Falmouth Branch Line - stations, facilities, services and improvements - ongoing discussion, merged posts

[whole diary]

[caliwag]

err. Is this a negative response to what's going on?
It does appear rather useless, given that the radio sations were suggesting to people to travel by public transport!!

I cannot see how, on here, we can be apologetic about lack of funds/stock/resources and at the same time as miss out on scope to put FGW^▸ (First Great Western) forward as a resourceful outfit...what would it have cost to put a 67+ a few coaches on for an event that has been known about for months?...shambles. many peeps will be leaving Falmouth mummbling "how pathetic was that".

[devon_metro]

what would it have cost to put a 67+ a few coaches on for an event that has been known about for months?...

Far too much for it to be worthwhile.

[caliwag]

Ok...what is involved financially? In terms of the "didn't the railways do well?" factor, how much is that worth? I overheard a conversation today, in the pub, about a journey on XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise))...literally " but they must have known about the extra people, why didn't they add another 4 car?"...now that was from two ladies travelling to some flower show.
Maybe the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) should run a poster campaign saying "look we cannot cope, thanks to DAFT, with any extra traffic due to sporting, entertainment and tourist events, so we will be very happy if you seek out alternative arrangements."

[grahame]

Ok...what is involved financially?  ....

Goodness - that is very hard to find out. But substantial. For last year's loco hauled Saturday service to Weymouth, I surmised a figure of around 15 to 20,000 pounds a week; this year it should be considerably less by using the stock that's in the Bristol area anyway for the FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s Monday to Friday services.  And the chance of any extra income to meet the expense (even if you add a healthy "goodwill" element) is pretty slim - you would need every seat taken at premium rates, I suspect, with no abstraction from the regular service.

Noting elsewhere the availability of 159s based in Salisbury for some service enhancement work;  I suspect the financial model is different there - potentially along the lines of "we may as well run the units when they're not otherwise in use".

But the overcrowded train situation - where occasional travellers feel that what's provided by (or via) the train operating company is totally inadequate for levels of traffic the t.o.c. should have predicted - does the train operating company (as the face of the rail industry that the occasional customer sees) no good at all.   About 10 days ago, I was travelling with a normally very mild mannered bunch (your "flower show ladies") and I was shocked at their strong and negative reaction to First Great Western;  that's their view that may mellow with time, but won't fade away completely for months or even years.

[caliwag]

Graeme...thank you for an excellent and understanding response. Would be good to know the costs, but yes I can imagine it does not make financial sense. I know there is nothing "standing around". I do just wonder how we can make the occasional travelling public aware how hard everyone is working within a very difficult, and resource strapped industry.

Cheers Caliwag

[vacman]

err. Is this a negative response to what's going on?
It does appear rather useless, given that the radio sations were suggesting to people to travel by public transport!!

I cannot see how, on here, we can be apologetic about lack of funds/stock/resources and at the same time as miss out on scope to put FGW^▸ (First Great Western) forward as a resourceful outfit...what would it have cost to put a 67+ a few coaches on for an event that has been known about for months?...shambles. many peeps will be leaving Falmouth mummbling "how pathetic was that".

if you read some of the other posts you will see why, 30 MPH SPEED RESTRICTION FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s! yeah, 67 and coaches would be brilliant running the service every 1 and a half hours! the line speed is 50 all the way for units (bar the very short section of 35 through Perranwell platform and 25 over the points at Penryn)

[LiskeardRich]

why a lower speed for non dmus?
surely as the event was in the evening there were some 150s somewhere locally running not full and could of coped with a 153 on that diagram to increase capacity for the event? Falmouth was busy all week with a massive sailing regatta as well, so even swapping the 153's with 150's for the week could of been logical,
above saying there are no spare units, dont need spare units if you swap a longer train for a shorter train, i've been travelling frequently over the last couple of weeks, and i've yet to be on a 153 thats been more than half full, admittedly i dont know how busy it gets after i got off

[inspector_blakey]

why a lower speed for non dmus?

Because of the forces that locomotives apply to the track. A class 67 weighs 88 tons, spread over 4 axles for an axle loading of 22 tons which is relatively very high. For the sake of comparison an HST^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) power car weighs around 70 tons, for an axle loading of 17.5 tons, and a 150 vehicle around 36 tons for an axle loading of 9 tons.

Should be obvious given that why loco-hauled trains are subject to lower maximum speeds than DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) in some places - an axle with 22 tons on it hammering along at 50 mph will place vastly more stress on the track than one with 9 tons. So in places where the track is laid to a lighter specification than on a high-speed mainline (i.e. branchlines) loco haulage is subject to a lower speed. A good example of this is class 67 haulage of the Caledonian sleeper portion that runs to the West Highlands, which has to slow almost to a crawl in places.

[vacman]

why a lower speed for non dmus?
surely as the event was in the evening there were some 150s somewhere locally running not full and could of coped with a 153 on that diagram to increase capacity for the event? Falmouth was busy all week with a massive sailing regatta as well, so even swapping the 153's with 150's for the week could of been logical,
above saying there are no spare units, dont need spare units if you swap a longer train for a shorter train, i've been travelling frequently over the last couple of weeks, and i've yet to be on a 153 thats been more than half full, admittedly i dont know how busy it gets after i got off

its not that simple though, yes, in the evening the St Ives 4 car 150 could cope with 3 cars but you cant swap them without cancelling trains, i.e. it takes 30 minutes St Erth Truro and vice versa.

[caliwag]

Any further news or rumours regarding the Falmouth docks freight branch...off to Falmouth for a few days, will report back if any activity!

[caliwag]

Delightfully informative and amusing overview of the Maritime line (whist googling for freight branch news )

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/nigel.nicholson/gn/page%2099.html

[Chris from Nailsea]

From FGW^▸ (First Great Western) live updates:

Line problem between Truro and Falmouth Docks.

Train services are being disrupted due to a passenger being taken ill between Truro and Falmouth Docks. Short notice cancellations can be expected.

The XX:20 Truro to Falmouth Docks and the XX:50 Falmouth Docks services have been cancelled. Customers are advised to use the First Devon & Cornwall Service 88 between Truro and Falmouth Docks.
Last Updated: 27/08/2010 14:08

(My highlighting. CfN.)

[Chris from Nailsea]

From FGW^▸ (First Great Western) live updates:

Line problem between Truro and Falmouth Docks.

Train services are now running normally between Truro and Falmouth Docks.

Last Updated: 27/08/2010 16:40

[slippy]

restarted from 16:20 pinching half the 14:49 PNZ to PAR service. 153318 dumped in Truro Yard requiring a heavy clean.

[The Tall Controller]

restarted from 16:20 pinching half the 14:49 PNZ to PAR service. 153318 dumped in Truro Yard requiring a heavy clean.

dont they all do?