|
Pages: [1]
|
 |
|
 Author
|
Topic: Last Night (15 mar) (Read 2076 times)
|
|
Dawn
|
Well, I wasn't impressed. Despite all the promises re better conectivity come GWR taking over the Wessex franchise... The 17:30 from Paddington (the advertised conection for the 18:58 Chippenham to Melksham) was delayed. Instead of holding the Westbury train at Swindon to allow the Bristol train through they let the Westbury train out just in front of the Bristol train thus ensuring that the Bristol train was further delayed following the slower Westbury train and those of us wanting to connect to the Westbury train missed it. The logic astonds me....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
courgettelawn
|
There is no logic in terms of passengers, the logic will have been that it made life easier for the train operators to do this for their own convenience. When I have been in similar situations, however, the gross lack of communication was what amazed me more than anything. In an age when instant communication is meant to be taken as a given, especially when it comes to transport, I can't imagine how they function at all. Often platform staff will know little more than you will as a passenger. Orders to hold trains at stations will not be made or not received.
Do let us know how they respond to your complaint about the incident.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Graham Ellis
|
There has been a history, especially at Swindon, with a lack of information and sensible platform decisions about the Trowbridge, Westbury, Salisbury, Southampton service. Prior to last April, that was said to be because of the fact that it was a National Express train at a First Group station and I have on file assurances that although the service was to be trimmed back last December, the new service would be well co-ordinated, and much more reliable. I understand that the role of making decisions about what to do in response to service incidents has just been (or will shortly be) centralised, so that the whole thing can be done as part of a bigger picture. The idea has been sold as giving more "joined up" reactions to delays, but I suspect that there's also a financial motive allowing the operator to save on the cost of staff in the role, and to use centralised computers to find a solution that's going not going to involve them in a lot of extra costs (i.e. will reduce late running). We'll see how it goes ... whether remote / overall decisions will help on instances like this. Oh - the centralised location for the new centralised system is Swindon  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dawn
|
I had a standard reply saying that (to cut a long email short) for safety and efficiency reasons it is not their policy to hold trains unless it is an infrequent service or the last service of the day etc. I've written back stating that putting the Swindon-Westbury service on Platform 2 at Swindon does not create an efficiency or safety issue, that letting it out in front of the delayed 17:30 Paddington - Weston Super Mare service delays the Western Super Mare service further and that the Swindon - Westbury service is both very infrequent and the last of the day. I'm still waiting for a reply!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
|
 |
