It's been covered at great length that there are just not that many people who want to travel between Bedford and Bicester or Oxford. Any connections, enabled by such a through service, over and above the December 2025 service level, at either Bedford or Bletchley, such as Flitwick to Oxford or Winslow to Luton are of very limited value.
The original post says that. The never ending resource that are Voyagers, or 222s.
With XC having 12 more 221s from Avanti, that takes their total to 36 sets with GC having 2 sets leaving only 6x 221 sets available for open access. Of course there are 27 Meridians so in total there are 33 trains to go round the 4 open access applications that want Voyagers/Meridians.
Well, I think that as with many of these re-openings, and indeed, improvements in service to existing lines - these changes stimulate demand, and use. And these days, tend to bring home-building and jobs.
Previous postings suggest that the 222s are stitched up for Euston to Stirling (5 units) and Scotrail HST replacement (the rest).
The X5 sustains a double decker bus twice an hour. A decade ago they were getting 1.3m passengers a year. There’s definitely some demand there, or they wouldn’t be building EWR.
Thanks, didn't think of those as well. Isn't Euston to Stirling being taken over by First so would that become 80x? Even so, that's 33 22x to go round 5 or 6 possible operators.
I don't disagree with the principle but unfortunately there's just not much you can do in Bicester that you can't do in Bedford, or vice versa, even if they both were to as much as double in size. Oxford and Bicester Village have some tourist pull and Oxford main serves education and employment, but this is pretty much adequately served by the proposed Chiltern timetable.
It does, but importantly the X5 serves CMK rather than... Bletchley station.
Minus any that Scotrail get.
I wouldn't be especially shocked if the X5 were significantly curtailed when the Oxford to MK part of EWR opens. The part that involves sitting in traffic at Peartree and down Woodstock road is going to be a real drag on it's ability to compete, never mind the reliably unpredictable A34.
Presumably they are all banking on the other applications being turned down. If none of the open access applications gets a place on the network, the units will remain available for the next speculative application. As it is, the lease companies are hedging their bets that one of the operations will be approved.
Alliance Rail have withdrawn their application for five trains a day between Cardiff and Edinburgh which required 125 mph diesel trains necessary to maintain timings on the East Coast Mainline. Their website states they are evaluating submitting the application again using new build trains. Perhaps the lack of availability of 125 mph diesel trains is one reason Alliance Rail have withdrawn their application. When the Office of Rail and Road make decisions on all the competing track access applications for December 2025 the availability of rolling stock for open access applications 2026 onwards will presumably become clearer. In some cases the open access operators will be ordering new trains to be built for their passenger train services.
Cardiff to Edinburgh - Grand Union Trains Ltd
This application has been withdrawn and is being evaluated for a later submission using new build trains.This service will offer a significant number of additional seats on this important cross-country route while also linking Wales, England and Scotland with a regular daily service of 5 trains...www.granduniontrains.co.uk
I have often wondered if it could end up becoming Buckingham - Bedford, or something along those lines. But who knows! Not long now to find out.
I'd imagine there's some kind of demand to head west from Buckingham, but whether that'll be met by a change to the train at Winslow remains to be seen.
Trying to keep on top of pending, approved and withdrawn applications has certainly become a challenge recently hasn't it
They won't though, three of the WCML ones are fighting for the same paths.
It is the DfT that specifies the service, and it will be GBR to specify it in the future. Competition of this nature is just likely to extract funds from the state specified railway that makes it more difficult to justify subsidy to improve services.
That's rather a pessimistic view of this.
It does if it's "cream-skimming" behaviour, yes. It doesn't if it is something genuinely new, when it actually assists the state with track access sales. Of course, all three of the major existing open access operators are widely accused of the negative cream-skimming behaviour you're hinting towards, though Hull Trains and Grand Central can at least claim to provide meaningful direct services such as Hartlepool to London or Beverley to London which the state doesn't attempt. Lumo can't make any similar claims.
