Great Western Coffee Shop

Briefing from GWR yesterday afternoon on their "Central Area" train services which includes Swindon and Wiltshire

* There are a couple of extra trains at peak times from London Paddington to Bristol Parkway, formed of 8 carriages of electric multiple units and calling at the intermediate stations the current trains serve.  The current trains will then call at fewer places

* The 10:04 (?) Paddington to Penzance will now leave at 10:02 and be superfast too, with a 10:04 train following and serving places like Reading, Taunton and Newton Abbott.  UPDATE - I added (?) for a reason - it's the train two hours later ... 12:03 super fast and 12:05 relief.

* There is a swap of a couple of the early morning Plymouth to London services between 9 and 5 car sets to match the loading more closely

* From mid September to mid December, a Saturday service will run from Bristol to Oxford (2 round trips), not calling at Didcot.

* Cross Country are not running to Newquay this summer, and GWR will run an extra round trip on the branch from Par on Saturdays to fill the gap.

* Sunday Looe branch services will resume in April

* For the next six Christmases, Paddington will be closed with stoppages between 2 and 18 days. GWR will be running some services (during the longer closures?) into an alternative terminal.  Not confirming which one yet

* Westbury will be shut for 30 days from the end of traffic on Christmas Eve this year (2024). I will start a separate thread on that.

* There is a 2 week plus stoppage of the Severn Tunnel for track works in July. Passengers are to be encouraged to reroute via Gloucester, and London to South Wales services will be routed that way.  For those who prefer, rail replacement buses will be provided but the emphasis will not be on having people use them; this should help alleviate supply problems as have been previously experienced (cynically, also cheaper to put people on the local train to Gloucester aand change there)

Early draft timetables for the next couple of changes have been provided to inform those of us at the meeting, but they are neither final 100% nor for general public release at the moment.  Significnatly, they cover only what GWR designate as main lines for their operational purposes and do not include Portsouth to Cardiff.

As ever - big THANK YOU to GWR for providing this briefing. Much appreciated.  That said, over the years the sessions have morphed from being interactive discussions into presentations followed by Q&A sessions, and there is now a need IMHO to provide an interactive local level in the space vacated.

Footnote - I missed the engineering presentation at the start of the session as I was transferring from a train to a hotel and then fighting Microsoft Teams which had me trying to prove I was human - a difficult thing to do after a long train journey.   Some other members were at the meeting - please add pertinent points

It's the 1203 PAD-PNZ service which is having a relief service provided for it  :)

It'll run non-stop from Paddington to Exeter St Davids (to pick up only) then non-stop to Plymouth before all the usual stops in Cornwall.

It's relief service departs at 1205 stopping at Reading (to pick up only), Taunton, Exeter St Davids, Newton Abbot, Totnes and Plymouth.

Thanks - I have updated my post to correct it.

Kind of related, I found this Rail Express interview with Mark Hopwood  (https://www.railexpress.co.uk/14474/the-future-of-great-western-railway/)on the future of GWR. It covers all sorts of things from electrification to battery power to the Night Riviera, so it may already be posted somewhere, so I shan't quote. It's a very good read, although I suggest selecting the bits with a dark background with the mouse to better read them.

A welcome addition, but I fail to see how the 'pick up only' requirement will be policed. Yes, I know that the stops will not be announced on the screens at Paddington, but this currently happens for all Friday afternoon services to the far west and yet there are always plenty of folk alighting at Reading.

It's never policed or enforced.

Probably less of an issue at lunchtime though.

It is an effective policy in that it lessens the number of people for Reading quite significantly on what there would be otherwise.

The 2h 51m journey time to Plymouth is nice to see for those calling for faster trains.

Indeed.  And there are plenty of other trains from London to Reading, and there's the relief a couple of minutes behind to Exeter.  The only flows lost / changed by more than a few minutes are Reading, Taunton, Exeter, Newton Abbott and Totnes to stations beyond Plymouth.  Plenty of other direct journeys for these - just not that particular hour.

That assertion will bring a wry smile to the face of anyone who's travelled on the 1904 Plymouth service on a Friday!  :)

As I said, less of an issue at midday without the commuters.

The faster journey time to Plymouth is welcome however likely to be temporary until work starts in earnest at Old Oak Common on the Acton-Solihull express.

Considering the difficult they are currently experiencing, and have done so for a while, in providing enough sets to cover the diagrams, one wonders how often the 1203 will be cancelled with passengers put onto the 1205?

In your experience has that been a problem in the last four years since COVID?  I only ask as I specifically took a look at it on a couple of Friday evenings last year and there was a decent amount of room on board for a train that time of day, and only a handful of people alighting at Reading - though happy to be corrected if that's not usually the case?


You've lost me there.  Can you elaborate?

Our local media have been highlighting the probable delays with the Old Oak HS2 Interchange building.
Also talk from said media that West Country trains could be sent into Euston to avoid the delays and possible bus replacement or shuttle replacement into Paddington.

For example Plymouth Live yesterday (https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/fears-new-hs2-station-cause-9163572), with a local MP playing the "we in the SW are always victims" card again:

The benefits of this go well beyond a quicker journey. I've just checked RTT and the 16:18 PAD-SWA being 'superfast' gives it a much better path:

• It leaves CDF before the stoppers that is current follows, giving it much better timings west of CDF, along with avoiding the performance risk associated with delays to those stoppers. (OTOH if it is 10 mins late it could still be stuck behind them)
• It will go through to CMN, replacing the 1548 through journey. In fact the SWA-CMN part of the journey is in the same path, as the 1548 had a half-hour wait at SWA, so a much quicker through journey. The 1548 also runs close to a Milford Haven service, so it is in a way pointless except for those who really wanted the through train, as the quickest option for CMN is to transfer to the Milford.
• It's currently booked a 5 car, and I assume that won't be changing as the CMN leg doesn't show a split on RTT (assuming it's correct). It's usually fine west of CDF that side of 6pm but removing the RDG & SWI stops would probably help with loading on the busier part of the journey.

I believe it's known as "representing his constituents"......MPs used to do it quite a lot.

A small price to pay for progress. How else does he expect it to happen?

Seems oblivious to the positives, the easy connections to the North and the additional traffic that could potentially bring and only concentrates on the negatives.

As I said elsewhere, he's focussing on his constituents interests and concerns, that's his job.

Appreciate that it doesn't chime with the HS2 advocates.

Given there’s very little if any information publicly available regarding the HS2 works and its affect on the GWML I doubt his constituents will have voiced any concern. No other MP has voiced concerns. Are they failing at their job.
This is just an MP doing what a MP does best. Cheap shots to get noticed. Is there an election coming up?!! 

I'm sure you're better informed and have more knowledge of the concerns and interests of the good people of Plymouth Sutton and Devonport than their local MP, as well as having such compelling, unbiased and objective insight into his character.

My compelling, unbiased and objective insight into his character stems from the fact this MP voiced no concerns over the reduction of the sleeper service to just two days a week for the past, 5 months or more.
He voiced no concerns over the week long line closures currently being experienced for resignalling, neither did he voice any concern for the months of alterations to early morning and late evening services to/from Plymouth, also for resignalling.
Alterations that have far more impact on the good people of Plymouth Sutton & Devonport then hearsay surrounding HS2.

Maybe Mr Pollard fears these HS2 works are actually going to personally affect him, hence why he has concerns. Who knows.

The relief train to Plymouth and the resulant superfast run of the regular Penzance train are for the summer only.  The extra train has other things to do come the autumn.  The path IS being kept so that it can be run again when appropriate amd there's a train to do it.  So not really a long term thing for Plymouth.

There is what I read as widespread early concern amongst the informed and interested in the community, and indeed in GWR, at the effect the closures for six years over the Christmas period - ranging from 2 days some years to 18 years days in other years - is going to upset passengers, as will extra stops if they are to be aded thereafter at Old Oak.   There is a feeling that the new station will bring very few benefits / new travel opportunities to GWR passengers who are having to "pay" for it with extra disruption and slower journeys.   But I suspect at the end of the day people will just put up with the disruption and slowing, with the wider community getting a bit upset nearer the time it actually happens, but then learning to live with the changes that are permanent.

How much MPs are briefed, by who, whether they choose to take these briefings / inputs further and what they look to achieve by doing so will vary between them.  It was very interesting to see the different ways our local MPs in Wiltshire and BaNES reacted to the news that well used through services to and from London were to be withdrawn, and the murky and dirty way that had been decided.  Some made very strong and public inputs in support of the services (not that it saved the services), other talked of going in to see the minister and raising it with him - but the way this was reported left it very unclear as to whether the MP in question had made a strong input on our behalf, or had assured the minister that if he stuck to his guns it would blow over.

Edit to correct closure from "18 years" to "18 days"

People opposed HS2 on the basis of it not being worth it for just 15 minutes…… but an a extra stop on a services between Padd and Reading costing probably about 5 minutes onto a journey time going into Paddington is now a big deal. Old Oak station will be a quicker interchange to get onto the Liz Line, then going through to Paddington for starters. Swings and roundabouts.

As for disruption whilst the work is undertaken, some trains will surely leave the GWML at Acton Mainline, effectively go round the back of the current CrossRail depot where it’ll drop onto the WCML into Euston, an extra 2 miles.  Might even be the potential to upgrade the current track for higher line speeds but it’s certainly not the end of the world.
They rebuilt Reading station around an operational railway with minimal interruption, it can be done again

Thanks for providing an objective, informed and reasonable answer to my question, Graham.  Though I think you meant 18 days and not 18 years!

Still waiting any more insight as to whether the 19:04 is being badly crowded with Reading passengers on a Friday?

Corrected now in my original post.  Several reports of that slip, which at least confirms that people still read my stuff and furthermore that some are happy and have the time to let me know when I make a goof like that -  I appreciate the reporting, thank you.

I am not going to speculate on the 19:04 dropping off people at Reading on a Friday these days - I do not have the knowledge to inform; I am not a politician so I can say "I don't know"  :D ;D

  :)

I’ll see if I can take another few looks at it myself.  :)

The benefits of Old Oak will only be realised if passengers are able to use integrated ticketing that supports railcards. The current position means that passengers have to travel to Paddington on the mainline with discounted tickets then swap to the Elizabeth line with a contactless payment mechanism.

There are pictures of a GWR IET at Waterloo station today as part of a test run for the Old Oak Common HS2 closures, apparently one is also due to visit Euston this week.

https://x.com/SWTrainspotter/status/1769659039867081051?t=1dM3g_rktSn6YAt75TnqeA&s=03 (https://x.com/SWTrainspotter/status/1769659039867081051?t=1dM3g_rktSn6YAt75TnqeA&s=03)

Well looks like a GWR IET went to Euston today.
https://x.com/TerrierMcD/status/1769691037558059255?t=CVVTnxxoYsbWZxbGrHSTwQ&s=03 (https://x.com/TerrierMcD/status/1769691037558059255?t=CVVTnxxoYsbWZxbGrHSTwQ&s=03)

Which station, Euston or Waterloo, would make for the best temporary London terminus for GWR IC services when the route into Paddington is closed for HS2 related work?

Could they end up using both?

I know which one I’d prefer and it certainly isn’t Euston.

Both. There isn’t the space to run everything into one.

Euston is probably the top choice as it offers easier access to North Pole and very few miles of diesel running.

They have been playing their cards close to their chest ... it seems that both options have their pros and cons and I suspect that the balance is quite fine and the decision will be based on how much weight is given to each of things like platform and path availability, extra running time needed, staffing considerations ... and how many trains are going to be diverted, how many stopped back at Reading (or Ealing?).  Marylebone is rule is ruled out - max length 5 carriages and hardly any paths available. 


I don't think they're going to attempt to run everything ...

And on the subject of both - looking at the pictures it seems the same unit went to both Waterloo and Euston - 802101.

2 trains an hour into Euston, presumably the same for Waterloo

What a pity Acton Bank was not electrified or they could run Heathrow Express into Euston.

Electrification was planned, I don’t know if it’s still on the cards

Wouldn't it make a huge difference to being able to run electric freight trains across North London, or have I misunderstood that?

How is the UK doing for people who know how to electrify railways and can do the specialist stuff?  Our "stop / go" system seems to mean that we build a skill base of people then loose it - or is there somewhere being electrified as I write b a roving progress team?  Are they - for example - under full employment on HS2?

Just a thought - and folks more knowledgeable than I will be able to explain why this is an unworkable option - but why not terminate some / most / all* 'fast line' scheduled services at Ealing Broadway (EAL)? The fast line platforms are available for use so passengers would be able to transfer to Elizabeth, District & Central line TfL services with comparative ease. East of EAL there are crossovers which would allow bimode IET's access to (temporary?) fuelling / stabling facilities in Acton Yard should this be required. Fully electric trains could be stabled on the presumably OOU fast lines between EAL & AML with perhaps (a) new temporary crossover(s) to permit the departure order of RDG-bound ECS trains to be changed.

If required additional stabling capacity could be made available at Southall and near West Ealing.

There would be little conflict with relief line services and this would surely be easier than trying to 'shoehorn' GWML trains into either WAT or EUS train plans.

*I believe fast line services from/to PAD run at roughly 3 minute intervals, how about 50% to EAL and 50% terminating at/starting from RDG?

Of course an additional option would be to run all EXD<>WAT services as 9-coach trains, and temporarily reinstate as many BRI<>WAT trains as possible, and encourage passengers via publicity campaigns to use these thereby reducing pressure on the route east of RDG.  ;D

   

The EAS contains a lot of short possessions for "Poplars electrification", starting with surveying last December and continuing until the end of next year at least. "Acton Bank" seems not to be an official railway name; it was built as the GWR Acton Wells Branch (its ELR is still AWL) and the lines are now the Up and Down Poplar (oddly).

Electrifying that won't in practice get electric-only stock to Euston (it would take at least two reversals), but it will get 345s onto the NLL and so to Ilford when they can't get to the Old Oak depot. If you accept that the Elizabeth Line is best run to Ealing Broadway and the Underground used to close the gap, there isn't really a current need for 387s to go further.

The route for bimodes to either Euston or Waterloo involves the Willesden South West Lines (still labelled as "sidings", though the actual sidings look abandoned). The connection at the north end is only low capacity (worse  for Euston), but then so is Acton East Junction to get to/from the GWML. Those lines were redesignated for passenger trains in 1990, but I don't think there is any plan to electrify then or upgrade the junctions to give generally useful connecting route.

This does look like a missed opportunity - a case of "if a job's worth doing it's worth doing before you need it". And how much work can it take to electrify 41 chains of double track? The installation can't be a big job, though I suspect there are serious technical issues over how best to do it. Since the ends are two different electrification schemes, this link has to provide isolation. But it is so short - and not at all level - so making it all a neutral section isn't going to work.

You’d only have to electrify one of the tracks as you could simply roll down the ‘Down Poplar’!  ;D

This has been talked about right from day one of the HEX scheme in the 1990's.

There are a number of challenges, the track layout where the UP & DN Poplars join the GWML is setup for freight moves in and out of Acton Yard, Acton Yard will also need to be wired, whilst all this is achievable the crux comes down to who funds the electrification and future Maintainenance.

The Freight Operators (FOC's) currently due to their tight operating margins they have little or no need / desire to fund the electrification of Acton Yard and Poplars , they are private companies without public funding (unlike passenger TOCs) 
The Passenger TOCs have virtually no need for the Poplars to be electrified, the usage into Euston would be limited; indeed running a few trains via the poplars could impact the turning around of services at Ealing Broadway.
Network Rail cannot undertake the task alone as it could not justify the funding because neither FOCs or TOCs have a requirement for it.

Should Acton Yard and the Poplars be electrified ........... yes ............. but unfortunately there just is not the demand to spend the money to do it