Why was Oxford-Bristol axed?

[TheWalrus]

Basically I'm wondering why this service was axed when surely it was a vital link between 3 cities? (Oxford, Bath and Bristol.)
Also did this service require a guard to operate the doors?

Hope you can help!

Ryan

 

[yorkie]

I think it was due to it being underused.

I'd be very surprised if there is any provision for DOO working at Bath and Bristol, so I think you can be pretty sure the guard would have operated the doors.

 

[Mojo]

The two options looked at in the business case for the Greater Western franchise (carried out by Jacobs Consultancy) looked at two options; one requiring two additional turbo units, which was worse in financial and economic terms, and required a subsidy over £20 per passenger journey; and another using units that were not being used at the time of the timetable, which would have still required a subsidy per journey, but was a better option.

 

[mindfeeder]

It isn't THAT hard to change at Didcot, so i'm sure most passengers didn't fall for the novelty of not changing there and kept using the normal services.

They only used two car 165's I think?

Found a pic of a service in action http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantherev/4051033840/

 

[mickey]

It isn't THAT hard to change at Didcot, so i'm sure most passengers didn't fall for the novelty of not changing there and kept using the normal services.

Monday-Saturday it's a very simple, quick and regular change to a HST at Didcot. In effect it's a much better service now - it isn't always the case that a direct service is better, especially in cases such as this when the removal of small DMUs clears paths for more intercity workings and allows for more comfort for passengers.

 

[tripleseis]

The service used to have to reverse at Didcot as well which added to the total journey times. You were no better off than if you just changed trains.

 

[tbtc]

What were the "saved" Turbos used on instead when it was withdrawn?

 

[dk1]

Think the units were better used to strenghthen crowded peak services out of Paddington. Whenever i used the Oxford-Bristol it was only ever really busy from Temple Meads to Bath where it just mirrored other services. Was not that many through passengers. With the frequency & high speed services on the route it was often quicker to change.

 

[route:oxford]

It started at Bicester didn't it?

I used the service on a few occasions during the summers that it ran, it was very well patronised on those days.

The trouble is, the benefit of having the direct service between the two major tourist cities was more than offset by the horror of sitting on a busy 165 next to broad girthed tourists for a couple of hours with no air conditioning.

Subject to pathing, I could see the benefit of running the direct service between Oxford and Bath from Easter until the end of the Summer as an open access operation. Stock for the operation? Two 3 car Adelantes, using the displaced carriages to strengthen 4 Zephyrs to 6 car units.

 

[Greenback]

I think it was one of those ideas that looked good on paper but wasn't so successful in reality. I agree that this was probably due to the speed of the services, plus the units, which did not compare well to a HST!

I think Crossrail failed for similar reasons, it seemed like a great idea at its launch but never really took off. I wonder whether people really do prefer a through service at all costs, as some commentators claim.

 

[dk1]

I think Crossrail failed for similar reasons, it seemed like a great idea at its launch but never really took off. I wonder whether people really do prefer a through service at all costs, as some commentators claim.

Do you mean CrossLink?

 

[Greenback]

Oops, yes! Far too much Crossrail talk lately!

 

[Ivo]

An NSE unit at Temple Meads. Riiiiiiiiiight.

I would suggest though that if the ATOC-proposed station at Grove & Wantage was to get the go-ahead, there could be a case for reviving the route. Starting at Portishead/Clevedon (ideally! ), run as a stopper through to Didcot Parkway, including every station to Bath Spa, then Corsham (hmm...), Chippenham, Calne Parkway, Swindon, Grove & Wantage and Didcot. However, besides the multitude of new stations in there, I'm also going to be an imbecile and terminate it at Didcot. How nice of me

EDIT: CrossLink's problem was the timetabling on the NLL. It just couldn't get a decent service/frequency.

 

[dk1]

Oops, yes! Far too much Crossrail talk lately!

Ha ha, maybe you were a timelord for a minute. After posting thought i sounded a bit picky. Sorry if thats how it came across mate .

 

[philjo]

I did read in one of the magazines recently that if the Oxford-Bicester-Bletchley line is re-opened as propsed, then a Bristol-Oxford-Milton Keynes service could run, possibly extended up the WCML via Trent Valley to Manchester as this would be quicker from Brsitol than the current route via Birmingham, plus providing new journey opportunities to/form Milton Keynes.

 

[Greenback]

Ha ha, maybe you were a timelord for a minute. After posting thought i sounded a bit picky. Sorry if thats how it came across mate .

No problem at all, I was glad to have the chance to correct it! I'd never have noticed otherwise!

 

[tbtc]

I think Crossrail failed for similar reasons, it seemed like a great idea at its launch but never really took off. I wonder whether people really do prefer a through service at all costs, as some commentators claim.

Based on the very small amount of evidence we have, it seems that direct services work when they give a "new" link to central London (Hull/ Sunderland/ Wrexham) but they maybe don't work when it comes to a direct service avoiding London (East Anglia to Basingstoke, Bristol to Oxford).

Okay, I know that the Bristol to Oxford route means changing at Didcot/ Reading, rather than London, but it seems the use of paths into/ out of central London is a better use of resources.

Not saying that's how it should be, and I'm not saying that open access operators should be given scarce paths into London, or that routes like Milton Keynes/ Watford/ Clapham/ Croydon/ Gatwick or Reading/ Basingstoke/ Portsmouth aren't worth investing in. Maybe its just that direct London services have an initial impact whilst other ones take longer to build up demand for (and companies don't have the long term vision to invest in those kind of routes)...

 

[Greenback]

Based on the very small amount of evidence we have, it seems that direct services work when they give a "new" link to central London (Hull/ Sunderland/ Wrexham) but they maybe don't work when it comes to a direct service avoiding London (East Anglia to Basingstoke, Bristol to Oxford).

Okay, I know that the Bristol to Oxford route means changing at Didcot/ Reading, rather than London, but it seems the use of paths into/ out of central London is a better use of resources.

Not saying that's how it should be, and I'm not saying that open access operators should be given scarce paths into London, or that routes like Milton Keynes/ Watford/ Clapham/ Croydon/ Gatwick or Reading/ Basingstoke/ Portsmouth aren't worth investing in. Maybe its just that direct London services have an initial impact whilst other ones take longer to build up demand for (and companies don't have the long term vision to invest in those kind of routes)...

I've always been a bit sceptical about the desirability of through trains for most travellers. Many connections are simple really, and work well as long as everything is going to plan. I'm not sure someone travelling, say, from Reading to Portsmouth would be that put off by changing trains, particularly as there is relatively frequent service, with plenty of alternative options if there are serious delays or disruptions.

 

[tbtc]

I've always been a bit sceptical about the desirability of through trains for most travellers. Many connections are simple really, and work well as long as everything is going to plan. I'm not sure someone travelling, say, from Reading to Portsmouth would be that put off by changing trains, particularly as there is relatively frequent service, with plenty of alternative options if there are serious delays or disruptions.

I agree with you. I'd rather we used hubs like Doncaster/ Reading/ Gatwick/ Preston and ensured that places had a good service to them, rather than a load of "one a day" trains.

 

[A60K]

With an east-west rail link fully constructed then a fast hourly Bristol - Bath - Oxford - Bedford - Cambridge - Norwich service would seem potentially useful.

 

[tbtc]

With an east-west rail link fully constructed then a fast hourly Bristol - Bath - Oxford - Bedford - Cambridge - Norwich service would seem potentially useful.

Would it be faster than Bristol/ Oxford - London Paddington - Circle Line - London Liverpool Street - Cambridge/ Norwich service?

 

[mickey]

I agree with you. I'd rather we used hubs like Doncaster/ Reading/ Gatwick/ Preston and ensured that places had a good service to them, rather than a load of "one a day" trains.

Ditto. There were a lot of complaints when CrossCountry services from Liverpool were ditched but there's now much better frequencies available using Stafford (Reading line), Wigan (Scotland) and Birmingham (Bristol/Plymouth). I do feel a little bit sorry for older folk who have to carry luggage between trains (especially at New St since the removal of NW>SW services) but for those who don't want to follow the 'one train a day, miss it and you're buggered' mentality of old it's quite an improvement.

 

[route:oxford]

Would it be faster than Bristol/ Oxford - London Paddington - Circle Line - London Liverpool Street - Cambridge/ Norwich service?

Anything has got to be quicker than the Circle line. Especially now that for step-free access clockwise, when carrying luggage, you have to change at Edgeware road.

Perhaps the *right* question is...

Would it be considerably cheaper and take no more than the same time to travel on a direct route that avoided London?

I'm pretty sure the answer would be "yes".

 

[anthony263]

I think if that a direct Bristol - Oxford - Milton Keynes service would be well used. I was told that another reason why the Bristol to Oxford train was cut was because of capcity contraints between Bristol TM & Bath.

 

[Deerfold]

Anything has got to be quicker than the Circle line. Especially now that for step-free access clockwise, when carrying luggage, you have to change at Edgeware road.

Only if you make the mistake of catching it from the old "Circle" station at Paddington - go to the Hammersmith and City station and between them you've get a Circle or Hammersmith train to Liverpool Street every 5 minutes (all things being well). Of course if there's anything wrong it's not so much fun.

 

[route:oxford]

Only if you make the mistake of catching it from the old "Circle" station at Paddington - go to the Hammersmith and City station and between them you've get a Circle or Hammersmith train to Liverpool Street every 5 minutes (all things being well). Of course if there's anything wrong it's not so much fun.

That's why I was careful to mention "step-free" access...

Signicant works are required at the Hammersmith & City Station at Paddington, during peak times ingress/egress is quite intolerable via the fairly narrow staircases.

 

[A60K]

Would it be faster than Bristol/ Oxford - London Paddington - Circle Line - London Liverpool Street - Cambridge/ Norwich service?

I would estimate around 10-20 minutes faster end-to-end even assuming perfect connections in London, but the real benefit would be to journeys like Bristol to MK, Bath to Bedford, Oxford to Cambridge, MK to Norwich.

It would also appeal more to older people going to the south west for holidays, being able to avoid London - you could possibly on summer weekends have a few Weston/Paignton to Norwich through services.

 

[philjo]

Presumably it would also introduce some lower "not london" fares for various routes where you have to go via London at the moment by changing instead at Milton Keynes, Oxford or Swindon etc.
Plus it lets you avoid the tube in the rush hour!

If Oxford-Milton Keynes is built as an electric line, it would then be electrified all the way from Bristol/Swansea to Scotland (assuming the GWML electrification goes ahead as previously announced). (& provides a WCML diversion from MK via Oxford to Paddington for electric trains)
Also filling in Reading-Basingstoke would provide an electric route for freight trains from Southampton docks to the WCML avoiding London. (& XC from Bournemouth via Oxford & Milton Keynes)

 

[mickey]

Also filling in Reading-Basingstoke would provide an electric route for freight trains from Southampton docks to the WCML avoiding London. (& XC from Bournemouth via Oxford & Milton Keynes)

Yes, but won't the difference in power supply (i.e. OHE vs 3rd rail) then cause problems? Even if that doesn't, the perennial problem of loading guage doesn't look as though it'll go away any time soon - container trains to Southampton are still nothing like they should be.

 

[Ivo]

I did read in one of the magazines recently that if the Oxford-Bicester-Bletchley line is re-opened as propsed, then a Bristol-Oxford-Milton Keynes service could run, possibly extended up the WCML via Trent Valley to Manchester as this would be quicker from Brsitol than the current route via Birmingham, plus providing new journey opportunities to/form Milton Keynes.

How would it be quicker from Bristol to Manchester via Oxford and Milton Keynes? It takes three hours on the CrossCountry route and the WCML north of Birmingham, so how could this option possibly be quicker if it's nearly half of that to Oxford alone?