Nuneham Viaduct: what alternative provision could be provided?

[HamworthyGoods]

Is it likely to be easy to clear the GWR 165s for Chiltern use?

Hopefully someone more technical will be able to answer that one, afraid I don’t know.

 

[Trainbike46]

Question is what %age of those who board a GW Oxford - London service make the full journey, as opposed to alighting at Didcot or Reading.

Chiltern don't need to replace GW seats on a 1:1 basis - a combination of RRBs to Didcot and perhaps some increase in Chiltern capacity is all that's needed. Pretending Chiltern somehow need to accommodate all of GW's passengers is wrong.

Fortunately then that I wasn't suggesting chiltern would need to fully replace GWR capacity.

From other people in this thread, it sounds like 2 or 3 165s could be missed by GWR, which would increase chiltern capacity, but won't come near fully replacing the Oxford-london capacity.

There were reports of Chiltern asking people to avoid travel as their Oxford service was too overcrowded, which suggests that they do need extra capacity to handle the shifted demand

Thr only container cleared routes north of London are the WCML, ECML, and GEML to Felixstowe.

I was mostly thinking of other ways in which a freight service from the south could reach the WCML other than going via oxford, so either by running into London (via GWR or via Clapham Junction) and back out again, or by running via cheltenham spa

Though that would require the necesary routes to have been cleared for the appropriate loading gauge (W12 for containers, W10 for intermodal, right?)

 

[A0]

Fortunately then that I wasn't suggesting chiltern would need to fully replace GWR capacity.

From other people in this thread, it sounds like 2 or 3 165s could be missed by GWR, which would increase chiltern capacity, but won't come near fully replacing the Oxford-london capacity.

There were reports of Chiltern asking people to avoid travel as their Oxford service was too overcrowded, which suggests that they do need extra capacity to handle the shifted demand


I was mostly thinking of other ways in which a freight service from the south could reach the WCML other than going via oxford, so either by running into London (via GWR or via Clapham Junction) and back out again, or by running via cheltenham spa

Though that would require the necesary routes to have been cleared for the appropriate loading gauge (W12 for containers, W10 for intermodal, right?)

I'm afraid some GW passengers are going to have to board a Rail Replacement Bus to Didcot - and there's nothing they can do about that.

Overcrowding Chiltern isn't the answer - bussing people to Didcot, or encouraging those who are travelling to Oxford station to instead start their journey at Didcot would be much more sensible.

 

[Trainbike46]

I'm afraid some GW passengers are going to have to board a Rail Replacement Bus to Didcot - and there's nothing they can do about that.

Overcrowding Chiltern isn't the answer - bussing people to Didcot, or encouraging those who are travelling to Oxford station to instead start their journey at Didcot would be much more sensible.

or you know, Chiltern could look at ways to increase capacity to take over the GWR london-Oxford passengers, for example by temporarily using stock which GWR can't use now (as you know, one of their routes is shut) which chiltern staff is already trained on, to increase capacity.

obviously that specific example does rely on the GWR 165s being able to be cleared for the chiltern route relatively quickly and easily. hopefully someone with a better technical understanding than either of us will come along to give an indication on that one.

Just to state the obvious, passengers from intermediate stations are better of taking the bus in any case, and they are undoubtedly doing that already

I wish you the best of luck trying to convince passengers starting in London to travel to Didcot to then catch a bus from there. In the real world, passengers tend to prefer taking alternative routes via rail rather than get a rail replacement bus requiring extra changes and leading to a longer travel time. people will shift to Chiltern, so thinking of ways to accommodate them makes sense. Particularly if this does end up taking 12 weeks

 

[A0]

or you know, Chiltern could look at ways to increase capacity to take over the GWR london-Oxford passengers, for example by temporarily using stock which GWR can't use now (as you know, one of their routes is shut) which chiltern staff is already trained on, to increase capacity.

It's already been explained it would only free up one or two units - depending on what you cancelled on GWR's network. So frankly not enough to make a difference.

Then you have the small matter that Chiltern's 165s are not the same as GWR's 165s - different safety systems among other things, so drivers not passed out to drive them.

Basically passengers get told if they're heading to London it's a bus to Didcot, no if's no buts. Easily addressed at the gateline. If you're heading to Bicester, Birmingham, Banbury or anywhere else, you get on the train. If you're heading to London, you're on the bus to Didcot. Simple. If you don't like it, tough.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Basically passengers get told if they're heading to London it's a bus to Didcot, no if's no buts.

What utter fantasy. Chiltern operate a direct service from Oxford to London, what exactly do you propose doing that would make those passengers not just tell the gateline staff where to go, brandishing their Chiltern only tickets?

If it's going to be months there are plenty of options for increasing Chiltern capacity. Compared to the WCML it really does rather help that they are effectively a 75mph railway, that means pretty much any charter lok+stock will work, or they could reform their own loco sets to be longer.

 

[HSTEd]

If people prefer standing on a train via Chiltern rather than sitting on the rail replacement bus, is this really the railway's concern?

 

[A0]

If people prefer standing on a train via Chiltern rather than sitting on the rail replacement bus, is this really the railway's concern?

It is if you're boarding at Bicester, Princes Risborough or High Wycombe - or more to the point, not boarding because Chiltern are trying to shift GWR's Oxford passengers.

 

[HSTEd]

It is if you're boarding at Bicester, Princes Risborough or High Wycombe - or more to the point, not boarding because Chiltern are trying to shift GWR's Oxford passengers.

I'm skeptical, given that all of those stations are served by trains that don't go to Oxford, that crowding could realistically be driven high enough to actually leave significant numbers of passengers stranded.

EDIT:
Especially as railhead passengers will redistribute themselves across GWML/Thames Valley branch and Metropolitan line stations.

 

[Ken X]

I believe there is still a detachment, but I'm not sure how big it actually is these days.

Certainly is.
507 Specialist Team Royal Engineers (STRE), Railway Infrastructure.
Nice little challenge for them to get their teeth into.

 

[A0]

What utter fantasy. Chiltern operate a direct service from Oxford to London, what exactly do you propose doing that would make those passengers not just tell the gateline staff where to go, brandishing their Chiltern only tickets?

If it's going to be months there are plenty of options for increasing Chiltern capacity. Compared to the WCML it really does rather help that they are effectively a 75mph railway, that means pretty much any charter lok+stock will work, or they could reform their own loco sets to be longer.

And if you've bothered to read any of the other posts, you'd have seen there's no spare capacity at Marylebone for either extra services and very limited if any for longer services there.

@zwk500 summed it up here:

Nuneham Viaduct shut - Didcot- Oxford

I went over it this morning on the early Hereford service (06:40 dept) and the train basically stopped on the bridge for 5 mins. I'm a regular on the route (commute Ledbury - Paddington) and first noticed the speed restriction, then a bump, then a slower speed restriction with a bump, then in a...

www.railforums.co.uk

and here:

Nuneham Viaduct shut - Didcot- Oxford

Network Rail have posted an update stating that they think the line will be closed until late April: https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/passengers-advised-to-check-before-travelling-as-railway-between-didcot-parkway-and-oxford-to-remain-closed-until-after-easter Passengers advised to...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Bletchleyite]

And if you've bothered to read any of the other posts, you'd have seen there's no spare capacity at Marylebone for either extra services and very limited if any for longer services there.

If you're willing to rejig Chiltern's timetable there is.

This all depends if it's going to be weeks or months.

EDIT:
Especially as railhead passengers will redistribute themselves across GWML/Thames Valley branch and Metropolitan line stations.

And Stagecoach might find getting a few extra coaches onto the Oxford Tube to be worthwhile. The tourists have long gone for that anyway.

 

[A0]

If you're willing to rejig Chiltern's timetable there is.

This all depends if it's going to be weeks or months.



And Stagecoach might find getting a few extra coaches onto the Oxford Tube to be worthwhile.

Yeah - right.

So you basically screw up Chiltern's timetable for all their regular commuters just to keep Oxford sweet - not happening.

GW's Oxford passengers can get on a bus to Didcot - that's the correct answer and GWR can ensure sufficient capacity from Didcot, which is feasible.

 

[Trainbike46]

And if you've bothered to read any of the other posts, you'd have seen there's no spare capacity at Marylebone for either extra services and very limited if any for longer services there.

@zwk500 summed it up here:

Nuneham Viaduct shut - Didcot- Oxford

I went over it this morning on the early Hereford service (06:40 dept) and the train basically stopped on the bridge for 5 mins. I'm a regular on the route (commute Ledbury - Paddington) and first noticed the speed restriction, then a bump, then a slower speed restriction with a bump, then in a...

www.railforums.co.uk

and here:

Nuneham Viaduct shut - Didcot- Oxford

Network Rail have posted an update stating that they think the line will be closed until late April: https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/passengers-advised-to-check-before-travelling-as-railway-between-didcot-parkway-and-oxford-to-remain-closed-until-after-easter Passengers advised to...

www.railforums.co.uk

so unreasonable of people to not have read posts that are in a different thread.....

But it does actually sound like there is some potential for lengthening, it would require some thought though. If this does take 12 weeks, then taking a few days to figure it out, and then use it for the many weeks this keeps going on would make sense.

 

[The Planner]

Oxford Tube will be coining it in from this

 

[A0]

so unreasonable of people to not have read posts that are in a different thread.....

Apart from the fact Bletchleyite had actually posted in that thread as well....... so not unreasonable.

But it does actually sound like there is some potential for lengthening, it would require some thought though. If this does take 12 weeks, then taking a few days to figure it out, and then use it for the many weeks this keeps going

Well it doesn't - unless there's a fairy godmother who's going to conjure up some more stock for Chiltern - but even then it's going to be limited by compatibility with existing stock and platform lengths.

The reckoning on the threads has been at best GWR could provide a couple of 165s at the most - basically those covering the Didcot - Oxford - Banbury services, after which it will affect their other services.

So again - the correct answer is to direct GWR's customers to Didcot, either under their own steam or via an RRB and to strengthen the Didcot services which GWR can do with their 387 fleet. And dare I say it, if really needed there are class 379s sitting in warm store which could probably be passed out for use on GWR between Paddington and Didcot.....

 

[Bletchleyite]

GW's Oxford passengers can get on a bus to Didcot - that's the correct answer and GWR can ensure sufficient capacity from Didcot, which is feasible.

Umm, GW's passengers?

There's no such thing as "GW's passengers" from Oxford to London, bar those who have an Advance. The only non-interavailable ticket appears to be a Family Travelcard, which is routed Chiltern only. Anyone else is a railway passenger and is entitled to choose either route.

(I'm genuinely surprised there aren't a full set of TOC specific walk up tickets, but there indeed aren't).

 

[zwk500]

I was mostly thinking of other ways in which a freight service from the south could reach the WCML other than going via oxford, so either by running into London (via GWR or via Clapham Junction) and back out again, or by running via cheltenham spa

Though that would require the necesary routes to have been cleared for the appropriate loading gauge (W12 for containers, W10 for intermodal, right?)

W10 for most deep-sea containers, W12 for the slightly bigger ones. W9+ can handle Swapbodies but it's rare.

Only W10 and up route from Southampton to London is via GWML. I did check what the route via Chertsey/Virginia Water/Kew was but can't remember, think it's W8 only so would need well wagons. Routing via Cheltenham isn't cleared for W10 either - not sure if it's W8 or W6 only. The GWML on it's electrified routes will likely be W10 compliant as part of the OLE rebuild, but I haven't confirmed that.

 

[The Planner]

Kemble and via the Lickey is a no for big boxes.

 

[Irascible]

Does the Chiltern line still use it's own ATP system? ISTR talk of removing it, not sure if it happened or not.

 

[Trainbike46]

W10 for most deep-sea containers, W12 for the slightly bigger ones. W9+ can handle Swapbodies but it's rare.

Only W10 and up route from Southampton to London is via GWML. I did check what the route via Chertsey/Virginia Water/Kew was but can't remember, think it's W8 only so would need well wagons. Routing via Cheltenham isn't cleared for W10 either - not sure if it's W8 or W6 only. The GWML on it's electrified routes will likely be W10 compliant as part of the OLE rebuild, but I haven't confirmed that.

so the only alternative routing with any chance would be Southampton-Reading-London, and then something like Acton Wells-Willesden Junction onto the WCML

 

[zwk500]

so the only alternative routing with any chance would be Southampton-Reading-London, and then something like Acton Wells-Willesden Junction onto the WCML

Which is exactly what they have been doing.

 

[A0]

Umm, GW's passengers?

There's no such thing as "GW's passengers" from Oxford to London, bar those who have an Advance. The only non-interavailable ticket appears to be a Family Travelcard, which is routed Chiltern only. Anyone else is a railway passenger and is entitled to choose either route.

Well - there's a start. Anyone with a GW only ticket doesn't get on the train. Simple.

And from there, if necessary, there are two other options - one is limit the number of people who can board each Chiltern service at Oxford and once that number's reached, no more are allowed on unless they are only travelling to points up to Wycombe, the other is to turn some Chiltern services short at Oxford Parkway. So if people turn up at Oxford station, there isn't a train and they have to board the RRB to Didcot.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well - there's a start. Anyone with a GW only ticket doesn't get on the train. Simple.

There'll be very few of those as the only GW Only tickets are Advances, and Advance use on short routes like that is low.

And from there, if necessary, there are two other options - one is limit the number of people who can board each Chiltern service at Oxford and once that number's reached, no more are allowed on unless they are only travelling to points up to Wycombe, the other is to turn some Chiltern services short at Oxford Parkway. So if people turn up at Oxford station, there isn't a train and they have to board the RRB to Didcot.

No need for either, the Birmingham services and the Wycombe stoppers also call at local stations on the Chiltern line. If anything I'd remove some or all of those stops and direct people from those stations onto the Birminghams.

 

[A0]

No need for either, the Birmingham services and the Wycombe stoppers also call at local stations on the Chiltern line. If anything I'd remove some or all of those stops and direct people from those stations onto the Birminghams.

So you'd lose on average 2 tph at High Wycombe. Why should Wycombe or Princes Risborough passengers lose out ?

The best solution is to send Oxford passengers to Didcot via GWR which can be done with plenty of capacity then RRBs.

I know you don't like RRBs and you do like cutting other people's services for the places you want to serve - but those other places shouldn't lose out or find their services crowded out so they are unusable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So you'd lose on average 2 tph at High Wycombe. Why should Wycombe or Princes Risborough passengers lose out ?

Because it's better that the pain is shared a little than one set of people get all of it.

The best solution is to send Oxford passengers to Didcot via GWR which can be done with plenty of capacity then RRBs.

I know you don't like RRBs and you do like cutting other people's services for the places you want to serve - but those other places shouldn't lose out or find their services crowded out so they are unusable.

RRBs are second-fiddle to rail. They are a fallback, not a desirable option.

You don't perchance live in High Wycombe do you?

 

[A0]

Because it's better that the pain is shared a little than one set of people get all of it.

RRBs are second-fiddle to rail. They are a fallback, not a desirable option.

You don't perchance live in High Wycombe do you?

No, I don't live in Wycombe - but I fail to see why places like Princes Risborough or High Wycombe, who already have busy trains, should see them rendered unusable due to overcrowding just to keep Oxford moving.

RRBs are absolutely the right solution when Didcot is 30 mins away by road and GWR can easily provide alot of capacity from there - whereas Chiltern have limited capacity by virtue of platform lengths and line capacity.

 

[HSTEd]

No, I don't live in Wycombe - but I fail to see why places like Princes Risborough or High Wycombe, who already have busy trains, should see them rendered unusable due to overcrowding just to keep Oxford moving.

RRBs are absolutely the right solution when Didcot is 30 mins away by road and GWR can easily provide alot of capacity from there - whereas Chiltern have limited capacity by virtue of platform lengths and line capacity.

Short of cancelling every Chiltern train to Oxford, there is no real ability to prevent people boarding those trains though.

If they have a valid ticket they are permitted to take that train.

There is no real need to withdraw stops on any of these trains, the reality is that passengers who are unable to board the Oxford trains at intermediate stations will naturally switch to the other trains.

Some people may take RRBs, but I doubt it would be many given how useless they tend to be.

 

[A0]

Short of cancelling every Chiltern train to Oxford, there is no real ability to prevent people boarding those trains though.

Maybe that's the answer then - stop them short at Oxford Parkway.

Anyone wishing to get to Oxford has to travel via Didcot.

People in Oxford itself then have a choice, they either get RRB'd to Didcot or have to make their own way to Oxford Parkway. Should spread the demand more evenly than overcrowding Chiltern to the detriment of their regular users further down the line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Only you would seriously propose, when a route has lost half its service, to remove the other half because people at stations which have two other trains per hour (minimum) might have to stand if they get on those ones or choose the other two. This utterly beggars belief.