First Group win South West franchise

[Kris]

It's nice to see that way that references to historical companies are being used in modern franchises. 

[Zomboid]

Pretty much the whole of the old Southern will be trading on historic names when new LSWR takes over (SouthEastern might be a push, but they do operate the old SER routes).

 

Of course given that SWT lasted almost as long as the Southern Railway, that could be considered similarly (1994 - 2017, 23 years; 1923 - 1948, 25 years).

[Joseph_Pestell]

Given that the rail franchising system works around Train Operating Companies, South West Trains is a much more accurate name than London & South Western Railway.

 

And will they use a separate name for the IoW?

[Dunsignalling]

Given that the rail franchising system works around Train Operating Companies, South West Trains is a much more accurate name than London & South Western Railway.

 

And will they use a separate name for the IoW?

I don't consider the IoW to be in the South West geographically, so neither is really appropriate. (but I wouldn't wish Southern on them).

 

John  

[petethemole]

I don't consider the IoW to be in the South West geographically, so neither is really appropriate. (but I wouldn't wish Southern on them).

 

John  

 

But it is south-west of London, as are Portsmouth and Southampton. I've always reckoned that the old railway company names were meant to indicate the direction they took from London.

[Ron Ron Ron]

.....will they use a separate name for the IoW?

 

 

Metropolitan & District Railway ?

Circle Line?

 

 

.

[Zomboid]

Metropolitan & District Railway ?

Circle Line?

 

 

.

Isn't Piccadilly Railway the appropriate one for the trains?

[4630]

 

 

And will they use a separate name for the IoW?

 

 

They could do worse than resurrect 'Ryde Rail' or perhaps 'Wight Rail'.

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

Ryde on the Wight Line.

 

(.....as Jonathan Ross might say.)

Edited April 6, 2017 by Ron Ron Ron

[Dunsignalling]

But it is south-west of London, as are Portsmouth and Southampton. I've always reckoned that the old railway company names were meant to indicate the direction they took from London.

On that basis, London & South Western will be more appropriate than SWT which carries no reference to London.

 

However, if you were to ask residents of Southampton, Portsmouth and the IoW in what part of England they considered themselves to live, I think most would answer "the South".

 

John

Edited April 6, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[JohnR]

GWR diversions, unless some replace the SWT trains, have been more-or-less killed off by the 2012 recontrol scheme. Up trains aren't a problem but down trains certainly are.

 

Relocating Signal 4807, the down main starter at Honiton (formerly H20) has made it impossible to create an overlap on 4809, the down home, behind a train. Thus, no following down train can leave Axminster loop until the preceding one has departed from Honiton, by which time there will be an up train there awaiting a path to Axminster.   

 

That precludes the former practice of having one train on the down starter awaiting an up working, while a second down is en-route from Axminster. The Axminster dynamic loop has room to hold more than one train in each direction so diversions are still possible but the relocation of one signal at Honiton increases delays by around 20 minutes. Either to the up train held at Honiton or the down at Axminster.

 

So, a schoolboy error in the planning process for the recontrol has greatly reduced the usefulness of the line between Exeter and Yeovil for diversionary purposes. Unless of course it was decided in full knowledge of the impact it would have..........  

 

Various landslips over the years since singling would make it prohibitively expensive to redouble the line throughout.

 

However, new loops at/near Whimple and Crewkerne plus some lengthening of the one at Honiton would facilitate a robust half-hourly service. More substantial extension of Honiton loop (down to Feniton and about a half-mile up towards Axminster) with intermediate signals as at Axminster, might make adding one at Whimple unnecessary. 

 

John

There was, at one point, a suggestiong ot very slightly extend the loop into Templecombe, so that an up train could wait at the platform for the single line to clear, rather than just before arriving (in full view of the passengers). I presume the extension of the formerly disused platform has killed that off. 

[Glorious NSE]

On that basis, London & South Western will be more appropriate than SWT which carries no reference to London.

 

However, if you were to ask residents of Southampton, Portsmouth and the IoW in what part of England they considered themselves to live, I think most would answer "the South".

There's also the issue that most folk who do regard themselves as being 'in the South West' aren't primarily served by South West Trains (or L&SWR...)...

 

There's forever folk from Cornwall querying train times on the South West Trains twitter feed (and being referred onto GWR), in the not entirely unreasonable assumption that South West Trains is the company serving the South West...

 

Geographical names are another of those things that sound great as idea's, but don't always make sense on the ground.

 

 

 

 

 

[PaulRhB]

Honiton, Exeter, London & Portsmouth?

[Zomboid]

Before privatisation you could undertake fairly significant journeys entirely within Devon on the appropriately named "Network SouthEast".

And long before that, the London & North Eastern Railway would happily convey you to that well known North Eastern destination of Wales.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Before privatisation you could undertake fairly significant journeys entirely within Devon on the appropriately named "Network SouthEast".

And long before that, the London & North Eastern Railway would happily convey you to that well known North Eastern destination of Wales.

 

Endless examples come to mind. London & North Western to Swansea/Llanelli.

[Gwiwer]

"London and South Western Railway" would be no more nor less accurate than many other names some of which have already been mentioned.  Network SouthEast (which ran its own trains as far afield as Paignton and Kings Lynn, neither of which is by any standard "SouthEast"), Southern Railway (who ran almost as far west, at Padstow, as the GWR and again way beyond what most people consider "south"), the LNER in both its iterations ran to destinations well beyond London and the North East including Aberdeen and Inverness and, in the original LNER days, to the West Highlands as well.  The SE&CR ran to Reading which has generally been held to be in GWR territory though whether it counts as "south east" or something else might be open to debate.  

 

And if we are resurrecting names of bygone railway companies should not Ryde - Shanklin simply be the Isle of Wight Railway?

[Ron Ron Ron]

Dare I mention, the GWR ran to the Midlands and North West of England.

....And if we are resurrecting names of bygone railway companies should not Ryde - Shanklin simply be the Isle of Wight Railway?

 

IOWR

[Gwiwer]

Dare I mention, the GWR ran to the Midlands and North West of England.

 

IOWR

 

No

[Ron Ron Ron]

...and if First win the WCML franchise next time round....

 

FWCR

 

 

 

.

[Dunsignalling]

There was, at one point, a suggestiong ot very slightly extend the loop into Templecombe, so that an up train could wait at the platform for the single line to clear, rather than just before arriving (in full view of the passengers). I presume the extension of the formerly disused platform has killed that off. 

Unfortunately, yes. The same "improvements" were applied at Whimple and Crewkerne so any new loops at either of those locations would demand a reversal of the process or require the loop to finish outside the station. 

 

That said, if constructed, they would reduce single-line section times to 10 minutes or thereabouts so sitting just outside for 20 minutes or more shouldn't happen.

 

John

Edited April 6, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[Christopher125]

It's nice to see that way that references to historical companies are being used in modern franchises.

A note of caution - I gather that appeared on facebook, I've not seen any confirmation that it's genuine or evidence of any official source.

Edited April 6, 2017 by Christopher125

[Edwin_m]

the London & North Eastern Railway would happily convey you to that well known North Eastern destination of Wales.

Though to be fair, it was only the very North East corner of Wales...

 

Quite the daftest names in my view are WCML and ECML.  The ECML is only the easternmost railway in Britain on its latitude north of Morpeth, though you can see the coast itself for a fairish distance on that section.  The WCML is only the westernmost between Lancaster and Carnforth and between Carlisle and Gretna, with a tiny glimpse of the sea on each of these sections. 

 

Don't get me started on West Anglia. 

Edited April 6, 2017 by Edwin_m

[Ron Ron Ron]

...Quite the daftest names in my view are WCML and ECML.  ....

 

 

Maybe they should be named something like..

 

The mainline that runs up the west/east side of the country from London to Scotland and vice versa.

 

TMLTRUT(W/E)SotCFLTSaVV for short.

 

Sounds a lot better and the acronym rolls off the tongue very easily.

 

 

 

.....and I expect some smart Alec will say that's a place in Wales?

 

 

 

.

[phil_sutters]

I thought I only had one thing to say on rail company names

but 'alph a line later I realized there was more

Edited April 6, 2017 by phil_sutters

[phil-b259]

There was, at one point, a suggestiong ot very slightly extend the loop into Templecombe, so that an up train could wait at the platform for the single line to clear, rather than just before arriving (in full view of the passengers). I presume the extension of the formerly disused platform has killed that off. 

 

The problem with this suggestion is the rail over road bridge immediately to the east of the station (which the platforms may have continued over in the past based on photos) was rebuilt after the line was singled as a single track structure. Thus for the second platform to be returned to work, total bridge reconstruction is needed. Moving the signals and getting rid of the extended platform (which I believe is of a modular construction and can be removed relatively easily is peanuts by comparison although obviously they will add to the 'total cost' of such a project).

 

In short there is no business case / very poor BCR for such works, a situation that won't change unless said bridge requires renewal and the powers that be chose to make the replacement double track again.

Edited April 6, 2017 by phil-b259