Now found at http://www.clpg.online

 
http://www.clpg.org.uk


Gentlemen and ladies, you have performed miracles over the years.  Power to your knees and elbows, long may you continue.

 
It is usually a tight squeeze, and with it being the 40th Anniversary year, we are expecting it to be extremely cosy. Apologies to everyone. There isn't a larger venue along the line available that is walkable from a station. Unfortunately, I have to be in Edinburgh for another AGM in which I am a required attendee.

 

Update; I have heard from a member of the committee and due to space limitations at the venue, this is "members only".

As it's the 40th anniversary / AGM they're expecting a busy meeting and "those attending just about squeeze into the venue normally" .... 

 
From http://www.clpg.org.uk/blog/cotswold-line-service-problems-a-response-from-gwr/


CLPG has over 1600 members ... including a number who visit us here on the Coffee Shop.   I don't know if they welcome guests at their AGM (so how wide this "Meet the Manager" opportunity is), but I'm flagging up the date anyway for members and perhaps wider.  Can someone from CLPG follow up on due course / let us know if this is "members only", "guests by invite" or public?   Thanks!

Link to last year's AGM: http://www.clpg.org.uk/blog/the-39th-agm/


Edit to add - Members only, I'am afraid - see follow up

 
The person I knew who lived in Wolvercote pronounced it without the e.  I never saw her write it but I had always assumed that that was the correct spelling.

 
Wolvercote, Wolvercot and Woolvercot have all enjoyed periods in use, just as Wytham and Witam have been used just across the river in what used to be Berkshire - or do I mean Barkshire? Maybe we should bring back Moreton Henmarsh? It would at least have the virtue of stopping some conductors telling people trains are arriving at Moreton-in-the-Marsh...

Bicester Local History Society suggests that the LNWR actually used the Woolvercot spelling for its halt http://www.blhs.org.uk/index.php?page=railways but it's on the internet, so who knows?

County archives may be a more reliable source but the rail network at least is sticking to spelling it Wolvercot.

 
After I posted that earlier on I did a bit of digging and the sources I came across on the web suggested a different explanation. The entry for Wolvercote village in Wikipedia suggests that it's been known as such since 1185, and doesn't mention any alternative spellings. Nor does the slightly more scholarly British History Online from a quick skim-read, so it looks as if the spelling Wolvercote has been in common (although maybe not exclusive?) usage since long before the Old Worse and Worse came along.

The other suggestion I came across is that the spelling of the GWR platform's name as "Wolvercot" was to avoid confusion with the LNWR's nearby Wolvercote Halt, although I must say it doesn't strike me that much confusion would be saved by the trivial differences in station name... It did get me wondering though whether this may have led to a chicken/egg situation where the village's name may have sometimes been spelt Wolvercot after the GW station's appearance rather than before.

 
Because, as I'm sure I've explained before (and constantly have to at work), Wolvercot was how the name of the village was spelled when the Oxford Worcester and Wolverhampton Railway opened in 1853, hence the junction got that spelling. But while the village later got an e added (and it was certainly still Wolvercot in the 1920s, as I have a book with the relevant chunk of a 1922 OS map showing it without the e), the railway never changed and has a standard BR nameboard up next to the points to prove it.

And there was nothing incorrect about Handborough either. This too was the spelling used in the mid-19th century. In this case, BR did eventually change to Hanborough, in the 1980s or early 1990s, certainly some time after the d was dropped by other people - and only after a period when the sign at the top of the station approach road had one spelling, while the platforms had the other.

 
I've never understood why it's called Wolvercot Junction even though it's located in Wolvercote! The railway in those parts didn't have a great track record at spelling, given that Hanborough was incorrectly known as Handborough until surprisingly recently...

 
Twas a buckled rail, no less, which resulted in single line working between Ascott and MIM.

 
Yes, sorry Chris, was running around collaring people about possible stories for the papers and getting collared myself.

Not entirely surprised the points went out of shape - had a wrestling match with my back door catch as well. Was certainly a bit scorchio in these parts today.

9pm update: points still causing problems according to FGW site:

 
And the HST that returned us to Oxford got caught by the first heat-related points failure at Wolvercot Jn......sorry to miss you, Will.

 
CLPG chairman Derek Potter stood down at the group's AGM today, after 16 years as either secretary or chairman but he will remain a member of the committee. He has been succeeded by John Ellis, GLPG vice-chairman until now, who is a former production director of Railtrack and ex-managing director of ScotRail, now a trustee of the Campaign for Better Transport, a director of First GB Railfreight and chairman of National Railway Heritage Awards Committee - he knows his railways, in other words - though he admitted to the meeting he had yet to tell Mrs Ellis about his elevation!     

 
This is taking place on Saturday, May 23, at the WI Hall in New Road, Moreton-in-Marsh, just round the corner from the station, at 10.30am.

I won't be going myself, as I'm off to Canada for a fortnight (and fitting in a ride on the Rocky Mountaineer from Vancouver to Calgary), so if anyone else will be at the meeting and can report on what was said, it would be appreciated.

 
If you want a walk down memory lane on the Cotswold Line, the CLPG treasurer Andrew Wilkins and membership secretary John Stanley have converted the first 100 issues of the group's newsletter, from its formation in 1978 until last summer's edition, into pdfs, with the full set now available on a CD.

The CD, priced ^10, including post and packing, is available from Mr Wilkins at 16 Marlborough Crescent, Long Hanborough, Witney, Oxon, OX29 8JP.

 

Basically better utilisation of LM stock, as they essentially only need to conjure up a set every two hours to fill in the gaps in the FGW services - assuming those get north of Gloucester or Cheltenham - I'm not sure that linking these to Weymouth and Brighton trains can be sustained in the long term, as delays north and south of Bristol and turning back short seem almost endemic now. Scarcely a day seems to go by without service alterations appearing on the website affecting these services.

 

Excellent stuff if they pull it off, and thanks for posting the info.

 

Perhaps. The LM 153s (taken off the 3 LM branch lines) were being run in a threesome but this had to be withdrawn as they could not keep to the timetable.

As long as they don't shorten LM Snow Hill or New Street services! They are both packed enough during the peaks (and off peaks with New Street)!

Quick comment: I know, the overcrowding is probably nothing compared to Bristol!

 
Probably stock that was going to be cascaded to FGW in 18 months time, or a unit replaced by the PPM? 

 

Wow!

But where will the stock come from?

 

Idea is that everything would stop there. Worcester News story today has more:

http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/display.var.2265680.0.bid_for_extra_rail_service_for_cities.php

 

I hope so, but don't hold your breath!

 

Will Ashchurch be well-served by this welcome improvement, willc?

 

Yes there are, and the 05.45 from Malvern overnights there, but it was just one of several locations mentioned by Mark Hopwood and the facilities at Hereford are pretty basic - water supplies and a power supply to keep the batteries charged, which could probably do with being replaced with something more modern anyway, as it apparently took quite a while to find the necessary spares to get it working again at the start of this year after many years' disuse.

All the other locations mentioned are essentially geared up for DMUs, so being able to keep an HST at Oxford to do the 05.50 from Moreton would be a clear benefit, as the train now has to leave Old Oak Common in West London before 4am, which is not the greatest use of resources, nor of staff time. And keeping an HST at Worcester would allow more efficient use of crews based there and save a Bristol crew from a start in the small hours and miles of running before the train earns a penny in revenue.

 
But there were/are stabling facilities at Hereford. Wasn't that many years ago that the 1820 (as it used to be) from Paddington stayed overnight to do one of the morning services, the old 0650, I think. Granted the other one had to come from Bristol or Cardiff or something daft.

Didn't somebody say in a post a good few months ago that the electrical connections at Hereford for keeping the train engines warm had been repaired. Mind you given the time the overnight stock used to spend winding its good old Paxmans up in the early morning annoying the local residents I'd guess they were red hot by the time the train left.

 
Various points of interest today:

The lobbying campaign for the double track proposals has been making an impact in the corridors of power. See: http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/display.var.2262529.0.rail_upgrade_calls_make_impression.php

One for Mookiemoo - Mark Hopwood said FGW are looking at cutting some of the padding out, as of the December 2008 timetable change - though I suspect it may be some of the more insane off-peak waits and the extended stops at Evesham on Saturdays that are the top targets at this stage.

Long-term they are looking at stabling and servicing facilities at Oxford, Worcester, Hereford and Reading (presumably making them more HST-friendly) with a view to cutting down running empty stock to and from the depots in London and Bristol. Mr Hopwood specifically mentioned the impact if there is some problem miles away, which fouls up the empty stock moves in the early hours from Bristol to Abergavenny and Old Oak Common to Moreton-in-Marsh (for the 05.50)

There was a suggestion from FGW that double-track completion may slip to December 2010, or even into 2011. If double track gets the go-ahead, then a blockade is likely on the Evesham to Moreton-in-Marsh section to speed up work here, most likely August as passenger numbers in peaks are low (I have joined the first train out of Hereford on days that month when there were fewer than 80 passengers on board after Moreton, according to the TM's headcounts).

In Worcester, the county council is looking at buying up the city's post office building (services are switching to WH Smith) next to Foregate St station with a view to using the site to create a 'gateway' station in the city centre.

FGW and London Midland have drawn up a plan for an improved joint service between Worcester, Cheltenham and Gloucester which they are now seeking approval and financial support for. If approved, it could start from December. Would plug the key gap in the morning (about 6.50 to 9.05) in departures from Worcester and be essentially hourly all day, with good connections at Cheltenham with XC services. LM also planning a half-hourly Worcester-Bromsgrove-Birmingham service, due to rising passenger numbers, up 12-14% year-on-year.

A disabled access route to the Oxford-bound platform at Evesham station is now under construction on an old ramp down from Worcester Road after many years of delays - I think this was first suggested under Thames Trains after the old wooden barrow crossing across the tracks was removed, along with Kingham's - still no sign of a solution there though.

Cotswold and Malverns Tramsport Partnership has printed 75,000 copies of a fold-out guide to the Cotswold Line and on to Hereford with local info, attractions and bus connections to encourage use of the line. It will be distributed through visitor information centres. Nice big map of the lines on one side.

CLPG is helping organise a bus service on Saturdays in August, linking Evesham station with the village of Broadway and the Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway at Toddington. Plan to run bus to/from Honeybourne has been dropped as station facilities are basic and not attractive for a long wait for connections, whereas Evesham station is at the end of the town's High Street.

 
The agenda enclosed with the new Cotswold and Malvern Line News says the guest speaker will be the transport journalist Christian Wolmar.

 
My thanks to willc for the following :

The Annual General Meeting will be held at the Womens Institute Hall, Moreton-in-Marsh, Gloucestershire on Saturday 10th May 2008 at 1045.

The WI Hall is in New Road, which is one of the two approach roads to the station, so just a minute's walk from the trains.

The time fits in nicely with the trains due from Malvern at 10.16 and from Oxford at 10.25.

 
The Cotswold Line Promotion Group AGM will be held in the Moreton-In-Marsh Area on 10 May 2008.

If anyone could post the exact venue then I would be most grateful.....

 

True, but they must not slow down now! Much more is needed!


Completely agree!


Typical short sightenedness. I would not be surprised if they had removed some of the "double" structures and replaced them with "single track" structures (e.g. bridges etc.)

 
I'm not sure whether or not CLPG are as active as they once were but credit must be given to them for improvements in the past.

Working with FGW must be like pushing string uphill.

Btline makes a good point about Chiltern who, in my experience, are vastly better. I travel from Pershore to Paddington and it is both (a lot) cheaper and quicker to drive to Warwick Parkway and go on the Chiltern line.  The trains are by and large punctual, they have similar seat space to the Adelante and the one class 'Clubman' works well giving extra seating by not having first class.

In the recent thread about doubling one observation was that on the single lines the track alignment had been altered so doubling by installing a parallel track is not possible and the existing single track would need to be realigned as well.

In the very recent past most of the track has been replaced - why wasn't it realigned at that time to make doubling at a later date easier and a cheaper?
 

 

I think that if anyone from the CLPG is reading this, that may well be a hint....

While I am not going to comment on the usefulness (or otherwise) of the CLPG, I will say that they didnt reply to my e-mails either.

 

Quite right! The CLPG are absolutely useless. They still have not replied to my emails, nor have they put the petition link on the website.

However, Network Rail are responsible for not getting double track down. If the Cotswold Line is to get better, full redoubling is the only answer. Forget, "infrastructure improvements at Oxford"

REMEMBER CHILTERN RAILWAYS GOT THEIR LINE DOUBLED (the line that BR mothballed and singled, disguising it as "improvements").

If Chiltern did it, why can FGW?

 
I deliberately posted the link without comment as I wanted to see what others thought. I am not impressed by CLPG at this time, letting FGW off with playing the blame game (ie blame network rail). What about all the trains cancelled in december due to staff availability (trying to run a railway relying on staff overtime shifts), train failures, short notice (or no notice) cancellations, non-working train information screens, short formed trains and overcrowding.

 

Pointless- Network Rail have AGAIN refused to confirm that they want to redouble the line! What good came from that meeting? 

Can't they see- that single track is the main problem- the root of all the other problems (ie- train terminate early because they were delayed  because of the single track).

Having more staff here and there, and a better relationship with LM is not going to help anyone, if the 15.51 to Hereford (for eg) gets stuck on the single track section for 10 mins at Charlbury (for whatever reason), therefore delaying the whole FGW schedule for hours!

Not good enough. 

 

Hmmm....I will be interested to read willc's report on this.

 
Report from meeting between CLPG and Andrew Haines here:

http://www.clpg.co.uk/newsFGWmeetingreport.htm

 
I'm not very impressed with the CLPG- look at their website! 

They never replied regarding my petition, nor did they put it on the website! 

Do they want the line to get better? 

 
More here....CLPG meeting Andrew Haines today

http://www.witneygazette.net/display.var.2036653.0.campaigners_meet_rail_executive.php

 
The Train Fellows Blog expresses similiar sentiments (link below.)
http://trainfellows.blogspot.com/2008/02/not-auspicious-start.html

 
The Cotswold Line Promotion Group says it is virtually impossible to promote local rail services now because they have become so unreliable (link below.)
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2008/02/its_almost_impossible_to_promo.html#more

CLPG chairman Derek Potter said:


Richard Rowland, regional manager for First Great Western, said: