Going to London - considered Bicester North?

Sat 25 Aug 2007, 10:08

I disagree & think losing the direct train link to London is a really terrible idea. It would make it easy for FGW to downgrade even further services to Charlbury and beyond--especially connections at weekends and in the evenings. What is needed is the doubling of the track, not its demotion.
Those who think that a direct train connection to London is an optional extra might think about the effect that losing it would have on businesses & shops--and also probably on house prices--locally.
FGW is probably just a temporary evil; losing the direct train to London would be a more permanent one.

Fri 24 Aug 2007, 20:21

Dave - that is a great idea. The line between Oxford and Worcester should be treated for what it is - a secondary branch line.

Fri 24 Aug 2007, 10:17

I partially agree and partially disagree. If you are travelling to London, CBY-PADD is not a reliable enough option. If travelling CBY-OXF, it's the only option. If FGW considered running the Cotswold line with all trains terminating and starting at Oxford, the service might improve dramatically for Oxford travellers. This might also mean trains could run more frequently up and down the line. London travellers would simply have to connect onto an Oxford train. It's an idea...

Thu 23 Aug 2007, 22:10

Dave - the Chiltern Line have only one line to worry about which is why the trains are reliable. If they had to cope with many lines, as FGW and Virgin do, then they would too not be always on time. But how green are you being - and what about the rest of us who cant get to Bicester? And what if you just want to go to Oxford? If the Cotwold Line isnt used regularly, then we stand a chance of losing it - just because those in Charlbury wont support it. I agree with Christine, OK to use but only when there is no other option.

Thu 23 Aug 2007, 19:29

I've just completed another week of travel on the Bicester North/Marylebone route. I leave home at exactly 6:20 to get the 6:54. In the last five days it has arrived on time every day. This gets me into Marylebone at 7:50 (on time everyday). I catch the 17:30 home and arrive at the house between 6:50 and 6:55 everyday. I get a seat everyday. If I arrive at 17:28, I get a seat. Who wants to travel on the 17:22 from Paddington anyway? To get a seat, you need to be on it by 17:15. You might as well have caught the 17:03 from Marylebone... The week's season with parking was £112. I can't see me reverting to Paddington/Charlbury unless there's a dramatic improvement in reliability or they start using those Hitachi bullet thingys that have just arrived from Japan today.

Sun 12 Aug 2007, 14:49

Dave, Before you start feeling too smug, I hope you have noticed that the Chiltern Line is up for sale. I'm sure some of the current enterprises making bids for it -- e.g. National Express Coaches -- will want to make changes to the way that the line operates.
Indeed, it seems that the fact that the Chiltern Line has prioritised quality rather than quantity is the reason why it is being sold off.
By the way, you misinterpreted my earlier post to this thread. This was not an endorsement for using the Chiltern Line every day--only when there is no sensible alternative.

Fri 10 Aug 2007, 16:49

Yesterday, I used Bicester again (and would have done so today also if I had not worked from home). My wife commented yesterday, that I was home 5 minutes before I was due.... I'd have been laughing all the way to Marylebone this morning if I'd known then what I know now about this morning's appalling Cotswold line service...

Thu 9 Aug 2007, 10:42

Christine, thanks for the endorsement. I have also used Banbury, but as most Banbury trains stop at Bicester about 10 minutes earlier, I just find it easier to get on/off there. Good point about innovation though - the Bicester ticket machines let you buy a ticket and parking for tomorrow - the new machine at Charlbury is today only - How I would love to buy tomorrow's parking today to just give me a bit more time....

Wed 8 Aug 2007, 14:44

I try to use Charlbury station whenever practicable on the "use it or lose it" principle. But it wouldn't do FGW any harm to know how tempted people are by the Chiltern Line offerings.
My own preference is for Banbury, rather than Bicester, and use it when returning from London late at night & sometimes also when travelling North or when the Cotswold Line is disrupted at weekends.
Chiltern also have such innovative ticketing options: e.g. the mobile phone tickets. These make travelling to London quite a lot cheaper than anything FGW offers.

Wed 8 Aug 2007, 11:37

I think Dave's point is unarguable - Bicester North does get a much better service than we do at Charlbury. I'd like to think that is is almost entirely to do with the single track on the Cotswold Line but I suspect that Chiltern is simply a better operator than FGW. I believe that the Chiltern Line also used to have a single track between Bicester and London which was later redoubled. We can only hope for the same kind of investment here.

That said, if the choice was between Bicester and Charlbury, I know where I would rather live!

Wed 8 Aug 2007, 08:44

I think you all misunderstood me. I am a regular London traveller and have been for the last eight years. Over the last two weeks, I've compared Chiltern from Bicester with the service I got before the floods. The service from Bicester is far better than that from here and there's one more plus point - if you travel later in the day and buy a cheap day return, there are no restrictions on the time you can return... To travel back between 4pm and 7pm, you have to buy a saver from Charlbury.

Wed 8 Aug 2007, 00:49

Richard's on holiday and just asked me to approve news items, ads etc - nothing complicated!!! I am sure I will be taken off when he gets back!

Wed 8 Aug 2007, 00:17

How did you become site administrator Susie? I think we should be told - was there a coup?!

Tue 7 Aug 2007, 20:35

Well said Derek - cant agree with you more. If we dont use it - we'll lose it!

Tue 7 Aug 2007, 12:45

You said you were expecting derision Dave so far be it from me to disappoint you! Some flaws in your argument:

1. You say that the service on the Chiltern Line has been "far superior and ultimately quicker and more reliable" than that on the Cotswold Line over the last…

Long post - click to read full text

Mon 6 Aug 2007, 21:45

It pains me to suggest that anyone should drive 25 minutes to another town to get a train to London. But this is what I've been doing for the last two weeks. And I can only report that the service is far superior and ultimately quicker and more reliable. The trains take about 55 minutes direct to Marylebone. Add 25 minutes drive and you have roughly the equivalent of the Paddington/Charlbury time. These are the pros: 1. No-one stands on Chiltern trains. 2. They arrive on time and depart on time. (Only once in two weeks was my train 5 minutes late leaving, but it caught up all lost time.) 3. It's £37 return. 4. You don't get stiff sitting on a chiltern turbo as the seats are much more comfortable and four across as standard. 5. There's no 1st class wasting valuable space for standard class travellers. 6. Marylebone is two stops nearer central London on the Bakerloo line. 7. Marylebone is much cleaner than Paddington. 8. The Bakerloo line entrance at Marylebone never seems to close due to congestion. 9. Most trains are four or eight car units and the majority seems to be mobile-free zones. 10. You travel with confidence that you'll arrive on time. 11. There are 9 departures to Bicester North between 4pm and 7pm - Charlbury has 4. Now the cons: Eco-friendly it is not as you have to drive 36 miles per day. However, after today's 17:52 was cancelled, I was remembering that I could easily have been on the 17:30 from Marylebone. I would have been home in Charlbury by 18:50 - Not the one hour later that I actually got home...

I'm expecting much derision from you all, but I'm now unlikely to use Paddington/Charlbury much. I listen to Sarah Kennedy in the morning and Chris Evans in the evening and it's much more relaxing than 80 minutes stress on FGW, wondering if the single track is free...

Dave