Just for once I looks like GW^▸ (Great Western) have come up with the best solution in difficult circumstances (assuming that is that they hire adequate replacement busses). The line to Hereford is a long slow journey (3 hours plus), has I believe two longish single track sections and then it's another 50-odd minutes down to Newport.

An hour and a half to Parkway, say 15 minutes to get on your bus, and forty minutes to Newport doesn't look too bad as an alternative. I hope they have air conditioning!

Anyone on our network know what's happening about these trains?

In the light of recent correspondence here about air condition/cooling, cascading of Turbo trains etc, I have done some Googling to  find out what specification we can expect. I ended up on something called RailUK Forums (a pale imitation of our own!) where there was much conflicting information as to the comfort of the trains from which they are being converted, and the delightful suggestion we should follow the French and call them Bi-Bis (rather than trimodes).

More significantly is the suggestion that there are problems with developing the trains - it is suggested that there is not yet a working prototype, and there may be problems with the conversion.

Should we start worrying? 

Thanks all for your views on the Gatwick suggestion - DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have my suggestion in my consultation response, but it sounds like plenty of reasons to say "no" - another bright idea bites the dust?

As a regular commuter on the North Downs line, the comment about use of 165s and 166s and luggage is from personal experience. Strangely though this morning there were more 166s in evidence. Is the manager of Reading depot out there behind one of your aliases?

As regards Grahame's question about what XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) is for, the answer is (I think) simple. It is to provide direct train services between the larger urban areas of the country without going via London. The fact that at times the services are also used by commuters and get busy, such as at rush hour around Birmingham should not derogate from this role - after all most mainline services into London become crowded commuter trains at peak times too. I would be against trying to limit the use of XC services at peak times - why take capacity out of Leamington to Birmingham that will simply result in other services becoming even more crowded, or their passengers taking their cars instead? This is one of the reasons I oppose removing XC services from north of Northallerton. XC services provide capacity on the lines they run on - removing an XC an hour would presumably allow another train that starts at London to use its path, but the continuing problems with the East Coast franchise hardly indicates unmet demand, and the XC services are capacity for Doncaster-York-Newcastle passengers, to say nothing of those from Leeds and Harrogate with one change of trains. Not all journeys start and finish at London.

As regards time, longer journeys may take longer than via London, but if you are travelling for leisure/holidays, which is a large part of XC's business, it is attractive to avoid hauling across London by tube - the same applies to Reading-Gatwick.   

As you may gather, I am a bit of a fan - please don't give First the franchise! If we are to persuade more people to leave their cars at home and use the train, we need a decent Cross Country network.

 

The line service is two an hour, but one is a slow stopper calling all stations between Wokingham and Ash, then Guildford, and terminating usually at  Guildford, Shalford or Redhill, if they go beyond Guildford there is a mixed pattern of stops towards Redhill: the second is a limited stop service missing Crowthorne, Sandhurst, Farnborough North, Ash and anything other than Dorking Deapdene, Reigate and Redhill after Guildford. There used to be a few XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Gatwicks under Virgin management, and there is still one early morning from Guildford and a train arrives at Guildford in the early evening, so I guess there must be room to add more.

Following on my earlier post elsewhere, I have found this consultation and responded.

Three  points for our forum. Firstly I would like to speak up in support of this franchise and its two holders so far. I thought it was tough on Virgin/Stagecoach to lose the franchise having transformed the service during their tenure. However Arriva have also kept it as a very useful link between those of us in the Thames Valley and the north. The two an hour service to Birmingham, and one an hour to Manchester, Newcastle and Southampton really does provide an alternative to taking your car or struggling across London. The Voyager trains I also find comfortable, although I am aware that those over 6 feet tall find them cramped, and its a shame that there are windowless seats in most (all?) coaches. I am not able to comment on fares as most of my peak hour journeys are for work on tickets procured through work. They are not particularly quick (it would usually be quicker to go via London from Newcastle to Reading), but you can see that there is plenty of slack in the timetable to take account of the fact it crosses everyone else's networks with their problems and delays. It's quicker to Birmingham and (usually) Manchester from Reading.

Secondly- I am amazed how few people know about this service! A colleague from our Manchester office and I had a meeting in Reading, and he was surprised he could get a direct train- even more that it called at his home station, Macclesfield. Network Rail and the franchisees have not done a good job at alerting the travelling public to these useful services.

Thirdly - it occurred to me that this franchise might be a better home for one of the Cinderella services of the GW^▸ (Great Western) franchise, namely the Reading - Gatwick service. The service suffers from being unknown to many, made worse by the inconvenience of its departure platforms at Reading (remote 4,5 or 6 - a long walk for holiday makers loaded with luggage, and with narrow platforms) and now unsuitable trains. Until recently FGW^▸ (First Great Western) used the airconditioned Turbos 166, which at least had extra luggage space in the centre coach, more 4 across seating and two first class sections at either end. However they have now largely been replaced by the 165s with 5 across seating in most of the standard class accommodation, one first class section at one end and which therefore end up  clogged with luggage. Not a good travelling experience, which is a shame as it's another useful service (and a pretty ride from Guildford to Reigate!).

My suggestion would be that the Gatwick service be transferred to Cross Country, perhaps as an extension of the Newcastle to Reading. I've seen elsewhere on this forum a suggestion of upping North Downs services to three an hour, so two stopping GW Reading to Guildford and Redhills and a limited stop Reading to Gatwick operated by XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) could be the answer. Perhaps the fragmented nature of franchises and their renewal rules this out. I also appreciate that platform lengths apart from Reading, Wokingham, Guildford and Redhill are probably inadequate. No doubt more knowledgeable users of this forum will know of other problems.

However, would Grahame's colleagues in Wiltshire welcome the opportunity of a single change of train at Reading to get to Gatwick as part of the new franchise?     

Thanks Graeme for your comprehensive responses.

As regards bringing consultations to our attention, perhaps it should be part of the franchise specification that in the run up to a renewal the franchisee should send an email alert to all customers on its contact list and leaflets on trains. At the very least, the teams that are periodically employed to hand out questionnaires could be retained to hand out consultation questionnaires at this time. In our part of the world we get these (from memory) about once every two years. A single poster at a station like Reading would be absolutely useless!

I take your point about apathy among consultees, but the opportunity would be welcomed.

As regards the value of completing a consultation response - if you do, you might just make a tiny difference. If you don't, you won't! There does though seem to be an element of box ticking in some of the questions on the Cross Country questionnaire - notably the Community Rail Partnerships question at the end. This seems to have limited application to this franchise, and would surely have been more appropriately dealt with by a few letters or emails to the organisations involved. I also had the impression consultees were being softened up for decisions already made - such as curtailing services north of Northallerton. It did though make me appreciate that there is one issue that cuts across the XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise))/GW^▸ (Great Western) franchises which I will raise in a separate post.

 

perhaps the engine that moved to the front remembered that in a former life it was a Brush Type 4 that ran around its train at Reading to take the York to Bournemouth down to the south coast.....

I think Bignosemac might be right!

This was in my Inbox today -

"Dear Consultee

 

Thank you for your response to the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)’s recent consultation on the Great Western Franchise. We are currently considering the responses and will summarise the outcomes in a Stakeholder Briefing Document in due course.

 

In the meantime, we have been asked by First Group if they can see the full responses, to help them develop proposals for the future franchise that are informed by the views that people have expressed in their consultation responses. We recognise that not everyone will necessarily wish for their response (including any personal details) to be shared with First Group.  So, rather than share those responses directly, we are inviting you to decide for yourself and to forward your own response if you wish to do so.

 

First Group have provided a dedicated email address for this purpose. If you wish to amend or redact your response to omit personal details then you are welcome to do so.

If you would like First Group to see your response, then please forward it to them at: consultations@gwr.com

 

If you would prefer not to forward your response then please take no further action and be assured that this will in no way affect how your response is viewed as part of the DfT’s own consultation analysis.

 

Thank you again for taking the time to respond

Kind regards

 

GW^▸ (Great Western) Consultation Team"

 ...and this is how I responded-

"To - the GW Consultation Team, Dept of Transport

Thank you for your email.

I am concerned that the current franchisee is being allowed to pass on this request. Shouldn't it be the case that any prospective bidder that might be interested should be able to make this request?

FGW^▸ (First Great Western)/GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have held this franchise long enough, and must have received more than enough complaints from fed-up passengers to know what we want and what we think. They have passenger panels, and there is a website (GWR Coffee Shop) that provides a forum for suggestions and complaints. I see no reason why they should be allowed to use departmental resources to secure an advantage over other bidders. This tends to reinforce the impression that First Group might already be a shoe-in for a new franchise or extension.

Can I suggest that you instead ask consultees if they would be prepared to allow there responses with their personal details redacted to be made available to any prospective bidder in due course?  Or require First Group to forward any comments received to Govia, National Express, Stagecoach, Arriva & Abellio?

I might add that as a daily commuter, who changes trains at one of the busiest stations (Reading), I only found out about the consultation by accident (on a BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) regional webpage that is not my local one). I have spoken to a number of my fellow Thames Valley commuters, and none were  aware that a consultation has been undertaken. There has been nothing I have seen in the local press (I take both a Reading and a Newbury local paper), nor on any regional TV programme. I have not seen any posters at any station. I have just discovered today that there is currently a consultation on the future of the Cross Country franchise, another route I sometimes use, and which serves my locality. The same comments apply about the lack of publicity.

Can I suggest a review of public consultation arrangements for rail franchise renewals be undertaken?"

I might add (as a "Newbie") that I only discovered GWR Coffee Shop after nearly missing the GW Franchise consultation. I am still finding my way around, so thank you Graeme for alerting me to the XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) consultation. I hope DfT does not use it as a way of giving the current franchisee an advantage over competitors, although my experience of Arriva XC has been generally satisfactory (sometimes good!) - it is a shame few seem to know their services exist.


 

Sadly, "Broadway" in Didcot is probably one of the shabbiest streets in south east England outside Greater London, even though it's now just a few paces away from the recent Orchard Centre which has at least brought a  selection of national chain stores to Didcot.

Thatcham Broadway is not exactly glamorous either...

Has anyone spotted this on the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) website, a "Reality Check" on the current Northern Rail problems -- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44356993?

There seems to be many similarities to the position in January on GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) when the new electrified timetable came in between Didcot and Paddington. Problems blamed on changes to electrification schemes, staff training and shortage difficulties.

Is the problem that too many changes are being introduced at the same time? Should new trains be introduced, and drivers trained up, before major timetable changes take place? Are there any industry insiders out there in the coffee shop able to help?

Back in 1974 some school friends and I went to Southern Ireland for a holiday. We were told that the Republic had only just abandoned a system whereby to get a driving licence all you needed to do was go to a Post Office and pay a fee (50p/10 shillings if I recall correctly) - even if you were totally blind!

As a recent poster on the subject of timetables, it is disappointing that there is so little information available and no sign of any consultation.

It is becoming clear that the current timetable for stopping trains between Didcot and London is a stopgap. It seems to result in quite a mismatch between the number of carriages arriving at Reading and demand on the various parts of the routes served and little resilience when things go wrong. For example, last week two westbound and one eastbound stopping trains between Reading and Didcot were cancelled in the late rush hour/mid evening period (19-30 to 21-00). During my prolonged wait at Reading, an empty Electrostar moved off station to the depot at Reading, two more almost empty eight coach trains arrived at Reading to terminate. One divided, the front 4 coaches going to the depot, the rear 4 returning empty out of service towards London. The second, after a wait, departed back almost empty as a stopping service to London while over 80 passengers gathered on platform 12 with nothing going to Didcot to get us home.

There are a number of concerns. Firstly, how will the Crossrail/Elizabeth Line services dovetail with GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) services east of Reading? Secondly, what will be the pattern of stopping services between Reading and Didcot - will we end up with more random trains filling gaps in a crowded timetable with varying stopping patterns east of Reading with widely varying gaps between trains as at present? Will any attempt be made to facilitate connections at Reading?

Does the Coffee Shop have any inside track to Mark Hopwood to seek some information? 

Can I add three nominations? It's not just the clarity of language that is a problem.

The first are two sections of the current timetable T10 covering evening trains from London out to Didcot, and morning trains in from Didcot on weekdays. The problem is firstly that some **** at GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) has to run together what should sensibly be two pocket timetables - one for stopping trains from Reading to Didcot, another for stopping trains east of Reading. Secondly is the confusing mix of stopping patterns on the current electric services between Didcot and Paddington, with trains passing one another between Reading and Paddington. This results in trains flitting between columns and pages, making it difficult to follow which train will arrive first at Paddington (in the morning) or back home (in the evening).

Dear GWR - just because the nice new Electrostars can only run as far as Didcot does not mean that it is sensible to produce timetables covering all their routes. Instead please recognise that the Didcot to Tilehurst passengers primarily travel to Reading and London - a separate timetable for us (or perhaps just adding any missing services to T8, and removing the "Oxford Canal Line" marketing tag) would be much more useful.

Secondly, a special prize for the old FGW^▸ (First Great Western) website, and its enigmatic tab "Your Journey" - what on earth did that mean? Although the current GWR one is a little better, it is still not easy to find (for example) the timetables.

Thirdly the appalling signage at the new Reading station - here the problems are manifold - poor positioning, lighting and inadequate signs at key points. However I think the worst are the signs stuck on the side of each staircase with a lift symbol and an arrow pointing upwards, which results in most strangers with luggage struggling up escalators rather then going behind the escalator to find the lifts.

To be fair to Network Rail, as part of the electrification project they have set up a fund for ecological mitigation projects to offset the effects of clearing a considerable amount of lineside vegetation to make it suitable for overhead lines. This is available for local wildlife groups to use for habitat creation.

The "new" (or restored?) open grassland habitat on the cleared cuttings and embankments will also not be pure loss. Those with an interest in wildlife may recall that when we had a spurt of motorway building in the 1960s and 1970s the newly created verges created an ideal habitat for small mammals, especially voles, which in turn resulted in hovering Kestrels becoming a feature of motorway journeys. As the verges have grown, this has been lost, and you don't see so many Kestrels