Great Western Coffee Shop

An hourly service will be operated from Oxford to Bicester and back this Saturday and Sunday, to celebrate 20 years of service on the line (since re-opening).

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=1196

Excellent to see that First are running extra trains for special events. I hope they'll be well supported.

Did Wessex run any special trains to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the re-opening of Melksham station , grahame? Here are some interesting links.
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=1637.msg4328#msg4328

http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/oldpics1.html

http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=109.msg235#msg235

http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=179.msg428#msg428

Here are some related links.
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=2239.msg5189#msg5189

http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=2240.msg5190#msg5190

http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=2241.msg5191#msg5191

From Saturday 17 November to Sunday 6 January there will be extra trains running on Saturdays and a special Sunday service between Oxford - Bicester (link below.)
http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=1907

Fares between Oxford , Islip and Bicester Town :

Adult Return ^2.00 , Child Return ^1.

Some quotes by Industry Insider (plus brief comment by me) from the Save The Train forum :

Some of the No Smoking audio announcemnts and signs are a little confusing.  At Paddington, signs say something like "No Smoking within the confines of this station".  I guess this means anywhere on station propery, but why put it in some a wordy way.  people could be forgiven for thinking that the ban only applies to the confined (ie, enclosed parts of the station". 

At Bath the auto-announcement says "no smoking on any FGW station" (how is the public supposed to know which stations are FGW stations?  Why not just say "no smoking on this station" or "no smoking on any station" (I belive that smoking is banned at all stations in GB with the possible exception of fishguard harbour where it is allowed because it is actually owned by a ferry company and when they tried to ban it smokers ended up standing on the adjacent road and level crossing which presented a more imediate health risk.   

Smoking is actually against railway byelaws (byelaw 3) provided there are signs indicating this, so yes, technicaly it's illigal to smoke on a station if there are signs!

An interesting point, vacman!  Just an idle observation, but the last time I saw someone actually on duty at our 'allegedly' manned station at Nailsea one morning last October, he was leaning nonchalantly against the 'It is illegal to smoke on this station' sign at the top of the steps to platform 2, puffing away!  (And he's ex-Wessex, too!)  :o ;)

Maybe we could campaign for the coffee cart lady to sell tickets. She's now minding the newspapers, and I bet she could do with a bit of extra income. By the way, do you think Digital Doris will ever reappear (if a voice can appear). I haven't heard her at Nailsea for weeks. Don't suppose that's FGW's fault either.

More interesting points, John!

I saw the poster from our local newsagent this morning, taped inside the shelter where the newspaper stand and 'honesty box' used to be, explaining that he's discontinued the service, due to the cash being stolen twice in the last month. That wouldn't have happened when Nailsea was indeed a 'manned' station?

Hopefully, Digital Doris has gone the way of Vera Duckworth - not least because they both spouted a load of absolute $^%&*& ... !

More likely, though, it's probably just a case of 'rainwater in the electrics' - which is why the ticket machines don't work, whenever there's been rain overnight ... !   ;D

I think that smoking on stations is allowed in Scotland.

Anyway, when I was on the West Highland Line many passengers, not to mention the guard and trolley man (and the driver) got off the train at all opportunities and had a fag!  :o

Ha Ha!!

Is Digital Doris the one that does lots of LM stations e.g. Snow Hill where she was banned because she spurted absolute cr*p!!! It is now manual.

She also pronounced Cradley Heath and Rowley Regis incorrectly. So she rerecorded- AT A HIGHER VOLUME so all Snow Hill Line announcements are weird now.

There 7 No Smoking signs on Platform 4 at Taplow, we haven't counted the ones on the other 3 platforms. Thats more than the number telling you about the train service.

Magdebug - Hanover is a five fag run for the driver, seen from the DVT.

two Bicester trains cancelled tonight due to train failure

1910 Oxf-Bicester and its return 1951 Bicester -OXF

From the FGW website :

05:51 Oxford to Bicester Town due 06:17

This train has been cancelled.This is due to a problem with line-side equipment.

06:24 Bicester Town to Oxford due 06:50

This train has been cancelled.This is due to a problem with line-side equipment.

There are a couple of extra trains from December as FGW slowly increase the service up towards the level they were at up until Thames Trains cut them back about five years ago. More details, and news on other related topics concerning the line are contained in the following quote from the OBRAG (Oxford to Bicester Rail Action Group) website by its Secretary, John Watts.

Dear All,
 
Various bits of news to report:
 
New Services

    * Alongside the extra Christmas services, which FGW will run on the same basis as last year for the four weeks either side of Christmas, we shall get some extra trains in December for the whole year.  First off, there will be an extra evening train from Oxford on weekdays - around 9.00pm, with an extra one on Fridays around 11.00pm (times tbc when we know them).  There will also be extra trains on Saturday - to a total of about 10, I understand, so that there's a reasonably frequent daytime service, I think going into the evening.  From May 2009, there should be further improvements - FGW are looking at a Sunday service (probably on a smallish scale) and at filling the gap between the last morning trains (9ish) and the first afternoon ones (1.30ish).  All these trains will stop at Islip as well as Bicester (some of the Christmas services may not).
    * These developments, which are great news, are made possible by investment on the part of Oxfordshire County Council, but they also reflect FGW's interest in the potential of our line and the strong passenger-growth that has occurred in recent years.  As awareness and patronage increase, especially in Bicester, so do the possibilities for a really good train service.  If any of you know people who commute to Oxford and could use the train, do urge them to give it a try.

 
Improvement Works

    * The long-awaited works to convert a length of track between Oxford North Junction and Oxford Station for passenger use are now certain to go ahead.  Late 2009 is the likeliest time for these works.  Once complete, they will mean an easier, more reliable ride into and out of Oxford, cutting journey times by a couple of minutes or so and eradicating delays at the junction.

 
Parking

    * May I remind season-ticket holders that FGW have introduced a parking scheme at Bicester Village.  You need to collect a notice to put in your windscreen, which you can get from the ticket office at Oxford, but then you can park free of charge in the part of the BV car-park nearest the Station, and simply walk through the footpath to the trains.  People who've been using it say it works well, and it avoids the risk of driving to the Station and finding the spaces full.

 
Chiltern Scheme

    * You may have seen press reports about Chiltern Railways' plan to build new track connecting our line with theirs (Snow Hill to Marylebone), and to double our track into Oxford, allowing 100 mph trains and a much more regular service.  This has been welcomed by the East-West Rail Consortium, who have been working towards the upgrading and reopening of the Oxford-Cambridge line, and also by the DfT.  What makes it serious and likely to go ahead is that Chiltern's owners - Deutsche Bahn, the German railway network - are prepared to invest their own money to pay for the scheme.  Fingers crossed that the present financial crisis doesn't rule it out, but, as things stand, we should have a transformed railway, with new stations at Bicester and Islip, by the early-to-mid 2010s.

 
Islip and Weston Otmoor

    * We are campaigning to protect Islip, which is threatened by the Weston Otmoor development plan.  It's hard to gauge how likely WO is to come off - on the one hand, local authorities are against it, and there are vigorous protests from the Weston Front and others (see their website, and note upcoming meeting at the end of the month); on the other hand, it's rumoured to be high on the government's list of proposed eco-towns.  We hope that Tony Baldry may be able to ask a direct question about the threat to Islip in Parliament, which would put a government which pledged not to close stations in a difficult position.
    * In the meantime, the more people who use Islip the better.  If you have friends in Kidlington who drive into Oxford or are tired of sitting in stationary buses, you might mention the big car-park at Islip, which is easily accessible from the Kidlington-Islip road.

 
That's about it for now, but we're moving into exciting times!
 
All best,
John
 
John Watts,
Secretary, OBRAG.

Good news, as another branch cut back in recent years seeks to recover its services. Only one left now.....

Just one question and thought. Why does the OBRAG keep it's website to members only? I'm sure a public website (as say for Severn Tunnel Action Group) would be more effective in communicating their opinion, informing people and encouraging debate about the line.

All sounds very positive (apart from the Islip issue) , and a great turnaround from 2004, when withdrawing the service was recommended in two Greater Western franchise reports.

On a related note, there is an OBRAG noticeboard at Bicester Town station (photo taken on 28/10/2008) :

(http://www.raildocuments.org.uk/oct08photos/281008bicestert2.jpg)

More photos can be found in the link below.
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=3769.msg29098#msg29098

But you'll need to improve the resolution of the photo somewhat to make it readable, otherwise the OBRAGs sole web offering remains for members only.

It's only a members website in so much as you have to be a member of the group through a Yahoo account - you don't have to be a member of OBRAG. With a free Yahoo account just log in and access the group at http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/obrag/ (http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/obrag/)

Then click on 'Join this Group' in the top right-hand corner and after setting your e-mail preferences you can access the site. NO charges or actual OBRAG membership need apply.

But not anymore, it would appear (link below.)
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/3816982.Surprise_move_in_eco_town_battle/

All sites on the shortlist ^ including Weston-on-the-Green, between Kidlington and Bicester ^ have been graded A to C, with A meaning the site is suitable for development, B meaning it might be suitable and C meaning it would be suitable only if substantial and exceptional innovation took place.

Weston Otmoor is the only site currently ranked C.

However, in an surprise development, Oxfordshire might still have to find room for an eco-town, as Cherwell District Council has tabled an alternative to Weston Otmoor, it has been revealed.

The scheme - called North West Bicester (Cherwell) -has been included on the shortlist and given a B ranking.

See link below for background.
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=2433.msg18240#msg18240

From the Oxford Mail:


For the full articles, see http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/3944111.Signal_failure_delays_trains/
and http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/3942475.Train_services_back_on_track/
and http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/3941863.Commuters_endure_railway_delays/

The Oxford Bicester Rail Action Group is holding its annual meeting on Tuesday - April 7.
The event is at Oxford Youth Hostel, in Botley Road, alongside the station, from 5.30pm to 7pm and FGW Oxford station manager Geoff Capes and service delivery manager Dave Barlow will be there to talk about the improved timetable from May.
Members will will also hear about Chiltern's plan to create a new Oxford-London route via Bicester.

Points discussed were:

Enhanced branch service from May, which will see 11 trains each way Mon-Thurs and 12 on Fridays (when there is already an extra at 23.01 from Oxford) - extras will run at 10.00, 11.00 and 15.00 from Oxford, and leave Bicester 29 minutes later. Current 13-train Saturday service continues, but there will be the first Sunday trains for a good few years, with nine each way, first from Oxford at 9.26, last from Bicester at 22.03. FGW managers said they are planning a publicity blitz. FGW is tendering for a new passenger information system based on the kit installed at Oxford and both branch stations will be equipped as part of this programme.

Track and signal alterations at Oxford to keep the branch trains off the main line - a progress report from Network Rail on this work.

Chiltern's plans to upgrade the line and run to London this way - broadly welcomed, but members want to see Islip served at something like the level FGW is planning from May and some had concerns about Water Eaton station, in terms of the traffic it might generate on nearby roads.

East-West Link, an update on progress with the development work for this.

Issues around cancellations and delays, information available when this happens, alternative transport if no train and security at Bicester Town and Islip - NR said age of signalling an issue but will have to wait for Chiltern scheme or Oxford resignalling in 2016 for this to change. FGW is working on better liaison between traffic controllers and passenger information team, and has tried, unsuccessfully so far, to set up a deal with taxi firms in Bicester to provide cover if a train is cancelled. Hoped that moving the position of the bike shed at Bicester to a new more open position would help to deter thieves.

Thanks for updating us, Will.

There's more information on these points at the OBRAG Website:

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/obrag/message/77 (http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/obrag/message/77)

Note that you have to have a Yahoo! account and join the Yahoo! website group 'OBRAG' (which is free) before you can access the site.

The Bicester Link was celebrated at Bicester Town today when the Mayor &  Mayoress of Bicester, the Deputy Lord Mayor of Oxford, Station Manager from First Great Western and Director from Oxfordshire County Council got the new enhanced services underway.

Speeches were made and guests toasted the new services with free food and drink, including a special commemorative cake featuring the new line logo. A town crier announced the arrival of the train fitted with a special commemorative headboard as it set off detonators on the track to announce its arrival at the station.

Celebrations then continued on the trains throughout the day with a saxophone quartet, children's entertainer and face painting being enjoyed by mums, dads and children alike. The many overseas visitors travelling to Bicester Village enjoyed the hospitality and took photographs of the festivities and town crier in his ceremonial outfit.

All the trains during the day were busy, with passengers enjoying free travel and complimentary food, drink and promotional giveaways. There were up to five times more passengers than a normal Saturday and local people came out in large numbers to support the new service - a terrific start which bodes well for the future.

More information on the line and the new services is on the Bicester Link website - www.bicesterlink.info

From the Oxford Mail (http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/headlines/4650551.Bridge_fault_halts_train_service/):

I like the dramatic 20 hours wording - with no trains actually scheduled to run from Oxford after 21:00 until 05:50, that's over 8 hours when it wouldn't matter a jot whether the line was open or closed! Of course it sounds much more dramatic than saying that 8 return trips had to be cancelled...

Adds credance to the issues Chiltern are said to be having, with their plans to go to Oxford, regarding the state of the  existing infrastructure and the costs of redoubling.

These are now online here http://www.obrag.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/OBRAG-AGM-2010-Minutes.pdf

Hmmm - there were only 8 of us there......I think she's counted the officers twice.

By way of a follow-up to the mention in the minutes of new CIS system, following has appeared at Obrag website

Customer Information Systems
February 23rd, 2010
FGW are planning to replace the existing help points and Customer Information System (CIS) at Islip and Bicester with a new system. Details are in the following communication from FGW:

^At Islip and Bicester we are removing the current Help Points and CIS and replacing them with a WebCIS unit.
These act as Help Points and will have two buttons ^ one to contact National Rail and the other for Emergencies.
Additionally the Help Point has a screen that reflects the current train service from its location ^ as the information on the screen will be fed directly from our new CIS server it will reflect the very latest available information.
That is to say should we replace a train service between Oxford and Bicester and return by bus this will show on the Help Point screen.
Furthermore the new style help points will have the ability to rung up from either a staffed station or the control centre and a broadcast live annoucement made to customers.

The date of install at Islip and Bicester has not been finalised yet but hopefully these Help Points will appear shortly after April.^

From http://www.obrag.org.uk

Meeting with Chiltern Railways
Updated, as date of meeting has changed:

The OBRAG committee will be meeting with Chiltern Railways on 19 April 2010. The purpose is to talk about concerns that we have, as a group, about the proposed service level after Chiltern take over from FGW on the Bicester Link line.

Currently on the agenda are: loss of enhanced service, fares, bikes, station facilities, car parking.

Thanks, willc: I've taken the liberty of adding this topic to our calendar. C.  :)

What's wrong now? You're going to have an upgraded line, fast journey times to London with reasonable fares and a new parkway station! Not to mention a link to High Wycombe.

What more do you want? Many people would love to have the old woeful service provided by FGW let alone Chiltern's transformation!

Have you ever considered a job in the Chiltern Railways PR department...? ;)

Well you have to see what I mean! If it was about the changes to the calling patterns on the mainline I could understand. (even though I think the changes are for the better overall)

I thought Btline already did (although perhaps in a voluntary capacity)!

I think the point that OBRAG are making is that recently there have been really significant improvements in service on the Bicester branch, and they're keen to ensure that The Sainted Chiltern aren't planning to reverse those improvements. After all, are Chiltern really interested in serving Bicester and Islip as part of their "transformation", or are they more keen on the (possibly more lucrative) Oxford and Water Eaton traffic...? These are, at the very least, legitimate questions and there's nothing wrong with asking them.

There will be 2 trains an hour to Bicester Town - an improvement. I fail to see how Chiltern are not "serving" Bicester in this respect. Adding in the 2 tph from Bicester North and the major journey time reduction, that argument is completely invalidated!

Water Eaton will more than make up for any losses at Islip. But I'm sure Chiltern can easily put in extra Islip stops if they see the demand.

Not if you live in Islip, I would assume...

I'd consider that answer to be
;)

Anyway, like I said, there's no reason to flame people for asking perfectly reasonable questions!

Quite.

What I would suggest you do, btline, is look at the Stage 2 timetable on the Chiltern Mainline site and compare the number of calls at Islip, in particular, under that timetable, with those currently provided on the 'enhanced' FGW timetable, where a number of extra trains over and above those required by the franchise are provided with help from the county council, using planning gain money from Bicester Village.

Do that and then you might see what Obrag are worried about. For example, as I have posted elsewhere, on the phase 2 draft timetable, there is no service indicated from Islip into Oxford from about 6.35 until 10am, even if the current 8am-ish Bicester-Oxford train is full leaving Islip every weekday morning.

Water Eaton is about traffic going out of Oxford to London. The current branch timetable is all about travel into Oxford and back home - from both Bicester and Islip and the people using that service would like to keep it. They couldn't give two hoots about being able to get to High Wycombe.

I am not in the habit of posting up my journalism here, preferring to let others find it, but I think the following is relevant in terms of explaining where Obrag are coming from. This was published last week in a story about station usage.

I'm sure Chiltern will be able to put in Islip calls without any hiccups.

I do my best!  ::) :o ;D ;D ;D ;D

I'm sure they will once they have engaged with OBRAG. However, as supporters of another branch line (also reopened in the 80s) have found out, it's a lot easier to influence changes prior to introduction than subsequently. I don't see what your problem is btline, the user group have identified deficiencies for Islip in the timetable and they are meeting with Chiltern to try and rectify them.

I think the problem is that nothing Chiltern (pause for a moment's reverence please) do under any circumstances could ever be wrong or even slightly sub-optimal in any way at all...

 ;D

Ah, thanks for the explanation.

Given that the main interest for Chiltern is travel out of Oxford towards London in the morning, stopping at Islip on inward services in the morning peak should not reduce the attractiveness of the target market at Oxford and Water Eaton. Although, whether the required turnaround times at Oxford and single line sections will compromise the stops remains to be seen.

I wonder if the simple explanation is that the draft Chiltern timetable has been in development for a few years, using FGWs original SLC for the route, and the planners just didn't follow up what the current (enhanced) FGW sevice was?

Paul

Obrag's minutes from the meeting are now online at
http://www.obrag.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Minutes-^-Chiltern-19-04-2010.pdf

I really don't see why you love Chiltern so much, my experience of them on more than one occasion is pretty poor! they have peak restrictions on Saturdays for a start!

Peak restrictions on a Saturday??? thats harsh.

From Oxfordshire County Council:

The number of people travelling by train between Bicester and Oxford has exceeded all expectations since an enhanced service was fully introduced last year, according to the latest figures from First Great Western.Oxfordshire County Council was able to secure extra trains on weekdays, evenings and weekends using funding secured from local developers. They were introduced by First Great Western between December 2008 and May 2009.

Bicester Town station was the start or end of 105,329 journeys in 2009-10, up an impressive 73.7 per cent from the 60,638 journeys recorded in 2008-09.

Despite the recession, business is booming on the Bicester Link trains as more and more people realise they are a reliable and cheap way to get to work or go shopping.

New records

The number of journeys has more than doubled in just two years and is now at the highest level since the railway was privatised in 1997, making Bicester Town Station the 10th busiest of the 22 railway stations in the county.

Last year also saw the highest number of journeys at Islip station for more than a decade. Custom was up by 40 per cent, to 23,885 journeys from 17,062 in the previous year.

Recent on-train passenger surveys show the popularity of the trains continues to increase - particularly for visitors to Bicester Village outlet centre just a few minutes' walk from the station - but also throughout the day and into the evening.

Thriving service

Oxfordshire County Council's Cabinet Member for Transport Rodney Rose said: "This success owes a great deal to the research and careful planning that we carried out with First Great Western along with a first class marketing campaign last summer.

"There is still space for more passengers on the trains and with Bicester expanding, the railway is now ideally placed to carry more people when services and stations are improved further in the future. The Bicester Link is going from strength to strength."

Chairman of the Oxford-Bicester Rail Action Group, Dr Ian East added: ^Just a few years ago the line was threatened with closure, but the improvements made to the stations by the county council and FGW, and the release of money from planning gain to finance extra trains, have resulted in a dramatic rise in usage.

"This shows how a commitment and investment by train operator and local authority can realise the value in a local rail corridor."

Customer confidence

Mark Hopwood, Managing Director of First Great Western said: "Passenger growth on the Bicester to Oxford rail line is testament to the confidence our customers now have in the service and the close working relationship that has developed between First Great Western and Oxfordshire County Council.

"Our partnership approach has delivered enhancements to the route, including a joint marketing campaign to promote the line and the much needed introduction of additional daytime, evening and weekend services over the last eighteen months.

"There's even more investment this year as we are spending ^8m on the refresh of our Turbo train fleet, the first five of which are already in service, to improve the overall journey experience for our customers. New Help Points are also being installed at Islip and Bicester Town this year, again with support from Oxfordshire County Council.^

Fantastic figures with Bicester Town now having well over double the number of passengers than it had in 2007/8, and Islip up around 60% in the same time.  Given that nothing has really happened except a couple of extra trains and (critically) some proper advertising and a sensibly cheap fare structure, it just shows what can be done.  After all, the linespeed is still a pitiful 30mph to Islip (including a 20mph section) and then 40mph to Bicester!

Bicester Village outlet centre is a huge factor in these rises and with a much faster link to Oxford and a direct link with London (Marylebone) coming along shortly, watch those numbers go through the roof!

I presume some sort of shuttle bus will be required for people arriving at Bicester North from the Birmingham direction, but it will be much more convenient for passengers arriving from the London direction, who I would guess make up about 80% of the shoppers.

No, it's not a typo!  Today sees the opening of the new station car park on land by the station formerly owned leased by a coal merchant. 

The original 15 space car park has been increased to well over 200 spaces (although to be fair there was an agreement with Bicester Village for overspill parking in their facilities).

Here's a couple of pictures:

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4082/4828011489_88ea267887_b.jpg)

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4078/4828010579_4a6edbfd5b_b.jpg)

I'm a bit confused as I thought the Evergreen 3 car park for Bicester Town was going to be built on land between the station and the B4100 'London Road'?  And there's no way that the current Bicester Town service will generate anywhere near that much parking demand on weekdays when the notice specifically states it's for rail passengers only. 

I'm guessing that Bicester Village will inherit this car park on a permanent basis when the Chiltern Evergreen 3 station (and new car park) is built - no doubt with a charge for parking!?  Can any of our local experts 'Oxman' or 'gwr2006', or anyone else for that matter, shed some light?

Yes, it is!



Dont thay tech spellin grammer or punctwation at Furst Grate Westurn skool thees daze??  ::)

Not sure if this Oxford Mail report from 2006 refers to the same bit of land, but sounds like it does. BRB Residuary was talking about doing a deal with Bicester Village and it would appear that the railway does have a long-term call on use of the site for station parking on weekdays, should it wish to retain the facility - given what has happened at the other end of Bicester in recent years, that may be just as well.

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/sport/omboysleague/archive/2009_2010/2006/08/25/News+%28bic_news%29/893965.Town_station_yard_to_be_sold/

And the sign is just following in the fine traditions set by one that Apcoa put up hereabouts when they got the FGW contract, informing people they were arriving at Moreton-in-THE(my caps)-Marsh station car park. It eventually disappeared, only to return with a bit of blue tape stuck over the offending bit.

Thanks, Will - that does indeed help answer the question.  Though a little on the extravagant side, certainly for the time being, I guess the Bicester Village goers will soon fill up any spare space in the run up to Christmas!  I will be interested to see what kind of patronage it gets on a typical weekday, and whether there will be a noticeable increase in the usage of the peak train from Bicester Town as a result.

According to Obrag, there's not a lot of scope for a significant increase, given the numbers already packing into the two-car 165 on the 07.57.

I had a word with one of the guys who regularly works that train as a Ticket Examiner and he said the train usually loads to about two-thirds full (of seating capacity).  Quite a lot of people take bikes on board apparently which might give the impression that it's fuller than it is, so he reckons another 50 or so people could travel seated each day without it being sardine time.  I sometimes catch the evening commuter train to Bicester in the evening which for some reason loads less from my experience - I would guess there's usually about 50 or so on board - approx. 15 for Islip and 35 for Bicester (I've always had a bay of seats to myself).  I guess that a few of the regular commuters get either the earlier or later train home?

There might be scope for more 'shoppers' to use the following two trains (09:07 and 10:30) if they know there's ample parking available?  However, I'll still be amazed if this new car park is ever more than 25% full, unless of course it gets swamped by non-rail users taking advantage of free parking and a lack of actual checks that people who've parked there are indeed rail users - a problem that I know used to affect Oxford until the RingGo system was installed.

Truly shocking. However I suspect it was error on the part of the sign maker!

Yes, good news isn't it. Its a deal that was done long before Evergreen 3 emerged, so it will be interesting to see what Chiltern make of it.

The sign says it is managed by Bicester Village - there may be a clue there as to who produced the sign!

Covered already.  The Evergreen 3 booklet already shows the Bicester Village 'shared' parking.

http://www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.uk/uploads/images/Chiltern%20A4%208pp%20Booklet%20V9%20Website%20v2.pdf (http://www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.uk/uploads/images/Chiltern%20A4%208pp%20Booklet%20V9%20Website%20v2.pdf)

Page 6:  "Car parking would be provided on the north side of the railway, with additional parking for
rail users on weekdays in the proposed Bicester Village shopping outlet car park which already has planning permission."

Paul

The site was previously an assortment of small light industry units (scrap yard, recycling, coal merchant etc.) but was leased to those businesses by the British Railways Board (Residuary).  When they were preparing to offer the land for sale on the open-market in 2008, a forward-thinking Oxfordshire County Council sought a safeguard that some of the land should be used to create a station car park.  Research had shown that this would be attractive in encouraging local people to use the train.

In the event the land was sold to Bicester Village, who were already working with FGW and the county council to promote use of the Bicester-Oxford line.  After serving notice on the sitting tenants they took over the site last year to begin the transformation to a car park.

A condition of the land sale was a requirement to provide at least 220 spaces for rail users on weekdays, with the car park being used as an overflow for Bicester Village itself at weekends.  The car park is owned and managed by Bicester Village not FGW or Network Rail and is private land.  Also, the obligation to provide 50 parking spaces for rail users throughout the week (secured by the county council as part of planning permission for a third extension to Bicester Village) also remains in place.

This car park has nothing to do with Evergreen 3 and was negotiated and secured long before Chiltern Railways came forward with their plans.

I think you're right about return traffic being more spread out. Haven't observed the 16.30 lately, but I'd guess it's pretty popular, like most trains out of Oxford at that time of day, and there are usually people boarding the set for the 19.30 in platform 3 well before departure time.

Not sure the car park will be swamped by the office workers of Bicester, as parking fees there aren't quite as sky-high as Oxford, though it might become popular if spaces are at a premium when the town centre redevelopment, masterminded by Sainsbury's, gets under way.

And clearly a case where congratulations are deserved all round for solving several issues at once, and displaying a degree of forethought. If only other some other areas of railway land had been disposed of in such a carefully-thought out way. The former goods yard at Evesham - now a Tesco store - springs to mind when contemplating the problem of car parking there. A deal with Tesco to reserve a slice of the car park for rail passengers on weekdays would have been very handy indeed.

That's what I just tried to explain. It was mentioned in the booklet as it was expected to be already completed before the Evergreen work commenced, not as part of Evergreen 3.  When they're doing a planning application and associated publicity it would be normal to include activities already taking place?

Paul

From the Oxford Times:
http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/8628831.Fears_over_Islip_rail_service/

Interesting - the extra 3 are provided by the County Council funding via a Section 106 Agreement with Bicester Village. I wonder why OCC won't continue this funding as the S106 money must be ring-fenced - and Chiltern have more than once confirmed in public that Islip would eep their 11 trains if OCC continue funding.

The latest Today's Railways UK notes (in their article about the Evergreen3 enquiry, p12) that Chiltern will be running the Oxford to Bicester service from May 2011.

Has that relatively early date been mentioned here before, I couldn't find it by searching...

Paul

Yes, I'm pretty sure it has.  With comments suggesting that Chiltern will hire a Turbo off of FGW, and quite possibly a driver too, until the line closes for the rebuild.

Is the indicative timetable that the article was based on available online?

Welcome back, Lee!

They are available on the following link - the six 'phase 2' timetables are the relevant ones:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browseDirectory.aspx?dir=\Track%20Access\2%20Completed%20Consultations\2009\2009.10.27%20Chiltern%20Railways%2073rd%20Supplemental%20Agreement%20-%20consultation%20closed%2023%20November%202009&pageid=4593&root= (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browseDirectory.aspx?dir=\Track%20Access\2%20Completed%20Consultations\2009\2009.10.27%20Chiltern%20Railways%2073rd%20Supplemental%20Agreement%20-%20consultation%20closed%2023%20November%202009&pageid=4593&root=)

Magic, thanks IndustryInsider  :)

I think there's concern that Islip will revert to the SLC service rather than the enhanced service being paid for via a section 106 agreement by Oxfordshire CC.

In discussions I've had with OCC, they have indicated every time that they're willing to continue to pay until the money runs out, and just needed Chiltern to reach the same agreement that FGW has with them.

AIUI, it's on Chiltern's side to agree.

What is scary about the modern railway's accounting systems is that there is supposedly a significant 'cost' in stopping a train at an unmanned station, even when managed by the TOC running the service. 

ISTM that this is completely artificial, and although people have explained in the past that there is a marginal fuel cost in accelerating away from a station call that would otherwise not have occured, the same must be true whenever a train is held at a running signal.

Meanwhile SWT seem to have had little problem with doubling the offpeak SLC service pattern at Mottisfont and Dean to hourly, does that mean they are paying FGW additional access charges for the privelege as well?

Paul

Totally agree with Paul the marginal fuel used with a modern DMU would probably be paid for by one passenger. With a modern EMU it would be even less as it would have put back power into the wire regen braking for the stop.

However stopping and accelerating an HST on a 125mph railway every 20 miles is expensive. I wonder what TOC does that every half hour in both directions?

Couple of pictures of the first Chiltern trains today taken by Martin Loader this morning here http://www.hondawanderer.com/

The first train to Oxford fell foul of some trackside eqipment & activated a tripcock, bringing the train to a halt the M40 side of Islip.

After isolating said tripcock, the driver called control to get NR to shave the trip down, and proceeded to Oxford arriving 4 late.

Overnight stabling of the unit at Oxford Rewley Road Carriage Sidings will take place on Saturday nights with the unit returning to Banbury the rest of the week.

Any news on Bicester chord and general upgrade of line for the Marylebone service.

Awaiting the verdict of the public inquiry in Oxford at the end of last year and start of this year.

The Vhiltern unit is stabled in Platform 3 on Saturday nights - or was last Saturday night.

There is an issue with FGW drivers not signing the Chiltern 165/0 as they've got different controls to FGW's 165/1s and have modifications like tripcocks.  If the unit failed in the carriage sidings it would block in quite a few FGW units so best kept out of the way in the bay platform.

The unit can't get back to Banbury on Saturday nights due to engineering time, which also means the final train from Oxford to Banbury is always a bus!

The unit wouldn't necessarily need to fail - it might be that FGW might need to just have it moved to access their own stock, for example.

At what time did you see it in platform 3?

I didn't - a driver told me that's where he left it.

Rather bizarre then, as I saw it locked in behind two other FGW units in the Carriage Sidings at 2am Sunday morning?!  They were certainly staying put for the night!

Makes sense to either stable it in the bay platform or on the headshunt at Rewley Road though for the reasons 'gwr2006' mentioned.

I wasn't aware that the avoiding line behind those sidings was only an 'up' line - not Bi-directional....

What avoiding line are you talking about?

The one behind the turbo sidings that gives access from Platform 3 & the parcels area to the Bicester Town Branch without going via the Main Lines.

Oh, OK.  Well, firstly I'd have described that as 'in front' or 'next to' the turbo sidings, and I've no idea how that's linked to what we were talking about, but...  ;)

...Called the Down Jericho, it's signalled for 'Down' direction movements only.  It used to be called the Up Goods Loop and was then signalled for 'Up' direction movements, but not those involving passenger trains.  However there's a Ground Position Signal meaning that trains can still shunt from Platforms 1/3 or the Dock and return back to any of those three locations.  The difference being that the line is no longer under permissive working so you are unable to stable more than one train (sets coupled together in that sense would only count as one train though) at a time.  So its use as an extra siding is now more limited given the lack of permissive working and the extra trains going to Bicester.  The alteration from Up to Down movements was completed in the minor enhancement scheme finished in June 2009.

'In front of' = Main Line, IMHO
'next to' = better, but could include Main Line, and I wanted to be clear that I wsn't talking about that line.

Thread Title = 'Chiltern takes over Bicester Branch'. This line is part of that branch. I didn't quote any of your previous post = talking about thread title, not necessarily the previous post.


Oh, ok. When I asked a Chiltern staffer why we hadn't used that line to access Oxford station instead of sitting at a signal awaiting an up Cotswold to clear the Main Line before following it into Oxford, I was told it was 'up' only. Which explained why we couldn't use it into Oxford. But you've clouded the answer - any ideas as to why we didn't / couldn't use it on Sunday morning?


I didn't lnmow that extra trains had started running yet - the current Chiltern service mirrors that which FGW was offering.





Edited to fix quotes. bignosemac

Initially I thought you were referring to the headshunt (mentioned in the previous post I made in the thread), hence the confusion.  Perhaps 'between up main and sidings' would have been best!?  Certainly not 'behind' IMHO.



Couldn't use what?  If you were (wrongly) told it was 'Up' only then that would mean you could use it into Oxford surely?  Confused.com again I'm afraid.  To summarise; If you're arriving at Oxford from Bicester you have to use the Up Main.  There's no other option.  If you're going from Oxford to Bicester from Platforms 1 or 3 you can either use the Down Jericho, or the old route via Down Main to Oxford North Junction then across onto the Bicester line.  If you're going from Oxford to Bicester from Platform 2 you have to use the old route via the Down Main.


In the context of my post, talking about the June 2009 enhancements, I meant that extra trains were now using the Down Jericho Line going to Bicester than when it was just an occasionally used Up Goods Loop, hence the opportunity to stable sets there has now been reduced.

According to the CIS announcements at Oxford, the service is still being operated by First Great Western!

Total confusion on my part, I'm sorry.

Having thought the whole conversation through, I realise I am muddling some parts that agree with what you outline above, with the yet-to-be-built line that WILL run *behind* the turbo sidings directly from the Bicester branch and the parcel sidings.

But it doesn't exist yet, it's part of EG3 phase 2.
Of which, I understand, the inspector ought to have reported to the Secretary of State now.

Yes, it will certainly be 'behind' then!  I think the investigator has three days per each enquiry day in which to submit to the SoS, so if not already it must be very soon!

Correct.

Chiltern indicated that they expected him to report end of last week.

Do we know whether Chiltern get to see his report at the same time it goes to the SoS, or will they only see it when the SoS makes his decision?

According to NRE:
Chiltern Railways have taken over the running of the line between Oxford and Bicester Town from First Great Western.

As Chiltern haven't received their 172s yet has this really happened?  If it has then has it freed up directly/indirectly for FGW to use elsewhere?  (I'm assuming if Chiltern have taken it over that they'll be using ex-W&S stock to fill the gaps opposed to subleasing off FGW.)

There's already a thread on this subject....

In answer, Chiltern did take over from FGW on Sunday last, using one of their own 2car 165s. The FGW 165 was going to depot to improve refresh rates, but as all their 165s are dine, I guess its running in place of a 166 thats gone for refresh.

Topics now merged here, in the interests of simplicity and continuity ...  ;)

Excuse my ignorance. What are refresh rates?

Improve rate of refresh = Two at a time being refreshed, rather than one!

Sorry, posting from my iphone on a train!

I posted my question via iPhone on a train!  Thanks for clearing it up.

Still getting used to see a white and blue 165 in platform 3 at Oxford, all the more so when, so far this week, two of the 165/0s I've seen came from the small batch that Thames Trains used to operate, back on their old stamping ground.

Someone has said on this thread that Chiltern do not yet have any Class 172's. Oxford Mail today reports that a Chiltern Class 172 will be at Didcot Rail Centre when Adrian Shhoter launches the restored GWR rail car.

A 172 was on the way through Leamington yesterday with a Paddington window blind destination - we wondered why! But it is true - the 172s are not yet in Chiltern service, due next week hopefully.

Chiltern now have most of their class 172's:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36593372@N04/5763259040/in/pool-977230@N20

Apart from the number, they look extremely similar to the 168/2s, don't they...

Paul

Probably deliberately.

Do the London Midland sets look like these?

No, they look just like SN Electrostars. It's the gangway that makes the difference...

Edit:  Found a decent picture now - http://www.shakespeareline.com/images/172_231_tys_brw_v.jpg

Paul

Modern Railweays screw up yet again.....

In June's Modern Railways (pp 74 - 77) there is an article headed "Chiltern main line set to challenge West Coast".
Of more relevance is the piece at the bottom of page 77 (LH corner) which reads :


So says Modern Railways.
However, the Project Manager - East West Rail Consortium, says in an email....


I bet they don't print a correction, however.
 

Any news on Evergreen 3?

Cabin rumours abound that there are problems with the construction side of things from Laing and that it'll be at least a year late opening, and in the meantime Chiltern are struggling to crew the trains between Oxford and Bicester Town and may hand the service back to FGW for a while.

All cabin chat I hasten to repeat!

Lainmg aren't the contractors are they? Its the same lot doing the Phase 1 works isn't it?

I'm hearing that the Inspector hasn't yet reported to the Sec of State yet, so the TWA order is still some way off.....

I believe BAM Nuttall have both the phase 1 and phase 2 EG3 contracts - the latter phase, Bicester-Oxford, is presumably in some sort of 'pending approval' stage at the moment, awaiting the TWA order decision.

Found this:  http://www.bamnuttall.co.uk/news/JAN10/BAM_Nuttall_lands_Chiltern.html

AIUI Laing have nothing directly to do with Chiltern any more, since selling the business to DB.

PS  Google found the Oxford Mail article reporting Jarvis going bust.  IIRC at that time Jarvis's PR dept had been giving every impression that they were working for Chiltern on the project, the last section of the Oxford Mail's report seemed to be BAM Nuttall putting the picture straight...

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/5083841.Evergreen_3_rail_firm_in_administration/

Paul

 

Thanks for clearing that up then guys.  Hopefully nothing is too amiss - though that Inspector really needs to pull his socks up...

They did actually.

After the rumpus, they had no choice.

Teach them for using the notes taken without checking with the speaker....

From the Bicester Advertiser (http://www.bicesteradvertiser.net/news/bicester/9611008.Improved_rail_link_survives_end_of_subsidy/):

Thanks for posting that, Chris ... yet another success story where an increase in service has resulted in a spectacular (and propotionately much greater) increase in traffic.


That figure of 11 is particularly interesting ... rather confirms our work / projections for the TransWilts

"You may very well think that, grahame: I couldn't possibly comment."  :P

I agree and if increasing the number of trains between Oxford & Bicester Town has worked then it in my opinion  boosts the argument for extra services between Swindon & Salisbury/Southampton

I wonder if the Bicester Line figures could be properly compared with the Mid Wilts possibility. Rail use has grown from all parts of Oxfordshire into Oxford at a much higher rate than on many other lines. The main reason for this growth is the positive local authority policies of discouraging commuters (and as many others) from travelling by private car into Oxford by operating a high public car park charging policy. For an all day public car park in Oxford it can cost up to nearly ^30 a day and that makes rail fares very good provided there is an adequate rail service as the Bicester Line case shows that a better service does produce more rail travellers. I am not familar with the current Mid Wilts rail use but assuming the present appallingly poor frequency rail service was improved to make rail travel more viable, are the parking charges at the destinations of these rail users high enough to encourage people to actually make the shift in the same numbers as in the case of Oxford? There are still plenty of people who drive into Oxford at peak hours as exemplified by the 10 mile bumper to bumper queue of traffic from Witney to Oxford each morning starting at around 07.00 for up to two hours. The reason for so many people still driving into Oxford is that Oxford, at a count some years ago, was noted for having the highest number of private off-street car parking places compared with any other town of similar size. The reason for this is that there so many car parking spaces tucked away in the grounds of the secluded 40 plus colleges in Oxford. To get more people on the already busy trains to Oxford there now needs to be the implementation of a work place car parking tax at, say, ^5 a day. That would reduce road use into Oxford by commuters but would not affect the shoppers and tourism market that Oxford so desperately wants to encourage.