Cheltenham

I agree, pretty much totally, but I would prefer a "better" destination than Gloucester; perhaps the Cheltenham to Cardiff section of the TfW service could be transferred to XC (or whomever is operating this new service).
Alternatively, reverse at Gloucester and run to Swindon (to head back to the topic of this thread!).

 

[SoccerHQ]

I agree, pretty much totally, but I would prefer a "better" destination than Gloucester; perhaps the Cheltenham to Cardiff section of the TfW service could be transferred to XC (or whomever is operating this new service).
Alternatively, reverse at Gloucester and run to Swindon (to head back to the topic of this thread!).

Or Reading?

 

[ABB125]

Or Reading?

The paths probably don't exist, and I doubt this hypothetical new service would be using 125mph stock, so it would probably be quicker to change at Swindon.

 

[Mintona]

Re the op, why on earth would you want to miss out Gloucester? The only place where you have a traincrew depot that can cover almost the entire route (the only bit they don’t do is south of Westbury and until recently they did go to Southampton).

Anyway, as has been said, Bristol - Gloucester should be going half hourly soon with Gloucester - Worcester being hourly. That’s probably enough for the time being.

A long distance local train between Birmingham and Bristol probably wouldn’t be the worst idea however, there are plenty of stations that I’m sure would love a direct service to those two cities.

 

[PTR 444]

Re the op, why on earth would you want to miss out Gloucester? The only place where you have a traincrew depot that can cover almost the entire route (the only bit they don’t do is south of Westbury and until recently they did go to Southampton).

Simple answer - to avoid a reversal.

 

[Mintona]

Simple answer - to avoid a reversal.

Cutting your nose off to spite your face. Missing out one of the biggest cities on your route (and therefore many passengers) to save five minutes, and also making it far more operationally complex to operate.

 

[PTR 444]

Cutting your nose off to spite your face. Missing out one of the biggest cities on your route (and therefore many passengers) to save five minutes, and also making it far more operationally complex to operate.

I mean, that’s also the reason behind my idea to truncate the London - Cheltenham service at Gloucester. Would it be better if my new Swindon service goes to Gloucester and terminates there, while the London service skips it in lieu of Cheltenham then continues to Great Malvern?

 

[ABB125]

I mean, that’s also the reason behind my idea to truncate the London - Cheltenham service at Gloucester. Would it be better if my new Swindon service goes to Gloucester and terminates there, while the London service skips it in lieu of Cheltenham then continues to Great Malvern?

Or just have both call at GCR?
I don't think the time penalty for calling and reversing IET units is anywhere near as bad as for HSTs, so it's not the end of the world.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I mean, that’s also the reason behind my idea to truncate the London - Cheltenham service at Gloucester. Would it be better if my new Swindon service goes to Gloucester and terminates there, while the London service skips it in lieu of Cheltenham then continues to Great Malvern?

It would be better for a Southampton - Westbury - Swindon - Gloucester (and beyond) not to exist.

 

[PTR 444]

It would be better for a Southampton - Westbury - Swindon - Gloucester (and beyond) not to exist.

Okay, it was just an idea anyway.
What about an alternative - splitting my proposed service so that the Transwilts portion from Salisbury only runs as far as Swindon, while the 2tph on the Golden Valley both start from London Paddington with 1 terminating at Gloucester and the other going straight to Cheltenham after Stonehouse.

I would also consider extending the Transwilts service to Southampton but would rather it didn’t take over the Romsey Rounder due to its local nature and convoluted routing.

 

[Mintona]

There’s not enough custom from Gloucester and Cheltenham to London to justify an hourly service to each. Not without some clever thinking, such as extending the Gloucester train to Cardiff and the Cheltenham train to Birmingham anyway...

 

[4-SUB 4732]

The absolute alternative would be to operate a ‘real’ Intercity service to Cardiff (e.g. the Manchester or the Edinburgh / Leeds) and then use freed up Meridians etc to enable the Nottingham to go to Bristol, stopping at Worcestershire Parkway.

Bristol keeps its good Intercity connectivity, yet Cardiff gets a better destination / facilities. That, and as one of the half-hourly Nottingham services (the Birmingham starter) will be West Mids Trains soon anyway, you may as well upgrade the one that stays as Intercity to be a Bristol. You could argue that Plymouth to Manchester and Bristol to Nottingham (connections at Cheltenham or Derby) is perfectly acceptable, especially as people from Plymouth have to change to Manchester anyway so you’re only causing a different number of changes.

 

[ABB125]

The absolute alternative would be to operate a ‘real’ Intercity service to Cardiff (e.g. the Manchester or the Edinburgh / Leeds) and then use freed up Meridians etc to enable the Nottingham to go to Bristol, stopping at Worcestershire Parkway.

Bristol keeps its good Intercity connectivity, yet Cardiff gets a better destination / facilities. That, and as one of the half-hourly Nottingham services (the Birmingham starter) will be West Mids Trains soon anyway, you may as well upgrade the one that stays as Intercity to be a Bristol. You could argue that Plymouth to Manchester and Bristol to Nottingham (connections at Cheltenham or Derby) is perfectly acceptable, especially as people from Plymouth have to change to Manchester anyway so you’re only causing a different number of changes.

In my ideal world, both Nottingham to Birmingham trains would be extended to Cardiff, both calling at major stops but the minor ones split between the two so that the overall journey time is the same on both. This is simply because I have OCD and like things to be neat! In practise, I would have thought one would be fast(ish) and the other one mopping up all the small stops.
Alternatively, one of them could be diverted to Swindon (as I suggested upthread) "just 4 lolz"!

In the real world, I'm sure someone (The Planner?) has said that paths don't exist to extend the current Nottingham to Birmingham terminator, hence why I'm interested in the reduction to 4tph on the Cross City line (but that's in another thread).

 

[4-SUB 4732]

In my ideal world, both Nottingham to Birmingham trains would be extended to Cardiff, both calling at major stops but the minor ones split between the two so that the overall journey time is the same on both. This is simply because I have OCD and like things to be neat! In practise, I would have thought one would be fast(ish) and the other one mopping up all the small stops.
Alternatively, one of them could be diverted to Swindon (as I suggested upthread) "just 4 lolz"!

In the real world, I'm sure someone (The Planner?) has said that paths don't exist to extend the current Nottingham to Birmingham terminator, hence why I'm interested in the reduction to 4tph on the Cross City line (but that's in another thread).

The only plausible option would be to find a way of ‘path matching’ the Hereford WMT to the slower of the Nottingham services, providing a cross-Birmingham connection, removing the platform occupation and the moves are all on the same side of New Street.