Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
End of through trains
Bristol to Waterloo?

 
Please sign our petition
(more information)
 
Campaign links here
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 05:35 29 Nov 2021
* Covid: Dutch police arrest quarantine hotel escapee couple
* Covid: South Africa's president calls for lifting of Omicron travel bans
- Venezuelan migrants seeking a new home in Chile
* Barbados prepares to cut ties with the Queen
- The underwater 'kites' generating electricity as they move
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 03/12/21 - TWSW AGM - online
09/12/21 - Award Event - CRN
19/01/22 - MTUG - regular meeting
08/03/22 - WWRUG AGM - B-o-A
Random Image
Train RunningCancelled
04:57 Reading to Redhill
06:43 Redhill to Reading
06:46 Reading to Gatwick Airport
07:01 Shalford to Reading
08:32 Gatwick Airport to Reading
Short Run
21:15 Penzance to London Paddington
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
November 29, 2021, 05:39:16 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[221] Stranded on a train for 17 hours !
[128] Masks To Become Compulsory On Public Transport Again
[84] XC short notice alterations due to driver unavailability.
[53] Are the railways fit for their (future) purpose?
[52] Day one - cruising in the time of Covid
[36] Great Western Railway: on-board catering, buffets, Travelling ...
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Naming of Bicester London Road / Town  (Read 11708 times)
81F
Transport Scholar
Full Member
******
Posts: 81


View Profile Email
« on: August 02, 2013, 10:00:07 am »

Has any consideration been given to the naming of the station at the south end of Bicester. When I was a lad it was called London Road, but since re-opening it has been called Bicester Town.

As far as many visitors to Bicester are concerned, it should surely be re-named Bicester Village, as that "outlet centre" is the destination of thousands of visitors each month. I am sure that as soon as through trains start running from Marylebone, many tourists from all over the world will take advantage of the new link, to stock up on last year's fashions.

Perhaps it should be known as "Bicester Town, for Bicester Village"?
Logged
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4542


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2013, 12:15:01 pm »

i would imagine promotion of Bicester Town for Bicester Village is in the forefront of Chilterns plans!

Once the link is up and running look out for the ads,  special offers (discount vouchers with rail tickets) etc.
Logged
anthony215
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1235


View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2013, 03:49:40 pm »

I think Bicester Town is going to become an extremely busy station in the future especially once the east-west route is completed and electrified.

Hopefully we will see a return of the direct Bristol - Oxford service which could then continue over the east-west route to Either Milton Keynes or to Bedford and further north to Nottingham.

If the GW (Great Western) starts running local services between Milton Keynes and Reading perhaps these could be interworked with the proposed Reading - Heathrow Airport services unless they become part of Crossrail.

Certainly the owners of the Bicester Villiage shopping outlet can certainly expect a sharp increase in visitor numbers
Logged
Btline
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4782



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2013, 05:40:03 pm »

It's a shame that there isn't a single interchange station, as Bicester will have 3 / 4 tph to London, but only effectively 2 tph (if you've parked at one station, you can't really come back to the other).

Unfortunately Chiltern can't use the Oxford service to axe more Bicester North stops, as it would affect Bicester to B'ham commuters.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 34949



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2013, 05:57:15 pm »

It's a shame that there isn't a single interchange station, as Bicester will have 3 / 4 tph to London, but only effectively 2 tph (if you've parked at one station, you can't really come back to the other).


A station at the point where the East-West line crosses the London-Birmingham line?  How sharp is the Oxford - London curve?  Could a platform be built on that curve to be in effect a triangular station like Shipley?

All you need to do then is move Bicester Village Outlet centre a mile to the new station (I've look at that on the map / just an estimate of the distance!)
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5856


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2013, 08:39:47 pm »


Unfortunately Chiltern can't use the Oxford service to axe more Bicester North stops, as it would affect Bicester to B'ham commuters.

Always an axe...
Logged

Now, please!
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4960


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2013, 09:19:27 pm »

A station at the point where the East-West line crosses the London-Birmingham line?  How sharp is the Oxford - London curve?  Could a platform be built on that curve to be in effect a triangular station like Shipley?

A curved platform and/or a platform on a significant gradient would not be allowed under current group standards, AFAICT (as far as I can tell).  There are always dispensations available if there is absolutely no alternative, but I doubt they'd be allowed here.

http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Railway_Group_Standards/Infrastructure/Railway%20Group%20Standards/GIRT7016%20Iss%203.pdf

Page 7 Part 2 refers...

Paul
« Last Edit: August 02, 2013, 09:30:12 pm by paul7755 » Logged
Btline
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4782



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: August 03, 2013, 12:23:54 am »

In this instance platforms wouldn't be needed.

London to Bicester to B'ham served by existing route.

Oxford to Bicester to Milton Keynes served by new EWR.

Then the (probably already packed) Oxford to London trains curve round and miss Bicester and have their journey time sped up (hopefully the pointless Islip station can be axed as well as Chiltern clearly want).

Simples.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 34949



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #8 on: August 03, 2013, 01:34:16 am »

Simples.

Not to me ... but then it's early in the morning.    Are you suggesting
a) Closing the current Bicester Town and making people walk from the Village to the new station?
b) Having two stations on the East-West line - one at Town and one at Junction
c) Moving Bicester Village to be adjacent to the new Junction station, and missing the stop anyway on Oxford / London?
d) Another option I haven't thought of?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
CLPGMS
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 155


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: August 03, 2013, 10:18:37 am »

Quote
hopefully the pointless Islip station can be axed as well

I wonder what those who made the 29126 passenger journeys to/from Islip in 2011/12 would feel about their station being regarded as "pointless".
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 34949



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #10 on: August 03, 2013, 12:46:55 pm »

Quote
hopefully the pointless Islip station can be axed as well

I wonder what those who made the 29126 passenger journeys to/from Islip in 2011/12 would feel about their station being regarded as "pointless".

Context, Gentlemen.   "100 people were given 100 seconds to name as many of the top 30 stations in the UK (United Kingdom) National network in terms of passenger numbers using them, according to the office of the rail regulator".  TV quiz program 'Pointless', quite recent edition.   And two of the top thirty were indeed 'pointless' in that no-one guessed them!
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
Network SouthEast
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 492



View Profile
« Reply #11 on: August 03, 2013, 02:24:10 pm »

   And two of the top thirty were indeed 'pointless' in that no-one guessed them!

Come on Grahame, don't leave us hanging! What were they?

Whilst Islip has a modest number of passengers, it has seen quite a sharp rise in useage in recent years. In any case, over half of the new Oxford/Water Eaton to Marylebone services won't stop at Islip anyway, so I think it would be a bit harsh to call for taking away any more stops from that station!
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 34949



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #12 on: August 03, 2013, 02:36:58 pm »

   And two of the top thirty were indeed 'pointless' in that no-one guessed them!

Come on Grahame, don't leave us hanging! What were they?


Blackfriars and Fenchurch Street
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
Btline
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4782



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: August 04, 2013, 06:41:13 pm »

Hmmm, I thought that Bicester Town is quite near the proposed junction, but having looked at at a map, I'm wrong.

Still, the situation in Bicester will be annoying for Bicesterians!

Islip commuters should use Water Eaton Parkway. It will become a pointless station and will probably cost Chiltern more in fuel to stop than they'll get from fares! Indeed, if a call pushes the journey time over the all important 59 minute mark, then it could cost them a lot.

It will be the "Finstock" of the Chiltern line, withering on with no-one having the nerve to close it.

Hopefully, they'll just shove the franchise commitment calls to silly o clock hours to close it by stealth. The only reason it has so many passengers now, is that it acts as a mini parkway for Oxford, Water Eaton is basically replacing it.

In this day and age of constant fare hikes, you cannot justify keeping these halts open, pretending we're still in the 1950s. See also: Cotswold halts train!
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8929


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2013, 07:08:07 pm »

The only reason it has so many passengers now, is that it acts as a mini parkway for Oxford, Water Eaton is basically replacing it.

No it doesn't.  There's rarely more than half a dozen or so cars in the car park which can hold around 35 cars.  I'm a little surprised it doesn't attract more parkway commuters into Oxford, but it doesn't despite the OBRAG usergroup trying to push for the car park to be used more.

What it does do is nicely serve a small village community with a pretty good service for a station its size, in a similar manner to nearby Heyford.  It will continue to do so, though the number of trains may well drop to around 7 a day if Chiltern's proposals go through when the new service starts in 2016.
Logged

To view my GWML (Great Western Main Line) Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page