| Archived Save the Train forum articles - 2005 to 2010. See below
A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/9230 Written by Industry Insider on Saturday, 29th December 2007 I know that certain people on the forum (rightly) put information on what services are running very highly on their list of priorities. The following are two examples of where there just seems to be a general lack or basic organsation within the publicity department. 1) The Christmas & New Year alterations booklet - Congratulations if you got hold of one of these, but in truth you'd probably be better off guessing what times trains are running as the one I have been most heavily involved in referring to (Book B) is absolutely full off errors and ommisions, especially regarding services from Oxford to Didcot. Remember, that this booklet is for the use of the staff as well as passengers and it's no wonder their is a general state of confusion! 2) Information at Bicester Town - I noted today that the (unstaffed) station at Bicester Town had its train times poster up with the heading Bicester-Oxford Train Times. It then goes on to print the timetable for the Cotswold Line with not a mention of the Oxford-Islip-Bicester service anywhere to be seen. Surely, even if those who produced the poster made a cock-up and printed the wrong service by mistake, the person sent out to stick it up in the poster board might have spotted that the layout looked a little suspicious (about 25 stations listed rather than 3). Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/9244 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Monday, 31st December 2007 Hi, II - I've got to the stage that I just shrug off too many thingls like this. Errors in information / lack of the correct information almost seem endemic in the FGW organisation at times and I've had some long battles over things that should be patently obvious - like getting First to display at Trowbridge station the time of trains that leave from THAT VERY STATION to Melksham, Chippenham and Swindon. I'm now picking and choosing what I report / ask about - just too negative to do 'em all, but I WILL push hard on cases where they are turning business away by not marketing ... and pushing travellers away onto other less appropriate means of transport. But ... I notice in Melksham a day or two back, First's Town Centre bus stop still tells us that there are no trains from Swindon to Westbury on a Sunday. I've news for you - there IS a service again ... but how on earth do First expect peopel to use it if it's absent from the timetables that so many people use! Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/9258 Written by Lee on Wednesday, 2nd January 2008 [quote author=Industry Insider link=topic=5116.msg9230#msg9230 date=1198931242]2) Information at Bicester Town - I noted today that the (unstaffed) station at Bicester Town had its train times poster up with the heading Bicester-Oxford Train Times. It then goes on to print the timetable for the Cotswold Line with not a mention of the Oxford-Islip-Bicester service anywhere to be seen. Surely, even if those who produced the poster made a cock-up and printed the wrong service by mistake, the person sent out to stick it up in the poster board might have spotted that the layout looked a little suspicious (about 25 stations listed rather than 3).[/quote] Henrietta Leyser of Oxford-Bicester Rail Action Group informs me that this error has now been corrected. Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/9862 Written by Industry Insider on Sunday, 3rd February 2008 On my latest visit to Bicester Town, I note that the timetable poster has indeed been changed. Though I noticed this little 'gaggle' of signs at the platform entrance...  It struck me that all three of them have certain issues concerned with them that mean they perhaps shouldn't be there at all? : 1) The facilities are checked on a regular basis. Hmmm, are they really? I somewhat doubt it judging by the documented farce with the help phone at Melksham, though I suppose it is at least useful to have a phone number listed you can call to report faults. 2) Nearest station with access for mobility impaired customers is Oxford. What does this actually mean? Bicester Town is an unstaffed station, but it only has one platform which has level open access from the small station forecourt. The step up from the platform to the train is probably typical of most stations (around 6 inches), so unless you are 'Mobility Impaired' to an extent you are confined to a wheelchair then there are no problems. If that is the case why not use the phrase Confined to a Wheelchair or is that not PC? In any event the nearest station is Bicester North which also has level access to all platforms and is staffed throughout the majority of the operating day. The 'Station Facilities' poster on the platform also states Oxford is the nearest station to purchase advance tickets, railcards etc., when of course Bicester North is much closer. Sceptics would say that Oxford is quoted deliberately so Chiltern Railways (who operate Bicester North station) miss out on some potential sales commission. Or perhaps it's just an innocent mistake with the person who produces the poster being unaware of the other station? 3) It's against the law to smoke. An interesting one this. As a non-smoker the fewer places people can smoke the better as far as I'm concerned, but I can clearly see that it seems silly to prevent smoking on the station platform, which is as open and windswept as the station forecourt and road. It doesn't actually say where the non-smoking area starts and ends either of course, and as it's an unstaffed station who on earth is going to enforce such a ban? I guess the wider issue I am raising is that the number of useless/contradictory/vague signage at our stations is increasing incrementally as the years go by, and is yet another way that money is being wasted. Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/9877 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Monday, 4th February 2008 Thanks for that interesting trio ... the "Mobility" one is a new one on me ... and it does seem out of place with your description of Bicester. We have (it sounds like) a similar situation at Melksham with regard to flat access to the trains, and no signs, and we loaded a wheelchair-bound traveller for the Santa trip to Swindon with no problems at all. I have phoned the number on the notice concerning the checking of the facilities to make a comment, and have been assured that all comments are noted and that the facilities (at Melksham at least) are indeed checked once a week. However, the lady I spoke to wasn't able to give me details of how they're followed up, nor what targets (if any) are set for resolving issues thus raised. On the "No Smoking" sign - I'm pretty sure that's a legal requirement on any company operating a business to which the public (or suppliers) are invited, isn't it? I know that we have even had to put up signs at home, as we work from there and sometimes an engineer comes in to fix something, or a delivery man carries a parcel inside. Actually, we got conflicting advise from the people who's job it is to enforce the law ... it is a bit "woolly"; I take it that First has been advised that even on an open platform smoking is banned for legal reasons - that's what the sign says! Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/9881 Written by Industry Insider on Monday, 4th February 2008 [quote author=Graham Ellis link=topic=5116.msg9877#msg9877 date=1202111750] On the "No Smoking" sign - I'm pretty sure that's a legal requirement on any company operating a business to which the public (or suppliers) are invited, isn't it? I know that we have even had to put up signs at home, as we work from there and sometimes an engineer comes in to fix something, or a delivery man carries a parcel inside. Actually, we got conflicting advise from the people who's job it is to enforce the law ... it is a bit "woolly"; I take it that First has been advised that even on an open platform smoking is banned for legal reasons - that's what the sign says! [/quote] I might be wrong, but I believe the non-smoking legislation brought in by the government concerns indoor and 'covered' areas only that are not private dwellings and might potentially accessed by members of the public - by which I think a 'covered' area is a roof structure that is attached to more than two walls of a building. That explains some of the pubs that have got outdoor covered areas that are exempt (such as outdoor heaters, and canopies). By that definition an uncovered platform would be exempt from this legislation, though of course most covered ones wouldn't be. It does just seem daft at places like Bicester Town, but perhaps it was a railway industry decision to keep everything consistent by just banning smoking on all platforms? Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/9885 Written by Lee on Monday, 4th February 2008 Some feedback from the First Great Western Coffee Shop Forum : [quote author=Tim link=topic=1624.msg10848#msg10848 date=1202120936] Some of the No Smoking audio announcemnts and signs are a little confusing. Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/10488 Written by Industry Insider on Saturday, 1st March 2008 My 'Stupid Sign of the Month' award for February (I spotted it last night!) goes to Pershore and Moreton-In-Marsh (and very possibly other stations). The signs read "Bicycle Parking - please note that bicycle searches can take place at any time". Now, how the hell do you conceal something suspicious on a bike? It would take some fiend to hook up a bomb inside the cycle frame, so unless someone leaves their panniers attached (which of course would be rather inviting theft) then this is another example of stupid signage. Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/12628 Written by Industry Insider on Wednesday, 2nd July 2008 I continue my campaign to highlight stupid station signs with this view of the new, improved, cycle storage facilities at Hanborough.  Just in case you miss stupid meaningless sign no. 1 concerning the risk of your cycle being 'searched' at any time, a duplicate sign has been put up about 4 feet away. Not that you're able to use these facilities anyway however as the other sign clearly states that you are not allowed to pass that point and access the cycle racks anyway. I give up! Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/12629 Written by Lee on Wednesday, 2nd July 2008 [quote author=Industry Insider link=topic=5116.msg12628#msg12628 date=1214998635] Not that you're able to use these facilities anyway however as the other sign clearly states that you are not allowed to pass that point and access the cycle racks anyway. I give up! [/quote] I've always had a bugbear as to why "not allowed to pass that point" signs are situated in stupid places. See example below from St Andrews Road :  Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/12655 Written by Graz on Tuesday, 8th July 2008 ^ Surely, the 'no passing' signs should be where the platform ends (except in situations where the platform is overgrown/dangerous - eg. Stapleton Road) - but I can clearly see a station sign further down in that photo! Re: A couple of examples of FGW general incompetence - 5116/12904 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Sunday, 15th March 2009   One of these pictures was taken at about the time of day that First chooses to run a train from Trowbridge (behind us) to Melksham and Chippenham (in frontg of us), and the other was taken some six hours from the time that any train runs. I was taught when I learned a bit of marketing to provide a product that people wanted, at a time they wanted it. It strikes me that someone may have failed to do their marketing here ... the picture with queuing traffic is taken when there's no train about an the quiet one is at the time that there IS a train. And before you ask - the reason for the road being quiet in the second picture is because no-one is travelling and NOT because they're all on the train! 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