Cotswold Line redoubling: 2008 - 2011

[whole diary]

[Andrew1939 from West Oxon]

The intention of this new Charlbury starter at around 0710 - 0715 is to boost the CL traffic growth by improving frequency that will be possible as a result of the completion of the 20 mile redoubling project. Whilst we hope this will be achieved, this new Charlbury starter (made possible by the tunback facility in the redoubling scheme), will undoubtedly relieve the pressure on the two up trains immediate before and after this new CL up train and thereby provide at least some alternative seating for travellers boarding at Oxford. You can't please all of the people all of the time! Of course, if it is successful in increasing CL patronage, there will be increased pressure at Oxford and beyond, but should that be the case, it will boost the case for the Oxford south bay scheme at present, I understand, on hold.

[IndustryInsider]

The intention of this new Charlbury starter at around 0710 - 0715 is to boost the CL traffic growth by improving frequency that will be possible as a result of the completion of the 20 mile redoubling project.

Yes, and good news it is too - though I'm with 'Willc' in that running a HST^▸ (High Speed Train) empty to Charlbury, and allowing suitable turnaround time, and then running it back over the single line to Wolvercote will put pressure on the performance of the line and mean there's very little spare capacity pathing wise.  The scheme seems to have changed its aims and ambitions slightly from the original funding agreement based purely on increasing the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) PPM^‡(resolve) figures, towards providing more trains.  Don't get me wrong, I'm pleased about that, and if the service east of Moreton can be tweaked a little to give them a better mid-morning service then the timetable as proposed does indeed look pretty impressive.

[ChrisB]

The CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) have been pushing for more trains since this was anmounced.

[Oxman]

Worth remembering as well that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) will be in a fight for customers from the Eastern end of the Cotswolds line if and when Chiltern starts its Oxford service. There is a real prospect of customers from Hanborough and Charlbury opting to drive to Water Eaton Parkway - ample free parking and competitive journey times on a half hourly service. It would be a great shame if the Cotswold line was to see a reduction in passenger numbers, so FGW are right to improve the service at the earliest opportunity. Always get your retaliation in first, as I think a famous footballer once said?

[willc]

if the service east of Moreton can be tweaked a little to give them a better mid-morning service

West, surely?

There is a real prospect of customers from Hanborough and Charlbury opting to drive to Water Eaton Parkway

Charlbury, I seriously doubt - so long as the Cotswold Line service does what it says on the timetable and especially if the car park extension happens, going a long way towards ending the issue of turning up and finding all the spaces gone. If those conditions are satisfied, why on earth would anyone need/want to drive to the edge of Oxford? As for Hanborough, it's most likely to be all the people who would like to catch a train a little later than the 06.42 - because that's when the car park is full most days and there's little prospect of anything being done about that issue any time soon - unless someone has a pot of gold to build Oxford Bus Museum a new home elsewhere.

And it will require another mystery pot of gold if the south bay at Oxford is ever going to happen. The county council has been told by the government it isn't getting the money, so that's it for the foreseeable future.

I don't have a problem with extra trains per se, i do have a problem with this notion, when it appears guaranteed to introduce a performance risk - the very thing the redoubling was supposed to be getting us away from.

If this was part of a thoroughgoing overhaul of the full morning peak service, with trains at fairly even intervals, then I would be less concerned but given that it's more likely to be just another tweak after the September changes (hopefully pending a proper rethink come December 2012), I'll remain a sceptic, not least on the basis of experience with the 09.29 from Moreton-in-Marsh, which is a classic 'well, we can just about squeeze another train in there' exercise, where the empty stock move has often fallen foul of late running by the 06.48 from London or the 06.43 from Hereford, meaning the set doesn't leave Oxford - so I don't think withdrawing stops from the first Hereford service would be advisable, plus its timing is ideal for those starting work in Oxford at 8am.

And don't forget what happens when you provide more capacity - on roads as well as railways - that extra capacity soon tends to be used up, as it stimulates more demand - the Cotswold Line Turbo services being a case in point, with them unable to cope on certain services within a few years of their introduction.

An extra train from Charlbury may divert some custom from other services initially but it is just as likely to stimulate more demand, especially in the context of a more frequent and more reliable service, both on any extra peak train and on the existing services where a number of extra seats are made available. So not only will Reading commuters miss out completely but Oxford commuters may very well find themselves facing stiff competition for seats.

And this is surely just about the limit of enhancements that can be achieved with canny juggling of rolling stock. If demand shows a steep rise on the back of this train, extra peak calls at Hanborough and the overall enhanced service, then FGW^▸ (First Great Western) or anyone else who might turn up from 2013 will have quite a headache on their hands until electrification and IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) ride to the rescue. Still, there's always that old and trusty railway stand-by - pricing off demand...

[ChrisB]

Charlbury, I seriously doubt - so long as the Cotswold Line service does what it says on the timetable and especially if the car park extension happens, going a long way towards ending the issue of turning up and finding all the spaces gone. If those conditions are satisfied, why on earth would anyone need/want to drive to the edge of Oxford?

The car park extension has to be funded somehow....there's a 50/50 chance of the whole car park becoming a fee-paying car park. Chiltern's fares from Water Eaton will be priced to attract those not only from Hanborough & Charlbury, but from Kingham & Moreton too! Chiltern needs serious extraction from the Cotswold Line to pay for the cost of line refurb.....that's why!

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) will either need to fight hard or give up & lose heavily. As it currently sounds, the latter is likely as they give up the franchise in 2013.....just as Chiltern start their services!

I don't have a problem with extra trains per se, i do have a problem with this notion, when it appears guaranteed to introduce a performance risk - the very thing the redoubling was supposed to be getting us away from.

Better they try it for three months to see if there's any risk, than intro it in December & have to stomach it until the end of May before they can change the timetable again?

And don't forget what happens when you provide more capacity - on roads as well as railways - that extra capacity soon tends to be used up, as it stimulates more demand - the Cotswold Line Turbo services being a case in point, with them unable to cope on certain services within a few years of their introduction.

Yes, that's the idea!......more money in the fares basket pays for the extra trains!

So not only will Reading commuters miss out completely but Oxford commuters may very well find themselves facing stiff competition for seats.

Good - so long as there is one seat for every bum. That is every TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) target.

[IndustryInsider]

if the service east of Moreton can be tweaked a little to give them a better mid-morning service

West, surely?

Yes, I meant west.

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) will either need to fight hard or give up & lose heavily. As it currently sounds, the latter is likely as they give up the franchise in 2013.....just as Chiltern start their services!

Has it been confirmed that they are giving up the franchise early then, and secondly, they're not just chucking in the keys as they surely intend to bid for the new Greater Western franchise, so why would they want to give up and lose heavily?

[ChrisB]

Lose heavily? Think again.....

In those three years, they would have to pay franchise payments totalling ^850million....and thery're on Revenue Support (likely till whichever end date they choose) which severely limits abny profit that they can make.

Nothing is preventing them from re-bidding - this franchise ends in 2013, with an extension (only available if FGW^▸ (First Great Western) want it - i.e. the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have no say, as long as they qualify for it, which they are very likely to do) available to 2016.

What would you do - take the extnsion & pay the TReasury ^850million whilwe making little profit - or hand the keys back at the end (2013) and rebid (probably at a lot lower cost)?.....

In my view, there's only one sensible answer....

[IndustryInsider]

As you were talking about revenue being lost to Water Eaton Parkway, when you said 'fight hard or lose heavily' I assumed you meant FGW^▸ (First Great Western) would have to fight hard to keep Cotswold Line/Oxford punters travelling with them, or give them up to Chiltern - not on a more general franchise level.  Thanks for clarifying.

I agree that handing it back is probably going to happen and is probably the sensible option, though my point was that there was little point in giving up trying to compete with Chiltern in the intervening period, if they were intending to re-bid, as that custom would be very hard to win back.

[ChrisB]

my point was that there was little point in giving up trying to compete with Chiltern in the intervening period, if they were intending to re-bid, as that custom would be very hard to win back.

That depends.....
If they're giving up in 2013, I wouldn't expect them to try & compete with Chiltern's proposal *unless* you intended to go all out for the new GW^▸ (Great Western) franchise. Who knows - if First get East Coast, they might not try for GW....so, just keeping the September status-quo through to the end in 2013 would make sense....

If however, you are either going to 2016, or intending to beat the competition for the new franchise - surely you would want to encourage & keep (nay, improve) the current Cotswold Line paswengers.....and thus find what improvements you could to services pre-IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)

[Richard Fairhurst]

Where are Water Eaton passengers going to come from?

Charlbury, Chipping Norton, and the eastern Cotswolds - I don't think so; Bicester's nearer and already open, yet people don't use it. Woodstock/Bladon - maybe, but a very small settlement. Kidlington/Begbroke/Yarnton - yes, definitely, but I doubt many of them use the Cotswold Line right now.

The only abstraction that I can foresee is of passengers living in Witney and Eynsham. Driving from Witney to Water Eaton is competitive with Witney to Charlbury or Hanborough; driving from Eynsham to Water Eaton is competitive with Eynsham to Hanborough. Peartree and Wolvercote roundabouts are of course the big PITA^▸ (Pain in the A**e), but you can possibly take the Cassington-Yarnton rat-run.

No doubt the loss of (say) 50% of Witney passengers would hurt the Cotswold Line - but I'm not convinced it would be a mortal blow.

[ChrisB]

Oh, I wasn't saying it'll be anything like a mortal blow for the line as a whole - but Chiltern might be hoping to strike a bigger one than you or I reckon. They can set whatever fare they choose there - may even try undercutting FGWs^▸ (First Great Western) Oxford fare ( they'll get 100% of the fare box at Water Eaton).

Together with a train every 30 minutes, until late into the night, they'll be sure to make it attractive. Just how attractive, we've a little longer to wait to find out.

But seeing as we need extra pax on the Cotswold Line, not just a stand-still to improve services further/ retain HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train), forewarned is forearmed.

[willc]

.there's a 50/50 chance of the whole car park becoming a fee-paying car park

Well Charlbury is currently a 100 per cent fee-paying car park - and 100 per cent full three or four days of the week usually, so I'm not sure what you're driving at.

Chiltern's fares from Water Eaton will be priced to attract those not only from Hanborough & Charlbury, but from Kingham & Moreton too!

I don't know who you get these ideas from but the number of people in Moreton and Kingham who would willingly drive all the way to the northern edge of Oxford to get on a train - especially given where petrol prices are going these days - when they can get on one five minutes down the road is pretty much zero - whatever fares Chiltern offers. Mr Shooter may want them to but I think he would find focusing on tackling the Oxford express coach market a rather much fruitful use of time and money - quite apart from the environmental impact on the likes of Chipping Norton, Enstone and Woodstock if people were all hurtling along the A44 in their cars, communities which already have serious traffic pollution problems.

Better they try it for three months to see if there's any risk, than intro it in December & have to stomach it until the end of May before they can change the timetable again?

They're not trying it for three months - the Charlbury starter, if it happens, would be from December, not September.

Yes, that's the idea!......more money in the fares basket pays for the extra trains!

But any extra rolling stock - unless a 180 deal is cobbled together and even then they would merely help tackle existing peak demand - will not appear until electrication. Juggling around existing rolling stock won't ultimately help if the improved route generates a boom in custom, especially if it comes in the morning peak, will it? If all the 'extra' seats fill up quickly, what is plan B? Without more stock to put into service, there can't be one, can there?

Good - so long as there is one seat for every bum. That is every TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) target

I was thinking more about the bums that don't have seats - of which there are already rather too many on FGW^▸ (First Great Western) peak services.

Work-wise, the back wall of the platform at Ascott-under-Wychwood's new platform is about half complete, while at Charlbury piling has begun on the new platform for the footbridge foundations. At the end of the existing platform, cages full of stone are being placed for what looks like reinforcement of the bank alongside the trackbed before piling starts on that side. S&T^▸ (Signalling and Telegraph) teams were at work in several places this morning between Charlbury and Finstock.

[ChrisB]

Well Charlbury is currently a 100 per cent fee-paying car park - and 100 per cent full three or four days of the week usually, so I'm not sure what you're driving at.

Thanks for the info - I thought it was currently free. How much a day is it?

I don't know who you get these ideas from but the number of people in Moreton and Kingham who would willingly drive all the way to the northern edge of Oxford to get on a train - especially given where petrol prices are going these days - when they can get on one five minutes down the road is pretty much zero....quite apart from the environmental impact on the likes of Chipping Norton, Enstone and Woodstock if people were all hurtling along the A44 in their cars, communities which already have serious traffic pollution problems.

When you can save ^1000+/year, environmental considerations go out the window, I'm afraid - it's been proved elsewhere.
With journey's London <-> Water Eaton under an hour, twice an hour, free Parking, and saving around a grand a year - I think you'll have your eyes opened.

They're not trying it for three months - the Charlbury starter, if it happens, would be from December, not September.

Thanks again - I thought I read up-thread it was SEptember.

But any extra rolling stock - unless a 180 deal is cobbled together and even then they would merely help tackle existing peak demand - will not appear until electrication. Juggling around existing rolling stock won't ultimately help if the improved route generates a boom in custom, especially if it comes in the morning peak, will it? If all the 'extra' seats fill up quickly, what is plan B? Without more stock to put into service, there can't be one, can there?

My point, way up-thread....but to satisfy the CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) demand for around hourly services, someone has to pay for them. Why should it be the taxpayer by way of suibsidy? And yes, for the purposes of this discussion, I was bringing the 5 180s into play.

Re the 180s, I understand the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have to make a decision on them by September, if they're going to be in use for the DEcember Timetable - apparently driver (re)trining will take that long.

[willc]

Charlbury parking ^3.80 per day for peak parking, acoording to Apcoa site http://www.apcoa.co.uk/carparks/charlbury-station
You didn't really think FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and Thames before them would miss out on such an easy source of so much revenue did you? The National Rail page is hopelessly out of date, saying much of the car park is unsurfaced, never mind the bus information, with years-old route numbers and no mention whatever of the railbus services driect from the station.

When you can save ^1000+/year, environmental considerations go out the window, I'm afraid - it's been proved elsewhere.
With journey's London <-> Water Eaton under an hour, twice an hour, free Parking, and saving around a grand a year

And add on the 55 minutes or so to do the drive, park, get a ticket, etc, on a good day, plus one hour train travelling versus a typical 95 to 100-minute run direct to paddington doesn't exactly say what a brilliant idea it is to go to Water Eaton from Moreton-in-Marsh. Hit a tailback at Loop Farm or Kidlington roundabouts and you can add another half-hour on to your journey. Factor in depreciation on a car clocking up a 50-mile round trip each day and your ^1,000 'saving' soon disappears.