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 01:35 05 Dec 2021
- Coronavirus: UK tightens travel rules amid Omicron spread
- Huge Calder Valley model railway hidden from girlfriend unveiled
- Omicron: What are the new Covid rules for travelling to the UK?
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 09/12/21 - Award Event - CRN
19/01/22 - MTUG - regular meeting
08/03/22 - WWRUG AGM - B-o-A
09/03/22 - MTUG - regular meeting
Random Image
Train RunningDelayed
05/12/21 07:53 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 08:34 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 08:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington
05/12/21 09:20 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 09:34 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 10:03 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington
05/12/21 10:18 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington
05/12/21 10:22 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 10:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 11:22 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 11:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 12:22 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 12:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 13:22 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 13:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 14:20 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 14:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 15:17 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 15:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 16:22 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 16:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 17:20 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 17:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 18:20 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 19:20 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 19:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 20:19 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 20:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 21:42 London Paddington to Swansea
PollsThere are no open or recent polls
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
December 05, 2021, 01:39:38 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
[274] Are the railways fit for their (future) purpose?
[89] Overhead Electrification Plans
[56] Masks To Become Compulsory On Public Transport Again
[53] Advent quiz- day 4 - "Pilning" - round 1
[40] Portishead Line reopening for passengers - ongoing discussion
[22] South Western Railways Waterloo - Bristol services axed
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Chiltern charm offensive  (Read 9954 times)
willc
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2330


View Profile
« on: November 27, 2008, 11:05:33 pm »

Reading my copy of this week's Cotswold Journal, I came across a full-page advert headed "Putting 'reliable' and 'trains to London' in the same sentence".

Needless to say, it wasn't published on behalf of FGW (First Great Western). Chiltern are offering season ticket holders from Evesham, Honeybourne, Moreton and Kingham a free return ticket to London to sample their service. Judging by the web page, similar ads must be running around Maidenhead. See http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/better

Unfortunately, they seem to have had problems with spelling Moreton-in-Marsh correctly. The newspaper ad calls it Morton-in-Marsh and the website has Moreton-in-the-Marsh.

And the newspaper ad is a bit naughty, as it doesn't make clear the offer only applies to season ticket holders.
Logged
Btline
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4782



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2008, 11:25:54 pm »

I wonder why they don't include Pershore in the offer?

A very good offer though, and well timed - before the WCML (West Coast Main Line) mod/Cotswold doubling benefits have fully kicked in.

But can Warwick Parkway take more cars?
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8939


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2008, 03:05:29 pm »

A very good offer though, and well timed - before the WCML (West Coast Main Line) mod/Cotswold doubling benefits have fully kicked in.

But can Warwick Parkway take more cars?

I expect during the Cotswold Line works they'll make even more of a push to pinch FGW (First Great Western)'s passengers. You can't blame them! I've never seen Warwick Parkway car park more than about 80% full since they added more spaces about 5 years ago.
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/
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4965


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2008, 03:26:30 pm »

There is a massive car park at the new Aylesbury Vale Parkway to fill - might be that it's also aimed at Leighton and Cheddington users, or possibly people who drive to Tring rather than into the middle of Aylesbury?

Paul
Logged
johoare
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2818


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2008, 11:01:42 pm »

Reading my copy of this week's Cotswold Journal, I came across a full-page advert headed "Putting 'reliable' and 'trains to London' in the same sentence".

Needless to say, it wasn't published on behalf of FGW (First Great Western). Chiltern are offering season ticket holders from Evesham, Honeybourne, Moreton and Kingham a free return ticket to London to sample their service. Judging by the web page, similar ads must be running around Maidenhead. See http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/better

Unfortunately, they seem to have had problems with spelling Moreton-in-Marsh correctly. The newspaper ad calls it Morton-in-Marsh and the website has Moreton-in-the-Marsh.

And the newspaper ad is a bit naughty, as it doesn't make clear the offer only applies to season ticket holders.


We have had the advert in the Maidenhead advertiser for the last couple of weeks. I have just looked at it, and definitely no mention of only applying to season ticket holders (although obvious as soon as you get into their web site).. Apparently Beaconsfield is our option, although it would take a fair amount of time to get there!
Logged
Electric train
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3642


The future is 25000 Volts AC 750V DC has its place


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2008, 08:24:55 am »

The 'Tizer' has a very wide coverage, across to Stoke Poges etc not to mention Marlow which lets face it the journey time from there to Paddington to not as good as FGW (First Great Western) could make it.  I live in Maidenhead and I must admit up until the Dec 2007 FGW timetable change I was looking at Chiltern as a viable option even adding on car parking and traveling to Beaconsfield it was starting to look better all the time, I will review it again post the Dec 2008 FGW timetable change as the combining of the 07:02 and 07:04 is madness of the first order and there general service that connect with the Marlow branch during the day and weekends is poor and as for the late afternoon / early evening service to Maidenhead  Cry

Loohs like FGW need to lift their game for the mid Thames and upper Thames parts of their area
Logged

Neither a wise man nor a brave man lies down on the tracks of history to wait for the train of the future to run over him.     
Dwight D. Eisenhower
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4542


View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: November 29, 2008, 10:54:16 am »

Givern the Wolmar question, "What are TOCs (Train Operating Company)?" for Chiltern is probably the least worse TOC. At least they seem to like running trains reasonably briskly, but are still pretty high up the punctuality table. They've redoubled Risborough to Anhyo and have ambitous plans to run from Oxford. They also work well with Wrexham and Shrewsbury.

As Electric train says the Tizer has quite a wide circulation in South Bucks where Beconsfield is a viable alternative to the Marlow branch, Maidenhead or Taplow. I knew someone in Bourne End who gave up on FGW (First Great Western) and drove to Beconsfield. Until they gave her a parking place in London when she drove!

I say good for them, especialy if it gets FGW to put its socks up. Wasn't competition why the railways were privatised? However, as above the real competiton comes from road.

 
Logged
Andy W
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 267



View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: November 30, 2008, 07:39:36 am »

It's a shame Chiltern didn't replace Thames keeping the Paddington Oxford Worcester route with two TOCs (Train Operating Company). Competition would benefit the line.
Logged
willc
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2330


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2008, 09:38:48 pm »

It's a shame Chiltern didn't replace Thames keeping the Paddington Oxford Worcester route with two TOCs (Train Operating Company). Competition would benefit the line.

What competition? There was never any competition in the two-company era. Pre-2004, FGW (First Great Western) operated a handful of services on this corridor, which were complementary to Thames, in the shape of the peak Hereford-London services, and not forgetting the comedy off-peak out and back working from London which was officially operated by FGW, but was actually a hired-in Turbo!
Logged
Btline
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4782



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: December 01, 2008, 10:36:34 pm »

It's a shame Chiltern didn't replace Thames keeping the Paddington Oxford Worcester route with two TOCs (Train Operating Company). Competition would benefit the line.

What competition? There was never any competition in the two-company era. Pre-2004, FGW (First Great Western) operated a handful of services on this corridor, which were complementary to Thames, in the shape of the peak Hereford-London services, and not forgetting the comedy off-peak out and back working from London which was officially operated by FGW, but was actually a hired-in Turbo!


Why did FGW run it then?
Logged
Andy W
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 267



View Profile Email
« Reply #10 on: December 02, 2008, 07:57:18 am »


"What competition? There was never any competition in the two-company era. Pre-2004, FGW (First Great Western) operated a handful of services on this corridor, which were complementary to Thames, in the shape of the peak Hereford-London services, and not forgetting the comedy off-peak out and back working from London which was officially operated by FGW, but was actually a hired-in Turbo!"

You can't have competition without a multiple choice. I would not claim that in the Thames days there was real competition however get a good TOC (Train Operating Company) who understands pricing, service etc. and FGW would have to raise their game without the need for pressure groups such as the CLPG» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about). For example tried to get an advanced purchase ticket on this line recently?

I personally don't agree with privatisation but as it stands we get the worst of all worlds, a private company running the line as a monopoly.
Logged
willc
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2330


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: December 02, 2008, 01:20:42 pm »

There is multiple choice, it's called cars, coaches, planes...

On-rail competition for passengers on the same set of rails is nonsense and even the most ardent Tory advocates of privatisation in the 1990s couldn't come up with a way to make it work. Only parallel routes can provide that and they usually aren't operating on a level playing field to start with, eg Reading-London. Even runnning non-stop to Waterloo, SWT (South West Trains) could never match the time on the GW (Great Western) route.

If Chiltern do get to Oxford, I expect FGW (First Great Western) might up their game, but with Reading rebuilding looming, there may not be that much they can do for a few years anyway.

Cheap advance purchase tickets are used to fill seats that would otherwise run empty. There's no point FGW offering them from the Cotswold Line into London until after lunchtime because the trains are already busy. And after lunchtime coming out of London, the same applies. Not forgetting that if you have a Network Card, you can get 1/3 off fares outside the peaks as well, which doesn't apply to the likes of Swindon or Chippenham. Plus for local journeys there is the Cotswold Railcard, so there are ways to get discounts.

THE FGW Turbo ran because before privatisation BR (British Rail(ways)) InterCity operated an off-peak HST (High Speed Train) out to Malvern and back - Cotswold and Malverns Express - so Great Western Trains had it written into the service requirement that they provided a train at this time of day. As far as I know, a combination of rising demand elsewhere and stock shortages after incidents like the Southall crash meant the HST was used on better-loaded duties and the Turbo hire deal was arranged.
Logged
ReWind
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 337


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: December 02, 2008, 02:40:59 pm »

How long does a typical journey on a Chiltern 165 Unit take from Warwick to Marylebone then?

It would be interesting to see which is quicker, a FGW (First Great Western) HST (High Speed Train) or a Chiltern 165 unit?

Im sure I know which is cheaper?  Cheesy Wink
Logged

Here, there and Everywhere!!
Btline
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4782



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 02, 2008, 05:41:06 pm »

Why don't FGW (First Great Western) offer advance fares on off peak services, which are normally empty?
Logged
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4542


View Profile Email
« Reply #14 on: December 02, 2008, 08:58:51 pm »

How long does a typical journey on a Chiltern 165 Unit take from Warwick to Marylebone then?

It would be interesting to see which is quicker, a FGW (First Great Western) HST (High Speed Train) or a Chiltern 165 unit?

Im sure I know which is cheaper?  Cheesy Wink

A quick look at National Rail Enquiries gives 1:41 for the 11:21 off Warwick Parkway to Marylebone
^5 Advanced Single.

Putting via Reading gives 2:06 for 11:21. 2 changes. Actual running time 1:40. with 168, Voyager, HST so would be rough running time for through train.

^28 Advaced single. Although ^16.90 at 12:21.

So time would be roughly the same but considerably cheaper to Marylebone.

Your guess was correct.
Logged
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