Plymouth MP slams city's rail link with the capital

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Is Melksham Off Peak or evening peak?

It's a peak fare from Paddington to Melksham on the 17:45 (change at Swindon)

If you travel on the 15:00 and change at Chippenham, that's super off peak
and if you travel on the 16:30 and change at Chippenham, that's off peak
(experts please confirm.  At the least you could split at Chippenham)

There is a very good coffee shop at Chippenham Station, run by the lady who runs the Bagette Bar in Melksham.

[Rhydgaled]

13:26 Fishguard Harbour
19:11 Melksham

The first connecting train of the day from London arrives Melksham 19:11? Does Melksham only have one train a day then, I was under the impression it had two? Maybe the first is just too early for a London connection? Before the extra trains, I thought Fishguard probablly had the worst service (for locals) of any line in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) that has a train every day (at least Monday - Saturday) all year. I knew Melksham's service was very bad, but now I see that maybe it is even worse than Fishguard's was.

[grahame]

The first connecting train of the day from London arrives Melksham 19:11? Does Melksham only have one train a day then, I was under the impression it had two? Maybe the first is just too early for a London connection? Before the extra trains, I thought Fishguard probablly had the worst service (for locals) of any line in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) that has a train every day (at least Monday - Saturday) all year. I knew Melksham's service was very bad, but now I see that maybe it is even worse than Fishguard's was.

The second train from Swindon:

Paddington 23:30
Swindon   00:45 to 06:12
Melksham   06:37

Also possible to use this same 23:30 train, change at Bath Spa and Trowbridge and arrive at Melksham at 07:20
Finally, the 17:33 from Paddington, change at Westbury, arrives at Melksham at 19:48

Both of these trains are pointelss from London - leave at the same time and arrive later, or overtaken. The 19:48 arrival is a higher fare.  Not sure about the 07:20 arrival - it's "via Swindon" so I think the lower fare might apply, or you might need two tickets - would need to have a routing guide expert tell me.

It depends on which figures you look at - in some ways Fishguard used to have a worse service, in some ways Melksham.  Sorry - but it's "no contest" now and I'm delighted for Fishguard.

[Zoe]

An earlier arrival in Plymouth was considered for the Great Western RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) but was rejected as the business case was weak.  There would need to be evidence that there is demand for any earlier service an the conclusion that the business case for this is weak would suggest that it is not there.

[JayMac]

The Great Western RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) was published nearly two years ago. The research for the document was carried out in the two years prior to publication, so the business case may be up to four years out of date.

In that time the air link from London to Plymouth has ceased. Passenger numbers have continued to rise at Plymouth station.

Evidence that there is demand is surely there in the original news item posted in this thread. Various business and academic people all singing from the same song sheet.

[Zoe]

Evidence that there is demand is surely there in the original news item posted in this thread. Various business and academic people all singing from the same song sheet.

The question is if this demand would be sufficient to justify running an earlier service to Plymouth.

[woody]

Evidence that there is demand is surely there in the original news item posted in this thread. Various business and academic people all singing from the same song sheet.

The question is if this demand would be sufficient to justify running an earlier service to Plymouth.

So Torbay on the branch line (population 130,000) justifies a direct early service from Paddington (07.06 departure) but Plymouth on the main line (population 250,000plus) does not!.Sorry Zoe but its attitudes like yours that have shown that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) have lost touch with their customer base in places like Plymouth.Far more people arrive and depart on trains at Plymouth through the year than in Torbay or indeed Newton Abbot for that matter.Not surprisingly overcrowding is also an issue now in these parts particularly between Plymouth and Penzance.It is sad that even after nearly two decades of Firsts involvement in the FGW franchise Plymouth and indeed Cornwall have still to continually battle for a half decent rail link to London,hopefully with all the political pressure now being applied this issue will be adressed in the new franchise with or without First Groups involvement.As Oliver Colvile conservative MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) for Devonport put it to Theresa Villiers MP
Minister of State for Transport in the debate on the next Great Western franchise in Westminster Hall on the 20th December 2011 "Plymouth is not Portsmouth,we are not 20 minutes from Bristol.Please stop ignoring us".

[devon_metro]

Newton Abbot - Paignton takes 20 minutes max, Newton Abbot - Plymouth takes 40 minutes. I think you have your answer.

[woody]

Newton Abbot - Paignton takes 20 minutes max, Newton Abbot - Plymouth takes 40 minutes. I think you have your answer.

Sorry but those excuses are not going to wash anymore particularly with the closure now of Plymouths airport.The specification of the next Great Western franchise will no doubt be amended by the government.As everyone knows including MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) and business leaders alike very big mistakes were made when the present FGW^▸ (First Great Western) franchise was let in 2006 leading to the present bodge-up or as "Modern Railways" magazine calls it the "Franchise from Hell".Even FGW itself has said recently(maybe in desperation) it will upgrade rail links to the south west if it wins the new franchise if the government ammends the specification.

[The SprinterMeister]

Evidence that there is demand is surely there in the original news item posted in this thread. Various business and academic people all singing from the same song sheet.

The question is if this demand would be sufficient to justify running an earlier service to Plymouth.

So Torbay on the branch line (population 130,000) justifies a direct early service from Paddington (07.06 departure) but Plymouth on the main line (population 250,000plus) does not!.Sorry Zoe but its attitudes like yours that have shown that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) have lost touch with their customer base in places like Plymouth.Far more people arrive and depart on trains at Plymouth through the year than in Torbay or indeed Newton Abbot for that matter.

Is Zoe someone from the marketing / train organising department then?

It always strikes me as somewhat odd that at Exeter you have the spectacle of an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) going to Paignton at 09:32 follwed by a 150/1 making its way to Penzance at 09:36, particularly given the fair number of passengers making the leap from the HST to the unit at Exeter. Passengers who know they're going to be on there for a bit make the leap at Exeter for the chair of their choice, the ones only going the shorter distance make the leap at Newton Abbot to minimize their unit mileage.

It should be possible to start the 1C73 07:06 Padd - Paignton at about 06:30 from Padd which would give you a slightly pre 10 am arrival if you diverted 1C73 to Plymouth using the existing stopping pattern as far as Exeter. Which would be sufficient time to sweep it out and send it back on its way to Paddington in the path it currently occupies from Newton Abbot (11:55 ex Exeter). It's doeable using the existing resources although the return working off 1C73 can be busy from Paignton of course which is why the HST is better suited to that job during the summer months. You could of course knock the Paignton trip out and use the unit to strengthen the next Exmouth to Paignton round trip (09:50ish ex Exeter) and run it as a four car which would give you a connection with carrying capacity off the  Paignton - Exmouth back working into the up London services at Newton Abbot or Exeter. (although that would leave you minus one unit in Cornwall, I expect there is a way round that though.) It depends of course if your running the train service for Grockles or buisness people of course.

[The SprinterMeister]

Newton Abbot - Paignton takes 20 minutes max, Newton Abbot - Plymouth takes 40 minutes. I think you have your answer.

Not really the answer at all bearing in mind the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) sits in the platform at Paignton for the best part of 40 minutes...

[Louis94]

Pathing the up service from Plymouth would not be possible, it would need to leave Plymouth at around 1046, which isnt possible due to the Cornish Riveria which departs at 1044, which is non-stop to Exeter. Running it before the 1044 and looping at Newton Abbot would be quite tight aswell with the signalling sections between Plymouth and Totnes given the XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) service departing Plymouth at 1025, even more so with the fact the Exeter to Penzance unit dosent arrive in Plymouth till 1041...

The Cornish Riviera already causes delay to the up service at Newton Abbot if it is late, the up service departs 8 minutes after the Cornish Riviera is booked to pass through.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

If 1C73 did go to Plymouth (either in present timings or a bit earlier) it's not entirely obvious what the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) set would do next, as the return HST services from Plymouth it may be available for (ie 1044 or 1201 deprtures) come from Penzance. So the you get into more wide ranging questions eg would extending 1C73  to Penzance in the path of the 150 be justified, then you've lost that HST set from the London end for most of the day.  Or run a new up HST from Plymouth between the 1044 and 1201 departures - would the traffic justify that?  

So it's all a question of compromises to make sure that the HST's are in the best places for most of the traffic for most of the day.  I'm sure FGW^▸ (First Great Western) do their best to maximise the revenue from their HST's - why would they not?

[Louis94]

If 1C73 did go to Plymouth (either in present timings or a bit earlier) it's not entirely obvious what the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) set would do next, as the return HST services from Plymouth it may be available for (ie 1044 or 1201 deprtures) come from Penzance. So the you get into more wide ranging questions eg would extending 1C73  to Penzance in the path of the 150 be justified, then you've lost that HST set from the London end for most of the day.  Or run a new up HST from Plymouth between the 1044 and 1201 departures - would the traffic justify that?  

So it's all a question of compromises to make sure that the HST's are in the best places for most of the traffic for most of the day.  I'm sure FGW^▸ (First Great Western) do their best to maximise the revenue from their HST's - why would they not?

Could send 1C73 to Penzance, return it on 2A64 which connects with the 1500 to London at Plymouth, so run that through to London (1A89), then use the unit which would form the Penzance unit from Exeter for a Paignton service, then send to Plymouth to run 2A64 ex Plymouth dep @ 1508. then use the HST set that terminates at Plymouth at 1436 to go to Laira to form 1A82 the following day, and that could even start Paignton still?

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Good heavens, Louise, that's very clever!  I was going to say how would you cover the 1106 ex Paignton as it obvioulsy has a working out of Padd after it arrives at 1444, but you've even thought of that!   Well done - or can somebody out there see a fatal flaw?