Paddington to Bristol Parkway non stop

[irish_rail]

Im afraid the railway doesn’t work on importance, political or social aspects - it works on financial aspects. This is why if you had to miss a station you would miss Plymouth. The size of a place is irrelevant, it’s demand that’s important in the current structure.

However I think we are both likely to agree the answer is you miss neither regardless of how few services it is.

Not convinced though as Plymouth is an important stop in terms of restocking the catering, plus the majority of on-board crew and drivers change here. But as you say, missing either Devon City is not likely to happen.
Personally I'd be quite happy with a few trains a day stopping Reading, Exeter, Plymouth and daresay you could get a journeytime well below 3 hours if pathed properly.

 

[CharlesR]

Not convinced though as Plymouth is an important stop in terms of restocking the catering, plus the majority of on-board crew and drivers change here. But as you say, missing either Devon City is not likely to happen.
Personally I'd be quite happy with a few trains a day stopping Reading, Exeter, Plymouth and daresay you could get a journeytime well below 3 hours if pathed properly.

Exeter is also an important stop for crewing, as I am sure you are aware. You also made the point earlier that "if you had to pick between the two" you'd pick Plymouth. In a post-COVID, DfT cost cutting era the idea of skipping stops on Intercity trains is hardly at the forefront of plans in the region.

The services hardly stop everywhere either, they stop 6 times in around 3 hours prior to Plymouth. The claim you could get services "well below" 3 hours if "pathed properly" is quite easy to say - but unfortunately rail usage in the UK doesn't exclusively come from the Paddington-Penzance line, and therefore clear runs aren't entirely realistic.

Missing station calls at key points along the route that contribute to the viability of the service is surely a step backwards, making rail travel more complex and difficult?

 

[Class 33]

Haha good one.


Hate to rain on your parade, but from experience, the Plymouth train will likely depart a couple of minutes behind a Bristol stopperand as happens everytime we get diverted, there will be no high speed running due to the Bristol getting in the way everywhere! I hope for your sake the planners have timetabled it well away from the Bristol, but as I said, we generally depart 2 minutes behind Bristol stuff (including on a saturday). EDIT: Just looked on realtime trains and the 1842 follows the 1832. So the Bristol has a ten minute headstart, so you may avoid it until Swindon , my guess is that's where you'll catch it, but in my relatively limited experience of driving on the GWML (as opposed to the B and H) usually tend to find i get checked by Didcot due to slow station work and the train infront also catching up the one infront of it.

Yes, I realised the 1842 service is due to depart 10 minutes after the 1832 to Bristol. As you say, it should get a fast high speed run until around the Swindon area and then will probably catch up with it and riding the yellows for most of the way into Bristol. Although it is scheduled to arrive there 7 minutes after that 1832 service. Either way whether a fast high speed run from Reading all the way to Bristol or a slower run riding the yellows behind that 1832 service, I'm still looking forward to this journey. A long distance journey of about an hour and a quarter and not stopping at stations every 15 minutes(ish). Very much a rarity again along the original Great Western Mainline.

Looks like there may well be more chances of journeys like these between Saturday 18th February until Thursday 2nd March when there are engineering works again on the Berks and Hants line.

 

[Horizon22]

It is true that Exeter is very well used and has lots of interchanges, but in terms of importance, politically and socially you'd miss it out over Plymouth if one of the two had to go.

Too reiterate though I am only suggesting a service or two a day to miss Ex out not every single "fast" service!


Just looked on realtime trains and the 1842 follows the 1832. So the Bristol has a ten minute headstart, so you may avoid it until Swindon , my guess is that's where you'll catch it, but in my relatively limited experience of driving on the GWML (as opposed to the B and H) usually tend to find i get checked by Didcot due to slow station work and the train infront also catching up the one infront of it.

I simply see no justification for missing Exeter OR Plymouth. Both sizeable locations with relevant rail connections. I know you’re obsessed with the Cornwall / Penzance service but I’m not sure why it’s even being discussed.

 

[irish_rail]

I simply see no justification for missing Exeter OR Plymouth. Both sizeable locations with relevant rail connections. I know you’re obsessed with the Cornwall / Penzance service but I’m not sure why it’s even being discussed.

Its being discussed because whilst the north of England and Scotland are seemingly obsessed with ever faster journey times to London, the south west seems to get left behind despite being geographically a similar distance from London as the north of England.

If we are prepared to spend money on speeding up journeys to Liverpool then why not Plymouth for example. As someone who travels on the trains a fair bit both as a driver but also a passenger, the journey time is frustratingly slow. Linespeed improvements cost money, whereas cutting out a Tiverton or Totnes stop doesn't, and psychologically at the very least helps make the journey feel quicker. This would help generate additional business from the far south west. Why should the far south west continue to be left behind? So much for levelling up!

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Its being discussed because whilst the north of England and Scotland are seemingly obsessed with ever faster journey times to London, the south west seems to get left behind despite being geographically a similar distance from London as the north of England.

If we are prepared to spend money on speeding up journeys to Liverpool then why not Plymouth for example. As someone who travels on the trains a fair bit both as a driver but also a passenger, the journey time is frustratingly slow. Linespeed improvements cost money, whereas cutting out a Tiverton or Totnes stop doesn't, and psychologically at the very least helps make the journey feel quicker. This would help generate additional business from the far south west. Why should the far south west continue to be left behind? So much for levelling up!

It’s a difficult one to argue that - it may well generate business from the south west but it may well loose money from Totnes and Tivvy the railway current gets.

In the same way quicker journeys in the South West might generate revenue, the gaps in service created may loose revenue as their service becomes less attractive.

 

[Bald Rick]

If we are prepared to spend money on speeding up journeys to Liverpool then why not Plymouth for example.

Because the urban area of Liverpool has 4 times as many people in it than the urban area of Plymouth?

 

[Horizon22]

Its being discussed because whilst the north of England and Scotland are seemingly obsessed with ever faster journey times to London, the south west seems to get left behind despite being geographically a similar distance from London as the north of England.

If we are prepared to spend money on speeding up journeys to Liverpool then why not Plymouth for example. As someone who travels on the trains a fair bit both as a driver but also a passenger, the journey time is frustratingly slow. Linespeed improvements cost money, whereas cutting out a Tiverton or Totnes stop doesn't, and psychologically at the very least helps make the journey feel quicker. This would help generate additional business from the far south west. Why should the far south west continue to be left behind? So much for levelling up!

The line speed is slow because of the geography and winding route primarily. Most lines out of London don’t have this problem until quite some way out and even then not necessarily at all. Liverpool is also substantially larger and arguably, culturally more significant.

It may actually have some cost; can you replace all the Exeter or Tiverton or Taunton passengers with Cornwall traffic on a yearly basis (it’s highly seasonal let’s not forget) to break even or better? And also you then have to serve those stops with another service; that costs money to provide the stock and the diagram and the resources etc etc. And if you don’t, you want to permanently reduce their service? Doesn’t sound like levelling up for Dorset or Somerset! That will just push people to cars.

It’s not as simple as you make it out to be and not always the most raw deal.

 

[Dai Corner]

Because the urban area of Liverpool has 4 times as many people in it than the urban area of Plymouth?

Also Reading to Plymouth is about five times as far as Crewe to Liverpool.

 

[irish_rail]

Because the urban area of Liverpool has 4 times as many people in it than the urban area of Plymouth?

Its not the point. The population of Cornwall plus west Devon and Plymouth is large enough to warrant faster services to London. There just isn't the political will sadly, and as a result the area will always be left behind and its no surprise outward investment isn't forthcoming. Sadly Plymouth City Council for example is very backward looking and has never cared too much about improvement , and I guess this is part of the problem..

I'm also interested in the current statistics on passenger usage at Tiverton and Taunton.
Anecdotally speaking, since covid both stations seem to me to both be very poorly used , especially Taunton. Whereas in comparison Plymouth and Exeter seemed to have bounced back stronger than pre covid.
If it continues like this, I'd argue that some trains missing out Taunton and Tiverton should be justified.

 

[Watershed]

Linespeed improvements cost money, whereas cutting out a Tiverton or Totnes stop doesn't

Cutting out any station is likely to cost revenue, so it does cost money. It's not a zero sum game - to justify skipping those stops you'd have to have modelling showing that it would generate more revenue than it would cost.

 

[stuu]

I'm also interested in the current statistics on passenger usage at Tiverton and Taunton.
Anecdotally speaking, since covid both stations seem to me to both be very poorly used , especially Taunton. Whereas in comparison Plymouth and Exeter seemed to have bounced back stronger than pre covid.
If it continues like this, I'd argue that some trains missing out Taunton and Tiverton should be justified.

I live in Taunton and have used the station a fair bit over the summer, I would have said that numbers off-peak seem back to where they were pre-covid

That said, what I haven't done is travelled at peak time to London, which I used to do regularly and there used to always be lots of people obviously heading for meetings etc. It would expect a lot of that traffic has vanished, probably forever. The flipside of that is that there has been a significant influx of people from cities looking for more space who may only travel to the office irregularly - Taunton saw the highest increase in average rental prices in the whole country last year.

The actual usage figures will be interesting

 

[didcotdean]

Cutting out any station is likely to cost revenue, so it does cost money. It's not a zero sum game - to justify skipping those stops you'd have to have modelling showing that it would generate more revenue than it would cost.

One example of this: GWR calculated at a late stage prior to the introduction of the IET-based timetable that it was better from a revenue point of view for both Bristol TM services in the hour to call at Didcot compared with the previous practice of one Bristol and the Cardiff which had been pencilled in to continue. It may be more debateable whether this is also a better pattern for users overall.

 

[Birmingham]

One example of this: GWR calculated at a late stage prior to the introduction of the IET-based timetable that it was better from a revenue point of view for both Bristol TM services in the hour to call at Didcot compared with the previous practice of one Bristol and the Cardiff which had been pencilled in to continue. It may be more debateable whether this is also a better pattern for users overall.

That is interesting. It must be frustrating for passengers between, say, South Wales and Oxford (as an example of what Didcot is useful for!). While possible to double-back between Didcot and Reading to Oxford to avoid changing twice, tickets valid for this can cost considerably more. However, I can see that there might be more custom between Bristol/Bath and Oxford.

 

[Shrop]

I've raised this subject of overdone stops on the Cardiff route previously, and met with all sorts of disagreement. But despite all of the arguments as to why every single South Wales train should stop at Reading, Swindon and Bristol Parkway, as well as mostly also stopping at Didcot, I still believe this is discriminatory against the residents of South Wales.

In the mid 1970s you could reach Newport non stop from Paddington in a quicker time than you now can after the huge investment in electrification. The Cardiff area has a population of half a million, and the Swansea area a quarter of a million, but they have no prestige trains from London whatsoever, just semi-fast services all the way from London. There are plenty of trains that run non stop from London to Warrington and York, both of which are a good bit further away from London than Cardiff, both of which are considerably smaller than Cardiff, yet you can't reach Cardiff with fewer than 4 stops, and mostly 5.

So I'm with the OP. Not necessarily with non stop to Bristol Parkway, although that wouldn't be so bad, but I certainly think that at least one or two prestige services to South Wales ought to be possible, and I maintain that when Reading, Didcot and Swindon get so many services already, the occasional services missing them out would help to be less discriminatory against South Wales passengers.

 

[Bald Rick]

Its not the point.

it very much *is* the point.

The population of Cornwall plus west Devon and Plymouth is large enough to warrant faster services to London.

If only the population of Cornwall, west Devon and Plymouth travelled to London in greater numbers…

I still believe this is discriminatory against the residents of South Wales.

Discriminatory? How?

 

[MontyP]

I've raised this subject of overdone stops on the Cardiff route previously, and met with all sorts of disagreement. But despite all of the arguments as to why every single South Wales train should stop at Reading, Swindon and Bristol Parkway, as well as mostly also stopping at Didcot, I still believe this is discriminatory against the residents of South Wales.

In the mid 1970s you could reach Newport non stop from Paddington in a quicker time than you now can after the huge investment in electrification. The Cardiff area has a population of half a million, and the Swansea area a quarter of a million, but they have no prestige trains from London whatsoever, just semi-fast services all the way from London. There are plenty of trains that run non stop from London to Warrington and York, both of which are a good bit further away from London than Cardiff, both of which are considerably smaller than Cardiff, yet you can't reach Cardiff with fewer than 4 stops, and mostly 5.

So I'm with the OP. Not necessarily with non stop to Bristol Parkway, although that wouldn't be so bad, but I certainly think that at least one or two prestige services to South Wales ought to be possible, and I maintain that when Reading, Didcot and Swindon get so many services already, the occasional services missing them out would help to be less discriminatory against South Wales passengers.

I really don't understand the linkage between "prestige" of a service and the number of times the train stops on it's way to the final destination. Journey times of around 1:55 to Cardiff and 3:10 to Plymouth are competitive with any other way of making the journey. More frequent services have resulted in more stops to increase the loadings. We could always return to 1980s frequencies such as only 6 or 7 trains from London to Glasgow, lots of 2 hour gaps in the Plymouth service etc.

 

[cle]

I could see an hourly pattern of say, Paddington - Reading - Bristol Parkway and on to South Wales - likely the Swansea. I prefer this to a Temple Meads, as it's a longer journey. And then the 'semi' Cardiff terminator which could cover Didcot and Swindon.

But then you get into chopping Swindon services - and whether that is acceptable to save 5-10 mins. Or if something else could replace it - but the Bristol 'super fast' paths are now spoken for - unless they themselves extended to Swindon as a semi-fast/outer suburban service, which Swindon really doesn't have. And maybe now you can chop a Didcot! Anon anon...

 

[irish_rail]

If only the population of Cornwall, west Devon and Plymouth travelled to London in greater numbers.

Very much a chicken and egg thing isn't it. Maybe the slow journey times, uncomfortable trains and high prices are putting them off?
Put in a few quick trains at a reasonable price and demand would be through the roof

 

[Bald Rick]

Very much a chicken and egg thing isn't it. Maybe the slow journey times, uncomfortable trains and high prices are putting them off?

or maybe the demand isn’t there whatever you do?

Put in a few quick trains at a reasonable price and demand would be through the roof

what evidence is there for that? Do you not think GWR (and predecessors) might have people who specifically look at their markets and where opportunities are?

 

[JonathanH]

I could see an hourly pattern of say, Paddington - Reading - Bristol Parkway and on to South Wales - likely the Swansea. I prefer this to a Temple Meads, as it's a longer journey. And then the 'semi' Cardiff terminator which could cover Didcot and Swindon.

You then end up with an uneven timetable at one end or the other which has to fit in with other services on the route at that end. Much easier to have the timetables on even frequencies.

 

[CharlesR]

In the mid 1970s you could reach Newport non stop from Paddington in a quicker time than you now can after the huge investment in electrification.

When you technically could do more than 125, and as you've said yourself, non-stop... when the markets were different.

The Cardiff area has a population of half a million, and the Swansea area a quarter of a million, but they have no prestige trains from London whatsoever, just semi-fast services all the way from London. There are plenty of trains that run non stop from London to Warrington and York, both of which are a good bit further away from London than Cardiff, both of which are considerably smaller than Cardiff, yet you can't reach Cardiff with fewer than 4 stops, and mostly 5.

Because the market isn't there? And there isn't justification as people from Cardiff and Swansea don't make the same journeys as those from Warrington and York?

and mostly 5.

Not many South Wales services call at Didcot...

the occasional services missing them out would help to be less discriminatory against South Wales passengers.

It's not like every other service out of Paddington is in the same situation

 

[Shrop]

I really don't understand the linkage between "prestige" of a service and the number of times the train stops on it's way to the final destination. Journey times of around 1:55 to Cardiff and 3:10 to Plymouth are competitive with any other way of making the journey.

Oh come on, don’t plead ignorance about a prestige service. It’s not hard to work out that when travelling from A to B, if you can travel non-stop then you feel like you’re getting an excellent service, whereas if you stop several times then the service is much more second rate.

I would describe the present London to York or Warrington as prestigious. Suppose every single train to York stopped at Huntingdon, Peterborough, Grantham, Newark, Retford and Doncaster (yes, it’s further so 6 stops), then would you really call that a prestige service, even if it was still quicker than going by car? Or London to Warrington with every single train calling at Milton Keynes, Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Stafford and Crewe?

 

[Grecian 1998]

Conversely, there are often complaints that Liverpool has no services to anywhere in the south of England except London. I'm not sure Milton Keynes or Watford would be the obvious places to visit, but they'd likely be easier to provide than reinstating XC services.

If the folk of South Wales can provide a persuasive argument that cutting out stops in England will lead to increased loadings from west of the Severn to London and greater revenue, I'm sure GWR would be interested to hear it.

Any 'prestige' service needs very careful timetabling anyway - passengers are far more likely to perceive a poor quality service if regularly trundling through west London suburbs than for scheduled station stops.

 

[Bald Rick]

Oh come on, don’t plead ignorance about a prestige service. It’s not hard to work out that when travelling from A to B, if you can travel non-stop then you feel like you’re getting an excellent service, whereas if you stop several times then the service is much more second rate.

That might be your interpretation of prestige, but others will have a different view based on comfort and luxury.

 

[Shrop]

or maybe the demand isn’t there whatever you do?

Okay so you're talking about South Wales / West of England services not having the demand whatever you do. So why then, does somewhere like York deserve its non stop service? Is this because the demand for York actually is there? Your arguments often depend on population centres, but York is smaller than Cardiff, and a fair bit further from London.

Nevertheless, let's presume that there really isn't the demand from South Wales to justify a better service, and let's accept that York actually does deserve it's fast service. It would follow that the demand to Sheffield and Leeds would be greater than to York, after all their population centres are much bigger, and yet here we are, with HS2 Eastern leg being abandoned. Of course it depends how you look at it, but I do have my doubts about some of the present arguments.

 

[JonathanH]

So why then, does somewhere like York deserve its non stop service? Is this because the demand for York actually is there?

York gets a non-stop service from London solely because it is on the way to Newcastle, and more importantly Edinburgh.

It doesn't get it on its own virtues. Cardiff simply doesn't have the demand that exists to travel to Edinburgh.

There is strong demand between London and Leeds but its trains have to pick up the stops on the way from London, rather than running non stop.

 

[Shrop]

That might be your interpretation of prestige, but others will have a different view based on comfort and luxury.

Yes, comfort and luxury are obvious parts of prestige. As is the absence of having to shuffle around frequently en route to your destination.

 

[Horizon22]

I've raised this subject of overdone stops on the Cardiff route previously, and met with all sorts of disagreement. But despite all of the arguments as to why every single South Wales train should stop at Reading, Swindon and Bristol Parkway, as well as mostly also stopping at Didcot, I still believe this is discriminatory against the residents of South Wales.

In the mid 1970s you could reach Newport non stop from Paddington in a quicker time than you now can after the huge investment in electrification. The Cardiff area has a population of half a million, and the Swansea area a quarter of a million, but they have no prestige trains from London whatsoever, just semi-fast services all the way from London. There are plenty of trains that run non stop from London to Warrington and York, both of which are a good bit further away from London than Cardiff, both of which are considerably smaller than Cardiff, yet you can't reach Cardiff with fewer than 4 stops, and mostly 5.

So I'm with the OP. Not necessarily with non stop to Bristol Parkway, although that wouldn't be so bad, but I certainly think that at least one or two prestige services to South Wales ought to be possible, and I maintain that when Reading, Didcot and Swindon get so many services already, the occasional services missing them out would help to be less discriminatory against South Wales passengers.

They don't "mostly stop at Didcot"; in fact very few do. You could maybe argue just about for a Swindon withdrawal (Bristol Parkway gets no high speed service otherwise) but as I've said it's a busy hub for the area and has considerable traffic. Reading is also a huge hub, but you could maybe have the odd sail past. Perhaps the open-access operator will whet your appettite if it ever gets going. As for 4-5 stops being too many, you'd want to try and pull Newport too?

As for "discriminatory", that's frankly laughable and evidently you have no understanding of the meaning of the word.

Yes, comfort and luxury are obvious parts of prestige. As is the absence of having to shuffle around frequently en route to your destination.

Why would you be shuffling around? Pick a seat by the window and you don't have to get up once (unless you need to use the facilities).

 

[Shrop]

Why would you be shuffling around? Pick a seat by the window and you don't have to get up once (unless you need to use the facilities).

Have you seriously never been on a train where reservations haven't been managed properly? You've never occupied a seat with no reservation notice, only for the reservation to appear a few stops along the route once the system is booted up properly?

Have you never found the only available seat to be an aisle seat, with the window seat regularly changing occupants? Have you never been on a crowded train with people shuffling past moving bags around at every station?

I do wonder how divorced some people are from many of the realities of train travel, yet still feel entitled to criticise others who have experienced more of the realities.