MPs to meet minister over Worcestershire to London rail services

[whole diary]

[swrural]

Last few replies - groan!  I'm sorry but a girl in Glasgow has just lost her life - I think adventures should be carried out by going to some remote place and seeing how one gets on with nature.

We did not hear whether speed limits were exceeded that morning from Hereford.  It's no good, I give up, I won't change the minds of contributors and it no longer matters anyway,

[stebbo]

Whilst I am sorry when anyone passes on, I do think we have become too health and safety orientated these days. I look back on the "older" times with a smile - like climbing a tree with some friends in the 1960s and not worrying about falling out of it.

Apologies, nothing to do with Great Western but I come from a slightly older school of thought and have a slightly different outlook on things.

There's a few other good class 50 rides I remember but I won't bore you with them..........................

[IndustryInsider]

The meeting has taken place:

http://www.halesowennews.co.uk/news/worcestershire/10090110._/

[stebbo]

A report from the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) website:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-20608597

(I promise to be serious on this blog now).

[Andrew1939 from West Oxon]

I attended the CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) annual christmas dinner last night (and very good it was) when Mark Hopwood (FGW^▸ (First Great Western) MD) was one of the guests and spoke about a number of issues, including as expected comments on the recent deteriorating punctualilty and reliability problems of the Cotswold Line (CL). He had yesterday been to a meeting with the NR^» (Network Rail - home page) Regional Director yesterday on this matter. However he also said that the CL has also experienced the highest growth in use amongst the various FGW lines and that now that off-peak services on the CL are served by 5 coach adelates (that is when they haven't broken down! - my comment), some of these services are carrying capacity or near capacity loads. He is wondering how the line will cope with the planned?/expected? growth in rail use when the Hitachi bi-mode 5-car trains now on order and intended to cope with traffic for the next 30+ years, will cope. Of course the obvious answer is to complete the redoubling of the two short stretches of single track (Evesham westwards and Charlbury eastwards) that would increase the capacity of the line enormously and enable more trains to run between Worcestershire and the south east stations as well as cater for trains to and from Stratford if that project were ever to come to fruition. Perhaps the MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) should follow up this matter with Daft.

[martvw]

The more I hear about the poor time keeping on the North Cotswold Line, the more it seems that the Charlbury/Oxford and the Evesham/Norton sections should be double tracked to remove these last two bottle necks and the long stops at Evesham/Chalbury. Otherwise pasengers will keep driving to neighbouring counties to catch a faster train to Oxford/London etc. Daft or what,(we cant blame the passengers for doing so). The Cotswold Line should be the obvious choice of train travel for passengers in the surrounding area. We need faster services and better parking , the parking is being dealt with I read.

[Andrew1939 from West Oxon]

Of course redoubling the two remaining relatively short stretches of single track at each end of the Cotswold Line would be the best solution. However matters could be much improved if the CL timetable could be recast so that more Up and Down trains passed somewhere around the middle of the now lengthy middle section of double track. That would give significantly better leeway for a late train in one direction not delaying a punctual one going the other direction. At present too many trains pass at the ends of the central double track, i.e. at Evesham and Charlbury. Too many trains have built in timetable waits of 10-15 minutes at Charlbury and some at Evesham lengthening travel times let alone the problems with late running trains. Whilst recasting the timetable would seem to be easy at first glance, I am told that pathing at Worcester/Hereford and Paddington/Oxford is so congested that to recast the CL timetable would mean making many other timetable changes that would be difficult and complex to introduce, especially with the major engineering works ongoing for years and the franchise renewal up in the air.

[martvw]

With regard to the Cotswold line redoubling, could the track work be doubled to each end of the line but revert back to single track just short of the actual connections at Wolvercot and Norton? That way the trains would have all of the Cotswold line to pass each other on. The connections could be doubled at a latter stage.

[John R]

What you describe is known as a single lead junction.

They were all the fashion in the 80s, and replaced many standard double junctions on the grounds that they were much simpler and cheaper both to install and maintain.  Then there was a fatal head on collision at one, at Bridgeton in the Glasgow area, and for some strange reason they fell out of fashion overnight. I seem to recall reading a few days ago that the fateful Bridgeton example has just been replaced by a standard double junction, only 20 or so years after the accident.

 

[Andrew1939 from West Oxon]

Martvw's suggestion might be feasible at the Evesham end of the line as there is only one station (Pershore) that would need a second platform. However at the Charlbury end there are 3 stations (Finstock, Combe and Hanborough) that would all need major expenditure for double track. There could also be other complications such as rebuilding bridges that would not nowadays have adequate clearance for double track.

[martvw]

If the northern end of the Cotswold line were to be redoubled that would be a step in the right direction and, improve Pershore station with a new second platform as has been done with Chalbury / Honeybourne and better parking . The town of Pershore has grown quite a bit since the station was reduced to a single platform, it would be well used by passengers going both north to Worcester for Hereford/Birmingham and south to Evesham/Oxford and beyond.

[martvw]

I think the only road under bridge that would need a new twin track deck is at the back of Drakes Broughton on the B road,or perhaps the twin track could end just before this to keep the costs down.

[stebbo]

Sorry to be contentious (again) but what is the current usage of Combe and Finstock before we get overly excited about doubling the platforms? On the - admittedly - few times I've been on a train that stopped at either, I'd say the answer is not many but I'm open to correction. As there is limited/no car parking at either I guess most people will head to Hanborough.

[Chris from Nailsea]

The figures for Combe and Finstock are available via the link to our Railway 'Station Comparator' at the top of this page.

Hope this helps! 

[CLPGMS]

Before we get too concerned about Combe and Finstock, please remember that there was never any problem with providing an extra platform for Ascott-under-Wychwood, which, on 2011 figures, attracted the lowest passenger numbers (1658) on the Cotswold Line.

I think that the real problem with redoubling Charlbury to Wolvercot Junction lies elsewhere.

1.  Nothing can really happen until the signalling at Oxford is transferred to Didcot and a double track junction can be provided at Wolvercot.

2.  I believe that there could be a problem with the road bridge at Hanborough.  If my memory serves me correctly, when the track was relaid some years ago, it was moved towards the centre of the arch to give better clearance.  I think it had something to do with the sleepers being a few inches higher than the ones they replaced, but it may have been when the speed limit was increased to 100mph and the curve was slightly eased.  Placing a second track alongside the present one may cause clearance problems.

3.  At the Charlbury end, it was originally announced that the junction would be about 1 mile east of the station. As it turned out, this was, for some reason, reduced to about ^ mile.  One suggestion was that it had something to do with the bridge at Cornbury Park.

I think that martvw is correct in saying that the only real infrastructure problem in redoubling Pershore to Norton Junction is the missing deck of the road bridge at Drakes Broughton.

Actually, it is the need for the timetable to fit in with Oxford-London and Worcester-Malvern-Hereford which is the real nightmare.  During a period last year when the line between Oxford and Didcot was closed for renewal work, the Cotswold Line had the best timetable ever between Oxford and Worcester - clock face hourly all the way.  Trains passed near Ascott-under-Wychwood and at Littleton and Badsey and ran to time.  Unfortunately, all trains could not get into Worcester Foregate Street due to other trains requiring access at the new times and, of course, at the Oxford end, passengers had to transfer to buses.  Obviously, this would be an unacceptable timetable under normal circumstances, so we have the irritating situation where trains are timed to wait for long periods at Evesham or Charlbury.  The latter is particularly annoying.  On Thursday, the 1513 HFD^» (Hereford - next trains)-PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) arrived at Charlbury on time.  It is booked to wait there for about 8 minutes until 1710, but, as the 1551 PAD-WOS^» (Worcester Shrub Hill - next trains) was running 10 minutes late, this wait was extended to 15 minutes!  I suppose that is better than the previous situation, where it would have had an even longer wait at Ascott-under-Wychwood.  The real answer is to ensure that trains from London do not arrive late at Oxford.  We can only live in hope!