Save the Train forum

Dedicate to campaigning to retain an appropriate "TransWilts" passenger train service ... Swindon - Chippenham - Melksham - Trowbridge - Westbury - Dilton Marsh - Warminster - Salisbury ... and to other services too

THIS FORUM IS NOW A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE. Please use our Coffeeshop Forum for new posts

link to main site
Save the Melksham Train

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 22, 2012, 11:17:59 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Recommended service - hourly, according to the GWRUS. Let's work towards that service and towards ensuring all services are used.
7889 Posts in 5009 Topics by 97428 Members
Latest Member: Betlykeyday
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  Save the Train
|-+  General Discussion
| |-+  The Future
| | |-+  Anger all over the South West - we're a little boat on a big stormy sea now.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Anger all over the South West - we're a little boat on a big stormy sea now.  (Read 4532 times)
Graham Ellis
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2062


View Profile
Anger all over the South West - we're a little boat on a big stormy sea now.
« on: March 20, 2006, 06:52:11 PM »

It seems that a lot of people are upset at the mauling of the ex-Wessex Trains services under the new Great Western Franchise - not quite a case of the victor in the battel for the franchise weilding their sword over the old network and slashing big bits off (the decision is blamed on the DfT) but they're certainly doing the bidding.

Somewhere upwards of 3000 responses were received to First's timetable consultation that closed on 8th March and I suspect that figure was much more than they expected.   Certainly, I know that they had the best part of a hundred inputs concerning the Melksham part of the Swindon to Southampron service and that compares to just 7 inputs at the official consultation last spring.  Rather proves to me that original consultation was flawed in that it didn't reach the right people.  Like some of the statistics used in making the decisons.   The DfT quote me figures for the 17:02 from Melksham ...
1647 Departure   Number of passengers when leaving  Westbury 5, Trowbridge 9, Melksham 11, Chippenham 13
over 8 or 9 days in the Spring.

Odd that - I've travelled on the train from Melksham a few time recently and counted the passengers. Always a couple of dozen, and sometimes as many as 30.   Can traffic really have doubled in a year?   Personally, I doubt it - I point to the previous survey being flawed.  Perhaps the count was missed one day and some statistitian put down "0" instead of "don't know"?

Our story is not alone, though, and our voice is getting lost in the shouting of far bigger groups with far bigger targets. We're looking to see justice for a single one-coach train, the removal of which will have a significant effect on its rapidly growing but still relatively small customer base.   Users of the Bedwyn to Paddington service are fighting to retain their service, which is threatened with a reduction from 21 to 16 services a day which would mean that they would have to retime their journeys by up to 45 minutes.  Yes, they're right to fight for that but I do feel that a 45 minute shift isn't quite such a life change as a regular on the 13:20 from Westbury to Melksham who will now be able to choose between trains at 07:22 or 19:13.

I had the opportunity to speak with our MP a week ago on Sunday - a couple of days before he met with tha transport secretary to discuss the train situation.  He assured me that he had Melksham in hand, but that he was only going to discuss Bedwyn with the minister, as (I hope I have this right) "if you bring up too many different subjects at the same time, you get no-where on any of them.  The best way to get things done is to stay on topic".

I'm still waiting to hear what he's doing about the Melksham situation.   But he's right that there's a need to concentrate the mind, and to make sure that the boat for this line doesn't get swamped by the waves of other boats which are far larger.  Their passengers may get a bit seasick, but we're liable to sink.
Logged
Nick Field
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 423


View Profile
Re: Anger all over the South West - we're a little boat on a big stormy sea now.
« Reply #1 on: March 22, 2006, 09:04:18 AM »

There is an article in the latest 'Rail' magazine about the new Greater Western franchise, basically saying that a lot of the good work Wessex have done over that past few years promoting services / ensuring good connections etc etc has been destroyed with the new timetable.  It makes no mention of Melksham or the Swindon to Southampton service specifically but does talk a lot about some of the Cornish branches, these do seem to be getting quite a bit of publicicty.  I does make me realise that we are one of lots of small fish in quite a big pond, whilst I hate to hear of cuts anywhere on the network and I applaud those who a prepared to fight their case, I do feel that our cuts are a lot worse than others.  My cynical side says that branch line / secondary services are being deliberatley run down as a prelude to further 'beeching 2' cuts in a couple of years time.  I sincerely hope I am wrong.
Logged
Graham Ellis
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2062


View Profile
Re: Anger all over the South West - we're a little boat on a big stormy sea now.
« Reply #2 on: March 22, 2006, 07:08:52 PM »

The decision has just been taken that the Northern Rail review which is underway will NOT cut jobs / services .. apparently they're being run well.   It's difficult to see much difference between that and Wessex, except that Northern runs through a lot more marginal constituinces, I think ...  or perhaps it's because they realise just how badly wrong they have got it in the South West ...
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Save the Train | Powered by SMF 1.0.5.
© 2001-2005, Lewis Media. All Rights Reserved.
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.081 seconds with 19 queries.