Wag express to be withdrawn?

[Gareth Marston]

30 ?? you'll be lucky.

depends how addicted you are to charter minutes, extended station dwell and whether you view life as rosy through your PPM figs.

As I said I've seen "suburban" 150's keep time on Cdf/Holyhead diagrams 70mph top speed on a service run nominally by 100 mph units! I've changed at Newport to FGW services due to running ahead of schedule and being held.
30 of the 200 mins scheduled for Aberystwyth to Birmingham Intl services are station dwell and charter minutes. 105 min schedules between Aberystwyth and Salop have been turned into 119 ones by ATW. Did you see Rhodri Clarks article on ATW's timekeeping in Modern Rlwys mag a few months back?

Calling pattern could be much simplified which saves many mins unless your paranoid about PPM! PPM conning has had the whistle blown on it!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I doubt any would be quicker than the North & West route.

Of the N-S routes most traffic would be generated by Bangor-Caernarfon-Pwllheli link. Coming via England would still be quicker.

The opening with the most traffic potential would be restoring the Newport to Pontypool service and maybe the closed southern half of the Heart of Wales.

 

[TDK]

depends how addicted you are to charter minutes, extended station dwell and whether you view life as rosy through your PPM figs.

As I said I've seen "suburban" 150's keep time on Cdf/Holyhead diagrams 70mph top speed on a service run nominally by 100 mph units!

30 of the 200 mins scheduled for Abr to BHM INTL services are station dwell and charter minutes. 105 min schedules between Abr and Salop have been turned into 119 ones by ATW. Did you see Rhodri Clarks article on ATW's timekeeping in Modern Rlwys mag a few months back?

Calling pattern could be much simplified which saves many mins unless your paranoid about PPM! PPM conning has had the whistle blown on it!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

ATW's PPM was appauling on it's Chester Shrewbury to Brum, it was down to 65% at one point, someone threatened ATW about this poor performance and the franchise was in threat of being lost so ATW added these dwell times to improve puntuality, take them away agin and the performance will drop like a stone.

Where do you get the 70mph max speed, a 150 will do 75mph on most of the route south of Shrewsbury and there isn't any 100mph running the max is 90mph. The reason the 150's keep time is that I am almost certain the diagram is booked a 150.

PPM figures are what they are Public Performance Measure I think it stands for,if this figure is at 75% it won't be long before the DfT start to investigate the franchise performance. You can't have it both ways, take away the dwell times and the trains will run late.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

theres easily 30 mins to be saved more when Wrexham to Saltney is redoubled. The MK2's & 57 could make more than 1 run especially with 2 sets and the off peak trains be 175's. The saved 158's & 175's could be redeployed.

The current journey time from Saltney Junction to Wrexham is 12 minutes, with improvements you will be luckey to save 3 minutes then sit and wait at Wrexham for the train in front to clear Gobowen, the only thing the doubling of the track will achieve is maybe an extra service or 2 but where will ATW get the stock from for these? The doubling is a waste of money in my eyes.

 

[tbtc]

The current journey time from Saltney Junction to Wrexham is 12 minutes, with improvements you will be luckey to save 3 minutes then sit and wait at Wrexham for the train in front to clear Gobowen, the only thing the doubling of the track will achieve is maybe an extra service or 2 but where will ATW get the stock from for these? The doubling is a waste of money in my eyes.

That's what I don't understand. As far as I understand, there are no spare trains, and no plans to run additional services on the line through Wrexham, so I'm not sure what the additional capacity would be used for (other than to avoid disruption caused by the single track section) - not sure why this is a priority when there are single track sections causing delays elsewhere on the network (e.g. the line through Dore station is used by three passenger trains most hours in each direction, plus freight along the Hope Valley but is staying single track, the Holmes Chord into Rotherham similarly has around three trains an hour in each direction, but we're spending money on a line with an hourly frequency?)

 

[lm321412]

Well, Apparently one of the main reasons for extending the BHM - Wales services to BHI was to give a better turnaround time instead of the previous run into New Street and turn straight round. I usually see that if any ATWs services are deleyed by around 10 - 20 minutes they cancell it between BHM and BHI and run it from New St on time. They also come into BHM at about XX26 and sit around on dwell time till XX36 with 2 services infront to BHI at xx30 and xx33 and one at xx39 behind it.

Of course, the official reason was to give Wales a link with Birmingham International Airport

 

[4SRKT]

The problem is that Wales is a cultural rather than a logical geographical entity. By an accident of history the two parts of the land are cut off from each other by high ground, and Chester and Shrewsbury are significant economic centres for North and Mid-Wales respectively. I doubt anyone can buck centuries of economic and infrastructural trends just like that.

 

[TDK]

Well, Apparently one of the main reasons for extending the BHM - Wales services to BHI was to give a better turnaround time instead of the previous run into New Street and turn straight round. I usually see that if any ATWs services are deleyed by around 10 - 20 minutes they cancell it between BHM and BHI and run it from New St on time. They also come into BHM at about XX26 and sit around on dwell time till XX36 with 2 services infront to BHI at xx30 and xx33 and one at xx39 behind it.

Of course, the official reason was to give Wales a link with Birmingham International Airport

The unofficial reason was a deal for paths with VT that ATW gave up for VT to run a Wrexham to London service to try and put WSMR out of business
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The problem is that Wales is a cultural rather than a logical geographical entity. By an accident of history the two parts of the land are cut off from each other by high ground, and Chester and Shrewsbury are significant economic centres for North and Mid-Wales respectively. I doubt anyone can buck centuries of economic and infrastructural trends just like that.

If you want a frequent service between Chester and Shrewsbury go via Crewe there is more headway and the chance of a more frequent service

 

[Greenback]

I doubt any would be quicker than the North & West route.

That depends on where you are starting from and finishing at!

The problem is that Wales is a cultural rather than a logical geographical entity. By an accident of history the two parts of the land are cut off from each other by high ground, and Chester and Shrewsbury are significant economic centres for North and Mid-Wales respectively. I doubt anyone can buck centuries of economic and infrastructural trends just like that.

Thi is very true. It will take longer than a couple of years, if it can be done at all!

If you want a frequent service between Chester and Shrewsbury go via Crewe there is more headway and the chance of a more frequent service

What about a more frequent service between Wrexham and Chester? or the other intermediate stations? By cuting out some of the Holyhead - Cardiff trains, stock may be available for more trains...

 

[Gareth Marston]

ATW added these dwell times to improve puntuality, take them away agin and the performance will drop like a stone.

You can't have it both ways, take away the dwell times and the trains will run late.

My point is ATW put in too much dwell time due to the appalling punctuality it was recording resulting in a number of services being slower than they need be. Funnily they only sorted out the Cambrians punctuality when they were allowed to run to BHM INT and get a share of the ORCATS cake for it. With a shortage of units across the franchise 2 158's are permanently east of New St throughout the day.
As another member pointed out ATW trains arriving at New St have 12 minute wait to go forward to INTL and have charter minutes built in between New St and INTL no wonder the ppm is impressive! You could commute all year between Telford and New St and every train be late but have 100% PPM stats.

ATW are more concerned with these figures. Look at the "misses" in connections at Shrewsbury.

 

[paul1609]

ATW's PPM was appauling on it's Chester Shrewbury to Brum, it was down to 65% at one point, someone threatened ATW about this poor performance and the franchise was in threat of being lost so ATW added these dwell times to improve puntuality, take them away agin and the performance will drop like a stone.

Where do you get the 70mph max speed, a 150 will do 75mph on most of the route south of Shrewsbury and there isn't any 100mph running the max is 90mph. The reason the 150's keep time is that I am almost certain the diagram is booked a 150.

If you look at the specs of the class 150s and 175s you'll see that a 150 has a power to weight ratio of nearly 8 bhp/ tonne whilst a 175 manages just over 9 bhp.
When you factor in the final drive ratios a 150 is almost certainly faster to accelerate to 60 mph than a 175.

Whilst nice trains from the passengers point of view (imho) the 175s are not optimised from an engineering point of view for this sort of service. I dont have a detailed knowledge of the line speeds and stopping pattern of this service but with 450 bhp on offer in a relatively heavy train I doubt that youd be looking at a top speed above 80 mph if you wanted to optimise the final drive for journeytime on this service.

 

[The Planner]

With a shortage of units across the franchise 2 158's are permanently east of New St throughout the day.

How are there two ?? xx.36 off New St gets to International at xx.50, it then forms the xx.09 off International which arrives at New St at xx.20 ?? Thats one unit.

As another member pointed out ATW trains arriving at New St have 12 minute wait to go forward to INTL and have charter minutes built in between New St and INTL no wonder the ppm is impressive! You could commute all year between Telford and New St and every train be late but have 100% PPM stats.

This is the way it has to work. The ATW arrives in New St at xx.26. It has to have a minimum 2 minutes dwell time. Earliest it could leave after that is xx.28. That would then stop the xx.30 Virgin leaving which is bound to have stonger contractural rights and would break the clockface timetable. The same goes for the xx.33 LM to Northampton. Therefore it leaves at xx.36, which is the 3 minute headway to Proof House Jn and the next available path. After Proof House to International the headway is 4 minutes. The xx.33 stops at Marston Green so the ATW is padded out to keep it 4 minutes behind the LM. It is then knocked by the xx.45 LM departure from International to New St as that departure doesnt provide a margin at the crossover at the New St end. Add in the approach control signals into Platform 1 and the 40mph crossover, the ATW gets a less than clean path.

You can't put it into platform 5 as there are freights that sit there during the day in various hours and it also blocks a useful bolt hole for pertubation. It also still provides problems as you can't get away from the conflicting moves as it still has to cross the up lines on the return journey.

Here endeth the lesson....

 

[Gareth Marston]

How are there two ?? xx.36 off New St gets to International at xx.50, it then forms the xx.09 off International which arrives at New St at xx.20 ?? Thats one unit.

Planner should know that every ATW diagram between Shrewsbury & INTL from 0731 until 1731 departure is booked as a 4 coach formation and INTL to Salop from 0909 until 1909. Thats 2 units. If your splitting hairs theres a 2 minute gap between the xx24 departure from New St to Shrewsbury and beyond and the xx26 arrival, but effectively you have 2 158's permanently east of Monument lane all day long.

This is the way it has to work. The ATW arrives in New St at xx.26. It has to have a minimum 2 minutes dwell time. Earliest it could leave after that is xx.28. That would then stop the xx.30 Virgin leaving which is bound to have stonger contractural rights and would break the clockface timetable. The same goes for the xx.33 LM to Northampton. Therefore it leaves at xx.36, which is the 3 minute headway to Proof House Jn and the next available path. After Proof House to International the headway is 4 minutes. The xx.33 stops at Marston Green so the ATW is padded out to keep it 4 minutes behind the LM. It is then knocked by the xx.45 LM departure from International to New St as that departure doesnt provide a margin at the crossover at the New St end. Add in the approach control signals into Platform 1 and the 40mph crossover, the ATW gets a less than clean path.

You can't put it into platform 5 as there are freights that sit there during the day in various hours and it also blocks a useful bolt hole for pertubation. It also still provides problems as you can't get away from the conflicting moves as it still has to cross the up lines on the return journey.

Here endeth the lesson....

In other words ATW adds to the congestion on this 2 track section! I'm sure the ORCATS money made it all worthwhile.

 

[The Planner]

The path they have works, just because it gives an extended journey time whats wrong with it ?? It makes perfect operational sense to have them sit out of the way at International, giving an extra train to the Airport and back, than to try and have them sitting clogging up a platform at New St for any longer than they do.

 

[Greenback]

The problem is that passengers from the Cambrian line tend to look at Birmingham as their regional capital, which means that it is a desirable destination for ATW services. I would suggest terminating at Shrewsbury and forcing LM to run more trains from Shrewsbury to Birmingham, but that wouldn't be popular with customers and stakeholders. It would also result in the same capacity issues for terminating trains, and ATW would probably have to release some stock to LM, so it wouldn't really solve a lot!

 

[tbtc]

How are there two ?? xx.36 off New St gets to International at xx.50, it then forms the xx.09 off International which arrives at New St at xx.20 ?? Thats one unit

To keep the same paths through Wolves etc, the ATW unit can either hog a platform at New Street for 44 minutes (impractical) or run to somewhere like International to reverse (and give handy links to the Airport). Makes sense to do what they do, but some people will complain at any ATW services in England!

This is the way it has to work. The ATW arrives in New St at xx.26. It has to have a minimum 2 minutes dwell time. Earliest it could leave after that is xx.28. That would then stop the xx.30 Virgin leaving which is bound to have stonger contractural rights and would break the clockface timetable. The same goes for the xx.33 LM to Northampton. Therefore it leaves at xx.36, which is the 3 minute headway to Proof House Jn and the next available path. After Proof House to International the headway is 4 minutes. The xx.33 stops at Marston Green so the ATW is padded out to keep it 4 minutes behind the LM. It is then knocked by the xx.45 LM departure from International to New St as that departure doesnt provide a margin at the crossover at the New St end. Add in the approach control signals into Platform 1 and the 40mph crossover, the ATW gets a less than clean path.

You can't put it into platform 5 as there are freights that sit there during the day in various hours and it also blocks a useful bolt hole for pertubation. It also still provides problems as you can't get away from the conflicting moves as it still has to cross the up lines on the return journey.

Here endeth the lesson....

At the risk of sounding like I'm brown-nosing, I love these little insights into the practicalities of running the railways, all the obstacles, all the short "windows"..

Whilst Forums like this have their share of petty arguments, they are also a great place to find how things are at the "coal face" so I always appreciate a post like yours - makes it all worthwhile
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The problem is that passengers from the Cambrian line tend to look at Birmingham as their regional capital, which means that it is a desirable destination for ATW services

...in the same way that most people I've known from North Wales would say Liverpool or Manchester are the cities their lives revolve around, not Cardiff, despite artificial attempts to build a "demand".

 

[Gareth Marston]

All these issues boil down to Arriva introducing a clockface timetable without addressing the infrastructure and rolling stock to make it work properly. could you see the Swiss letting this happen or anyone else come to that matter?

Its fashionable to blame "London" for the woes of the Wales and Borders franchise but Arriva must shoulder a fair amount of blame for their attempt at emulating continental best practice without learning how to do it properly. Arriva's bid team went around giving various stakeholders the impression that a swiss style interconnecting service was on offer. I tackled Penarth House on this recently - the answer was that it wasn't in the franchise agreement!

 

[Greenback]

At the risk of sounding like I'm brown-nosing, I love these little insights into the practicalities of running the railways, all the obstacles, all the short "windows"..

Whilst Forums like this have their share of petty arguments, they are also a great place to find how things are at the "coal face" so I always appreciate a post like yours - makes it all worthwhile

agreed. Often, what seems to be stupidity is in fact the best solution that can be found in the circumstances, when all the factors and limitations are considered.

...in the same way that most people I've known from North Wales would say Liverpool or Manchester are the cities their lives revolve around, not Cardiff, despite artificial attempts to build a "demand".

Yes, I agree again! As I've said in other threads, I think it's a well intentioned political move to have better transport links between the north and south, I doubt if it can ever erode or replace the traditonal economic links.

 

[tbtc]

All these issues boil down to Arriva introducing a clockface timetable without addressing the infrastructure and rolling stock to make it work properly. could you see the Swiss letting this happen or anyone else come to that matter?

Its fashionable to blame "London" for the woes of the Wales and Borders franchise but Arriva must shoulder a fair amount of blame for their attempt at emulating continental best practice without learning how to do it properly. Arriva's bid team went around giving various stakeholders the impression that a swiss style interconnecting service was on offer. I tackled Penarth House on this recently - the answer was that it wasn't in the franchise agreement!

What's wrong with a clockface timetable? Regular trains at the same time each hour (or two hours, on rural sections) is what attracts passengers, and has been proven to work on other TOCs. I can't think of any TOC that has abandoned a clockface regular timetable for a random assortment of services at unpredictable times.

The ATW service to Birmingham has to fit around a lot of other trains between Wolves and New Street, and fit around the London Midland service to Shrewsbury. Given that, I think they've made a resonable fist of it.

What people forget is before Arriva when the Aberystwyth services were often turned "short" at Wolverhampton because of problems, meaning passengers at Birmingham finding out that they needed to board a Central Trains service to Wolverhampton (or, more likely, missing the connection at Wolves). ATW are concentrating on the flows that matter to people, not politicians
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

agreed. Often, what seems to be stupidity is in fact the best solution that can be found in the circumstances, when all the factors and limitations are considered

There's been a lot of "why can't xyz happen" ideas in my head, that (after reading the professionals' experiences on here) I now understand can't work and there are obstacles the public maybe don't see

 

[Greenback]

All these issues boil down to Arriva introducing a clockface timetable without addressing the infrastructure and rolling stock to make it work properly. could you see the Swiss letting this happen or anyone else come to that matter?

Its fashionable to blame "London" for the woes of the Wales and Borders franchise but Arriva must shoulder a fair amount of blame for their attempt at emulating continental best practice without learning how to do it properly. Arriva's bid team went around giving various stakeholders the impression that a swiss style interconnecting service was on offer. I tackled Penarth House on this recently - the answer was that it wasn't in the franchise agreement!

I doubt the Swiss have the shortage of rolling stock that we have!

ATW tried to introduce a better timetable under the guise of making it more clockface than previously. Clearly, they had both budgetary and infrastructure limitations that they had to consider as well. But by far the biggest problem to be encountered wby anyone planning an interconnectional timetable is the interface with other operators, particularly freight paths, which you tend not to see in public timetables!

Of course, the current timetable is not the absolute BEST that can be provided, given funding, but I don't think it's possible to do much better than we have now, frankly.

 

[The Planner]

What infrastructure needs adding then ?? realistic answers too, not pie in the sky "re-open Wolves low level to Snow Hill or flyovers here and there or more platforms at New St"

 

[Geezertronic]

What infrastructure needs adding then ?? realistic answers too, not pie in the sky "re-open Wolves low level to Snow Hill or flyovers here and there or more platforms at New St"

What are the chances of fitting in a couple more services between International & New Street (per hour) and maybe start more services from International (in particular some of the Birmingham-Scotland services)? How easy would it be to add a Platform 6 at International to help accomodate this?

 

[Gareth Marston]

What's wrong with a clockface timetable? Regular trains at the same time each hour (or two hours, on rural sections) is what attracts passengers, and has been proven to work on other TOCs. I can't think of any TOC that has abandoned a clockface regular timetable for a random assortment of services at unpredictable times.

The ATW service to Birmingham has to fit around a lot of other trains between Wolves and New Street, and fit around the London Midland service to Shrewsbury. Given that, I think they've made a resonable fist of it.

What people forget is before Arriva when the Aberystwyth services were often turned "short" at Wolverhampton because of problems, meaning passengers at Birmingham finding out that they needed to board a Central Trains service to Wolverhampton (or, more likely, missing the connection at Wolves). ATW are concentrating on the flows that matter to people, not politicians
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


There's been a lot of "why can't xyz happen" ideas in my head, that (after reading the professionals' experiences on here) I now understand can't work and there are obstacles the public maybe don't see

"Before Arriva" trains didn't turn at Wolves as they were part of East Midlands/East Anglia to Mid Wales/Chester turns under Regional Railways and Central Trains. The creation of the Wales and Border franchise introduced the turn at New St which as we all know did not have sufficient time to recover from any incoming delays, so we can "blame" the SRA for not thinking through the consequences. Yes, the ex Central services were hived off to Wales and Borders run by Nat Ex for a short period before Arriva took over but the rate of Wolves turns increased after Arriva took over.

Theres nothing wrong with clockface timetables but they have to be implemented over infrastructure that can support it or have sufficient stock to have long layovers at either end of the run. You have to remember the distances between the remaining passing loops west of Shrewsbury are long so theres no get out if something starts its run on the single track section late. Talerddig to Newtown is 16 miles, yet they put the service between Wolves and Birmingham and the interaction with other operators at risk hoping a clockface timetable could be maintained over limited infrastructure in Mid Wales.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What infrastructure needs adding then ?? realistic answers too, not pie in the sky "re-open Wolves low level to Snow Hill or flyovers here and there or more platforms at New St"

I was talking about the whole Wales and Border area. How about signaling headways for a start? Also I'm thinking of proper costs not Network Rails ones!
Remember the turn back at Kidderminster put in a few years back for Chiltern? Lets put it this way the Severn Valley Railway could have done it for a single digit percentage of what NR did. You can do awful lot when you dont have NR's costs!

I was on the "hump" at Aberdyfi station last week, NR = £400K, my friend whose in construction took a look and said £20K tops.

 

[The Planner]

Theres nothing wrong with clockface timetables but they have to be implemented over infrastructure that can support it or have sufficient stock to have long layovers at either end of the run.

You also need to look at it the other way, long layovers means the unit isnt in use and effectively running up a cost doing nothing and the likelihood of needing more drivers/staff. As much as people dont like it, TOCs are in it for the money. Aber services have a 19 minute layover at International and 10 at Aber. The 8 minutes at Shrewsbury gives them a fighting chance of keeping the service going if something is late off the branch.

You have to remember the distances between the remaining passing loops west of Shrewsbury are long so theres no get out if something starts its run on the single track section late. Talerddig to Newtown is 16 miles, yet they put the service between Wolves and Birmingham and the interaction with other operators at risk hoping a clockface timetable could be maintained over limited infrastructure in Mid Wales.

Which is why the signallers at Mach will make the call on whether to send the up unit from Talerddig or hold it. The worst scenario you can have is a down arriving at Newtown as the up gets to Talerddig. The down would need to be a good 20 minutes late for that to happen though.

 

[yorkie]

30 of the 200 mins scheduled for Abr to BHM INTL services are station dwell and charter minutes. 105 min schedules between Abr and Salop have been turned into 119 ones by ATW. Did you see Rhodri Clarks article on ATW's timekeeping in Modern Rlwys mag a few months back?

ABR = Aber, not Aberystwyth
BHM = Birmingham New Street
I've edited the above post but please use either correct 3-letter station codes (as used on Live Departure Boards, Avantix, booking sites, etc) or don't abbreviate please

 

[Greenback]

"Before Arriva" trains didn't turn at Wolves as they were part of East Midlands/East Anglia to Mid Wales/Chester turns under Regional Railways and Central Trains. The creation of the Wales and Border franchise introduced the turn at New St which as we all know did not have sufficient time to recover from any incoming delays, so we can "blame" the SRA for not thinking through the consequences. Yes, the ex Central services were hived off to Wales and Borders run by Nat Ex for a short period before Arriva took over but the rate of Wolves turns increased after Arriva took over.

So this has all turned into another Arriva bashing thread? How depressing. There's nothing wrong with criticising any TOC where they deserve it, but there a lot of people who have favourite and hated TOC's which seems to completely colour their way of thinking.

I am not going to defend Arriva or ATW where they have failed, but it's been explained why the trains are better running through to Birmingham International. As far as I know, every TOC turns trains around early in order to maintian the timetable as best they can and minimise delays and inconvenience for passengers later on in the day. Arriva is not alone in this!

 

[The Planner]

What are the chances of fitting in a couple more services between International & New Street (per hour) and maybe start more services from International (in particular some of the Birmingham-Scotland services)? How easy would it be to add a Platform 6 at International to help accomodate this?

You would need a sixth platform in at International to do that. It would need to be on the up side as there is no room on the down, which wouldnt help for turning services as described before. The biggest gap between services out of New St is xx.13 to xx.30. The xx.13 is a Cov stopper so it would be a bit pointless to have another stopper up its backside. To get a clean run non stop run you would need to be off New St around xx:21.

Current Scotland Birminghams arrive around xx.56, so if you got it out at xx.00 you could sneak infront of the Bournemouth, but you wouldnt have a platform for it as the xx.39 local off New St is sat in 3 and the xx:09 Aber/Holyhead is coming out of 1. You could pad it out to arrive in 1 after thats gone but then you knock everything behind it. So as per normal, its all ATWs fault (it wouldnt work coming back anyway as they are xx.20 off New St going North so you would need to be at least xx.07 off International at a guess to have a fighting chance)

 

[merlodlliw]

So this has all turned into another Arriva bashing thread? How depressing. There's nothing wrong with criticising any TOC where they deserve it, but there a lot of people who have favourite and hated TOC's which seems to completely colour their way of thinking.

I am not going to defend Arriva or ATW where they have failed, but it's been explained why the trains are better running through to Birmingham International. As far as I know, every TOC turns trains around early in order to maintian the timetable as best they can and minimise delays and inconvenience for passengers later on in the day. Arriva is not alone in this!

I don't think Gareth is bashing Arriva, I put up this thread due to speculation
about services being dropped between HDD/CDF, this may just be speculation,I am sure the Minister will confirm one way or another.
If the planners comments "yes another Premier Service is still being worked on!"
and yes this is in the All Wales plan, this service if loco hauled and due to politics will have to travel via Wrexham, again in the All Wales plan. This means a doubling of the line here, or dropping the lot.
I some how think with the elections in Wales in a few months and promises made, the plan to double track and add another Premier Service will be confirmed, even though there is no demand or dosh to front it.
We have a Minister hell bent on leaving a legacy of Premier Trains and Air services for his own & cronies ends.

my opinion

 

[Greenback]

Morning M

Yes, I don;t mind the original thread, but I became a bit concerned by Garteh's last couple of posts, where he has mentioned London not being all to blame for the franchise, broken promises by ATW, and the fact that there are more turnbacks at Wolves than there were before! We know that is to maintain the timetable, and all TOC's do it! The Birmingham services were introduced under the franchise,w hich was written in London - I don't see how Arriva can be held responsible, and the only alternative is for even longer layovers requiring more stock!

As I say, the best that can be done in the circumstances!

Anyway, I'm off to Dorset now for a couple of days, so I won't be posting anything else for a while!!!

 

[TDK]

Morning M

Yes, I don;t mind the original thread, but I became a bit concerned by Garteh's last couple of posts, where he has mentioned London not being all to blame for the franchise, broken promises by ATW, and the fact that there are more turnbacks at Wolves than there were before! We know that is to maintain the timetable, and all TOC's do it! The Birmingham services were introduced under the franchise,w hich was written in London - I don't see how Arriva can be held responsible, and the only alternative is for even longer layovers requiring more stock!

As I say, the best that can be done in the circumstances!

Anyway, I'm off to Dorset now for a couple of days, so I won't be posting anything else for a while!!!

The cause of the turn backs at Wolves was mainly due to the delays on the Cambrian, with the short turn round time ATW had at New Street the train was turned at Wolves to be able tomaintian the return Cambrian/Chester service, the turn round at Chester is also very tight or was and this always had a knock on effect, the Standard Pattern Timetable that ATW brought out was good thinking however with these short turn round times it was doomed from the start however, the dwell time ATW now have in their timetable are really too much in places, agreed that sometimes like New Street the slots are tight and you go when NR say you go. ATW did try to make things work with their SPT but it was as usual badly planned like the London bid was. It's not Arriva as a company but bad middle and upper management who really do not know what they are doing or what is involved when it comes to the working of trains.

 

[merlodlliw]

Anyway, I'm off to Dorset now for a couple of days, so I won't be posting anything else for a while!!![/QUOTE] greenback

...................................................................................................
Hope its a holiday.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The cause of the turn backs at Wolves was mainly due to the delays on the Cambrian, with the short turn round time ATW had at New Street the train was turned at Wolves to be able tomaintian the return Cambrian/Chester service, the turn round at Chester is also very tight or was and this always had a knock on effect, the Standard Pattern Timetable that ATW brought out was good thinking however with these short turn round times it was doomed from the start however, the dwell time ATW now have in their timetable are really too much in places, agreed that sometimes like New Street the slots are tight and you go when NR say you go. ATW did try to make things work with their SPT but it was as usual badly planned like the London bid was. It's not Arriva as a company but bad middle and upper management who really do not know what they are doing or what is involved when it comes to the working of trains.

Having seen the antics of ATW Management, I fully agree with you.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Morning M

Yes, I don;t mind the original thread, but I became a bit concerned by Garteh's last couple of posts, where he has mentioned London not being all to blame for the franchise, broken promises by ATW, and the fact that there are more turnbacks at Wolves than there were before! We know that is to maintain the timetable, and all TOC's do it! The Birmingham services were introduced under the franchise,w hich was written in London - I don't see how Arriva can be held responsible, and the only alternative is for even longer layovers requiring more stock!

As I say, the best that can be done in the circumstances!

Anyway, I'm off to Dorset now for a couple of days, so I won't be posting anything else for a while!!!

Greenback- we monitored the occasions when Wolverhampton turn backs occurred from 01 when they first started up until now. The peak of tunrbacks was in 04 & 06 - Arriva run years. The Arriva bid team and also the Arriva man who "babysat" ATW's first MD Peter Strachan in Cardiff were confident to the point of arrogance that Cambrian punctuality would be turned around "straight away" once they took over the franchise. It took them 5 years!
I was actively involved with all the bidders for the Wales and Border franchise in more than once capacity and can remember what was said and how the various bidders were rated at the time. To a large degree Arriva's current management in Cardiff still have to pick up the pieces of what Arrivas bid team said and did 8 years ago. Hence why I insist Arriva must take a share of the blame for the franchise. Despite having a magic 15 year long franchise they are also very reluctant to dip their own hands in their pockets for anything and are always looking for WAG to give them more subsidy. Looking at their financial figures its clear they take a larger cut out of the franchise as profit than some other operators do, which ties the management in Cardiff down in what they can do as money that could be used to improve customer experience/improve services ends up with shareholders who've brought nothing in. In essence Arriva "are the wrong type of company" - as many of the bus bandits are .Have a good read of the DfT Reforming Franchising consultation its their conclusion too!

We can but hope that Deutsche Bahn bring a new corporate attitude.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't think Gareth is bashing Arriva, I put up this thread due to speculation
about services being dropped between HDD/CDF, this may just be speculation,I am sure the Minister will confirm one way or another.
If the planners comments "yes another Premier Service is still being worked on!"
and yes this is in the All Wales plan, this service if loco hauled and due to politics will have to travel via Wrexham, again in the All Wales plan. This means a doubling of the line here, or dropping the lot.
I some how think with the elections in Wales in a few months and promises made, the plan to double track and add another Premier Service will be confirmed, even though there is no demand or dosh to front it.
We have a Minister hell bent on leaving a legacy of Premier Trains and Air services for his own & cronies ends.

my opinion

merlodlliw is right that the forthcoming Assembly election in May 11 will have a large bearing on this and other rail related issues across the Wales and Borders franchise area. The two party's in coalition in Cardiff Bay are the opposite to those in coalition in Westminster. You don't have to be a genius to work out where rail might be an election issue given the national transport plan and a map of constituency's with 2007 & 2010 results! Chuck in budget cuts and it could get quite interesting.