| Archived Save the Train forum articles - 2005 to 2010. See below
Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1279 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Friday, 25th August 2006 The latest published figures for ticket sales to / from Melksham are 27,447 per annum - for the year ended March 2005. Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1280 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Friday, 25th August 2006 P.S. On ticket sales per train calling, Melksham would come much higher up the list. I don't have statistics / a table of passenger train numbers .... but glancing up and down from position 1899 in the list, I see station after station that has much more frequent services (and serves a much smaller catchment) than Melksham. Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1281 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Friday, 25th August 2006 Correction to my first post - only ONE station, Pilning, has ended up with a worse service that Melksham. 245 tickets were sold to and from Pilining in 2004/2005, compared to over one hundred times that number (27,477) to and from Melksham. In the original specification, Thornford (annual ticket sales 1,396) was due to be reduced to one train a day each way, but I had overlooked the fact that it got a reprieve during the consultation process - excellent news! Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1282 Written by Sion Bretton on Friday, 25th August 2006 do the ticket sales for melksham include Internet sales , via Traineline, First group & Wessex Trains (I know they are gone) and Q jump? Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1283 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Saturday, 26th August 2006 I understand that the figures include all tickets sales where the tickets are specifcally to or from Melksham. Where the ticket is a season ticket, an appropriate number of journeys is counted (I can't give you the details of the algrithm used). The figure is, though, what is say which is "Ticket Sales to or from Melksham", so it is NOT an accurate journey count. It does not include things like: * journeys made to or from Melksham on tickets such as Severn-Solent Rovers, Britrail passes, etc * journeys made by infants under 3 who are travelling for free * journeys made where no payment is possible (last bus on Sunday night from Chippenham when there's no train!) * Journeys made where people get off short at Melksham It does include things like * tickets purchase to / from Melksham but not used (e.g. train cancelled and they phone someone for a lift) For some stations, extreme care needs to be taken of the ticket sales figures. For example, there are certain journeys such as Chippenham to Paddington where it's sometimes more economic to buy a return ticket to Didcot, then a further return ticket from Didcot into London - and this is perfectly within the rules provided you catch a train that actually calls at Didcot in both directions. If the level of these sales is significant, then Didcot's figures may not be very representative of true station usage. Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1285 Written by Lee on Saturday, 26th August 2006 [quote author=Graham Ellis link=topic=433.msg1281#msg1281 date=1156524090] Correction to my first post - only ONE station, Pilning, has ended up with a worse service that Melksham. 245 tickets were sold to and from Pilining in 2004/2005, compared to over one hundred times that number (27,477) to and from Melksham. In the original specification, Thornford (annual ticket sales 1,396) was due to be reduced to one train a day each way, but I had overlooked the fact that it got a reprieve during the consultation process - excellent news! [/quote] So did Chetnole (annual ticket sales 2,248.) However it would be too simplistic to suggest that the timetable has been restored and there are no cuts. Here is a link to Appendix 2.2 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%202.2.pdf [quote author=Lee link=topic=423.msg1274#msg1274 date=1156497960]Poor timekeeping on First Great Western's long-distance express services is under investigation by the Office for Rail Regulation (link below.) http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2006/08/great_western_running_late.html#more Quotes from the above link : "The ORR said that part of the cause of delays to FGW's express services was the large-scale track renewal programme on lines from London Paddington." "However, it said that track and signals operator Network Rail and FGW had drawn up joint plans to tackle the problems, which should be in place next month." "Among the ideas already implemented is for teams of FGW and Network Rail managers to 'adopt' poorly-performing services to identify why they are suffering delays and tackle the causes."[/quote] Here is a link to the final First Great Western December 2006 timetable. http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Documents/Custom/Rev%20Dec%20TTs/SX%20-%20Cardiff%20-%20Bristol%20to%20Weymouth%20-%20Portsmouth%20-%20Brighton.pdf Examples of forthcoming First / Network Rail performance studies include the following : 1) The 1200 Cardiff - Brighton service , which will assess the benefits / disbenefits of missing out the Patchway , Keynsham , Oldfield Park , Freshford and Avoncliff stops , but keeping the stop at Bradford - on - Avon. 2) The 1400 Cardiff - Weymouth service , which will assess the benefits / disbenefits of the original Westbury - Weymouth SLC2. The timetable is also designed to assess the benefits / disbenefits of missing out the stop at Pilning altogether. You will also have noticed that all of the "00" Cardiff Central departures , except the 1200 , include long waits at Bristol Temple Meads , which is the exact opposite of what the JSPTU Rail Vision proposed. Those who conclude that the Swindon - Southampton service is being withdrawn because of the high subsidy ignore the fact that Graham's figures prove that growth on the northern section will pull the southern section , and thus the whole service , out of subsidy and into profit within 5 years , especially if a both - ways , clock - face , 2 - hourly frequency is introduced. The true reason that the Swindon - Southampton service is being withdrawn , and that Melksham is having its train service replaced by buses , can be found in the quotes below. [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." 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: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1295 Written by Lee on Saturday, 26th August 2006 Here are some further station usage stats. Avonmouth 33815 (year) , 92 passengers per day. Severn Beach 29295 (year) , 80 passengers per day. The Severn Beach line is served by 15 train / replacement bus services each - way on Monday - Fridays and 15 train services each - way on Saturdays. I strongly suspect that the true figures for Avonmouth & Severn Beach (and Clifton Down , click on http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=371.msg1115#msg1115) are WAY above the official figures. I would very much appreciate the views of any regular Severn Beach line passengers on this issue. Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1297 Written by Lee on Saturday, 26th August 2006 [quote author=Graham Ellis link=topic=12.msg17#msg17 date=1127455984]Questions are also raised concerning different speed trains on the line - a slower train has to have a "double" or triple space slot in the flow so that it can set out well ahead of a faster train [from Swindon] and still be clear at the other end [Didcot] of the crunch section. Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1307 Written by Lee on Monday, 28th August 2006 [quote author=Lee link=topic=433.msg1295#msg1295 date=1156598771] Here are some further station usage stats. Avonmouth 33815 (year) , 92 passengers per day. Severn Beach 29295 (year) , 80 passengers per day. The Severn Beach line is served by 15 train / replacement bus services each - way on Monday - Fridays and 15 train services each - way on Saturdays. I strongly suspect that the true figures for Avonmouth & Severn Beach (and Clifton Down , click on http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=371.msg1115#msg1115) are WAY above the official figures. I would very much appreciate the views of any regular Severn Beach line passengers on this issue. [/quote] Forgot to mention - both Avonmouth & Severn Beach stations' passenger usage is shown as having declined. Here is how First described the radical changes made to the Weymouth line timetable on 3 April 2006 (link below.) http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/NewsItem.aspx?id=302 "Services between Bristol Temple Meads and Weymouth will be retimed to better suit leisure and commuter customers on the line, including the retiming of a morning peak service from Frome to Bristol Temple Meads. Connections at Castle Cary for the West of England will be improved." Here is how the Greater Western Franchise Agreement described the same changes : "Weymouth – Bristol. Service will be retimed away from a standard two hour pattern, providing the same quantum of service, but at times better suited to the leisure and commuter market requirements. This will include provision of a morning commuter service from Frome to Bristol." "Weymouth – Bristol. Through introducing the new service pattern (issue 34a) connections at Castle Cary for the West of England will be improved." [quote author=Lee link=topic=36.msg1253#msg1253 date=1156239153] One thing may have puzzled followers of this thread : If it is becoming increasingly obvious that a large number of freight trains are about to be routed via Melksham , then why is the line (and the line from Southampton through Westbury & Trowbridge that links into it) only projected to achieve medium - level tonnage growth to 2015? The answer probably lies in the quotes below : 1) Network Rail Business Plan 2006 (Page 8 of the link below.) http://www.networkrail.co.uk/documents/3103_Route%204%20Wessex%20Routes.pdf "Capacity on the line that stretches from Route 13 to Route 3 is also expected to be adequate for the required quantum of freight and passenger traffic , but this is to some extent dependent on routeing choices for future freight flows and the implementation of a W10 diversionary route." 2) [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." 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 – Eastleigh – Romsey service through to Salisbury, curtailing the Southampton – Salisbury – Bristol or Swindon local service at Salisbury to become a Salisbury – Westbury – Swindon or Bristol service" but concluded that "The capacity effect of this slight increase in service frequency, for instance on freight growth, would have to be carefully assessed before a recommendation could be made." Of course , we know what actually happened (links below.) http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/melkshamrailway/138_Lies_damned_lies_and_statistics.html http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/melkshamrailway/145_Letter_from_Derek_Twigg.html http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=337.msg968#msg968 [/quote] The following also needs to be bourne in mind. 1) What looks very much like a rail - replacement bus service has just been revealed for Melksham (link below.) http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=424.msg1249#msg1249 2) Over half of the services planned for Dean , Dilton Marsh and Dunbridge from December 2006 appear to have been scheduled at the times that the Rail Freight Group have stated would be ideal for freight trains (link below.) http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=421.msg1243#msg1243 In my view , Network Rail are not going to upgrade their tonnage growth forecast until the above passenger services have been withdrawn. I would also remind you of the following quote : [quote author=Graham Ellis link=topic=210.msg509#msg509 date=1144818659]I understand from a phone converstion last night with a usually reliable source that First are in discussion with the DfT on running rail replacement bus services on the following routes: a) Par to Newquay b) Liskeard to Looe c) Totnes and Ivybridge to Plymouth d) Chippenham to Frome e) to Severn Beach[/quote] Recent events have certainly not eased my concerns for the rail services mentioned above. [/quote] [quote author=Graham Ellis link=topic=36.msg1254#msg1254 date=1156244360] In other words, a moderate increase in traffic could be caused by a removal of the majority of passenger trains and a massive increase in freight, and that is what you're foreseeing? Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1346 Written by Eddy on Friday, 1st September 2006 I find Graham's analysis and the discussion about the usage of Melksham station to be interesting. However, it would be more informative, and probably more damning, if statistics were available for each individual train of the day. From my experience, away from peak hour trains, there are similarities with the Marie Celeste when other trains call and I suspect that FGW had already noticed this when compiling the winter timetable. I am a railway enthusiast and will always travel by train when it is possible and convenient. Unfortunately, although I travel for pleasure on average once a fortnight, it is rarely convenient to use our local station due to the lack of trains. The problem we face at Melksham is that we are the only station between Thingley Junction and Bradford Junction and, with the low passenger numbers away from peak, it is not worth the TOC's while in running through our part of the former Wilts, Somerset and Weymouth line. Instead of incorporating us in the Swindon to Southampton route, I would dearly like them to speculate and run a trial of a two-hourly shuttle between Swindon and Westbury during the day for six months or a year and challenge the Melksham folk to use the station. eddy Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1348 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Saturday, 2nd September 2006 Eddy, you are so spot on with most of this analysis, and you use about a tenth of the words that I would have used. Welcome to the board. We do have three sets of statistics for individual trains of the day. The DfT set from around 18 months ago, where they measured over a period of about a week; they stated that some trains are measured for 8 days and others for 9, which tells me that either a counter failed to turn up for work, or they were measuring at times of cancellation or included a Bank Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1351 Written by Lee on Saturday, 2nd September 2006 As you know , Graham , I have actively supported your push for a 2-hourly Swindon - Westbury service. However , I believe that growth on the northern section of the Swindon - Southampton service should be used as a tool to pull the southern section out of subsidy and into profit , which it would have done had the service been left to grow and savage cuts not proposed. As a consultancy firm might put it , "Total social benefit in a realistic modern - day financial setting." Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1359 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Saturday, 2nd September 2006 Eddy, following up further .... that bundle that wedged my door this morning turned out to include more traffic figures - very patchy surveys, and quite hard to draw many conclusions. Re: Comparing Melksham's ticket sales to other stations - 433/1849 Written by Lee on Monday, 6th November 2006 [quote author=Lee link=topic=433.msg1285#msg1285 date=1156589994]Here is a link to Appendix 2.2 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%202.2.pdf [quote author=Lee link=topic=423.msg1274#msg1274 date=1156497960]Poor timekeeping on First Great Western's long-distance express services is under investigation by the Office for Rail Regulation (link below.) http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2006/08/great_western_running_late.html#more Quotes from the above link : "The ORR said that part of the cause of delays to FGW's express services was the large-scale track renewal programme on lines from London Paddington." "However, it said that track and signals operator Network Rail and FGW had drawn up joint plans to tackle the problems, which should be in place next month." "Among the ideas already implemented is for teams of FGW and Network Rail managers to 'adopt' poorly-performing services to identify why they are suffering delays and tackle the causes."[/quote] Here is a link to the final First Great Western December 2006 timetable. http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Documents/Custom/Rev%20Dec%20TTs/SX%20-%20Cardiff%20-%20Bristol%20to%20Weymouth%20-%20Portsmouth%20-%20Brighton.pdf Examples of forthcoming First / Network Rail performance studies include the following : 1) The 1200 Cardiff - Brighton service , which will assess the benefits / disbenefits of missing out the Patchway , Keynsham , Oldfield Park , Freshford and Avoncliff stops , but keeping the stop at Bradford - on - Avon. 2) The 1400 Cardiff - Weymouth service , which will assess the benefits / disbenefits of the original Westbury - Weymouth SLC2. The timetable is also designed to assess the benefits / disbenefits of missing out the stop at Pilning altogether. You will also have noticed that all of the "00" Cardiff Central departures , except the 1200 , include long waits at Bristol Temple Meads , which is the exact opposite of what the JSPTU Rail Vision proposed.[/quote] Here are links to the current London - Oxford timetable. http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Documents/Custom/Timetables/Table%203A%20from%20London.pdf http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Documents/Custom/Timetables/Table%203A%20to%20London.pdf As you can see , all stations between Didcot - Oxford are served by the same 2 - hourly pattern , with other trains calling at Radley so as to give it an hourly frequency. Here is a link to the proposed timetable from December 2006. http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Documents/Custom/Rev%20Dec%20TTs/SX%20-%20London%20to%20Outer%20Thames%20Valley.pdf Radley is still served hourly , but the other stations are served by a "skip - stop" pattern , in order to test the benefits/disbenefits of reducing the journey time. Also , some trains miss out Ealing Broadway & Slough stations. When combined with a service that only calls at Radley (between Didcot - Oxford) this brings the London - Oxford journey time comfortably below 1 hour 30 minutes. In other words , you could run a London - Radley - Oxford hourly service with just 3 units. There are 4 buses an hour from Radley - Abingdon and a half - hourly bus service from Radley - Didcot Parkway. 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