230 replies to this topic

[alan]

I thought that this letter from Graham Lloyd-Jones of Hill Paul, Stroud – published in The Citizen of Wednesday 20 September 2006 would add a new dimension to the Kemble – Swindon saga:

“I was pleased to read recently of David Drew’s [ Labour MP for Stroud ] discussions with Great Western Railways on long overdue improvements to Stonehouse station and proposals to double track the line from Kemble to Swindon.

May I offer a few additional ideas to David and anyone else involved in the discussion on how to improve rail services in Gloucestershire?

Double tracking east of Kemble needs to be accompanied by the reinstatement of four lines working between Standish Junction and Barnwood, otherwise a similar bottleneck will occur at the northern end of the Stroud Valley line at peak times.

Forget Barnwood and Elmbridge – how about using Naas Lane ( just inside David’s constituency ) as the new Gloucester interchange station? It could be called Gloucester South. It is near to the Waterwells Park and Ride, close to Junction 12 on the M5 and adjoins an expanding business and residential area.

It would be an ideal interchange for trains between London Paddington and Gloucester on the Stroud Valley line, and for trains to Birmingham and Cheltenham from Bristol, Taunton and Exeter. The reinstatement of four lines would allow for cross-platform connections, with both services arriving and leaving simultaneously.

It would also provide a quick and simple public transport route from Stroud and Stonehouse to Bristol. A cross platform simultaneous interchange at Gloucester South could mean Paddington services either terminating at Gloucester or at Lydney ( renamed Lydney Harbour park and ride )

Would an intermediate Forest of Dean gateway station somewhere between Westbury and Newnham help reduce traffic chaos at Over and fatal traffic accidents along the A40?

How about a Tunnel House platform once the Thames and Severn Canal restoration reaches Sapperton? This could be a short train hike and ride stop and could operate on weekends only.”

I would agree to all the above, the only extra caveats being four lines also being restored from Barnwood to Cheltenham through Churchdown and the whole Paddington – Swindon- Stroud – Gloucester line being electrified at some point in the future, thereby allowing more and faster trains to operate. What does everyone else think?

[Joker]

That letter intrigued me also.

I sometimes wonder if it's worth contacting Christian Wolmar, a transport journalist with a particular interest in rail, for his views on this? He knows his stuff and has been no friend to the rail authorities in the past. I shouldn't be surprised if he did pen something to the Citizen, or even produce an article.

Christian Wolmar's website

[Joker]

It's still possible to comment on that letter (that function comes and goes):

BIG PLANS FOR RAIL LINKS

[phyllus_jones]

I sent an e-mail to Christian Wolmar today giving details on the Swindon-to-Kemble bottleneck. He said that he wasn't aware of the problem, but was interested at looking into it when he returned from the Labour Conference.

Reportedly, there have only been 15 miles of new track laid (as opposed to track being replaced) in the U.K. since the days of Beeching. It's quite scandalous, given the massive amounts expended on new motorways and airport expansion in the same period. I view the problem as stemming from the interaction (or rather lack thereof) between Network Rail and the Office of Rail Regulation. As I understand it, the ORR was supposed to oversee passenger train travel, and take whatever action was necessary to improve it. From what I can see, all the ORR does is go after the train companies and does nothing about inaction by Network Rail. For instance, First Great Western has made its position on re-doubling the Swindon/Kemble line very clear. Now, the ORR should independently investigate and, if needs be, order Network Rail to put back the second track. But what does the ORR do? It blames FGW for "poor service" on the Stroud Valley line, taking zero consideration of the lack of adequate track. Instead of looking into why Network Rail has done nothing to add track, it automatically goes after First Great Western. The Telegraph carried an article in a Saturday edition in August in which the ORR was warning FGW that "things had to improve, or else big fines were coming". I know that the ORR doesn't go after Network Rail from a letter that the ORR sent me when I complained about the delays at Swindon and Kemble because of the single track. I got a letter from a Ms Jack at the ORR saying that whether or not the second track was put back between Swindon and Kemble was totally up to Network Rail's decision on whether it was needed! And of course Network Rail isn't going to expend the money voluntarily. The ORR isn't going to force Network Rail to do it. This is the basic problem with UK railway today. Apart from train crashes and political pressure, Network Rail isn't going to initiate any track-laying. And who is there to force them to take action? No one. The ORR would be the obvious body to go after Network Rail and force it to undertake new trackwork such as at The Bottleneck. But the ORR just sees its role as going after the train companies, even if the train companies are operating on inadequate track. Give the train companies adequate track for their trains, and I'm sure that there would be improvements in service. Until the ORR is willing to take action against Network Rail, nothing will improve.

[phyllus_jones]

A lengthy but interesting history of the railway linking Swindon to Cheltenham, from its conception to the present, can be found at:

http://homepage.ntlw...com/davidlloyd/
CGWURLYHOME.htm#A%20short%20history%20of%20the

[Joker]

phyllus_jones, on Sep 25 2006, 08:04 PM, said:

I sent an e-mail to Christian Wolmar today giving details on the Swindon-to-Kemble bottleneck. He said that he wasn't aware of the problem, but was interested at looking into it when he returned from the Labour Conference.

He's got to chair a conference in Westminster tomorrow, according to his site, so he's having a busy week.

As someone who rarely uses rail, I'm more concerned about the impact of the Parkway proposal, but it's cool to get an expert view on this bottleneck, too

[alan]

Some more arguments for double tracking between Kemble and Swindon are contained in the following article from The Times of Wednesday 6 September 2006:

An unprecedented increase in freight trains will rid the motorways of 12 000 lorries a day but risk causing a decade of disruption for rail passengers. Network Rail, the rail infrastructure company, said yesterday that it will remove bottlenecks from its network to allow mile long goods trains to operate between ports, power stations and distribution centres. It will also create room for an extra 120 freight trains a day by 2015, with bulk goods such as imported coal, fuel and building materials expected to fill much of the extra space. Each train will be able to carry 2 000 tonnes, the equivalent of 100 lorry loads. The boom in freight will reduce congestion on the roads but rail passengers may face delays from engineering works and are also more likely to find themselves stuck behind slow moving freight trains. Announcing Network Rail’s freight strategy for the next ten years, John Armitt, its Chief Executive, said:

“We must maximise what rail can offer because otherwise we will end up with a lot more trucks on the road.”

He said that the increase in rail freight capacity would cost up to £500 million, which would have to be funded by the Government. Ministers are committed to expanding rail freight but have said that decisions on the future level of rail spending would be made next summer. In addition to laying extra lines on routes that have only a single track, Network Rail said that it would widen dozens of bridges and tunnels to allow trains to carry the standard international size of freight container. It also promised to lengthen passing loops – the parallel stretches of track where freight trains wait while being overtaken by faster passenger services – on the East and West Coast Main Lines to accommodate longer trains. Supermarkets have begun the switch back to rail, to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions caused by distribution and to improve their public image. Last month Tesco started moving non-perishable goods by train from the Midlands to its main scottish distribution centre as part of a plan to save 4.5 million road miles a year and to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 6 000 tonnes. It joins Asda, which moves its goods from southern ports to northern depots by rail. Other companies, including Sainsbury, Toyota and Nissan, have also announced plans to carry their less time sensitive goods by rail, and even mail trains, which were all but dead in January 2004, have made a comeback. EWS, Britain’s largest rail freight company, said that trains produced a tenth of the harmful emissions of trucks per tonne carried. Network Rail proposes to increase the total weight of goods carried by trains by 30% by 2016. The growth will be higher when the long distance travelled by rail freight is taken into account. EWS predicts that the number of tonne-kilometres – the industry’s preferred measurement, which multiplies the number of tonnes by the number of kilometres travelled – will be 50% up on current levels by 2015. That would restore rail freight to the level last achieved in the 1950s, when steam trains still dominated the network. Graham Smith, EWS’s planning director, said that the growth would be achieved only if the Government addressed the unfair advantage enjoyed by road hauliers.

“We welcome Network Rail’s vision for growth, but it will not happen unless the costs of using rail infrastructure are made more affordable. We are being undercut by road hauliers coming from Europe, where they buy cheaper fuel and pay lower wages to Eastern European drivers.”

EWS is lobbying against the Rail Regulator’s proposal to double track access charges paid by freight operators. It said that it might have to cancel all goods trains through the Channel Tunnel from November 30 when the public subsidy for cross-Channel rail freight ceases. EWS is facing additional costs of £ 8 000 a train for using the tunnel, but says that it can only afford £ 500 a train. Mr Armitt said that Network Rail’s predictions assumed Britain’s continued reliance on imported coal for power generation in the next ten years.

“Even if we see a new nuclear programme, that will take time to deliver and may only deliver 20 to 25% of generating capacity, so there will still be big demand for coal.”

Additional data contained in the article included the following possibilities:

Adding an extra line to single track routes between Gretna to Annan ( between Carlisle and Glasgow ) and around Hull docks. The Settle – Carlisle would also be resignalled to allow more coal trains to pass each day and bridge and tunnel widening would be carried out between Felixstowe and Nuneaton, Southampton to West Coast Main Line via Winchester and Reading and on theTottenham to Hampstead line.

[Railfriend]

Alan

Thanks for your excellent post. There's an awful lot of us out here interested in improving train travel in Gloucestershire, particularly on the Stroud Valley line. The sooner the second Swindon/Kemble track is replaced, the better.

David Drew has been working very diligently on the problem the whole time he's been Stroud MP. If British Rail was still running the show, the second track would probably by now be back. But Network Rail's record is to stall and stall until getting orders from "on high" (Transport Secretary). So let's hope that David and the other five Cotswold MPs can knock on enough doors to finally get something done. The Swindon/Kemble single track surely has to be the worst bottleneck in the whole UK rail system.

[alan]

Welcome Railfriend! Good to have another contributor on board! You make your point well, and I have some other arguments for redoubling the Kemble-Swindon line. Firstly, the Gloucester Citizen has carried news in the first week of October that Royal Mail plans to close its Gloucester sorting office by 2008 and move all the work to Swindon. Not only will this mean local job losses and the associated knock on damage to the Gloucester economy but also lead to the farce of a letter posted in Churchdown having to go to Wiltshire en route to Brockworth. And there’s the rub. If the letters go by lorry, their 70 mile round trips will cause a huge carbon dioxide footprint and add to congestion on the A417 / A419 ( already Britain’s busiest non motorway road ). But if they go by more environmentally friendly train, the mail will just increase pressure on the existing bottleneck. Indeed, the Gloucester sorting office moved to Barnwood from its former site next to Gloucester Central station in the 1970s. But despite hopes to the contrary has never received a railway loop or siding!

The whole point of a railway network, too, is that all the bits join up. As such, the Kemble – Swindon bottleneck is holding Gloucestershire commerce and tourism back from some exciting new developments in London, as reported in The Times of Wednesday 6 September 2006:

“Rail services will double on one of Britain’s most overcrowded lines as part of a £1 billion investment in new trains and restored tracks. A gap between the [Network Rail] North London Line and the [London Underground] East London Line at Dalston Junction in Hackney will be plugged by 2010. Trains will run every eight minutes rather than every quarter of an hour. The increase in capacity, promised in the London Olympic bid, will allow thousands of passengers an hour to travel by train to the Olympic Park in Stratford in 2012. A 100 metre new section of track will connect the North London Line – which links Richmond in Southwest London with Stratford in the East – with the East London Line. The East London Line is being extended from Shoreditch to Dalston Junction in the North and from New Cross Gate to West Croydon in the South. Two new fleets of trains, costing £ 233 million, will operate by 2010. All stations will also have staff on duty throughout the day to improve security. Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, launched a new routes logo yesterday, based on the Tube symbol, but with the words London Overground instead of London Underground.

He also reiterated his long term plan to create an orbital railway for London, allowing passengers to cross the capital without travelling into the centre. This will require additional funding to extend the East London Line to Clapham Junction via Surrey Quays.

Mr Livingstone said ‘ For decades, national rail services in London have been neglected – London Overground will start a much needed revitalisation. By joining the North and East London Railways we will create a new rail artery around the city, serving 20 London boroughs.’

Four companies, Govia, National Express, Netherland Rail and Laing, are bidding to run services on the lines.

[phyllus_jones]

Alan

The sadness about Ken Livingstone's future plans is that at one time the extra track he's proposing did exist. For instance, if you walk south of Surrey Quays you can still see the old roadbed that veers off to the SW from the East London line and passes under the main line that runs east from London Bridge. The abandoned roadbed (as of about 60 years ago) then climbs to join the London Bridge to Victoria Station line. At one time that area of SE London was filled with crossing rail lines. You can see them on old maps of SE London.

When I go on long walks on Sundays, often along abandoned railway rights-of-way, it's always frustrating to see 9.5 miles of railway right-of-way preserved and then see a Tesco (or B&Q or .... or a new house ) sitting straight across the right-of-way of the last 0.5 miles. If British Rail and its successors had had the least amount of commonsense, they would have made sure that all the old rights-of-way were preserved -- just in case. One would not expect them to upkeep the right-of-way in any form, just not let anyone buy parts of the land. But I guess it's too much to ask for such commonsense. There's always expropriation, but governments never seem to have the stomach for it (unless it has to do with a new road or widening of a road!!).

[alan]

You are quite right Phyllus - when so many lines were closed no thought was given to keeping them in "sleep mode" until their routes were needed again. One classic case is the Royal Mail building at the southern end of Cheltenham Lansdown station - just blocking the route from there to Cheltenham Racecourse. Another is, I hear, of a factory being built on the old Penrith - Keswick- Cockermouth branch: much to the disgust of local rail campaigners.

I also read in the Railway Development Society newsletter iof Autumn 2006 that the Salisbury- Exeter line is suffering in the same way as Kemble-Swindon, as Branch Chairman John Walker wrote

Following my meeting some time ago with SELCA ( the group of local authorities campaigning for an upgrade of the Salisbury -Exeter line ) , we now find that there will be additional passing loops at Whimple ( three miles long ) and another ( five miles long ) from Axminster to Chard Junction. At the meeting the Network Rail representative said he was not sure when these changes would be made. it would depend, he said, on what money would be available but this route was not a high priority. Since the meeting, Network Rail has appealed to the Government to be allowed to borrow money from the Stock Exchange. if this is granted, Network Rail will be able to invest far more money which is obviously needed because of the chronic overcrowding of the system. If this private money becomes available then NR will feel more like a proper limited company. it can then use accounting systems that are in line with commercial company procedures. Once these systems are in place it is hoped that even more privarte money can be attracted, thus taking the Company forward to replacing track mileage and therefore able to accommodate more trains.

My thought is that a fraction of the money spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could have redoubled both Salisbury-Exeter and Kemble-Swindon!

[phyllus_jones]

Alan

Christian Wolmar e-mailed me to say that he had a discussion with Network Rail, and that, unless something changes in the meantime to speed up the timetable, the Swindon/Kemble bottleneck will be included in a "2008/2009 feasibility study". Just another delaying tactic. The need for the second track is already there for those of us who travel down to Stroud and Gloucester on a regular basis. I travel on many other lines that are double-tracked, but where trains run only about once or twice per hour. The train to East Grinstead is a classic example. (I've often wondered why all the rail lines into East Grinstead except the one coming in from the north (London) were pulled up. I don't suppose it could possibly have had anything to do with the fact that Lord Beeching lived there?) The Sunday service to East Grinstead is one train per hour on Sundays, two per hour other days, yet it's double-tracked all the way down from Alton. That's just one example. There are lots of little-used rail lines in the UK that are double-tracked, with all the extra maintenance that requires. Yet an extremely busy line, like the Swindon to Kemble line, has a single track. Totally totally ridiculous and unacceptable. I think in the end it will come down to a political solution, as more and more Stroud/Gloucester/Cheltenham rail travellers get tired of the poor service.

[alan]

If independent Members of Parliament can be elected to save hospitals, does anyone fancy standing in Gloucestershire on a redoubling Kemble-Swindon ticket?

[alan]

God willing, I hope to be at the meeting on Saturday 21 October 2006. Hope to see you all there!

[phyllus_jones]

Thanks, Alan. See you there.

Christian Wolmer's latest newsletter indicates that Network Rail has put The Bottleneck into Stage One of the eight-stage Guide for Railway Investment Projects (GRIP). Also, they advised him that work on the actual re-doubletracking could start "as early as 2008/09". What is not so clear is whether GRIP automatically leads to the work being done, or is just a feasibility study without any work commitment. Apparently NR is getting so much flack on the issue that they have at least decided to look at it so as to have something encouraging to say in responding to enquiries. As an old cynic would say: "I'll believe it when I see it!"

[phyllus_jones]

Mr Wolmar has clarified in an e-mail to me that Stage Five of GRIP is Decision To Proceed. So we'll have to keep an eye on any movement to further stages and how long it's taking to go from stage to stage. He said that the person he spoke with at Network Rail was very positive for the project going ahead, but the person did say it would be 2008/09 at the earliest.

Unfortunately, British Rail didn't simply remove one of the two tracks, but rather removed one track, re-distributed the ballast to be higher at the center of the trackbed, and re-positioned the remaining track on the raised ballast at the center of the trackbed. So presumably a reverse process would be needed if the work was to be done (probably at weekends) while the single track remained open, i.e. move lengths of the single track to one side while redistributing the ballast across a track bed for two tracks (lowering the centre), and then after that has been done for the 12 miles, relaying the second track on the lowered ballast beside the other track. Alternatively, they could simply close the line and do both tracks at once. For those interested in the railways, it should be an interesting situation to follow.

Stay tuned. For those interested, sign up to Mr Wolmar's newsletter. He indicates that the project has rather caught his fancy, and that he will be keeping a close eye on it.

[Joker]

alan, on Sep 12 2006, 09:26 AM, said:

Readers of this strand may like to know that RailFuture Severnside Branch is hosting an open meeting entitled "Developing Gloucestershire's Railways" at 2.00pm on Saturday 21 October 2006 at the Redwell Room, GL1 ( Gloucester Leisure Centre ), Bruton Way, Gloucester.

I thought I'd bump this thread again, and also take the time to mention that there will be ameeting at the North Warehouse tomorr... actually, it's today:

Quote

CLIMATE DEBATE

Gloucester City Council's environment and ecology forum will meet again this Wednesday.The meeting, which will take place at 6pm at the authority's North Warehouse headquarters, will discuss the problems of climate change.

It's only tangentally related to transport, but the carbon waste issue may give rail enthusiasts an opening. I'm sure the proposed Severn Barrage will get a mention, too.

[Joker]

Off topic, but a note to say that in a two and a half hour meeting about climate change (with a fascinating presentation by Dr. John Hunt of the University of Gloucester), the Severn Barrage proposal was not mentioned once. I didn't need to ask, I think it's a bad idea, but it would have been interesting to know what the forum felt about it...

[phyllus_jones]

Per my post yesterday (which still hasn't appeared on this site), a lady named Pat phoned me from Network Rail (Swindon) in response to a letter I sent NR asking about NR participation in the Gloucester meeting tomorrow.

Pat said that Network Rail knew nothing about the meeting but that, if she had heard about it sooner, would have been pleased to have sent someone to discuss all the Gloucestershire railway issues. I was a bit shocked that the organizers of the meeting wouldn't have mentioned it to NR, but apparently no one did.

Maybe it will be possible for a summary of comments at the meeting to be made, and a copy sent to NR?

[Eddie]

Quote

Per my post yesterday (which still hasn't appeared on this site),

I don't know why that should be. No one has blocked it