Welsh report calls to cut Swindon train stops - January 2010

[Glovidge]

I'd quite happily cut out Swindon from my journey. But how can this even be proposed? when Swindon is twinned with Disneyworld. The number of tourists cramming into Swindon now to look at the roundabouts is unheralded

http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/news/4781996.Swindon_twinned_with_Disney_World/

[willc]

And the service provided 34 years ago on the Great Western was a different service, one that was subsequently changed due to the radical changes in travel habits brought about by the HSTs, without the benefit of lots of extra rolling stock to cope with those changes.

If BR had got all the HSTs it wanted to build in the mid-1970s, then they would probably have been able to add extra semi-fast services to cover growing demand for long-distance commuting, while allowing long-distance trains to storm past the likes of Didcot and Swindon. It didn't, so they don't.

Hmm, the Midland Main Line - not hard to speed things up there, using HSTs and Meridians in place of 133 lumbering tons of Class 45, a type which was hardly noted for sparkling acceleration, never mind the power being drained off for the train eth supply.

MK is served by another train operator as well as Virgin and sits on the core section of the WCML, before routes start to diverge, so there are many more trains to go around - and straight through the station, in that case.

Swindon is served by just one operator, lies some distance beyond Reading, the last point at which the GWML core services are all on a shared route (and that a route which is carrying way more trains than in 1976, with precious little by way of capacity improvements in all that time), and again past the divergence of the frequently-served Oxford route and was never included in the Network South East area, so InterCity, then (F)GW, has had to cover all types of (growing) traffic.

Electrification may offer the opportunity to run some queue-buster peak emus out as far as Swindon, though given the number of routes that Class 319s are now supposed to be the salvation of, that may be difficult.

In the meantime, how do you propose maintaining capacity and frequencies at Swindon (and Didcot) if you remove a series of stops by long-distance trains there? Serious answers only please.

[bignosemac]

I'd quite happily cut out Swindon from my journey. But how can this even be proposed? when Swindon is twinned with Disneyworld. The number of tourists cramming into Swindon now to look at the roundabouts is unheralded

http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/news/4781996.Swindon_twinned_with_Disney_World/

I'd not want my occasional changes at Swindon to be compromised. I'm still hoping to bump into Billie Piper.  With my luck it'd probably be Mark Lamarr........ 

[John R]

In the meantime, how do you propose maintaining capacity and frequencies at Swindon (and Didcot) if you remove a series of stops by long-distance trains there? Serious answers only please.

You do need more rolling stock. The suggestion in RUS for 6tph as far as Swindon and 5 tph to Bristol post electrification is the first acknowledgment that there is a need to cater for the two markets separately.

[Deltic]

If there was an additional semi-fast to Bristol Temple Meads via the Badminton line each hour, you could run the Swansea service non-stop from Reading to Newport.

As mentioned above, this would need more rolling stock.

[devon_metro]

John, I consider your comparisons to be completely unreasonable. You have quoted an FGW terminating station with a bit of low speed running from Bath, whereas both Warrington & Leicester are the first stops after a high speed run.

If we compare the 54 minutes allocated for Paddington - Swindon we achieve 84.25mph, a far more realistic and fair comparison of speeds.

[John R]

D-M  I do accept your point. Though to the citizens of Bristol, it doesn't mean a jot to them that they are at the end of the journey. They used to have services that ran limited stop, and now they don't, and are much slower as a consequence.

And both the examples I cited were ones where journey times have improved considerably over the years, whereas on the Great Western they have universally got slower. WillC cited (in an ironic way) Milton Keynes as an example whereby the growth in commuting meant it would be unreasonable to have trains passing through non-stop, yet that's exactly what happens several times each hour.

The fact that the RUS has suggested a 5th train ph thus enabling some faster services to be restored does imply that there is a recognition that the current service provision is not completely appropriate for the major cities served.       

[Timmer]

D-M  I do accept your point. Though to the citizens of Bristol, it doesn't mean a jot to them that they are at the end of the journey. They used to have services that ran limited stop, and now they don't, and are much slower as a consequence.

As a traveller from Bath to Paddington, how I miss next stop Reading services that flew past Chippenham, Swindon and Didcot.

Anyone remember the West Country Pullman that ran for a couple of years in the late eighties between London-Paignton that ran non-stop both ways between London-Bath giving an HST opportunity to show what a great Intercity train it is 

[matt473]

I highly doubt any of the South Wales services would drop Parkway as it is need of a half hourly service, and if I remember rightly First not to long ago advertised services every 15mins to Bristol alternating between Temple Meads and Parkway.

[willc]

WillC cited (in an ironic way) Milton Keynes as an example whereby the growth in commuting meant it would be unreasonable to have trains passing through non-stop, yet that's exactly what happens several times each hour.

The reason I ironically cited Milton Keynes was because we were being told such and such happened on the GWML in 1976 and that apparently this was better and we should go back to it. My point was that Milton Keynes Central did not exist until 1982, so if Virgin adopted the 'what happened 34 years ago' approach they could just ignore the station entirely and save lots of time on trains to more traditional WCML destinations. But they don't, because there is lots of money to be made - just like Swindon and Didcot, which is why more trains stop at them than did 34 years ago.

Virgin has nine trains per hour passing through Milton Keynes, backed up by LM semi-fasts, so the opportunities to provide a number of non-stop services are rather greater than at Swindon. IF FGW was running HSTs every 20 minutes to Cardiff and to Bristol and hourly to Cheltenham, backed up by half-hourly trains turning back at Swindon, I'm sure it would do things differently itself.

[The Grecian]

Depending on how much control outside the DfT FGW actually have, I suspect this issue boils down to money. If FGW thought they could fill trains between Wales and London by cutting out Swindon or Reading they'd do that (although as pointed out finding a path to make use of it would be tricky) - people travelling further pay more for their tickets. If they can't count on enough people filling the train then it makes more sense to stop it at Swindon, Didcot and Reading. At the moment it seems their view is that stopping all services at Swindon makes more money than if they didn't stop some. If you want to change that you'd need to be able to show that you could attract more people by reducing journey times by 5-10 minutes.

[devon_metro]

I was on the first Paddington - Swansea yesterday (30/1/10) and it was well loaded in Standard class in all coaches. Despite sitting behind the 0730 Paddington - Penzance between Didcot & Swindon we still arrived into Bristol Parkway early. There is certainly lots of slack however as the xx30 stops at Didcot it would probably catch up with the preceding service. Lots of re-jigging would be needed I suspect!

[unfarepayingpassenger]

In the December 2009 timetable a train from Swansea was altered to cut out the Didcot and Reading stops (and leaves Swindon ONE whole minute earlier than it did in the May 2009 timetable).
This has made the next two trains from Swindon busier as those travelling to Didcot, Reading and connecting stations have to get those. (The 08:11 which is from WSM, and the 08:28 which is another Swansea). So I think it's a really bad move.

[devon_metro]

Blame the WAG

££££££££££££££

(not too subtle was it?)

[John R]

In the December 2009 timetable a train from Swansea was altered to cut out the Didcot and Reading stops (and leaves Swindon ONE whole minute earlier than it did in the May 2009 timetable).
This has made the next two trains from Swindon busier as those travelling to Didcot, Reading and connecting stations have to get those. (The 08:11 which is from WSM, and the 08:28 which is another Swansea). So I think it's a really bad move.

It may leave Swindon only one minute earlier, but doesn't it arrive in London around 10 minutes earlier. And provides a nice fast non-stop service for Swindon to Paddington pax of whom there are quite a few. These things are always a compromise, and with at least 5 trains ph from Swindon to Padd in the peak, it's not unreasonable to run one non stop to give pax further west a faster journey.