Great Western Coffee Shop

I last visited Pilning station in July 2006. Here is whats changed (and what hasnt) :


The Weston - Cardiff service is to return , but the Monday - Friday Pilning stops wont be making a comeback.


And still does today. Thats 8 more parking spaces than the number of trains that call at Pilning per week.


The nameboards on the footbridge are now FGW - branded , but the one on the former station building still has "Wessex Trains" written on it. FGW have now put a poster up stating "there is a very limited train service from this station" (!) and which also lists the 2 trains per week that call there. To give them credit , the shelters are in good condition (better than at Melksham , for example) and the usual no - smoking / train tracker signs are on display. The information point (for what its worth) is also in working order.


Its still not working.


The sidings are still up for sale , but the coal yard has now been sold.


Heres an interesting fact :

I was at Mottisfont & Dunbridge station very early the same morning.

Did you know that there are less houses within 5 minutes walk of Mottisfont & Dunbridge station than there are within 5 minutes walk of Pilning station?

Yet Mottisfont & Dunbridge will have a 2 - hourly (rising to hourly in the peak) service from December 2007 , while Pilning will remain on 2 trains per week! This is bizarre , when a study of the timetable tells us that there is virtually no time penalty to be accrued from calling at Pilning (same principle as Superconducting Tunnel Junction (STJ) on the other side of the tunnel.) As if to prove my point , a totally unannounced 1508 service called when I was there waiting for the 1541 to Cardiff (anyone know why?)

While I wouldnt begrudge Mottisfont & Dunbridge their improved service for one moment , I do feel that some consistency (even if only in the form of a Monday - Friday commuter service) is called for regarding Pilning.

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

I'm going to be contraversial now, but of all the campaigns in this Coffee Shop, I think the case for restoring a semblance of a train service to Pilning is pretty weak.

1. Pilning itself has a pretty small population.
2. The village isn't within a sensible walking distance of the station.
3. Given you've got to drive, Severn Beach station is at most a couple of minutes further away (although accept the service from there to Bristol is also meagre and slow).
4. It's on a very busy main line, operating close to capacity, with a mix of trains.

If I lived in Pilning I'd be more miffed that the village is surrounded by motorways (and presumably noise), and very close to a junction, but you still have to drive for miles to access the motorway network. 

For what use Pilning is today the station might as well be closed.

In recent years the only direction you could get a train to and come back the same day was Bristol. The service then wouldnt allow a passenger to travel into Bristol and back again if following a 9 - 5 employment.

What the powers to be should have done is closed the station when either the line to Severn Beach was closed in the sixties or the original Severn Bridge was opened.

I can remember tha days when Pilning was a busy station with commuters travelling through the tunnel to SVJ and beyond which even included free the travel railwaymen going to work at the yard at SVJ.

Pilning even had a motorail service, it wasnt called that though, and conveyed cars to SVJ. Very useful when the winds stopped the Aust ferry from operating and avoided the slog up to Gloucester and back to Chepstow.

As I said, for what use Pilning is today thw station might as well be closed.
 

Thanks so much for the positive suggestions. Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways (FOSBR) & I will just have to give up then.


I would like to (not for the first time) dispute this. John's point (though correct) makes little difference when stopping a train at Pilning. For example :

On Saturdays , the time taken for the 0800 Cardiff - Weymouth service to travel between Severn Tunnel Junction and Patchway WITH a stop at Pilning is 16 minutes.

The time taken for the 1000 Cardiff - Southampton service to travel between Severn Tunnel Junction and Patchway WITHOUT a stop at Pilning is ALSO 16 minutes.

Going in the other direction , the time taken for the Saturday 1249 Weymouth - Cardiff service to travel between Patchway and Severn Tunnel Junction WITH a stop at Pilning is 13 minutes.

The time taken for the Monday - Friday 1732 Westbury - Cardiff service to travel between Patchway and Severn Tunnel Junction WITHOUT a stop at Pilning is 14 minutes.

Not stopping at Pilning has nothing to do with operational reasons , and everything to do with spite and the undeclared (but real) wish to close the station.

A good opposing view to John's overall one , along with some background , can be found in the link below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilning_railway_station

Quotes :

"Prior to the timetable change in December 2006, Pilning was served by 1 train each way on weekdays. From December 2006 First Great Western decided to cut the service to just one train a week in each direction on Saturdays only. (westbound Cardiff Central and eastbound Weymouth.) This is in spite of the site being surrounded by undeveloped land, close to major arterial roads, and the line being used by Intercity and Cross Country services."

"It has been speculated that a decision was taken to close the station by stealth after the Severnside Stadium housing development stalled. This had been an extensive new housing project near the station and would have provided much commuter traffic to the area."

I would argue (as do Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways (FOSBR)), that we need to keep the station open now , because it will be needed in the future (link below.)
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=357.msg1034#msg1034

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

Did you know that there is another FGW station , not too far away , that closely fits most of John's criteria?


Here are a few clues :

1) Its service was increased from 2 - hourly to hourly in December 2006.

2) Its passenger numbers have grown from 50534 in 2002 / 2003 to 72113 in 2005 / 2006.

3) Nobody (as far as I am aware) is suggesting that it should be closed.

4) See link below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cam_and_Dursley_railway_station

They don't want to close the station, as I belive it costs more than it does to leave it open and give it a train service!

That may have been true a couple of years ago , but it isnt true now.

Jim , we've been through this one before (on the MTLS forum) but I guess we will have to go through it again. See link below for details of the new DfT Closure Guidance (which I presume you read last time I posted it in response to similiar comments from your good self.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/F3641215?thread=2441627

Ooops, sorry Lee,forgot about that

Sorry as well if my comments sounded a bit off , but you know what I am like regarding potentially threatened lines & stations....

My opinion is that the station is being kept open because if it were to close then it would be very difficult to reopen it again if it were needed in the future, by stopping one train a week doesn't really cost much and keeps options open for the future. No one uses it so theres not much wear and tear on the station.

Agreed with most of that, apart from 4

I live right next to the line, it isnt really what i'd call a "busy line" (about C&D)

there are 3 passenger trains each way every hour with the ocasional freight, and this will be reduced to 2 tph when the new XC service comes in,

it's not the busiest line in the world, and is no where near capacity!

also, those figures were published before it changed to 1tph each way at C&D iirc, i wouldnt be suprised if the stats had gone through 100,000 as a result.

One thing it has over pilning though, it has an incredibly reliable bus service purely for connections to local towns for the train!

The main difference between Pilning and C&D is that the latter was built to serve the populations that give it its name, and are within a few minutes drive. It's not obvious what populations of similar size Pilning could serve. 

Sorry if I sound negative Lee, but with the best will in the world I just can't see what market this station would serve, even if it had a half hourly service. It's only purpose now seems to be as an emergency place to detrain passengers in the event of an incident in the ST. What am I missing?   

Pilning is in the middle of nowhere. Trust me i've been there.

Its not far from the M4 and the other road that crosses the Severn.

I feel that the clear issues surrounding Pilning now, are:
The station is quite far from Pilning village. The road that links Pilning to the station is, according to the OS map, a narrow country lane. The station is accessible only via minor roads. There are no easy connections to the motorways.
There are few other villages nearby. Almondsbury is quite close but road links are poor.
The residents of Pilning (probably) find it easier to get to Severn Beach station due to the connecting B road.
And the skeletal service doesn't help at all, the station has practically been wiped off the FGW map.

However, the station does have potential. If Pilning were to extend to the east, which I feel is likely, it could serve a lot of commuters.
Better roads to the station, even from Pilning itself, would certainly help with a roadside footpath / cycleway connecting the village to the station.
I have noticed, according to the OS map, that there is a pub and plenty of country footpaths nearby, so the station could appeal to walkers. An untapped market maybe?
Of course, all of this would not be possible without an increased service. There has to be at least daily peak hour trains to serve potential market for a quick peak hour service to Bristol/Cardiff and more trains on a saturday to appeal to leisure trips. If it was true that stops at Pilning would not matter to overall timings, there seems little reason not to.

A quick further comment- I wish the line from Severn Beach to Pilning had not been closed. With that, we could have seen frequent Bristol circular services via Severn Beach serving Pilning.

In the proposals the the SB line, FGW did a while back, aparently there is to be an "investigation" into making it a circular in each way. but not for the near future anyway

Sadly though there are now lots of houses in the way at the end of the line. The only real way they could extend it is to knock houses down or build the loop further back up the line. I don't think there's any other real way possible. It's a shame as it would have provided a quicker route into Bristol from Severn Beach and a much quicker route to Cardiff for most local Bristol passengers, with a change at Pilning. Unless of course you mean the Henbury route, but that may have adverse effects on Severn Beach and won't help Pilning too much  ;)

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=1152

may be of interest, and yes the henbury route, (i got it mixed up with pilning somehow) but not until 2013 at the earliest due to re signalling. See page 22

Ah , yes , the Severn Beach Line Development Plan. You can find my views on that in the link below , plus a defence from Andrew Griffiths. It may interest you to know that I am meeting Keith Walton soon to discuss this and many other issues , including Pilning. Let me know if any of you want me to ask him something.
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=311.msg877#msg877

Going back to one of John's other points , I have a question :

You know these Pilning villagers who are supposed to drive to Severn Beach to catch the rail - replacement bus to connect at Avonmouth with the train to Bristol Temple Meads....

Where are they meant to park?

An interesting comparison for you :

CURRENT PILNING VILLAGE - BRISTOL VIA SEVERN BEACH STATION JOURNEY :

- A 5 minute drive to Severn Beach.

- 10 minutes to find a parking space and walk to the rail - replacement bus stop.

- A 15 minute bus journey with a 4 minute connection to the train at Avonmouth.

- A 27 minute train journey to Bristol.

OVERALL JOURNEY TIME - 1 HOUR 1 MINUTE

POTENTIAL PILNING VILLAGE - BRISTOL VIA PILNING STATION JOURNEY

- A 5 minute drive to a dedicated parking space adjacent to Pilning station.

- A generous 5 minutes to get out of the car and walk on to the platform.

- A 20 minute train journey to Bristol.

OVERALL JOURNEY TIME - 30 MINUTES

Sounds like a no - brainer to me.

Sorry, Lee - that doesn't work for me.   You're assuming that you know it's gooing to take exactly 10 minutes to park and that you'll not need any connection time at Severn Beach station into the bus.  Shouldn't you allow an extra 10 minutes or so in case you have more problems parking than normal ;)

To answer some of the other points :


Ive been there too. See earlier post with comparison to Mottisfont & Dunbridge.


You are entitled to your view , but I disagree. Standardised European Rules of the Air (SERA) documents show that there were plans to close it as part of the new franchise.


Not sure where you got your information from , as there will still be 3 passenger trains each way every hour passing through Cam & Dursley , although only 1 each way , as now , will stop there. The line currently has a tonnage level of 10 - 15 million tonnes per year (indicating a reasonable amount of freight) and is projected to acheive medium - level tonnage growth to 2016.

Agree about the passenger figures and , in my view , this indicates the potential of such stations.

Regarding your point on bus links , here is a section from the "Gateway To The Future" proposals regarding their potential for Pilning. Bear in mind this only refers to EXISTING bus services , which would require a small , but minimal , diversion :



Quotes from FOSBR's Pilning proposals :

"P&R facilities here also have the opportunity to attract use from Almondsbury & Thornbury. Whilst those are closer to Patchway station, lack of parking here would make Pilning more attractive for journeys into Bristol City Centre."

"Due to possible low usage, and the fact that nearly all users will be local, an hourly service off peak should be adequate ^ and this could be achieved using the existing passing services"

"Improving facilities at Pilning will mean this area retains a rail service. First Great Western should be supportive of this as it will mean more income, especially as no additional trains are needed. Additional patronage from nearby towns/villages in South Gloucestershire should also make investment worthwhile."

Personally , I dont think that Pilning has the catchment area to be able to match (say) Cam & Dursley's passenger figures , but I DO think that , if an hourly service is introduced and BRB land is used for car parking & bus / rail interchange , 30000 - 40000 passengers per year would not be out of the question.

On the other hand if (as is perfectly possible) a housing developer gets permission to build "Severnside Stadium II" , then those figures could rise significantly.


As a non - driver , I have approximated on such driving / parking timings (using Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways (FOSBR) research.) You may well have a point though....

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronyms

So why didn't they close it? no one would have batted an eyelid if they had closed it, for some reason it's being kept open, basicly "mothballed", for the sake of one train per week it must be worth keeping open for any changes of circumstances in the future.

If you want Pilning station to be revitalised

- Build a 400 free place car park next to it
- Add a 30 minute return bus service to the Mall
- Add an hourly service

A busy car park will attract travellers!

I recently had to see my parents, near Birkenhead and we went shopping to Chester. We parked at Hooton station, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooton_railway_station) to get into Chester. This is a small rural station, not in the heart of the village, that  handles 300K passengers a year because of its car park, and 30 minute train service to Liverpool/Chester.

I never actually thought of this. Pilning is very close to Cribbs Causeway, so unless a station is to be built in Henbury, I see no reason why this should not go ahead. a 10 minute bus journey, decently connected to hourly train services could pay off extremely well. Cribbs Causeway and FGW/NR could benefit very well financially from people who don't want to have to struggle through Bristol or the M5 to go on a shopping trip. Although, while I think the car park could be bigger, 400 spaces is a little excessive!

I honestly hope you are right. Regarding the "no one would have batted an eyelid if they had closed it" comment , this is wide of the mark. CANBER & FOSBR have a joint & detailed plan of action ready to be implemented should closure be proposed. Without giving too much away , I can assure you (plus anybody else who happens to be reading this) that opposition to closure will be very loud and very visible. Former Shadow Transport Secretary Chris Grayling and local MP Steve Webb have also highlighted the potential threat to Pilning station.


If you read Gateway To The Future , the above is very close to what CANBER propose (link below.)
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=357.msg1034#msg1034

Account of a recent FOSBR visit to Pilning (link below.)
http://www.fosbr.org.uk/Pilning.htm

(http://www.fosbr.org.uk/photos/IMGP4356.jpg)

(http://www.fosbr.org.uk/photos/IMGP4366.JPG)

(http://www.fosbr.org.uk/photos/IMGP4357.JPG)

Developers are searching for greenfield sites on which to build new homes in the Bristol region due to a shortage of land in built-up areas (link below.)
http://thisisbristol.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=145365&command=displayContent&sourceNode=145191&contentPK=19648479&folderPk=83726&pNodeId=144922

Another crazy thought of mine the other day, was that should Pilning be used as a request stop rather than a regular station?

I understand it's not in the most convenient of locations as it's not a great idea for trains to be slowing down approaching or leaving the Severn Tunnel. But with trains not calling at Lawrence Hill / Stapleton Road on the Cardiff-Taunton route would this be at all possible for some services?

As mentioned before, stops at Pilning may become significant if the village were to expand.

More people got off at Pilning today than Melksham!

1429 Swansea to London Paddytoon called at Pilning at 1600 to 1610.

Exciting stuff. I think I may need to go cuddle my teddy bear....  ;) ;D ;D ;D

Were you there to count?

No, the Doctor was.  ;D

Why did it call? And who many boarded/got off? Not that I'm complaining or anything! ;)

 http://www.bristol-rail.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1540

If you'll permit the link to another site, this shows the first day of operation of the newly enhanced Pilning (Severn Gateway) Parkway.

 ;D Thanks for that John! If only...

If there was ever a Pilning campaign for service improvement website, that photo might be there somewhere!

John R

What actually happened? Presumably a tunnel bound train failed and passengers were put on the next train back to Parkway. Good job it wasn't a 150/8 coming out of the tunnel.

How did they move the High Speed Train (HST) presumably the following service could have used used the freight loop to bypass it. Nice bit of rare track if you were on one of those.
 
It's how the TOCs and Networkrail respond to incidents like this that shows how good or bad they are at running the railway.

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

A tunnel bound train failed near Filton Abbey Wood (not on that line of course, but near the junction) - was put in the goods loop and then dunno what happened - it passed Newport 140 down though!

Not a major topic, but I'm interested in everyones opinion on Pilning.

Is it really worth this station being open with just 1 service a week?  On a Saturday!!  ???

I live in Severn Beach and Pilning would provide a much quicker link to South Wales and Bristol Parkway, rather than going in and out of BTM!  I would love a meaningful service at this station.

What are your views here?

You may be surprised, BristolBlogger, that a small station like Pilning can nevertheless generate a wide variety of very strongly held opinions!

There's been a lot of discussion on this subject in two previous topics on this forum, so I've now taken the opportunity to merge them with this one (keeping the posts in chronological order, and retaining their original headings), for continuity.

Chris  ;) :D ;D

Didn't see much use when I was there!

This was discussed at length some months ago (before you joined us). I think views are divided. I can see the merits of a Parkway station (though that was what Bristol Parkway was for in the days when it was in fields and easy to get to) to railhead for South Wales. Maybe with an access road off the M4/M49 junction it could work, especially as it comes just before the tolls and the congested stretch of the M4 at Newport.

Though from a practical perspective the line is fairly much at capacity, so having additional services stopping at Pilning would be a further capacity constraint. And if it were successful then I'm not sure the trains themselves have much capacity for more passengers.  

I believe there is a relief line that runs around the back of pilning station on the approach to the tunnel.

It wouldn't cost too much to platform this line, so that trains could stop at the station more often, and not disturb the faster services, would it???

If Pilning doesn't work, and it would cause to much disruption/not profitable, then surely its best just to close the station?

Indeed and both goods lines are currently being upgraded to passenger use as part of the Newport Resignalling Scheme to provide more flexibility.  (The up relief stops short of the station though.) Unfortunately in the railway world, everything costs a fortune. Gone are the days when a platform could be put up for ^25k and a new station opened. Nothing seems to come in at under ^2m these days. 

Unfortunately, it's not quite as simple as that.

A railway station can be left with just one service per week, if only to avoid that station being subject to a statutory 'closure' process (with all the attendant bad publicity).  And if that station were to be 'closed', but a TOC then wanted to resume services at some future date, it would need the formal process of 're-opening' the station (with a repeat of all the previous bad publicity over why it had been closed).

Vacman has covered this in a previous post, at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=814.msg3326#msg3326 and Andrew Griffiths gave the same argument at a FOSBR meeting in Bristol that I attended, on 12 July this year.  Andrew was quite emphatic that there would be no closure of Pilning Station, for this very reason.

Basically, it's far easier to maintain even a notional service at a station, if only to keep it 'open', rather than to stop services altogether.

As an aside, one could speculate whether such considerations may have influenced the decision to cut (but not stop altogether!) services to Melksham, for example.  And perhaps that's why the long-running campaign to re-open Corsham Station has faced so many obstacles?

Actually, Chris - Melksham Station has already been through the whole formal closure and then reopening process - which is why it's particularly galling for old codgers like me who campaigned once to have it reopened, only to see a subsequent TOC doing it's damndest to shut the blooming thing down once again.

Here's the cover of a "Souvenir issue" of the local paper dating back to when the station was reopened with much fanfare in May 1985. As it says, "An historic day - the first station closed by Beeching to be reopened" (this is one of only a handful of claims to fame that Melksham has, so it's not surprising that we tend to set great store by it locally!)

http://www.terrascope.co.uk/images/MelkshamStationReopening.jpg

Dont see much point in keep this station open to be honest with only 1 train per week.

Even it if it was 1 train per day in each direction it would be more worthwhile.

I agree Jez.  If they have to it open for operartional reasons, then there is no harm in increasing the service to at least 1 or 2 trains in each direction a day!

The passengers (if any) would be standing at Pilning quite a while if a replacement was not provided...  ::)

Indeed. Good job that later Cardiff departure called at Pilning. Should there have been pax waiting and no alternative train was laid on they could've faced a 168 hour delay to their journey.  ;D

Dave Wood On Track column: Two trains a week from Pilning Station? Where is the sense in this

Read more: http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Dave-Wood-Track-column-trains-week-Pilning/story-25995240-detail/story.html?

With electrification, if (as I think should happen) the Cardiff-Taunton service becomes a Swansea-Bristol EMU and the faster Cardiff-Portsmouth in the other half-hour is retained (which presumably would remain a DMU) would there be any capacity hit from stopping the Swansea-Bristol EMU at additional stops, eg. Pilning?

The reasons for what is known as a "Parliamentary Service" have been correctly described in earlier posts and remain valid. David Wood lists the many attractions and facilities to be found at Pilning station, but omits to say what is not to be found, which is basically Pilning. Much of Pilning lies closer to Severn Beach station than to Pilning's, making it currently less attractive to passengers.

So why not close it? South Gloucestershire is an expansionist authority, fond of the smell of council tax and Section 106 receipts. Pilning may yet achieve the critical mass or geographic spread to merit a meaningful service. Capacity is lacking at present, but electrification and re-signalling may solve that problem, but only if there is political will.

With the population to support it, Pilning could provide useful links to Parkway and beyond, and to Temple Meads via Patchway. EMU services would be better able to manage this without getting in the way of other services. To answer Rhydgaled's question, capacity can probably be found. Political will and operator enthusiasm may be much harder to come by.

This forum started up at a time that we feared for the future of the train service on the TransWilts line, and services calling at Melksham Station.  For a two week period, the line was closed for engineering works, with a rail replacement bus running in its place, and we had very real fears that the trains wouldn't restart once the line was reopened, but rather the bus would continue. At the time there were five services eash way a day (4 on Saturday, 3 on Sunday), but with a specification for the upcoming franchise that only required 2 each way per day on Monday to Saturday, and just 2 northbound on Sunday. Examples such as Wedgwood and Barlaston, Etruria and Norton Bridge, Watford West and Croxley Green were in our minds.

I'm delighted how things have moved forward ...
1. * Getting people to realise the future should be reviewed
2. * Getting the review to work out what an appropriate service was
3. * Getting that approriate service running (if a service was indeed approrpiate)
4. * Getting that service to work well and to tune it as proven
5. * Getitng that service to stick for the longer term

From the last 10 days - four pictures. 

The first shows Melksham Station on Saturday 2nd April 2016, a late morning train to Swindon; the train itself is a 3 coach 158 (longer than our norm, since our service has been linked to the regioanl service rom Portsmouth Harbour during engineering), but the numbers getting on or off are 'nothing special' - no particular event that we or other have organsied out of the ordinary, no loading of the picture with volunteers.

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/tpod2_0.jpg)

The second picture was taken on the evening of Friday 8th April - at about 17:45.   Some 30 passengers had got off though single door, multiple taxis had been prebooked, at it was a bit of a "zoo" around the station entrance.   As I was arriving and behind others off the train, the picture is more of a reminder that an art piece

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/multitaxi.jpg)

The third picture *is* a specially organised event - Wiltshire Ramblers have arrived on 9th April to walk around 8 miles through the countryside to Chippenham

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/twramblers1.jpg)

Finally, at Bath Station the A to Z now has an extra section cut onto it - me thinks that they're finding significant requests for times of trains to Melksham

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/a2z2mkm.jpg)

So why the heading "Pilning" ... because I hear comment that the station / service there may quietly be slipping into oblivion in all the current works going on; looking to ask what's happening and raise the flag.   Initially in "The Rumour Mill" as I'm going on a lack of definite data.   Let me be clear - Pilning is NOT Melksham - just that it may be coming to a point at which people want to be alert and take place in a look at where its future should be.

Note to anyone who follows up in "The Rumour Mill" - as and when the comments I've heard are proven to be substantive, I may move this thread to a public board

Pilning is one of those "parly" services that I don't feel has a strong case for revival (unlike say the Stockport to Stalybridge service). 

The station is far enough away from the village that most people would feel the need to use the car for, in which case Severn Beach is just as close.  The village is small enough that it won't generate much traffic, and there's not really a catchment around it which could use it as a railhead.  Finally, given the capacity constraints through the Severn Tunnel, stopping services there may not be as simple operationally as might be expected, particularly given the long signal section through the tunnel.

You may well be right, John R ... but I do know that quietly slipping from one train each way a week to zero (but a bus) to a platform fenced off to a platform with no footbridge to access it probably doesn't have the feel of due process.

The purpose of my post is to ask "are we at a crossroads as we were on the TransWilts ten years ago". If the answer is yes, it's sensible to take a look-see


And see what the answer is to question 2.   

Isn't Pilning maintained for emergency use should there be issues in the Severn Tunnel?

A useful site to de-train passengers would become less useful if the footbridge were removed and the platforms fenced off.

The footbridge at Pilning MUST be removed for the installation of wires. The issue is getting Network Rail to spend a couple of million on a brand new footbridge with ramps to replace it.

Whilst there isn't a case to reinstate it on the current situation of the station, the key is understanding whether Pilning has a future worthy of investment.

Tricky one. Certainly, I was not aware of any great outrage when the service became parliamentary only, for the reasons set out by John R. I know it has miserable passenger figures because of the lack of a real service, but the Severn Beach argument that give it a service and it will generate pax does not seem to apply. If it were nearer the village, maybe.

This subject has been discussed out on the Coffee Shop forum, in more than one topic, in the past: I'd be happy to move and merge such discussions into one definitive topic (without it needing to reach any particular conclusion, obviously!), if we're all happy with that?

Yes, please Chris - now that we've established that there are very real issues with continining to provide a (usable) train service at Pilning.   You're the merge expert - I'll leave it to you as I often struggle to do it.

So, the immediate question is whether it's worth spending ^2m on a footbridge for the current level of service. Clearly the answer is no.  The next question is whether the failure to do the work now would add much to the cost at a later date if it were to be decided to reinvigorate the station. I'm guessing the answer to that is that it would be slightly higher, but not by so much as to make a speculative investment of ^2m now on the off chance that it might be needed in the future worthwhile.

So unfortunately, I think it's the right decision, although given how long we've known about electrification, somebody should bite the bullet and go through the proper process.  It's not as though the station has ever had much of a service - e.g. 3 tpd each way throughout the 70s (though admittedly that's rather more than today). 

Well, I really did walk into that one, didn't I?  :o ::) ;D

Now done: I've moved and merged three topics into this one here.  I've chosen to put this combined topic in our 'campaigns' board, simply because many of the previous posts show some clear feeling that the train service(s) at Pilning should be 'improved'.

However, we can now continue to debate that here, in this ongoing discussion.  ;)

For whatever my opinion is worth, though: I rather reluctantly have to agree with John R in his post above.  :(

Thanks, Chris.

Comment I hear is of development encroaching around the area and possibilities - but whether that is pious hope or realistic looking forward I'm uninformed on and cannot express a valid opinion.   But I do look to options and, yes, question the spending of millions on ramps / lifts for a bridge that would only be required apart from people going out of there way to use it a handful of times per year if that.

Thinking out of the box.

a) Are either of the platform lines reversible - especially the up?
Noting crossover (but maybe gone?) - http://bristol-rail.co.uk/wiki/File:Pilning_Track_Plan_1988.jpg

b) Is there access possible other than by bridge to the second platform (I fear the answer is 'no / no practical without - horror - a level footway crossing')

c) Polesworth solution - or is that to be regarded as an effective and hard to reverse closure by 'the team'?

d) Moving the station "a bit" up the line to where it might be effective. http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=14751.msg167185#msg167185

Virtually all this area is in flood zone 3 - the highest risk - with a presumption against further development. So I would be surprised.  There is, however a small area south of the station which is only zone 2. 

Had to look that up. Given that one train each way a week (as Pilning has apparently) is an effective closure anyway, the 'Polesworth solution' (a parlimentary service in one direction only, meaning the other platform can be closed) doesn't sound like much of a change from the current suituation. Of course, it would be better if both platforms can be kept running, but with just a parlimentary service an accessibility-regulations-compliant footbridge is not worthwhile.

I know rolling stock has to be compliant by 2020, but is there actually a legal requirement for stations to become accessible by a certain date (or be closed), or is it just a case of the government making a certain amount of money available each year to make more-and-more stations accessible? In the latter case, Pilning can simply be left at the back of the queue for said funds; by the time all other stations are accessible things might have changed considerably, somebody may even have invented teleportation and the whole railway might be redundant.

Doesn't Pilning's proximity to the vibrant hub of activity that is (Aloha! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKPaewLSjcY)) Severn Beach make this a non-starter?

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8036/8012081826_84c207a8d8_b.jpg)

Of course if there was only one platform the footbridge would comply! assuming the entrance is on the remaining platform. 

The band "One Direction" are said to have been inspired by a visit to Polesworth.

Would a new footbridge actually have to be accessible? It's my understanding of the EA, mostly via a disabled friend, that infrastructure which is a straight replacement for what's already there does not have to be DDA-compliant.

it seems ridiculous that a silly station like pilning can remain open and cause problems such as the footbridge as electrification approaches. It's in the middle of nowhere and has less than 100 people visiting it. Seems stupid that its easier to keep it open with a parliamentary train than to close the station completely.

But what if a station with such a limited service did have the potential to be another Melksham.  How do you tell the difference from just the 100 people which is all the railway really sees.  Be careful what you ask for.

Whilst there might not be much prospect of residential development in the area given the potential for flooding, there is an awful lot of industrial development going into the Distribution Park, so much so that an additional junction for the M49 is planned. The Range are building a big centre, and Lidl have just signed up.
 
There are a *lot* of people going to be working on that estate, much of it in labour-intensive warehousing type jobs. Perhaps it might not be a daft idea to rebuild Pilning Station as a station for the estate with a new link road? Employers could then run shuttle buses to the station at shift changes and other times.

It obviously wouldn't be a cheap project, but it would make the estate much more accessible to job seekers across Gloucestershire, Bristol and South Wales, so it would be in the employer's interests, plus very eco and good PR.   

In that case could developers contribute to the improvements to the station.

A shuttle bus service already exists for the Avonmouth industrial area. An extension to the SevernNet Flyer service would be all that is required.

http://severnnet.org/workareas/transport/bus-services/severnnet-flyer/

But to use it you have to get to Avonmouth station along the Severn Beach line, which isn't massively attractive for many people.

With Pilning you can have the Cardiff to Bristol stoppers calling in, which would make it very attractive for a lot of South Wales and north Bristol. 

I suspect though the problem is that calling at Pilning would mess up the train pathing through the tunnel.

Hi all, long time lurker, first time poster.....

This is something seemingly not very many people were aware of, i think it is a travesty that they are going to close the down platform. Pilning is a undervalued asset.

The copies of NR's letters are included in the below publication.

FOSBR (Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways) are most unimpressed and are writing to Office of Rail and Road ORR and Western Enterprise Partnership WEP regarding this.

http://www.fosbr.org.uk/files/20160615_pilningpr.pdf

Hi, Oliver, and welcome to the forum.    There is some background discussion on the issue to access to Pilning's platforms on electrification / the cost of providing a disability compliant access to the platform that's an island, etc - at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=814.msg194642#msg194642 - so readers can pick that up as background.

The consultation, though, was news to me and I'm going back through my notifications to see if I had heard about it.   With my Wiltshire hat, probably not logical to be told ... but I would have hoped that FOSBR would have been altered to a consultation, and I would be surprised if they hadn't heard from others if the consultation had been given reasonable publicity through people like the rail unions, CBT and RailFuture, even if FOSBR had been overlooked.

Welcome to the forum.

From reading the NR letter at the end of the consultation I think this was only a consultation to train operating companies as a network change.  As far as I recall they do not need to consult local authorities for a network change.  

However, this is a change that has significant implications.  I am not sure whether retaining Pilning has benefits over services to Severn Beach, but I believe that there needs to be proper consideration. I therefore fully support FOSBR's campaign.

MODS there has been a previous discussion on the future potential for Pilning

Just pipped by Grahame

I'm sure there's another thread where we've discussed this? I think before June 10? Maybe FOSBR ought to be monitoring this board?

As an admin / moderator, I plan to merge this with the previous Pilning topic mentioned in my earlier post once the white heat of initial responses is over, and it's clear that this is indeed a continuation rather than a specific failure os consultation system.

I did try to follow the link in the letter from FOSBR (the Network Rail consultation letter. But I got a "404" page telling me to check the link / or the content may have been moved.    Could be that my browser is the issue.   Does anyone had a working link they can post here, or a  copy of the text of the letter in their cache?

Try this link:
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%2520documents/network%2520code/network%2520change/completed%2520proposals/western/ncg12016west594%2520pilning/a%2520ncg12016west594%2520notification.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi7kMuboLTNAhUMJsAKHdcpBaIQFggdMAE&usg=AFQjCNHU0cOXPIOcKff1Kns9ItgoOWCsPQ&sig2=Wbjv2TGSkLpF83-stSVHKw

Good heavens ... now try http://atrebatia.info/pilning_down_closure.pdf where I have put a mirror.

Looks like it's a consultation letter just to the train operators .... which is a pretty slim "consultation" to me for what looks like it may be the reduction of a viable station to one that's not viable.   The URL above / mirrored doesn't include the scheme details, nor the distribution list, so I don't know whether down trains can cross over and stop at the up platform, or who's been asked.  I took the liberty of checking with TravelWatch SouthWest and even they didn't receive an invite to comment.

I am not expressing a view on the scheme in this post ... just a view on what may appear to be effective closure without public consultation.

Is this in Charlotte Leslie's constituency? Or do you live in her constituency. Even if not writing to the local MP using the term "effective closure" might be a useful approach.

Pilning is not in Charlotte Leslie's Bristol North West constituency: it's in Jack Lopresti's Filton and Bradley Stoke constituency.

I shall also check with my contacts at the Severnside Community Rail Partnership as to whether they have been informed of this proposal, and whether they are involved in the 'consultation'. ::)

Another long and interesting URL documenting other notices under the same consultation scheme:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browseDirectory.aspx?root=&dir=%5cnetwork%20code%5cNetwork%20Change%5cCompleted%20Proposals%5cWestern

For 2016, as well as Pilning there are notices for Dr Day's Bridge Junction to Filton Abbey Wood, and for the Heathfield branch.

The link above leads you to responses as well as the original consultation.  For ease of access / shorter URLs, there are copies at http://atrebatia.info/pilning_docs

Information suggests platform closes "from 17th September".   Does that mean last service Pilning to Cardiff is 10th September?

Is the platform also due for physical removal at some future date?

Severn Tunnel closes on the 12th, so nothing would be stopping anyway from that date.

Still gets 2 buses to/from BPW each week: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/advanced/PIL/2016/09/17/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt

OK - will 'Calendar' 10th.  I probably won't go;  been to two railway "lasts" in the past.  One was sad.  And on the other I saw just about the angriest passengers I've err seen on a train.

I was on the last service on the Epping Ongar branch, some 22 years ago.  Rather a lot of detonators if I remember...

They were using up surplus stock.  ;)

I was there a week or two before the axe fell.  I'm sure the other two people on the train were there for the ride like me as they didn't leave Ongar station either.  No wonder it closed.

It seems we waver between closing things too easily and quickly, and hanging on to redundant infrastructure well past any foreseeable further use. I am not a likely user of Pilning station: is anyone (other than those that like to catch trains from 'rare' stations)? If not, why not get on and remove it from the network?  There are plenty of openings/re-openings demanding resources more likely to be of profit (not only monetary).

The formal process for closing a section of line or station is so complex these days that there's [educated guess] a handful of stations on the network that are (frankly) not going to be use nor ornament in the foreseeable future.  But then there are other stations with similarly low passenger numbers which, given a decent service, would fulfill a much more useful role ... or given a planned or projected development would have a new lease of life.  So those could be of use in the future, and there's a bit of an issue in sorting out which are the "no hope"s, which are the "maybe"s, which are "future potential" and which are "why the heck haven't people been told about this".

What is rather unfortunate (IMHO) is that the closure procedure is so frightening these days that there's been a number of 'closures by stealth' - no consultation, but no effective service remaining.  Each may be a 'special case' and they're at different  process stages ... but think Norton Bridge, Newhaven Marine, Barlaston, Polesworth, Watford West, Denton, Sinfin.  Are those all logical closures?    The casual reader may say "yes" ... but I've sneaked Watford West into that list which was closed without proper closure - shrunken service, became a bus then (I think) a 6 a.m. taxi, but is now being rebuilt, reopened, rejeuvanted.

I don't live in or near Pilning.   Like most people, I have never used it.  But what I do see is a consultation that seems to have been internal rail industry only ... potentially closure by stealth.   It would - at current traffic levels - be an exceptionally poor investment to replace the foot bridge to the international departure platform with a new, disabled-friendly one.  But then it would be silly to end up with no station there if some of the development I've seen talked about / park and ride possibilities now that Parkway is squeaking for space should happen.  Problem is that the decision process, going past the point of "difficult to return" hasn't been advertised and transparent.

Edit because I had included one station twice in my list!

I'm guessing there might be two problems from ToCs pov with proper consultation: expense, and that it's very easy for people to say they'll use a putative service but harder for them to actually GOTA and catch the train.

There are - thank goodness - all sorts of optimism factors built in to forecasting models in an attempt to be realistic; in practise, indeed,modelling comes in distinctly on the negative side.

You correctly identify the expense and hassle of a 'proper' closure test.  It's right that it shouldn't be easy to close something until the avenues have been explored, but when that exploration is so contorted that it leads to what's been described as 'closure by stealth', it's a sign of a system that'n not working.   And indeed, the expense and hassle of closing something are somewhat of a barrier to re-openings, although the 1984 Speller Act for five year trials with a simplified closure procedure if the trial hasn't worked has been a lifeline for many stations and services at the restart point.   Mind you, we lost a service in May at the end of the five years - since to continue it would have meant it couldn't easily be withdrawn at a future date.

I'm unconvinced that Pilning is worth saving (but admit that I don't really know) but clearly the closure by stealth, and in fact the whole Parliamentary station concept, is no good for anyone. The fact that it does seem easier/cheaper for ToCs to do this than have a proper, open inquiry followed by either total closure or a decent service does seem to indicate that procedures are not right, neither in closing nor opening stations.

I quite agree that it's no good for anyone and farcical that money is being spent on the upkeep of, say Polesworth, where there's just the one call a day but quite a long platform that needs lighting, cleaning, maintaining and posters updated and so on, for a handful of passengers a year.  However, it's good that legislation to close a station is so complicated that it's not worth it otherwise TOC's would probably want to close hundreds of lightly used stations which provide a lifeline for local communities but would never make any money - compare the handful of Parliamentary stations across the country with the wide-scale culling of rural buses in Oxfordshire later this month, where it seems that, without any recourse, scores of local villages are having there bus services completely removed.

As this topic continues to be debated on the Coffee Shop forum, I've now moved a discussion of the closure of the Pilning down platform and merged it here - simply in the interests of continuity and ease of future reference.  ;)

Fair point that TOCs shouldn't be able to close stations at the drop of a hat, but what I want to say is that if a station is not being kept open with a reasonable service, it should be closed. The process of closing it should be preceded by extensive, well advertised consultations while a decent service continues. Then either close it down completely or carry on. Parliamentary services are a waste of everyone's time and money.

And yet... the point has been made that sometimes Parly stas act as a sort of mothballing from which it's easy to rejuvenate a station when circumstances change, eg major new developments. So...  :-\

The former young Miss FT, N! lives in Carterton, adjacent to RAF Brize Norton. Mrs FT, N! visits occasionally on child minding duties. The normal route is - was - train BRI to SWI then bus. The problem is that the bus begins its journey in Wiltshire, then serves destinations in Gloucestershire before proceeding into Oxfordshire. That gives three possible funding authorities. Any one dropping out will kill the service. As has happened. As Mrs FT, N! does not drive, then in the absence of someone collecting her from SWI, the alternative will be a much longer journey via OXF. That said, I have done the bus trip once, and was the only passenger after Highworth, something I am told is far from unusual. Must cost a fortune.

The more likely solution will involve me and the FT, N!mobile spending my retirement on or near the M4...

Something I hadn't noticed before - a new footbridge at Brigg Station, which has some similarities to Pilning - low-use Saturday only trains, two platforms ...  the newspaper article here is about increased station use rather than the bridge, but I couldn't help noticing than shiny bridge;   looks like a complete new structure, and I suspect there's room for overhead wiring underneath it.

http://www.marketrasenmail.co.uk/news/local/rail-walk-at-brigg-1-7502634?

further research leads to a story from last year (Feb 2015):

http://www.scunthorpetelegraph.co.uk/row-erupts-disabled-access-station-bridge/story-25978267-detail/story.html


Just adding a comparison case in to this thread - it's very difficult to justify large investments in low-use stations, even where the station has been there since Victorian times and it's just an investment to keep it available.

From The Gazette (http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/14694323.Campaigners_speak_out_against_closure_of_Pilning_railway_station_platform_and_footbridge/?ref=mr&lp=5):

I was at Pilning today to catch one of the last westbound trains.

I was the only one joining, but two got off.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/pilnbridge.jpg)
(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/pilntrain.jpg)

A large poster advertises the changes to the service

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/pilnsign.jpg)

Video from yesterday:
https://www.facebook.com/PilningSevernParishCouncil/videos/1168164809907482

A still captured from that video (with permission):
(http://www.wellho.net/pix/notlastpilning.jpg)

I would strongly encourage Bristol / FOSBR / Pilning 'lurkers' on this form to register (if not already registered) and login to add your own 'take' on Bristol and wider events.

Whilst I can (and will on occasions) post news that comes to me as messages / emails, we do provide facilities here for free public posting on subjects just such as this. Neither I nor the rest of the moderator / admin team really has the time to be everyone's personal assistant for routinely cutting and pasting contributions. We are not like a normal newspaper / radio show where (yes) you do have to submit by email for them to use.

Think about it - you get to describe things in your own words, your own editorial decisions, and your own timing of what you post. And by setting up notifications, you can trigger email alerts to inform you when a follow up has been posted so that you don't even have to visit us on a very frequent basis.

Journey planners are showing Wales bound trains calling at Pilning on the 22nd and 29th October (the two Saturdays after the Severn Tunnel blockade) and the poster at the station - shown above - shows changes from 5th November.  So are there two more trains?

Yes.  Bridge removal not happening during the blockade. Your post includes the "From 5th November" poster that's up at Pilning. I didn't wonder "why" at the time, but it was recently confirmed that there are the trains calling towards Wales for a couple more Saturdays after the blockade.

BBC Radio Bristol covered the Pilning story on Emma Britton's breakfast programme on Monday.

Audio available here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p045m19m (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p045m19m) -- advance clip to 38:05 for interviews with Olga Taylor of Save Pilning Station and Julian Burnell of Network Rail, and to 1:32:35 for a further contribution from another local resident.

There is a report on NotTheLastTrainFromPilning here: http://fosbr.org.uk/files/20160910_pilning_notlasttrain_blog.pdf (http://fosbr.org.uk/files/20160910_pilning_notlasttrain_blog.pdf).

And more photos on FOSBR's Facebook page: http:www.facebook.com/FOSBR (http://http:www.facebook.com/FOSBR):

(https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14238277_1109236312495163_4685894722460440731_n.jpg?oh=5b64a2f4c8c84a1428bad25930d19b98&oe=586EB567)

(https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14222203_1109164359169025_1462247117607182334_n.jpg?oh=38a83edbcfcc1d1c0a33a7dbce4044b0&oe=584338C4)

Many thanks for those links and pictures.   

As an update (or is that downdate?) removal of the footbridge has slipped back a few weeks in Network Rail's schedule, and the final train towards Cardiff probably calls on 29th October.  See http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C47762/2016/10/29/advanced . This is inline with Bobm's post earlier in this thread (sat month) which tells of alternative arrangements from 5th November.

Thanks, grahame.

I think that's a change in plan -- when I was at Pilning, I saw one poster showing the new arrangements from 5 November, as shown earlier in the thread, and another poster showing replacement bus services in the interim.

Anyway, just as well the event was called NotTheLastTrain!

The local people did well to decorate the platform with English and Welsh flags, I thought.

It was a change it plan, but this was made around a month ago.

The other poster you saw is dated up to the end of the Severn Tunnel works (21 October) so its validity doesn't cover whatever is beyond it.

So the actual last train to call at the northbound platform at Pilning is scheduled for today, leaving Temple Meads at 15.21 and arriving at Pilning at 15.40, with removal of the footbridge perhaps commencing later this weekend. We won't be there, but would be interested to hear any reports.

Latest news is that the brick staircases of the footbridge have been demolished, with removal of the metal part scheduled for Saturday 5 November.

(https://scontent-bru2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14639813_1154602337958560_6592003046856297463_n.jpg?oh=04ff6cfcdaa7ecb1c7d3a79401f61150&oe=58CC62B7)

Inspired by last week's demonstration in Buckinghamshire of a new technique for bridge lifting (see below), campaigners are asking for the metal part of the bridge to be removed intact for future reinstatement.

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/infrastructure/single-view/view/bridge-lift-to-increase-clearances.html (http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/infrastructure/single-view/view/bridge-lift-to-increase-clearances.html)

http://www.railengineer.uk/2016/08/19/planning-for-a-worlds-first-elevarch-masonry-arch-jacking-trial/ (http://www.railengineer.uk/2016/08/19/planning-for-a-worlds-first-elevarch-masonry-arch-jacking-trial/)

Of course if you lift it, you have to provide new steps, so you are probably classed as new construction which has to meet modern regs and accessibility requirements.

Note also that the new safety rules relating to electrification also require parapets to be higher to keep people away from wires, so the bridge would probably require modification anyway. 

Now that the down platform is closed, how are GWR complying with their Service Level Commitment? That requires one call in each direction on Saturdays.

Have the got the necessary derogation to ignore the SLC, or has it been amended? 

Maybe they will continue to call but for pick-up only!   ;)

Or institute a bus replacement? That would count

There are two Up trains now calling on Saturday; so would they say, if pressed, that you "just" need to change (at BRI or STJ, presumably)? The timings kind of work in some cases, but not for all four directions.

Perhaps -- though at Stapleton Road, where the footbridge also had to be raised to allow clearance for electrification, a new footbridge without ramps was installed. However, there is currently level access to both platforms there; I'm not sure how access will be provided to what will become the island platform after the four tracking.


Yes -- such parapets have recently been installed on the bridge carrying the railway path (on the old Midland line) over the railway near Lawrence Hill.


As stuving has said, passengers have been advised to travel via Severn Tunnel Junction. There doesn't appear to be a formal easement in place, but I understand tickets to Pilning will be accepted without the need to pay an extra fare.

For the outward journey, one can still depart Pilning at 08.32 and arrive at Temple Meads at 08.53 as before.

For the return journey:

• Previously, one could depart Temple Meads at 15.21 and arrive at Pilning at 15.40.
• Now, one must depart Temple Meads at 12.21, change at Severn Tunnel Junction (arrive at 12.48 and depart at 13.25) and arrive at Pilning at 13.34 (an extra Pilning stop in the Bristol-bound direction has been provided on this train).

So a return journey is still possible, but with a double-back at STJ and a much shorter time in Bristol (or for journeys elsewhere). I don't know whether that is enough to ensure compliance with the SLC.

Any questions to GWR on the SLC will probably be countered with ticket sale information.

I suspect they'd state that no one was making the return journey. With just 68 recorded journeys last year...

I'd just hope that the proper legal derogation of thr SLC has been obtained. Pilning may be a special case, but if a TOC is allowed to vary SLC arbitrarily, this case could be the thin end of the wedge.

Not really a case of GWR being allowed to vary SLC. Rather GWR being effectively forced to. 

This. Network Rail have imposed this change upon GWR by removing the footbridge (NR property) and choosing not to replace it.

Customers may also return from Bristol to Severn Beach (New easement along with via STJ) so travelling Pilnonians still have plenty of options.

Plenty of options but still few trains. Unless tickets to Pilning are now valid on all trains to Severn Beach?

Pilning return tickets are valid to Severn Beach from Bristol on all trains as I understand.

FYI - Pilning footbridge appears to have been gas-axed during the weekend  :-\ ...only half of the stair structures still standing when I passed today @ approx 1630. Couldnt take a photo as up the front & had lost the light on the way back.

Assume the rest will dissapear over the next few nights.

Thanks for posting, Sprog: I've simply added your update observation to our ongoing discussion here.  :)

Shame, we are after a footbridge.....!

Seriously though, it does make me wonder if there is any mileage in relocating and refurbishing disused/ unwanted footbridges, or if the logistical challenges force it into the 'too difficult box' ?

The one at Patchway may be a good candidate..it was redecked and refurbished several years ago but I cant imagine it surviving the electrification - may get a footbridge like Stapleton road. May be worth makong some serious enquires before they cut that up aswell!

Well now, you could have a word with the GWSR - they are currently rebuilding the old Henley-in-Arden footbridge at Broadway. See here, for example: http://broadwaystationgroup.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/finishing-off-few-jobs.html

There's a couple of reports I found based on the idea - not sure how far they got / where it went.

From Herald Scotland (http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13116298.Historic_footbridge_to_be_relocated/)


And from the St Austell Voice (http://www.staustellvoice.co.uk/news/0/article/4371/)


Also reports / a suggestion of relocating a bridge that is / was at St Erth.

If you're looking for one for Lostwithiel, I suspect you'll have the best chance if you find one which (a) is in known (and reasonable condition and (b) who's removal from its original site doesn't involve a controversial closure of facilities which the bridge serves.

Here is a photo, taken on the afternoon of Sunday 6 November:

(https://scontent.flhr2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14639890_1158740690878058_353476887837615693_n.jpg?oh=24cf74b724dd492198fb9ebf7ad3905c&oe=588BC992)

Thanks for posting that pictorial record here, Kempis.  ;)

A year on ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDqz-KLH_2E

A year on ... and a FOI request has revealed the cost of these demolition works, and estimates of what the costs would have been to replace the bridge, to provide a DDA compliant bridge, and of associated works.   FOI is a wonderful way of learning after the event - though this one dates from December 2016 and so wan't all that long after the event, though  have only just been sent a copy


No questions in this FOI request about the decision processes under which the decision to change the station such that only the one (Bristol bound) platform remains in operational use for passengers.

It seems crazy that it would cost £2m to build a footbridge. And stupid that full GRIP could more than double that cost.

Far better to put that sort of money,towards the scheme for SEWWEB ,and the replacement station at Pilning Westgate.😁

The money talked about looks like a virtually complete rebuild of the platforms and station to modern standards.  And if you have been to Pilning station, you'll probably appreciate that it's not really suitable in current form to handle traffic several orders of magnitude more than use it today this Saturday.   

For the same money, you could rebuild the station a couple of hundred yards down the track at a suitable over bridge, with slopes down to new platforms.  With the existing over bridge on the road (the B4055 springs to mind) eliminating the  need for that extra Network Rail £2 million pound thing.  The platforms and approaches at Oldfield Park make a suitable comparison.

As a follow up ... I note that Denton, which has had a one way service on one day of the week only only for a number of years has had its service doubled in the new Northern timetable with trains in both directions on Saturdays.

08:46 Stockport to Stalybridge calls at Platform 1 at 08:55
09:45 Stalybridge to Stockport calls at Platform 2 (brought back into use) at 09:55.

Reddish South also has an extra train - one in each direction again now - though that's a single platform that's used in both directions.

I am not sure that is what is being said in the quote.  The wording implies it includes works costs.

Just to wake this thread up Today is the 2nd Anniversary of Pilning having its Footbridge removed !
So With that in Mind , https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=asfMseyPCOI.
Hope you enjoy.

Just this morning, I've received an email containing the new FOSBR newsletter - not seeing it online yet, so I guess it may be at the early members-only release stage - which includes some good discussions on Pilning and how a station at Pilning could play a major part in daily passenger transport in the area once again.

I will add a link once available

Saturday December the first  is the One Hundred and Thirty Second Anniversary of the opening of Pilning Station what's left of it .

Which raises the question, would a possibly relocated Pilning station in the future be seen as continuity or a different station? Many stations have changed dramatically over the years. Would a small shift in the site be seen as just another change over time or do we have to look at it as something new?

You have an excellent question.  From a business case viewpoint, a new site proposal a few hundred yards up the track will attract a new look at the case for build and service calls from the experts who have already laughed off the idea of doing more than legally needed at the current site.  There are the precedents such as station moves from Filton Junction to Filton Abbey Wood ... also Abercynon North and South combined in Abercynon. 

I Think I have sorted it?, No need to spend loads of money on new bridges or platforms, Make it nice and tidy like Melksham Then just fit a position 4 junction indicators to signals BL1533 And BL1566 Then trains can just cross back over via NT1613. Sorted and up to 7 trains each way could then stop Mondays to Saturdays, with 4 each way on Sundays. these would be timed as to not block the lines for other trains needing the line.

Note. These trains would also call at Patchway on the other Platform also.

I have taken a look at that idea over recent months, and the conclusion has been that using the bidirectional line for services stopping at Pilning would put a significant strain on capacity.   You might be able to timetable it for a handful of trains each day, but trains are nothing like as reliable in running to timetable as you might like - especially freight ones - and the whole thing could go pear shaped far too often and easily.   Sadly, don't think it flies. 

Indeed ... I was there and it's a sad shadow of what it used to be.  Quite a flurry of activity for that short period that the train called there at 15:24 - multiple passengers off and on, including a long distance "meet and greet" with heavy luggage; genuine traffic there in amongst those of us who were there because of the transport / stations issues.

I have written up - separate thread at  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=20784.0 - an update concerning the whole line from the Parkway area until it dives down under the Severn.  Much of what's there regulars will know; the new thread is intended to start looking at all the possibilities under the same ground rules.

Noticed today one last train at 15:34 to Taunton, What a shame.

I'm slightly confused with that statement. There are no trains next week due to the engineering works, so rail replacement taxi, but the week after its back to the 08:34 and 15:34?

Last train of 2018 ... there are only a few other stations across the whole of GB who's services have already ceased for the year.

There should be a rail replacement service available at Pilning next Saturday, right?

GWR send a return taxi from Bristol Parkway to Pilning in the morning and afternoon.
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/advanced/PIL/2018/12/29/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=GW

Passengers double at Pilning station despite one-way trains - https://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/17378127.passengers-double-at-station-despite-one-way-trains/

It might be because of one-way trains.

Change at Pilning!
Well not really,but yesterday afternoon saw the arrival of the first High Speed Train (HST) to stop at Pilning a short 4carriage slam door set formed the /15:34 to Taunton from Cardiff.

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/tunnelcars.jpg)

How old is that? Not many motorcycles less than 120lbs now.

Well, it mentions the Railway Executive (Western Region) at the top so later than 1948.

The prices had gone up by 1959  :)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/93122458@N08/18926681565/

The Railway Executive was abolished in 1953, so must date between 1948 and 1953

Records of the Railway Executive, 1947-1953 in the National Archive
‘The Transport Act of 1953 provided that the British Transport Commission should prepare and submit to the Minister of Transport a scheme for the re-organisation of that part of their undertaking which consists of the operation of the railways.
This scheme provided, inter alia, for the abolition of the Railway Executive which was abolished as from 1st October 1953 under the British Transport Commission (Executives) Order 1953, dated 19th August 1953 (No. 1291). The rights, powers and liabilities of the Railway Executive, in force immediately before the 1st October 1953, were transferred to the British Transport Commission.’

...but interestingly the price of having your paint scuffed off by a gritty tarpaulin had fallen from 2/2 to 2/-...

Today, allowing for inflation, that single fare for an 8hp+ car would be around £25.

I suppose the calculation back then would have been the time/cost of the trip through the tunnel, versus the time/cost for the Aust Ferry. Or versus the drive via Gloucester. Other influences would be one's susceptibility to seasickness, the vagaries of tides in the estuary that sometimes stopped the ferries from running, and ultimate destination.

The Severn Bridge certainly reduced the cost of the crossing. Today, that cost is zero.

Anyone know how much the ferry cost in the early 1950s? I've tried Google but no joy.

Correct. 1952. Front cover:

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/1952_tt_1.jpg)

Interesting example of subtle shift in word usage.  ;D

Very much so. One is accustomed to "gratuitous" sex, violence, and/or profanity in modern motion pictures, but not "gratuitous" timetables.

Olga Taylor, a vocal campaigner for Pilning Station, stood for election as an independent in the new Pilning and Severn Beach Ward. She beat the Labour, Lib Dem and Green candidates, but came second with 271 votes (23% of the poll). The Conservative candidate, Robert Griffin, won with 483 votes.

Apparently Olga used the count to inform the newly re-elected councillor of the importance of Pilning Station  ;D

Whilst looking at other stuff - as one does these days - I came across a DoT paper concerning the Proposed closure of Angel Road station (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/771998/proposed-closure-of-angel-road-station-summary-of-responses.pdf) in NE London dated 2018. In the responses to the proposed closure, 21 respondents called for the footbridge there (an overhead electrified line) be relocated to Pilning (page 3). Don't know what subsequently became of this as Angel Road closed in 2019.

The report hints ...


and that suggests to me that the inputs were too significant to ignore, but not overwhelming enough for anyone to follow the suggestions. So the DfT were seen to be "helpfully" kicking the ball to someone else (actually their own agency!) who had a patch of long grass / filing cabinet waiting for it.

Indeed it does as it has not miraculously appeared at Pilning. My curiosity is more to who those 21 respondents were, and my guess is they they weren't from NE London but somewhat further west. I presume part of the action group to get their bridge, platform and service restored.

I wouldn't like to speculate as to who the other 20 were, but i have no.problem whatsoever with the world knowing that one of them was me.

You have another here.

Network Rail removes footbridge at Chatham Station says the headline in Kent Online (https://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/footbridge-removed-in-train-station-revamp-246573/) and my thoughts turn to Pilning.

"Here we go again?" I wonder. But then the article detail read ...


Access for all at Chatham;  access for none at Pilning. Yes, I understand that Chatham is a different case to Pilning,

Have just seen this thread, so congratulations to the 21 signatories mentioned above. Looks like the start of some low-scale guerrilla action from our Pilning activists.

As it was Angel Road station, did any of the 21 suggest some sort of heavenly intervention to fly the bridge westwards?  :D

Flagging up "on this day" - 7 years since the removal of the Pilning footbridge.