October 2007 Meeting in Taunton

Guest speaker: Julian Crow, Regional Manager (West of England), First Great Western, "What’s going on in First Great Western?"

Julian Crow explained the background to the Greater Western Franchise specification, which had been devised by the Department for Transport (DfT) at a time when the Government believed the costs of the railway industry were spiralling out of control. FGW had considered the specification to be "somewhat deficient" and had therefore undertaken a Consultation exercise with stakeholders, with a view to achieving a Timetable closer to what people wanted. The retention of the Exeter- Paddington semi-fasts, which had been removed in the original specification, was one of the successes of the Consultation.

Although FGW’s December 2006 Timetable had been a great improvement on what DfT had specified, it had still disappointed a great many people. FGW was therefore revising the Timetable in December 2007; most of the changes would be outside the South West but cross-Bristol services would be restored to the pattern which had operated prior to the December 2006 alterations.

Infrastructure and Fleet were the main factors which had adversely affected FGW’s Performance. FGW currently ran over more 1970s track than did most franchises because a great deal of the trackwork dated from the introduction of HSTs. Network Rail now had a very productive High Output track renewal vehicle based at Taunton but that Company currently had difficulties at the Thames Valley end of the patch where it suffered from a 30 % vacancy gap.

The replacement of Paxman Ventura engines in HSTs by the MTU variety had doubled the reliability of the sets which had been re-engined. The internal refurbishment of HSTs had received a mixed reaction but the layout of more seats and fewer tables in Standard Class was inevitable given the franchise requirement to increase seating capacity.

In order to improve the reliability of the former Wessex Trains fleet, FGW had moved maintenance from Cardiff to Bristol. Unfortunately the completion of its new depot at St. Philip’s Marsh had been delayed when the contractor went into liquidation. It was now almost complete following a new contract.

Refurbishment of the ex Wessex fleet had just begun. £11m would now be spent instead of a planned £2m because of the mechanical state of the trains. Another imminent problem was the transfer of 11 ex First Transpennine Class 158s to Northern Rail. The only stock available in lieu were 142s, which FGW anticipated leasing for about two years before either collecting 150s being displaced by new stock in the West Midlands or making a business case for some of the 1,300 new vehicles to be deployed on Cardiff- Portsmouth, where there is known to be much frustrated demand. The incoming 142s may well run in pairs to provide additional or strengthened services to routes such as Barnstaple and Torbay but they would not be used in Cornwall !

The Class 180 (Adelante) fleet will be returning to the leasing company. By the time FGW starting using them in 2001, the xx.55 Cardiff- Paddington service they were intended for was experiencing such growth that the 180s soon became overloaded. These 5-car sets cost as much to run as 7-coach HSTs because each Adelante vehicle is powered. They would be replaced by HSTs. When this happens the only unused multiple units in the UK will be 180s and 442s. FGW had recently snapped up the last two available 153s. There were now simply no spare sets on offer.

The Government’s recent High Level Output Statement was remarkable in that it actually talked in terms of "growing the railway". The challenge now was to accommodate expected growth.

Crossrail would be very disruptive during the construction period but, after completion, would benefit the South West by removing many suburban trains from Paddington, thereby releasing paths for long distance services. The remodelling of Reading station, announced with the White Paper, will enable trains to enter and leave the station at intervals of 2½ minutes instead of more than five minutes at present.

He expressed optimism about the future of branch lines in Devon and Cornwall, all of which had seen impressive growth in patronage over the past year. He then referred to each branch in turn, showing how FGW was developing their respective main functions.

The core business of the St. Ives branch was park & ride from St. Erth, where 600 parking spaces had been provided. FGW was working with Cornwall County Council, which was considering promotion of the line on electronic road signs.

Cornwall CC was also seeking EU Objective One funding to provide a passing loop at Penryn to allow a more frequent service on the Falmouth branch.

The Newquay branch was essentially a seasonal railway. FGW would be extending the high summer peak service to nine weeks in 2008. The role of the line depended on developing its long distance traffic. Whilst Par was not a major destination for travel from stations on the branch, there were no funds in the short term for the scheme to divert the line to St. Austell.

The Looe branch was also very much a summer line. The Devon & Cornwall Rail Partnership had reduced fares evasion by providing ticket offices both at Looe and on the branch platform at Liskeard.

The Gunnislake line had experienced strong growth in patronage. Further growth could be expected if a scheme to reopen Bere Alston- Tavistock were to attract the necessary third party funding linked to a housing scheme. FGW itself would not be able to fund it.

An additional round trip on the Exmouth branch would be provided from December 2007. Devon County Council was supporting a plan to extend platforms at intermediate stations to accommodate four-car trains.

The Barnstaple branch had seen 35 % growth in custom in one year, possibly because of reduced fares. One or two additional round trips were planned from May 2008.

It was very encouraging that there was now no negativity from DfT about branch lines. On the main lines, greater use of HSTs in Cornwall had enabled FGW to carry more schools traffic. The economy of the region needed earlier trains from London to Exeter and Plymouth. At present the first train of the day from Paddington (07.30) ran via Bristol and did not reach Plymouth until 11.15, arguably too late for a morning business meeting. There was also a need for fast trains taking three hours or less from Plymouth to London.

Questions from the audience

1. Anne Lock referred to the £33m cost of the proposed Westbury bypass and asked what the cost of restoring the line to Tavistock would be.

Julian Crow suggested the capital cost of reopening Bere Alston- Tavistock might be in the region of £6m-£10m, depending on what work was required on structures. External support would be needed to fund the trains because no rural railway in the UK made money. He anticipated that the subsidy per passenger would be less than on the existing Plymouth- Gunnislake service but FGW would still need help to run a Plymouth- Tavistock / Gunnislake route without financial loss.

2. John Dixon referred to the Portishead line and predicted that M5 Junction 19 would seize up if the railway had not reopened by the time new housing developments were built. He expressed concern at the delay to the Bristol- Avonmouth timetable enhancement and added that Bristol Panel Signal Box suffered from periodic faults.

Julian Crow wondered whether the main travel trend from Portishead was actually towards Temple Meads. It was difficult to see a way forward on this subject but Bristol certainly needed a PTE. There was scope for growth on the Severn Beach line but the dispersed location of work and other destinations in the Bristol area pointed to the need for a Metro system. On the question of signalling, NR had a major programme of resignalling over the next decade, starting in South Wales and then in the West of England.

3. Graham Ellis referred to the 35 % growth in usage of the Barnstaple line, which was facing the prospect of more trains. He said hoped to learn from FGW’s successes in Devon and Cornwall. It would help make a case for the TransWilts (Melksham) service if he knew what the pence per mile subsidy was from Cornwall County Council for Cornish lines.

Julian Crow pointed out that Cornwall CC did not provide any rail subsidies but FGW was hoping to reduce costs on all branch lines as part of the Community Railways strategy. It was very difficult to identify the exact costs of any one train service because of shared fleet, infrastructure and staffing costs. He thought the Melksham line might be redoubled to carry additional Freightliner trains between Southampton and the Midlands, although NR believed that passenger services could be restored (to pre-December 2006 levels) without any increase in capacity. The challenge for the Melksham line was how to obtain additional sets whereas in Devon and Cornwall it was how to make more intensive use of existing crews and sets. Asked whether 142s could go to Melksham, he said they could but would need to be based at Bristol with other Pacers.

Nigel Bray noted that 143s were already used on the Stroud Valley line. Julian Crow agreed that traincrews conversant with these would need only a short conversion course to be able to work 142s.

4. Dick Drew commented that the Local Authority structure in Greater Bristol had been an obstacle to transport improvement. The four Councils covering the former Avon area did not seem to be working towards an agreed strategy.

5. A speaker referred to the inadequacy of northbound services from Cornwall in the evenings. Julian Crow replied that evening travel on trains within Cornwall was not heavy for most of the year and the Franchise had not specified enhancements to them.

6. Gerard Duddridge noted that connections to Weymouth from the South West at Castle Cary had improved and asked whether these could be developed further to give more journey opportunities for the Olympic sailings at Weymouth. He considered Castle Cary to have enormous potential as an interchange for Weymouth and local buses.

Julian Crow commented that more work was needed on the Weymouth line timetable but it was difficult to justify more train services because the route had few major traffic generators and served many small flows. The timetable would change in December as part of the revision of cross- Bristol services. FGW tried not to upset the larger intermediate flows such as work journeys to Yeovil and school journeys to Dorchester. FGW hoped to run a daily loco hauled train over the line in Summer 2008. For the Olympics the line would need to move people from Bristol (eg in HSTs), provided Weymouth station could accommodate the extra trains.

7. Gerard criticised the emphasis on high backed airline seats in the refurbished HSTs and said the scarcity of back to back seats would result in more luggage being placed on the racks.

Julian Crow replied that the new seats had to have high backs in order to reduce the risk of whiplash injuries in the event of a crash. Luggage space would be a challenge during the summer but the Franchise required FGW to provide an increase in seating capacity.

8. Mr. F. Pook (Burnham-on-Sea) said there was a need for a later evening train from Exeter to Taunton so that people connecting for Bridgwater, Highbridge etc, could attend events such as concerts. The current last trains (20.37 EWD, 20.55 Sun Exeter St. Davids) were too early for a main line connecting two county towns.

Julian Crow accepted this was unsatisfactory. He understood there would be a 21.45 Taunton- Bristol service from December 2007 and it might be possible to adjust this to run later.

9. John Walker spoke of the need to reinstate the Okehampton route to Plymouth in view of concerns that climate change might result in the sea wall carrying the main line at Dawlish being swept away.

Julian Crow noted that NR had undertaken major expenditure on resignalling the main line (to permit Single Line Working when required) and on the sea wall itself. He accepted that a reopened Okehampton- Bere Alston route would be very useful.

10. A speaker referred to the scarcity of train services from Taunton to Castle Cary and Westbury, eg for onward connections, and said it was not feasible to make a day trip from Taunton to Frome by any form of public transport. He believed the problem was the London-orientated mindset of decision makers.

Anne Lock asked how this could be changed.

Julian Crow said the remedy for specific journeys was incremental timetable change. A stop by a main line train at Castle Cary cost about four minutes and about seven at Westbury, where London trains not stopping ran via the avoiding line. Gerard added that approach control signals limited the speeds of trains entering and leaving the Frome loop. Higher speed junctions would reduce the time penalties for stopping at Frome. Julian Crow concluded by saying that the attitude of London-based civil servants could be changed over time through our elected representatives.

Branch discussion

11. Anne provided details of telephone conferencing services for use by the Committee members to update each other on local issues. Nigel undertook to study these with a view to setting up a regular conference (post-meeting note: trial run of Conference Genie took place on Friday 16 November).

12. Nigel reported on his correspondence with ATOC concerning the latter’s proposals for increasing capacity on the existing network. Some of the ideas he put forward had been Gerard’s, including the realignment of Westerleigh Junction slightly further west to allow for higher speeds. A speaker asked whether it might not be preferable to reinstate the original route from Yate to Bristol via Mangotsfield. Gerard considered that TOCs would not want to omit stops at Bristol Parkway, although there might well be a case for a single track commuter line from Mangotsfield to Bristol.

13. Anne reported on a West of England Partnership meeting she had attended, where Barbara Davis of its Transport team had pointed out that Bristol received much less funding than did Northern cities of comparable size. Anne referred to Section 106 agreements concerning transport infrastructure to be provided in connection with new housing developments. She said that such developments at Corsham and Portishead had been approved on the understanding that railway stations would be reopened. The reply given at the meeting suggested that these reopenings had not been ruled out.

Anne noted that road schemes were assessed on the basis of 60 years’ worth of time savings (in seconds !) for each vehicle journey, whereas rail schemes in England were required to demonstrate a high benefit/ cost ratio or an operating profit. English rail projects needed to be assessed in the same way as were those in Scotland and Wales if they were to get off the ground.

14. Michael Hodge (user of Bridgwater station) noted that his station had lost out in terms of connections westwards in the December 2006 timetable. He added that the 06.48 Bristol T.M.- Penzance did not call at Bridgwater, which had also lost a fast train with the ending of Manchester- Penzance services via Hereford (post-meeting note: the retimed 06.46 SX Bristol- Penzance calls at Highbridge and Bridgwater, with effect from 19 May 2008, following correspondence between Railfuture and FGW. From 9 December 2007, FGW revised its cross-Bristol services to provide an hourly Cardiff- Taunton stopping service. One result is that xx.04 or xx.08 departures from Taunton to Cardiff have improved connections to Bridgwater and Highbridge from the West).

15. George Bailey noted that an Act of Parliament had been needed to open railways in the first place and he believed legislation was also needed to obliterate an existing line. He cited a case where developers had had to reinstate a section of canal. Nigel commented that the granting of a Transport & Works Order by DfT was the current mechanism for opening or reopening lines. Such an Order had also given Cambridgeshire CC permission to destroy the St. Ives (Cambs) line so that a guided busway could be built.

16. John Walker updated the meeting on the progress of Taunton- Minehead Rail Link Company (TMRL) and noted that West Somerset Railway intended to run a service from Bishops Lydeard into bay platform 1 at Taunton via the Down Relief Line using an upgraded d.m.u. There might well be pathing problems on the DRL, which was much used by Engineering trains and in any case the WSR train was likely to be regulated for main line services at Norton Fitzwarren. John was now the link Councillor between West Somerset District and Somerset County Councils. He had contacted NR asking to be offered any surplus track from the High Output ballast depot at Taunton for use on the projected TMRL running line.

17. David Redgewell commented that DfT had been asked to support pathing for a Minehead- Bristol service in the Summer 2008 Timetable and it was hoped this could be advertised in Butlins 2008 brochure. He added that the South West Regional Assembly and local authorities would be lobbying for additional rolling stock for the region. These bodies had appealed unsuccessfully to DfT against the transfer of the ex Transpennine 158s to Northern Rail but unfortunately this had resulted in postponement of the enhanced Bristol- Avonmouth service because the movement of alternative rolling stock to FGW for December 2007 had been put on hold while the appeal was being considered. He had been informed that a small number of the new build sets mentioned in the White Paper would be based in Bristol.

David expressed concern that Arriva Cross Country services might become overcrowded on the Bristol- Penzance route because five-car Voyagers were to be redeployed on Euston- Holyhead (post-meeting note: the need for longer formations, including use of HSTs, was stressed in the Branch’s submission to the Cross Country 2009 Timetable Consultation). SWRA and the Regional Development Agency intended to produce a Rail Prospectus.

Radstock Railway Station Site