• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Could the Maesteg branch be operated differently, to increase reliability?

Status
Not open for further replies.

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,781
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Living in Lydney I'm looking forward to the TfW Cheltenham services no longer coming from Maesteg. Virtually every week I'm claiming delay repay, and I only go to the office once a week!

I’m just at Bridgend now, and once again the next Maesteg is 20 late and terminating at Tondu. Seems the Maesteg branch isn’t really fit for purpose as this seems to be endemic. Very daft tagging a single-track branch onto a long through service, surprised this was ever done in the first place.

This isn’t great when the Llynfi valley is one of the more deprived places in Wales (especially beyond Maesteg itself). The train service needs to be reliable.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Signal_Box

Member
Joined
25 Dec 2021
Messages
655
Location
UK
I’m just at Bridgend now, and once again the next Maesteg is 20 late and terminating at Tondu. Seems the Maesteg branch isn’t really fit for purpose as this seems to be endemic. Very daft tagging a single-track branch onto a long through service, surprised this was ever done in the first place.

This isn’t great when the Llynfi valley is one of the more deprived places in Wales (especially beyond Maesteg itself). The train service needs to be reliable.

There is a down direction bay that could be used to lock in the branch but that would create a downgrade in services for people wanting destinations east.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,993
Always going to struggle without a proper passing place, either with a bit of double track at Bridgend to allow a train to sit on the branch without blocking the main line or somewhere else. Bridgend to Maesteg is occupied 50-55 minutes of the hour so its always going to fall over.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,542
Location
South Wales
Need the lynfi loop at Tondu upgraded and reinstated for passenger services. Ideally then you'd need another loop if possible between Litcham and the jct with the mainline at Bridgend
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
18,089
Location
Airedale
Need the lynfi loop at Tondu upgraded and reinstated for passenger services. Ideally then you'd need another loop if possible between Litcham and the jct with the mainline at Bridgend
Pending that, maybe splitting the service at Bridgend (as when it ran through from Treherbert - showing my age now!) might be the least worst option. There are plenty of trains Bridgend-Cardiff, but it would require an extra unit.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,266
Location
Torbay
Something that might be worth investigating is converting the end of the branch to OTWS (one train without staff) working, using an axle counter, in place of the key token. Even though full 'track circuiting' would thus be provided all the way to the buffer stop of the single line spur, classification as OT instead of TCB would avoid the requirement for a signal for reversal at the terminus so the axle counter would only need to be single-ended, with sensor equipment solely at Tondu and no need for any new signalling equipment beyond there. This would avoid having to stop for the token exchange in both directions outside the signal box, perhaps saving a minute or so in each direction. The token exchange might alternatively be relocated to the station platform at Tondu with a remote instrument for train crew to use in a hut, Central Wales style, to avoid the double stop, but this probably wouldn't save as much time as an OTWS conversion.

For further resilience, I'd also definitely look at a short bit of double track through the main line junction at Bridgend and for around one kilometer along the branch, to just short of Wildmill, thus avoiding any expensive station reconstruction. Something like the following:

1687040159562.png
 

SWML9102

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2019
Messages
23
Location
bridgend
There was a plan for a half-hourly service that involved a loop at Llangynwd (north of Tondu, near the paper mill) as the Tondu loop was deemed too far south. That plan was shelved pending electrification due to capacity on the main line, but then electrification was cancelled too! Timekeeping on the route should improve when the 231s eventually find their long term home there, due to their superior acceleration. The rather sluggish 170s haven't helped in that respect over the last few years.
 

geoffk

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2010
Messages
3,259
I thought I read somewhere the plan was Maesteg to Ebbw Vale.
 

David Goddard

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
1,503
Location
Reading
Think that decoupling it from the Cheltenham service could probably help, so that delays at each end are more contained and not imported to the other.
Cheltenham <-> Swansea and Maesteg <-> Ebbw Vale may be a better combination
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,542
Location
South Wales
Think that decoupling it from the Cheltenham service could probably help, so that delays at each end are more contained and not imported to the other.
Cheltenham <-> Swansea and Maesteg <-> Ebbw Vale may be a better combination
They changing Swanline so it will leave Swansea at 27 minutes past each hour 5 minutes behind the London service. So won't be able to run through to Cheltenham.

Could run to Chepstow if we ever get the long proposed local services to Abergavenny and Chepstow
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top