At the West Wilts meeting on Tuesday it was interesting to hear FGW say, that they had no idea what train you would catch just because you bought a ticket from one place to another. By this argument that would theoretically mean that anyone (apart from Melksham passengers) travelling from Westbury to Swindon and back, could do so without having to use the Transwilts train by going via Bath Spa, therefore meaning, that theoretically only a handful of people would need to use the trains travelling through Melksham, giving FGW a perfect excuse not to improve the service. 

Now we know that's not the case and I'm quite sure FGW do too, but is it time to prove it to them by carrying out a passenger survey e.g. name-origin-traintime- destination-comments? This may have been done already, but is it worth trying again to prove a point?

They were - err - stretching the truth there, I think.  The operator of a train service should have a darned good idea roughly how the traffic will split between the services offered and although, techincally, they don't know whether you'll catch the 07:00 or the 19:35 from Westbury to Swindon when you buy a ticket, their historic details and market intelligence should tell them that it's more than likely that you'll be on the 07:00.   

In the case of FGW on the Swindon to West Wilts and beyond service, though, remember that they took over a service last April which they had no experience what so ever in operating, and they accepted the contstrains laid down on them by the DfT.  They had no prior experience of running this service and appear to have failed to listen to advise (or if they did listen, failed to make alterations to their plans based on inputs given).

From the various surveys - informal and formal - that I and others have done over the past couple of years, we could have told First (correction - we DID tell First) roughly what the mix of traffic across the various trains was.  It was parchy from day to day, with the number of passengers on the lunchtime train in particular rising and falling quite sharply from day to day.   We also forecast that the service that was imposed on us from December, with 60% of the trains cut and the remaining ones retimed, would loose the vast majority of the business.  But (of course) we're not experts - we're just users of the service and so our predictions were discarded and discredited - I have quite a file of patronising messages 

I have seen - thank goodness - a change in the last few months.   It does seem that the inputs we have made locally are now being given a little more weight, based on the growing realisation that we might actually be better placed to tell the professional planners when we would and wouldn't travel on various altered services, and also based on the fact that some of our forecasting (growth rates, effects of timing changes, etc) turned out to be far more accurate than theirs.  Alas - that's only a little more weight at this stage - but we do have a couple of sheets of paper with our comments on 'at the table' these days - still no seat, mind you.

I'm rambling.   

I understand that First were doing surveys (at the passenger count level) the other week - I'm not sure if they addressed the issue of "from / to" or were just looking at now many bums were on seats. 

I would very much encourage Wiltshire CC to repeat the survery they did in Feb 2006 (and, please, in a full week and NOT one that's distorted by a Bank Holiday) to give a like for like comparison

And as a further piece of research, I would very much like to look at the West Wilts / Somerset  to Chippenham / Swindon corridor as a whole - REALLY awkward one, this. I had breakfast yesterday with a chap who commutes from Melksham to London, driving to Chippenham and then getting the train each day.  From the 2001 cencus we know there were around 60 people doing similar way back then.  How do we count people such as that?  And THAT piece of research would mean looking at the existing direct train, AND train uses via Bath, AND people who park at Chippenham station to catch the train and where they live AND the 234 bus.

The one common factor, of course, in ALL these journeys to be surveyed is the First group. Although they're expecptionally good at FGW in presenting a united front (witness that all questions on a subject tend to result in near identical replies, often off-topic), I don't think their co-ordination yet extends to cross-mode information.   Witness the problems of getting bus times put up at Chippenham train station.   So - I fear - we're somewhat on our own if we want to attempt something like this flow survey.

So did Jacobs. See Pages 153 & 154 of the link below.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/foi/responses/2006/september06/swindonwestburytrainsservice/greaterwesternoutlinebusines1103

It certainly bore a striking resemblance to the contents of the original SRA Consultation document which , with a few revisions , formed the basis of the original Greater Western Franchise SLC2 (links below.)
http://www.dft.gov.uk/press/releases/sra/2005/20051/nextstepsingreaterwesternfra1399

http://www.dft.gov.uk/foi/responses/2006/september06/swindonwestburytrainsservice/greaterwesternfranchise

The above link formed part of a package of documents released as a result of Save The Train efforts (see link below.)
http://www.dft.gov.uk/foi/responses/2006/september06/swindonwestburytrainsservice/

Documents also obtained by Save The Train revealed how the SRA / DfT sought to minimise consultation and made clear that (as assumed by Jacobs) the main aim was to reduce costs (link below.)
http://www.dft.gov.uk/foi/responses/2005/sept/greatwesternfranchise/?version=1

The Jacobs reports undoubtably also had a bearing on the Great Western Main Line Route Utilisation Strategy (link below.)
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/strategyfinance/strategy/greatwesternmainlinerouteuti3510

The DfT and FGW would argue that many "positive changes" have been made since then. However , as the link below shows , it isnt as simple as that.
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=475.msg1405#msg1405

Other points to note :

1) FGW stand to lose 58 vehicles up to January 2008. How can this be done without cutting services? The only December 2007 "improvements" flagged up at the recent WWDC meeting were "more even spacing of Bristol - Westbury services" & "HST stops in the peak at Keynsham and Oldfield Park."

2) The Network Rail Business Plan 2006 assumes that the FGW timetable will be implemented AS ORIGINALLY SET DOWN. The links below are , according to very reliable sources , an accurate portrayal of their mindset.
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2006/12/take_a_taxi_in_the_country_say.html#more

http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2006/12/off_the_rails.html#more


From December 2007 :

Dilton Marsh - loss of 10 services per day.

Dean & Dunbridge - loss of 5 - 7 services per day.

Melksham - no change?

The DfT and , to a certain extent FGW and others , can do something about this. I would dearly love them to prove my "closure by stealth" analysis wrong.

I urge them to do so.