Proposal for additional platforms at Cheltenham

[whole diary]

[Red Squirrel]

Hmm... I always wonder what people mean when they follow an ellipsis (...) with some extra dots.

Perhaps ... you're looking at a regular expression ( see http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/Perl/matching.html ) ?

if ($sauce =~ /.../) matches "red", "grey" and "squirrel" in $sauce
but
if ($sauce =~ /..../) matches "grey" and "squirrel" but not "red" in $sauce

Regexes... really must make time to get my head round them properly...

[Deltic]

There are advantages and disadvantages of having bay platforms rather than the current arrangement where trains terminating at Cheltenham run empty to the siding at Alstone.  If there were bay platforms, passengers could board trains starting from Cheltenham further in advance of their departure.  However, for a connection from the Swindon line or Gloucester for Birmingham and the North, with the current arrangement, passengers use the same platform, whereas with bay platforms, they would need to go up and over the bridge to get to the northbound through platform.  Both manoeuvres involve crossing the southbound line on the level and therefore create conflicting movements.  On balance, it looks better value to retain the current arrangement, possibly increasing the capacity of the sidings and spend the money on improving the station facilities.

[John R]

It's a fair point about passengers needing to cross platforms. Although I dispute the point about conflicting moves, as the move to the sidings also results in having to cross the southbound line.

In a decade there could easily be the following hourly services (using current franchise holders):-

3 x XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) through
1 x FGW^▸ (First Great Western) either through (Malvern) or terminator from Bristol
1 x ATW^▸ (Arriva Trains Wales (former TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company))) terminator
2 x FGW terminator from Swindon
1 x FGW terminator from Bristol
plus any freight traffic. 

Although only 2 up from now, that would appear to be much more effectively handled via 2 bay platforms than the current arrangement. Quick turnarounds are easier, which also enables time to be made up in the event of a late arrival.   

I guess nothing's being done that will compromise the scheme being resurrected at a future date, but with new platforms springing up all over the network over the last few years, I'm surprised that such icy water has been poured over the idea.

[bobm]

Bay platforms would also assist with reliability.  Currently any train from the Swindon direction often has to be terminated short at Gloucester if it is more than 10-15 minutes late as it would foul up Cheltenham Spa station while it is crossed over into the sidings and back out again to form the return working having missed its "slot".

[grahame]

The quicker turn around has other knock-ons too.   The two-hourly Swindon to Cheltenham Spa service currently uses two sets, each running a round trip every 4 hours of just over 50% of the time is spent "in" stations reversing. Not efficient, but not changeable in the past due to the Kemble to Swindon single line section, and due to the time required at Cheltenham.

In theory, into the future a service that runs Swindon to Gloucester and Cheltenham, reversing there in 5 minutes, and back to Swindon using the Gloucester avoiding line would be do-able with one set.   Just a theory, because the whole thing gets changed anyway when IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) comes and we're told to expect that local service to be replaced by through London trains ... and I am aware that my suggestion reduces Cheltenham to Gloucester services, and slows down Gloucester to the Stroud Valley while speeding up Cheltenham to the Stroud Valley, which would call in local comment, I'm sure.

[Deltic]

If bay platforms were installed, there would still be a conflicting move for terminating trains and departing trains would still need the main line to be clear.  I have some sympathy for the idea of a direct service from Swindon to Cheltenham, in addition to an hourly Swindon to Gloucester, now that there is the capacity for two trains an hour in each direction between Kemble and Swindon.  Cheltenham lost out badly when it was decided to close Gloucester Eastgate station and make trains reverse to reach Cheltenham from  London.  The route between Swindon and Cheltenham is circuitous as it is, without the delay in travelling via Gloucester Central.  On my last journey from London to Cheltenham, we reached the curve between Gloucester Yard and Horton Road Junctions well ahead of time, then waited for a platform to become available.  I managed to arrive in Cheltenham earlier by racing over the Platform 4 to catch a Cardiff to Nottingham.

[stuving]

If you look in the Western Route Study, for evidence of what the industry's ideas are, you'll find option N2:

N2:	Mainline platforms at Gloucester
Conditional Output	Capacity
Timeframe	Longer Term, however there may be a case for passive provision in 2019 ^ 2024 (Control Period 6)
Purpose	^ would enable more main line services to call at Gloucester without incurring a journey time penalty as at present
	^ reduces timetable conflicts across the area
Description	Provision of an additional two-island platform providing four platform faces in total on the Main Line.
Indicative Cost	^50m ^100m
	^ cost of passive provision not known

But there's no sign of any intent to add platforms at Cheltenham. In part, that's because linking shorter routes into longer ones is seen as a better idea. So the service pattern on this area looks like:

Anticipated 2019 Baseline Service Patterns:
The principal off-peak services anticipated in the 2019 Indicative
Train Service Specification (ITSS) are as follows (tph = trains per
hour, each direction):
^ 1tph London Paddington ^ Cheltenham Spa
^ 1tph Bristol ^ Manchester
^ 1tph South West England ^ North East England / Scotland
^ 1tph Cardiff ^ Nottingham via Birmingham
^ 1tph South Wales ^ Cheltenham Spa
^ 1tph Westbury or beyond via Bristol ^ Gloucester, continuing
once every two hours to Great Malvern
^ 2tph Freight.

Changes to the Indicative Train Service Specification to 2043:
To accommodate the connectivity Conditional Outputs, the ITSS
for 2043 includes the following additional services:
^ 1tph Bristol ^ Gloucester
^ 2tph Cardiff ^ Bristol Parkway ^ Birmingham (continuing to
Manchester/Leeds etc)
^ Extension of 1tph London Paddington ^ Cheltenham to
Worcester
^ 1tph London Paddington ^ Gloucester
^ 1tph Swindon ^ north west England via Worcester and
Birmingham
^ 1tph Freight.

(Obviously not all of these go through Cheltenham.) There's a diagram, which shows no Cheltenham terminators at all - though I can't exactly square that with the words. So that's the background to NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s dismissal of the plans for Cheltenham.

[Charles T]

I know this was last posted on over 8 months ago.


Gloucester should be put on the main line. If I am going to Weston-Super-Mare I go up to come back down!. It's only less than 1/4 of a Mile away from GCR^» (Gloucester - next trains)!!

Please Discuss[/shadow]

[ChrisB]

XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) decision not to call. They consider themselves a long distance company.

But can't you get Gloucester - Bristol TM^‡(resolve) / BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI)) to Weston trains? No need to go up to go down.

[TonyK]

But can't you get Gloucester - Bristol TM^‡(resolve) / BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI)) to Weston trains? No need to go up to go down.

You can, but it's often easier and quicker to go via Cheltenham. The direct trains stop frequently.

Addendum: Did SRD - GCR^» (Gloucester - next trains) and return yesterday. I got to the platform just in time to see a very slowly moving train, heading for GCR, driver's window open. I asked "Coming or going?" - neither, it turned out. He was waiting for the SVB service to BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains) to clear the junction, and wasn't due to stop at SRD. So, change at BPW^» (Bristol Parkway - next trains) for the Cross Country service non stop to CNM^» (Cheltenham Spa - next trains) (destination MAN), then a XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) 158 to GCR. Despite the rather stale smell on the Voyager, I think I preferred it to an all-stations-stopper. And I had the chance to sample the fabulous cuisine available throughout historic cosmopolitan Cheltenham, or at least the bit near the station.

Why can't the Co-op make nice chicken sandwiches?

[Charles T]

XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Trains should arrive on platform 1, get ready to reverse, and then get to the other end, it doesn't take 4 mins! Easy connections to Weymouth/Westbury, Cardiff/Wales and stopping local services! It gets me annoyed when you spend 20 mins or over than just stopping at Gloucester!