Hopefully finally a decent service to get to the cricket in Taunton when travelling from Weston

EDIT: On seeing they are single carriage trains and then reading this, I am not holding my breath "It will compete with Great Western Railway (GWR), a public service operator. Go-op plans to start in December 2025 at the earliest, and must do so no later than December 2026 in order to use the capacity ORR has granted."

 


From https://grahamellis.uk/blog1418.html

 
I am asked what my opinion is on the granting of a license to operate trains, subject to certain conditions being met - "You must do this then you can".

Prime in "what's my view" is "what works for the passenger and wannabe passenger" and that's a close relative of "what's good for the area and it's economy" and should have a good relationship with "what works for a sustainable environment". Go-op, FGW, GWR, GBR, FirstBus, Faresaver, Stagecoach, BusesofSwindon, FromeBus, GoAhead, National Express and Seend Community Bus are all, or have been in my personal memory, or will be operators of public passenger services in the Melksham community area.  And which one of that dozen names actually operates the service you are on is of little interest, surveys tell us, to most people.

It's very interesting that what I am asked is for an opinion and an explanation and not an unadulterated expression of joy, isn't it?

---

Let's look forward at two possibilities, and I'm taking the Melksham Passengeresque view

The optimistic view

As from the December 2025 timetable, the train service seven days a week to Swindon will run at 2 trains every 2 hours in each direction. Realistically, it will not be possible to go clock-face and maintain connections along the way at this point, and I would anticipate the two trains being something like ... 12:30, 13:10, 14:30, 15:10 northbound and 12:10, 13:30, 14:10, 15:30 southbound which allows a freight path through Melksham at :50 in every hour.  The alternate trains at :30 connect from and to the Portsmouth Harbour service at Westbury, and the :10 service southbound every 2 hours carries on to Frome and Taunton. Please note peak and school time tuning to be applied such as the 15:30 I mentioned remaining at 15:40.

The ORR document mentions class 153 trains which are single carriages, and with accessible loos in them the seating capacity is limited.  However, TfW who have done the work (and I suspect these are the train that Go-op will use as they retire) have also retained 9 (classed 153-9) without a loo and I would look forward to seeing Go-op running two carriage trains (and needing to for capacity) quite soon.

As from the December 2026 timetable, with a Penryn / Dovey Junction / Bad Doberan style station at Melksham, it will become clock-face at :30 in both directions and that will allow 2 freight paths each way in the hour. With freight able to pass each other at Melksham so that's up from one to four freights per hour, and there's extra flexibility with them able to follow each other at tighter headway if nothing is coming the other way.

A further (community supported) service of a Town Bus vehicle connecting with the trains at xx:30 - arriving the station at xx:22 from Berryfield, Hampton West, Bowerhill Business, Pathfinder Way, Melksham East Relief Road stops, Sandridge Road and the Town Centre, and leaving at xx:38 back along the same route.

---

The Pessimistic view

Nothing starts beyond Taunton - Westbury in December 2025, but perhaps two or three of trains in the middle of the day extend to Swindon at some point in the following year. They run 20 minutes ahead of, or behind, the GWR / GBR service in the same direction so there are still 100 minute gaps in the service.  The DfT sees "duplication" as it did with the Bristol to London (Waterloo) via Westbury and Bristol to Brighton (via Westbury) services, and withdraws the TransWilts shuttle leaving just the 07:21 and 20:22 northbound, and 06:32 and 19:19 southbound on the national operation, and perhaps Go-op northbound services at 09:30, 12:30 and 15:30, southbound at 10:30, 13:30 and 16:30.

A business run on off-peak trains only would be hard to sustain I would suspect that the model I have just described would make it hard to break even, especially if things like mutual ticket acceptance was not in place and the train run by both companies shared the unreliability problems we see today, and I can see the Go-op experiment has a significant risk of failing, leaving Melksham back as it was in 2010 - just two trains each way per day, and the joke of "two trains - too early and too late to be of any practical use to most people" once again.

---

Both extreme possibilities ... and my crystal ball is prismatic and may be distorting what I see.

I would love to see the optimistic view fall into place and I am prepared and happy to support that as best I can.  I hope all other parties are too. I look carefully at who the decision makers are in each organisation, and what their motivation is, and what track record they have. "What turns them on" and  "Why are they doing this?"

 
That seems to be a concern of ORR, too.

To quote the decision letter-


So this is only a conditional approval, and those conditions have to be met. I think the headline on the ORR press release is therefore somewhat misleading. I see from Go-op's website that a fund-raising campaign has been started to raise £2m. But as well as £1.5m of works, there's the costs of leasing the rolling stock, making arrangements to lease premises for storage and maintenance, set up the on-line infrastructure, the professional fees for negotiating the agreements with Network Rail and the Rosco (the latter will I imagine seek some kind of guarantee or security for their financial exposure), getting insurance and so on.

I can't help feeling that it would have been more efficient if there GWR could be persuaded (and allowed!) to acquire another (say) six trains on lease, recruit the additional staff and run additional trains along at least some of the route - say Taunton to Westbury and strengthening the Westbury-Swindon service.

 
My ongoing concern is over the financial reality of this proposal.

I really do wish them all the best with their bid - but can they actually produce the funds, up front, to start it?

 
I can’t see how this can even work, unless you’re planning some lengthy dwell times at some stations like Westbury, Frome and Taunton to fit around the existing timetable. You’ve also got a huge 10-mile signal section between Castle Cary and Somerton. To squeeze anything through is going to prove problematic…. and 153’s. Not the quickest unit off the mark and with a top speed of 75mph.

 
Yes.  It's set out on page 6 of those 14 pages, in paragraphs 32 to 34:

 
Do we know how many level crossings have work needed on them as required by ORR

 

Go-op will not have to do much to the 153s as tfw have done a great job refurbishing them

 
Personal post - I am noting the grant and thinking.

It will be a delight if the outcome is an appropriately enhanced train service linking Swindon, Chippenham, Melksham, Trowbridge, Westbury and Frome.  And the onward service to Taunton will be magic for people headed west as current connection from the TransWilts to there are "pants".

But ... I need to define "appropriately enhanced" and I can see various risks of it not reaching that definition.  I congratulate Alex Laurie on the approval and I will certainly be in touch to help make sure that all the parties involved work together so that it does come out appropriate.  He and his team have correctly identified, in my view, a market that the franchise / contract has failed to address and the abstraction data in the ORR letter confirms that.    And people would be initially delighted with class 153 carriages.   Much more for me to follow up on to define those really wooly words "appropriately enhanced".

 
Note the rider ORR have added

 
Thanks for posting, within a couple of minutes of each other, ReWind and RichardB: I've just merged posts into this existing topic.

CfN. 

 
They now have ORR approval

https://twitter.com/railandroad/status/1857427965417566461

More here https://www.orr.gov.uk/search-news/regulator-approves-new-go-op-train-service-between-swindon-taunton-and-weston-super

Rolling stock - Cl 153 (our old friends!)

 
Some positive news for the Wiltshire & Somerset constituents amongst us.  The ORR have approved new train services between Swindon - Taunton & Weston Super Mare.  Initially I assumed these would be via Bristol but reading the press release suggest these may run via Melksham & Westbury instead;

https://www.orr.gov.uk/search-news/regulator-approves-new-go-op-train-service-between-swindon-taunton-and-weston-super

Apologies if there were a more suitable sub thread to put this news in, instead.

Not sure what traction is lined up for this though.

 
Probably 350/2's then I suspect as porternrook trying to get some fitted with batteries

 
Up to date list of Go-op's Directors   https://go-op.coop/go-ops-directors/

 
Update on Go Op at Somerton
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/somerton-station-uks-first-battery-8979178.amp

 
Are tickets on sale yet?

 
A gentle corner - more a bend, like a coiled spring.

 
It all sounds splendid, but so did all the previous plans.
Perhaps it will actually happen this time ?

 
Just around the corner then. 

 
An update on Facebook (here)

Co-incidentally, I wrote about the need for additional service between Westbury and Swindon just this weekend , and provided they were reliable and ticketing was such that people could use the next service no matter who was operating it, it'll be fine by the local community.   See http://www.passenger.chat/28245 - and should the northbound service carry on to Oxford, crossing an incoming southbound in the shown paths - why not.

 
https://go-op.coop/our-planned-services/

 

There are practical things to be learned during times of diversion:

24 trains in 24 hours last week (Friday 17th)
24 trains in 12 hours this morning (Friday 24th) ... 24 expected in the 24 hours

So I make it that in normal times a further half dozen each way might fit 

 

As I read it, they object not only on various technical grounds but on the whole idea ...


GWR are right in having detailed and capacity concerns. 


A little disingenuous of you, GWR!   There have been a handful of situations where extra trains would not fit on the single line.  However, there have been many more circumstances where line capacity has been available, but there has been no train available, no crew available, no funding available and ongoing to thi s day, GWR is failing to run trains not due to capacity issues on the line, but lack of crew.

I share some of the concerns expresses in the responses, and answers from Cross Country (for example) are well measured.  GWR seems to have looked for every possible reason to object, and in my view has weakened its case and its moral standing by so doing.

 
The application & responses are now on the ORR website under section 17 applications

https://www.orr.gov.uk/rail-guidance-compliance/network-access/regulated-networks/network-rail/current-applications

The responses are worth a look-see. GWR object on several grounds, which do include the timetable suggested.

There is also a draft contract on that ORR page.

 
Apparently it’s on the NR track access application page. (However I haven’t checked myself.)

 
No application on the ORRs website.  I'm.watching to see if hopefully grand unions application is successful

 

and before a wheel turns, there is the small task of raising a target of £1.1m from investors.........   

 
From Ethos-PR, posted 17th October


and later in the article


I - and Melksham - will welcome additional services on what has only moved up from a useless to an infrequent (and still below appropriate) service over the years.  However, Go-op has been in the planning for so long that we'll believe it only when we see the first trains arrive. With a new and different operational model, I remain unconvinced that the business and case is robust for the long term; I hope that concern is mis-founded. The route / flows certainly are excellent ones for significant service improvement - the Go-op team are right in that analysis.

 
Yes, I might complain about the trains being only 5 coaches long, unless this was demonstrably sufficient even at Christmas, Easter, Butlins days, and bank holiday weekends.
However a 5 car train from London to Minehead and return is a GREAT IMPROVEMENT over no trains and is therefore to be welcomed. And if overcrowded could hopefully be replaced with a full length train.

I might also complain about the hard seats and other negative aspects of the IETs, but again an inferior train is still a great improvement over no train and is still to be welcomed.

 

There is demand ... with traffic across intermediate places too and let me see how some of those might string together.

-> Minehead to Taunton (new service)
-> Taunton to Frome (new service)
-> Frome via Westbury (improved service)
-> Westbury to Swindon (much better service)
-> Swindon to Oxford (new service)
-> Oxford to Bletchley (new service)
-> Bletchley to Bedford (better service)

Been the same for years - but there are differences since the Go-op stuff started.  Even the daily train from Frome to Taunton has been scrapped. Westbury to Swindon has increased from 2 to 9 each way per day then back down to 8, passenger numbers up 25 fold but still 2.5 hour gaps.    Swindon to Oxford is a lottery with connections at Didcot not always being connections and since Go-op started we have been promised, then denied electric trains to Oxford by GWR. Oxford to Bicester is another line that has been shut, reopened, built up and the line is being re-extended as far as Bletchley ....

Of course, there are all sorts of other ideas that could be floated.  The hourly  semi-fast from Paddington to Newbury and all stations to Taunton could extend to Minehead, passed at Taunton by the Penzance express.   But I expect someone would grumble about hard seats and the trains being only 5 carriages so not proper trains.  Probably need to ease the platform at Watchet, but I think there were similar concerns at Narbeth that were quickly fixed.

 
I admire their persistence, and am satisfied that public demand exists for a year round train service from Minehead to at least Taunton and preferably further afield.

Whilst the climate crisis is now last years news, concerns about petrol prices and road congestion remain. The existing bus service from Taunton to Minehead provides an acceptable service at off peak times but is almost unusable at busy times.


Actual progress is very limited.

 
I admire their persistance. But, sorry, I share the concern that even after a decade this remains unlikely to come off. I also remind members how other new service proposals have been mocked, and yet have been achieved.

When I look at Go-op, I am reminded of Derek Twigg, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport speaking to contrast my campaign in summer 2006 on Radio 4's "Today" - "We cannot run a train service just for Mr Ellis"; Alex Lawrie and his team find themselves mocked but persistant too.  There are other similarities, such as a need to adjust the campaign along the way whilst retaining the core and the need to go through painfully slow process and wait for opportunities.  There are also big differences and I am personally nothing like as informed on Go-op as I was on TransWilts to evaluate all these things.  I am aware that after more than six long years of working with little apparent progress, most of our ducks on TransWilts lined up, remaining ones were coaxed into place, and that train service started not just for Mr Ellis's journeys but for 180,000 other journeys in the first year.

 
I share others' pessimism.  When this thread started 10 years ago things had already not been happening for quite some time.  A great pity, but somehow the people involved don't seem able to build up any momentum and I've rather lost interest in their announcements as they never seem to come to anything.  Starting an open access operation certainly isn't easy and the most recent (Lumo) seems to have taken around 7 years from inception to passenger-carrying, but Go-Op are well over that with nothing to show for it.  I'm not sure whether to admire or mock their persistence.

 

Here you go.   I can't see it happening either.

https://go-op.coop/our-planned-services/

 
Where are they planning on operating from and to this month?

Still no chance of it happening as far as I’m concerned!

 
From Facebook (And I have managed to loose the link in posting!) - web site at https://go-op.coop

 

I guess you really meant here, back in 2012, the next Olympics to be held in the UK?

Paul

 
“…everything hangs on a successful track access application.”

With a bit of luck ORR will turn down the whole idea of Go-Op. How long ago was the first announcement, and just how many random route options have been discussed ever since?

 
Note the bold I have added to the quote above and then see...

Has somebody looked at the ScotRail photograph and confused 153s with 156s? The configuration of the ScotRail class 153s has a large part of the vehicle dedicated to bicycle storage (so very few seats are provided) and, if I understand correctly, toilets which are not wheelchair-friendly. A fleet made up entirely of ScotRail-specification class 153s would therefore be unworkable for passenger services - you would probably have insufficient seating capacity and you would not meet PRM regulations unless you locked the toilets out of use and provided a toilet-less service.

(PRM = Persons of Reduced Mobility)

 
Just checked their website - this says-


Have they abandoned the class 769 pipedream?

 
So they've moved on from using Pacers to Dogboxes. Progress I guess.

 
I’m already looking forward to the 2023 update.

 
https://www.facebook.com/groups/mineheadraillinkgroup/posts/1579613502384694/

 
Not completely off-topic; it's relevant because if TfW aren't releasing 150s in 2022 then obviously the Taunton councillor's news is incorrect. Or, alternatively, if the Taunton councillor is correct then TfW are releasing 150s earlier than originally expected...

 

If but that were the only problem with Go-op's proposals...

 
Discussion of the merits (or otherwise) of the new fleet for TfW is a rather rapid diversion that is completely off-topic.

 
The availability of a reasonable number of relatively cheap-to-run PRM modified diesel trains in the form of the ex-TfW class 150s could be quite an opportunity for new services, whether run by Go-op or otherwise. I'm not sure how to react to the details though - my understanding was that the 150s were to be replaced by 231s and 756s (not by 197s) and not before 2023. The class 197s were originally planned to replace 158s and 175s in 2022 but that is an awful idea since the 158s and 175s are far superior trains to class 197s and the diesel-only 197s would derail any hope of electrification. If the plan has now changed to see 150s replaced by 197s in 2022 instead of 158s and 175s then that's great in some respects but not others.

 

May I suggest a really novel idea - have a Bishops Lydeard base in the MIDDLE of the route and run a public train service from Taunton to Minehead. Once successful (and the operator has good experience of running that public service), extend it.  Options there would include Taunton - Frome - Trowbridge - Swindon - Oxford - Milton Keynes to fill in gaps linking county towns across Central Southern England, and Bridgwater - Burnham - fast to Bristol suburban stations to supplement their slow and less-than-walkup frequency at present.

An example of a bay platform where a service from Minehead could terminate:

 
Or even from Bishops Lydeard to Minehead !

 

Yes how about delivering a service from WSR to Taunton for a start and then see where else it might go.

 

Excellent news if it is actually achieved, however Go-op do not have a great record of actually achieving their hopes.

And in the specific case of Bishops Lydeard (or elsewhere on the WSR) To any place on the national network, how many schemes have been talked about, and how many trains have run ?

 

Indeed - I had the pleasure of witnessing the joint Go-op/TfL photoshoot earlier this week celebrating upcoming rail expansion:

 
As the cl769 do not seem to be appearing in the forseeable future perhaps GWR could grap those cl150s to ease the capacity problems in the WoE

 
News from a Taunton councillor at the Railfuture meeting today at Yatton is that Go-op plan to start the Bishops Lydeard to Swindon service in May or December 2022, using class 150 trains retired by Transport for Wales as their new class 19x come into service.

 
For those of you that like a fairy tale read at bedtime, there is an article on Go-Op in the latest edition of "Rail" (on sale tomorrow)

 

Great shame to apply that condition.   

For community groups and their teams who are looking to work with all parties providing public transport in their area, holding a pecuniary interest in any company which might be competing for paths / advantage / contracts it leads to a potential conflict of interest.   

It also gives me a similar personal decision to make as a Town Councillor in Melksham - if I were to show my support by buying a few shares, I would gain an interest which would mean that I could not take part in discussions nor votes asking for the support at the council, for which Go-op with surely (as a community co-operative) be seeking at some point.

It strikes me that the absence of guests at their meeting was potentially a difficult decision for Go-op - but that they may not have made the right decision by turning off people and community representatives who would love to use their services, in addition to others running on the line, should their service come about and call at Melksham.

 
From https://www.facebook.com/gooptrain/ - a public post

 
A brief update (really no news) on this from the public question and answer section at the TransWilts CIC annual meeting on Thursday - an answer from a senior GWR manager was that "We [GWR] know as much as you [TransWilts member audience do". "Until platform 4 is reinstated at Westbury and there's substantial double tracking of the single line section, we don't believe there's room for a second operator". For TransWilts, a director commented that the draft Go-op timetable does provide two useful journeys each way per day, with the others within 30 minutes of an existing service, and they would much rather have any extra capacity used to point towards Salisbury and Southampton as in the TransWilts Strategic plan.

 

I wonder if Gwyneth Paltrow is interested in running a train service between Bishop's Lydeard and Oxford.  Could have some unusual stuff on the trolley if so.  I think it would be very newsworthy.

 

I guess this means that the Big Battery will have to be "consciously uncoupled" at the end of each operating day.

 
I did a double take when I saw this  -!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57169730

 
We need journalists prepared to actually challenge these proposals, rather than just republish fantasy PR verbatim.

Paul

 

I'm surprised you weren't asked to comment, grahame.

I have to say I remain concerned at how the proposed Go-op service is being reported as if it is likely to go ahead, when even a cursory glance beneath the surface reveals multiple hurdles to be overcome.

 
From the Melksham News

 
From the Wiltshire Times

 

I've gotten very technical on this on the Transport Scholars area ... http://www.passenger.char/24926 ... also dropped a note to the signatory on the timetable .... "Clearly a lot of work in there, but some things puzzle us. Is there background documentation?  Would love to help inform / tune from a community viewpoint if it’s still at that stage."

 

I suspect it is, Lee.   There are some useful trains in there - not just the one picked out by Celestial.   There's headscrathers too.

 

Measurement trains almost certainly. They do run on 4-, 8-, and 24-week schedules, and those are in the TPR  (national section). The last stable one I've got shows those runs at the wrong time of day to affect that service. However, from the version currently on line, it looks as if the timings are being revised.

 
I won't be holding my breath.

I notice the really useful 1644 from Swindon has a note that says "Cancel one day every 24 weeks, and one day every four weeks."

So does that mean it is cancelled one day every four weeks, and then an additional cancellation every 24 weeks? 

And why? Is it so that some maintenance schedule is kept (say a visit by a track recording vehicle), or maybe a very occasional freight path?

 

Further quote from "a WSR spokesperson" :


Definitely looks like a fair bit of cooperation has taken place between WSR and Go-op on this:


There's even a timetable, which would certainly have quite an impact on the TransWilts line, particularly in terms of the viability of future ambitions such as regular pattern services to Southampton, Oxford snd Birmingham.

It's almost as if someone at the WSR has read grahame's Minehead timetable proposals...


...and thought to themselves "let's see how he likes it when we write the future timetable for his line!"

I am sure that's just me being "Mr Cynic" though...

 
I'll say this for them. They don't give up. But it always seems to be next year. 12 months to introduction seems very optimistic given the procedures that have to be completed and trains to be acquired.

 
From Go-op

 

To be fair, 8 years is but a moment in railway projects. I am surprised they are still going for it, though, even if "it" changes often.

 

The long history of Go-op is certainly a factor which helps colour views of their proposals.

 
Sorry grahame, force of habit. I have learned not to get too excited when I see Go-op over the past 8 years. I'll be wrong one day.

 

Hmmm ... or has Go-op now learned its way in to be making proposals where all the ducks line up? Answer, please, not here but in the "Transport Scholars" area - http://www.passenger.chat/24561 .

 
It's something new to talk about for a few years, I suppose.

 
From the Bishops Lydeard Facebook Page, that excellent source of news about plans on the TransWilts line 


The "Transport Scholars" board referred to (above) is where we occasionally go deeply into specific subject - admins, moderators, data managers always there - other members very welcome if they wish to be.  Please like this topic if you would like me to add you in so the link works - I will check back from time to time until 25th January to follow up.  As an alternative, send me a personal message.  Sorry - Transport Scholars is a members-only area for regular contributors

 
He talks a good game, but never mind what has actually happened, stating that his class 769 rolling stock would be delivered on time is possibly symptomatic of a lack of appreciation of what is really involved?  Even this time last year it seemed clear from information on this forum that the timescale was constantly slipping.  Anyone out there think he would have got his trains by January?

 

Or maybe that should be a decade in Go-Op's case?

 
There is a transcript of the video here

https://www.lowimpact.org/co-operative-train-line-alex-lawrie/

 
Missed this video - over a year old; sadly, a year is not a long time in setting up a rail service, so still worth a read.

Building a co-operative train line: Alex Lawrie of Go-op

 
Indeed.  And that probably won’t happen.  Though I still wonder how detailed their discussions have been thus far.

 
They won’t sign on the rolling stock dotted line until they get a favourable response from the ORR applications

 
I wonder how detailed their discussions with suppliers of said types of rolling stock have been?  You would imagine they are about to announce the deal(s) if they are to be working their trains within 18 months.

 
Interesting choice of rolling stock. Both 230 and 319 are suffixed IPEMU. The only other train that has been given that designation as far as I can recall is the class 379 battery prototype unit. In other words, IPEMU means battery trains without on-board diesel generator. Vivarail has their rapid-charge concept for the 230s, but the 319 would only have a little bit of OverHead - Line Equipment (OHLE) between Chippenham and Swindon to charge up the batteries. I didn't think that battery technology had advanced enough to allow such range.

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying acronym

 
For completeness of proposal, following from forms on the ORR website.

https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/42044/go-op-open-access-economic-equilibrium-test-form-november-2019.pdf



https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/42043/go-op-open-access-economic-equilibrium-test-form-2019-11-15.pdf

 

Taunton to Watchet? Why not Minehead?

 
Good to see the plans are at such an advanced stage after all these years.  I’m looking forward to travelling on the first train in 18 months time, though I won’t book any overnight accommodation yet as I’ve no idea where the train will be running to or from!   

 
And another service application from Taunton to Watchet, one of which may start from Castle Cary or Frome, and another from Castle Cary to Yeovil, some of which may, or may not, be extended to Dorchester or Gillingham.

I didn't think there was much spare capacity on the lines around Yeovil for a Viva Rail 230 to trundle around getting in GWR and SWR's way, especially now SWR has filled in some of the gaps. 

 
From Transport Extra

 
I have the tools now that you have supplied the link - thank you

 
I see the DfT also think the application is rather vague and woolly.

https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/41593/go-op_economic_equilibrium_test_notification.pdf

(Sorry, I can't paste a quote, but the first paragraph of the DfT's letter says so, although in more polite terms.)

 

I'm running out of time to post a major reply here ... please excuse this brain dump.  No doubt - lots of spelling and grandma mistakes (  )  and double dipped claims of the same dividend.

In summary, I believe that there is double-plus evidence reaching the same conclusion in different directions, that there are untapped passengers flows - unaddressed travel requirements - on just about all legs of the proposed / suggested Go-op routes. There may not be a glossy case statement, the result of an expensive survey putting this particuar set of evidence together, but there's some pretty well known stuff in the 'right circles' there and I could easily enough cobble together a paper if only I had the time.  And, yes, I note the tails now wagging with Nuneaton becoming Newport and we're back to Dorchester and Taunton. The areas are riddled with good cases - some gooder than others.

Just because there are good cases, services will only work if all the ducks are in a row. Trains, paths, crew, price, passenger confidence in the service, timed when they want to go, advertised, appropriate cross ticketing and easy ticket purchase, information, comfort, ability to share station facilities, etc.  I know some of those overlap something rotten - this is a very quick morning note not a full list or report.   For a franchised service, or one sponsored by a local authority or grant body for a trial, risk looms huge, with elimination of public / taxpayer risk being frustratingly high up the agenda.  Political expedience and planning something which fits best into a grand overall government infrastructure is also key and can frustratingly hold a scheme back (or propel it forward even if risky!). But with an open access provider, only the safety risks and the risks of the service interfering with someone else's trains really need to be robustly and publicly considered - it's their shareholders who take the financial risk in the setup, and the risks of carrying fresh air or of not having enough serviceable trains or staff to run the service.  So if they're happy, that means far less studies for open access. We 'grin' at the lack of detailed studies, etc, on parts of the route, perhaps.   Or perhaps we are simply not privy to matters commercial in confidence.  Either way, that's OK.

I do look at some previous open access services and note their lack of robustness over quite short lead times. And for than reason I was concerned at an earlier point at suggestions that my town's service might almost exclusively be run by such a service.   The risk of it going "belly up" in early build-up days was a risk I would prefer to be without, and such a risk if perceived in public would put people off making life changing decisions based on the service in question.  Open Access has no government guaranteed safety new such as that we see repeatedly used on service such as franchised express trains from London via Peterborough. And this lack of guarantee on an operation that provides virtually all services to a place would be a hurdle putting people off using it - no safety net - resulting in many having an objection to using it, and traffic not being what they wished.

Now – take a line / service that's running anyway - that's moved up from an unusable service of 2 trains each way per day to a frankly poor service of 8 or 9 trains each way per day.  Serving a town which should generate 350,000 journeys per annum but which has only moved up from 3,000 to 75,000 and paused there because no more people could fit on the trains.  And whilst the trains are longer is still growing again only slowly because of gaps of 132 minutes (and going up to 150 minutes!) at peak shoulders for a typical journey of 10 to 28 minutes and you see a gap which could be well filled by another service combed in, to the mutual profitable benefit of both operators.  Food for thought, and I can come up with other data that's not purely Melksham numbers but for the line / service as a whole, less spectacular in proportion, but far higher in magnitude.

---

I am not reaching any conclusion as to whether all ducks are in a row. But I have some more evidence and more thought than many that, perhaps, they are. And I have far more evidence and thought that a combined service that's hourly on the Swindon - Chippenham - Melksham - Trowbridge - Westbury - Frome - Yeovil and/or Taunton corridors would / will be capable of generating spectacular further passenger numbers growth, however changes of train at Westbury work out; in may ways, it's two different flows joined end to end.

Edit to correct some of the more major spelling issues, and highlight key points in the mass of text!

 


I'm noting these comments and went to sleep (after an eventful day that "Transport Scholars" will have read about) answering in my mind - and it's a very long answer.

You are right to raise these issues - and more. Yet some of them have significant and excellent answers and whist certain concerns remained to be resolved, others are far more logically correct from looking at public evidence in numbers than you might expect.   A full answer to follow as I get the opportunity - just wanted to flag "not as daft as you might speculate".

 

Which thought occurred to me also. Permission to run five trains daily from Euston to Blackpool North by Alliance Rail Holdings subsidiary Grand Central has been granted from September. This must have taken years out of someone's life, with a lot of expense and no income. The first try ended in failure, when they got the permission but couldn't source Pendolinos. This time, the proposal is to use Class 91s, which, because they can't tilt (or at least can't straighten up if they do) are limited to 110 mph. This means the trains will stop only at Nuneaton and Milton Keynes before Preston, thereafter making a decent local stopping service to Blackpool North. In this, they are up against Virgin, with three or four daily direct trains, at a time when the big operators are grumbling about lack of profit. I can't honestly see the point.

 
I can't help thinking that all the time and energy spent in dreaming up routes and dreaming of running their own trains might not have been better spent engaging with GWR or other TOCs lobbying for services to fill gaps in current services and carrying out customer research to demonstrate that there's demand to justify them.

 
So curiously Go-op has now applied for a service that goes nowhere near Oxford, but may go to Newport, or may go to Cheltenham.  And it may go to Exeter, or if not to Dorchester, or if not to.... oh I give up.

It seems odd that after so many years they still can't decide where they want to go, and even make an application which leaves all the options open.  I can't imagine they will be taken very seriously.  Why don't they just start with something simple like Westbury to Oxford, and if that works built up from there.  At least all of them involve an extra train every two hours through Melksham, which I presume will please Grahame.

https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/41278/open-access-economic-equilibrium-test-form-go-op-june-2019.pdf