How can Paddington - Penzance services be sped up

[Sir Felix Pole]

St. Austell is the biggest town in Cornwall (2021 Census) after all. Par attracts passengers as the nearest point to Fowey, as Lostwithiel has a poorer service.

 

[Prestige15]

The 10:20 Penzance to Paddington is timed as 5 hours 7 mins on RTT, what could be done to improve journey times between Penzance and London Paddington.

Realtime Trains | 1A84 1020 Penzance to London Paddington | 14/09/2023

Real-time train running information for 1A84 1020 departure from Penzance to London Paddington on 14/09/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

To answer your question, Maybe less stops, Perhaps a London - Penzance calling at Reading (pick up/drop off only) then non stop to Exeter and again the Plymouth then as normal to Penzance.

Lets take Newbury for instance for stopping vs passing train along the line side by side, The stopper will have to slow right down for a stop, pick/drop passengers then accelerate back up to speed by that time it'll be 2-5 mins behind the passing train so if more stops removed more time saved. however doing that would mean the stops like taunton and newton abbott will end up with 2 hourly service to london/plymouth. Would be ok I think if it was a 2 trains per hour to Plymouth with 1 continueing to Penzance that way the stops mention will still have hourly as today, either that of build a maglev of something.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Work is about to start on upgrading the signalling between Plymouth and Totnes with additional sections to improve capacity. It will still be controlled from Plymouth PSB - ironically this section is the more recent signalling (well 1974!) added after the original 1960 scheme.

Plymouth Resignalling

The project will see Network Rail engineers carry out improvements to signalling systems between Totnes and Plymouth. The work will see the old signalling system replaced with new state-of-the-art signalling, which will support improved reliability and safety whilst allowing a higher number of trains to operate in the area.

 

[Xavi]

It will still be controlled from Plymouth PSB

I thought it was reported that all the new kit (also Cornwall) would be controlled from Exeter.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Insufficent room in Exeter PSB (for the moment) - the Cornish section (Truro - Lostwithiel), also about to start, only just fits.

 

[Meerkat]

It should fit 10 cars, as 2x5 is already used. Obviously a fixed 10-car would have more capacity than a 2x5, so would be an advantage.

Are there any trains to the southwest that consist of a single 5 (rather than a 9 or 2x5?), if so they'd be the obvious ones to extend

I was thinking properly long - ie maxing out to fill the Paddington and Plymouth platform.

 

[brad465]

Work is about to start on upgrading the signalling between Plymouth and Totnes with additional sections to improve capacity. It will still be controlled from Plymouth PSB - ironically this section is the more recent signalling (well 1974!) added after the original 1960 scheme.

Plymouth Resignalling

Are there any planned extra services to take advantage of this, or is it just to provide extra resilience?

 

[RPI]

The only real way to speed up Cornish services is to take out stops on some services West of Plymouth, generally the busiest stations for London passengers are Truro, St Austell and Bodmin Parkway. But to speed them up would then reduce the near half hourly Plymouth to Penzance service calling at principal stations that do deserve the half hourly service.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

My logic was to provide connectivity to the branches for the summer season. Worth remembering the service in Cornwall is still quite good.

At the expense of all year round traffic from St Austell to London?

If you want an example of where the all year round traffic to London comes from look at the calling pattern of the “Golden Hind” (the Cornwall ‘business train’ focussed London demand) which calls in Cornwall at Redruth, Truro, St Austell, Bodmin and Liskeard.

 

[Anonymous10]

At the expense of all year round traffic from St Austell to London?

If you want an example of where the all year round traffic to London comes from look at the calling pattern of the “Golden Hind” (the Cornwall ‘business train’ focussed London demand) which calls in Cornwall at Redruth, Truro, St Austell, Bodmin and Liskeard.

Sorry I can't find any online mention to this service. I also think I've added a 2 hourly service could be introduced at an opposing time to the bodmin Parkway. Unfortunately to speed up services stations would need to be dropped and I would prioritise connecting stations to give everyone the best possible service or at least equally mediocre.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Sorry I can't find any online mention to this service. I also think I've added a 2 hourly service could be introduced at an opposing time to the bodmin Parkway. Unfortunately to speed up services stations would need to be dropped and I would prioritise connecting stations to give everyone the best possible service or at least equally mediocre.

The Golden Hind is the 05.03 from Penzance and 18.03 return. Was named by BR and historically deemed as a high priority train as was high revenue earning.

A quick google search brings up the details.

Golden Hind (passenger train) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Yes I accept if you want to speed up you will need to drop stations but you would need to drop the right stations; you need to prioritise stations which actually generate demand (and thus revenue) such as St Austell and Bodmin Parkway as opposed to “connecting stations” which just because they have a connection doesn’t meant they actually have passenger demand (St Austell has a higher usage than Par and all the Newquay branch stations combined for example).

Bodmin Parkway is a “connecting station” for large parts of North Cornwall, it’s just these connections are by road not rail which you seemed to have focussed on instead of total demand.

 

[The Ham]

IF there was a way to run a couple of stopping services which the express caught up with at a key station (ideally with a cross platform connection), then dropping stations might be possible on some services.

However, the reality is that the line has capacity issues and limited places where an easy change between trains is easy, so that's probably not overly viable. Especially given the time savings are likely to be small.

 

[BrianW]

The Golden Hind is the 05.03 from Penzance and 18.03 return. Was named by BR and historically deemed as a high priority train as was high revenue earning.

A quick google search brings up the details.

Golden Hind (passenger train) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Yes I accept if you want to speed up you will need to drop stations but you would need to drop the right stations; you need to prioritise stations which actually generate demand (and thus revenue) such as St Austell and Bodmin Parkway as opposed to “connecting stations” which just because they have a connection doesn’t meant they actually have passenger demand (St Austell has a higher usage than Par and all the Newquay branch stations combined for example).

Bodmin Parkway is a “connecting station” for large parts of North Cornwall, it’s just these connections are by road not rail which you seemed to have focussed on instead of total demand.

Is worsening of services by dropping stations worth it? The (former?) Golden Hind departs Penzance at 5.03, stopping at Redruth, Truro, St Austell, Bodmin Parkway, Liskeard and Saltash en rote to Plymouth (06.55) then Newton Abbot, Exeter stDavids, Taunton, Reading and Paddington (9.55) (4h52). The next Paddington train from Penzance departs 6.05, taking 5h24 to arrive 11.29, having called at twelve stations to Plymouth and the same as the 'Golden Hind' beyond, with the addition of Tiverton Parkway. What's so bad about those?

Ok the thread title is Paddington - Penzance, so maybe in the other direction?

The first train departs Padd at 6.00 (I doubt there be call by many for an earlier start), making twelve stops to Plymouth (9.45- in time for a meeting at 10/10.30) then a further twelve calls in Cornwall, arriving Penzance before noon (11.45). An unspectacular 5h40, but what benefit would there be by speeding that up by dropping stops? The fastest services are at 10.04,taking 4h56 to arrive Penzance 15.00, ; and the Golden Hind departing 18.03 to arrive 22.59 in the same 4h56.
Are those not good enough either? The 'South Devon Banks' at Dainton, Rattery and Hemerdon were significantly overcome by the HST. The Kings and Castles , and the Warships of the 1960s, took the flagship Cornish Riviera in 6h30; the HST achieved that magic 4h56 in the 1980s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornish_Riviera_Express). The Cornish curves, many on viaducts, remain.

Maybe an HS7(or 27?) on new alignment and eliminating ALL calls OOC- Penzance Parkway might meet the objective?

I'm done- Night Riviera anyone?

 

[hexagon789]

the HST achieved that magic 4h56 in the 1980s

4h45 in the 90s...

Yes, I know I'm evil for bringing it up and this thread will now descend into ever more chaos over the dropping of calls to accelerate services by that magic 11 mins now

 

[Bletchleyite]

It may be possible to drop Par from the fast services when the "West Cornwall Metro" creates a through Newquay-Falmouth service.

 

[I'm here now]

In my view the only stations that could potentially be lost in Cornwall on the London trains are Saltash, St Germans , Lostwithiel and perhaps Hayle. Other than those, most Cornish stations hold their own, although possibly Redruth and Camborne may not generate a huge amount of long distance journies.

You could always remove St Erth and just use Penzance as the interchange, PZ has enough platforms anyway. It wouldn’t make sense anyway as the spunked a ridiculous amount of money moving a perfectly fine P&R station to St erth.

Couldn’t GWR get some tilting trains to deal with the tight corners in South Devon. I think XC did this in the past, though I could be wrong.

 

[The Ham]

You could always remove St Erth and just use Penzance as the interchange, PZ has enough platforms anyway. It wouldn’t make sense anyway as the spunked a ridiculous amount of money moving a perfectly fine P&R station to St erth.

Couldn’t GWR get some tilting trains to deal with the tight corners in South Devon. I think XC did this in the past, though I could be wrong.

Whilst XC have trains which (when new) could tilt, I don't believe that the line side infrastructure was put in place for it to be used in many places (only WCML, or was it deployed elsewhere?).

 

[irish_rail]

Whilst XC have trains which (when new) could tilt, I don't believe that the line side infrastructure was put in place for it to be used in many places (only WCML, or was it deployed elsewhere?).

I think Oxford to Banbury also got done.

 

[dk1]

Whilst XC have trains which (when new) could tilt, I don't believe that the line side infrastructure was put in place for it to be used in many places (only WCML, or was it deployed elsewhere?).

Yes only the WCML. There would be no business case to install TASS on a minor line such as Plymouth-Penzance regardless of how useful it would be on the curvature of this route. XC were quick to remove all tilting equipment from their 221 fleet after 2007 which improved reliability.

 

[D6130]

I think Oxford to Banbury also got done.

Yes, Oxford to Aynho Junction....but I believe that the equipment has now been de-activated.

 

[The Planner]

Yes, Oxford to Aynho Junction....but I believe that the equipment has now been de-activated.

Deactivated many years ago, and I dont think it even had any EPS differentials.

 

[JamesT]

Deactivated many years ago, and I dont think it even had any EPS differentials.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/wcml-eps-speeds.186723/post-4255598 states

TASS was fitted on the Oxford - Banbury line from Wolvercote Jn to Aynho Jn (both exclusive) and allowed a small but useful uplift in speed (on one section from 90 without tilt to 110 with tilt).

Wouldn't the 110 be EPS?

 

[The Planner]

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/wcml-eps-speeds.186723/post-4255598 states

Wouldn't the 110 be EPS?

Im not convinced it was ever put in on the ground and it would have made little difference to the timetable.

 

[Matt P]

A new high speed line from Paddington to Reading or possibly Didcot......but I appreciate that this a suggestion this is up there with cloning dinosaurs in terms of detachment from reality.

 

[irish_rail]

A new high speed line from Paddington to Reading or possibly Didcot......but I appreciate that this a suggestion this is up there with cloning dinosaurs in terms of detachment from reality.

It won't help speed up Paddington to Penzance much. Also that stretch is actually due to be slowed down end of the decade by the Old Oak Common stops. Now a high speed line from Exeter to Plymouth would help a bit, but also up there with Dinosuar cloning!

 

[The Ham]

A new high speed line from Paddington to Reading or possibly Didcot......but I appreciate that this a suggestion this is up there with cloning dinosaurs in terms of detachment from reality.

Arguably you'd skip past Reading and have your first stop further out. In the past I've suggested the Wales and West HS line run Old Oak Common, Salisbury and then fab or from there to serve Southampton, Wales, Cornwall, Bristol, etc.

 

[RobShipway]

Arguably you'd skip past Reading and have your first stop further out. In the past I've suggested the Wales and West HS line run Old Oak Common, Salisbury and then fab or from there to serve Southampton, Wales, Cornwall, Bristol, etc.

I would agree, I think that the first stop after Old Oak Common should be Newbury from there serve Southampton etc....

 

[stuu]

Arguably you'd skip past Reading and have your first stop further out. In the past I've suggested the Wales and West HS line run Old Oak Common, Salisbury and then fab or from there to serve Southampton, Wales, Cornwall, Bristol, etc.

Why would you skip the second busiest station on the GWR network?

 

[takno]

Why would you skip the second busiest station on the GWR network?

Traffic at Reading is largely heading towards London, or is people changing trains to double back somewhere on the GWR network or to points north. The London passengers would be catered for since you wouldn't be closing the existing line, changing for HS2 at Old Oak Common would already have dealt with passengers changing to points north, and passengers changing to head back westwards would simply have less far to go to make the connection. I'd go as far as to say the whole enterprise is (even more) pointless if it goes via Reading.

 

[The Ham]

Why would you skip the second busiest station on the GWR network?

In part because it's the second busiest station on the network, however mostly because it's fairly close to London.

Combined, these two factors could overload services between London and Reading whilst leaving services west of there underloaded.

By bypassing Reading you free up a lot of capacity for London/Reading services as well as Reading/other locations.

Depending on where the first stop is you could relocate a lot of the people changing from Reading to the new station.

For example, Salisbury as your first stop, you're likely to get people from Basingstoke, Farnborough, Woking, Southampton and the like heading there over Reading.