Save the Melksham Train
Archived Save the Train forum articles - 2005 to 2010. See below
An incremental alternative? - 766/2221
Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Thursday, 7th December 2006

There are elements of the new timetable that starts on Sunday that are less than ideal (I'm being very kind in how I say that), and some of the problems are widely and generally acknowledged - for example on the timing of the train on the TransWilts.

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2223
Written by Lee on Thursday, 7th December 2006

My personal view is that we should move both forward under a "service development" banner. Yours to start , then building the service up to the "bigger picture" as problems such as road congestion reach unmanageable levels.

[quote author=Graham Ellis link=topic=766.msg2221#msg2221 date=1165480062][i]I have not done all the careful studies that the other have done with their proposals at this stage; you

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2226
Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Thursday, 7th December 2006

[quote author=Lee link=topic=766.msg2223#msg2223 date=1165486367]
My personal view is that we should move both forward under a "service development" banner. Yours to start , then building the service up to the "bigger picture" as problems such as road congestion reach unmanageable levels.

My view too.  I've put a first draft comment through and I'm asking around.  Will ask around on train tomorow and Saturday too.

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2241
Written by streety7 on Thursday, 7th December 2006


Lee suggested I typed your idea as well, and to incorporate it with our proposed London timings to free up the 'non-intercity' unit to run your proposed service.

I have also edited some of the timings - explanations of which are shown in the timetable.

Any errors? Misprints? Changes? Post and I'll be on it.

Link --> [url]'s melksham new 2007 timetable proposals.pdf[/url]

Link to main proposed timetables page --> [url][/url]

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2243
Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Friday, 8th December 2006

Chris, that's fabulous.

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2257
Written by streety7 on Friday, 8th December 2006

Hi Graham,

I'm only on here quickly, but will change when I am on later:
> Timings of all services - relevant to current timetable instead of our hypothetical one
> Create a draft timetable of a 2-hourly service from Swindon to Westbury and back from 08:30

One thing - should there be any earlier services, for example earlier services which would connect to London?

And one other idea, thinking about Lee's London - Cheltenham/Bristol/Cardiff/Swansea timetable which frees up 2 non-intercity units... we're currently using only one in this plan, is there another door headed 'hourly service' which could be obtained using this other free unit?  ;D
If there is, I would have to work on getting the single track timings correct, but do you think there is opportunity there, as we still have a spare unit?
Or if we are not going to use our new London - etc. timings, which use 24 HST units, where will we get the 1 unit we need for the 2-hourly Swindon - Westbury service or 3-hourly Swindon - Salisbury service from?  ;D

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2258
Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Friday, 8th December 2006

Chris, it needs to be one unit.  We're looking prior to anything else; we're looking at doors which we might be able to push open and the one-train door is labelled "300k", with the two-train door saying "1200k" on it. Not, I regret, a question of what's freed up from elsewhere as there's a different budget involved.  Its OK to leave unwanted rolling stock rotting in a siding and owned by a ROSCO as that's at their expense, but it's NOT OK to subsidise too many leases; this may seem madness but my specification / requests are very carefully scripted.

On earlier services ... I could see the unit running out from Bristol to Westbury, then up to Swindon for  06:15 and starting its day like that.  There have been up to 42 people on the train that does that run in the past (it's not one I personally used a lot!)

Interestingly, can trains reverse at Trowbridge?  If so, the morning train could reverse there rather than at Westbury.

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2260
Written by Lee on Friday, 8th December 2006

Chris , the strategy is to treat Graham's proposals & my proposals as two completely seperate threads.

Graham's is the NOW proposal , and we have decided that it is to have NO relevance to any unit savings that I have made in mine.

Many thanks for your work on both so far.

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2268
Written by streety7 on Friday, 8th December 2006

Now I have changed this timetable completely, and to Graham's request a 2-hourly timetable from Swindon - Westbury have been added - to compare the two.

Link here --> [url]'s now melksham train proposals.pdf[/url]

Sorry for the confusion before.

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2301
Written by James on Sunday, 10th December 2006

Should do what Lymington did to Lymington branch, buy a unit for the service, then all you need is crew

Re: An incremental alternative? - 766/2308
Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Sunday, 10th December 2006

I'm not sure how that model would work with the unit up and down the main line.  The Lymington was the very last of the old slam-doors, wasn't it, and I can't imagine FGW bening happy with anything less that a 153 regularly on the line. I was quite surprised to see Saturday's 143.  Not ruling it out, but I suspect lease /pool might be the way - we don't have special restrictions which I understand precluded more modern stock from being used to Lymington.

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

This site is hosted by Well House Consultants Ltd. (
Contact Information

Further Information:
 Current Summary
 Daily update
 User forum
 Service now
 Service future
 Future Analysis
 Recent Statistics
 Recent letters
 Letter to DfT
 Save the train
 Support us
 Other Maps
 Station facilities
 Station approach
 Trains diverted
 About Melksham
 Site Map
 About this site