I'm sorry, but sure it did, but don't you think we could do something better really than moan about TransWilts being Cancelled, because of a stupid tosspot who parked his car on the line
Jim, I don't think anyone criticised the decision to cancel the Transwilts trains for that period of - what - 10 days or so. It was a shame yes, and First (who's trains displaced those of Wessex trains for the period) wouldn't actually put in extra stops for the displaced passengers, as it would have "caused even further delays".
The problem arose from the subsequent use of figures which included that period, and the aftermath of rebuilding confidence / reliability, in the decisions about future services. That's where you'll find the original posts were critical on this topic.
I would like to expand on that if I may. Here are some quotes from the links that I posted :
"The
SRA» has not provided any figures to justify its decision. My own (annecdotal) evidence is that the station / train seems to be getting busier rather than quieter, and that doesn't seem to tally with statement that traffic levels can no longer justify the service."
"The SRA's figures may include August 2004 - an exceptional month"
"In August, 2004 a collision between a car and a train near Reading closed the line from Reading to Westbury for a period of several weeks. The railway line through Melksham was used a diversionary route throughout this period, and all trains except the 05:56 to Swindon and the return service were cancelled by Wessex Trains on the demand of Network Rail."
"During this period, First Great Western trains were passing through the station regularly but not stopping. I spoke to First Great Western about this and asked them if they could stop some of their trains - we had customers booked on the cancelled train - but after due consideration they told me that they could not do so for operation reasons."
"It seems ironic that we're threatened with a train service cut based on figures including a period during which the service was withdrawn without notice. OF COURSE no one could use the train during that period."
"It strikes me as circumstantial evidence that the SRA are using the low travel figures during the aftermath of an accident on which to base future provision."
"Re-visiting a quote from nearly a year ago ... at a time I knew no better than to accept the figures issued by the now-defunct SRA"
"Swindon-Southampton service discontinued (apart from 1 service in each peak the services were, on average, less than 25% loaded i.e. less than 20 people on each train). The peak services between Westbury and Swindon (calling at Trowbridge, Melksham and Chippenham) will remain."
"The quotation and figures, I have come to understand, is based on the number of tickets sold divided by the number of trains shown in the timetable ..."
"Overall? I would estimate that of 64 services scheduled each week in the published timetable, an average or around 40 to 45 run - that depends on the period you take to look at. August 2 years ago, perhaps 25% ran. And THAT is a part of the period that's been used in so many statistics I've had quoted at me."
"Bryan Drysdale, who committed suicide by stopping his car on the level crossing near Reading, caused 6 more deaths on the train he derailed. He has also provided the ammunition which certain parties are using to "rubbish" our train service."
"Figures quoted to me by Andrew Griffiths of First. 109,000 passenger used the line in the year that's being used for all the various statistics. At 64 trains per week, 52 weeks per year, that's an average of 32 passengers per train. At 45 trains per week actually running, that's 46 passengers per train ... to which you must add rover tickets, Brit Rail pass holders, Inter-Rail ticket holders, toddlers ...."
I am sorry , Jim , but one thing that life has taught me is that sometimes you need to look back in order to travel forwards.
