New Go-op train service between Swindon, Taunton and Weston-super-Mare approved by ORR

[AlastairFraser]

The line was originally double track (broad gauge), and had triangular junctions both ends (although those at Thingley Junction were a world war 2 addition (there were vast navy gun shells, and D Day invasion ammunition stockpiled in the former underground quarries near Corsham).

I believe Go-Op wants to use part of the Admiralty sidings at Thingley for a servicing depot (a couple of sidings are still there, although rusty) along with small building that used to have track through it.

As it stands there is nowadays a single lead crossing at both ends, so northbound trains (from Trowbridge) block the line towards Bath if they cannot enter the single line section (and there are generally 3-4 passenger trains per hour + one freight through Trowbridge, each way). The signalling on line through Trowbridge is 2 aspect with distants, and with small halts like Avoncliffe effectively has a maximum of one train about every 8 mins (nearer 10 mins if not higher performance, or same type). With 4-5 trains each way per hour though Trowbridge not that much slack with the rather limited 1984 era signalling

South of Trowbridge it is not uncommon for local trains to be delayed waiting for platform at Westbury (only 3 of the 4 platforms are in use, following rationalisation about 40 years ago). And even though Westbury is now busier, the upcoming 4 week closure from Christmas doesn't restore the 4th platform to ease the waiting for platform.

Ideally need a loop just north of Bradford junctions, or double lead junction restored and short bit of double line, so that trains for Melksham line do not block the line to Bath, and then another loop near Melksham (cheaper if near, but not at station as platform was demolished).

Might be appropriate to link photos of Melksham station

Old Pictures of Melksham Station

Old Pictures of Melksham Station

www.savethetrain.org.uk

And a link to photos of the sidings at Thingley Junction where the proposed depot will be

Thingley Junction.

In the early 1980s,the overnight Glasgow to Bristol sleeper service has been diverted between Gloucester and Bristol.Having travelled via Swindon,the train is seen here passing Thingley Junction,near Chippenham,as it heads for Bristol behind an unidentified class 45 loco.

www.flickr.com

rudloescene.co.uk - Thingley - Jun 2018

New page

www.rudloescene.co.uk

Thanks for the insight into what could be done, this is perhaps useful for a second stage of any Go-Op plans.
However, what could be done without any modification of the existing infrastructure (I agree that you'd have to build the maintenance area at the Thingley Jcn sidings, but apart from that?).

Bradford Jn to Thingley is treated as a single absolute block section in planning terms. If you aren't stopping at Melksham you could probably squeeze 2tph each way but it would be incredibly tight. Hawkeridge to Bradford Jn is a 4 minute headway and 6 minutes on to Bathampton Jn.

Does that mean you could fit 1tph in the hours that the TransWilts service doesn't run, with stops at Melksham?

 

[daodao]

Population of Langport + Huish Episcopi (the two parishes have essentially merged) in 1961 was Approx. 1700. Population today? Just over 6000. Population of Somerton in 1961, 2100.

These places are both still tiny. A station at Somerton might be warranted as a railhead for Street and Glastonbury, although even then I suspect the business case is poor. With regard to the Go-op proposal, is there a costed business case supporting their proposal? I cannot envisage significant potential passenger custom in rural Somerset/Wiltshire where even the larger towns are all fairly small, most with a population well under 50k.

 

[Snow1964]

These places are both still tiny. A station at Somerton might be warranted as a railhead for Street and Glastonbury, although even then I suspect the business case is poor. With regard to the Go-op proposal, is there a costed business case supporting their proposal? I cannot envisage significant potential passenger custom in rural Somerset/Wiltshire where even the larger towns are all fairly small, most with a population well under 50k.

Since the closure of the local stations : Keinton Mandeville, Charlton Mackrell, Somerton, Long Sutton and Pitney, Langport East etc in the early 1960s the population has grown.

Keinton Mandeville is still fairly small and most of the surrounding areas probably best described as multiple big villages. So reopening station not justified.

Charlton Mackrell on its own would be deemed small, but if start including Charlton Adam, Ilchester, Yeovilton, Keinton Mandeville and other small villages then clearly above 5000 population

Somerton is nearest to Street and Glastonbury (and I mean the town, not the rural area at Pilton where festival is held), together population with other villages is over 25,000

Long Sutton and Pitney is still rural not justified

Langport East, although town has grown, even if include nearby Curry Rivel would really be to small.

Potentially a reopened station in Somerton area could be serving 40,000 people, who currently have big gap from Castle Cary to Taunton.

Creech St Michael, another closed station, but the area includes nearby Ruishton, and is all rather merging into an extended Taunton (Taunton has extended back to M5, and now other side of M5), there has to be a question of it Taunton is a good railhead for this, or if a reopened station (which is very close to jct 25 of M5) would be better than having to drive through traffic laden Taunton. It is also worth noting that plans exist to rebuild A358 between jct 25 of M5 and Horton Cross so would soon be even better drive to railhead near M5 junction.

GWR only serves some of the stations on this line every 2 hours, and even that is often less due to cancellations and delays, if it is not going to improve things for a growing area, not really surprising someone else sees it as potential

 

[irish_rail]

GWR only serves some of the stations on this line every 2 hours, and even that is often less due to cancellations and delays, if it is not going to improve things for a growing area, not really surprising someone else sees it as popotential

The issue with this is that the current 2 hourly "stoppers" already routinely delay the following "fast" in the down direction, and I'm talking about nearly all the time. As nice as it would be to better serve this area, when looked at in terms of passenger numbers, you really are slowing down services for the great majority to appease a tiny minority.

 

[Hartington]

I live in Castle Cary. Have done for nearly 20 years. It was sleepy and relatively uninhabitated. Compared to many places it still is but things are changing.

When I first moved here the car park was maybe 70 places. It's now over 300 and it's not just a car park, there are multiple 20 minute "kiss and ride" spaces. It is very well used.

Station Road (from the station to town) has 4 recent housing developments (not all complete). If you pass through the station look at the down side where there is a nice green field opposite the station which has recently been granted planning. There is a similar sized field that has an application pending at the other end of town.

Several surrounding towns (Wincanton in particular) have expanded in the past 5 years.

There is an old estate that has been turned into a high end visitor experience with hotel rooms costing over £700/night. Have a look for the "Newt in Somerset". They have rebuilt the old milk factory on the down side and turned it into a farm shop/cheese factory/restaurant which they call "The Creamery". The Newt runs day trips to their estate from London and in summer one of the nominally non stops to Exeter makes a satuday stop to provide sufficient capacity in first class.

I haven't seen actual plans but there have been several cryptic references to providing accessible facilities to replace having to use the barrow crossing.

As for Go-op I remember a meeting at the Pen Mill Hotel not long after I arrived. If memory serves they were suggesting Exeter/Honiton/Yeovil/Westbury/Swindon? I came away feeling sceptical. As others have said they have tried all sorts of other routings and the cynic in me can't help think that ORR has given them a chance to hang themselves! On the other hand it may be about putting pressure on GWR. Until about 2 years ago the service was nowhere near "clockface". Now, it's supposed to be every 2 hourly on both routes. Lovely if it works but, particularly at weekends we get dire warings about how staffing issues mean they won't be able to run the full service. During the week it can be "timekeepimg, what timekeeping"!

 

[SirDanielGooch]

Ideally there would be two stations reopened here, one for Langport and one for Somerton to help serve both. However all proposals seem to focus on one station for the whole area, putting it in between these two settlements, which actually makes it inconvenient for both places, especially if you're only travelling locally. Glastonbury & Street residents are probably too far from the railway to utilise any station in this area for local services, although if one of them got some London trains they'd opt for that over Castle Cary.

I believe the preferred option put forward was for the station to be in Langport, to the east of the old station site just off the A-road to Yeovil. The other options under consideration are the old Somerton station site, or a park and ride option on the old Upton halt site approximately halfway between the two with a bus link. Ideal world yes you’d have 2 small stations, but realistically it’ll be a push to just get 1. The case for that (or both) stations would be massively strengthened by this Go-Op attempt succeeding.

It’s worth weighing it up against the competition. For me based in Langport, driving into Taunton town centre (either to catch a train, or for visiting Taunton itself) on paper takes 25/30 mins, but with the complete logjam of traffic that is the norm, I have to budget an hour. To catch the bus takes an hour if it runs on time, if it’s caught in the traffic it can take 90 minutes at times.

The train would take 15 minutes. It would be a no brainer.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I believe the preferred option put forward was for the station to be in Langport, to the east of the old station site just off the A-road to Yeovil. The other options under consideration are the old Somerton station site, or a park and ride option on the old Upton halt site approximately halfway between the two with a bus link. Ideal world yes you’d have 2 small stations, but realistically it’ll be a push to just get 1. The case for that (or both) stations would be massively strengthened by this Go-Op attempt succeeding.

It’s worth weighing it up against the competition. For me based in Langport, driving into Taunton town centre (either to catch a train, or for visiting Taunton itself) on paper takes 25/30 mins, but with the complete logjam of traffic that is the norm, I have to budget an hour. To catch the bus takes an hour if it runs on time, if it’s caught in the traffic it can take 90 minutes at times.

The train would take 15 minutes. It would be a no brainer.

How long would it be to reach the Somerton station from Langport? I think the proximity of Glasto/Street to Somerton helps the case significantly, given the quickest route from Glasto/Street to Langport passes through Somerton anyway (according to Google Maps). One issue is that Somerton's old station looks hemmed in, so the parking needed would have to be a 5 min walk away on the site of Bedlands Gate Farm, at best.

 

[SirDanielGooch]

How long would it be to reach the Somerton station from Langport? I think the proximity of Glasto/Street to Somerton helps the case significantly, given the quickest route from Glasto/Street to Langport passes through Somerton anyway (according to Google Maps). One issue is that Somerton's old station looks hemmed in, so the parking needed would have to be a 5 min walk away on the site of Bedlands Gate Farm, at best.

5/10 minute drive at most between Somerton and Langport site. The current bus route between the two is pretty poor though with only 1 every 2 hours. It takes 20/25 minutes to drive from Glastonbury/Street to Langport, closer to 15 minutes to Somerton. Street to Castle Cary is similarly about 25 minutes, but a very patchy bus service.

Basically, Langport probably has the better site for local access and room to build the car parking. Somerton would be a bit more convenient for those driving in and for current bus routes and could have a wider draw. But the Somerton site likely poses more challenges for the parking situation for those parking and riding.

 

[cle]

It feels a bit 'nowhere to nowhere' - with no offense to anywhere en route. If it maybe got to Oxford on the one end, and Exeter at the other, it might be interesting. Especially with the new Devon stations - I don't get the Weston leg though.

Worth a shot of course, and hopefully better units are available one day... remember there are lots of meandering, local and regional, quite random routes in Japan which are very well used locally (schools, old people etc) and for connections - this might find a similar niche. And feed lots of fasts at Swindon, I guess.

Trowbridge is definitely underserved. And I did think there was scope for additional services (there, Bradford and Warminster) after the Waterloo-s left, all fairly busy for not being on mainlines.

 

[Goop Coop]

Hi, I'm Alex Lawrie - I'm the Chair of Go-op, so hopefully I'm fairly well placed to answer some of your questions and address the points above.

It feels a bit 'nowhere to nowhere'

None taken, speaking as a Taunton resident. Do bear in mind that we are not trying to do the same thing as many other open access operators and maximise profits by serving a prestigious destination (which probably has plenty of trains going there already). Our goal is take towns and routes that very limited rail services (eg 1tp2h) and bring them up to a level where people will actually find that they meet their needs for travel (eg 1tph). So if we are connecting relatively neglected and underrated settlements, well, that's us doing our job.

The issue with this is that the current 2 hourly "stoppers" already routinely delay the following "fast" in the down direction

No question, there are real issues with performance in the area - too many delays and cancellations. However, I'm not convinced that congestion is the root cause. Other factors - staffing issues, supply of spare parts, underinvestment, long term sickness - have all played their part in a perfect storm for the railways in recent years. We're here to help, not hinder - we're training new drivers, refurbishing rolling stock and trying to better align the interests of all the stakeholders.
I would also add that we've good reason to make sure the timetable performs well in this respect - passengers on those stopping trains will likely be wanting to change on to the fast trains, and vice versa. These are not two unrelated sets of passengers we're talking about!

they have tried all sorts of other routings and the cynic in me can't help think that ORR has given them a chance to hang themselves!

Ok, that is a pretty fair summary of our progress to date. However, the thing about being a co-operative is that we serve at the pleasure of our (potential) service users. If Somerset and Wiltshire residents get behind this, it'll succeed. If they don't... it is much harder. Simple as that really: we are powered by solidarity.

GWR only serves some of the stations on this line every 2 hours, and even that is often less due to cancellations and delays, if it is not going to improve things for a growing area, not really surprising someone else sees it as potential

I have no wish to criticise GWR who deliver the trains that they are asked to deliver in their service specification, and who are wrestling with challenges that we've not yet had to confront ourselves (other than as theoretical problems). But yes, that's exactly it: we do think there is untapped potential in our region that the planners in Whitehall haven't acknowledged. And let's not forget that Somerset and Wiltshire have some big advantages - relative to the rest of the UK, we're not short of money, skills or community spirit. Who should we be looking to for better rail services, if not ourselves?

 

[SirDanielGooch]

Oh Lord, I was so hopeful about this project, right up until the CEO says their plan to make this succeed is to be “powered by solidarity”. Not very reassuring.

Genuine questions that I, as a very hopeful Langport resident, would like answers to:

-Where would the rolling stock for these services be maintained and stabled?
-What is the plan for staffing and driver recruitment?
-If initial passenger numbers are lower than expected, what is the financial plan to keep the service running while attracting new passengers?
-What contingency is being planned for the inevitable unreliability of an aging fleet of 153s?

Very much believe there is an untapped potential here for a local service to succeed, especially if Langport/Somerton station is built, but talk of solidarity and community spirit doesn’t solve anything.

 

[Goop Coop]

Timetabling things carefully is great on paper, but in reality it will be problematic for this particular route.

Yes indeed. The ORR was not just concerned that we had a compliant timetable, they also gave us a proper grilling on our performance management too. We are well aware that we'll need to have a disproportionate level of control capacity relative to our size, and a culture of precision and resilience, to maintain performance levels on the route. But bear in mind that the challenges were already there - the Westbury area advanced timetable study in 2022 involved us, but it was triggered by the additional services from Bristol. Performance management at Westbury needed to shift up a gear, with or without us.

Bradford Jn to Thingley is treated as a single absolute block section in planning terms. If you aren't stopping at Melksham you could probably squeeze 2tph each way but it would be incredibly tight. Hawkeridge to Bradford Jn is a 4 minute headway and 6 minutes on to Bathampton Jn.

That's very well put. We really wanted to offer Melksham 1tph throughout the day, but the challenges are immense. Not only the occupation of the block section, but also the complex mix of different operators rights that makes it hard to run clockface timetables. However, just because something is hard doesn't mean there's no value to attempting it. We can definitely take Melksham from seven trains a day to twelve, and that's a big difference. And unless someone uses what capacity there is on the branch, it's very hard to make the case for the infrastructure improvements that would increase capacity further.

 

[Bertie the bus]

- we're training new drivers, refurbishing rolling stock and trying to better align the interests of all the stakeholders.

To pick up on this 1 point - 'we're training new drivers', does that mean you already employ trainee drivers and are currently in the process of training them? That would have been a brave move without ORR approval for the service to go ahead. Or does it mean you will train new drivers? If so how does training new drivers correlate with a proposed service start date of this time next year?

 

[Goop Coop]

Oh Lord, I was so hopeful about this project, right up until the CEO says their plan to make this succeed is to be “powered by solidarity”. Not very reassuring.

Too much? Well, it's probably as well that I'm not the CEO then. I know my limits...

Genuine questions that I, as a very hopeful Langport resident, would like answers to:

-Where would the rolling stock for these services be maintained and stabled?

As noted elsewhere, we proposed Thingley Junction in our application. However, that application was submitted two years ago, and so we are reviewing the present available capacity.

-What is the plan for staffing and driver recruitment?

We have a small group of apprentice drivers that we will begin training in the new year. They'll be joined by a second cohort of trainees later in the year, and by a smaller number of experienced drivers as we begin building route knowledge.

-If initial passenger numbers are lower than expected, what is the financial plan to keep the service running while attracting new passengers?

We do have a margin of safety built in to our funding target, and we rely only on a 'base case' demand forecast which assumes (for example) that the historic trend of increasing use of rail stopped in 2019 never to return; and that passenger numbers will never recover from the decline since the pandemic.

-What contingency is being planned for the inevitable unreliability of an aging fleet of 153s?

Working with old rolling stock is an occupational hazard for any new open access operator. We certainly wish to upgrade to modern bi- or tri-mode units as soon as profitability permits, and in the meantime a policy of just-in-case rather than just-in-time will be important in procurement of spares and light maintenance.

Very much believe there is an untapped potential here for a local service to succeed, especially if Langport/Somerton station is built, but talk of solidarity and community spirit doesn’t solve anything.

It doesn't, that's quite true. But it does bring the problem within reach of practical and rigorous people who can solve it. Technocracy and democracy are often set up as opposed to one another, but that's a choice - with a bit of care and thought, they can be complementary, forming an effective partnership.

 

[SirDanielGooch]

Too much? Well, it's probably as well that I'm not the CEO then. I know my limits...

As noted elsewhere, we proposed Thingley Junction in our application. However, that application was submitted two years ago, and so we are reviewing the present available capacity.

We have a small group of apprentice drivers that we will begin training in the new year. They'll be joined by a second cohort of trainees later in the year, and by a smaller number of experienced drivers as we begin building route knowledge.

We do have a margin of safety built in to our funding target, and we rely only on a 'base case' demand forecast which assumes (for example) that the historic trend of increasing use of rail stopped in 2019 never to return; and that passenger numbers will never recover from the decline since the pandemic.

Working with old rolling stock is an occupational hazard for any new open access operator. We certainly wish to upgrade to modern bi- or tri-mode units as soon as profitability permits, and in the meantime a policy of just-in-case rather than just-in-time will be important in procurement of spares and light maintenance.

It doesn't, that's quite true. But it does bring the problem within reach of practical and rigorous people who can solve it. Technocracy and democracy are often set up as opposed to one another, but that's a choice - with a bit of care and thought, they can be complementary, forming an effective partnership.

Many thanks for replying. Sorry to be glib about these things but I’ve seen too many good ideas go to waste due to lack of detailed planning and preparation, and too much faith in solidarity and such things.

Glad to hear about the driver apprenticeships already underway, such skills training is valuable even if this project falls through. Again, I sincerely hope this project succeeds and to be catching a Go-Op train from Langport station some time in the future!

 

[irish_rail]

Yes indeed. The ORR was not just concerned that we had a compliant timetable, they also gave us a proper grilling on our performance management too. We are well aware that we'll need to have a disproportionate level of control capacity relative to our size, and a culture of precision and resilience, to maintain performance levels on the route. But bear in mind that the challenges were already there - the Westbury area advanced timetable study in 2022 involved us, but it was triggered by the additional services from Bristol. Performance management at Westbury needed to shift up a gear, with or without us.

That's very well put. We really wanted to offer Melksham 1tph throughout the day, but the challenges are immense. Not only the occupation of the block section, but also the complex mix of different operators rights that makes it hard to run clockface timetables. However, just because something is hard doesn't mean there's no value to attempting it. We can definitely take Melksham from seven trains a day to twelve, and that's a big difference. And unless someone uses what capacity there is on the branch, it's very hard to make the case for the infrastructure improvements that would increase capacity further.

Thanks for your reply. To be clear though, I am referring to delays that are of GWRs making (not your potential operation). At present, there is scope, sometimes at least, to make up lost time if a GWR service leaves London or Reading late. My concern, is that this will be lost when your on time trains simply get in the way of the intercities. Of course this isn't a problem of your making, but I feel until GWR give sufficient priority to the Penzance route, then the current situation of frequent late running on the B and H will continue, and through no fault of your own, your on time services will get in the way and cause much longer delays to long distance trains.

 

[Snow1964]

Thanks for your reply. To be clear though, I am referring to delays that are of GWRs making (not your potential operation). At present, there is scope, sometimes at least, to make up lost time if a GWR service leaves London or Reading late. My concern, is that this will be lost when your on time trains simply get in the way of the intercities. Of course this isn't a problem of your making, but I feel until GWR give sufficient priority to the Penzance route, then the current situation of frequent late running on the B and H will continue, and through no fault of your own, your on time services will get in the way and cause much longer delays to long distance trains.

I see where you are coming from, but the idea of ruining a new operators on-time timetabling because someone else fails to arrive at start of section on time seems wrong.

Perhaps GWR need to move the places with recovery allowance to start of shared route, (as in not change length of time, but tweak locations, along the B&H)

 

[geoffk]

Excellent, will be interesting to see what rolling stock they get for it (IIRC they were floating the idea of 153s initially). This should also provide a catalyst for a new station in the Langport-Somerton area.

If there is spare diesel stock sitting in sidings, then surely priority should be given to ensuring the existing TOCs are properly resourced rather than allocating it to a speculative venture like this. The 175s coming to GWR may not eliminate the short-forms we see daily on the Exmouth line, for example.

 

[Bartsimho]

If there is spare diesel stock sitting in sidings, then surely priority should be given to ensuring the existing TOCs are properly resourced rather than allocating it to a speculative venture like this. The 175s coming to GWR may not eliminate the short-forms we see daily on the Exmouth line.

Depends who owns the stock and the maintenance capabilities

 

[Bertie the bus]

If there is spare diesel stock sitting in sidings, then surely priority should be given to ensuring the existing TOCs are properly resourced rather than allocating it to a speculative venture like this. The 175s coming to GWR may not eliminate the short-forms we see daily on the Exmouth line, for example.

Why would an existing TOC want some manky old 153s that require a load of work doing to them? Regardless of the answer I don't think there is much doubt there will be the same number of available rancid stored 153s in a year's time as there are now.

 

[cle]

Better to start up with something, and the average joe won't know, especially if they aren't in single formation - as the giveaway!

If you gutted them and added new seats, very deep clean etc - and ran as 2-3 car trains, many would be oblivious. 150/6s and 165s will come to the market eventually.

 

[43096]

I see where you are coming from, but the idea of ruining a new operators on-time timetabling because someone else fails to arrive at start of section on time seems wrong.

Perhaps GWR need to move the places with recovery allowance to start of shared route, (as in not change length of time, but tweak locations, along the B&H)

Can I suggest a simpler alternative for GWR? Just run the trains on time in the first place.

 

[Bertie the bus]

If you gutted them and added new seats, very deep clean etc - and ran as 2-3 car trains, many would be oblivious. 150/6s and 165s will come to the market eventually.

None of that is going to happen. Even if this service does start they have no plans to run them in multiple or use 156s or 165s. With their stated budget it is also very, very unlikely the 153s will be gutted and given new seats.

 

[IanXC]

Working with old rolling stock is an occupational hazard for any new open access operator. We certainly wish to upgrade to modern bi- or tri-mode units as soon as profitability permits, and in the meantime a policy of just-in-case rather than just-in-time will be important in procurement of spares and light maintenance.

As long as you pick up some staff with long term experience of 153 operation, then *if* you run them in pairs, then you've probably got a better chance than plenty of other Sprinter operators. As a pair not only do they have redundancy, but, worst case, you can run one around the other and bury whatever defect is causing the problem.

For whatever reason Network Rail's 153s run on their own, leading to farces such as the on on the Liverpool Street - Norwich route.

 

[cle]

None of that is going to happen. Even if this service does start they have no plans to run them in multiple or use 156s or 165s. With their stated budget it is also very, very unlikely the 153s will be gutted and given new seats.

so what is going to happen, Bertie?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

so what is going to happen, Bertie?

They have already stated that they've drawn inspiration from TfW, who's 153/3s are largely the same as they've always been, just with an accessible toilet and larger wheelchair space.

 

[Bertie the bus]

so what is going to happen, Bertie?

There is no need to guess or for me to explain. Their plans are all in writing in their application on the ORR website.

 

[The exile]

Since 1930 or thereabouts, British railways started closing unremunerative rural lines and minor stations on main lines that got in the way of faster through trains, but many lingered on. It needed Beeching and his report "The reshaping of British Railways" to complete this process, although some lines and stations that should have been closed escaped the axe (and vice-versa). Re-introducing such a service, as this Go-op company proposes, would be futile. For reference, the sparse service calling at Langport and Somerton stations comprised a mere 5 railmotors daily (except Sundays) in 1910 and 4 trains daily (except Sundays) in 1961, the year before their closure.

Whatever the merits or otherwise of this case, using stats from 1910 or even 1961 tells us very little. Not only have populations grown, but demographics have changed as has the demand for mobility. I bet that in 1910 the majority of the population of those Somerset towns /villages had neither set foot in Bristol, Bath or London nor could they imagine why people would want to (maybe exaggerating a bit). Not that far away, only 40-odd years ago Keynsham and Oldfield Park barely scraped into double figures when counting the number of stops daily if you combined the two. Now it’s a 2tph hour service and on the peak train I often use, Oldfield Park has higher usage than Bath itself. Obviously they’re not directly comparable…

.

 

[daodao]

Whatever the merits or otherwise of this case, using stats from 1910 or even 1961 tells us very little. Not only have populations grown, but demographics have changed as has the demand for mobility. I bet that in 1910 the majority of the population of those Somerset towns /villages had neither set foot in Bristol, Bath or London nor could they imagine why people would want to (maybe exaggerating a bit). Not that far away, only 40-odd years ago Keynsham and Oldfield Park barely scraped into double figures when counting the number of stops daily if you combined the two. Now it’s a 2tph hour service and on the peak train I often use, Oldfield Park has higher usage than Bath itself. Obviously they’re not directly comparable…

Railways need to concentrate on what they are best doing, namely carrying large number of passengers between cities and from local suburban areas into major cities, for which subsidies may be needed but which may be justified by the wider societal benefits. For local services within and around larger cities, a reasonable frequency (minimum 2 tph) is needed to encourage use. They also have a role in carrying bulk freight point-to-point over longer distances. By contrast, maintaining unremunerative rural lines and minor stations on main lines in rural areas to run local services is a waste of money. IMO, the Go-op proposal is a futile attempt to resurrect a concept that was doomed more than 60 years ago.

The Bath-Bristol service that you mention is a local service into a major city from a neighbouring smaller city and the development of a 2 tph service in this part of Somerset is appropriate. A similar comment would apply to the Weston-Bristol service. However, the rest of Somerset is a largely rural county and has neither the population density nor proximity to a major conurbation to merit local rail service development. Somerton may have given its name to the county of Somerset and in the middle ages been its county town, but it is still a very small place in a rural area far from a major city.

 

[The exile]

The Bath-Bristol service that you mention is a local service into a major city from a neighbouring smaller city and the development of a 2 tph service in this part of Somerset is appropriate. A similar comment would apply to the Weston-Bristol service.

I think you overlooked my first sentence- the point was that quoting service provision from 60 or 110 years ago tells us nothing. The reasons for a poor service in 1961 may still apply (and I would agree that in this case they probably do), but equally things may have changed dramatically. “Accepted wisdom” in the 1970s and early 80s was that Keynsham & Oldfield Park merited the minimal service they got. At the time, accepted wisdom was probably right - but times (and people) change. Incidentally, getting people out of their cars is also something railways (and trams) manage which buses rarely can.