TrawsCambria / TrawsCymru

[daodao]

Is that why the whole Oakley Arms interchange thing came about?

Until Pont Briwet was rebuilt to allow heavy vehicles to cross (from 2015), all bus services from Porthmadog to points east/south had to run via Maentwrog, so it was a convenient interchange point for the coastal service via Harlech.

A quick look at Crosville's area timetable no.5 for Western Wales from 1969, available at Timetable World, reveals that services on main routes (e.g. calling at Maentwrog) were not especially frequent even then. Longer distance services were infrequent in 1969 and TrawsCymru is a distinct improvement on former provision; the Welsh Government should be applauded for the development of these longer distance bus services.

Timetable World

timetableworld.com

 

[johntrawscymru]

A quick look at Crosville's area timetable no.5 for Western Wales from 1969, available at Timetable World,

Wow. Thanks. Did not know about Timetable World .

 

[Rhydgaled]

Your argument would appear to be that fast bus links are not required because the train operates between Carmarthen and Newport.

I know you weren't replying to me with that comment, but to a degree yes, I would make that argument. Bus links are required, but unless they can be faster than the train (as the T1C could, although only because the rail timetablers insist on everything going via Swansea and the T1C doesn't) then I don't think the bus needs to be fast. Sure, having a fast bus as well could still be a nice-to-have but other things are a higher priority.

The Trawscymru network should be a series of long distance services that connect the major towns and cities by the most direct fastest possible route in comfortable buses.

I agree, the question then becomes which of the major towns and cities should be connected by TrawsCymru within the limited budget available? My view is that, if two major towns cannot be affordably* linked by both a fast direct service and a local bus making detours to serve places in between then the local bus should take precidence and there should be no TrawsCymru branded services on that corridor. Obviously the ideal suituation is a route where the direct route between major towns also serves all the main places in between, such as Aberystwyth to Aberaeron, allowing the TrawsCymru service to fulfill both roles.

There is also a need to determine how direct is 'direct enough' for a route to be allowed to carry the TrawsCymru brand; my view is that this should be based on the time difference between the car journey time and the bus journey time. I think the Winckler review suggested 50% slower than the car as a worst case and recommended that most routes should aim to be significantly faster than that, but the exact percentage to be used needs to be defined by a much more scientific study.

* exactly how you determine this is open to debate, some form of cost benefit analysis is obviously required but I have little faith in the system used to determine the 'cost benefit ratio' of infrustructure projects which seem to generate alot of 'economic benefits' and monetary value for time savings but very little weight given to the 'cost' in terms of greenhouse gas emissions leading to a climate breakdown which is recognised as costing far more than the actions needed to avert it.

The "clock-face" timing mentality in use now should be abandoned in favour of prioritising Trawscymru connections with other rail and bus services.

Often, clock-face timetabling helps develop good connections. Rail services are often clockface to a degree and therefore it follows that any bus service connecting with it will also be clockface. However, clockface timetabling should not be religiously adhered to if there are reasons to break it, for example if trying to connect with a rail or local bus service that isn't clockface then TrawsCymru should have the flexibility to amend it's timetable to maintain connections. Similarly, if a service takes longer at peak times due to traffic, and/or there is a specific trip generator (such as a school/college/university with work starting at 9am) then there should be freedom to flex from the standard pattern to meet these needs. For example, between Aberystwyth and Aberaeron what might be a half-hourly pattern during the day taking 37 minutes could increase to three arrivals 20 minutes apart in the morning peak (one or two of these possibly being local services rather than direct TrawsCymru ones), but with the one arriving at the busiest time allowed 45 minutes to do the trip instead of the normal 37.

The practice of looking for the easy option and existing Local Bus Services to link together as a Trawscymru service should be abandoned.

I see no reason why not to join two services that meet the TrawsCymru critera** and would still do so if joined into a through service. However taking an existing indirect local service and tagging it onto another route should not be used as an excuse to apply the TrawsCymru brand; nothing wrong with linking routes (people often prefer not to have to change bus) but an indirect local service is still an indirect local service no matter how long-distance you make it.

** except possibly the long-distance part

TrawscymruConnect should be abandoned. Local bus services are the potential connection to either rail services or TrawsCymru Services. Priority should be given to improving local bus service coverage and identifying those Local services that can be used to link passengers to the rail and Trawscymru networks. Local Authorities cannot do this alone and it needs some level of central direction.

Isn't TrawsCymruConnect simply a 'level of central direction' for improved local bus service coverage anyway? It's a bit of a pointless brand to have, except that it makes things look a little more joined up (which might encourage people to try the bus), and my guess is that it exists mainly to draw attention to Welsh Government support so ministers can take credit for it.

The T11 is inexplicable even as a TrawscymruConnect service . The 2 Local bus services should have remained local services feeding the T5 at Haverfordwest and Fishguard.

But, does TrawsCymruConnect mean anything anyway? The T11 is basically just the two local bus services that were there before, except now perhaps there is no need to change (I can't remember if I've used the route since the rebrand; it's possible you still need to change as you often do in Cardigan on the T5 (at least pre-Covid)) which I would say is a good thing. I would have kept the 411 service number though given the comments way back in this topic that changing numbers can cause patronage to drop.

I agree entirely regarding the slowness of the T1 and T5. The T5 diversions, (Aberporth, Newquay) are ridiculous for a Trawscymru Service.

The extension south of Cardigan is also ridiculous for a TrawsCymru service, but probably sensible otherwise. For anyone going from Cardigan to Haverfordwest, the time penalty compared to driving is worse than even going to Aberystwyth via Aberporth and New Quay.

The T1 is just criminal. This service has the very highest standard of punctuality of all the Trawscymru Services at 99%. The reason for this is the timings have been engineered to give plenty of slack. Even though it has planned waits at Lampeter and Aberaeron it frequently either trundles or stops for a few minutes in order to stay on timetable. Both the T1 and T5 in the current parlance are therefore TrawscymruConnect, the T1 because of speed and the T5 for diversions.

The T1 is not completely free of the diversion issue; to be reasonably direct it would have to either run via Llandysul to Synod Inn (meaning the important destination of Lampeter would have to be omitted) or it would have to skip Pencader to go direct to Lampeter.

The T2 cannot be accused of major diversions.

Not in the same way as the T5, but I'm not sure it would be fast enough to acheive the speed objective because of the impact of the last few decades of car-centric transport policy. In other words, there are far too many bypasses. Groeslon, Penygroes, Tremadog, Porthmadog etc. It all adds up.

Fourthly, Future Trawscymru Services:
The Welsh Government have to address the TrawsCymru brand as Rhydgaled pointed out. Passengers are put off using long distance bus services if they take forever making diversions/ U-turns and failing to make connections when they reach their destination. There is a market for long distance bus travel in Wales and it should be encouraged in the very near future in order to remove cars from the roads.

Well said.

The current network is not fit for purpose and there is no analysis being used in the formulation of new routes.

My own feelings on the T1/T1C/T1S/T2/T3/T5/T12 routes are as follows:

1. The routing of the T3 should be reviewed to improve journey times.
2. The timetable of the T2 should also be reviewed to improve T2/T1 connectivity in both directions following the route review of the T3.
3. The T12 should operate from Aberystwyth to Wrexham on a faster direct route with no other diversions linking with other services at Llangurig, Llanidloes, Newtown, Welshpool and Oswestry.
4. The T5 should have its diversions removed to improve journey time and be linked to the T12 and T2 and the rail network in Aberystwyth. The 460 should be renumbered T460 and converted to a direct Trawscymru service between Carmarthen and Newquay via Cardigan (30 miles) thereby opening up a route to Swansea (56 miles) similar to the T3 Wrexham to Barmouth (58 miles) .
5. The T1 route should be rationalised. Half the services should operate as the T1 via Lampeter and half should operate as a new T701 service via llandysul. The T701 would provide a faster service and would release the connecting service between Llandysul and the T1 in Pencader. The T701 should stop for passengers at Pencader which the T1C does not.

Aberystwyth to Wrexham as you suggest might work, but Carmarthen to New Quay via Cardigan is rather indirect (about 10 miles further as the crow flies). Also, I cannot recall ever seeing a bus with destination displays capable of displaying a route/service number greater than 3 characters, so your T460 etc. designations don't work. Given that there were existing local services in Wales with a 'T' designation (for example a 'T1' in north Wales somewhere an a T22 (if I recall correctly) out of Aberystwyth before TrawsCymru was introduced, and the likelyhood that few routes could be found that can meet the required journey time, my view has always been that TrawsCymru should be limited to a maximum of ten routes numbered TC0 to TC9.

It would be very difficult to construct a Trawscymru Network which nowhere touches a Commercial route or a rail route. We would have a very strange long distance network if this were so.

I agree regarding commercial routes; however if you see rail and TrawsCymru as a single combined long-distance network then it would not necessarily look strange at all. In fact, maybe the TrawsCymru brand is not needed at all. Perhaps it should now be ditched and replaced by the Transport for Wales brand, with the operating contracts let not by the Welsh Government / Local Authorities but by the TfW Rail Services TOC (or whatever it's called now). In this case, in addition to the service standards (legroom, journey time vs car) I believe should be required for TrawsCymru then the services should also be fully integrated into the rail journey planners and rail fares system (but with bus-only routes priced at bus prices, not rail prices), with the buses having ticket machines similar to what guards have on trains able to sell tickets to anywhere on the rail network. This would ideally be provided on TrawsCymru services as well, but it's understandable to not provide this if the TfW rail brand is NOT used.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

The T1 is not completely free of the diversion issue; to be reasonably direct it would have to either run via Llandysul to Synod Inn (meaning the important destination of Lampeter would have to be omitted) or it would have to skip Pencader to go direct to Lampeter.

Not in the same way as the T5, but I'm not sure it would be fast enough to acheive the speed objective because of the impact of the last few decades of car-centric transport policy. In other words, there are far too many bypasses. Groeslon, Penygroes, Tremadog, Porthmadog etc. It all adds up.

Sorry to labour the point but there's a balance to be struck on the TrawsCymru and it's not a binary, yes/no right/wrong answer.

You have to balance the wish to reduce journey times, which is perfectable laudable, by removing diversions/loops. If you cut out significant centres, you will disadvantage larger numbers of people - obviously we're not going to bypass Dolgellau on the T3 to speed up the overall Wrexham to Barmouth journey.

The trickier issue is whether you then remove TC services from places that are relatively minor with few passengers and in areas where there aren't existing alternative facilities. Were the T3 to be rerouted from Llandrillo and Cynwyd, that would allow the T3 to be sped up by 5-10 mins. However, and if we're going for a fixed replacement bus, then you're looking at c.£100k to provide a minibus around Bala for relatively few passengers. To be honest, it would be cheaper to simply pay for people's taxis in that instance!

Instead, what you need are areas where you have a sweet spot of sufficient passengers (but not too many) and whilst having the opportunity to provide alternative facilities relatively easily. In the case of the T3, you could simply remove the T3 from Rhos and Johnstown to save the same amount of time; passengers from those could feed into the T3 either in Ruabon or Llangollen on existing services.

It all depends on the individual circumstances. Should the T2 divert via Trawsfynydd? It's a minute or two so minimal cost but with the 35 running a few times a day, could it happen? However, will that remove the most obvious link for residents, being to Porthmadog?

As ever, it is a far more difficult, less precise exercise than people suggest. I fully agree that before any new services or that services are rationalised, a cost benefit analysis is preferable. However, even then, you're not going to please some people.

Also, I cannot recall ever seeing a bus with destination displays capable of displaying a route/service number greater than 3 characters, so your T460 etc. designations don't work.

Buses have long been able to display more than three numerals. This example shows how easy it is with LEDs https://www.flickr.com/photos/35759...23YMGdm-22EkYLT-FTKX91-29yzT4w-VjbqwJ-22Ej2iF (credit to Mark Smith); West Midlands PTE buses had 4 track numeral blinds, back in the day, and more recently, they had M symbols ahead of service numbers (e.g. 404) to denote that they fed into Midland Metro - good examples of both practices seen on this photo from Jamie Cooke https://www.flickr.com/photos/55059...dv-ykteQV-8qsR4o-U9ESbo-7yMwua-7yMxor-dojC3i/

Improved bus/rail interavailability of tickets is an oft quoted aspiration. Arguing against a more integrated system and a less car centric environment is like arguing against motherhood and apple pie.

In areas of low population density and some intensely rural areas, the TC is often the sole, substantial public transport facility and it's not easy to replace it cost effectively to enable faster journey times to be achieved. Perhaps some places like Boughrood may simply have to be dropped off the public transport map - too few passengers and too much cost

 

[Rhydgaled]

Sorry to labour the point but there's a balance to be struck on the TrawsCymru and it's not a binary, yes/no right/wrong answer.

Yes, there is a balance to be struck but my view is that the balance should be clearly defined (eg. not more than 33% slower than the car) as the Winckler review suggested so that whether to brand a route as TrawsCymru becomes a binary question.

obviously we're not going to bypass Dolgellau on the T3 to speed up the overall Wrexham to Barmouth journey.

The trickier issue is whether you then remove TC services from places that are relatively minor with few passengers and in areas where there aren't existing alternative facilities. Were the T3 to be rerouted from Llandrillo and Cynwyd, that would allow the T3 to be sped up by 5-10 mins. However, and if we're going for a fixed replacement bus, then you're looking at c.£100k to provide a minibus around Bala for relatively few passengers. To be honest, it would be cheaper to simply pay for people's taxis in that instance!

Indeed, we're not going to bypass Dolgellau, and I understand the arguments you're making with the T3 as an example. I'm just saying that there needs to be a fixed point where we say 'right, this route is too slow to market as an end-to-end long-distance service' and refuse to apply the TrawsCymru brand. The actual service provided might not change at all, but society needs to be under no delusions regarding whether or not a practical alternative to the car exists on a given corridor. The current TrawsCymru network map gives potential passengers and remote decision makers an illusion that such an alternative exists on routes such as Fishguard/Haverfordwest to Aberystwyth.

The result of this is that, if you have too many Dolgellaus/Porthmadogs on a route, or even a load of Trawsfynydds (but not enough to justify a seperate slow bus to serve them) then it becomes impossible to provide an acceptable TrawsCymru service between those end points and you need to look at something else. Something else like finding a way to slow down the car journeys we have spent decades speeding up by building stupid bypasses, or building a new Bangor-Porthmadog railway to provide for the long-distance travel.

Buses have long been able to display more than three numerals. This example shows how easy it is with LEDs https://www.flickr.com/photos/35759...23YMGdm-22EkYLT-FTKX91-29yzT4w-VjbqwJ-22Ej2iF (credit to Mark Smith)

I stand corrected; given the different font size and fixed position of the route/service number I assumed the LED displays were set up in such a way that operators were still limited to displaying three characters there (also the small rear window on some bus models doesn't leave room for many characters, although 4 might fit I'm not sure).

In areas of low population density and some intensely rural areas, the TC is often the sole, substantial public transport facility and it's not easy to replace it cost effectively to enable faster journey times to be achieved. Perhaps some places like Boughrood may simply have to be dropped off the public transport map - too few passengers and too much cost

If Boughrood pushes the T4 over the brand threshold for 'too slow' and there isn't an alternative way of serving it with a local bus service then my view is that the T4 should be dropped off the TrawsCymru map rather than dropping somewhere off the public transport map altogether. However, hopefully there will be other places on the T4 route that can be served by a seperate local bus instead to bring the overall time penalty on the route down to an acceptable level.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Yes, there is a balance to be struck but my view is that the balance should be clearly defined (eg. not more than 33% slower than the car) as the Winckler review suggested so that whether to brand a route as TrawsCymru becomes a binary question.

Ok, but how do you measure it?

If you use the offending T4, then Newtown to Brecon is 1h23 in the car. The 33% is 1h 50 so you can essentially the recovery time at Llandod and that would allow that Boughrood to be retained? If you instead take the Newtown to Cardiff, end to end time, then that is 2h26 by car becoming 3h14 by bus. It is currently 3h46 with the T4 and I don't know where you would miss out to get your 32 minute saving so by that rationale, the T4 would cease to be a TC route.

The same issue exists with the T3. Barmouth to Wrexham is 1h37 in the car so the T3 should take no longer than 2h 09 with the 33% allowance, not the 2h35 it currently takes. Even taking out the Llandrillo route, the south Bala loop, and sending it via the Ruabon bypass, it's going to be difficult to save all 26 minutes, unless you remove the interchange/recovery time en route.

Certainly, speed routes up where you can but pragmatism must be blended with the ideals and aspirations of faster routes against providing links.

If Boughrood pushes the T4 over the brand threshold for 'too slow' and there isn't an alternative way of serving it with a local bus service then my view is that the T4 should be dropped off the TrawsCymru map rather than dropping somewhere off the public transport map altogether. However, hopefully there will be other places on the T4 route that can be served by a seperate local bus instead to bring the overall time penalty on the route down to an acceptable level.

This is absolutely the point I'm trying to make. In some places, you will have a critical mass of (potential) ridership where a parallel service or feeder is appropriate aka the sweet spot; too many passengers, and you question why you're avoiding such a large traffic objective whilst too few, and the cost of doing so becomes just too expensive. It's why de minimis payments were originally introduced.

I don't know the T5 in the detail as I know the T3 (or upper reaches of the T2) but Aberporth and that stretch of coast would appear to be the sort of area where it could work with a parallel feeder route from Cardigan via Aberporth to Synod Inn to New Quay.

I just don't believe that there's a hard and fast, cover all approach that addresses these. It's one area where I actually do agree with Dr Winckler - otherwise you wouldn't need a CBA....

 

[Rhydgaled]

Ok, but how do you measure it?

If you use the offending T4, then Newtown to Brecon is 1h23 in the car. The 33% is 1h 50 so you can essentially the recovery time at Llandod and that would allow that Boughrood to be retained? If you instead take the Newtown to Cardiff, end to end time, then that is 2h26 by car becoming 3h14 by bus. It is currently 3h46 with the T4 and I don't know where you would miss out to get your 32 minute saving so by that rationale, the T4 would cease to be a TC route.

The same issue exists with the T3. Barmouth to Wrexham is 1h37 in the car so the T3 should take no longer than 2h 09 with the 33% allowance, not the 2h35 it currently takes. Even taking out the Llandrillo route, the south Bala loop, and sending it via the Ruabon bypass, it's going to be difficult to save all 26 minutes, unless you remove the interchange/recovery time en route.

Good question, and my brain's attempt to answer takes us back to the definition of TrawsCymru provided above by johntrawscymru:

The Trawscymru network should be a series of long distance services that connect the major towns and cities by the most direct fastest possible route in comfortable buses.

In trying to define what constitues a signficantly direct route between key towns, we also need to define what are the "major towns and cities" that TrawsCymru exists to connect. I'm not sure how we do that; population doesn't work because a key town in a rural area might be smaller in population terms than a suburb of a major city that wouldn't be considered a key node on the TrawsCymru network. Perhaps population combined with distance from the nearest larger town/city?

Anyway, if we could define what a key town is my suggestion is that the time penalty of using public transport should be within acceptable levels for any pair of key towns on the route. For the T4, rail almost saves the day by making Newtown-Cardiff by public transport possible in around about 3hrs. By my suggested definition, it would of course also be necessary to check Pontypridd to Newtown, Merthyr Tydfil to Builth Wells, Llandrindod to Brecon etc. against the car journey time.

Not sure how to provide a realistic alternative to the car for Barmouth to Wrexham though, but refusing to show it on the TrawsCymru network map would highlight that there is a problem here; a problem that is hidden by allowing it to carry the TrawsCymru brand.

Certainly, speed routes up where you can but pragmatism must be blended with the ideals and aspirations of faster routes against providing links.

In some places, you will have a critical mass of (potential) ridership where a parallel service or feeder is appropriate aka the sweet spot; too many passengers, and you question why you're avoiding such a large traffic objective whilst too few, and the cost of doing so becomes just too expensive.

I don't agree that there is such a thing as too many passengers in this context. If, by missing out B, you can attract enough passengers* from A to C to justify running a bus (or even a train) then I see nothing wrong with that provided that B is given a decent service to both A and C. This is exactly what I've been arguing for for years; instead of running slow trains between Carmarthen and Cardiff via Swansea run all three of these things:

• slow trains between Carmarthen and Swansea
• slow trains between Swansea and Cardiff
• fast, direct, trains between Carmarthen and Cardiff, avoiding Swansea

Yes, the last bullet point misses out a very large traffic objective but it also saves a heck of a lot of time, so it's very clear why you're avoiding it. So too many potential passengers isn't a problem here, too few is and if there are too many places with too few passengers (and they cannot be aggregated into one parallel slow service) that is when you have to question the existance of TrawsCymru.

* especially if they have been attracted out of cars

Aberporth and that stretch of coast would appear to be the sort of area where it could work with a parallel feeder route from Cardigan via Aberporth to Synod Inn to New Quay.

It did, to a degree, in TrawsCambria days. You had the 550 (which in my mind was 'baggage' the Traws brand could have done without, but was a vital service) Aberystwyth - Aberaeron - New Quay - Synod Inn - Aberporth - Cardigan and the X50 Aberystwyth - Aberaeron - Blaenporth - Cardigan. Unfortunately until Arriva left you often had to change bus at Synod Inn on the 550, a very dangerous thing to have to do with 50mph traffic between you and your 'connection', and at Aberaeron on the X50, although there were some through journeys. There was also the odd confusing journey that didn't fit the pattern, such as Aberaeron-Aberporth-Cardigan without going via New Quay and New Quay to Cardigan via Blaenporth, which really needed their own route numbers but didn't have them, but then Arriva left and everything became labelled X50 despite all but one working each way now going via New Quay and roughly half the service continuing to go via Aberporth and the other half directly (via Blaenporth). At least you don't need to change anymore, although on the occasions when the timetables actually were in sync (and realistic) Aberaeron could be a reasonable interchange so I would suggest:

• bringing back the 550 as a local/TrawsCymruConnect connection out of the T1 at Aberaeron every two hours
• a direct Aberystwth - Cardigan/Fishguard T5/X50 every two-three hours (with timings picked to connect with trains at Fishguard Harbour if running through to Fishguard, the old 16:10 (via university) and 18:15 X50 departures from Aberystwyth could be a good fit with the evening trains at Fishguard if the latter were reinstated and made clockface with the morning services), leaving Aberystwyth half an hour after the T1
• an Aberystwth - New Quay -Synod Inn local/TrawsCymruConnect service 50 leaving Aberystwyth in the hours the X50/T5 doesn't run, with short workings between New Quay / Synod Inn and Aberaeron at other times to connect with T1/T5 services. The extension to Synod Inn is NOT intended to provide connections further south, just to serve the (holiday) villages between New Quay and Synod Inn.

While I suggested the 550 connects with the T1 in Aberaeron, the difference in journey time between X50 and 550 mean they would arrive in Cardigan at a similar time (or an hour apart, providing an hourly service out of Cardigan towards Aberystwyth) despite the X50/T5 running half an hour ahead/behind the T1 between Aberystwyth and Aberaeron.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Good question, and my brain's attempt to answer takes us back to the definition of TrawsCymru provided above by johntrawscymru:
In trying to define what constitues a signficantly direct route between key towns, we also need to define what are the "major towns and cities" that TrawsCymru exists to connect. I'm not sure how we do that; population doesn't work because a key town in a rural area might be smaller in population terms than a suburb of a major city that wouldn't be considered a key node on the TrawsCymru network. Perhaps population combined with distance from the nearest larger town/city?

Exactly my point. If you're trying to nail something down as a matter of exactitude but how major is major? Even you concede that the size of the place has to be considered in relation to its surroundings; it's all about context.

I don't agree that there is such a thing as too many passengers in this context. If, by missing out B, you can attract enough passengers* from A to C to justify running a bus (or even a train) then I see nothing wrong with that provided that B is given a decent service to both A and C.

That's an admirable theory. However, do you think there are many instances in a network that has to have a substantial amount of public subsidy to be able to carve out routes in the way you suggest?

Is it really likely that a T1 omitting Aberaeron will generate anything like the patronage to even scratch the surface of providing alternative facilities? Or that run every other one via Llandysul would be preferable to serving Lampeter? Even some of the smaller places... would you remove the T4 from Talgarth? There is a line where you just won't pursue removing the principle traffic generators as you simply will not get the additional patronage to justify it but there will be certain opportunities where you won't potentially sacrifice too much trade, and it won't be a hard and fast rule; that's what cost benefit analyses are all about.

 

[Rhydgaled]

That's an admirable theory. However, do you think there are many instances in a network that has to have a substantial amount of public subsidy to be able to carve out routes in the way you suggest?

Hopefully not many, but I haven't given much thought to where else this applies. Still, the example of Swansea shows that there can be an argument for public transport to skip even big cities if the private car is able to do so, although perhaps the ideal thing, if we could turn back the clock, would be not to build the bypass for the cars in the first place so everyone has to take the slow route and there's no need to miss out large traffic sources such as Swansea.

Is it really likely that a T1 omitting Aberaeron will generate anything like the patronage to even scratch the surface of providing alternative facilities? Or that run every other one via Llandysul would be preferable to serving Lampeter? Even some of the smaller places... would you remove the T4 from Talgarth? There is a line where you just won't pursue removing the principle traffic generators as you simply will not get the additional patronage to justify it but there will be certain opportunities where you won't potentially sacrifice too much trade, and it won't be a hard and fast rule; that's what cost benefit analyses are all about.

You don't miss out a big place like Swansea or Aberaeron unless serving it is stopping you providing an attractive alternative to the car on other flows. Unfortunately there are alot of flows on the TrawsCymru network where public transport doesn't provide an attractive alternative to the car, partly due to serving places (like New Quay) that are not on the way from A to B and partly because lots of bypasses have been built to speed up car journeys at the expense of buses. Omitting just Aberaeron would probably not save enough time to attract enough modal shift to justify it, but taking the B4337 through Tal-sarn, New Inn / Cross Inn and Nebo to Llanrhystyd might work depending on the impact that would have on traffic between Llanrhystyd (and points north) and Lampeter (and points south). I'm not particularly confident that is a good idea, but it does have the advantages of provding buses at Nebo etc. AND the replacement service via Aberaeron would not just be duplicating the T1 over most of the route but would also be serving Llanon, Aberarth, Ciliau Aeron, Ystrad Aeron, Felinfach and Temple Bar. Looked at like this, the more you can miss out the more likely it is to make sense.

As for Talgarth, the current timetable suggests that most workings miss it out anyway; I don't know what, if any, other services serve Talgarth but my suggestion would be that the workings via Talgarth should simply be given a different route number which likely wouldn't be a TrawsCymru route by my definition (though I haven't tried to work out the percentage time penalty). As I keep saying, I can understand the attraction (financially) of the bus network being how it is, I just think that if we have a brand like TrawsCymru that supposedly is about long-distance travel then it should be attractive for long-distance travel. If we can't afford to do it properly in addition to local transport then we shouldn't do it at all (the brand that is, carrying on linking up services to reduce the need to change bus as much as you like).

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

As for Talgarth, the current timetable suggests that most workings miss it out anyway; I don't know what, if any, other services serve Talgarth but my suggestion would be that the workings via Talgarth should simply be given a different route number which likely wouldn't be a TrawsCymru route by my definition (though I haven't tried to work out the percentage time penalty). As I keep saying, I can understand the attraction (financially) of the bus network being how it is, I just think that if we have a brand like TrawsCymru that supposedly is about long-distance travel then it should be attractive for long-distance travel. If we can't afford to do it properly in addition to local transport then we shouldn't do it at all (the brand that is, carrying on linking up services to reduce the need to change bus as much as you like).

It's the T14 that's the main service via Talgarth.

So what do you do with your single T4 of an evening to debrand it from TrawsCymru. Give it another number (704) so it's more difficult to find on timetable searches? Different non-branded vehicle? It becomes a nonsense like that.

Take the T3 - are we going to have a fast T3 that avoids Llandrillo, Johnstown and Llanuwchllyn with TC branded vehicles? In addition, you'd have a separate stopper service - let's call it the 94 for old times' sake. That would serve all those places now removed from TC. Different vehicles (not TC branded) and a hope that the faster T3 (same frequency as current) can produce the passenger growth to justify more resources.

There is the very understandable concern that you can't be "all things to all men" and that was one of the things Winckler pointed out; a confusion about what TC was looking to achieve. I fully understand the wish to speed up routes and there are some opportunities that should be investigated. Each investigated on its merits as part of a Cost Benefit Analysis as you can't have a uniform blanket rule. I'm not certain that splitting routes to have multiple services of different routes and speeds over corridors where traffic is relatively thin really helps and it won't help in promoting a consistent brand to the public. This is rural Wales - I don't think the patronage is there, potential or otherwise

Hopefully not many, but I haven't given much thought to where else this applies. Still, the example of Swansea shows that there can be an argument for public transport to skip even big cities if the private car is able to do so, although perhaps the ideal thing, if we could turn back the clock, would be not to build the bypass for the cars in the first place so everyone has to take the slow route and there's no need to miss out large traffic sources such as Swansea.

It skips Swansea because there is an existing, faster public transport alternative.

And we can't turn back the clock; those bypasses exist and they are not the only pro-car policies enacted. I might add that if you didn't have those bypasses, then imagine the delights of large goods vehicles heading through small villages.

 

[Rhydgaled]

It's the T14 that's the main service via Talgarth.

So what do you do with your single T4 of an evening to debrand it from TrawsCymru. Give it another number (704) so it's more difficult to find on timetable searches? Different non-branded vehicle? It becomes a nonsense like that.

Ok, that's a tricky one. It seems to be a nonsense whatever you do - the way it is not only devalues the brand but also runs the risk of leaving people for Talgarth behind (I've seen it happen with Aberporth where people didn't board an 'X50' because the X50 didn't normally go via Aberporth, but that one did). I think I would give it a different number but show it on the T4 and T14 timetables (perhaps with a different font colour on the T4 timetable to highlight that it's not a TrawsCymru service) but there's still a problem of how to get a non-branded vehicle onto it. After all, the X50 and 550 were shown on the same timetable for some time.

I fully understand the wish to speed up routes and there are some opportunities that should be investigated. Each investigated on its merits as part of a Cost Benefit Analysis as you can't have a uniform blanket rule.

Evaluate each route on it's own merits as much as you like, but I still think you CAN have a uniform blanket rule for what constitutes an acceptable time penalty, just nobody knows what that acceptable penalty is. Where the route does not pass the Cost Benefit Analysis, simply continue to run as-is but using the bus operator's brand or the TrawsCymruConnect brand.

I'm not certain that splitting routes to have multiple services of different routes and speeds over corridors where traffic is relatively thin really helps and it won't help in promoting a consistent brand to the public. This is rural Wales - I don't think the patronage is there, potential or otherwise

If the patronage isn't there then just don't have TrawsCymru at all (or turn it into a handful of limited-stop express coaches).

we can't turn back the clock; those bypasses exist

Sadly true, and they cause anyone trying to make public transport attractive a major headache, which is one of the main reasons I firmly believe we shouldn't build any more bypasses.

I might add that if you didn't have those bypasses, then imagine the delights of large goods vehicles heading through small villages.

We might also have an alternative to those vehicles if the bypasses hadn't been allowed; it may have forced society to think of a better alternative.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Evaluate each route on it's own merits as much as you like, but I still think you CAN have a uniform blanket rule for what constitutes an acceptable time penalty, just nobody knows what that acceptable penalty is. Where the route does not pass the Cost Benefit Analysis, simply continue to run as-is but using the bus operator's brand or the TrawsCymruConnect brand.

I disagree. Again, if you look at the T4, you're going to struggle to speed it up. It's 2h15 by car (as I've just googled) so to hit the 33% figure, it would need to do Cardiff to Newtown in 3h00. It currently has stand time in Merthyr, in Brecon and serves Boughrood. Remove all of that, and you'd still only get it down to 3h16 so the T4 would not hit the magic figure.

So would you remove the T4 from the network, and have it operated as a standard Stagecoach route? That seems counterproductive when you're trying to encourage people to ditch the car. Instead, assess removing Boughrood, reduce the stand time at Merthyr, and you take out 15 minutes. Then perhaps investigating bypassing Pontypridd and then you might be at 22 minutes? All these tactical aims will help but unless you elected to miss out places like Builth, Brecon and Merthyr (which would be crazy), I don't think you'd get near 96 miles in 3 hours.

TC is far from perfect and I have my misgivings about the T10, the weekend free fares, the T19/T22 but compared to what was there before, you should be thankful.

 

[Rhydgaled]

I disagree. Again, if you look at the T4, you're going to struggle to speed it up. It's 2h15 by car (as I've just googled) so to hit the 33% figure, it would need to do Cardiff to Newtown in 3h00. It currently has stand time in Merthyr, in Brecon and serves Boughrood. Remove all of that, and you'd still only get it down to 3h16 so the T4 would not hit the magic figure.

It might not need to do Cardiff to Newtown in 3hrs, because the train can (which surprises me given the roundabout route). So, to hit the 33% target for journeys where TrawsCymru would be the fastest public transport, if I have calculated correctly, it needs to do Cardiff to Pontypridd in 30 minutes and Pontypridd to Newtown in 2h50.

Of course, we don't know if 33% is the correct magic figure because the study recommended to establish what the magic figure is was never carried out.

So would you remove the T4 from the network, and have it operated as a standard Stagecoach route? That seems counterproductive when you're trying to encourage people to ditch the car.

I would remove the brand, otherwise I would have it operated exactly as it would be under TrawsCymru. I don't see how using the standard Stagecoach livery rather than TrawsCymru livery would have much of an impact on modal shift (no impact at all unless one livery was really smart and the other drab and dirty), would operating it as a standard Stagecoach route mean anything else changed?

TC is far from perfect and I have my misgivings about the T10, the weekend free fares, the T19/T22 but compared to what was there before, you should be thankful.

In a lot of cases, I don't know what was there before. The Enviros used on the T1 when it first launched were no better (perhaps worse) than the Wright Eclipses used previously on the 40 (albeit there weren't the only vehicles used) and the T5 south of Cardigan mostly uses the same buses that were used on the 412 previously. I'm thankful these services were kept going but I don't think there's any point (other than highlighting that the Welsh Government are contributing to the funding) in having the buses in TrawsCymru livery rather than the operators' liveries.

 

[Bletchleyite]

TC is far from perfect and I have my misgivings about the T10

I'd certainly question the T10 going past Betws unless there is a plan for a major A5 Park and Ride for day trippers by car from Birmingham etc, but a decent frequency/coverage service via the Ogwen Valley has been needed for years and could well get some cars off the road. Though some stops need adding e.g. by the two popular "Gwern Gof" budget campsites, and it could do with a lateish Friday evening service for weekends away.

Three such routes from Betws to Bangor (the T10, another via Pen y Pass and Llanberis, another via Beddgelert) would make a huge difference to accessibility of the area without a car. Much better than the rather hotchpotch Snowdon Sherpa offering.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I'd certainly question the T10 going past Betws unless there is a plan for a major A5 Park and Ride for day trippers by car from Birmingham etc, but a decent frequency/coverage service via the Ogwen Valley has been needed for years and could well get some cars off the road. Though some stops need adding e.g. by the two popular "Gwern Gof" budget campsites, and it could do with a lateish Friday evening service for weekends away.

Three such routes from Betws to Bangor (the T10, another via Pen y Pass and Llanberis, another via Beddgelert) would make a huge difference to accessibility of the area without a car. Much better than the rather hotchpotch Snowdon Sherpa offering.

The T10 east of Betws is something I've questioned in the past. The need for a service up the Ogwen Valley to Capel and Betws would hopefully reduce the impact of private cars in the area, but really, that should be a Snowdon Sherpa service. The effective marketing of the Sherpa services is a real missed opportunity in my opinion.

The T9 (if and when it returns) and T7 are perhaps the other ones that should lose the TrawsCymru brand in that they don't fit the overall remit.

it needs to do Cardiff to Pontypridd in 30 minutes and Pontypridd to Newtown in 2h50.

That 2h50 is probably about right in your calcs. It currently takes 3h16 (spookily a number that has coincidentally come up before in another different calc). Reduction of Merthyr stand time and removal of Boughrood would reduce that to 3h02. Surely that's better for the public coffers and passengers than having a multitude of fast services and stoppers, over the same rough corridor, with different service numbers and brands, in order to achieve a rather arbitrary 33% target?

In a lot of cases, I don't know what was there before. The Enviros used on the T1 when it first launched were no better (perhaps worse) than the Wright Eclipses used previously on the 40 (albeit there weren't the only vehicles used) and the T5 south of Cardigan mostly uses the same buses that were used on the 412 previously. I'm thankful these services were kept going but I don't think there's any point (other than highlighting that the Welsh Government are contributing to the funding) in having the buses in TrawsCymru livery rather than the operators' liveries.

Before TrawsCymru was TrawsCambria and so before that, I'm suggesting the late 90s/early 2000s. Without going over the T1/T5 etc (which you know better than me anyway), the original routes were

X32 (now T2) - this had been two routes at one time with the 94A Aber to Dolgellau (Darts/Minis) and 2 Dolgellau to Caernarfon (elderly deckers - this did run to Aber on a Sunday) - it may have been linked to form the 2 throughout before it became the X32 and also gained Arriva Commanders.

X94 (now T3) that had progressed from a mix of coaches and Deltas through to Daf SB220s and Darts. TC brought a better frequency and Arriva brought in Daf SB200/Wright Commanders

704 (now T4) simply didn't exist. There were a odd mix of little runs between Builth and Llandod operated by Cross Gates and Browns; a couple of runs north to Newtown from Llandod per day, with an equally parlous service south of Builth to Brecon. All operated by minis with Mercs and some newer Solos IIRC. The 704 created that new link and was operated by Stagecoach with WG supplied Tempos.

Compared to what was there, with a lack of decent fleet and variable promotion, TrawsCambria and later TrawsCymru has transformed the services provided. TC ain't perfect but not certain a mish mash of liveries, services, numbers etc is what is required.

ps Arriva used Pulsars rather than Eclipses on the 40/50

 

[Rhydgaled]

That 2h50 is probably about right in your calcs. It currently takes 3h16 (spookily a number that has coincidentally come up before in another different calc). Reduction of Merthyr stand time and removal of Boughrood would reduce that to 3h02. Surely that's better for the public coffers and passengers than having a multitude of fast services and stoppers, over the same rough corridor, with different service numbers and brands, in order to achieve a rather arbitrary 33% target?

Removal of Boughrood would require a seperate stopper, with a different number and brand, over roughly the same corridor anyway. It might be better for the public coffers than either a single slow T4 route (via Boughrood etc.) or a longer-distance parallel stopping allowing more detours to be ommited from the T4, but if people can still say 'the T4 is too slow to be a realistic alternative to the car' then I don't see how the TrawsCymru brand has any value. The 33% is rather arbitrary, but nobody has defined what a 'realistic alternative to the car' looks like.

Before TrawsCymru was TrawsCambria and so before that, I'm suggesting the late 90s/early 2000s. Without going over the T1/T5 etc (which you know better than me anyway), the original routes were

X32 (now T2) - this had been two routes at one time with the 94A Aber to Dolgellau (Darts/Minis) and 2 Dolgellau to Caernarfon (elderly deckers - this did run to Aber on a Sunday) - it may have been linked to form the 2 throughout before it became the X32 and also gained Arriva Commanders.

X94 (now T3) that had progressed from a mix of coaches and Deltas through to Daf SB220s and Darts. TC brought a better frequency and Arriva brought in Daf SB200/Wright Commanders

704 (now T4) simply didn't exist. There were a odd mix of little runs between Builth and Llandod operated by Cross Gates and Browns; a couple of runs north to Newtown from Llandod per day, with an equally parlous service south of Builth to Brecon. All operated by minis with Mercs and some newer Solos IIRC. The 704 created that new link and was operated by Stagecoach with WG supplied Tempos.

Compared to what was there, with a lack of decent fleet and variable promotion, TrawsCambria and later TrawsCymru has transformed the services provided. TC ain't perfect but not certain a mish mash of liveries, services, numbers etc is what is required.

Ok; I was thinking immediately before TrawsCymru so by 'compared to what went before' I was comparing TrawsCymru with TrawsCambria or the temporary non-branded service 40 that the T1 replaced. I have no memory of what things were like before the TrawsCambria X50/550/X40/X32 with Tempos and (in the case of the X32) Commanders; I think I must have only started using buses in Wales after those TrawsCambria services had been introduced.

ps Arriva used Pulsars rather than Eclipses on the 40/50

Sorry, I should have been clearer; I was referring to the short-term First Cymru operation on the 40 (shared with another operator, Lewis' Coaches I think) that came immediately before TrawsCymru, between Arriva pulling out and the T1 being introduced. Were those Eclipses that First used? They were certainly different to the Pulsars Richards Bros used on the 412 and still use on the T5.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The T10 east of Betws is something I've questioned in the past. The need for a service up the Ogwen Valley to Capel and Betws would hopefully reduce the impact of private cars in the area, but really, that should be a Snowdon Sherpa service. The effective marketing of the Sherpa services is a real missed opportunity in my opinion.

Yes, true. You only need to look at Stagecoach in the Lakes to see what could be.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Removal of Boughrood would require a seperate stopper, with a different number and brand, over roughly the same corridor anyway. It might be better for the public coffers than either a single slow T4 route (via Boughrood etc.) or a longer-distance parallel stopping allowing more detours to be ommited from the T4, but if people can still say 'the T4 is too slow to be a realistic alternative to the car' then I don't see how the TrawsCymru brand has any value. The 33% is rather arbitrary, but nobody has defined what a 'realistic alternative to the car' looks like.

I don't see how a separate stopper for a tiny village being better for the coffers. I meant just bypass it completely. Unless you're thinking that you will have a T4 every 4 hours that bypasses not just the small places but even stops like Builth? Then every 4 hours, you have a slower service akin to how it is now?

With separate brands, separate timetables, separate marketing?

Ok; I was thinking immediately before TrawsCymru so by 'compared to what went before' I was comparing TrawsCymru with TrawsCambria or the temporary non-branded service 40 that the T1 replaced. I have no memory of what things were like before the TrawsCambria X50/550/X40/X32 with Tempos and (in the case of the X32) Commanders; I think I must have only started using buses in Wales after those TrawsCambria services had been introduced.

No worries - we were at different points

Sorry, I should have been clearer; I was referring to the short-term First Cymru operation on the 40 (shared with another operator, Lewis' Coaches I think) that came immediately before TrawsCymru, between Arriva pulling out and the T1 being introduced. Were those Eclipses that First used? They were certainly different to the Pulsars Richards Bros used on the 412 and still use on the T5.

They were standard Eclipses - again, no biggie

Yes, true. You only need to look at Stagecoach in the Lakes to see what could be.

Indeed - Stagecoach have exploited that very well. Snowdonia doesn't quite have the same pulling power as the Lakes but it could be better. Just not certain the T10 or the T19 are the answer and that something other than TrawsCymru is needed i.e. a properly marketed Sherpa network. I will have to do the T10 from Corwen at some point; I don't like crowds but I'mm sure I'll be fine

 

[Rhydgaled]

I don't see how a separate stopper for a tiny village being better for the coffers. I meant just bypass it completely. Unless you're thinking that you will have a T4 every 4 hours that bypasses not just the small places but even stops like Builth? Then every 4 hours, you have a slower service akin to how it is now?

I didn't realise you meant bypass it completely and leave it with no bus service. Not having any sort of detailed knowledge of that area, I just assumed you had something in mind (like a Brecon town service which could be ammended to free up a vehicle to do a trip out to Boughrood every two hours) that would avoid a large increase in costs. I'm not in favour of cutting places off completely, so I understand it's difficult or impossible to improve things - but if it is impossible I just can't see promotional value of TrawsCymru given that any marketing efforts are, in effect, trying to sell something (long-distance travel) the service really isn't attractive for.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I didn't realise you meant bypass it completely and leave it with no bus service. Not having any sort of detailed knowledge of that area, I just assumed you had something in mind (like a Brecon town service which could be ammended to free up a vehicle to do a trip out to Boughrood every two hours) that would avoid a large increase in costs. I'm not in favour of cutting places off completely, so I understand it's difficult or impossible to improve things - but if it is impossible I just can't see promotional value of TrawsCymru given that any marketing efforts are, in effect, trying to sell something (long-distance travel) the service really isn't attractive for.

This is exactly what cost benefit analyses look at.

What is the benefit of serving Boughrood e.g. pax per day? What is the cost of diverting the T4 for the four times per day (in each direction) - both directly and in terms of negative impact on other passenger journeys and their attractiveness? What cost are the alternatives - loss of passenger access? What cost an alternative facility - it's 11 miles from Brecon so not easily served?

These are difficult decisions and a rigid rule just doesn't work which is why you do need to understand the individual circumstances. Even the Winckler study, from which you draw the 33% figure, recognises this - I'd suggest you reacquaint yourself with 3.2 to 3.12 in the report.



As regards @Bletchleyite and Snowdonia, there are naturally some similarities and some differences between that and the Lake District. The Lakes get about twice the number of visitors p.a. so that certainly influences things. Also, the length of the season seems, and it might be my perception, to be different so there is a more consistent, year round market in the Lakes. Again, and it might be perception, but it feels like there are a greater proportion of people visiting Snowdonia for outdoor sports (e.g. walking, canoeing, mountain biking) though obviously, that's a big element of Lakes tourism.

It's not easy for any bus service to service that and there is a very legitimate question as to how TrawsCymru serves Snowdonia; just not convinced that the T10 is right and the T19/T22 also seem to miss the mark. It might be argued that in comparison with the Lakes, most National Parks suffer from sub-optimal connectivity. The Brecon Beacons isn't too bad with the T4, T6 and T14 and the Connecting 43 to Abergavenny covering most of the main corridors.

 

[johntrawscymru]

The T2 should be made hourly just like the T1 and T5 with alternate buses via Dinas Mawddwy to replaces the 33, 36, T36 and 533

T2 to Dinas Mawddwy, Why needlessly increase journey times? One of the pros of the T2 is the journey time,

I am not sure it would increase journey times. It was a long time ago that I was on the diverted T2 but I seem to remember less climbing and less bends on the Dinas Mawddwy diversion compared to the route through Corris.

Losing a few minutes by splitting the T2 service is neither here nor there when the T2 services do not connect to T1 services in Aber. The arrival time of the T2 in Aber is currently irrelevant.

I have done some digging on the T2 times Dolgellau to Mach and yes it would increase journey times . The journey time in the timetable is 35 minutes via Corris to cover 16 miles. My own experience having used the service regularly is that the journey time is 30 minutes. So say speed 30mph.

The distance from Dolgellau to Mach via Dinas Mawddwy is 23 miles so 7 extra miles. At 30mph this would be 14 extra minutes. However, as I said, the Dinas Mawddwy route seemed faster. The T2 through Corris is a difficult route therefore I doubt whether the extra 7 miles will take 14 minutes.

Dinas Mawddwy to Dolgellau is 10 miles (20 mins). Dinas Mawddwy to Mach is 14 miles.(28 mins), Therefore, even if there is a connecting local service in Mach to Dinas Mawddwy the journey time Dolgellau to Dinas Mawddwy via Mach will be 63 minutes which is more than 3 times the time it would take for the T2 to travel direct from Dolgellau to Dinas Mawddwy .

The suggestion by @burns20, a driver on the T2 route, should be explored further. It would need some serious research on timings.

There is also dilemma with the inconsistencies in the arguments on this thread regarding what are the characteristics of a long distance service. On the one hand with the T12 route it is argued that end-to-end timing is not relevant as nobody travels end-to-end and diversions off a direct route are therefore acceptable. Yet with the T2 the argument is directness and speed is required where not even a 10 minute diversion on a limited number of T2 services through Dinas Mawddwy should be assessed as a possibility.

The T2 SHOULD be a fast, direct route. However it is no longer fast since the Welsh Government (WG) introduced 15 minute waits for the T2 in Dolgellau for late running T3 services from Wrexham . As a result the T2 now no longer links with the T1 in Aberystwyth as it was originally intended to do with the Trawscambria brand.

Before 01/01/2018 the T2 waited 5 minutes in Dolgellau. On 01/01/2018 the WG changed this to a wait of 10 minutes because the T3 could not meet the Traffic Commissioners regulation that 95% of services must reach a timing point no more than 5 minutes late. The WG do not publish the % figures for each Trawscymru service which they receive from Bus Users Cymru. However one figure is available in 2018 for the T3 in an obscure journal and that figure is 87.39%.

http://www.greengauge21.net/wp-content/uploads/GG21_IBR_A4P_WEB.pdf (Page 35)

With the last T2 of the day into Aberystwyth the WG went even further down the line that speed and directness are not important to the T2 service.

Before 01/01/2018 the T2 left Dolgellau and did a straight through run into Aberystwyth arriving at 18.40 and the T1 departed at 18.40. The WG said this was “not a connecting service” and refused to introduce a "5 minute delayed departure" for the T1 even though, as various people have pointed out, the T1 is a "trundle along" slow service with plenty of slack. On 01/01/2018 the WG stopped the straight through run into Aberystwyth by inserting a totally unnecessary stop in Mach for 5 mins ,(30 minutes after a 15 minute stop in Dolgellau!!), and put in a 5 minute diversion on the edge of Aberystwyth through Comins Coch and around a Housing estate so that the T2 arrived at 18.50 and could not connect with the T1.

I say that there is more of an arguement to cut the T3 at Dollgellau and run the 39 more frequently from Doll to Barmouth.

T3 should be sorted somehow as the Llangollen situation is a mess.

I can only speak for the T3 when I have been on it and there wasn't much through traffic on it, kind of unloaded and reloaded at Dolgellau. If it's busier in the summer season, I will take that onboard.

I don't think I've used the T3 (certainly not in full) but looking at the map and assuming the quicker route is the A494 between Corwen and Bala then any 'local service' introduced to speed up the T3 would serve Cynwyd, Llandrillo and Llandderfel, so the CBR wouldn't look quite so bad as if it really was just Llandrilo.

Most of the T3 Summer traffic will disappear when the Free Weekend Travel Scheme is scrapped, which I am absolutely sure it will be , when the correct passenger figures are published for 2018-2019.

The suggestions regarding the T3 , (ie removing Dolgellau to Barmouth, using a Local bus for the South Clwyd Villages, and a Direct route between Llangollen and Wrexham) would create a fast direct route between Wrexham and Dolgellau. This would allow removal of the !5 minute T2 waits in Dolgellau and the Dinas Mawddwy route suggestion for some services could possibly be accommodated. More importantly it would allow connections between T2 and T1 in Aberystwyth to be restored.

Speed of the T2 SHOULD be important if the Trawscymru network is comprised of CONNECTING services but, in the current circumstances created by the WG , speed and directness are totally irrelevant to the T2 as it no longer connects with the T1 in Aberystwyth. Therefore in the current circumstances, where there is NO STRATEGY for the Trawscymru network, diverting some T2 services via Dinas Mawddwy would not matter at all to passengers wishing to travel through Aberystwyth.

There is also a need to determine how direct is 'direct enough' for a route to be allowed to carry the TrawsCymru brand; my view is that this should be based on the time difference between the car journey time and the bus journey time. I think the Winckler review suggested 50% slower than the car as a worst case and recommended that most routes should aim to be significantly faster than that, but the exact percentage to be used needs to be defined by a much more scientific study.

Thanks you to Rhydgaled for the recent discussion on the Winckler Trawscymru review in relation to speed.
(https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2017-10/review-trawscymru.pdf)

Winckler said the following:-

The impact of intermediate stops should increase the journey duration by a maximum of 50%, with about 33% being preferable

Table 2 (Page 15 para 3.9) showed end-to-end journey time of TrawsCymru routes by bus and car. Winckler said:

All journeys take longer than the car, although only the X94 Wrexham – Barmouth takes more than 50% longer. (54 %). I recommend that further work be done in advance of the introduction of the proposed T3 service on the feasibility of its operation to Aberystwyth rather than Barmouth.

This Winckler T3 recommendation was nor pursued either then or 4 years later in 2018 by Professor Stuart Cole (https://gov.wales/trawscymru-t3-summary-recommendations-professor-stuart-cole) .

The Stuart Cole report says:

We (the WG) specifically asked Professor Stuart Cole to consider the broad strategic merits of operating new direct TrawsCymru T3 journeys linking Wrexham to Aberystwyth (as opposed to Barmouth).

This was the only remit made by the Transport Minister when he commissioned the review on 14/11/2017 . There was no mention of this very specific remit,in the very short one page report which took 9 months to complete on 9 August 2018 (Twice as long as the Winckler review !!)

The Winckler Table 2 data is interesting in that it can be used to compare the situation then in 2014 and now. I have reproduced part of Winckler Table 2 below and added the current Trawscymru end-to-end journey time with a recalculation of the % difference between bus/car on the right-hand side of the table.

Table 2 Comparison between car and bus journey times

Route	Distance (miles)	Bus Time	% Difference / Car	Route Time	% Difference / Car
40 Aberystwyth -Carmarthen	48	2hr 2	46	T1 2hr 13	56.5
T2 Bangor - Aberystwyth	87.3	3 hr 15	35	T2 3 hr 30	45.8
X94 Wrexham - Barmouth	57.9	2 hr 23	54	2 hr 42	79.8
T4 Merthyr Tydfil - Newtown	74.4	2 hr 35	48	2 hr 34	46.7
X50/550 Aberystwyh - Cardigan	38	1 hr 39	27	1 hr 21	30.6

The first point to note is that of the 5 services only the T4 and T5 journey times have NOT changed in 7 years. (T4 1 minute faster and T5 2 minutes slower).

The T5 is still the only service that meets the 33% increase in journey time suggestion, albeit only on those services that do not deviate through Newquay/Aberporth and also not on the full route, as pointed out by Rhydgaled.

For anyone going from Cardigan to Haverfordwest, the time penalty compared to driving is worse than even going to Aberystwyth via Aberporth and New Quay.

The T1, T2 and T3 services have all had their journey times substantially increased.

The T1 has had its journey time increased by 11 minutes which explains why its service reliability is 97.73% set against 87.39% for the T3 and 94.2% for the T2, both of which did not meet the Traffic Commissioners Requirement of 95%.
(see http://www.greengauge21.net/wp-content/uploads/GG21_IBR_A4P_WEB.pdf (Page 35).

The T1 now has plenty of slack time and trundles or stops to remain on timetable. The speed of the T1 can be vastly improved by employing half the services on a direct route via Llandysul under a different T number without the mid-way stop it has in Lampeter.

The T2, T3 journey times increased by 15 minutes and 19 minutes respectively. This is due to 15 minute stops in Dolgellau built into the T2 and T3 timetables to wait for late running T3 services from Wrexham.

The last T2 service of the day from Bangor to Aberystwyth has had its journey time increased by 20 minutes and it is now totally impossible to use this T2 to connect with the last T1 from Aberystwyth to Carmarthen. In 2014 the T2 almost met the 33% increase in journey time, but now, at 45.8%, is close to the suggested maximum of 50%. The T3 is now off the scale at 79.8 %.

The solution by the WG to the T3 problem of a ridiculous route and appalling service reliability was to delay the T2 increasing its journey time and removing its connections with the T1 in Aberystwyth. There is something not quite right when an unreliable T3 service with low passenger numbers (166,637 in 2016-2017 compared to T2 234,430 and T1 273,938 **) is given special treatment which results in a deterioration in the connectivity of other services in the Trawscymru Network. The T3 (Wrexham to Barmouth) never has been and never will be a Trawscymru Service The T1 and T2 SHOULD be Trawscymru services but in the current circumstances are not.

( ** NB the latest passenger figures are not available as the 2 latest Annual Reports have been removed from the WG website. Perhaps the T2,T3,T4 passenger figures are being corrected and once that is done we will know just how poorly the T2/T3 services are performing.)

https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2020-02/trawscymru-annual-report-2018-to-2019.pdf

https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2020-12/trawscymru-annual-report-2019-to-2020.pdf

Let's face it the Trawscymru network needs an independent review and a total overhaul if it is to make any contribution towards reducing car journeys and attracting passengers onto the long-distance bus network.

 

[Rhydgaled]

This is exactly what cost benefit analyses look at.

What is the benefit of serving Boughrood e.g. pax per day? What is the cost of diverting the T4 for the four times per day (in each direction) - both directly and in terms of negative impact on other passenger journeys and their attractiveness? What cost are the alternatives - loss of passenger access? What cost an alternative facility - it's 11 miles from Brecon so not easily served?

These are difficult decisions and a rigid rule just doesn't work which is why you do need to understand the individual circumstances. Even the Winckler study, from which you draw the 33% figure, recognises this - I'd suggest you reacquaint yourself with 3.2 to 3.12 in the report.

3.8 does use the word never (ie. "never more than 50% longer") which sounds to me like a rigid rule is being suggested. The same paragraph also states that the 33% and 50% figures are meerly the author's personal views and recommends that "further research amongst passengers should be undertaken to establish if this is reasonable." This research, and the results from it, are what I really want to see as the Welsh Government's second priority (after keeping services running) as far as TrawsCymru is concerned.

Paragraph 3.7 suggests "More than three-quarters of those in a survey of T4 users said they had no alternative to using the bus" and 3.9 "that passenger use of the deviation to Boughrood is very limited". This suggests to me that it is unlikely any progress can be made without substantial additional subsidy. The first point simultainously emphasises the importance of the service as a 'lifeline' and the ineffectiveness of the current service at attracting modal shift, while the second point indicates that providing an alternative service for Boughrood would be financially challanging. In the absence of a strategy to attract modal shift (and revenue) from car users then I suspect the only thing to do is drop the TrawsCymru brand from the T4 and just focus on keeping services in place for those who need them. 3.11 and 3.12 appear to reach a similar conclusion, albiet without suggesting removal of the branding.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

3.8 does use the word never (ie. "never more than 50% longer") which sounds to me like a rigid rule is being suggested. The same paragraph also states that the 33% and 50% figures are meerly the author's personal views and recommends that "further research amongst passengers should be undertaken to establish if this is reasonable." This research, and the results from it, are what I really want to see as the Welsh Government's second priority (after keeping services running) as far as TrawsCymru is concerned.

Paragraph 3.7 suggests "More than three-quarters of those in a survey of T4 users said they had no alternative to using the bus" and 3.9 "that passenger use of the deviation to Boughrood is very limited". This suggests to me that it is unlikely any progress can be made without substantial additional subsidy. The first point simultainously emphasises the importance of the service as a 'lifeline' and the ineffectiveness of the current service at attracting modal shift, while the second point indicates that providing an alternative service for Boughrood would be financially challanging. In the absence of a strategy to attract modal shift (and revenue) from car users then I suspect the only thing to do is drop the TrawsCymru brand from the T4 and just focus on keeping services in place for those who need them. 3.11 and 3.12 appear to reach a similar conclusion, albiet without suggesting removal of the branding.

Now let's see para 3.8 in full

3.8. There is no guide on the ‘time penalty’ that bus passengers are prepared to accept. The Wales Transport Forum’s 2003 report suggested a differential between bus and car on TrawsCymru routes of just 15% - which is in effect a non-stop service. In the absence of a guide, a rule of thumb should be that TrawsCymru services should ideally be no more than 33% longer than by car, and never more than 50% longer. These figures are no more than my personal views as a bus user and further research amongst passengers should be undertaken to establish if this is reasonable.

Therefore, it is clear that this is nothing more than an approximation on the part of Dr Winkler. In fact, as stated in 3.5

Before decisions are taken on stopping places on other services, there therefore needs to be an analysis of passenger demand for express vs stopping services, of boarding and alighting patterns and the impact on journey time.

Now this is an important point. Were this to be some blanket "50% or bust" rule, then there would be no need for the analysis to which she clearly recommends, would there? Clearly, the reference to analysis of any changes to stopping patterns must be a de facto recognition that there are other factors to be taken into consideration and that a 50% rule is not the sole consideration.

Now you mention 3.9 and the stuff contained therein which is about passenger figures in Boughrood etc. In 3.10 though, and this is the full para

The third reason for maintaining a ‘hybrid’ TrawsCymru network is that some stakeholders have suggested that the demand for express services is limited, and that communities would be without a bus service if they were not served by TrawsCymru. There is no up to date evidence on passenger demand for express services, although it was concluded in 2003 that demand would not be sufficient to warrant non-stop services. Equally, it cannot be said with certainty that local bus services would not be available if TrawsCymru no longer stopped at intermediate stops – in some cases local authorities may need to step in to support services or to ensure demand-responsive services are available. If they did so there would be a double cost to the public purse.

The hybrid model being the current model of longish cross country links that also serve a local buses. Your supposition that the position of providing supplementary services as merely "challenging" is not held by Dr Winckler; she explicitly states that there be a double cost to the public purse.

Now, I don't know what you've been reading but section 3.11 states

What is known, however, is that passenger demand across much of mid Wales is insufficient to support a large-scale commercial bus network. In Wales as a whole, 30% of the bus network is non-commercial services but this rises to more than 95% in Powys. Splitting what demand there is between express and local services seems likely to result, at best, in two, underused subsidised services or, at worst, the prospect of a nearly empty, Government-subsidised coach service bypassing communities where people have no means of getting to work or college

Dr Winckler says that there's precious little opportunity to have parallel services and that essentially TrawsCymru should continue as it is in its hybrid model. Splitting to have a fast service and a slow stopper will either be, at best, sub-optimal or potentially, the worst of all worlds at their simply isn't the market realistically to support it. That is what she says, and she's probably right.

I don't hold the Winckler report in particular high esteem; not because I have any axe to grind but because I question how knowledgeable she is in the subject, and more pertinently, the terms of reference that she was given and the limitations and constraints that she was bound by. However, that's not to say that there aren't some bits where I think she has a valid point but it's certainly not a weighty tome that speaks an immutable truth as some might say.

As Winckler herself says in para 3.9

This is not to say that there are not some ways that journey time could be reduced.

Indeed, there are opportunities as we've discussed now at length, whether it be on the T5 or T3 or T4. Could the T3 be speeded up....well, bypassing Johnstown and removing the interchange window at Corwen would save you 5 to 10 minutes.

Lastly, and perhaps showing some of the limitations of Dr Winckler's work. The X94 comparison was a journey from Wrexham to Barmouth of 1h33 by car. This is correct but the route is one that not only bypasses Dolgellau, but also Bala and Corwen so yes, you will be quicker if you don't go through any traffic objectives. Similarly, it is a relatively crude measure and one that even she recognises the limitations of.

Again, I recommend that if you are going to use Dr Winckler as your source, you are fully cognisant of what she is saying and not viewing it via a prism. She is quite clear that there is little opportunity for parallel networks across Wales. The ridership is not there and, at no point, does she mention modal shift. However, if you

Is TrawsCymru perfect? Of course not. There are aspects/services that do not seem to fit the remit - the T9, the T19/T22 whilst the T10 is a solution looking for a problem. Are there ways in which TC can be improved? Of course there are. However, let's look at the T3...

• Car travel is 1h39 (99 mins) in reality (rather than the stated 1h33 - 93 mins)
• Therefore, the bus should take no more than 148 mins (2h 28)
• It currently takes 2h 35 (155 mins)

So would you really create a Bwcabus service for the Dee Valley/Bala area costing c.£100k extra annually for the sake of SEVEN minutes? Even if you take Dr Winckler's erroneous assertion, the bus would need to be doing the whole journey in 2h20. Again, you could actually shave 7 mins from the current journey time from stuff like removing the Corwen layover, and send via the main A483, and use that £100k for other enhancements?

Removing a higher profile brand and leaving it to individual operators promotion and branding for such small margins may prove counterproductive. Apologies for the long winded response; whilst no one would wish to stifle legitimate debate etc, we are beginning to go over the same ground and/or into some detail.

 

[Marcus Fryer]

Newport Bus have been operating Yutong E12 Z13 (YD70 CHL) on the T7 yesterday and today. Does this make it the first TrawsCymru route to have electric buses running on it, beating the T19 to it?

 

[WelshBuses93]

Service T5 between Aberystwyth and Cardigan changing from January 4th.
Extended beyond Aberystwyth to Ysbyty Bronglais and Penglais University Campus.
All journeys operate via Aberporth.

Log in to Facebook

Log in to Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family and people you know.

www.facebook.com

 

[backontrack]

Service T5 between Aberystwyth and Cardigan changing from January 4th.
Extended beyond Aberystwyth to Ysbyty Bronglais and Penglais University Campus.
All journeys operate via Aberporth.

Log in to Facebook

Log in to Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family and people you know.

www.facebook.com

That's sensible. It's a good idea to serve settlements rather than bypass them like that bus route used to do.

 

[Rhydgaled]

That's sensible. It's a good idea to serve settlements rather than bypass them like that bus route used to do.

What about Blaenannerch and Blaenporth? While not as big as Parcllyn and Aberporth, is it sensible not to serve them at all? We would need to see the timetables for all the various routes in the area to be sure, but if all T5 services are to run via Aberporth then no services for Blaenannerch and Blaenporth would potentially be the result. The words "Amended frequency during the day" are cause for concern that the plan may be to simply remove all the journeys through Blaenannerch and Blaenporth from the timetable. If there are to be two routes, one via Blaenporth and one via Aberporth, with a sensible frequency (at least every two hours) then surely it makes more sense for the faster service (via Blaenporth) to be the TrawsCymru one?

 

[WelshBuses93]

New timetable is now up for the northern section of the T5 service. Will now operate roughly 2 hourly with some hourly bits during weekdays.

https://www.trawscymru.info/uploads/T5_Timetable_4_Jan_2022.pdf

 

[317 forever]

Route T1 is due to gain 8 electric buses next year. It is inferred but not confirmed that these will arrive in September and will be Yutongs.
Eight more battery-electric buses set for TrawsCymru - routeone (route-one.net)

Battery-electric buses are set to be introduced on TrawsCymru route T1 between Aberystwyth and Carmarthen in 2022. They will represent a second tranche of such vehicles for the long-distance and interurban network in Wales.

Transport for Wales (TfW) anticipates that eight of them will be required to convert the T1 to zero-emission operation. They will join six Yutong E12 models on TrawsCymru services. The latter have been purchased for use on two routes in North Wales but are yet to enter service. No date has been given for when those vehicles may begin carrying passengers.

Route T1 is operated by First Cymru, with end-to-end journeys generally allowed around 140min to complete the circa 55-mile trip.

Conversion to battery-electric buses will form part of other improvements to the service starting in September 2022, TrawsCymru says. It is currently consulting on potential changes, with areas under examination including the level of service provision and vehicle specification. Appetire for bike storage aboard vehicles forms part of that work.

Separately, TrawsCymru and TfW recently introduced integrated bus and rail ticketing that captures the T1 service. It allows travel between points on the rail network in South Wales and Aberystwyth, Aberaeron or Lampeter, connecting between TfW Rail services and the T1 in Carmarthen.

TfW says it is the first integrated ticketing pilot between bus and rail in Wales and that data gathered from it will be used “to help us plan further pilots in the future.”

 

[Rhydgaled]

Route T1 is due to gain 8 electric buses next year. It is inferred but not confirmed that these will arrive in September and will be Yutongs.
Eight more battery-electric buses set for TrawsCymru - routeone (route-one.net)

Interesting; the previous Welsh Government order of new vehicles for the T1 (the Optare Tempo X1260s that ended up on the T9 instead because of Arriva blocking the T1 launch) was for six vehicles (either no spares or 1 spare depending on whether 5 or 6 vehicles are needed to run the service) so either:

• a much larger provision of spares this time around
• timetable changes are planned which will increase the number of vehicles required (which seems unlikely given the service cuts on the T5) or
• vehicles will need to be taken out of service for recharging for part of the day hence not being available to run a trip that a diesel bus could have done