Class 165's on Bristol Temple Meads-Oxford services

[whole diary]

[XPT]

I loved it when there was the 165's on Thames Trains Bristol-Oxford services. Made a refreshing change from getting an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) between Bristol and Didcot.   Commenced service in 1998 I'm fairly sure.  But does anyone know whenabouts(down to the year and month) that these services were axed?

[willc]

It was May 2003. There was a discussion of this service previously in the thread below. While they may have had novelty value, I'm not sure anyone would be too thrilled to be doing that journey in an unrefurbished 165 these days.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/info/333_Social_engineering_major_changes_in_way_of_life_cause_by_rail_changes.html

[grahame]

While they may have had novelty value, I'm not sure anyone would be too thrilled to be doing that journey in an unrefurbished 165 these days.

Whilst another unit type might be preferred, the through journey / saving the change and wait at Didcot would be a very welcome gain indeed for passenger from the West to Oxford.

My Melksham -> Oxford journey in 2002 was a good one ... same-platform change (both ways) at Chippenham.  "Progress" now has me catching a bus to Chippenham (and walking across the town), getting a train to Didcot and changing there; on this run, it's progress in a negative direction and I would prefer a direct service even with a 142  ... must give FGW^▸ (First Great Western) a little credit.  Now that performance / reliability are somewhat improved, it's not quite the connection lottery it was a couple of years ago at Didcot, with the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) for Bristol leaving as the local from Oxford pulled in on days that you drew a short straw.  But in the evening, the 20:24 bus from Chippenham station pulls out just as the 20:25 arrival from Paddington is pulling in.

[willc]

But the fundamental problem, which there's no getting away from, was that overall demand for the through service was low.

Reopening Corsham and Wantage Road/Grove might have helped overall numbers. However, traffic over the central section of the journey through Swindon would still be low, as Corsham's key flow would be heading to Bath and Bristol.

At Wantage Road, the biggest demand would be for a service towards Reading and London, from all those who drive to Didcot at present. If they had to change five minutes down the line, they would stay in their cars for the run to Didcot. Oxford would be a secondary destination, even if it offered the prospect of a better public transport option than the current limited-stop bus.

And with the prospect of a tight rein on spending for years to come, the only way this station will ever get built is if the big Grove airfield housing development - supposedly still on track - goes ahead and the developers are obliged to cough up the cash. Even then, it's hard to see where you would get a train from to operate a service there until electrification, which might open up the prospect of 319s out to Swindon.

[moonrakerz]

it's not quite the connection lottery it was a couple of years ago at Didcot, with the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) for Bristol leaving as the local from Oxford pulled in on days that you drew a short straw. 

They've moved that one to Westbury - the 2103 arrival from the West and the the 2101 departure to Portsmouth. On a "good" day you can watch the doors on the Portsmouth train closing as you step down from the Exeter train 10 yds away on the other side of the platform !

[XPT]

Thanks for that info.   I remember travelling to Oxford a few times in 1998 and 1999 at certain times specifically so that I could ride aboard the 165's there and back.   After that I didn't bother as I then lost interest in trains for a few years.   However I don't remember seeing any 165's at Temple Meads after the year 2000.   Probably because I wasn't at the station at the relevant times the 165's were in the platforms. 

I agree with Grahame.  Whilst another train or a 165 with refurbished carriages may be preferrable for the average travelling public, a re-instatement of the direct Bristol-Oxford services would be very welcome. Especially for Bristol to Oxford commuters.  And with the growth in passenger traffic since 2003, the services may well be more popular than they were back then.  And it would help ease over-crowding between Bristol and Bath at peak times too.   With a bit of careful timetable planning these services could be fitted in amongst the existing services.   For example, the services could depart Bristol TM^‡(resolve) every two hours at xx:10. With the peak morning service(say 0710) TO Oxford by-passing Didcot Parkway.  As well as of course a service departing Oxford at 5pm-ish for the Oxford-Bristol commuters.

If you don't mind me posting this, here's a link to a clip of a 165 departing Bristol from 1998 which I've just uploaded to YouTube.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b80rvyApl0M

[willc]

And there would be how many Bristol-Oxford commuters? Not many, on the evidence of my own eyes when I used to see these trains at Oxford for the last 18 months of the service. Most were little better loaded than the Bicester branch trains - hence the distinct lack of resistance from Thames and FGW^▸ (First Great Western) when they were told to ditch the service.

The growth in traffic in the Thames Valley means that there aren't any 165s spare these days to go pootling around amid a lot of 125mph trains all the way to Bristol - another factor in the withdrawal, because pathing them among HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) and 60mph coal trains (which eat huge amounts of line capacity) trying to get from Bristol to Didcot was a nightmare.

Why would you bypass Didcot? For the sake of a few minutes saved, you would miss out on opportunities to connect for intermediate stops to Reading and Oxford and the way to solve overcrowding in Bath and Bristol is more trains in that area, not running something half (and usually much more) empty all the way to and from Oxford.

[bemmy]

Absolutely, if there were spare crews and units I'd rather they ran from Salisbury/Westbury to Swindon/Oxford than Bristol to Oxford.

[grahame]

Absolutely, if there were spare crews and units I'd rather they ran from Salisbury/Westbury to Swindon/Oxford than Bristol to Oxford.

Agreed (and I'm biased towards my home line)... but 165s are not cleared through Trowbridge.  Oxford / Salisbury would have considerable middle of the day tourist potential ... quite apart from Chippenham -> Westbury / Salisbury coming out far better BCR^▸ (Benefit Cost Ratio) in the GWRUS^▸ (Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy) than an extra Chippenham -> Bristol service. 

How big really IS the problem at Trowbridge?  Anyone know?

[XPT]

OK maybe not by-pass Didcot Parkway then.  After all it will only shave about 5 minutes off the total journey time.  By stopping at Didcot, it will provide another valuable link for Bristo/Bath/Chippenham passengers travelling to Reading - albeit requiring a change at Didcot.  

Alternatively yes a fairly regular Salisbury/Westbury-Swindon/Oxford service would be better than nothing atall.  And these such services would be welcome news to many.

Doesn't necessarily have to be a 165 to work these services.  Allthough they are my personal favourites compared to the likes of the Class 150's and 158's.   So a service worked by 150's, 158's, 159's, or even 143's would suffice.  I don't think a 143 would be allowed east of Bath Spa along the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) though!

Sadly it seems that once any train operators decide to withdraw services, they are then never to return.  Look at South West Trains with their former Brighton-Salisbury, Brighton-Reading, and Brighton-Paignton services for example.   As well as Arriva Cross Country who withdrawed services as far south as Brighton.  Nowadays services terminate at Gatwick Airport.   Unless a new franchise takes over(if that ever happens) we will probably not see those such services ever again.  

[John R]

Sadly it seems that once any train operators decide to withdraw services, they are then never to return.  Look at South West Trains with their former Brighton-Salisbury, Brighton-Reading, and Brighton-Paignton services for example.   As well as Arriva Cross Country who withdrawed services as far south as Brighton.  Nowadays services terminate at Gatwick Airport.   Unless a new franchise takes over(if that ever happens) we will probably not see those such services ever again.  

It's the government, (through whatever guise they use at the time to regulate the railways), not the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company), that has been the driving force behind the removal of the services you mention. So hardly surprising that they are not reinstated subsequently.

[XPT]

Oh ok then.  What reasons have the government given in saying that both Arriva and South West Trains can not run some services into Brighton?  I'm intrigued!  Not argueing with you.  I'm just intrigued as to why the government apparantly decided this.

[grahame]

A couple of points - not on Brighton, but on the Oxford / Bristols.

a) 143s are allowed (though not regularly seen since the 14x fleet was concentrated in Exeter) on the Thingley -> Swindon section of the GW^▸ (Great Western) main line.  "East of Bath" probably not a problem, but "East of Swindon" might be,and I don't know about sending them through Box tunnel.

b) The reason given for the withdrawl of the Oxford -> Bristol was capacity issues on the Bath to Bristol section which would not be an issue if the trains became Oxford -> Salisbury or Oxford -> Westbury.

c) Although that was the reason <b>given</b>, I have to wonder whether the request to First to withdraw the trains was queitely welcomed;  when set up originally, there was involvement from two companies - Thames Trains and First, but when they merged the competition element was lost.  Although the Oxford -> Swindon and beyond journey is FAR less convenient with a change at Didcot, for the most part First still get the money ... and they find it hard to justify a service improvement that brings no more revenue for them, even if it makes a major time saving for a whole lot of commuters. (specific example - Westbury / Trowbridge -> Chippenham / Swindon and I could quote exactly who told me that and when, but not for publication).

d) 15x's would be fine for Oxford -> TransWilts ... but if there is more spare 16x than 15x, then they would do equally well save for Trowbridge.  Perhaps 16x's are allowed Weston -> Parkway ... I know I saw a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) drawn up timetable option that had the Oxford -> BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains) service extended to WSM, an dif that's the case some 15x's could be released.  Or ... should we have loco and coaches up to Oxford or have an Oxford service from a Salisbury depot which - after all - is on the line!

Too much speculation, perhaps ... all of this is very much Sunday afternoon musings. Someone will be suggesting that the Stroud Valley unit that has a long layover in Swindon has time to make it to Oxford and back next!

[paul7575]

Oh ok then.  What reasons have the government given in saying that both Arriva and South West Trains can not run some services into Brighton?  I'm intrigued!  Not argueing with you.  I'm just intrigued as to why the government apparantly decided this.

Brighton/SWT^▸ (South West Trains)

The SWT franchise replacement stakeholder briefing, following consultation, published April 2006, shows it was DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) initiated.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/passenger/franchises/sw1/southwesternstakeholderbriefin1

"withdrawal of the Reading-Brighton service but this would be offset with a new service structure operating on the Brighton-Southampton corridor and additional calls in the Waterloo-Poole services."  Annex A of the linked pdf discusses the proposals DfT made, and the consultation responses.

IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) the Brighton - Southampton service is much more useful, as it runs hourly all day, and passenger numbers seem to be much higher than before. The SWT service did not run all day, as the paths were also used for Basingstoke - Portsmouth peak services, and between Fareham and Brighton the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) service ran in place of SWT's in those hours.  Latterly, SWT only used 450s on the route on a couple of off peak round trips, allegedly because the stock was better used elsewhere where the 4 car capacity was needed.  I suspect DfT saw a clockface pattern timetable on the West Coastway operated by SN as a more useful service, but AFAICT^▸ (as far as I can tell) it could have been run by SWT just as easily. Perhaps SN had a better availability of suitable stock?

Brighton/XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise))

XC franchise stakeholder briefing, November 2006. (Word format)

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/passenger/franchises/ncc/

"There is no requirement for bidders to operate services to Gatwick Airport or Brighton in the ITT^▸ (Invitation to Tender); however if a bidder identifies a business case for operation to either of these locations which is complementary to the rest of the New Cross Country operation this may be included in their proposals."

AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) the new XC franchise saw this as aapproval to withdraw and use the units made available elsewhere. Various other Route Strategy docs concerning the Brighton Mainline, Cross London etc,  give the distinct impression that they wanted the XC services out of the way, as they ran in non standard paths and basically got in the way of the preferred timetable.

In context, I think the DfT is the controlling mind in every route alteration in recent years.

Paul

[John R]

Regarding the long layover at Swindon, a few more minutes would enable the unit to get to Westbury and back. Is there anyway the timetable could be flexed between Cheltenham and Swindon to enable this (granted the section from Cheltenham to Standish will probably be the most difficult to change)