When (if?) Oxford-Marylebone services commence operations...

Status
Not open for further replies.

route:oxford

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2008
Messages
4,949
Should there be planned route-learning/diversionary services from the very outset?

For FGW, perhaps an Adelante operated return service between Marylebone & Bristol via Bicester Town and the Foxhall curve?

For Virgin, perhaps a Sat/Sun only service between Glasgow or Edinburgh & Marylebone via Oxford?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Eagle

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Messages
7,106
Location
Leamingrad / Blanfrancisco
Wouldn't think that those would have to start at Marylebone, as they can quite easily depart from their own terminals (FGW via the New North line; Virgin via Willesden, Acton Mainline, the Greenford branch and South Ruislip).


Also, I'm not sure what you mean by the VT service; it would have to reverse at Oxford and head back to Banbury and Birmingham, which seems completely pointless.
 

route:oxford

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2008
Messages
4,949
Wouldn't think that those would have to start at Marylebone, as they can quite easily depart from their own terminals (FGW via the New North line; Virgin via Willesden, Acton Mainline, the Greenford branch and South Ruislip).


Also, I'm not sure what you mean by the VT service; it would have to reverse at Oxford and head back to Banbury and Birmingham, which seems completely pointless.

Blending a valuable and useful service with the practical benefit of maintaining diversionary route knowledge..
 

Eagle

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Messages
7,106
Location
Leamingrad / Blanfrancisco
Blending a valuable and useful service with the practical benefit of maintaining diversionary route knowledge..

No, I mean why via Oxford specifically? That isn't a sensible diversionary route, because it includes a needless reversal. If you wanted a VT diversion, why not just send it straight up the Chiltern without having to double down to Oxford? There is no way that a diversion via Oxford would ever be needed.

The FGW diversionary is more sensible (although I think it would work better as a diversion of a Worcester/Hereford service).
 

route:oxford

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2008
Messages
4,949
No, I mean why via Oxford specifically? That isn't a sensible diversionary route, because it includes a needless reversal. If you wanted a VT diversion, why not just send it straight up the Chiltern without having to double down to Oxford? There is no way that a diversion via Oxford would ever be needed.

Well, Oxford is a large population centre which would make it more economically viable it also permits a return of an Oxford-NW England service.

The FGW diversionary is more sensible (although I think it would work better as a diversion of a Worcester/Hereford service).

To be fair, I didn't really want to suggest two services that required a reversal - I'm well aware that it provokes outrage amongst rail staff.
 

Eagle

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Messages
7,106
Location
Leamingrad / Blanfrancisco
Well, Oxford is a large population centre which would make it more economically viable it also permits a return of an Oxford-NW England service.

I'm sorry, is this meant to be a route knowledge service or a new cross-country service (with a service level of one train a week—bear in mind Oxford already has 1tpd to Edinburgh). If Virgin did operate a RK via the Chiltern, there is no way they'd want to bother stopping anywhere until they were back on the WCML; that's just how RK is done.


To be fair, I didn't really want to suggest two services that required a reversal - I'm well aware that it provokes outrage amongst rail staff.

The thing with the Cotswold services is you could do a RK via the Chiltern without much of a time penalty; whereas diverting a Bristol service that way would massively increase the journey time (and, as I said, FGW are unlikely to bother stopping anywhere for a simple RK service so there's no benefit).
 

aylesbury

Member
Joined
3 Feb 2012
Messages
622
Good idea Marylebone Glasgow, now that would provide a real service ,calling Aylesbury MK Rugby Crewe and all saliant points north.plenty of custom at all stations and also provide connections into a wide variety of services.
 

route:oxford

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2008
Messages
4,949
I'm sorry, is this meant to be a route knowledge service or a new cross-country service (with a service level of one train a week—bear in mind Oxford already has 1tpd to Edinburgh).

Route Knowledge, with the benefit of service provision.

I wouldn't expect Virgin or FGW to stop diverted services at intermediate stations during business-critical diversions.
 

Eagle

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Messages
7,106
Location
Leamingrad / Blanfrancisco
Route Knowledge, with the benefit of service provision service.

There is zero benefit (and quite a bit of disbenefit) to calling one train a week at a station way outside their area which staff will require training as to how to use, and which as you say would never be called at during a real diversion. If it were a frequent, revenue-generating service I could see your point, but the fact is that a rare and sporadic diversion is simply not worth the hassle of adding a rare, sporadic and pointless station call to.


Also as I've pointed out via Oxford is simply not useful RK for Virgin (via the Chiltern and Coventry, no reversal, would be however).
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
14,623
Watford Gap (which is on the WCML, south of Rugby, level with Long Buckby on the Northampton loop) is the traditional point.

Last time I looked, Watford Gap was in the Harlequin centre, near Next.

Does anyone know where I left my coat?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top