Bedwyn services - May 2017 to December 2018

[whole diary]

[grahame]

There is disappointment in the arrangements for Bedwyn after the arrival of electric services at Newbury from the east.

The following have been circulated around the group's email list and are, I feel, sufficiently in the public domain to post them here

23rd March, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to the group:

As you know from our discussions there is no immediate solution to the loss of through services on the Bedwyn to Newbury corridor given electrification is not being extended. This means in May 2017 Bedwyn to London services will be replaced by Newbury to London electric trains (EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit)) and Bedwyn to Newbury diesel shuttles (DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)).
 
However, within the franchise we have committed to maintain at least one through peak service in each direction. Bedwyn, Kintbury and Hungerford will not therefore lose all their direct trains.
 
We were also able to suggest a feasibility study into the use of Independently Powered electric trains (IPEMUs^▸ (Independely Powered Electic Multiple Unit (train running on batteries))) over the route between Paddington and Bedwyn. The DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have accepted that approach and have asked us to work up plans that would mean through services to Bedwyn, Kintbury and Hungerford could be re-established at levels similar to today by December 2018.
 
We cannot guarantee the outcome of the study, but we think this is a practical option and will be doing our best to make it work. I will keep you updated.

And from the group to the main contact at the DfT, 26th March:

Dear Xxxxxx,
 
We understand that, following the introduction of electrification in May 2017, the best we can hope for is a restoration of our direct Paddington service from December 2018 using battery operated trains that charge under the wires and run, on battery, between Newbury and Bedwyn.
 
We^d like the DfT to strongly consider plugging the interim gap, between May 2017 and December 2018, by retaining the current diesel turbo service between Bedwyn and Paddington. We think this is the best solution because:
 
1)      The Arup report clearly states that a new west-facing bay would be needed at Newbury and we believe it was priced at 2 to 3 million. If we are to get a restored through service in December 2018 it is hardly conceivable that Network Rail would spend that amount of money for something that would only be fully utilised for 18 months.
2)      As things stand the number of trains starting from and terminating at Newbury will at least triple from 2 per hour to 6 per hour from May 2017. Surely Newbury will not be able to cope with this? A through train takes up a platform for a short period of time whereas a termination will eat up platform space necessitating shunting in and out of sidings. We calculate that at least two Bedwyn shuttles will be required to connect with the prescribed trains at Newbury.
3)      It does not feel sensible to introduce electric stock to run Paddington to Newbury then 18 months later to have to redeploy 50% of it as the battery operated trains come into service. Couldn^t that electric stock be better used elsewhere for the 18 month period?
4)      Changing trains will extend journey times, impact on family life and not be good for the economy.
5)      Missed connections at Newbury are frequent. Having to change there will be unreliable. The timekeeping on this line can be very poor.
6)      Surveys we have done show that 84% of users of Bedwyn, Kintbury and Hungerford plan to abandon these stations and instead drive to Newbury. This will have a major impact on parking and the Newbury road network.
 
We respectively ask the DfT to think again.
 
Kind Regards
 
Bedwyn Trains Passenger Group

I'm noting a different suggestion on the wnxxforum from a professional railman:

http://www.wnxxforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=6541&p=126997

As I see it a possible solution to the "Bedwyn Massive" would be to create a circular service Pad - Pad calling at those stations, then Pewsey, Westbury, Melksham, Swindon & selected stations back to Pad.

So that would be Paddington - selected stations to Newbury - Kintbury - Hungerford - Bedwyn - Pewsey - Westbury - Trowbridge - Melksham - Chippenham - Swindon - - selected stations to Paddington.  "Selected Stations" perhaps some of Slough, Maidenhead, Twyford, Reading, Theale, Thatcham and Didcot?  Can't see missing out Trowbridge and Chippenham being a good idea - I have added them in.

[ChrisB]

Would the battery last from Newbury to Chippenham?

[a-driver]

Yet another very short sighted move by the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) based purely on cost rather than service quality. First wanted the wires extending to Westbury to enable EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) stopping services to operate which in turn would allow the High Speed West Country services to run non-stop thus reducing journey times. 
At the moment they're limited to 3-car trains to Bedwyn due to the length of the turn back facility, extending to Westbury could result in longer trains operating.  Electrify the Avon Valley from Bathampton Junc to Westbury and you've got a diversionary route for Bristol services. 

[ellendune]

Yet another very short sighted move by the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) based purely on cost rather than service quality. First wanted the wires extending to Westbury to enable EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) stopping services to operate which in turn would allow the High Speed West Country services to run non-stop thus reducing journey times. 
At the moment they're limited to 3-car trains to Bedwyn due to the length of the turn back facility, extending to Westbury could result in longer trains operating.  Electrify the Avon Valley from Bathampton Junc to Westbury and you've got a diversionary route for Bristol services. 

Pity those benefits were not considered by DfT when they did the cost benefit analysis. 

[ChrisB]

Possibly were, but this still came out dearer?

Wires don't come cheap

[grahame]

Possibly were, but this still came out dearer?

Wires don't come cheap

My understanding is that a handful of very specific scenarios was looked at, more or less based on current service patterns. Questions along the lines of "how would the BCR^▸ (Benefit Cost Ratio) change if ... were not asked nor answered in public, though I would be very surprised if they were not at least mused upon by the people doing the analysis, as they have been by very many of us customer / observers.   But there is a limit as to how much money should be spent on reports on things that won't happen - as I recall Bedwyn electrification good a good BCR, but it's not actually happening, so what's the point in looking at lots of other projects with potentially good BCRs but no capital to finance them or no resources to implement them?

[grahame]

Further ... from the Swindon Advertiser

http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/county_news/11882494.Bedwyn_misses_out_on_direct_service_to_Paddington_in_rail_franchise_deal/

First published Thursday 26 March 2015 in County News
Last updated 13:30 Thursday 26 March 2015
by Joanne Moore

RAIL campaigners in Bedwyn were disappointed when it was announced that there was no reprieve for the village's direct link to Paddington.

Steve Smith, of the Bedwyn Trains Passenger Group, said he had been quietly optimistic that part of Great Western's plans for its new franchise would be to save the Bedwyn to London service.

But hope was dashed on Monday when he received an email from First Great Western revealing that despite lobbying from Devizes MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) and railways minister Claire Perry and an on-line petition with 2,000 names there had been no change of mind.

The email said: "There is no immediate solution to the loss of through services on the Bedwyn to Newbury corridor given electrification is not being extended. This means in May 2017 Bedwyn to London services will be replaced by Newbury to London electric trains and Bedwyn to Newbury diesel shuttles."

Mr Smith said: "I was very disappointed. I had dared to hope that we might have done enough lobbying to stand a chance of a reprieve.

"I think it is a bad decision. Consultation has shown that most people from Marlborough will choose to drive to Newbury rather than come to Bedwyn and then have to change trains."

The only good news for Bedwyn is that Great Western has agreed to pilot the use of Hitachi independently powered electric trains from 2018.

Mrs Perry said: "I will be pushing to bring this pilot study forward to 2017 so there is not a gap. If we are able to do this it will be possible for the battery operated trains to hitch up to the electrified trains at Newbury without passengers having to change trains."

She said she would also be campaigning hard for electrification to extend beyond Newbury to Bedywn and Pewsey.

But Mr Smith said he was worried that if the pilot study is not brought forward there will be an 18 month gap when commuters will be forced to change trains or find an alternative way of travelling to Newbury.

He said: "If the pilot is brought forward that would be good news but there are no guarantees."

Great Western has said that one train in each direction will continue to operate as a direct service to and from London.

Pewsey has done better under the annoucements as it will keep its direct service and is also to get a new footbridge and more cycle racks.

Mrs Perry said: "The old bridge is very slippery when it is wet. It was second-hand even when it first came to Pewsey so it is good news it is being replaced. Work is due to start soon."

The on-line petition ends on Tuesday. Go to www.bedwyntrains.org.uk

[Rhydgaled]

Further ... from the Swindon Advertiser

[snip]

The only good news for Bedwyn is that Great Western has agreed to pilot the use of Hitachi independently powered electric trains from 2018.

Mrs Perry said: "I will be pushing to bring this pilot study forward to 2017 so there is not a gap. If we are able to do this it will be possible for the battery operated trains to hitch up to the electrified trains at Newbury without passengers having to change trains."

It sounds like there is some confusion there. The mention of Hitachi suggests bi-mode IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)/AT-300 units, as does "hitch up to the electrified trains". However, battery powered rolling stock, as far as I know, could be from any manufacturer.

In fact, given the timescale, could it be new stock? Otherwise I would guess that Hitachi is out and instead it would be the class 387 Electrostars cascaded from Thameslink being fitted with batteries, they are presumably a similar design (though a different class) to the Electrostar the battery concept is being tested on in GreaterAnglia.

Also, there seems to be rather alot of detail regarding the options for Bedwyn. Has the full detailed Service Level Commitment for the franchise been made public somewhere? I ask because somebody on WNXX^▸ (Stored Unserviceable, Mainline Locos HQ All Classes) suggested before the announcement that Pembroke Dock was about to lose its through trains (with immediate effect from the start of the direct award, meaning no 2016 service) and I'd like to know if this is the case.

[ChrisB]

I think you're confused - the 387 EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) will be serving Newbury - so it's something to hitch up to them.

Only problem Bedwyn needs to solve is that these EMUs will terminate in the siding, so how to hitch to them?