Direct trains from Bristol to Waterloo to be axed.

[Not Jeremy]

First Group, in their guise as South West Trains, have announced that they will be dropping all of the through trains from Bristol to Waterloo from the timetable later this year.

 

It will be a real shame if these through trains are lost, I, my family and friends have used them a lot and they are not trains that ever run empty, they are generally well patronised I think.

 

Waterloo is a great pedestrian destination for the capital offering a pollution free and fabulous walk across the Hungerford Bridge into the heart of the City. Paddington must be somewhere near capacity already, losing this train will surely make things a little bit worse for everybody there too.

 

It is depressing that there is apparently a need to cut these trains out, especially now with all of us being urged to use public transport more. They have been running for 25 years plus now and provide great connectivity to the Capital for Bradford on Avon, Trowbridge and Warmister to London.

 

I don't know whether their initial introduction related to the use of Waterloo for the Channel Tunnel service, and would be interested to hear more from folk on here that know more than I do on this subject.

 

With Andy's permission I am including a link to a petition that you can sign that protests against this planned curtailment of a wonderful and popular service.

 

Petition to save the Bristol to Waterloo service

 

It would be good if you could sign this petition if you feel the service ought to continue.

 

Apologies if I have got any of the details of this service wrong, it would be good if others could correct me or add more information on the subject to give a full and balanced view of the situation.

 

Simon

Edited October 24, 2021 by Not Jeremy
less sensational title

[Michael Hodgson]

Waterloo trains from Paris have already been axed  

[Andy Kirkham]

1 hour ago, Not Jeremy said:

or the Channel Tunnel service, and would be interested to hear more from folk on here that know more than I do on this subject.

 

 

Yes they were introduced when the Tunnel first opened. There was for a time a service from South Wales to Waterloo, although I can't remember the originating station. I remember I once boarded this service ar Bristol and it was nearly empty, but it began to fill up at Bradford and was full by the time it got to Salisbury.

[adb968008]

This weekend theyve axed Waterloo 159 services completely, leaving Salisbury without a London service.

Edited October 24, 2021 by adb968008

[DY444]

This reminds me a bit of Sir Humphrey Appleby's defence of Radio 3.  When Hacker pointed out that nobody listened to it Sir Humphrey replied that whilst that was true, it was nevertheless reassuring to know it was there.  If the Bristol service was routinely heavily loaded between station pairs either side of Salisbury then in all probability it wouldn't be going anywhere.

 

My, no doubt unpopular, view is that a TOC has to adequately service its core routes first before wandering off-piste a couple of times a day especially when the original decision to wander has the distinct whiff of an ORCATS raid about it.  A number of trains beyond Salisbury towards Exeter have resembled Indian railways several times in recent weeks.  That is a core SW route which desperately needs additional resources whereas Bristol isn't.  AIUI GWR will be picking up the paths between Bristol and Salisbury.

[Gilbert]

As a regular user I signed it.

Not only is it a decent link to the smoke but augments the rather poor off peak service between Keynsham and Bath/Bristol..

[40F]

30 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

This weekend theyve axed Waterloo 159 services completely, leaving Salisbury without a London service.

 

 

Only due to engineering works. Bristol Temple Meads was without a direct service to Padd for a week when the up grade was on 

[njee20]

I used to catch one from Bristol Temple Meads to Woking when I was at uni 15 years ago, and it was always a bit clandestine - it didn’t show on the indicators as a Waterloo train, you had to know, which always seemed odd. I forget what it did say though! Does seem a curious choice, as above, it was well utilised.  
 

56 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

This weekend theyve axed Waterloo 159 services completely, leaving Salisbury without a London service.

 

By that measure they close my local station quite often! Bit unfair. 

[Mol_PMB]

Realistically, there are likely to be cuts/changes like this across the UK over the next year or so.

 

The railways are hemorrhaging money at the moment, and it's likely that the most consistent and/or lucrative passenger traffics will take a long time to return to their pre-COVID levels. 

From a personal viewpoint, it's been 2 years since I last paid over £300 for a peak-hour standard class return from Manchester to Euston to attend a business meeting, and I can't see that happening again now - I can have the meeting on Teams from my own living room and it costs nothing. And I'm commuting locally into Manchester just one day a week; my employer has halved their office space and doesn't want us there every day.

 

The DfT has to cut costs and the quickest/easiest way to do that is to reduce the number of trains operated (and leased, staffed etc).

With GBR taking greater control and an overview of the whole passenger network, services which are (on some level) duplicated between different franchises are more likely to be simplified/reduced/split.

This also applies to services outside a TOC's core routes as mentioned above. Another example is the EMR services to Liverpool, which will be split and partly transferred to TPE.

[APOLLO]

So motoring is being demonised and we are urged to use public transport, which they are axing.

 

Petition signed, even though I live in Wigan these type of cuts will come here soon.

 

Brit15

[JeffP]

Isn't it First Group who have just recently announced they intend putting services in place on the ECML, a pretty well-served route already?

[njee20]

They’ve started this week, under the open access operator brand “Lumo”. 
 

Anecdotally my (Southern/Thameslink) services are back virtually to pre-covid levels, full and standing in the peak. Even travelling at the weekend yesterday the services were well utilised. Whilst the railways have undoubtedly have a very tough 18 months I really hope this doesn’t become the next “yeah, but y’know… covid” as an excuse for everything for the next 10 years. 

[Not Jeremy]

More information on this change can be read here.

 

This service really is something a bit "different" and users deserve better from the Government.

 

The cut is being made very quickly, really the whole thing stinks to high heaven.

 

Simon 

Edited October 24, 2021 by Not Jeremy
gibberish reduction

[Ron Ron Ron]

10 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Waterloo trains from Paris have already been axed  

They were axed 14 years ago, when St. Pancras International opened in 2007.

 

 

10 hours ago, Not Jeremy said:

First Group, in their guise as South West Trains, have announced that they will be dropping all of the through trains from Bristol to Waterloo from the timetable later this year….

 

South West Trains ceased operating in 2017.

The name you’re looking for is Southwestern Railway.

 

 

 

.

[phil-b259]

42 minutes ago, JeffP said:

Isn't it First Group who have just recently announced they intend putting services in place on the ECML, a pretty well-served route already?

 

Don't muddle up two types of operation.

 

The new first group ECML operation is an open access job and receives ZERO financial support from the Government. If it fails to attract enough users then its First Group shareholders that suffer*.

 

By contrast the likes of GWR are operated by First Group under a Government issued management contract and receives a large amount of taxpayers cash for their services. Any perceived inefficiencies or losses will end up being paid for by the taxpayer and that is anathema to the current incumbents who are obsessed with low taxes - so cuts are the order of the day.

 

* Though conversely if they are successful, then, regardless of what the ORR say, a large chunk of passengers will have been lured from the state backed LNER -but this is OK as it plays into the 'Private = good, state = bad' mentality of the Governing party.

[phil-b259]

44 minutes ago, njee20 said:

 

Anecdotally my (Southern/Thameslink) services are back virtually to pre-covid levels, full and standing in the peak.

 

 

In reality, no they are not! (particularly at weekends) where around half the services are being cancelled due to a shortage of drivers.

 

If I were a Whitehall mandarin then axing services to match the staff availability would be an obvious way to save cash and I'm surprised this tactic hasn't been used so far.

[Not Jeremy]

38 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

In reality, no they are not! (particularly at weekends) where around half the services are being cancelled due to a shortage of drivers.

 

If I were a Whitehall mandarin then axing services to match the staff availability would be an obvious way to save cash and I'm surprised this tactic hasn't been used so far.

 

Phil I agree with you, but in the case of these Waterloo services that is not what is going on.

 

This is a structural change to a timetabled service which, although set up for a purpose which it doesn't strictly fulfil, has over the last 25 odd years built up a solid ridership and established a very useful and popular route into London.

 

If they were saying that this was a short term cost saving measure and that it "would be reinstated when the current pressure is eased" or words to that effect then OK, maybe.

 

But they are not, they are cutting it out with no prospect or discussion of any future for the service.

 

This is not acceptable behaviour surely?

 

Without getting political, I absolutely hate the way in which this Country of ours seems to judge absolutely everything on a crude analysis of what it costs.

 

Moronic.

 

What are we - the third richest country on the Planet?

 

Whatever, this country can spend shedloads of money when it wants to and we are not so strapped for cash that we have to make each others lives worse than they were, however you look at it and whatever anyone tells you.

 

Simon

[Fat Controller]

11 hours ago, Andy Kirkham said:

 

Yes they were introduced when the Tunnel first opened. There was for a time a service from South Wales to Waterloo, although I can't remember the originating station. I remember I once boarded this service ar Bristol and it was nearly empty, but it began to fill up at Bradford and was full by the time it got to Salisbury.

I think several originating stations were used in West Wales, the one I remember was Milford Haven. My mother liked it because she could avoid having to cross London to get a train to us near Folkestone when travelling from Penarth.

[Ron Ron Ron]

8 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

Without getting political, I absolutely hate the way in which this Country of ours seems to judge absolutely everything on a crude analysis of what it costs.

 

Moronic.

 

 

Well, there's only so much money available.

The cost of things has to be considered and priorities taken into account, even if government departments waste and fritter away unbelievable amounts of money in all sorts of other areas.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

....What are we - the third richest country on the Planet?

 

 

Not third.

The UK is sixth in terms of GDP   (India has now overtaken us)

We're 37th richest in terms of per capita.

 

Don't confuse the general wealth of a nation, with the nations finances . They're different things.

For example, the UK in terms of the national finances, is massively in debt. i.e we haven't got the money.

 

As a result, the UK's standing in the list of individual nation's wealth,  doesn't mean the state has the money to spend on everything it wants or needs to do.

 

 

[Not Jeremy]

5 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

Well, there's only so much money available.

The cost of things has to be considered and priorities taken into account, even if government departments waste and fritter away unbelievable amounts of money in all sorts of other areas.

 

 

 

Not third.

The UK is sixth in terms of GDP   (India has now overtaken us)

We're 37th richest in terms of per capita.

 

Don't confuse the general wealth of a nation, with the nations finances . They're different things.

For example, the UK in terms of the national finances, is massively in debt. i.e we haven't got the money.

 

As a result, the UK's standing in the list of individual nation's wealth,  doesn't mean the state has the money to spend on everything it wants or needs to do.

 

 

 

Ron

 

Let's not get hung up on the detail, we can I hope agree that we are not a poor country and that we and (more relevantly in this case) our Government have many choices and options open to them.

 

Our Government has absolutely no "need" to behave badly.

 

I believe that in this one instance behaving badly is precisely what they are doing.

 

I am not saying that it is the "end of the world" if it goes ahead, merely that is a poorly thought out depressing course of action for all of the reasons that are outlined above and elsewhere.

 

If similar things are happening elsewhere and people care about them then they should protest.

 

This change absolutely does change things for the worse for people and businesses in this area and I do feel that it is a wrong headed decision, notwithstanding cost constraints etc.

 

Simon

Edited October 24, 2021 by Not Jeremy
even less gobbledygook

[caradoc]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

* Though conversely if they [Lumo] are successful, then, regardless of what the ORR say, a large chunk of passengers will have been lured from the state backed LNER -but this is OK as it plays into the 'Private = good, state = bad' mentality of the Governing party.

 

If that does happen would it not prove the Governing party right ?!!!

 

(Although I don't believe that a service of 4 trains each way daily, formed of 5 car EMUs and calling at a very limited number of stations is really going to devastate LNER's business, and Lumo themselves seem to be targeting airline passengers as much as rail).

 

 

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

41 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

Ron

 

Let's not get hung up on the detail, we can I hope agree that we are not a poor country and that we and (more relevantly in this case) our Government have many choices and options open to them.

Our Government has absolutely no "need" to behave badly.

I believe that in this one instance behaving badly is precisely what they are doing.......

 

 

I'm not commenting on whether this cutback is either a bad or justified move.

I'm not qualified or knowledgeable about the markets these western routes serve.

I can understand that it might/will affect the service provision for a lot of people.

Popular opinion is supposed to be in favour of central government control of the railways, so it should be no surprise that this is what you get when Whitehall departments and the treasury exercise greater control.

 

As for the countries comparative wealth; again that isn't the same thing as the nation's (as in the state) finances.

 

.

 

[Hal Nail]

So to be clear, it isnt that Waterloo has been swept away in shock rationalisation but that some people who've got used to having an alternative direct train to london, will now have to change trains (or get the other one)?

 

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, caradoc said:

 

If that does happen would it not prove the Governing party right ?!!!

 

 

That depends on your political outlook...

 

Personally I'm fed up to the back teeth with this 'flog it off' / 'outsource it' / 'leave it up to the free market approach'

 

Its not only left the state carrying the can when it all goes wrong but has left us woefully unprepared for the future - and making up the shortfall is going to hit the worse off in society the most.

 

As we have seen with the franchising troubles over the past decade and the energy problems now, some things are too important to the planet or society as a whole to be left to the machinations of 'the free market' and their city spiv cheerleaders who only care about share prices and dividends.

 

Receipts from rail travel should be retained within the state bankrolled industry - not allowed to leak out to private investors, thus making them available for more LONG TERM state sponsored investment. As such successful open access operators should be bought out by the state as their exsistance is an admission that the state has failed in its moral obligation to increase rails modal share.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by phil-b259

[Not Jeremy]

49 minutes ago, Hal Nail said:

So to be clear, it isnt that Waterloo has been swept away in shock rationalisation but that some people who've got used to having an alternative direct train to london, will now have to change trains (or get the other one)?

 

 

Very succinctly put Hal old boy, it would now be interesting to know what you thought of the proposed change.

 

Perhaps you think it a good idea?

 

Do feel free to disagree with me or my contention, I am very frequently wrong!

 

Simon