Tuesday 20 March 2012
Looe Line Visit Photos (20/03/2012)
As well as visiting Sandplace station, I also did a full-line recce. Here are a selection of photos, starting off with the Looe line platform at Liskeard, with the rest being of the terminus at Looe itself:
Sandplace Photos (20/03/2012)
One of the questions posed in the Department for Transport Great Western Franchise Replacement consultation document reads as follows:
"Should branch line services continue to call at all branch line stations, or could the needs of most passengers be better met by omission of some of the intermediate stops on some or all of the trains, so that the final destination is reached more quickly?"
One such station that could be affected by the answer is Sandplace, on the Looe branch line in Cornwall. Here are some photos from my visit there today:
"Should branch line services continue to call at all branch line stations, or could the needs of most passengers be better met by omission of some of the intermediate stops on some or all of the trains, so that the final destination is reached more quickly?"
One such station that could be affected by the answer is Sandplace, on the Looe branch line in Cornwall. Here are some photos from my visit there today:
Monday 19 March 2012
Lawrence Hill Platform Work Photos (19/03/2012)
Work is by Network Rail to replace station footbridge, existing platform surfaces and perimeter fencing. It should take 3 months to complete.
Monday 12 March 2012
Axminster and Plymouth suburban blues
Well, I woke up this morning raring to go, ready for another day out and about on the FGW network.
All started well enough, as I made the ever-reliable connection from my Portsmouth-Cardiff service onto the 1047 SWT service to Exeter at Salisbury. I did vaguely hear an announcement that an incoming train had been delayed due to signalling problems at Axminster, but thought to myself that the problem had probably cleared.
Wrong.
The first sign of trouble ahead was when we stopped at Chard Junction so another train could pass us there. This never, EVER happens unless there is a problem, and probably a a biggun, awaiting us. As it turned out, the delay was apparently due to Network Rail performing engineering works in the area. Then our guard added, hesitantly as if he couldn't quite believe he was actually telling us this, that NR were operating the crossing gates at Axminster manually!
I'm all for nostalgia, but not when I've got a tight connection to make...
One inevitably slow crawl past the orange-coat-massive later, followed by yet another lengthy delay at Honiton for yet another service to pass us, and we eventually made it into Exeter St Davids 30 minutes or so late.
My original plan was to have a recce at a couple of stations on the pseudo-heritage Looe line (as I said earlier, I'm all for nostalgia, and we're talking chocolate and cream heaven here) but the delay made that a bit of a non-starter.
So I decided to check out the Plymouth suburban stations instead.
If you havent been there yourself, prepare for an eye-opener. Think back to how stations like Stapleton Road in Bristol looked like a decade or so ago before the Severnside Community Rail army moved in with their planters, Bristol City Council & FGW (heavily prompted by FOSBR) chipped in with improved frequency services and upgraded station furniture, the Eastside Roots folks opened their garden centre on the disused platforms, and everyone lived happily-ever-after-ish.
This (along with earlier station garden schemes at places like Montpelier) set a template that was followed at several other Bristol area stations, giving a genuine feeling that the suburban passenger experience has significantly improved overall.
The Plymouth suburban stations BADLY need such a template to follow. Bare, uninviting & crumbling platforms, shelters where they exist (they are missing at both Devonport and Dockyard on the Plymouth-bound side) are poorly-maintained and are missing benches, the footbridge at Keyham looks like it is about to collapse at any moment, and the drainage at St Budeaux Ferry Road looks like it is poised to flood out its few passengers at any moment.
Ferry Road station does provide a rare piece of evidence of a community rail effort, but this is in the form of fading mosiacs that date back to the Wales & West era!
It's not as if there aren't examples of how it should be done relatively close at hand. The Saltash folks just across the bridge in Cornwall have made their station one to be proud of, all floral and plant displays, patio-syle areas with benches, and more useful passenger information than you can shake a stick at. If only the derelict former station building could be sorted, then it would be perfect, but that ongoing saga isn't their fault.
So come on Plymouth City Council. There's nothing wrong with pushing for more 3-hour journey services to London, or indeed better local rail services to Penzance & Exeter as I fully acknowledge you are in your GW franchise renewal lobbying, but please, PLEASE get together with FGW and experts such as Richard Burningham at the Devon & Cornwall Rail Partnership, or Richard Bickford at Saltash, to end this neglect of the local stations in your own backyard.
As the excellent Bristol and Saltash examples show, you wont regret it.
All started well enough, as I made the ever-reliable connection from my Portsmouth-Cardiff service onto the 1047 SWT service to Exeter at Salisbury. I did vaguely hear an announcement that an incoming train had been delayed due to signalling problems at Axminster, but thought to myself that the problem had probably cleared.
Wrong.
The first sign of trouble ahead was when we stopped at Chard Junction so another train could pass us there. This never, EVER happens unless there is a problem, and probably a a biggun, awaiting us. As it turned out, the delay was apparently due to Network Rail performing engineering works in the area. Then our guard added, hesitantly as if he couldn't quite believe he was actually telling us this, that NR were operating the crossing gates at Axminster manually!
I'm all for nostalgia, but not when I've got a tight connection to make...
One inevitably slow crawl past the orange-coat-massive later, followed by yet another lengthy delay at Honiton for yet another service to pass us, and we eventually made it into Exeter St Davids 30 minutes or so late.
My original plan was to have a recce at a couple of stations on the pseudo-heritage Looe line (as I said earlier, I'm all for nostalgia, and we're talking chocolate and cream heaven here) but the delay made that a bit of a non-starter.
So I decided to check out the Plymouth suburban stations instead.
If you havent been there yourself, prepare for an eye-opener. Think back to how stations like Stapleton Road in Bristol looked like a decade or so ago before the Severnside Community Rail army moved in with their planters, Bristol City Council & FGW (heavily prompted by FOSBR) chipped in with improved frequency services and upgraded station furniture, the Eastside Roots folks opened their garden centre on the disused platforms, and everyone lived happily-ever-after-ish.
This (along with earlier station garden schemes at places like Montpelier) set a template that was followed at several other Bristol area stations, giving a genuine feeling that the suburban passenger experience has significantly improved overall.
The Plymouth suburban stations BADLY need such a template to follow. Bare, uninviting & crumbling platforms, shelters where they exist (they are missing at both Devonport and Dockyard on the Plymouth-bound side) are poorly-maintained and are missing benches, the footbridge at Keyham looks like it is about to collapse at any moment, and the drainage at St Budeaux Ferry Road looks like it is poised to flood out its few passengers at any moment.
Ferry Road station does provide a rare piece of evidence of a community rail effort, but this is in the form of fading mosiacs that date back to the Wales & West era!
It's not as if there aren't examples of how it should be done relatively close at hand. The Saltash folks just across the bridge in Cornwall have made their station one to be proud of, all floral and plant displays, patio-syle areas with benches, and more useful passenger information than you can shake a stick at. If only the derelict former station building could be sorted, then it would be perfect, but that ongoing saga isn't their fault.
So come on Plymouth City Council. There's nothing wrong with pushing for more 3-hour journey services to London, or indeed better local rail services to Penzance & Exeter as I fully acknowledge you are in your GW franchise renewal lobbying, but please, PLEASE get together with FGW and experts such as Richard Burningham at the Devon & Cornwall Rail Partnership, or Richard Bickford at Saltash, to end this neglect of the local stations in your own backyard.
As the excellent Bristol and Saltash examples show, you wont regret it.
Sunday 17 May 2009
More Hard Hats And Buses
I'm not normally someone who majors on criticising weekend engineering work disruption. I recognise that the vast majority of it serves some useful purpose, and thus needs to be done. It is also obviously better than leaving the rail network to rot.
Indeed, Network Rail have just completed a set of clearly-defined and well-publicised engineering works on consecutive weekends between Bristol-Taunton and Bristol-Severn Tunnel Junction.
However, I hope I will be forgiven for being somewhat annoyed that a series of seperate engineering works on different sections of my route to Bristol combined to derail my travel plans for today.
I was considering a suggestion from the chairman of Friends Of Suburban Bristol Railways to attend a celebration of one year of improved services on the Severn Beach Line. However, to get there from Portsmouth would have involved me negiotiating:
- Line closure/diversions between Portsmouth-Southampton.
- Rail-replacement buses between Salisbury-Warminster.
- Trains avoiding Temple Meads.
I cant help but also ask why they chose to schedule three seperate engineering works on the same route on the same day as a new timetable came into effect.
As I like to make a day of it when looking around the FGW area, mucking about with the above plus arriving later than planned/leaving earlier than planned didnt really appeal to me.
So I wished FOSBR good luck with today, and hope it went well.
On a more positive note, I continue to be impressed by with how FGW are conducting themselves on the ground. Yesterday, virtually every FGW staff member seemed to be in a cheerful mood, and had a smile on their face.
Also, and not for the first time, an FGW guard offered his help regarding information about onward connections, with absolutely no prompting from me.
Now, I might not particularly need that kind of help, but if I appreciated being asked, then I'm sure a less seasoned passenger would have regarded this personal touch as a godsend.
To top it off, yesterday continued the trend of FGW trains I travel on being relatively on time.
If only they could combine with the other key players to offer a proper TransWilts service, then I could see myself becoming quite a fan...
Indeed, Network Rail have just completed a set of clearly-defined and well-publicised engineering works on consecutive weekends between Bristol-Taunton and Bristol-Severn Tunnel Junction.
However, I hope I will be forgiven for being somewhat annoyed that a series of seperate engineering works on different sections of my route to Bristol combined to derail my travel plans for today.
I was considering a suggestion from the chairman of Friends Of Suburban Bristol Railways to attend a celebration of one year of improved services on the Severn Beach Line. However, to get there from Portsmouth would have involved me negiotiating:
- Line closure/diversions between Portsmouth-Southampton.
- Rail-replacement buses between Salisbury-Warminster.
- Trains avoiding Temple Meads.
I cant help but also ask why they chose to schedule three seperate engineering works on the same route on the same day as a new timetable came into effect.
As I like to make a day of it when looking around the FGW area, mucking about with the above plus arriving later than planned/leaving earlier than planned didnt really appeal to me.
So I wished FOSBR good luck with today, and hope it went well.
On a more positive note, I continue to be impressed by with how FGW are conducting themselves on the ground. Yesterday, virtually every FGW staff member seemed to be in a cheerful mood, and had a smile on their face.
Also, and not for the first time, an FGW guard offered his help regarding information about onward connections, with absolutely no prompting from me.
Now, I might not particularly need that kind of help, but if I appreciated being asked, then I'm sure a less seasoned passenger would have regarded this personal touch as a godsend.
To top it off, yesterday continued the trend of FGW trains I travel on being relatively on time.
If only they could combine with the other key players to offer a proper TransWilts service, then I could see myself becoming quite a fan...
Wednesday 13 May 2009
Strategic Freight Network And The TransWilts Line
I have warned for some time that future increases in freight traffic over the TransWilts line could end up restricting the number of paths available for passenger services. With this in mind, I was interested to compare yesterday's DfT release entitled "Strategic Freight Network: The Longer-Term Vision" with previous rail industry statements:
Quote from Network Rail Strategic Business Plan Update 2008:
"To meet the challenge of increased growth in freight from the Southampton ports to the Midlands, the north of England and Scotland, we shall be re-evaluating elements of the former SRA Southampton – West Coast freight upgrade – capacity study, which included W10 gauge provision and revised layout options for Reading West Junction, including grade separation, upgrading and linking existing freight loops and providing additional loops at or between Didcot and Oxford. We are also evaluating the potential for an alternative route via Salisbury and Melksham to accommodate forecast growth."
Quotes from Strategic Freight Network: The Longer-Term Vision:
"As an operating principle, NR should aim to achieve through running of freight trains, seeking timetabling and signalling solutions in preference to looping. This has the potential to deliver significant environmental, operating and economic efficiencies, particularly if delivered alongside existing plans to reduce the level of delays to freight trains."
"New SFN capacity, particularly on key intermodal routes, will be required to meet industry growth forecasts, if this additional traffic is not to be forced onto the congested road network.
Routes for consideration for early capacity enhancement are likely to
include:
- Southampton to WCML – possibly with upgrades to routes and/or examination of alternative routeing options to provide capacity for growth"
Quote from the Future Of Transport White Paper:
"Because of the high up-front investment costs for rail freight, businesses using these services need to be sure about their access to the network. But this has to be balanced with the fact that freight users only pay for the cost of operating their services and not for the costs of the underlying infrastructure. Freight operators will be given greater certainty about their rights on the national network, and a group of key routes will be identified on which freight will enjoy and pay for more assured rights of access."
Quotes from Strategic Freight Network: The Longer-Term Vision:
"The 2007 Rail White Paper defined the SFN as: "a core network of trunk freight routes, capable of accommodating more and longer freight trains, with a selective ability to handle wagons with higher axle loads and greater loading gauge, integrated with and complementing the UK’s existing mixed traffic network."
"An ideal freight network would accommodate optimum size freight train travelling at appropriate line speed, without checks, over optimum routeing to commercially preferred timings. In practical terms this suggests that the SFN should:
- optimise the pattern of freight trunk routeing to minimise passenger/freight conflicts. This may lead to fewer, higher capacity trunk routes/diversionary routes but also to the definition of 'new' trunk routes. This would provide potential gains in reliability, environmental performance and operating cost savings"
So why am I particularly concerned about the possible impact on the TransWilts line?
- The TransWilts line is shown in the SFN Freight and Passenger Network Interaction map as being "interaction with lower frequency services."
- The TransWilts line is shown in Network Rail's Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy Baseline Information as being a "peak only" route for passengers.
My big fear is that the rail industry is planning for a future that includes hardly any TransWilts passenger train services. Therefore, it is vital that we get a proper TransWilts passenger rail service established as soon as possible, before decisions are made that destroy the opportunity to do so.
Please help Save The Train to do that by signing their pledge at http://www.transwilts.org.uk/pledge.html
Quote from Network Rail Strategic Business Plan Update 2008:
"To meet the challenge of increased growth in freight from the Southampton ports to the Midlands, the north of England and Scotland, we shall be re-evaluating elements of the former SRA Southampton – West Coast freight upgrade – capacity study, which included W10 gauge provision and revised layout options for Reading West Junction, including grade separation, upgrading and linking existing freight loops and providing additional loops at or between Didcot and Oxford. We are also evaluating the potential for an alternative route via Salisbury and Melksham to accommodate forecast growth."
Quotes from Strategic Freight Network: The Longer-Term Vision:
"As an operating principle, NR should aim to achieve through running of freight trains, seeking timetabling and signalling solutions in preference to looping. This has the potential to deliver significant environmental, operating and economic efficiencies, particularly if delivered alongside existing plans to reduce the level of delays to freight trains."
"New SFN capacity, particularly on key intermodal routes, will be required to meet industry growth forecasts, if this additional traffic is not to be forced onto the congested road network.
Routes for consideration for early capacity enhancement are likely to
include:
- Southampton to WCML – possibly with upgrades to routes and/or examination of alternative routeing options to provide capacity for growth"
Quote from the Future Of Transport White Paper:
"Because of the high up-front investment costs for rail freight, businesses using these services need to be sure about their access to the network. But this has to be balanced with the fact that freight users only pay for the cost of operating their services and not for the costs of the underlying infrastructure. Freight operators will be given greater certainty about their rights on the national network, and a group of key routes will be identified on which freight will enjoy and pay for more assured rights of access."
Quotes from Strategic Freight Network: The Longer-Term Vision:
"The 2007 Rail White Paper defined the SFN as: "a core network of trunk freight routes, capable of accommodating more and longer freight trains, with a selective ability to handle wagons with higher axle loads and greater loading gauge, integrated with and complementing the UK’s existing mixed traffic network."
"An ideal freight network would accommodate optimum size freight train travelling at appropriate line speed, without checks, over optimum routeing to commercially preferred timings. In practical terms this suggests that the SFN should:
- optimise the pattern of freight trunk routeing to minimise passenger/freight conflicts. This may lead to fewer, higher capacity trunk routes/diversionary routes but also to the definition of 'new' trunk routes. This would provide potential gains in reliability, environmental performance and operating cost savings"
So why am I particularly concerned about the possible impact on the TransWilts line?
- The TransWilts line is shown in the SFN Freight and Passenger Network Interaction map as being "interaction with lower frequency services."
- The TransWilts line is shown in Network Rail's Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy Baseline Information as being a "peak only" route for passengers.
My big fear is that the rail industry is planning for a future that includes hardly any TransWilts passenger train services. Therefore, it is vital that we get a proper TransWilts passenger rail service established as soon as possible, before decisions are made that destroy the opportunity to do so.
Please help Save The Train to do that by signing their pledge at http://www.transwilts.org.uk/pledge.html
Monday 11 May 2009
Rail Crisis? Who You Gonna Call, Dave?
As those who know me will tell you, I have been predicting that the day of reckoning will come soon, as the collapse of the franchise system sinks the rail budget. I have also predicted for quite a while that this could lead to a new "Beeching" scenario.
Here is a very relevant article (link below.)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/may/10/first-group-rail-expansion-budget
Key points:
- East Coast/SWT franchises on the point of collapse.
- First may end FGW franchise in 2013, rather than taking up their option of extending it to 2016. This would save them £826.6m in franchise payments.
A quote from Imperial College transport professor Stephen Glaister neatly sums up the situation:
"The deal that the government had in divvying up the cost of the railway between the taxpayer and the farepayer will have to be revisited. Somebody will have to pay more than they thought, or the scale of the railways will have to be dramatically cut back,"
Here are some archive Glaister quotes, starting in January 2007 (link below) :
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2007/01/planes_trains_and_the_road_to.html
"One option put forward by some analysts is to reduce the amount of money spent on the relatively little-used rural services. The investment per passenger mile for these lines is huge, with many of the trains maintained to the same standard as 90mph mainline services.
Cutting rural lines would prompt accusations that the Government is repeating the act of Dr Beecham (their spelling mistake), who axed nearly one quarter of the system 40 years ago. But the Government should at least raise the issue by demonstrating to the taxpayer what some of these lines are costing them, according to Professor Stephen Glaister of Imperial College.Last year's Eddington committee, which examined the future of public transport, made the same observation."
And the following in August 2008 (link below) :
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2008/08/romantics_love_high_speed_trai.html
"Professor Stephen Glaister, a transport expert at Imperial College, said there was scant evidence of a market for high-speed rail. More than two-thirds of rail journeys originated and ended in London, which indicated that the capacity problem was on short-distance commutes and not long distance lines. In the 15 years it would take to build a high-speed route to Birmingham and beyond billions of pounds could be spent on improving the existing network.
"There is an argument for spending a lot more money on the existing low-speed railway service. There are not enough people making long journeys for high-speed rail to make sense."
Plus this from April 2009 (link below) :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/13/trains-railways-branch-line-closures
"Something has to give," says Stephen Glaister, a transport professor at Imperial College, London. "The sensible thing might be to reduce the level of service. That would save some costs. Or the taxpayer's contribution has to go up as clear as night follows day."
It is rumoured that the Conservative plan for dealing with the crisis is as follows:
- Give the TOCs far more freedom from the specification, thus allowing them to reduce services/service levels and improve their ability to afford the premium payments. Also, by putting service level policy in the hands of the TOCs, it means that a Conservative DfT could avoid blame for service/service level reductions.
- Cut out a large chunk of infrastructure expansion/improvement plans, blaming the financial situation they inherit from Labour.
I think a certain professor can expect a call from No10 soon after May 2010...
Here is a very relevant article (link below.)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/may/10/first-group-rail-expansion-budget
Key points:
- East Coast/SWT franchises on the point of collapse.
- First may end FGW franchise in 2013, rather than taking up their option of extending it to 2016. This would save them £826.6m in franchise payments.
A quote from Imperial College transport professor Stephen Glaister neatly sums up the situation:
"The deal that the government had in divvying up the cost of the railway between the taxpayer and the farepayer will have to be revisited. Somebody will have to pay more than they thought, or the scale of the railways will have to be dramatically cut back,"
Here are some archive Glaister quotes, starting in January 2007 (link below) :
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2007/01/planes_trains_and_the_road_to.html
"One option put forward by some analysts is to reduce the amount of money spent on the relatively little-used rural services. The investment per passenger mile for these lines is huge, with many of the trains maintained to the same standard as 90mph mainline services.
Cutting rural lines would prompt accusations that the Government is repeating the act of Dr Beecham (their spelling mistake), who axed nearly one quarter of the system 40 years ago. But the Government should at least raise the issue by demonstrating to the taxpayer what some of these lines are costing them, according to Professor Stephen Glaister of Imperial College.Last year's Eddington committee, which examined the future of public transport, made the same observation."
And the following in August 2008 (link below) :
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2008/08/romantics_love_high_speed_trai.html
"Professor Stephen Glaister, a transport expert at Imperial College, said there was scant evidence of a market for high-speed rail. More than two-thirds of rail journeys originated and ended in London, which indicated that the capacity problem was on short-distance commutes and not long distance lines. In the 15 years it would take to build a high-speed route to Birmingham and beyond billions of pounds could be spent on improving the existing network.
"There is an argument for spending a lot more money on the existing low-speed railway service. There are not enough people making long journeys for high-speed rail to make sense."
Plus this from April 2009 (link below) :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/13/trains-railways-branch-line-closures
"Something has to give," says Stephen Glaister, a transport professor at Imperial College, London. "The sensible thing might be to reduce the level of service. That would save some costs. Or the taxpayer's contribution has to go up as clear as night follows day."
It is rumoured that the Conservative plan for dealing with the crisis is as follows:
- Give the TOCs far more freedom from the specification, thus allowing them to reduce services/service levels and improve their ability to afford the premium payments. Also, by putting service level policy in the hands of the TOCs, it means that a Conservative DfT could avoid blame for service/service level reductions.
- Cut out a large chunk of infrastructure expansion/improvement plans, blaming the financial situation they inherit from Labour.
I think a certain professor can expect a call from No10 soon after May 2010...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)