|
|
|
JayMac
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2016, 22:45:08 » |
|
Ambitious, but would First Group want to take patronage away from their buses?
Also permanent through fares would have to be the same as or more than to Taunton to prevent revenue implications. And the TSA▸ only allows the lead operator of a fares flow to have promotional fares for a certain length of time. If a new fare flow to Bishops Lydeard is set up then CrossCountry will be entitled to a revenue share.
Then their are the operational considerations...
Can all be overcome but I think unlikely. The odd 'Special' is no problem. But a permanent service? I doubt it.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 20:23:01 by Four Track, Now! »
|
Logged
|
"A clear conscience laughs at a false accusation."
"Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."
"Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity."
|
|
|
|
John R
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 02, 2016, 07:58:02 » |
|
I was thinking of a packaged fare including travel on the WSR so no problem with existing fares as they would inevitably be higher. They could also be made GWR▸ services only to prevent XC▸ taking a slice.
I think the main problem would be the very short timescales for submission. It hardly enables a well thought out proposal particularly with the need to get different bodies together and work through the various operational considerations.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 20:22:45 by Four Track, Now! »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #3 on: March 02, 2016, 09:45:34 » |
|
Packaged 'GWR▸ Only' fares would be classed as 'temporary fares' for TSA▸ purposes. These can only be used for a maximum of 34 weeks. Each period of temporary fares use has to have a 17 week gap before the next one can start.
So possible each year for the main operating period of the WSR from Easter to October Half-term, but no use for the other operating days such as off season Galas, Dunster by Candlelight, Santa Specials and the like.
GWR would not be allowed to introduce year round 'GWR Only' fares without a corresponding 'Any Permitted' flow.
Even if the did decide that the 34 week temporary fares were a goer that would be restricting the options for passengers to get to the WSR. One couldn't, for example, get a through fare from a Cardiff suburban station. Or use fast CrossCountry services to Taunton.
GWR, as lead operator, are allowed by the TSA to include other operators in the promotional fares ('GWR/XC▸ /ATW▸ Only' for example). They'd still be limited to a maximum 34 weeks with 17 week gap between promotions. Getting agreement with multiple operators to run, promote and sell such fares would be very difficult though.
Then the operational issues. Driver training for Norton Fitzwarren Junction to the WSR. I doubt that could be implemented quickly. Nor would using WSR pilots be feasible. It's a difficult enough logistic to sort just for the odd 'special'. Then timetabling. Extending the existing Cardiff-Tauntons would require a timetable recast and possibly changes to unit diagrams.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 20:22:26 by Four Track, Now! »
|
Logged
|
"A clear conscience laughs at a false accusation."
"Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."
"Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity."
|
|
|
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
Posts: 5450
There are some who call me... Tim
|
|
« Reply #4 on: March 02, 2016, 09:46:27 » |
|
Ambitious, but would First Group want to take patronage away from their buses?
Good to see that things have moved on: The history of the West Somerset Railway[...] is a sad one. That company has faced difficulties in extending its services to Taunton. One of the problems which I hope can be resolved is that the Taunton board of the National Union of Railwaymen has apparently not been very helpful, to say the least, about the extension of the service to Taunton, on the basis that its members operate services of the Western National bus company in the area. So they have placed themselves in the somewhat undesirable position of being railwaymen opposing the reopening of a railway line in order to defend a bus service. Source: Hansard, 1981 |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 20:22:03 by Four Track, Now! »
|
Logged
|
Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 02, 2016, 10:23:56 » |
|
I think the main problem would be the very short timescales for submission. It hardly enables a well thought out proposal ...
The fund was announced a long time (? about a year) ago and we have been awaiting the details of how it will work; TransWilts directors met last night to confirm our response. There is also another fund mainly for cycling and walking as an LSTF▸ follow up currently being bid on rather tight timescales. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 20:21:46 by Four Track, Now! »
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
Rhydgaled
|
|
« Reply #6 on: March 03, 2016, 14:53:44 » |
|
Utilising rolling stock available off-peak is a nice idea for a trial, but what I'd like to see in the medium-long-term is something rather more integrated. Heritage railways don't tend to run many trains in January and Feburary, and the timetable often varies throughout their operating season too. My idea would be for national rail services to run a basic year-round timetable on the heritage railway, with workings replaced by heritage stock as and when the heritiage railways wants to run the services. The national rail units released by heritage stock would be available for strengthening other national rail services during such periods (which in touristy areas is probably the busy time for the national network too). Of course there would be less time where the railway is closed, allowing maintenance, but that might be solvable if the government gave the heritage railway a maintainance grant, as they do for Network Rail, so they aren't as reliant on volunteers for maintaining the track. There could also be issues with the journey time being too lengthy because of the low speed limit required on most heritage railways, and bignosemac also makes a good point that this sort of thing would be very challenging to arange and hence probably couldn't be implemented in a hurry. But impossible? I doubt it. Not worthwhile (given the low linespeed, most likely)? possibly. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 20:21:28 by Four Track, Now! »
|
Logged
|
----------------------------
Don't DOO▸ it, keep the guard (but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea if the driver unlocked the doors on arrival at calling points).
|
|
|
|
Oxonhutch
|
|
« Reply #7 on: May 25, 2016, 19:13:35 » |
|
Very pleased to announce that the Chinnor and Princes Risborough Railway, a local Great Western style heritage railway, is one of the winners of this year's competition. The Department for Transport has announced the winners here. Chinnor and Princes Risborough Rail Association (C&PRRA): heritage rail interchange with main line services at Princes Risborough - ^75,000. The project will extend the heritage rail line from Chinnor to its former terminus at Princes Risborough station and see the reinstatement of a platform and loop line at Princes Risborough for interchange with services from London and other main line destinations. I am closely associated with the railway and this is great news for us. I am looking forward to receiving our first passengers directly from the National Network via the new platform 4 at Risborough. At the moment, we have to stop just short of our nominal destination. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #8 on: May 25, 2016, 20:15:27 » |
|
Is this cash enough to get you there, or is it a case of needing matched funding?
(Edit by FT, N! to correct fonts in all above posts)
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 20:27:22 by Four Track, Now! »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Oxonhutch
|
|
« Reply #9 on: May 25, 2016, 20:38:49 » |
|
Matched funding which, through the kindness of our existing donors and generous friends, we now have.
This will (re)build us a platform, provide the loop in the station area and allow us to run passenger trains between Princes Risborough and Chinnor.
In the future, we will need to restore half a mile of currently redundant track to make us totally independent of Network Rail infrastructure. We will need to undertake further fund-raising for this project and all contributions are generously and gratefully accepted!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Posts: 6594
The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!
|
|
« Reply #10 on: May 25, 2016, 21:15:14 » |
|
That sounds like a job that would cost ^75,000,000 on the national railway!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Now, please!
|
|
|
|
Oxonhutch
|
|
« Reply #11 on: May 25, 2016, 21:30:48 » |
|
Thank-you. You remind me that I must increase my volunteer pay rates this year by several hundred percent.
They are currently at a big fat zero!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Surrey 455
|
|
« Reply #12 on: May 25, 2016, 22:14:00 » |
|
Several hundred percent multiplied by zero still equals zero I'm afraid.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Posts: 6594
The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!
|
|
« Reply #14 on: May 25, 2016, 22:29:16 » |
|
B*gg*r !   Same old stuff then?  If you think that's bad, look at the pension scheme! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Now, please!
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
