| Archived Save the Train forum articles - 2005 to 2010. See below
Shuttles - 275/736 Written by Lee on Saturday, 1st July 2006 The Transport Minister , Derek Twigg , has confirmed that the South Western Franchise service between Salisbury and Romsey via Southampton Central and Southampton Airport Parkway will call at Dean & Dunbridge (link below.) http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060629/text/60629w1305.htm Here is a link to First's April 3 Statement. http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/NewsItem.aspx?id=302 "A shuttle service will be introduced between Westbury and Southampton, including calls at Dean and Dunbridge. This will operate until December 2007, when service levels will be reviewed in the light of subject to the new South West Trains franchise." Here is a link to the South Western Stakeholder Briefing (Specification Features.) http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_railways/documents/page/dft_railways_611460-05.hcsp#P100_10021 Quote from the above link : "The Romsey-Totton service was introduced as part of a Rail Passenger Partnership funded scheme in 2003, and connected Chandlers Ford (between Romsey and Eastleigh) to the national passenger network. The consultation document proposed scaling the service back to operate as a shuttle between Romsey and Eastleigh. Further work has been undertaken since consultation, and concludes a service Romsey-Eastleigh-Southampton-Salisbury offers best value for money." Here is a link to the South Western Stakeholder Briefing Annex A (Stakeholder consultation on South Western franchise replacement.) http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_railways/documents/page/dft_railways_611460-08.hcsp#P173_20630 Quote from the above link (Romsey-Southampton-Totton services.) : "The principal concerns raised by respondents were as follows; The majority of passengers using the service from Chandlers Ford travel to Southampton Central or Southampton Airport Parkway therefore an enforced interchange at Eastleigh will discourage passengers, The proposal will lead to an increase in car journeys, Continued growth at Southampton Airport will see the need for more rail journeys by both locally based employees of the airport and air passengers, The proposal is in opposition to Government policy to reduce car travel and increase public transport use, The service is popular, has seen consistent growth since introduction and will grow further as more development is planned in the Chandlers Ford area, Concerns were expressed that the Romsey-Totton service is the only daytime service that calls at Swathling and St Denis, If the current service is uneconomic then more appropriate and cheaper rolling stock should be deployed to operate the service rather than expensive Class 170s." All well and good until you reach the final item on the above list. The question that I would ask is where is this "more appropriate and cheaper rolling stock" going to come from? Lets take Ivybridge as an example , as the DfT have agreed to fund an extra unit to run between Newton Abbot - Plymouth calling there , just as the DfT agreed to fund the Southampton - Westbury shuttle. Ivybridge was to have had its service reduced from 24 services per weekday to 10. It is now to have its service reduced to 18 services per weekday. The 8 "extra" services recieved by Ivybridge are to be provided by the Newton Abbot - Plymouth shuttle. 4 of the 18 services in the proposed Ivybridge timetable are run by SWT. These are due to be withdrawn as part of the South Western Franchise base specification. This will leave Ivybridge with 14 services per weekday. If the Newton Abbot - Plymouth shuttle is withdrawn at the same time as the Southampton - Westbury shuttle (I would stress at this point that I do not know for certain whether this is going to happen) then Ivybridge will be left with just 6 services per weekday. Here is a link to the Ivybridge Rail Users Group website. http://www.irug.ik.com/ Here is a link to a recent Parliamentary Written Question. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060627/text/60627w1231.htm#column_264W Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent research he has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on the current operational performance of South West Trains; and how many complaints he has received from rail users Re: Shuttles - 275/739 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Sunday, 2nd July 2006 There's increasingly gowing evidence that some battles may have been won, but there's a potential war going on that's not going to be over at any time soon under current government policy. Mainly, I note waged against communtities in rural Tory or Lib Dem parts of the country ... Wales, Scotland and the North seem to have a different bias, don't they? Re: Shuttles - 275/750 Written by mthomson on Monday, 3rd July 2006 The Newton Abbot - Plymouth shuttle service is being introduced from Dec 2006 owing to a long and hard battle by the Ivybridge Rail User's Group, Local and District Councils and the Local MP. This shuttle provides Ivybridge with 8 more services than those originally planned. We believe one of the reasons for a change in the DfT's plans was the rise in passenger numbers at Ivybridge (23,000 to 50,000 over the last 3 years). However this increase has also happened at Melksham (3,000 to 27,000 in 5 years). Ivybridge is a Town of around 13,000 inhabitants and had a station which closed in 1959. The present station, built about half of a mile east of the old station in 1994 has a large car park (200 spaces) but the station is not in a convenient position for those that live west of the Town where the higher population is. The commuters in this area find it more convenient to take a bus or drive straight onto the main A38 trunk road directly into Plymouth. The main usage of the staion is for Plymouth commuters, schoolchildren and University and College students living to the east of Ivybridge. Ivybridge still has battles to fight when Re: Shuttles - 275/758 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Tuesday, 4th July 2006 Malcolm, Re: Shuttles - 275/776 Written by Lee on Thursday, 6th July 2006 [quote author=Graham Ellis link=topic=275.msg758#msg758 date=1151994500] Malcolm, Re: Shuttles - 275/891 Written by Lee on Saturday, 15th July 2006 Here is the answer (link below.) http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060711/text/60711w1564.htm#06071184000171 Sarah McCarthy-Fry: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to encourage the use of public transport by bus. Gillian Merron: Within the context of delivering our long-term strategy for improving bus services across the country, the most recent steps taken by the Government include: Providing local authorities in England with the resources to support their Local Transport Plan strategies, a large part of which are related to improving bus-related infrastructure (some Re: Shuttles - 275/969 Written by Lee on Sunday, 23rd July 2006 Here is a link to Appendix 10.2 of the South West Main Line Route Utilisation Strategy. http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/rus%20documents/route%20utilisation%20strategies/south%20west%20main%20line/appendices/appendix%2010.2.pdf Quotes from the above link : "Benefits elsewhere in the appraisal compensated for disbenefits between Romsey and Southampton, where the extended journey time from having to travel via Eastleigh had the same effect as a service frequency reduction. An alternative has now been developed that would see the service operate from Salisbury via Romsey and Redbridge to Southampton, then continuing via Eastleigh back to Romsey; and vice versa. This maximises the journey opportunities and benefits whilst preserving the estimated performance improvements. Terminating trains would be retained at Romsey, as now, but removed from Southampton and Totton. However, this does not address concerns over the quantum increase between Romsey and Salisbury, which could be exacerbated by trains continuing to terminate at Romsey as well as the new terminators at Salisbury. These proposed changes will have to be planned around freight services on the line, and balanced against the identified need for freight growth. Hence, the revised proposal cannot be recommended without further work." In other words Network Rail were not convinced. "The analysis has revealed clear potential to achieve significant benefits at relatively low cost by restructuring passenger services in an area where services had developed in an uncoordinated way. New links across Southampton, including improving access to the airport, are beneficial.Further iteration of the proposals is needed to ensure that the possible disbenefits are eliminated, or are quantified and consciously balanced against the benefits. These proposals are being considered by the Department for Transport, and are likely to be taken forward through the refranchising process." Network Rail considered "extending the hourly Totton Re: Shuttles - 275/970 Written by Lee on Sunday, 23rd July 2006 Here is a link to Appendix 12 of the South West Main Line Route Utilisation Strategy. http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/rus%20documents/route%20utilisation%20strategies/south%20west%20main%20line/appendices/appendix%2012.pdf Quote from the above link : "Since the publication of the SWML RUS Draft for Consultation, Network Rail has been working with industry stakeholders on baseline data for the Freight RUS. This work has established more up-to-date figures than those published in the SWML RUS Draft for Consultation." Appendix 12 lists the actual , planned & maximum trains per day for several sections of line including the one between Dean & Dunbridge. The link below includes a section that lists the onward routing options for any extra freight trains that may be run between the Southampton Area & Salisbury via Dean & Dunbridge. http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=36.msg56#msg56 Re: Shuttles - 275/981 Written by Lee on Monday, 24th July 2006 [quote author=Lee link=topic=275.msg969#msg969 date=1153662927] Here is a link to Appendix 10.2 of the South West Main Line Route Utilisation Strategy. http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/rus%20documents/route%20utilisation%20strategies/south%20west%20main%20line/appendices/appendix%2010.2.pdf Quotes from the above link : "Benefits elsewhere in the appraisal compensated for disbenefits between Romsey and Southampton, where the extended journey time from having to travel via Eastleigh had the same effect as a service frequency reduction. An alternative has now been developed that would see the service operate from Salisbury via Romsey and Redbridge to Southampton, then continuing via Eastleigh back to Romsey; and vice versa. This maximises the journey opportunities and benefits whilst preserving the estimated performance improvements. Terminating trains would be retained at Romsey, as now, but removed from Southampton and Totton. However, this does not address concerns over the quantum increase between Romsey and Salisbury, which could be exacerbated by trains continuing to terminate at Romsey as well as the new terminators at Salisbury. These proposed changes will have to be planned around freight services on the line, and balanced against the identified need for freight growth. Hence, the revised proposal cannot be recommended without further work."[/quote] Here is a link to a recent speech by Derek Twigg , the Transport Minister. http://www.aslef.org.uk/C2B/PressOffice/display.asp?ID=420&Type=2 "In addition, we need to assess the role of passengers and how their interests will develop Re: Shuttles - 275/1597 Written by Lee on Tuesday, 10th October 2006 [quote author=Lee link=topic=275.msg736#msg736 date=1151758732]Here is a link to a recent Parliamentary Written Question. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060627/text/60627w1231.htm#column_264W Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent research he has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on the current operational performance of South West Trains; and how many complaints he has received from rail users Re: Shuttles - 275/1680 Written by Lee on Friday, 20th October 2006 Here is one of the answers (link below.) http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm061019/text/61019w0002.htm#column_1340W Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent discussions he has had with the South Hampshire Rail Users Group; and if he will make a statement. Mr. Tom Harris: Ministers have had no such discussions, although there has been correspondence between the group and departmental officials. Re: Shuttles - 275/1683 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Friday, 20th October 2006 Is it just me, or are there times that these questions are a bit like a game ... with the questioer trying to ask a bullet-proof question and the minister's keepers looking for a hole through which they can avoid a meaningful answer? Re: Shuttles - 275/1728 Written by Lee on Wednesday, 25th October 2006 [quote author=Lee link=topic=275.msg1597#msg1597 date=1160481154]Mr Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South): To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what criteria were used to determine the outcome of the South West trains franchise; and what the cost difference is between the new and old contracts.[/quote] Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what criteria were used to determine the outcome of the South West trains franchise; and what the cost difference is between the new and old contracts. Mr. Tom Harris: The process used to evaluatebids was the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) evaluation model applicable to suppliers to the public sector. This approach utilised a scoring methodology assessing the bidder's approach, deployment, assessment and review, results/evidence (RADAR) to the contribution of 22 operational criteria to the achievement of the three principal delivery plans of performance, revenues and costs. The current franchise subsidy committed for the last year of the franchise (which expires in February 2007) is Re: Shuttles - 275/1734 Written by Lee on Thursday, 26th October 2006 [quote author=Graham Ellis link=topic=275.msg1683#msg1683 date=1161340151]Is it just me, or are there times that these questions are a bit like a game ... with the questioer trying to ask a bullet-proof question and the minister's keepers looking for a hole through which they can avoid a meaningful answer?[/quote] Upcoming PWQ : Mr Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South): To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 19th October 2006, Official Report, column 1340W, on railways, what the outcomes have been of correspondence between officials in his Department and the South Hampshire Rail Users' Group. Re: Shuttles - 275/1823 Written by Lee on Friday, 3rd November 2006 Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the answer of 19 October 2006, Official Report, column 1340W, on railways, what the outcomes have been of correspondence between officials in his Department and the South Hampshire Rail Users Re: Shuttles - 275/1844 Written by Lee on Monday, 6th November 2006 [quote author=Lee link=topic=275.msg891#msg891 date=1152993654]Up to link to index of articles |
|||
Save the Train was the campaign to bring an approriate train service back to and through Melksham. Most big contributors are still around writing at the Coffee shop forum where new members are very welcome. The train has been saved - sort of - we have stepped back up from an unusable service to a poorish one but it's doing very well. We did that through setting up the TransWilts Community Rail Partnership. That fulfilled its early objectives; it has been taken over by local and regional government types who are now doing medium and long term work. The team from this forun can also be found at the Melksham Rail User Group (which was the Melksham Rail Development Group at the time these articles were written and we had no users. We mustn't loose sight, though, that the train service remains poor and needs our community support in marketing and campaigning to keep it going in a positive direction ... and all the more so when we're expecting to find a different normallity once we get out of the Coronavirus Pandemic and head for zero carbon via the climate crisis. Yes, it's saved ... it's now a key community facility ... the need for enhancement and the strong and near-universal local support remain, and the rail industry and goverment remain slow to move and provide the enhancements even to level us up with other towns. Please support the Melksham Rail User Group - now very much in partnership rather than protest with the rail industry and local government, including GWR, TransWilts and unitary and town councils. And please use the trains and buses, and cycle and walk when you can. -- Graham Ellis, (webmaster), February 2021 | |||
|
|||
Further Information:
Home
Current Summary
Daily update
User forum
Consultation
Service now
Service future
Future Analysis
Recent Statistics
Recent letters
Letter to DfT
Save the train
Presentation
Support us
Other Maps
Station facilities
Station approach
Pictures
Trains diverted
History
About Melksham
Site Map
About this site