| Archived Save the Train forum articles - 2005 to 2010. See below
New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2696 Written by Lee on Tuesday, 2nd January 2007 The New Year has not started well cancellation - wise on the Devon - Cornwall border (link below.) http://www.srug.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=40&Itemid=2 "Congratulations to FGW on a stunning start to the first working day of the new year. The main commuter service - the 07:53 was cancelled without explanation. This is now the only morning train that serves the minor Plymouth stations, and the next train to Plymouth is 45 minutes later - hardly a viable delay on a working day." "If FGW are going to continue to play 'shuffle-the-cancellation' as they haven't bothered to lease enough rolling stock to run a reliable service we expect that passenger numbers, which have been rising, will rapidly start to decline." "This correspondent for one simply decided to drive over the bridge and use the park'n'ride - a little more expensive than the train but a lot cheaper and more convenient than the buses." Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2743 Written by Lee on Friday, 5th January 2007 Here is a further article , entitled "The Chaos Continues Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2747 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Friday, 5th January 2007 [quote author=Lee link=topic=966.msg2696#msg2696 date=1167759416] "Congratulations to FGW on a stunning start to the first working day of the new year. The main commuter service - the 07:53 was cancelled without explanation. This is now the only morning train that serves the minor Plymouth stations, and the next train to Plymouth is 45 minutes later - hardly a viable delay on a working day." "If FGW are going to continue to play 'shuffle-the-cancellation' as they haven't bothered to lease enough rolling stock to run a reliable service we expect that passenger numbers, which have been rising, will rapidly start to decline." [/quote] I heard a rumour that First didn't even include the ex-Wessex services in the Great Western bid, stating that they only wanted the main line services, but that the DfT told them "all or nothing". Of course, I don't expect we could get any confirmation of that as everything will be "commercial in confidence", but I do wonder if the rumour is true ... and if so, whether there's a delibarate under-resourcing going on. Why, because it would let First get shot of service and stations which "no-one wants" once they're unused because of reliability and infrequency and concentrate on the business that they really wanted, with the fallout going to their buses or to cars. In this scenario poor Andrew Griffiths, ex Wessex and with an excellent reputation for delevoping services, could be seen as their sacrificial lamb who is at this time doing his level best but will in due course carry the can. I don't know whether to believe the rumour and the scenario painted - but I can't believe that company that's shown itself to be pretty good overall, with good communitcations and managers, should have made such a mess accidentally. Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2753 Written by Nick Field on Friday, 5th January 2007 I hope that rumour is not true, its makes very scary reading and I wonder if Andrew Griffiths might be aware of it? Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2761 Written by Nick Field on Friday, 5th January 2007 [quote author=Graham Ellis link=topic=966.msg2747#msg2747 date=1167994034] [quote author=Lee link=topic=966.msg2696#msg2696 date=1167759416] "Congratulations to FGW on a stunning start to the first working day of the new year. The main commuter service - the 07:53 was cancelled without explanation. This is now the only morning train that serves the minor Plymouth stations, and the next train to Plymouth is 45 minutes later - hardly a viable delay on a working day." "If FGW are going to continue to play 'shuffle-the-cancellation' as they haven't bothered to lease enough rolling stock to run a reliable service we expect that passenger numbers, which have been rising, will rapidly start to decline." [/quote] I heard a rumour that First didn't even include the ex-Wessex services in the Great Western bid, stating that they only wanted the main line services, but that the DfT told them "all or nothing". Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2764 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Friday, 5th January 2007 [quote author=Nick Field link=topic=966.msg2761#msg2761 date=1168027069] If this rumour did turn out to be true, would it be something that first are doing behind the DfTs back, or would the DfT be behind it as well?[/quote] Well, clearly the DfT would be aware that the question had been asked. And it could have been sprung from something as innocent as an exchange at a very early meeting, with the bidders looking to learn what the contraints were. That's what I felt it probably was when I first heard it, buit I'm beginning to wonder in the light of what's been going on. I thought long and hard before I posted this. But these pages are ready and there's plenty of opportunity for someone to pitch in and tell us what the real status is - either to re-assure us or to confirm things. And I'm being very careful indeed until I know better to point out that it did come to me as just a rumour, and should be treated only as such. But we do need to discuss scenarios and the thinking that goes on behind if we're to be proactive in suggestions we make, to push on open doors and not ones that are locked closed, and to avoid being causght by surprise on any negative moves. Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2765 Written by bubblecat on Friday, 5th January 2007 Just a small thought to add onto this. FGW run my buses as well, so in essence, if they did manage to get people from train to bus in North Somerset they would lose none of the business. Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2766 Written by Exestudent on Friday, 5th January 2007 As an ex Wessex Trains manager who no longer works for FGW, I have been reading the comments on this forum this evening with much interest. I have thought long and hard about posting, but thought I'd like to add some things. Firstly, being passionate about railways in the westcountry, and being proud what Wessex Trains achieved, I am so angry and embarrassed at the present state of affairs... I can't comment about the above rumour, although my personal opinion is that it can Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2769 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Saturday, 6th January 2007 Hello, Exestudent, I'm delighted that you have posted, and understand your anonymity. Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2771 Written by Exestudent on Saturday, 6th January 2007 How I understand the restriction on units is quite different to what I've read elsewhere, so I may have got this wrong. I will say I wasn't personally involved in any aspects of the franchise bid, this is just what colleagues have told me, and what I've picked up myself. I would point alot of the problems at the minute though are down to St Philips Marsh depot being unfinished, very few extra staff taken on there, and noone to train them in how to maintain DMU's. Those 4 class 153's at Eastleigh wouldn't make much differnece at the minute because there would be noone to makew them fit for traffic again. However back to the subject. It is certain that the DfT requested all bidders made use of the 8 class 143's, orginally in the spec of course to work Devon local branches, one of the rare successes we had was to stop that! Beyond that, I believe the franchise agreement states that seating capacity must at least match Dec 05 capacity. This clearly hasn't happened on many routes, and I personally believe its FGW who have got their sums wrong. But clearly the DfT has had to approve the plan so there's many unanswered questions. My big concern now though is for the summer. In Wessex days we had the 31's, and usually managed to 'borrow' a couple of units from somewhere else, to ensure the Weymouth and St Ives branches were at least strengthened. I'd love to know FGW's plans for summer... Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2779 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Saturday, 6th January 2007 That's an interesting insight - very interesting. I'm always one to work with people to try to achive an outcome that's satisafctory for all, rather than take to the ramparts for a battle - I would much rather walk in through a door. I see a few indications of open doors but at times really, really wonder if they truely are doors, or just decoys painted on the walls. Sorry - I'm talking in riddles here. I have my fingers crossed that the December '07 consultation, and some of timetable improvements already being looked at, will action be acted on / actioned rather than just being answered with a sympathetic letter. Ideas welcome from all quarters! Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/2876 Written by Lee on Wednesday, 10th January 2007 [quote author=Lee link=topic=966.msg2743#msg2743 date=1167992145]Here is a further article , entitled "The Chaos Continues Re: New Year, Same Old Problems (Saltash) - 966/3084 Written by Lee on Tuesday, 16th January 2007 The RMT give their view on HST trains calling at stations not served by HSTs for many years prior to privatisation in the link below. http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2007/01/train_safety_at_stations_first.html#more Interesting quote : "Despite requests from our Representatives, FGW refused to carry out risk assessments. At one stage they claimed that they had 'Grandfather Rights' that allowed them to stop HSTs at the stations concerned without needing to undertake risk assessments. This of course is complete nonsense." 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