WARNING - Long post comming up...
Perhaps off peak something like a class 153 can shuttle between Fishguard Hbr and Carmarthen connecting with the ATW to/from Manchester which terminate at Carmarthen.
That was actually the orriginal plan. IWJ's announcment was a trial service of 5 additional trains
between Fishguard and Carmarthen. Then ATW were aksed to produce a timetable, apparently in consultation with the North Pembrokeshire Transport Fourm (NPTF) and came up with something that provided a couple of through trains to/from Cardiff/Swansea by extending existing services.
Also we have the concerns about the future of the Manchester - Milford Haven service and whether the service will be cut back to Cardiff after electrification to Swansea is completed in 2018. Hopefully this through service will continue as many of us know it is a vital link between West Wales and Swansea/Cardiff.
Personally, I think running through trains from S.W.Wales to Cardiff via Swansea isn't that great, and would be utterly ludicrous after electrification between Cardiff and Swansea.
The May 2014-Dec 2014 NR timetable will be with ATW this month for any alterations to current services, so the Minister only has a a very few months to continue/alter or stop the Fishguard trial.The Minister will then have to find money from the almost empty revenue account to continue this service in whatever form it may take until 2018 when ATW depart.
Another thing I seem to recall from the start of the trial was that there was to be a public consultation about future services at the end of the trial. I think this means either:
- The trial will have to be extended while the consultation is carried out or
- The service will reduce back to just the boat trains while the consultation is carried out, with later reintroduction of new services if the trial was deemed successful or
- The consultation will have to happen speedly now and the desision on whether to continue with a service made in time to cancel the service in September (the end of the 3 years) if it was deemed a failure
I had the misfortune to travel by train between Swansea and Tenby back in the summer. The train (I have no idea what type) was really nasty - uncomfortable, noisy and overcrowded - and I'd never do it again. I think ATW would see a significant increase in patronage if travelling on their trains was more enjoyable and less of an ordeal.
In all probability the train was either a
class 150 unit or a Pacer (class 142 or class 143 unit). In my opinion none of these trains are suitable for a journey of much over an hour, except maybe on stopping services which are overtaken at least once an hour by limited-stop services.
I don't think the
class 153 units, of which I believe ATW have only 8, are used west of Swansea anymore except on the Heart Of Wales line and perhaps as strengthening. Units of this type, running in pairs to provide more capacity, would be far more appropriate than 150s or Pacers in my opinion but could still do with an internal refurbishment to improve the legroom. I thus believe that the 150s and Pacers in Wales should be replaced with such trains (or the similar class 155 and class 156 units) once the ValleyLines are electrified.
The latest update on Fishguard Trains website shows a busy Goodwick station on a recent evening. I'm sure it's not like that every evening but I used the same train on a wednesday evening at the end of September and it WAS a similar situation.....I counted 21 getting off at Goodwick with some staying on to Harbour.
It does vary alot, for example one of my YouTube videos shows the morning Fishguard to Carmarthen train unloading a large number of passengers, but on another occasion I used the service with only a few others.
Another question members might like to ponder is stock utilisation on the Pembroke Dock branch which basically entails a 50 or so minute layover for each train at Pembroke Dock. With some investment, which is obviously longer term, journey time could be reduced between Tenby and PD but at the moment there is probably a waste of a unit. Any thoughts on a way things could be improved in the short term?
The only things that I've considered might be possible without enhanced infrastructure (other issues aside) would be a every-90-min frequency (would that be possible I wonder?) or closing a station. I wouldn't suggest the latter without a replacement (eg. replacing the lower two HOWL stations with trams) but Kilgetty and Saundersfoot stations are barely over half a mile apart and Saundersfoot station is over a mile from the town. Since you'd probably need a bus into Saundersfoot anyway why not run it from Kilgetty station if it will allow the train to get more speed up?
The recent article about The Cardiff Valleys in Modern Railways magazine makes a good case for converting most of the Valley lines network with the exception of the Maesteg and Ebbw Vale branches to tram-train operation especially when you see the difference in journey times.
You have to consider though that some of the ValleyLines were supposed to have gone to 6-car operation (platforms were lengthened for it, but the stock was diverted to other causes I believe). You'd never get that kind of capacity with a tram/tram-train would you? Cardiff Bay - Coryton - Radyr might be a good tram-train route though, since I think the Cardiff Bay and Coryton services are worked by a 153.
Electric traction would certainly help improve timekeeping on the Pembroke Dock branch.
Yes, that would be interesting. There are beaches called 'Freshwater West' and 'Freshwater East' in the area served by the branch, which may me think it could be a good home for the 3-CIG EMU 'Freshwater' formerly used on the Lymington branch. Hasn't got a chance of actually happening though.
As for the Fishguard branch yes the through trains do carry a lot of passengers while the shuttles to Claberston Road carry little at all. Any new timetable for the Fishguard branch certainly needs to eliminate thse little used shuttles and replace them with regular clockface departures to at least Carmarthen to connect with other services. The eractic timetable and the need to change at Claberston road are one of the main things putting off people using the additional services.
Well, one of the Clarbeston Road to Fishguard trains doesn't even have a connection from Carmarthen. I wonder if it ever carries fare-paying passengers? Another question is what the earliest service out of Fishguard needs to be. The 08:04 is perhaps a tad too late for commuters to Carmarthen, but if it was brought forward to arround 07:56 would there need to be an earlier service? If there does, wouldn't it be better to run it through to Carmarthen and connect with the 07:30 to PAD? Following electrification though, I think having the Fishguard service running through to Swansea could be a good idea.
Keeping an hourly through train from West of Swansea to Cardiff will cut down on the amount of rolling stock that can be redeployed and undermine the benefits of electrification along the SWML.
It would be better to campaign for some key trains running at key times via Swansea District Line from West Wales to Cardiff, an extra 4 or so each way a day could probably be accommodated.
I agree with sending any residual through services to Cardiff via the district line, since it will speed them up and mean they don't have to be long trains to cater for the Cardiff - Swansea demand.
However, I'm not sure token through services from S.W. Wales to Cardiff would make much difference (my support for the 07:30 Carmarthen - PAD is more to provide peak capacity into Swansea). Either through services to Cardiff should go completely or an express SDL service should run at least every two hours, prefrably hourly. The only way I can think of that undermining the benefits of electrification is if it puts too great a strain on the capacity, forcing a lower frequency between Cardiff and Swansea than would otherwise have happened. Certainly less of an undermining than every single new Intercity train for the Great Western having at least one diesel engine.
Start off with Swansea to Llanelli being in principle 2 tph and integrated with HoW trains including some terminating at Llandeilo.
Do you really need more than 1 tph off peak west of Llanelli? especially if you portion work and split at Whitland.
The previous SWWITCH rail strategy stated they want 3tph between Carmarthen and Swansea. In my view it should be 2tph, plus any Cardiff services (over the SDL).
1 tph Swansea to Bristol semi fast EMU cut back DMU service to 1 tph Bristol to Portsmouth is probably best operational plan.
Operationally perhaps, but it does impact on the number of changes required from S.W.Wales to southern England, esspecially if you don't run the SDL service to Cardiff. Personally, I think retaining the Cardiff - Portsmouth is important (prefrably integrated with the SDL service).
My proposals would be (minimum spec in blue, optional extras in orange):
West Of Swansea
- 2tph Swansea - Carmarthen, class 156 units, consisting of:
- 0.5tph Swansea - Pembroke Dock (all stations)
- 0.5tph Swansea - Carmarthen (all stations)
- 0.5tph Swansea - Milford Haven (all stations except Kidwelly and Ferryside)
- 0.5tph Swansea - Fishguard Harbour (all stations except Kidwelly, Ferryside, Clunderwen and Clarbeston Road)
[*]0.5tph Carmarthen - Cardiff, calling at Llanelli, Port Talbot Parkway and either Bridgend or a new station (Morriston Parkway on the SDL) only (ideally combined with Portsmouth Harbour service), class 158 units
[*]0.5tph Milford Haven - Cardiff, calling at Johnston, Haverfordwest, Carmarthen, then as above
- The services which orriginate at Carmarthen would ideally have good bus connections from Aberystwyth and Lampeter, ideally the Fishguard and Pembroke services would connect into the Carmarthen - Cardiff service also
East Of Swansea
- 1tph Swansea - London calling at Neath, Port Talbot, Bridgend, Cardiff, Newport, Bristol Parkway, Reading, Paddington
[*]1tph Swansea - Bristol Temple Meads calling at Neath, Port Talbot, Bridgend, Cardiff then replacing the Cardiff - Taunton (something like a 444 or perhaps a 377 would be nice)
[*]1tph Swansea - Cardiff (extended to Cheltenham if it ever gets wired, or to Ebbw Vale) all stations (3-car class 377s would be nice)
[*]1tph Swansea - Manchester (at least 4-car 175 or LHCS) calling at Neath, Port Tablbot, Bridgend, Cardiff, Newport, Abergavenny, Hereford, Ludlow and Leominster, Shrewsbury, Crewe and Wilmslow and Stockport (obviously since this is diesel it'd be the first one I'd drop if there are capacity/stock/cost issues, before the S.W.Wales - SDL - Cardiff services even, but if you can run this one then the Swansea - Bristol service could call additionally at Pyle and be a class 377)
I am rather surprised to note on Nat Rail after over £300K was spent on the refurb at Goodwick station by Pembroke Council ,no toilets,or has NR got this wrong.
Work to open Goodwick station included demolishing the station building, slewing the track so that it was within reach of the platform all the way along and resurfacing the car park. There are no facilities other than a bus shelter, making any attempt to provide bus connections there a bit redundant in my opinon.
The replacment station building serves no purpose and does not do the wonderful, characterful, original building justise at all. With the thinner wooden boards and industrial estate roof, the new building lacks character altogether. What a waste of a conservation area.
I wonder however now that Wales could get some borrowing powers could some money be raised to provide further investment in public transport.
Yea, that sounds perfectly logical. Unfortunately all the references on radio this morning have centred around resolving the M4 bottleneck at Newport. One can hope......???
Indeed, very concerning that WAG seem to be gearing up to throw more money at non-environmentally-friendly modes of transport. Hard to think which is a worse cause, Cardiff Airport or a second M4. Returning to S.W.Wales, Paul Davies, AM for north Pembs., wants the A40 dualed west of St. Clears. That'd be another nail in the coffin of sustainable transport.
There have been suggestions on the Cambrian Hourly Board that Gerallt could work the Fishguard Boats while laying over at Cardiff. I have, therefore, posted this here as Gareth Marston has pointed out this should be the correct thread form it as it has no connection to the title of the topic.
This would be impracticable as Gerallt is required to spend time at Canton for Maintenance purposes and any swapping out of vehicles or locos. Also it is a Welsh Government sponsored and paid for train whereas the Fishguard Boats is a run of the mill ATW franchised service Somebody would have to come up with additional funding to pay for the additionals such as higher Track Access charges and ATW are not going to do that.
- Time at Canton: There would still be time to swap the set if not individual vehicles, and other types of train aren't maintained during the day are they?
- WAG sponsorship: they also sponsor the franchise, the 158 refurbishment etc. and if the reports on here are true Gerald will be taking a franchised slot from December at 17:21 from Cardiff
- Track Access Charges: I only suggest using the Gerald set on occasions when the boat train needs strengthening. I think the boat train should be a 158, but I doubt a pair of 158s is at all acheivable. So: single 158 at quiet times and Gerald set at busy times.
