WelshBuses93
Member
A low floor coach demonstrator is due on the T10 service in February.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
TrawsCambria / TrawsCymru
- Thread starter Rhydgaled
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Richards Bros' website advises that they are no longer running the 551, 552 and 554 services, but doesn't say whether another operator has taken them on and Ceredigion council no longer has a list of timetables on their site (instead directing me to Traveline, where I can't find a timetable for the 554). If we assume, from the lack of information, that these services no longer exist then Blaenannerch and Blaenporth would appear to have been reduced to 1 early-morning northbound service and 1 evening southbound working (which is missing on M-F if you download the timetable from the TrawsCymru website rather than Richards').
Worryingly the "We are currently temporarily operating reduced journeys on the following routes" message on the TrawsCymru website now lists only the T1. That suggests this new T5 timetable is not a temporary reduction due to COVID but the 'new normal'. That said, the website's description of the T5 is still highly inaccurate and appears to be getting more so. Calling it "a regular and direct service" (my bold) was always a nonsense but now the service apparently features "An hourly service on weekdays and Saturdays between Cardigan and Aberystwyth" and "A two hourly service between Cardigan and Haverfordwest". Using the timetables from the Richards Bros' site (the TrawsCymru one doesn't seem to have any timetable for Cardigan to Haverfordwest) there is no 'hourly service' to Aberystwyth and on Saturdays it's the Cardigan to Haverfordwest leg that's more frequent.
markymark2000
On Moderation
This new T5 timetable is the future timetable. This is what got put out to tender recently. I think there was a Sunday service included but don't quote me on that. If so, that may come up in the future but as far as the actual route goes (Cardigan - Aber Uni), I do believe that this is the set route from now on.
johntrawscymru
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 118
This is the new normal for the T5 between Cardigan and Aberystwyth. There is no longer an hourly service. There are no longer any "Direct Services". Therefore the Trawscymru website is totally incorrect in claiming an hourly, direct service.
The new bus shelters in Ceredigion have electronic "next bus" message equipment which are currently not operational. The electronic message simply states "consult the printed timetables". However there is only 1 timetable in the new bus shelters, the T5 timetable. There is no T1 timetable and the T5 quotes only Cardigan to Aberystwyth with no Cardigan to Fishguard/Haverfordwest.
The problem now with the new T5 route is a) It is totally unreliable, b) there are no fast, direct services and c) the route design /timings are impractical.
I have used the T5 twice in the past week inbound to Aberystwyth and both services arrived late (9 minutes and 11 minutes), and the drivers appear to be "frazzled" trying to keep to the new timetable. The "9 minutes and 11 minutes late" does not meet the Road Traffic Regulations that bus services should reach timing points no more than 5 minutes late. The unreliability is related to the route changes. In addition services outbound from Aberystwyth are also running late.
The diversion to the University and Penglais School for every service through the day is ridiculous . The old service had 1 service at the start and end of each day doing the diversion. This diversion is 5 minutes each way, total 10 minutes. As a route designer, why would you divert every service on a "Long Distance" bus route off its route to service students? The majority of the students live in Aberystwyth and only require a service at the start and end of each day. Several other regular bus services already provide a frequent service throughout the day to Penglais and the University and what has happened to the "active travel" initiative?
The old timetable had services arriving in Aberystwyth at 57 minutes past the hour and departing at 10 minutes past the hour, with a wait time of 13 minutes at Aberystwyth Bus Station.
Simple maths tells you that employing the 10 minutes Penglais detour to the North of Aberystwyth leaves a wait time of only 3 minutes at Aberystwyth Bus Station. In fact the new timetable shows the wait time as 5 minutes for every service, which is generous as it should be 3 minutes. This means that the T5 should NEVER exceed the Road Traffic Regulations in its arrival time or services will depart already late from Aberystwyth. This is exactly what is happening and the T5 service is now a complete shambles.
The "missing" fast direct service took 1 hr 21 mins. The new services take 1 hour 48 mins plus the 10 minute detour to Penglais (total travel time 1 hour 58 mins). The total travel time of 1 hour 58 mins spells out that an hourly service with this route design is completely impractical. The direct distance is 40 miles and takes 1 hour by car. Therefore without the fast direct service passengers will be driven off the bus and into their cars and the "frazzled" bus drivers will find other employment. Then the Welsh Government can reduce the service frequency even further because there are no passengers and no bus drivers.
The T5 now joins the bulk of the services in the Trawscymru Network in not providing fast direct links between the major towns and cities of Wales. It is no longer a "Long Distance Service" but is a "Long, Meandering, Local Bus Service". It has no right to be branded as Trawscymru.
I assume 8 electric buses will service the hourly pre-pandemic T1 service, but there is no sign that the 6 services removed due to "Driver Shortages" will be re-instated. Therefore the T1 is highly likely to join the T5 as NOT an hourly service.
I suspect the Welsh Government are testing the water with the T5 changes before they remove services from the T1 route.
Last edited by a moderator:
To be fair, on weekdays it is almost an hourly service (with only two journeys, 12:00 and 14:00 from Aberystwyth, missing). However, to suggest that there is an hourly service on Saturdays is completely false, with not even a single departure from Aberystwyth in an even hour. In terms of directness, there is still one trip (at a very unsociable hour northbound) which avoids the detour to New Quay but I'm not sure if it does Penparc Estate. However, the college days only direct service to Aberaeron (originally a duplicate working provided, I assume, to avoid overcrowding) appears to have been axed unless it is now a 'dedicated learner transport' coach for the students and no longer open to the public.
Is that T5 timetable the current one? From what I remember from my sole 'leisure' outing since the pandemic hit (a circular route including Cardigan, Narberth, and Haverfordwest), I didn't see any current timetables, only pre-pandemic stuff or no timetable at all.
If they did show the timings for Haverfordwest to Cardigan, it would reveal that there is often an hour to wait in Cardigan rather than a decent connection with some of the remaining trips to Aberystwyth falling in the middle of a two hour gap in services from Haverfordwest.
I have never known direct services between Cardigan and Haverfordwest, and between Cardigan and Aberystwyth most direct services were removed when Arriva withdrew from Aberystwyth (which was some time before the T5 existed) so that is nothing new.
The T5 has always been a "Long, Meandering, Local Bus Service". It only ever had a right to be branded as anything other than that between Cardigan and Aberystwyth and even then only on workings which avoided New Quay which I don't think has been more than 1 each way for the whole time the T5 has existed (and the current timetable still has one such trip each way).
Have they changed the time allowed for any part of the route? I didn't think they had actually changed much other than extending trips to Aberystwyth university and removing most services through Bleanporth on Saturdays and diverting them via Aberporth (to match the retained workings) on weekdays.
The timetable implies that the service is extended to the university rather than diverted to travel past it. Is this the case? As a former student of Aberystwyth University, I think an extension to the university is a good concept. However, unless the university's timetable structure has changed, the execution of it is terrible. In my time, if I recall correctly, lectures were timetabled to start at 10 past the hour and finish on the hour, leaving 10 minutes to get from one to the other, except that the first two slots (09:00 and 10:00) started on the hour and finished at 09:50 and 10:50. This means that the scheduled T5 departure time from the university on the hour is useless to students, unless they leave early and miss the end of the lecture.
As for 'active travel', many was the time when I left my last lecture at 6pm and ran down to the bus station for what was in those days the direct* X50 departure at 18:15. The more-recent departure times of XX:10 from the bus station could not be reliably reached following the end of the lecture. Unlike school, there could be just two or three lectures a day meaning not everyone finishes for the day on the same hour and providing a bus service all day makes sense. For example, on some days my last lecture was 15:10 to 16:00 - if I left the lecture hall promptly at 16:00 I could sometimes just about make the 16:10 (it was always earlier than the then-standard XX:15 slot due to the diversion it made via Llanbardan for Coleg Ceredigion) but it required a lot of running; I'm probably too unfit to manage that now. Walking up the hill isn't something I've ever been willing to do; in my final year I had accomodation in Aberystwyth (near Morrisons) and would walk back in the afternoon, but in the morning I'd walk into town (a similar distance probably, but flat) and catch the 03 up the hill.
* relatively at least, I cannot remember whether it did Penparc Estate but that one only adds about a minute.
As noted above, we have been effectively without the fast direct service for some time (since December 21st, 2013 to be precise, assuming the date on my camera was correct); I wonder how many passengers have been driven into their cars or whether motorists never really considered the bus to be a viable option even in the days of the X50.
One has to ask, who is running the Welsh Government transport department? Lee Waters MS, the deputy minister for climate change, seems to understand the need for modal shift to public transport and to deter car use (and even appears to be opposed to road building) and yet he appears to have been unable to stop his department from signing contracts to build a major new line of bypasses on the A40 in Pembrokeshire (now under construction) and now his department is overseeing cuts to what should be the flagship bus network.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
I appreciate your view but, to be honest, the T5 is not going to be a major plank in modal shift. Nor does it mean that bypasses on the A40 aren't needed. I don't know if you drive but that part of the A40 carries a lot of large goods vehicles. There's a lot of milk tankers as it's one of the major milk fields, fuel tankers from Pembroke Dock, and then you have the international freight to Ireland (not much compared to, say, Holyhead but enough) and then the domestic stuff like deliveries to stores.
Significant modal shift can realistically only be achieved in areas of higher population density; Pembrokeshire (5th largest county) in total has a population lower than Bridgend Borough (14th largest).
Also, there's a difference in how funding works so a road project is capital spending (where grants can be obtained) whereas revenue funding is completely different. Mind you, with £13bn just wasted on PPE and Covid fraud, that might have paid for a few things
splashoutradio
Member
A post on the Traws Cymru Facebook page, made at circa 18:25:
Seems odd to withdraw the app at such short notice. Announcing it at the end of the day, at a time where there is no one available to answer the questions of concerned travellers who have recently purchased weekly and period tickets, also seems very last minute.
markymark2000
On Moderation
That's not very good. Then again, do we expect anything better from the shambles that is TrawsCymru.
I presume the rush is down to them not being able to use the current app software beyond the 4th Feb. Of course this should have been mentioned much earlier though.
I agree that the T5 doesn't have anything to do with whether or not bypasses are needed on the A40 - they're seperate arguments really except that both developments are counter productive if the aim is modal shift away from private cars (the the case of the A40, the main public transport option is rail). However, I don't agree that the T5 is unimportant with regard to modal shift. As the only public transport on that corridor, it is key to reducing traffic on the A487 and, while there is less traffic than somewhere like Cardiff, the A487 is hardly empty. Additionally, if people are to give up their cars altogether they need to be confident of being able to get around wherever they go; not just in the more densely-populated areas where they live. The part the T5 has to play is a small one in the grand scheme of things perhaps, but that small part is nevertheless an important part in my opinion.
True, revenue funding is difficult to find, which perhaps explains the poor public transport service provided, but we shouldn't be building infrustructure that undermines the stated objective of modal shift just because there's money available for that. If anything, the difficulty of funding buses increases the case against road building - if we can't afford to make public transport better then we need to make car travel as unpleasant as possible to try to force people onto public transport. I would much prefer to see a behavioural change policy which is more carrot than stick, but if we can't afford the carrots then we must rely on the sticks (and certainly not give motorists carrots in the form of bypasses etc.).
What is wrong with the current app software that means they are not able to continue it until the new app is ready?
markymark2000
On Moderation
Depends on the contract that they have with UrbanThings. Does it expire perhaps and UrbanThings want's a commitment for longer than what TraswCymru can offer. There is a few potential options here.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
In what way will not building those bypasses improve the movement of freight along the A40? Perhaps this might be of assistance https://gov.wales/sites/default/fil...west-study-design-options-report-volume-1.pdf - it specifically cites the issues of HGVs, the land bridge to Ireland as part of Euroroute E30, tourist traffic pulling caravans and, which I hadn't mentioned, higher levels of agricultural vehicles. All this leads to platooning and making the T5 every 10 mins would do nothing to sort that!
Also, you should appreciate that if you really want to effect modal shift, in a meaningful, you really need to be looking at the areas where substantial numbers of people actually live. Imagine if you removed 5% of the cars on the A40 into Haverfordwest....then imagine removing 5% of the cars on the A48 into Cardiff - big difference.
The whole point is that I don't think we should be improving the movement of anything along the A40 as doing so would be detrimental to the climate as it would encourage the use of the A40 rather than rail.
So what? Platooning is by far the lesser of two evils compared to further entrenchment of car culture and consequential climate change. If a motorist is stuck behind a HGV or tractor they might consider rail next time, if they are enabled to overtake then they won't.
There is also the fact that major road investment sends out a signal that car use is supported and encouraged by the government. A study on Behaviour Change, Public Engagement and Net-Zero for the Committee on Climate Change includes the following quotes: "Mixed messages are highly damaging to public understanding, trust and sense of personal capacity to act" and "Policy which reinforces rather than undermines these narratives will also be required".
Of course not, the T5 doesn't run on that stretch of the A40 and I already agreed that improvements to the T5 would have no impact on that stretch of the A40.
Yes, I'm not familiar with that stretch of the A48 but that's probably a big difference. I could probably say the same for reducing cars on the M4 past Port Talbot by 5% compared to the A40 into Haverfordwest, but some of those journeys on the M4 may well have started or finished in Haverfordwest. To bring us back towards TrawsCymru (though not the T5), there will also be trips from Lampeter to Cardiff using the M4 past Port Talbot. No matter how good you make the railway between Cardiff and Swansea, were the T1 to be cut to 3 per day (as the bus service between Haverfordwest and Carmarthen is on the A40 corridor) and the A485 upgraded to a similar standard as the new A40 in Pembrokeshire you would still expect people from Lampeter to drive.
Clearly, putting the lions share of the investment in public transport improvements into the busier areas is likely to have a much bigger impact. However, that's no excuse for further increasing the car's share of trips in the less-populated areas.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
Sorry but you're just not getting it. The issue is freight movements and there is no way that improving public transport is going to improve that.
I'm not in favour of concreting the entire country and we've done too much of that, but there are very sound reasons for some piecemeal improvements. There has been too much reliance on new roads and less on public transport investment and that balance must be tilted but that isn't to say that no road building should be undertaken. Remember that this is E30 - it's a major freight transport route into Pembrokeshire and as part of the land bridge.
As I stated above. The real issue is the mixed message of enabling car use in towns and cities when the benefits of not doing so are so much more evident.
I was making a flippant point but in the case of the A40 and similar instances, you can increase public transport (and we should) but it does not fundamentally tackle the problem of freight which is what the bypass programme is aiming to do.
In that utopia then, of course, Pembrokeshire's buses should be treated as well as Cardiff's. However, if your contention is that it is to effect genuine significant modal shift, then improving the reliability and effectiveness in the major towns and cities must be priority. It's why I've questioned why the TC routes in North Wales are getting electric buses when the benefit would be much greater in, for instance, Wrexham.
Now the easy comeback would be that, in that case, rural counties would never get the required investment and forever be a poor relation. That is essentially true but when you're looking at investment of public funds in obtaining modal shift, there are perhaps better places where bang for buck would feature.
johntrawscymru
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 118
Yes - the current timetable and a very pristine copy!
No other timetables anywhere except in Aber where there is a very confusing T1 timetable giving just departure times BEFORE the "driver shortage" and the departure times that are "MISSING". Passengers have to cross reference the 2 lists to see which departure times are "NOT missing".
By direct between Cardigan and Aberystwyth I meant the 1 hour 21 minute service which misses Newquay and Aberporth which is comparable to the car journey at 1 hour. I get your point that that service still exists but it has been moved from 16.00 to 5.45 in Cardigan and from 7.30 to 21.00 in Aberystwyth. I would be interested to know what research and logic went into those changes.
I have used Cardigan to Fishguard in the past and the service on to Haverfordwest is not direct .
What they have done is diverted ALL services through Aberporth. The pre-covid timetable had 6 services which missed out Aberporth . These 6 services were obviously faster than those which diverted to Aberporth . The new T5 timetable quotes the journey time as 1 hr 48 minutes from Cardigan to Aberystwyth with diversions to both Aberporth and Newquay and 1 hr 51 minutes in reverse from Aberystwyth to Cardigan . The pre-covid timetable indicates that for services missing Aberporth and not Newquay the journey time was 1 hr 50 minutes.
This would suggest that somehow the new T5 service is including a detour through Aberporth without increasing the journey time. If that is the case no wonder the drivers look frazzled and services are running late. When Summer comes and staycation starts again getting buses through Aberporth will be a nightmare. The 10 minute diversion in Aberystwyth to Penglais just adds fuel to the fire.
.
For EVERY T5 service to go North of Aberystwyth bus station to Aber Uni and Penglais campus is a diversion or extension from the original route increasing the Journey time by 10 minutes.
The diversion is unnecessary because passengers arriving at Aberystwyth Bus Station have a range of local bus services providing transport to Aber Uni and Penglais Campus.
301 (50 minutes past the hour every hour) to Penglais Campus.
512 (44 minutes past the hour every hour) to Penglais Campus.
06 (55 minutes past the hour every hour) to Penglais Campus.
X28 (30 minutes past the hour every hour) to Penglais Campus.
T2 (On the hour every hour/every 2 hours )
The new T5 timetable arrival time is either 45 or 50 minutes past the hour therefore passengers wishing to go to Aber Uni or Penglais could walk 20 yards over the road and catch the 301 or the 06. However because of the 10 minute T5 diversion to Penglais Campus the T5 is highly unlikely to arrive at 45 or 50 minutes past the hour as it is going arrive late most of the time!!
The diversion to Aber Uni and Penglais Campus has been carried out with no research and no consideration of how to improve Journey times and attract passengers away from their cars. A desk top exercise by someone who has probably never been anywhere near Aberystwyth.
I worked in Bronglais Hospital and did the same sprint. I rarely used a bus to go up or down the hill. Always a sprint in the evening and a leisurely walk in the morning. In the morning there is a very interesting route by exiting the T5 after it passes the Welsh Government buildings, cross the railway via the footbridge, through the cemetery and up the hill through a field ending up by the National Library/Hospital. This was faster than staying on the T5 to the bus station and transferring to a bus up Penglais.
I agree entirely
The A487, the only major road along the West side of Wales, is now overloaded with traffic compared to 10 years ago. Accidents and Road Maintenance are increasing. The local Community Council are so concerned they have set up a Working Group to consider Road/Traffic problems on the A487.
The Trawscymru services along this route are essential for many people and those with cars are now being encouraged to use their cars because the T1 and T5 are being downgraded.
Lee Waters MS has inherited the concept that was started by his predecessor that travel North to South in West Wales is irrelevant and modal shift can realistically only be achieved in areas of higher population density . Hence the South Wales Metro and the North Wales Metro and eye watering spending in those areas.
Lee Waters Officials are still the prime movers of the Bus Travel Policy. Until Lee Waters imposes his own authority on those officials who are following the same track as his predecessor we will see all Trawscymru services becoming a "Long, Meandering, Local Bus Service".
Perhaps it should change its branding to "Around Wales" .
I am not born in Wales, so correct me if this would not be "GwmpasCymru"
Last edited by a moderator:
I get that it is a major freight route. I get that you can't put freight on a bus or on a passenger train (although perhaps there is something that could be done with rail freight; after all the line isn't closed to heavy diesel locomotives although I imagine the loading guage won't allow container trains). What I don't get is what you think needs to be improved for road freight. What the HGV drivers complain about is quality/availability of rest facilities along the routes isn't it?
No, that is not what the bypass programme is aiming to do. Of the 16 scheme objectives across the two projects I was involved in campaigning against, only two (one for each scheme, both relating to reducing the number and severity of collisions) actually seem to have any real meaning. The other 14 objectives are vauge wishy-washy statements like "To improve prosperity and provide better access to the county town of Haverfordwest, the Haven Enterprise Zone etc." From a quick skim-read just now to remind myself of this nonsense, I don't think any of the objectives mention the words 'freight', 'lorry' or HGV. The actual reasoning behind the schemes seems to be found not in the objectives section but in the lists of perceived problems with the current road, which major on overtaking opportunities (which are of benefit to motorists, not freight).
Of course, reducing the number and severity of collisions is a worthy goal but if you got rid of all the nonsense objectives there would be alternative solutions which would be far cheaper (both financially and environmentaly).
I agree with the point I think you are making in the above passage. Public transport investment has a better return on investment in heavily populated areas. I get it. My point is that, even in the rural areas (where perhaps you aren't investing so much in public transport) you should not 'invest' in road 'improvements' that encourage car use. That is only going to deprive rural public transport of revenue and make maintaining what little public transport there is in rural areas even harder.
I have been very reticent to get involved in this discussion, especially when it gets near politics etc, as I don't know many of the details of Welsh politics and wish to avoid criticism of the same. And I am certainly going to avoid expressing any views on the T1c and T1s.
However it does appear that a good and simple concept is being lost by salami-slicing of cuts and in danger of being destroyed as a result. These are:
The T46 would roughly arrive in Cardigan at a quarter to the hour and leave at a quarter past which is OK for connections with the T5 both ways
Ideally trains should be hourly through to Haverfordwest and Milford Haven but I am not a train expert and maybe that is just impossible with the current infrastructure and allowing for freight trains. But certainly a regular hourly service to Carmarthen so that the T1 and T46/460 can connect with trains in both directions.
Yes that would cost a bit more to subsidise but surely this would be a fraction of what some of the railway subsidies in Wales amount to? And how about something radical - marketing and integrating into the rail network from a passenger perspective!
However it does appear that a good and simple concept is being lost by salami-slicing of cuts and in danger of being destroyed as a result. These are:
- The missing journeys on the T1, this is totally unacceptable and TrawsCymru should have come down like a ton of bricks on First for this.
- Similarly missing journeys on the 460, I don't know how (if at all) this ties in with TrawsCymru, but this ought to be a proper hourly service connecting with trains at Carmarthen like the T1 is supposed to. The 3 buses every 3hrs 15 minutes timetable was daft, now with one of these gone it is even sillier. If necessary TrawsCymru should take the service under their wing as T46 or whatever.
- The T5 has now been cut back on both legs, north and south of Cardigan. This also significantly dilutes the service between the peaks and it should be reinstated to hourly throughout. I'm not close enough to the detail on whether all journeys should go via Aberporth or just half of them, ditto whether all journeys should be extended to Aberystwyth University or just some of them. If timekeeping is a real issue on the northern leg then I would have thought there is a compromise here with half the journeys going via Aberporth and the other half going on to the Uni, while in peak times as the timetable is able to distort a little then perhaps both. As I wish to visit Aberporth maybe my view is slightly biased but I have no idea how much traffic the village generates. All journeys should go via New Quay, this is a significant town.
- T1 hourly Carmarthen-Lampeter-Aberaeron-Aberystwyth connecting with trains at Carmarthen
- T5 hourly Haverfordwest-Fishguard-Cardigan-Aberaeron-Aberystwyth, connecting with trains at Haverfordwest, outside peaks alternate journeys via Aberporth, alternate journeys maybe to Aberystwyth Uni
- T11 should be hourly Haverfordwest to St Davids, two hourly to Fishguard, also connecting with trains at Haverfordwest
- T46/460 hourly Carmarthen-Newcastle Emlyn-Cardigan
The T46 would roughly arrive in Cardigan at a quarter to the hour and leave at a quarter past which is OK for connections with the T5 both ways
Ideally trains should be hourly through to Haverfordwest and Milford Haven but I am not a train expert and maybe that is just impossible with the current infrastructure and allowing for freight trains. But certainly a regular hourly service to Carmarthen so that the T1 and T46/460 can connect with trains in both directions.
Yes that would cost a bit more to subsidise but surely this would be a fraction of what some of the railway subsidies in Wales amount to? And how about something radical - marketing and integrating into the rail network from a passenger perspective!
Well, that's a positive at any rate; at least the one timetable provided was up to date.
Yes, that's what I mean by direct as well. Not sure why they've moved it to a different time, but at the one-a-day frequency it has been ever since just over a year before the T5 started it isn't really enough to make an impact. The new times look like they may just be to get the bus to/from the depot within the driver's permitted hours although I've no idea if that is the case.
If they are indeed trying to run Cardigan Finch Square to Aberystwyth bus station via New Quay and Aberporth (the old 550 route) in the same time as the old timetable did it without the Aberporth detour then that is clearly not going to work. However, I don't have a copy of the previous timetable to hand at the moment and cannot remember how slow it used to be.
If it is an extension rather than a divertion then it does not increase the journey time between Aberystwyth bus station and Cardigan Finch Square. It does make the overall route longer though and reduces turnaround time before the return trip which could impact on punctuality as you suggest.
Do all these services (and the T5 for that matter) actually operate into Penglais Campus now? During my time there, I seem to recall that the X28 and T2 remained on the A487 outside the campus gates. This is fine for services heading into town (although a few more seconds need to be allowed to get from a lecture to the bus compared to the bus stop inside the campus gates). However, for services heading up the hill it is necessary to cross the busy A487; to do that safely a good few minutes need to be allowed.
I agree about the desktop exercise, the buses departing on the hour from the University are practically useless. However, I think eliminating the connection time (and risk of missing the connection) by extending services to the university would have some value if the service was sensibly timed.
Thanks.
I'm not sure it is entirely true that the Welsh Government is uninterested in north-south travel (see the mark 3 (now mark 4) coaches running express services between Holyhead and Cardiff and (although I am against it) the Valley-Cardiff air service. I suppose that was more the Labour-Plaid coalition government rather than Lee Waters' immediate predesessor though. However, in mid Wales they do mostly seem to be far more interested in car travel than public transport (eg. the Newtown bypass).
I wasn't born in Wales either, and am not a Welsh speaker, but I think it is "O Gwmpas Cymru" and said this of the TrawsCymru network years ago. Most of the network is already comprised of long, meandering local bus services.
A shortage of drivers is a shortage of drivers; you can't run a bus without them and we are in a pandemic so I can understand a temporary reduction in service. However, there needs to be an action plan (there may or may not be, I've no idea) to resolve the issues and return to an hourly service on these corridors. I'm actually of the view that the T1/T5 themselves should be every-two-hours but with other services running in the other hours to make up an hourly service on the core sections (and every half hour between Aberystwyth and Aberaeron) allowing a distinction to be made between the different routes (eg. Aberporth vs Blaenporth).
On the subject of Aberporth, there used to be a 554 service (I'm not sure if this still runs, all I know is that Richards Bros are reporting that they no longer run it) from Cardigan to Beulah via Aberporth so the latter was very much accessible when the T5 (and the 550 before it) went that way every two hours. Running alternate trips on the T5/X50/550 via Aberporth provided the villages of Blaenporth and Blaenannech (I think I spelt that wrong...) with a bus every two hours, rather than next to none with the new T5 timetable. As for whether they should run via New Quay, this depends on your objectives. In the short (and perhaps the medium) term, given the financial suituation coming out of the pandemic, I think I have to agree with you. However, if we are to have any hope of tackling car culture/dependancy then I feel that in the longer term, when finances improve, there needs to be a direct service similar to the X50 that existed when I started university. That was not an hourly service, and I don't think I have ever suggested that an hourly service avoiding New Quay would be a priority, at least in the short term.
There is very little freight west of Llanelli and I'm fairly sure the signalling would allow trains to run at 12 minute intervals in theory as far west as Clarbeston Road if there was ever demand for that. Beyond Clarbeston Road, the infrastructure is more limiting (being single track with a passing loop at Haverfordwest (and one on the route to Fishguard Harbour but that isn't of any use to passenger services)). I'm 99% sure an hourly service to Milford Haven would be possible with trains passing at Haverfordwest and maybe even (although it would be tight) if they were scheduled to pass at Clarbeston Road and didn't use the Haverfordwest loop. Personally though I think an uneven interval rail timetable (1tph, but alternating between a fast to Cardiff (bypassing Swansea) and a semi-fast to Swansea) would be a better choice for the Milford Haven branch in the medium-long term.
WelshBuses93
Member
Llew Jones have aquired a Volvo B8RLE Plaxton Panther LE for use on service T10. Ex demonstrator YX19MMF.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
Sorry to be brutal but you're manifestly wrong. The A40 is part of Euroroute E30 and that is the land bridge to the ROI. Containers aren't handled at Rosslare and they don't form part of the major flows of HGVs on the A40. Fishguard and Rosslare are Ro-Ro ports.
Even outside of that, a substantial amount of the traffic is road tankers servicing the milk field of Pembrokeshire, the fuel terminals, and the inward servicing of businesses. Moreover, the level of HGVs is higher than on the A55, the comparable route in the north. The issue for HGV drivers isn't about facilities per se (any more than elsewhere in the country) - it's about delays and meeting the ferry times.
Well, at least you're open in that you have actively campaigned against these developments. However, as this document states, the issues were about economic activity and HGVs.
The reality is that, by definition and by default, if you have any road developments for whatever reason, and in this case, it is about freight and economic activity, it will have an impact on the private car. Remember that much of the funding is coming from pre-Brexit commitments from the EU and they aren't doing that so Tony can drive more easily to work, or Alison can get to the supermarket five mins faster - they're doing so because it's a major trans European route. They highlight the higher than usual number of agricultural vehicles (aka tractors) that do make overtaking a consideration but also, there is the reality that it can promote unsafe overtaking from car drivers.
Do you drive?
As I've said, I believe in providing bus services to everyone and that TrawsCymru should be an important element in providing social mobility. You'll not hear me say anything other than that.
However, my contention is whether it will really deliver a significant modal shift in Wales. Given that it generally serves higher rural areas with low population density, it simply will not. It's aims are laudable, any modal shift should be welcome and we should promote public transport but don't kid yourself that getting a few cars off the road from Aberaeron to Aber is going to change much. The urban areas are where it really needs to happen.
South Wales Metro will do much, much more to effect modal shift than TrawsCymru will ever do. TC should provide direct, fast links on a regular headway but with the realism and pragmatism that it serves some of the sparsest territory and that in order to cost effectively provide a service, there will be some compromises on routeing.
Some fair points. If the hourly headways move from a Covid workaround to a new normal, that would be a retrograde step. That First couldn't crew the T1 journeys; yes, it's massively frustrating but if you don't have the drivers, then what else can you do?
However, it would be a poor show for the T1 not to be fully restored and same with the T5. The T46 having a half hour layover in Cardigan simply won't happen as it would add a further vehicle into the PVR.
So, your argument is that the main purpose of the new stretch(es) of A40 is so that lorries can overtake tractors?
Only rarely and only on private land. I do not do so on public roads as I do not have a license and have no plans to get one.
I agree with that. However, I think that modal shift really needs to happen in rural areas as well as urban ones.
RELL6L was also saying that the T46/460 should be a clockface hourly service though, which I think would increase the PVR to 4 anyway and allow a half-hour layover. Thus, the extra bus would not solely be delivering a but possibly also one or more additional journeys which would improve the cost:benefit ratio compared to adding a vehicle just to allow a longer layover.
Indeed, it would probably add one journey to the pre-driver shortage timetable. The drivers cannot drive two consecutive trips on the current timetable as that would be over 6 hours continuous, so they must drop back anyway. Maybe it would need an extra vehicle during the day or maybe with some creative thinking it could interwork with the 408 Cardigan town service, at least in part.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
Patently, it was not. I didn't say that and, if you read the report, it doesn't say that either.
A clockface can, and was, performed using three vehicles IIRC, using one way loops at each end.
Sorry; yes you did not say that. However I am still not clear what the point you are trying to make is, and was taking a guess at what you were trying to say. I still cannot see any significant benefits for freight from the A40 scheme(s). You suggested that missing the ferry was a potential issue and overtaking tractors is the only obvious way the A40 schemes could help with that.
The one-way loops (going via Tesco on the way into Cardigan and the railway station on the way into Carmarthen) have indeed been in place for some time and are not new pandemic-era features. However, I don't remember it having been clockface in recent years and, on the current timings, the turnrounds would need to be very tight to acheive that.
johntrawscymru
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 118
I used the T5 service again yesterday afternoon into Aberystwyth . The bus was already 9 minutes late when I boarded and 8 minutes late arriving in Aberystwyth . This service was the 13.02 Cardigan departure which was due to arrive in Aberystwyth at 14.50 (Journey time 1 hour 48 mins). Like all the new T5 services, the 13.02 Cardigan departure diverts at both Aberporth and Newquay.
I checked the old timetable and the equivalent service, before the recent timetable changes, was the 13.12 departure from Cardigan, which did not divert to Aberporth and arrived in Aberystwyth at 14.57 (Journey time 1 hour 45 mins). Therefore in the case of the new service only 3 minutes is being allowed for the diversion into Aberporth. If this diversion were done in a car it would take 10 minutes and it is no surprise that all the T5 services diverting to Aberporth are running late.
The new T5 services are failing to meet the Road Traffic Regulations. You would have thought that the Welsh Government would be liaising with the Regional Bus Compliance Officer to monitor the new T5 service. If monitoring were being carried out it would be expected that some action to change the route/timings would have been carried out by now.
The majority of services do not operate into Penglais Campus. That should not be a problem for young, fit students. They would have to cross the road and walk 20 yards onto the Campus and another 100 yards to their lectures.
In order to qualify as a Trawscymru branded service the T5 should have half its journeys on a direct route missing out Newquay and Aberporth. A direct route every 2 hours would persuade travellers to use the bus instead of their cars.
The extension to the University for ALL T5 services is impractical. If T5 services are reaching Aberystwyth between 8 and 11 minutes late and the turnaround time in Aberystwyth is 5 minutes then the 10 minute extension to Penglais cannot be accomodated. If the extension to the University is retained a large proportion of T5 services to Cardigan will have to depart immediately from Aberystwyth with no 5 minute turnaround time and will depart between 3 and 8 minutes late.
If half the T5 services were "direct", (missing out Newquay and Aberporth), then extension to the University would be easily possible without affecting the turnaround time but only for these "direct" services.
That is Very interesting. It would appear that Transport for Wales are perfectly happy to provide a fast, direct rail service for the benefit of Cardiff residents, but are loathe to do this with Trawscymru bus services. Perhaps I should have said that the Welsh Government is uninterested in North-South travel along the West side of Wales. The Welsh Government are unwilling to introduce fast direct Trawscymru T5 services by removing the diversions to Newquay and Aberporth.
The T5 now joins the T3 and the T4 in not fitting the Trawscymru brand. None of these services are fast, direct routes linking the major towns and cities of Wales.
Instead of designing fast Trawscymru routes and redesigning the timing/routes of local bus services to feed the fast routes, the Welsh Government are simply tagging together a number of local bus services to create a Trawscymru service. This approach attracts no new customers and what you end up with is the same customers who used the original local services. The service is then NOT a long distance service and is not attractive to passengers.
The T4 (Cardiff to Newtown) along the East side of Wales will never be removed from the TrawsCymru brand because it starts in Cardiff and it is part of the plan by Professor Stuart Cole (the Trawscymru route designer) to invest £20 Million in the Heart of Wales rail line. The investment is in rolling stock to attract walkers and cyclists with the option of using both the Heart of Wales Line and Traws Cymru buses.
Heart of Wales line: Call for more frequent services
A transport expert says the line between Swansea and Shrewsbury needs better, more frequent trains.
www.bbc.co.uk
One would assume that a CBA has been done on this £20 Million project. However I have been unable to find any evidence of any research having been done and the justification of attracting walkers and cyclists seems a bit thin to me. I have looked on both the Transport for Wales website and the Welsh Senedd publications / press releases /transcripts but can find no mention of this project.
The only Trawscymru route which intersects with the train is the T4 and only 2 stations, (at Builth and llandrindod), are on both rail and T4 bus route over a distance of 8 miles. Anyone wishing to go walking or cycling along that 8 mile stretch or on any other area along the Heart of Wales Line would want to set off early morning and come back late afternoon. Therefore there is really no requirement to increase the number of services throughout the day to attract these travellers.
I would suggest that increasing the number of services is unnecessary unless the existing Heart of Wales Train Line suffered from overcrowding before the covid pandemic . The £20 Million would be far better spent on a Trawscymru Carmarthen to Builth service (51 miles via llandeilo , Llanwrda , Llandovery and Llanwrtyd Wells). This could follow the Heart of Wales Line and provide a link to Newtown by accessing the T4 service at Builth. This would allow walkers to mix and match between the train and the bus along the route. The bus and train would be on similar routes but serving different markets.
The publicity regarding the T1 electric bus scheme indicates that choosing to use a bus not a train would be much less expensive and the £20 Million could be used elsewhere.
The cost quoted for the T1 scheme was £4.8 million to build a new depot in Carmarthen and buy eight electric buses .This indicates that the Welsh Government could provide a full hourly Trawscymru service between Carmarthen and Builth for 25% of the cost of the £20 Million upgrade to the Heart of Wales Line. In reality they would not have to spend £4.8 million. They have already committed to the recharging depot in Carmarthen for the T1 and a Carmarthen to Builth Trawscymru service would not require eight electric buses as the bus would be infilling every 2 hours between the train services. The electric bus option would also be the greener option compared to the train.
The Welsh Government could also provide a further 3 Electric trawscymru services elsewhere . They could also, (based on £100,000 to fund a Bwcabus), provide Bwcabus services for places such as Boughrood (T4) and the South Clwyd villages (T3) and thereby improve the speed of those 2 services. Improving the speed of the T3 would improve the speed of the T2 and improving the T2 would improve connections between the T2/T1.
The £20 Million could revolutionise the Trawscymru Network.
Professor Cole is the Chairman of the Heart of Wales Travellers' Association and it would be interesting to find out whether Professor Cole looked at provision of Electric buses in his CBA for the £20 Million upgrade to the Heart of Wales Line. Since he is also the Trawscymru route designer it appears that Professor Cole has his feet in 2 camps and it would be interesting to know why he chose a diesel train rather than an electric bus.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
Apologies for the delay in responding - been busy
In respect of the A40 upgrades, it is quite clear why the bypasses were planned and built. It is clearly listed in the documents that I provided links for. The A40 is part of Euroroute E30 - you know what that means? The EU provided funding for a series of road improvements and the reasons are multiple - it's to improve the road bridge to the ROI, to improve reliability and efficiency largely for HGVs heading to the Welsh ports but also to support the domestic HGV traffic - the loads of road tankers that. Moving them more quickly has economic benefits, obviously, as drivers aren't delayed and it is helped by having more road capacity and removing the constraints like agricultural vehicles. There are also local environmental benefits like moving vehicles out of villages. There are safety benefits too - all these are obvious anyway but are listed in the report. That there will be spin off benefits as well to car drivers, that much is obvious, but it isn't the prime reason. It's a bit like TrawsCymru - yes, it's a series of long distance bus services and some people will make longer end to end journeys and it can have a minor role in modal shift but will it ever have a significant role in that....no.
As for the 460, I can recall it being hourly and it never had a PVR of more than 3. The service wasn't clockface but was sort of hourly, just that it buses would do 3h15 circuit; I can only imagine that was to allow driver breaks of 15 mins. You can get a clockface hourly bus service on current timings...
Cardigan to Newcastle Emlyn 21 mins
Newcastle Emlyn to Carmarthen Stn 58 mins
Carmarthen Stn to Carmarthen 3 mins
Carmarthen to Newcastle Emlyn 60 mins
Newcastle Emlyn to Cardigan 26 mins
So in every 3 hour (180 mins) cycle, total driving time is 168. So it is eminently achievable to have 5 mins in Cardigan, 5 mins at Carmarthen, and 2 mins at Carmarthen station. It's just the pointless 3 mins each way at Newcastle Emlyn that makes it look tighter.
Last edited:
Three minutes does seem to be insufficient for the diversion into Aberporth but I seem to recall that a feature of the previous timetable was that the XX:12 departures (via Blaenporth) would run via Penparc estate and most of the Aberporth services would not. This means the journey time for a service from Cardigan to Aberystwyth via New Quay but neither Aberporth or Penparc estate would be a minute or two faster than the 1hr 45mins you quote. I am not sure whether the new timetable has the T5 run via Penparc estate.
However it would appear from your figures that, with no significant change of route, the drivers are being asked to do the run between 5 and 10 minutes faster than previously. That does not appear sensible. When Arriva tried a similar thing with their CymruExpress 40 service, it destroyed connections between the Cardigan and Lampeter routes at Aberaeron because the 40 couldn't run to time.
The walk is not a problem; the problem is the time spent waiting for a gap in traffic so that the road can be crossed safely. Being young and/or fit doesn't help much with that; yes it enables one to cross slightly faster meaning a smaller gap in the traffic can be used to cross but with a busy road it can still require a fair wait. Also, rushing for a bus (or, in the other direction, for a lecture) can cloud one's judgement of whether it is safe to cross; I've almost been hit a couple of times (though not there, because I avoided crossing there) while running for a bus. The 'connections' between the Richards and Arriva halves of the 550 at Synod Inn were a particularly bad example of this potentially leathal problem.
I agree, except that it shouldn't be half its journeys. The direct route every 2 hours (or slightly less, I would accept some 3hr gaps to allow good connections with rail services at Fishguard Harbour) should be ALL the T5 journeys; the other half should revert to being called the 50 or 550 and those should not qualify as TrawsCymru services. However, given the impact of the pandemic, I don't think this is a priority until an hourly Aberystwyth to Cardigan via Newquay (with alternate trips via Aberporth and the others via Blaenporth) has been restored and allowed to bed in.
First of all, T5 services should NOT be reaching Aberystwyth that late; the timetable needs to be revised to allow sufficient time to run the service on-time. As you have said, this level of lateness is breaking the rules (services are supposed to run no more than 5 minutes late and 1 minute early isn't it?)
If services from Cardigan are to provide good connections into Aberystwyth to Lampeter/Carmarthen services at Aberaeron (and vice versa) then whether or not you miss out Newquay and Aberporth has no effect on the available turnround time at Aberystwyth. I seem to recall the X40/X50/550 timetable allowed 37 minutes between Aberystwyth and Aberaeron, plus a 3 minute dwell time in Aberaeron. Allowing a 7 minute connection time, the bus from Cardigan will thus arrive in Aberystwyth 73 minutes after the bus to Lampeter has left Aberystwyth. If you also have the Cardigan and Lampeter/Carmarthen buses run on a clockface pattern half-an-hour apart between Aberystwyth and Aberaeron, there is therefore a turnround time of 17 minutes at Aberystwyth on both services. Taking ten minutes off that to extend to the university possibly does make things a little tight (3 minutes at the station both ways leaves just 1 at the university)...
I would argue that, with the possible exception of the T1C or T1S, none of the TrawsCymru services have ever fitted the brand. Having just one fast, direct, service a day in an hourly timetable (as the T5 always has done and still does, albeit at possibly less useful timings than before) is not sufficient in my view. It is however hugely important to maintain a service for the passengers who used the original local services, which makes doing anything which actually fits the TrawsCymru brand very difficult financially. Perhaps it just isn't feesible to do it and the whole network should simply be branded TrawsCymruConnect.
Anyone going walking or cycling is not going to want to rely on making it to a bus/train at the end of their walk/cycle where that service is infrequent. One of my brothers is walking around Wales with my mother, they have completed the Offa's Dyke Path and only have Llanelli to Chepstow left to complete the Wales Coast Path. Before embarking on this they did the Pembrokeshire and Ceredigion Coast Paths, meaning they have now done those two sections twice. Public transport wasn't an option the second time round due to the pandemic, but the first time they made use of the coastal buses (which are only about 3 trips each way per day). Occasionally there was no option but to rush for the bus at the end of the day, which was stressful and took some of the pleasure of the day out of it for them. Parking their car at the intended finish point and catching the coastal to the start of the walk was very much the prefered approach. Not having to aim for a specific time at the end of a walk/cycle is only possible by having a private car, overnight accomodation or a frequent public transport service which runs late into the evening at the finish point.
That said, your suggested alternative of an enhanced bus service running parallel to the Heart Of Wales Line (HOWL) would possibly deliver that, at least for walkers. However, if the rumoured deployment of 'cycle carriage' class 153 units (similar to ScotRail's) on the HOWL appens then the rail option would provide far more capacity for bikes than a bus could although TfW's current plan for 5 trains per day does not seem to be sufficient frequency wise to allow public transport to be used at both ends of the day.
Sorry, but I still don't get it. To me, saying that it has to be built beacuse it is on a 'Euroroute' (some of the document's I've seen have mentioned the TEN (Trans-European Network) but I don't recall the name 'Euroroute' being used) doesn't sound all that much different from:
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy said:
What you seem to be saying is that the main purpose of these bypasses is to reduce the risk of delays to HGVs. I cannot see how it does that other than by allowing them to overtake slow vehicles (tractors) which would otherwise cause the delay. The public inquiry documents indicate that significant time savings for free-flowing traffic are not expected, the only significant difference seems to be in overtaking provision.
Well, those 'spin off benefits' for car drivers are one of the major reasons I'm opposed to it; I simply don't think we should be doing anything that benefits car drivers in a way that could encourage more use of cars.
Interesting... Would 5 minutes turn-round at Carmarthen be considered sufficient for reliability? If so, maybe 3 minutes each way at Aberystwyth bus station and 1 at the university would too, although that is of course a bit tighter. However, I'm not sure the 3 minutes at Newcastle Emlyn is completely pointless; it is probably the busiest stop on the route besides Finch Square and the main Carmarthen stops and isn't it supposed to be one of the main interchange nodes with Bwcabus?
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
To be honest, if you're not aware of the fundamentals, then that's rather worrying. The E30 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_route_E30 is part of the International E Road Network developed by the UNECE. It is a major trans-European roadway that links the road bridge. It's not a case of building bypasses for the sake of it, it is to ensure that safe, efficient and resilient movement of goods and people across Europe.
Now the document that I shared has clearly stated the reasons for building bypasses and the reasons are:
The document does highlight a lack of public transport options but TrawsCymru isn't going to solve that and even then, there are many other reasons. However, it points to delays to HGVs, safety issues, local environmental issues from those who live in villages that the road bisects. So yes, delays to HGVs are a consideration and that means a number of issues that are clearly stated. Delays constrain economic competitiveness of local businesses, they create safety issues, they cause issues with ferries, and can provide localised capacity issues. Trying to boil it down to one singular issue simply isn't appropriate, and nor is continually misrepresenting what I've said. It's much more extensive than trying to suggest it's about one issue - it isn't.
The fact is that main issue is about HGV traffic. If you want to look at the factors that encourage car use, bypasses on the A40 is a long way down the list. Perhaps the restoration of fuel duty increases, the use of Clean Air Zones (or lack of), the fact you can park your car all day in Haverfordwest or Milford Haven for just £2? Broadening it out, the lack of bus priority in major towns and cities in Wales is a key factor, or the preponderance of roadside parking on arterial roads in places like Cardiff. The most painful issue was the loss of a well-located bus station in Cardiff next to the station. Worrying about bypasses on the A40 is really missing the point.
TrawsCymru can provide a means of mobility for those without a car. However, will it actually enable modal shift? I'd suggest that only in the most minimal instances will it enable any form of modal shift as, quite simply, the sheer lack of population and the disparate journey requirements don't support that. If you wish to truly achieve modal shift in Wales, you are looking at the major population centres rather than small market towns of 10-15k people.
One of the busiest stops on that route is a rather low bar. Whether it needs three minutes each way in Newcastle Emlyn is doubtful.
As for Bwcabus, have you looked at the number of services that serve Newcastle Emlyn and their timings? It is not a consideration - at all.
I think, going back, the 460 might well have been hourly throughout with just three vehicles out, but I assume that was not sufficiently resilient and/or road 'improvements' slowed things down so that they had to change it to three buses every 3hrs 15 minutes to work reliably. Which would destroy any semblance of regular train connections. But my point is that the drivers must change at one end, presumably Cardigan, every trip, because to work two consecutive trips would be too long at the wheel in one go. So although it might be an extra vehicle, at least between the peaks, it wouldn't have to be extra drivers - except for the one extra trip that I think would be possible with an hourly frequency. And seriously it could be inter-worked with the Cardigan local service in that the vehicle would have time to do a trip on this each hour during its layover, either with 460 drivers or the existing local service driver, so it should be possible to work it to hourly at a reasonable cost.
I note all the other arguments above. I don't see that it should be either/or for bus improvements and A40 improvements. And to spend all that money on a depot for electric vehicles for the T1 seems a bit mad, why not use it for a larger number of vehicles somewhere else. The T1 is not an obvious route for electric vehicles compares to local services which would have a better chance of a full day's work on one charge. I do think it is more sensible to stick with the T numbering for the longer distance network rather than lose passengers who don't realise that an X50/550 is just a slightly slower version of the T5 and it goes where they want to go. But I have no wish to enter into lengthy arguments and justifications for my thought here.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
The 460 was, I think, operated by Richard Bros (2 boards) and Morris Travel (1 board) with the latter later passing to First Cymru. 12 mins recovery time in every 180 mins is not overly generous but not unreasonable either. It was obviously too long for a driver to do two round trips but why the need to have a 3h15 cycle...? In the days of Davies Bros, it was run from the Carmarthen and Pencader depots and with spare fleet in Carmarthen during the day between schools, it was easy to slip an extra vehicle in. Not au fait with the requirements of the Cardigan local services and whether a full size vehicle (that the 460 needs) could be accommodated to allow interworking.
I agree with you that the A40 improvements and developing bus services should be an either/or. As I have said earlier in relation to the T19/T22, I can't see the benefit of electric vehicles on TC routes when there are much more logical places in which to achieve better results. Doubt if the air quality in Blaenau is a major issue in comparison to some of the major routes into, for instance, Wrexham. Just seems like a vanity thing IMHO.
Thank you for sharing a the relevant section this time, the whole 100+ page document was too much to wade through. It is however saying much the same thing as the public inquiry documents that I had already looked at and I still cannot understand in what way, other than overtaking provsion and saving a few seconds by avoiding a 40mph restriction 'through' a village, using the new road would be any more efficient than the existing one.
Sorry if I am misinterpereting (and, as a result, then misrepresenting) what you have said, but earlier you seemed to be strongly implying there that freight benefits are the main reason behind the bypasses, eg:
You make some good points there; bypasses are far from the only factor encouraging car use. However, as I quoted in post #2,291 above, mixed messages from Government are damaging to hopes of behavioural change. While the A40 in Pembrokeshire is perhaps a rather small issue in the grand scheme of things, it is probably one of the bigger issues in 'my patch'.
- Status