| Archived Save the Train forum articles - 2005 to 2010. See below
Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2470 Written by Lee on Sunday, 17th December 2006 At last , some honesty (link below.) http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2006/12/take_a_taxi_in_the_country_say.html#more I and others have been warning that these plans exist for quite some time. Here are some quotes : "Rural train services should be replaced by buses and taxis and the money saved invested in busy commuter and inter-city routes, the head of Britain's railway system has urged." "John Armitt, chief executive of Network Rail, said that running mostly empty trains was a waste of money and environmentally unfriendly. Instead, he wants to pump more money into overcrowded routes around and between major cities. Top of his list of priorities is an ambitious Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2472 Written by Lee on Sunday, 17th December 2006 [quote author=Lee link=topic=865.msg2470#msg2470 date=1166360186]I and others have been warning that these plans exist for quite some time. Here are some quotes : "Rural train services should be replaced by buses and taxis and the money saved invested in busy commuter and inter-city routes, the head of Britain's railway system has urged." "John Armitt, chief executive of Network Rail, said that running mostly empty trains was a waste of money and environmentally unfriendly. Instead, he wants to pump more money into overcrowded routes around and between major cities. Top of his list of priorities is an ambitious Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2474 Written by Graz on Sunday, 17th December 2006 Although I can't comment directly on any of those mentioned lines, as I haven't been on any, it would be nice for Mr Armitt to mention some usage statistics instead of what I percieve as randomly choosing a rail line from a specific part of the UK and making sweeping and untrue statements such as 'empty boxes'. Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2480 Written by mthomson on Sunday, 17th December 2006 ??? ??? ::) The logic of putting more cars on the road defies sensible reasoning. OK so a half empty train may be less environmentally friendly than a modern fuel efficient car or taxi but there is two sides to the coin. Firstly why not update the old multiple units to a more fuel efficient set of units, secondly what happened to the argument about taking traffic off the roads to relieve congestion, whether it's taxis, cars or buses it's extra traffic on the road. Beeching 2!! has the government/network rail gone stark raving mad? Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2483 Written by Trowres on Sunday, 17th December 2006 The figures used in the 4x4 / rail comparisons need to be checked carefully, as they rely on a number of assumptions. However, it is true that rail has been losing its environmental competitiveness due to a number of factors, including the use of fixed-formation trains and heavier vehicles. The extra weight per seat arises due to a mixture of reasons, including double glazing, air conditioning, other onboard services, the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act, and crashworthiness. Modern trains are actually worse than the 156 used in the comparison. Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2487 Written by admin (Graham Ellis) on Monday, 18th December 2006 It seems at times that rail has been "safeteyed", "luxuried" and "discriminated" out of the reach of everyone, doesn't it? Some of these are difficult matters to argue - the emotive words "one rail death is one too many" are indeed true, but then I suggest that 10 road deaths per day throughout the UK is also too many. Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2488 Written by Lee on Monday, 18th December 2006 Christian Wolmar was interviewed on this subject on Radio 5 last night. Can anyone find a link / recording? Full SRA list of "least - used lines or services" : South West St Erth-St Ives Truro-Falmouth Par-Newquay Liskeard-Looe Plymouth-Gunnislake Exmouth-Barnstaple Bristol-Severn Beach Bristol-Weymouth Swindon-Southampton South East Ryde-Shanklin Brockenhurst- Lymington Twyford-Henley Maidenhead-Marlow Oxford-Bicester Town Sittingb'ne-Sheerness Brighton-Seaford Turnbridge-Strood Wales Cardiff-Maesteg Machynlleth-Pwllheli Shrewsbury-Swansea Cardiff-Holyhead Wrexham-Bidston Llandudno-Blaenau West Midlands Paddington-Hereford Birmingham Snow Hill-Stratford-upon-Avon Leamington-Stratford Birmingham-Stafford Eastern England Marks Tey-Sudbury Wickford-Southminster Norwich-Sheringham Norwich-Lowestoft Norwich-Yarmouth via Reedham Ipswich-Lowestoft Harwich-Cambridge Bedford-Bletchley Watford Junc-St Albans East Midlands Derby-Matlock Nottingham-Worksop Crewe-Skegness Grimsby-Newark Cleethorpes-Sheffield Yorkshire & Humberside Middlesbrough- Whitby Sheffield-Huddersfield Cleethorpes- Barton-on-Humber Hull-Scarborough Leeds-York via Harrogate North East Saltburn-Bishop Auckland North West Chester-Manchester Piccadilly Blackpool-Buxton Preston-Ormskirk Manchester Airport/ Rochdale-Southport Rochdale-Kirkby Blackpool South-Colne Leeds-Heysham Barrow-Carlisle Leeds-Morecambe Oxenholme- Windermere Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2489 Written by Nick Field on Monday, 18th December 2006 Here is the link to the Five Live website, there is listen again buton which takes you into the BBC radio player. You may have to listen or scan through the whole 3 hour breakfast show as I cant (yet) see a specific link to the Christian Wolmar article www/bbc.co.uk/fivelive Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2490 Written by Lee on Monday, 18th December 2006 Sorry Nick , have edited above post because CW was actually on Radio 5 last night just after 2000....... Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2492 Written by Nick Field on Monday, 18th December 2006 No problem He therefore must of been of the weekend news program which stated at 8pm last night. You can listen again to Sundays program on this link: www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/programmes/weekendnews.shtml Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2494 Written by Lee on Monday, 18th December 2006 Todays Guardian leading article , reproduced here in full , courtesy of RMT Bristol Rail Branch : Leader Monday December 18, 2006 The Guardian Winter is the right time for pruning, for lopping old branches off. Outrageously, it looks as though rural branch lines may be among those to be cut. Almost silently, Britain's transport planners are planning a bonfire of secondary services. In the Department for Transport and the offices of Britain's big private rail operators, plans are being drawn up to hack back the size of Britain's rail network, reducing services and closing lines, especially in rural areas. John Armitt, the outgoing director of Network Rail, told the Observer yesterday that "we accept heavy rail is not always the best solution, particularly in some ... outer parts of the network". His polite language disguised a melancholy shift in government attitudes, in favour of reducing services on some routes. That has become easier with rules removing safeguards that protected lines from closure. A product of the 2005 Railways Act, the rules nominally help transport planning and efficiency but, in reality, aim to save money from a rail budget bloated by the vast inefficiencies of privatisation. Virgin, whose west coast route was profitable under British Rail, was last week offered Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2500 Written by Nick Field on Monday, 18th December 2006 Just listened to rhe Five live program. CW is on after about 13 minutes. CW makes a the case about the rural lines being a vital social service that dont need the same levels of high maintenance as the mian lines and therfore cost savings wouldnt be that high. He also thinks that it is a bit out of order for the Network Rail cheif to be making these suggestions just before he retires (and therfore not being around to deal with it if it did happen) Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2502 Written by Graz on Monday, 18th December 2006 ^ Thanks Nick, yeah, I completely agree with CW. Again, it's just Mr. Armitt, the Government, and the SRA using broad brush strokes to define the entire network as the same, and not even considering the impact with their one-sided views. And speaking of that... [quote author=Lee link=topic=865.msg2488#msg2488 date=1166436833] Full SRA list of "least - used lines or services" : ... ... Bristol-Weymouth Swindon-Southampton ... [/quote] Putting such long rail lines in this 'list' is confusing, vague, and misleading, and whoever at the SRA put this list together needs to start again from the beginning. "Bristol-Weymouth" - including a ticket from, say, Oldfield Park to Trowbridge? or just Bristol to Weymouth tickets? and "Swindon-Southampton"- including tickets from Trowbridge to Chippenham? It really is quite worrying how they are bending the figures to suit their ideal outcome. Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2504 Written by Lee on Monday, 18th December 2006 I think that it is important to note that the SRA (now defunct) drew up their list 2 years ago. However , it is believed that Network Rail are following the same strategy , and John Armitt quoted the SRA's "Wider Case For Rail" (click on http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=420.msg1242#msg1242) almost word for word. Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2514 Written by Lee on Monday, 18th December 2006 [quote author=Lee link=topic=865.msg2470#msg2470 date=1166360186]"Running empty boxes around is not very environmentally friendly or cost-effective,' said Armitt. In return for cutting government spending on under-used lines and services, Network Rail is asking for Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2516 Written by Lee on Monday, 18th December 2006 Apparently , Network Rail's press office are now saying that John Armitt was quoted out of context.... Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2523 Written by Lee on Tuesday, 19th December 2006 [quote author=Lee link=topic=865.msg2516#msg2516 date=1166466611]Apparently , Network Rail's press office are now saying that John Armitt was quoted out of context....[/quote] An e-mail round has found a generally cynical response to Network Rail's press office "out of context" protestations. Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2526 Written by Lee on Tuesday, 19th December 2006 From the Ivybridge Rail Users Group Website (link below.) http://www.irug.ik.com/pub/customersites/communitykit/son-041201201430.nsf/0/AFD25CB3A1C2B56580256BF300413A82?OpenDocument&add=yes&l=Campaign&pub/customersites/communitykit/son-041201201430.nsf "John Armitt, chief executive of Network rail has advocated cutting some train services in favour of running buses or taxis. Our campaign actively promotes the use of train travel instead of using cars or taxis. We do not advocate using buses as replacements for existing train services. The government has actively promoted the use of train travel as an alternative to road transport in order to reduce congestion and unecessary carbon emissions. Have they now gone back on their previous policies? Is the future bleak for some rail services? The group supports campaigns to save train services throughout the country, notably 'Save the Train' and CANBER." Re: Network Rail Boss Calls For Beeching 2 - 865/2558 Written by Lee on Wednesday, 20th December 2006 Peak Rail wants to reopen the historic Matlock-to-Bakewell line within the next decade (link below.) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/6192463.stm Their plans are to build a connection to the rail station at Matlock in 2007 as part of the new Cawdor Quarry development , which includes a new bus station (link below.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cawdor_Quarry They may have to be quick though..... Here is a link to the Network Rail Business Plan 2006. http://www.networkrail.co.uk/documents/3117_Route%2019%20Midland%20Main%20Line%20and%20East%20Midlands.pdf The Matlock branch diverges from the Derby - Chesterfield line at Ambergate South Junction (see map on page 2 of the link above.) As you can see from Page 4 , Figure 2 , the Derby - Chesterfield line carries above 20 million tonnes of freight per year , the joint highest of any line in this section of the Network Rail Business Plan 2006. Page 7 , figure 10 shows that the Derby - Chesterfield line is projected to achieve medium - level tonnage growth to 2015. There is no main line station at Ambergate South Junction , and the fear has to be that the required extra freight trains will be pathed at the expense of the "low - usage" Matlock - bound passenger trains. [quote author=Lee link=topic=865.msg2488#msg2488 date=1166436833]Full SRA list of "least - used lines or services" : East Midlands Derby-Matlock Nottingham-Worksop Crewe-Skegness Grimsby-Newark Cleethorpes-Sheffield[/quote] The Derby - Matlock service was given Community Rail status on 12 July 2006 (link below.) http://www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=213995&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False Quote from the above link : "Previously we have designated lines with the services running on them. The Strategy was extended earlier this year to allow for the designation of services without designating the lines on which they run. This change was made to recognise that it is not always possible to designate the line because it also carries heavy freight, is part of the Trans European Network or because of specific local issues. These services, Derby to Matlock and Grantham to Skegness are the first service designations." For more on these issues , click on the link below. http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=872.msg2564#msg2564 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