Great Western Coffee Shop

I would think an hourly service from Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington would be much more convenient, as Cheltenham Spa is a main destination and it would mean that you wouldn't have to change at swindon and get a 2 carrige DMU for nearly half the full journey. It also means that the present DMUs could provide a better service on other lines, like the Avocet Line! Cheltenham could also do with a Travelling Chef service.

Not as easy as it seems due to obvious lack of rolling stock. However I can see the meritsof possibly running a few Pad-Cardiff services via Cheltenham if realistically possible to offer maybe not an hourly service but more than currently exists.

I don't think diverting Cardiff services is an option, as it adds an hour to the journey, so is of no value to South Walians. Also it wouldn't even go through Cheltenham.

But the good news is that the GW RUS is proposing an hourly service, though you'll have to wait around 7 years, for electrification, and the ICE. Though at least it is an aspiration, which is a good start.

Any chance you could give us an insight into the evidence you have used to draw that conclusion? Sure it's a reasonably sized place but compared to Bristol, Reading, Swindon, Plymouth, Cardiff, Swansea etc etc that FGW also has to serve I can't believe it's too close to the top of the priority list (its population is slightly more than half that of Swindon, the smallest place on the list above).

Can you justify your claim with any figures for passengers making through CNM - PAD journeys compared to other "main destinations" on the FGW network? Remember too that there's a relatively easy alternative journey from Cheltenham to London that runs every half hour, changing at Bristol Parkway.

Whilst it would indeed be lovely for all concerned if every one-horse town on the FGW network could have an hourly (or more frequent) direct HST service to London, in the real world that's never going to happen, and it strikes me that Cheltenham is already pretty well served for a town of its modest size.

_{EDITED TO ADD: seeing as this thread does not refer to a specific campaign to improve Cheltenham/London services but is instead a general post about service frequencies on that route, I have moved it to the relevant route-specific board.}

According to the 2001 census, Swindon's population was 155,432, Cheltenham's was 110,013 and Gloucester had 123,205 inhabitants.  Given that Paddington services stop at Gloucester and Cheltenham, there is a case for a good service.  I grew up in Stroud and am old enough to remember having only 2 through trains a day to / from Paddington, reduced to one a day in the recession in the early 80s.  I think there are a number of problems with the current service:

• There is a wide differential between the quality of the through service (HST all the way) and the connecting services (DMU from Swindon, making the alternate hour services unattractive to passengers from Gloucestershire
• The journey from Swindon to Cheltenham is very slow, taking over an hour for what is only 30 miles as the crow flies.  Contributory factors include the reversal at Gloucester and conflicting movements at Standish Junction and at all corners of the Gloucester triangle.
• The station at Cheltenham is inconvenient for the town centre and has a rather old-fashioned feel to it.  However at least it's on the main line, unlike Gloucester which has lost its Cross-Country services (except for Nottingham to Cardiff) as a result

I was always against the proposed relocation of Gloucester station to Barnwood because when I go by train to Gloucester I want to visit the city centre without a long walk, bus or taxi.  But I can see that it would improve the Cheltenham to Paddington journey times by avoiding the reversal.  One possibility, if the redoubling of Kemble to Swindon is undertaken, is that we could have two trains per hour from Swindon, an all stations to Gloucester and a non-stop to Cheltenham Spa.  Most local journeys are to Gloucester and there would be plenty of connections from Gloucester to Cheltenham. 

This need not necessarily use up more rolling stock because the current service is inefficient with the DMU standing idle at Swindon for 1.5 hours between each return journey.  Swindon, all stations to Gloucester can be done in less than 50 minutes, while a non-stop service to Cheltenham could probably do the same.  So a 2-hourly service on each route could be operated with 2 dmus.  As for the through service from Paddington this could remain the same or you could apply the same principles as above.  Or you could save some time on the through Paddington - Cheltenham run by running fast from Swindon to Gloucester and running the Swindon - Gloucester stoppers hourly.

Do you think it would be possible for (London) - Swindon - Gloucester - Cheltenham to be given its own topic area, separate from London to Bristol on the site?  I think with the possibility of redoubling and its relative importance as a main line of arguably greater standing than Oxford - Worcester - Hereford (for example) it deserves its own special place!

Some interesting points made by Deltic.

Though I'm not sure the DMU sits around for 90 mins at Swindon, else Graham would long have pointed out the viability of running a few services on the TransWilts service.

I guess the acid test is how many pax use the off-peak HST's beyond Swindon. If they would all fit comfortably onto a 150 then that is probably your answer in the current economic environment. As noted, the service is still a lot better than 20 years ago.

The location of Cheltenham Spa station doesn't help. It's a real shame that there's no talk of building a spur half a mile into towards the centre. Though I recognise that even if you can build the line(?), there would be problems as very few of the services using the main station could use it. And for those that do there could be issues surrounding the new station for crew facilities as it would be a turnaround point. So probably a pipedream.

   

 :o :o :o

I think I can hear knives being sharpened and flaming torches lit in the Cotwsolds...  ;) :D

The suggestion of a separate board for Swindon - Gloucester and Cheltenham is an eminently sensible one though. I did wonder, in passing, when I was looking for a place to move this thread to why there wasn't a specific board for the purpose. I just didn't do anything about it...

In response to member opinion, I'm happy to create a new board and move this topic here!

Chris.  :)

Thanks for the new board and I meant no offence to the Cotswold / Malvern line but, prompted by the earlier points about population, I found Worcester to have only 90,000 and Hereford 50,000, which is somewhat less than the combined population of Cheltenham and Gloucester. 

It's actually 72 minutes according to the current published timetable, e.g. 09.40 from Cheltenham arrives at Swindon 10.42 and departs again for Cheltenham at 11.54.  I think the reasoning is its better to have a dmu hanging around at Swindon for an hour more than necessary than an HST having a 90 minute turnround at Cheltenham.  It's frustratingly not quite long enough for a return journey to Westbury for example.

John R's point regarding the location of Cheltenham's station is interesting.  It's remote from the town centre but on the main line so it gets an hourly service to Manchester, Edinburgh and Plymouth. Gloucester seriously considered moving its station from the city centre but would then have had a battle with Cheltenham to get these trains to stop there.  I would also love to see a town centre station reinstated at Cheltenham (or what about a tram-train to reach the Promenade?) and relocation of the existing station south of Lansdown Junction. However, in the short term I think we should be campaigning for improved services to Gloucester and Cheltenham on the back of the proposed redoubling.

For the a unit turning round at Swindon off the Cheltenham route to get to Westbury and back you need ...
5 minutes for the turn around at Swindon
45 minutes for the run to Westbury
10 minutes for the turn around at Westbury
45 minutes for the run back to Swindon
5 minutes for the turn around at Swindon
which is 110 minutes  :-\
You should probably add a further 10 minutes recovery time, giving a two hour round trip. 

What can be done (and happens on a Saturday afternoon) is that the Stroud Valley units heads off towards Westbury and is replaced by a unit coming up from Westbury, which it passes near Chippenham.  But that means that you need to have slack in a unit at Westbury, and at the right time too.  Passing the two units at Trowbridge could reduce the 110 minutes to about 90 minutes, but that's still in excess of the 72 minutes ...

There ARE a couple of options that have been / are being looked at  ;) - but then you get into the thorny question of crew breaks, operating costs, making a profit on the operation, robustness if there are problems somewhere, and so on ... and who is prepared to make extra payments to meet these - on what is a low cost-per-mile charged service for the most part.  At least we know the fuel tanks are big enough.

Service levels aren't just about population numbers, they are about people's travel patterns and journey time. It takes a long time to travel the great way round to Gloucester and Cheltenham. Cotswold Line stations as far out as Moreton-in-Marsh are commuter territory, so there is a more frequent through service to and from London to meet the higher level of demand from this area, as well as handling longer-distance traffic from Worcestershire and Herefordshire.

Can you not accept there may me comuter traffic from WOS!

Very interesting discussion about serving Cheltenham and Gloucester and London.

Unofrtunately teh seeds of this dilemma were sown in teh 1840s with the growth of teh netwrok and the "battle of the gagues". Brunel built his braod gague South Wales mainline via Gloucester as being the lowest easily crossable point of the Severn. The Midland built their standard gague line south from Birmingham to Bristol. The two met at Gloucester and confusion has reigned ever since.

The Gloucester line ceased to be the mainline to Wales when the Direct line via Badminton and the Severn tunnel was opened. Leaving Gloucester on a secondary main line with two stations a GWR       one Central (todays) West of the Midalnd line. And Eastgate on the Midland serving North South rrains without a reversal. Although when I travelled from there in the 70s I caught a Swindon train which had started at Cheltenham and served Eastgate thus not having to reverse. 

Unfortunately Eastgate succumbed to the motor car, too many level crossings on the loop. Meaning that any North South train serving Gloucester has to reverse. Giving the problem of how to serve both Cheltenham and Gloucester with London and Bristol  to Birmingham trains.

To the North therre is the Old Worse and Worse which was built on the cheap and has suffered ever since. Thus the traingle based on didcot Bristol Birmingham has always lack decent railways except for the Swindon Gloucester line to South Wales.

 

 

Re willc's comments, I think both the Cotswold line and the Golden Valley line deserve both their own boards and to benefit from the planned redoubling.  I believe there is also commuting from Kemble and Stroud to Paddington and possibly beyond.

The comment about the great way round is exactly why I am advocating a non-stop Cheltenham to Swindon service.  I reckon this could cut the journey time by about 15 minutes.

The mixture of fast and slow services (this seems to be a theme of mine at the moment!) could also benefit the Cotswold line by reducing journey times to the larger places but providing a more regular service to the smaller stations.

There simply isn't the volume of traffic on either route to support the kind of thing you suggest - if there was, then FGW, and BR before it, would have been running timetables with the mix of trains you suggest.

The proposition that you should bypass Gloucester is just bizarre if you're trying to make an hourly London service pay its way.

And define a 'smaller' station. The town of Charlbury has a population of about 3,000, yet its station generates more journeys each year than Evesham, with a population nearing 25,000. Remove stops at what may on the face of it seem 'smaller' stations on the Cotswold Line and you would end up with very empty, unprofitable fast trains to Worcester, hence the current service pattern, calling at 'smaller' stations along the way, so that it actually pays its way.

I have split off the Cotswold line discussion that flared up here and merged it with a previous thread discussing exactly the same issue on that board...if you're looking for it you'll find it from here onwards:
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4881.msg62154#msg62154 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4881.msg62154#msg62154)

Perhaps I didn't make clear what I was suggesting.  At the moment, Swindon to Cheltenham takes 1 hour and a couple of minutes.  Apart from the two hourly through services from Paddington it requires 2 units to operate this service, each of which is running for barely more than 50% of the time.  If the service were to split Swindon, all stations to Gloucester (50 minutes each way) and Swindon, non-stop to Cheltenham Spa (about the same), we could run the same frequency of service with the same number of units and provide a shorter and therefore more-attractive service between Swindon and Cheltenham. 

So far as missing out the stop at Gloucester goes, I am only advocating this because it is possible to maintain the frequency of Swindon - Gloucester and Swindon - Cheltenham with the same stock as is used for the current combined service.  However for this to be possible we would need to recast the through Paddington - Cheltenham service and probably require the double line to be reinstated from Swindon to Kemble.

My experience of Cotswold line cancellations on Monday led me to wonder whether extending the Swindon to Cheltenham non-stops to Worcester might give a faster overall journey time than the Cotswold line.  I can already hear the pitchforks being sharpened and torches being lit! ;D

Nope - there used to be one peak hour service that went PAD to WOS via cheltenham and it takes longer!

Yes but that was stopping at all stations, including reversal at Gloucester.  I'm proposing a non-stop Swindon - Cheltenham, which could be extended to Worcester, perhaps while the redoubling works are taking place.

We would probably need Swindon to Kemble doubled first in that case ::)

If Cheltenham Spa had an hourly service to London, (direct) it could call at all stations in the Stroud valley including Gloucester, but making up time by running non stop Swindon-London or non stop Swindon-Reading rather than non stop Swindon-Cheltenham Spa as it would miss all the Stroud and Gloucester commuters. plus Swindon-Gloucester isn't fit for 90mph+ running.I think  ;)

Yes, but it's not direct is it.  My point is that it takes more than an hour to get from Swindon to Cheltenham, calling at all stations and reversing at Gloucester.  The distance by road is only 30 miles so the timing is uncompetitive.  With the present timetable, the units are standing at Swindon for over an hour and at Cheltenham for about 45 minutes so they are not being used very intensively.  If one unit runs Swindon, all stations to Gloucester and the other Swindon to Cheltenham non-stop, both could be accomplished in about 50 minutes so you would not need any more units and have reduced the journey time to Cheltenham by about 15 minutes.

The main flaw with my idea is that, because Gloucester has lost all of its long-distance Cross Country services, it would make connections more difficult from Kemble, Stroud, Stonehouse and Gloucester to the North.  There would probably also be pathing difficulties between Standish Junction and Cheltenham.  I just think Cheltenham should have a quicker service than the equivalent of 25 mph from Swindon.

So it would be exactly the same as now but without the stop at Didcot then? Thereby saving all of about 7 minutes and removing the connection oppportunity for Oxford.