Great Western Coffee Shop

I have split this thread off from the original, as it's gathered something of a wide-ranging life of its own, looking at a mixture of short and long term possibilities.  Some, but only some, may be practical during the lifetime and within the upcoming franchise - others will have to wait (perhaps for ever, or until their dreams fade). 

Running a rail service is expensive, and needs a thorough case and significant finance to provide even a single extra short train on a line that's already up to snuff and carrying passenger services.  Building a station is very very expensive, and has become dramatically more so over the years.  And (re)opening a line to passengers after the tracks have been allowed to decay into unusability, let alone restabalising the works, reinstating bridges, building new ones where new / widened roads cross, and buying back land that has been redeveloped and reredeveloping it is very, very very expensive.

This post was edited extensively when I split the thread and after the following posts were written.   I have taken the unusual step of adding this "precomment" to help clarify the background / split / discussions for new readers.

I spent most of yesterday when not opening presents etc reading through that 99 page document.

A lot in it which did interest me:

some points I did pick up:

IEP -

Possibility of a cheaper alternative, 1 such being the proposed pendolino design from Alstom with permanent couplers allowing for quick easy coupling to a diesel locomotive to haul away from the wires.
(There is an article about this and the Chester electrification on page 14 of the latest issue of modern railways.)

Thames Valley branchlines:
Again I am  sure others on this forum may agree that these should be electrfied rather than having stay in the hand of class 165 diesel units which could be used elsewhere especially if there can still be some through services to London Paddington during the peaks.

However I am not sure what EMU's would be available especially since a class 319 would not be able to use the Marlow platform at Bourne End although perhaps a small extension maybe possible to allow for a 3 carriage EMU to fit.

I think the same could be said for the Reading - Bassingstoke line which should also be electrfied so that some Bassingstoke - Reading services can be extended to Paddington during the peaks if there paths available.

Swindon - Salisbury service:

I do think this route urgently needs more trains.
We know looking at other re-opening that people will use the train if the option is there I think we can look at the summer sunday trial service last summer which did seem to be a sucess although I dont have access to passenger numbers althoughs other members should be able to answer this.

I deally we should have a train service which offers an arrival into Swindon or Salisbury before 9am say 08:35 at Swindon and 08:55 at Salisbury  with return peak time workings from Salisbury/Swindon around 17:10-17:40.

Off peak the service should be everry 2 hours although I suppose  a service every 3 hours using 1 unit would be ok until more rolling stock becomes available. Ideally I would like to see a new station should be built at Wootton Bassett which should encourage more  passenger growth on the service.

Bristol local services:

Since I do regulary use the local rail services around Bristol to Weston Super Mare, Cardiff, Gloucester  I do have some views on these.

Henbury - Ideally I think once  Network rail have  4 tracked Filton Bank and GW have enough rolling stock  that a service should be run along the loop with new stations at Henbury & Filton North, Trains could run to Bristol Parkway or  via a circuit to/from Bristol TM.

 The new stations could be funded perhaps by developers especially if the go ahead is given to build houses on the airfield at Filton.

This should also offer a service along the  Severn Beach branch between Bristol & Avonmouth every 30 minutes and if the talk of the wires going to Avonmouth & Portbury is to be believed perhaps the line through Clifton Down should also be wired and emu's used which could provde further extra capacity on the line which could benefit from the sparks effect.

The Severn beach line should also get a much better sunday than is being offered currently with trains running much later on sunday evening as has been commented on by 1 or 2 members of this forum already.


The local service from Bristol to Gloucester should be every 30 minutes ideally providing there is enough rolling stock available which hopefully there will be come 2015/2016.

You could have the Great Malvern - Bristol - Westbury - Yeovil/Weymouth service as is now and an hourly Gloucester - Bristol - Portishead service if the branch is re-built.

Ideally I would like to see an hourly service beyond Gloucester to Worcester/Great Malvern and perhaps a regular clockface timetable offered on services to/from Weymouth instead of the gaps of 2 or 3 hours and give some services much longer turn around at Weymouth instead of 7-10 minutes like some get now.

I would like to see the through services to/from Brighton withdrawn as Southern already operate 3 or 4 carriage trains over the route and the class 150/158's used on the services could be better used elsewhere.

I do think the Bristol - Weston Super Mare service should be extended beyond Weston to Taunton and provide a full 30 minutely stopping service along the route in addition to the Cardiff - Taunton/Exeter service.

Speaking of the Cardiff - Taunton service if there are EMU's available I would perhaps like to see a hourly Cardiff - Bristol stopping service using a EMU with 1 of the services from the Severn Beach line being extended to Weston Super Mare/Taunton.


Golden Valley


Hopefully following electrifcation we will see a full hourly service to/from London Paddington with the 2 units used to provide the Cheltenham - Swindon shuttle being used to provide extra capacity elsewhere such as on the Swindon - Salisbury route.



As for the High speed service once the extra Bristol TM - London services start I think the Swansea/Cardiff - London services should be sped up perhaps by running non stop between Bristol Parkway & Reading

Something else I thought of is perhaps the lack of late evening and early morning services between Cardiff and Bristol TM.

Monday to Fridays I think there should be a local service from Cardiff to Bristol TM departing Cardiff at 05:15 arriving into Bristol @ 06:05-06:10 with late evening journeys from Cardiff to Bristol at 23:59 and from Bristol to Cardiff around 23:54

Devon Rail Services

I would to see the Devon Metro and news stations at Collumpton, Newcourt, Monkerton, Marsh Barton, Exminister and further Station improvements.

Improvement to the exiting rolling as used on the Avocet Branch line

The opening of the Okehampton Branch to regular passenger trains

A new passenger service Linking Exeter to Axminster providing a better train services for Pinhoe and Whimple with the new station and Cranbrook with a possible Shuttle Bus from Cranbrook to Exeter Airport. Possibly start at Exeter Central


Increase the line Speed and signalling from Exeter to Reading

A bit further away

New Station at Wellington Somerset.

Reinstating a second platform and loop at Newquay.

Reinstating a second platform at Branstable and Exmouth

Longer term

Possible Newquay to Falmouth rail Services using reinstated rail corridor from Parkandillick to St Dennis Junction

Extending the Tarka Line from Barnstable to Bideford or maybe Torrington.

Reinstate Okehampton to Tavistock line

Exmouth to Simouth Junction

I think Okehampton - Tavistock is a must and I think would be very well used if there was a Exeter - Okehampton - Tavistock - Plymouth service perhaps starting from Exmouth or something

There are some excellent future thoughts in this thread ... and some that I don't see working at all, but it's good to dream, and "who knows" in the medium and long term future.

I received a phone call from an independent expert, looking at details of the TransWilts line and possible service enhancements thereon, and one comment stuck in my mind.  "You'll never get more that [10 services each way per day]" he declared - just shortly after he was appointed and before he had gathered (let alone read) all the evidential data that he was gathering. And I went straight back to him - "I don't see how you can say never, but I would agree with you in the short and perhaps medium term. In the long term, who knows!".  And on that we agreed.  But it's a stark, and very recent, reminder of just how shortterm sighted some elements of the rail industry can be - taking a very conservative (at times almost too conservative) view  of any changes which have the slightest chance of producing trains that have empty seats in abundance.

In the short term, TransWilts improvements may be on the cards.   With the MVA report, the Network Rail Operational Study, the two Wessex Chamber of Commerce surveys of potential users and economic benefit beyond existing users, and the proof that extra trains (if decently timed, priced, advertised, etc) generate substantial extra traffic, the case is now a compelling one and overall most of the ducks are now lined up. Portishead is there in the consultation, and Tavistock is clearly on the cards too.  Crossrail, the effects of electrification, and the need to provide services for passenger loadings that have grown at 10% per annum rather that the 1% that was taken as a basis for the last franchise, are also very much in the frame.   There may be others - this is not intended to be anything like a complete list.

But I don't think we should clutter our response(s) to the DfT by asking for / suggesting that very long term projects  be included within the next franchise - let's face it - only in our dreams can we see the winning company being asked to run trains from Exeter to Plymouth via Okehampton and Tavistock from 2019, and to ask for such (I'm aware I'm going beyond what anyone has suggested here) would weaken our strong cases.   Never the less, rail is very much a long term thing and it would be wise - very wise - for those with the knowledge to listen to what the younger generations are saying about how they want to travel in the future, and to leave the route open for those desires to have been implemented, in modified form to suit further changing times, for when that younger generation has retired and has plenty of leisure time to enjoy.

Finishing on an optimistic note.  "Never" changes can happen.   I used to stay, quite often, near a station that had just 4 trains a day calling there in 1971/2.  It now has 4 trains an hour calling.  It's not in FGW territory, but it is in England.  I never used the service at 4 a day.  But I used it, usefully, and so did many others when it became 4 an hour.

I certainly agree with your view's Grahame about the Swindon - Westbury/Salisbury service, I think some similar views were said when the Ebbw Vale line was due to be re-opened and look what has happened there.

The Ebbw Vale line is picking up however I think the reason why passenger numbers are not increasing  as much as hoped is lack of affordable parking at the harbour station hopefully once the other station at Goodwick is re-opened which will have a large free car park and  regular bus links to St Davids etc thne we should get a lot  more passengers.

I think the Henbury loop is another line in Bristol which is likely to be a very good sucess once it gets a regular passenger trains service the same could be said about Portishead although Henbury should be easier to re-open as the  track etc is all in place all it needs is a station @ Henbury.

As for the cost, if the platforms are intact why not see what work needs to be done to get them up to standard the platforms at Fishguard and Goodwick with overgrown etc but have been cleaned up and the station is being re-opened for only a few ^1000,000 rather than a few ^million

I caviate I am a Hampshire-based train enthusiast and NOT a regular commuter or end-user, so my view may be unmangeable

Being in the SWT area, I note many of their Salisbury based services maximise the use of paths and rolling stock by having trains coming from various locations, coupling up and then using a single path into the capital e.g. An up Exeter and an Up Bristol combining at Salisbury to form a double-length up Waterloo.

Equally at on Sundays, Portsmouth (via Easteligh) and Poole service meet and divide at Eastleigh as do Alton and Basingstoke trains at Woking.

Could this model be used more efficiently in Great Western Land e.g. an up Pompey and an up Weymouth combining at Westbury to make a single up Bristol / Cardiff calling Trowbridge, Bath only to BTM?? Then use single carriage 153 as an all stations stopper which follows this??

Just a suggestion... I'm sure someone out there will point out whether this is manageable or not...

Some excellent suggestions.

One specific suggestion Sunday service for Taplow.

And my favoruite which no-one has mentioned Bourne End High Wycombe (to be heavy rail to linked to East West via Aylesbury and Bicester,

To add some general points.

Electrification of as much as the network as possible doable on a rolling programme.

Reinstatement of North curve at Bradford on Avon with wires to allow semi fast Bristol Padd to serve Bradford and Melksham.

Also Thames Valley branches, Basingstoke - Reading, Oxford Birmingham, Welsh Valleys.

All reinstated passenger service lines to be wired or at least ready for the wires.

Thus Bourne End Wycombe electrification extended from Bourne End.

Portishead, East - West should start electric, other lines like Henbury, Okehampton Tavistock to be made ready for wires when reopened.

If new 4 car EMUs were to have two motor coaches at either end then a 2 car unit, for Marlow and other branches plus strenghtening, would be feasable to the same design. It would just need a few Driving trailers which would be standard Driving Motor coaches without the motors. Unless you do what they did with the 309s and have a two car as a rocket booster (same power as a 4)to add to two 4s and enable 60 mph plus start stop averages over around 10 miles..
 

I agree with a  rolling electrification program .

I would wire Bath/Chippenham - Westbury - Salisbury - Southampton/Eastleigh as it provides alternative routes for freight from Southampton which could be hauled by electric locomotives.

 Also it allows the Cardiff - Portsmouth Harbour, Salisbury - Swindon, Salisbury - Southampton - Eastleigh - Romsey & Salisbury - Portsmouth Harbour services to be worked by EMU's 

This would release a lot of class 158's which could be used by ATW or by FGW in the south west and the Great Malvern - Weymouth as well as some by SWT to extend their services beyond Exeter  perhaps to Barnstaple. or if there is capacity a direct service say from Southampton to Plymouth even if it is only a few trains per day

With travelling on the line from Digby to Exeter or to Topsham newer rolling stock would be nice.

A 30 minute time table 7 days a week

I know my frineds who live at Pinhoe and St Thomas  would rather a better trains service.

Guy

  My comments in red below

Devon Rail Services

I would to see the Devon Metro and news stations at Collumpton, Newcourt, Monkerton, Marsh Barton, Exminister and further Station improvements.

Improvement to the exiting rolling as used on the Avocet Branch line

Government spending squeeze may prevent this

The opening of the Okehampton Branch to regular passenger trains

Should be possible but will people use the service?

A new passenger service Linking Exeter to Axminster providing a better train services for Pinhoe and Whimple with the new station and Cranbrook with a possible Shuttle Bus from Cranbrook to Exeter Airport. Possibly start at Exeter Central

This will need double tracking to Honiton to allow the longer distance Waterloo services to miss the stops between Honiton and Exeter - the current situation which requires trains to stop at Pinhoe at the start or end of a 172 mile journey is ridiculous. The original 1964 plan for the Waterloo-Exeter semi-fast services was for six stops between Exeter Central and Salisbury (with a few trains also stopping at Whimple and Tisbury). Currently, the Waterloo services stop at either 9 or 10 stations between Exeter and Salisbury (with a further stop coming at Cranbrooke) 


Increase the line Speed and signalling from Exeter to Reading

Would benefit travel times from Plymouth and Exeter to London, but how much potential does this line have for higher speeds?

A bit further away

New Station at Wellington Somerset.

Reinstating a second platform and loop at Newquay.

Reinstating a second platform at Branstable and Exmouth

Easier at Barnstaple than at Exmouth

Longer term

Possible Newquay to Falmouth rail Services using reinstated rail corridor from Parkandillick to St Dennis Junction

Extending the Tarka Line from Barnstable to Bideford or maybe Torrington.

I've seen a ^200m figure quoted for an extension to Bideford - highly unlikely given the limited amount of traffic this would generate

Reinstate Okehampton to Tavistock line

Likely to be very expensive, also line blocked by new developments at Tavistock, realignment of track from Tavistock to Plymouth needed for competitive journey times

Exmouth to Sidmouth Junction

Good idea but housing developments cover the track at Budleigh Salterton

Long term plan should be for a metro style network similair to valley Lines created for the Bristol area with Gloucester, Weston-Super-Mare and Bath as the outer part of the network with a dedicated EMU fleet to go with electrification. This would increase capcity for local stations and facilitate re-openings and new stations (Ashley Down, Long Ashton etc.) whilst stations such as Lawrence Hill no longer being served by longer distance services speeding these up or allowing more seats for longer distance travellers instead of few stop commuters.

I certainly agree with the Bristol Metro concept with local stopping services to Taunton/Weston Super Mare, Gloucester Portishead etc.

If the talk of FGW getting brand new EMU's instead of class 319's does come about then an add on should be made  for the local routes around Bristol if the lines are wired.

Somehow I get an image in my mind of a class 323 EMU at Clifton Down  (I wonder if i could photoshop such an image)

Just to follow up on the sidmouth idea.... That covers such a small population it's pointless, however sidmouth-ottery st Mary-Fenton-Exeter central could be a plan

Hi

I will just add the following link

http://www.avocetline.org.uk/rail-group-seeks-new-trains-and-more-stations/



http://www.tarkarail.org/page36.html

Guy

An Adelante service from Barnstaple to Paddington via Honiton and Yeovil  :)

I have to say I'd give this a less than 1% chance at best of ever re-opening.  So much of the old route has been obliterated by housing, roads or business parks that, in my eyes, it simply isn't practical for the level of benefits it would give.

That's why East-West Rail is such a good scheme - the route is protected in full (as far as Bedford at least), so aside from embankment and structure renewals, you have a much firmer footing to start with and don't have to either bulldoze housing estates or seek a new alignment somewhere in the Chiltern hills!  That's also why the line to Portishead should be given a huge push.

I agree the Bourne End to High Wycombe has do chance of reopening, I do believe the East-West Rail on the western section has a very good chance of becoming a reality unless it get bogged down by any planning storm caused by HS2 in the area.

Re Bourne End wycombe, of course, if we were really serious about railways we could revert to our Victorian ancestors way of dealing with obstacles and until recently the road lobby and just remove the buildings in the way.

What was it 14,000 house to build St Pancras and a whole road of houses in East London for a Motorway!

Yes and there are a lot of examples, for the rail route between Maidenhead and High Wycombe to be re-established there needs to be a greater desire for than there currently is to make the demolition of many houses and business palatable, to make the journey times viable there would need to be double track sections and not rely on passing loops, the other major hurdle to over come which was the thing that killed the line in 1970 the number of level crossings between Bourne End and High Wycombe 5 of them, yes 1970 was about manning cost / conversion todays argument would be about introducing something Network Rail is doing is best to get rid of

I would like to see the winner of the new franchise pay half of the cost of reopening the Portishead railway line considering they will be running the service when it does reopen.

Why? Don't you want it to reopen?

Of course I do. What I'm saying is that the winner of the franchise should try and help with the investment of reopening it.

But all they will do is plug that cost into the bid they submit, plus a bit extra to screw more money out of the taxpayer keep their shareholders happy. In effect, it will just end up costing more.

But it will then count as private finance not public and therefore, by some magic, good rather than bad.

Yeah, but if they put money in themselves it means less money for the taxpayer (North Somerset Council) to fork up getting it running.

I know its madness! But thats the private finance initiative for you. 

It may be interesting see a Adelante service from Barnstaple to Paddington via Honiton and Yeovil

Guy

Why can't all the local councils in the area covered by the franchise submit a combined bid, and effectively take the region's train services back into public ownership?

The councils would never agree on where services should be enhanced and limited resources allocated. In other words a bad idea.

Seems we have a choice. If the TOC pays half, they will get it back by charging a premium on the ticket sold to the passenger (us). If central government pays it all, they will get the money from the taxpayer (us). If the local council, or group of local councils pay, they will get the money from the council tax payer (guess who!). National government paying spreads the cost over a greater number of people. But we are all already paying for Crossrail and a lot of other projects. Ticket prices rising to pay for it means only passengers pay, but may deter others if the cost is to high. Local government paying means those who do not travel by rail, but enjoy the resulting reduction in traffic and boost to the local economy, also pay.

My preferred solution? I don't care where the bl**dy money comes from, just get on with it for crying out loud! If a government minister lived in Portishead, it would have been done years ago.

Thanks for your impassioned first post, Four Track Now! - and welcome to the Coffee Shop forum. :)

To be fair, we did have a Government minister living very near Portishead - and he does do a sterling job in promoting the line. ;)

For the welcome, many thanks. I had forgotten about that minister, and you're right, he did put the argument well, albeit without success. Or was it without success? He may have done more of the groundwork than meets the eye. Also, could North Somerset DC's failed application for funds to reopen Portishead have been a tactical move to remove the excuse for yet another rejection this time? I don't know enough about the way this works.

What seems remarkable to me is the strength of support for extra rail around Bristol that is building across party lines, both in local government and amongst the region's MPs. Hopefully, that pressure will lead to action, and not before time. I am aware, though, that everywhere has its own list of urgent projects. I remain optimistic.

It's explicitly prohibited by the Railways Act 1993.

Acts of PArliament are meant to be repealed.

That's not the purpose of Acts of Parliament at all as if it was then there would be no legislation at all.

From The Hindu (http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article3281449.ece):

Sorry my usual tounge in cheek what I meant to say was Acts of Parliament can always be changed by parliament they are not writen in stone.

Taking an axe to the Acts? Why not? Repealed acts of Parliament are still there for researchers, and there's no chance of us ever running out of laws.
I'm not even an armchair anarchist, but some of these regulations do seem to slow down projects and add expense. Locally, reopening the Portishead line is a case in point. There must have been a Transport and Works Act when it was first built. The TWA obtained to reopen the line to Portbury Dock did not include powers to operate a railway. The GRIP 3 report into reopening wasn't sure exactly what may still be needed, even though the route is intact, and a lot of rail is still in situ, albeit not fit for purpose.
So we need men with shovels, men with theodolites, and men in wigs to reopen a railway.* I suppose the original intention of the legal framework was to stop any old Tom, Dick or Isambard building railways wherever they wanted, but that's not a problem today. Maybe a reform of the Railways Act to take out a layer of unnecessary hindrance to new projects would be a good idea, but somehow I doubt it. Better the devil you know.

(*If this looks a bit sexist, don't worry. Section 6(a) of the Interpretation Act 1978 is on my side)

But, that reform would need to be drawn up by civil servants and lawyers. Just the sort of people who currently benefit from all the bureaucracy. Keeps the Sir Humphreys in employment and the legal eagles in fees. Reform to remove bureaucracy would be like turkeys voting for Christmas....

Before 1992 every new railway and every change to a railway (except a light railway) needed an Act or Paliament to approve it.  Almost every year British Rail had to sponsor an Act of Parliament to make alterations to the network. The Transport an Works Act 1992 did just what you say.  It allows this to be done bt a Transport and Works Act Order issued by the Minister instead. 

This procedure is being used for Chiltern's proposed Oxford Link, the Reading Station Works, the Hitchin flyover etc.

It wasn't being used for HS1 and isn't being used for HS2 as it was felt the necessary public enquiry would take far too long. So an Act of Parliament was/is used.

It's a bit of a process even so. Orders made by ministers will still need careful drafting, with all manner of studies into the usual environmental and equality stuff. When made, they are subject to judicial review. Incredible though it may seem, I bet someone will object to the reopening of the Portishead line, although only time will tell how far they will take it. It is unlikely to have a rough passage once started, though, something that probably won't be true of Bristol's BRT plans.
To have truly comprehensive public transport needs a totalitarian regime, usually communist, happy to ride roughshod over anyone who objects.

I'm a late arrival to this post. However, after Beeching I always wondered why they did not run the Padd-West of Englands fast from  Reading to Taunton, with a semi fast down the Berks & Hants thence Yeovil PM, Yeovil Junction and Exeter. Alternatively, run  all WofE fasts via BTM and close Cary to Cogload. Then either electrify  Waterloo to Yeovil Jnc or, more likely, electrify to Salisbury and close Wilton to Yeovil. Anyway, that is history, and things have moved on. However, elements of the plan, such as B&H semi fasts to Castle Cary, Yeovil and Exeter still have attraction.

There was briefly a post-Beeching Paddington-Ilfracombe service via Honiton and Castle Cary in around 1965. There might have been one to Bude as well but I'm not sure.

I have a cab ride DVD of Salisbury to Exeter where it mentions that the Western Region would probably have closed that line if they'd been able to but there was particular opposition in the Sherborne area where a lot of influential types live. Given that all stations east of Yeovil Junction now generate significant traffic including commuter traffic (look at the number of peak hour trains eastbound in the morning and westbound in the evening) it seems to have been a wise decision.

Unfortunately any Barnstaple-Paddington train via Honiton is hampered by the single track nature of the line. Exeter-Waterloo could be done in around 3 hours if all double track (that's how long most trains seemed to take when it was 2 hourly after the 159s were introduced) but is used too intensively for this now. It'd also interrupt the standard hourly service. Given that it will take at least 50 minutes for any train using the Tarka line and possibly an hour or more, it'd make more sense to send any service to Paddington even given a stop Exeter to allow the driver to change ends. There's also a 30mph speed restriction from Eggesford-Barnstaple and I'm not sure what trains other than 14x and 15x units are allowed to exceed it.

I'm not sure how competitive it would be with the North Devon Link Road to Tivvy Parkway anyway.

That would be the North Devon Link Road that was built over much of the direct Barnstable to Taunton route.

With all the talk of Yeovil Junction, how about trains from Weymouth being able to call at Yeovil Junction with a link similar to that proposed back in the 1860's but never built. It would mean trains reversing at Yeovil Junction  for Pen Mill but it does seem a nonsense that there are no trains scheduled between these two stations

You got a half hourly bus between the two

I had read recently that serious thought was being given to Okehampton to Plymouth. Could be very useful given the fragility of the sea wall from Exeter to Newton Abbot.

Not sure where that leaves Newton Abbot/Totnes/Torbay if there are longer term problems with the sea wall.

Double the avocet line to Digby and Sowton and loop Lympstone village, with a shuttle service from exc-top into bay platform.
Re-open the Okehampton line 7 days a week terminating at exc.
30 mins service Exeter to Torbay.
Large scale update to the Tarka line.

Okehampton - Exeter yes, but not aware anyone (DfT/NR/DCC etc) is giving any serious thought to Okehampton - Plymouth.  Key thing first is to get Tavistock - Bere Alston re-opened.