How can Paddington - Penzance services be sped up

[irish_rail]

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.

 

[The Ham]

I can't imagine the cost & objections to a southbound chord out of Exeter Central the WoE route needs more double track as it is, without adding demand beyond Exeter. I refuse to get drawn into another discussion about Okehampton, but that budget wuold also buy a fair bit of realignment on the existing route too. Add cash for Exeter resignalling into *any* increase in traffic, no matter the direction.

Err, I said redouble the WofE line (along with Okehampton) to run additional services, the only reason I mentioned the southbound chord (and that would follow at a later date) from the WofE line was as an option to increase the number of London/Plymouth services using the otherwise poorer value for money DAL.

Poorer value than the Okehampton route (even then the Okehampton route study didn't look at what impact running through services from the WofE line and certainly not services from London would have on the value).

As had already been established the impact of other schemes would be limited, even the DAL would only gain (at best) 6 minutes and had some cost estimates of up to £3.1bn in the 2014 study. (Via Okehampton in comparison was up to £1.2bn).

I'm happy to discuss other options where it would allow extra services to connect to Plymouth from London where the journey times aren't too dissimilar to the current services.

When is been discussed before I am accused of only suggesting via Okehampton as it happened in the past. I then explain that there's no spare capacity out of Paddington and there's no proposal to provide any (unlike from Waterloo where's the potential for 8tph in a post Crossrail 2 world, and some key locations - like Portsmouth 2tph and Guildford with 4tph - aren't likely to be able to get their average of +1tph for each 2tph they currently see - or at least pre COVID), likewise there's no other London station worth capacity nor the ability to run services of a comparable journey time.

Even if there was scope to turn services at OOC, the capacity around Reading West would likely stop additional services running.

As such whilst the WofE line was used historically, the reason for suggesting it now is because of current constraints.

The DAL would only ever see it's business case improve if there's more services using it. To justify that you need to build the numbers of passengers traveling between Exeter and Plymouth; the best way to do that is to improve the frequency of services with a journey time of circa 1 hour - which even with the DAL would likely run into difficulties between the DAL and Plymouth.

Lengthening the Castles (or more likely their replacements) and the Voyagers would help, however even if you had 3tph with a total of 1,800 seats vs the current 3tph with a total of 1,050 then rail growth at 3% per year would make trains just as crowded (at least seated capacity) in 18 years with those longer trains as is the case now with the existing rolling stock.

Given that Crossrail 2 is (at best estimates) also 18 years out we're taking long game here (as I intimated in my post). Probably a late 2040's early 2050's opening date.

 

[Irascible]

The WoE needs more double track just to unlock ridership inside Devon, even before you start looking at long distance, that was the point ( also something you'd have to take not of if you want to speed it up ). Why would anything have to go round the top of the moors though? that was the question - how much upgrading/realigning between Newton Abbott and Plymouth - note no mention of Dawlish/DAL - would you get out of the budget of rebuilding the entire LSWR route. Reversing *some* trains at St Davids & sending those to Waterloo seems practical if the area gets it's needed remodelling.

The discussion is "how do we make the service faster" rather than "how do we run more trains", though. I realise the latter is effectively the former and there's diagramming issues, but making best use of a better route has to come after making a better route.

 

[irish_rail]

The WoE needs more double track just to unlock ridership inside Devon, even before you start looking at long distance, that was the point ( also something you'd have to take not of if you want to speed it up ). Why would anything have to go round the top of the moors though? that was the question - how much upgrading/realigning between Newton Abbott and Plymouth - note no mention of Dawlish/DAL - would you get out of the budget of rebuilding the entire LSWR route. Reversing *some* trains at St Davids & sending those to Waterloo seems practical if the area gets it's needed remodelling.

The discussion is "how do we make the service faster" rather than "how do we run more trains", though. I realise the latter is effectively the former and there's diagramming issues, but making best use of a better route has to come after making a better route.

If you can increase the capacity (my example at Castle Cary to Somerton on the down), then you an increase the speed. At the moment , if driving a "fast" off London that follows half hour after a semi fast, I know there is zero point me gunning it down the B and H as I know if I drive hard I will catch the semi fast at Castle Cary, even if it is running to time. But add in a signal section, then I can drive that train at full throttle and reach Taunton a good few minutes faster. I wander what the cost of a new signal section at say Keinton Mandeville would cost, and would it be worth it for a few mins saved on the B and H?

 

[The Planner]

If you can increase the capacity (my example at Castle Cary to Somerton on the down), then you an increase the speed. At the moment , if driving a "fast" off London that follows half hour after a semi fast, I know there is zero point me gunning it down the B and H as I know if I drive hard I will catch the semi fast at Castle Cary, even if it is running to time. But add in a signal section, then I can drive that train at full throttle and reach Taunton a good few minutes faster. I wander what the cost of a new signal section at say Keinton Mandeville would cost, and would it be worth it for a few mins saved on the B and H?

Towards the thick end of 7 figures.

 

[irish_rail]

Towards the thick end of 7 figures.

I would argue then it is probably worth doing. Fuel costs alone must be staggering when you think how many trains are brought from 100mph to a stand to then have to reaccelerate to 100mph, perhaps 15 times a day. Add in the benefits of reduced journey times etc and id argue after a few years it will have paid for itself. But I guess in the grand scheme of things it wouldn't be seen as a priority.

 

[Xavi]

Without somehow getting rid of freight from the Berks and Hants I don't see much being done on that stretch.

Electrification is the answer to move the stone trains quicker. Hopwood is calling for this.

I would argue then it is probably worth doing. Fuel costs alone must be staggering when you think how many trains are brought from 100mph to a stand to then have to reaccelerate to 100mph, perhaps 15 times a day. Add in the benefits of reduced journey times etc and id argue after a few years it will have paid for itself. But I guess in the grand scheme of things it wouldn't be seen as a priority.

As I mentioned earlier, extra signal sections will almost certainly be part of re-signalling, but highly unlikely before because of relay based interlocking.

Combined with electrification to the Somerset quarries, I would expect the headline Taunton-Reading time to reduce by 7/8 minutes. Some may say that does not warrant electrification, however, timekeeping would improve significantly with the heavy stone trains getting out the way quicker.

Via Bristol will never be competitive for Devon / Cornwall traffic.

 

[rdlover777]

Probably not most realistic answer, but why not double track the section near the Royal Albert Bridge?

Have the Royal Albert Bridge on the downline and have the new bridge, let's say the Tamar rail bridge, on the upline

 

[The Planner]

I would argue then it is probably worth doing. Fuel costs alone must be staggering when you think how many trains are brought from 100mph to a stand to then have to reaccelerate to 100mph, perhaps 15 times a day. Add in the benefits of reduced journey times etc and id argue after a few years it will have paid for itself. But I guess in the grand scheme of things it wouldn't be seen as a priority.

I agree that its an odd situation down there, is there a TSR on as there is loss in running in the Somerton to Athelney section?

 

[irish_rail]

I agree that its an odd situation down there, is there a TSR on as there is loss in running in the Somerton to Athelney section?

Not that I'm aware of , no TSRs Somerton to athleney at moment.

 

[The Ham]

Electrification is the answer to move the stone trains quicker. Hopwood is calling for this.


As I mentioned earlier, extra signal sections will almost certainly be part of re-signalling, but highly unlikely before because of relay based interlocking.

Combined with electrification to the Somerset quarries, I would expect the headline Taunton-Reading time to reduce by 7/8 minutes. Some may say that does not warrant electrification, however, timekeeping would improve significantly with the heavy stone trains getting out the way quicker.

Via Bristol will never be competitive for Devon / Cornwall traffic.

7 minutes would still be faster than building the DAL, it may not be cheaper (but with DAL costs in excess of £2bn maybe not but much) but it would save operation costs as well as improved journey times - as such would most likely have a better business case.

 

[cle]

7 minutes would still be faster than building the DAL, it may not be cheaper (but with DAL costs in excess of £2bn maybe not but much) but it would save operation costs as well as improved journey times - as such would most likely have a better business case.

I agree. Journey time projects are by and large incremental, and the minutes add up.

If minimums were raised elsewhere on the route, combined with wires, you could see 15-20 mins in total. I can’t see more without some crazy civils which would never happen.

 

[SynthD]

Probably not most realistic answer, but why not double track the section near the Royal Albert Bridge?

Have the Royal Albert Bridge on the downline and have the new bridge, let's say the Tamar rail bridge, on the upline

The existing bridges are too close to each other and Saltash. But maybe the line from Budeaux to the Tamar Bridge worksite (half a mile) could be doubled. It would be disruptive to do and I doubt it would be worth it, but it’s the cheaper half of the single line section.

 

[DevonRailHead]

Interesting because I've always thought of this as a route where potential time savings could be made, but how? Some people will be along to point out the conflicts on the route I haven't had a chance to look at yet, and why most of these probably cannot be done, but initial thoughts simply based off of 1A84 as the quoted train and not yet researching further:

-There is a 5 min dwell at Reading. This could be reduced but probably has conflicting moves
-You could reduce the number of stops along the whole route. Since we're in the speculative section, you could reduce it drastically to call Penzance - Truro - Plymouth - Exeter - Reading - London. However, this removes some useful interchange stations, such as St Erth, Par, Liskeard and Newton Abbot. Add those in and the only stops you are omitting are Camborne, Redruth, St Austell, Totnes and Taunton. For the Cornwall stations at least this removes the ability to maintain a clockface timetable. I would actually quite like to see an express of this kind but again some of the intermittent stops are useful
-You could I suppose take out the performance allowances. However, along the entire route this is only 8 mins of performance allowance across 5h7m - EMR trains between St Pancras and Luton Airport Parkway on a Sunday morning have more than this just between their first two stations! If you take out performance allowance this train will regularly be late into Paddington
-Infrastructure wise, the section between Exeter and Plymouth isn't the fastest. I haven't been following the Tavistock developments but diverting another way I don't think will reduce these times considerably?

There's at least one member on here driving this route who I'd be interested to hear from as to whether more could be done. The most important thing right now I think is to ensure that capacity between PAD and Plymouth at the very least is maintained at a level suitable for the number of travellers, so I imagine speeding up this service is not at the top of the priorities list.

Just remove the Reading stop completely in both directions. There is no need for every GWR high speed train to stop there.

 

[stuu]

Just remove the Reading stop completely in both directions. There is no need for every GWR high speed train to stop there.

Have you seen how many people get off most eastbound trains at Reading?

 

[FlyingPotato]

Just remove the Reading stop completely in both directions. There is no need for every GWR high speed train to stop there.

In my experience there's always been strong demand at reading
If you removed the service, a lot of people travelling to Cornwall might be encouraged to fly to Newquay or take a car, meaning the railways lose revenue and co2 emissions could increase

 

[yorksrob]

The WoE needs more double track just to unlock ridership inside Devon, even before you start looking at long distance, that was the point ( also something you'd have to take not of if you want to speed it up ). Why would anything have to go round the top of the moors though? that was the question - how much upgrading/realigning between Newton Abbott and Plymouth - note no mention of Dawlish/DAL - would you get out of the budget of rebuilding the entire LSWR route. Reversing *some* trains at St Davids & sending those to Waterloo seems practical if the area gets it's needed remodelling.

The discussion is "how do we make the service faster" rather than "how do we run more trains", though. I realise the latter is effectively the former and there's diagramming issues, but making best use of a better route has to come after making a better route.

Well "how do we run trains faster" is the wrong question.

The question should be "how do we grow the rail market in Devon" and that should involve faster journey times, more capacity, greater frequency and new passenger catchments.

The route through Okehampton goes further towards meeting a number of these objectives.

 

[JonathanH]

Have you seen how many people get off most eastbound trains at Reading?

On the other hand, if the Reading stop were removed from the fast trains to Cornwall, it might strengthen the case for the Exeter semi-fast, as it would need to carry the passengers connecting from the West to Reading.

I assume the previous poster envisages that removing the Reading stop would increase the number of people travelling from London.

 

[stuu]

On the other hand, if the Reading stop were removed from the fast trains to Cornwall, it might strengthen the case for the Exeter semi-fast, as it would need to carry the passengers connecting from the West to Reading.

I assume the previous poster envisages that removing the Reading stop would increase the number of people travelling from London.

I find it very hard to believe that taking 5 minutes out of a minimum 3.5 hour train journey would have any measurable impact on demand.

But I would believe that making journeys to the second busiest station on GWR's network half an hour longer would adversely affect numbers.

 

[Ashley Hill]

TBH shaving a minute here and another there just to arrive in Penzance 7 mins earlier won’t make a difference to most people. To be noticeable I think you’d need to save 15-30 minutes to be able to brag about it. To do that it would mean either superfast services omitting popular stops that people wish to use or expensive infrastructure improvements which are not going to happen. Having said that I understand that some new signal sections are being installed between Totnes and Plymouth to give extra headways.

 

[Bartsimho]

TBH shaving a minute here and another there just to arrive in Penzance 7 mins earlier won’t make a difference to most people. To be noticeable I think you’d need to save 15-30 minutes to be able to brag about it. To do that it would mean either superfast services omitting popular stops that people wish to use or expensive infrastructure improvements which are not going to happen. Having said that I understand that some new signal sections are being installed between Totnes and Plymouth to give extra headways.

Either 15-30 minutes or crossing an hour barrier.

 

[Meerkat]

TBH shaving a minute here and another there just to arrive in Penzance 7 mins earlier won’t make a difference to most people. To be noticeable I think you’d need to save 15-30 minutes to be able to brag about it. To do that it would mean either superfast services omitting popular stops that people wish to use or expensive infrastructure improvements which are not going to happen. Having said that I understand that some new signal sections are being installed between Totnes and Plymouth to give extra headways.

It would probably be cheaper to move Penzance closer to London!

 

[JonathanH]

I find it very hard to believe that taking 5 minutes out of a minimum 3.5 hour train journey would have any measurable impact on demand.

It is the attraction of an uninterrupted journey between London and Exeter that would be attractive to passengers, not any substantial reduction in journey times. If passengers were told that they could join at Paddington and have a non disrupted journey to Exeter that could be a major selling point, in much the same way as LNER to York, Lumo to Newcastle or Avanti to Warrington might be considered.

But I would believe that making journeys to the second busiest station on GWR's network half an hour longer would adversely affect numbers.

Maybe, depends on how the passenger loads change. It has always been clear that passengers from London travelling on GWR resent their trains stopping at Reading, especially where they don't ever have cause to use Reading for interchange.

As you point out however, Reading is an important interchange and therefore unlikely to be avoided in this way.

 

[BrianW]

The thread title asks HOW to speed up services Padd to Penz; the more important question is WHY, then relatedly at what cost, and where if anywhere would it be in the priorities for improvement? The stations in Cornwall are all important, including the connections to/from 'branches', together with comfort and catering. The timings to/ from London and stations between Plymouth and Taunton are much more likely to be worthy of attention, and they are already good- approx 3h Plymouth- Padd; 2h Exeter- Padd.

 

[RT4038]

Construction of a new HS line between Exeter and Plymouth, via Newton Abbott; much of it in tunnel. Speed and resilience, to both Plymouth and Cornwall.

 

[stuu]

The thread title asks HOW to speed up services Padd to Penz; the more important question is WHY, then relatedly at what cost, and where if anywhere would it be in the priorities for improvement? The stations in Cornwall are all important, including the connections to/from 'branches', together with comfort and catering. The timings to/ from London and stations between Plymouth and Taunton are much more likely to be worthy of attention, and they are already good- approx 3h Plymouth- Padd; 2h Exeter- Padd.

The other way of looking at it is why should they be sped up at all, the passenger numbers at all the stations on the main line in Cornwall don't add up to much, especially as a lot of journeys are local anyway. What is the daily year round demand to London from Cornwall and is there a sensible benefit to be had from speeding those journeys up?

 

[irish_rail]

The thread title asks HOW to speed up services Padd to Penz; the more important question is WHY, then relatedly at what cost, and where if anywhere would it be in the priorities for improvement? The stations in Cornwall are all important, including the connections to/from 'branches', together with comfort and catering. The timings to/ from London and stations between Plymouth and Taunton are much more likely to be worthy of attention, and they are already good- approx 3h Plymouth- Padd; 2h Exeter- Padd.

Not many 3hr journey times Plymouth to London, a couple but most are about 3hr 10 to 3hr 15. Psychologically, if you can get more sub 3 hour Plymouth to London trips you could really grow the business on the route, and I suppose therein lies the problem. The trains are already full and increased passenger numbers on this route may not necessarily be seen as a good thing with many trains already at capacity.

As you point out however, Reading is an important interchange and therefore unlikely to be avoided in this waway.

For me, omitting Reading on any services is a massive no no. It is a fantastic location for changing trains with huge catchment area and is very well used by people coming from the south west for onward journies throughout the south east, south coast and Midlands. Everything should stop there. Any station omissions for me must be Taunton and or Tiverton which can be served by the semi fasts.

 

[AM9]

TBH shaving a minute here and another there just to arrive in Penzance 7 mins earlier won’t make a difference to most people. To be noticeable I think you’d need to save 15-30 minutes to be able to brag about it. To do that it would mean either superfast services omitting popular stops that people wish to use or expensive infrastructure improvements which are not going to happen. Having said that I understand that some new signal sections are being installed between Totnes and Plymouth to give extra headways.

I agree. Even shaving off 30 minutes wouldn't make it cost neutral. The route serves many markets, and apart from busy Fridays/Weekends in the holiday season, demand fits capacity pretty well.
From my first visit to Cornwall, in my late '60s, I've always used the train. So it took, 6 1/4 hours to St Ives and 5 hours to Par, both from St Albans. People I have spoken to who drive down usuallly say St Ives takes them 7+ hours with a single break 8+ with two stops assuming there are no major traffic issues. So ignoring the maniacs who leave home at 03:00 in the morning and drive nonstop, it seems that £250 for a pair of Saver Returns (or even £200 for Super Savers) is a fair deal for being slightly faster than a car with no parking issues in Cornwall. Making the journey time 30 mins less is irrelevant to such a market.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Any station omissions for me must be Taunton and or Tiverton which can be served by the semi fasts.

Agreed, However it should be noted that Taunton being in the top 3 busiest stations in the South West requires an hourly service not the previous timetable which had some 90 minute gaps.

All of Exeter, Plymouth and Taunton require a minimum of an hourly service to London and sadly there isn’t the capacity in some hours to run the ‘missing’ semi-fast services hence why Taunton must be in Penznaces to avoid a 90 minute gap. Where there are hourly semi-fasts such as in the 09.00 and 10.00 hour from London the Penzance doesn’t call.

 

[cle]

Either 15-30 minutes or crossing an hour barrier.

Notably we have 1h59 Exeter, 2h59 Plymouth and 3h59 St Austell on the 1004 fast service

Maybe if 3h59 was acquired for Truro? But otherwise the milestones are kinda there.

Agreed, However it should be noted that Taunton being in the top 3 busiest stations in the South West requires an hourly service not the previous timetable which had some 90 minute gaps.

All of Exeter, Plymouth and Taunton require a minimum of an hourly service to London and sadly there isn’t the capacity in some hours to run the ‘missing’ semi-fast services hence why Taunton must be in Penznaces to avoid a 90 minute gap. Where there are hourly semi-fasts such as in the 09.00 and 10.00 hour from London the Penzance doesn’t call.

I agree with this. In an ideal world there would be a second faster service per hour - something like:

London-Reading-Westbury-Taunton-Tiverton-Exeter-Newton Abbot, and then alternating a route, if Paignton hourly isn't worthwhile. In the Totnes/Plymouth hours, the Cornwall would skip Totnes. And the Padd-Cornwall would always skip Newton Abbot, as it would have an hourly service through this.