December Timetable at Melksham

[whole diary]

[phile]

There has been a long and intensive campaign since 2006 and thanks are due to all involved.   By consistently putting the pressure on, it told FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and DFT^▸ (Department for Transport) that the matter was not going to go away.

[JayMac]

... and Melksham to Taunton.

Now Taunton is close to my heart, and anything that improves journey opportunities to and from the jewel of Somerset gets my vote! 

The improved TransWilts service offers up an alternative route from Taunton and further west to/from Chippenham and Swindon, and in the December 2013 timetable there are a few options that are on a par time-wise versus travelling via Bristol.

Now, direct trains are always going to be the most attractive, so can I start the campaign now for a Taunton - Swindon service, calling at a new Taunton Parkway station with access to J25 of the M5, either at Bathpool on the Taunton side of the M5 or between Ruishton and Creech St Michael (reinstate four tracks to Cogload Junction), then re-opened stations at Langport and Somerton (with one or both having platforms on loop lines if possible), followed by calls at Castle Cary, Bruton, Frome, Westbury, Trowbridge, Melksham, Chippenham and Swindon. Should be able to slot in a DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) service (cascaded Class 165/166s?) between the high speed service to/from the West of England.

[grahame]

Now, direct trains are always going to be the most attractive, so can I start the campaign now for ...

Direct trains are indeed attractive - the figures of 40% and 46% traffic loss have been quoted for commuter and irregular traffic loss if you replace a long standing direct train with one that involves a change along the way - the data is quoted by the folks looking west from Newbury when looking at the option of diesel shuttle from there westward, though I'm not sure of their source;  I would be interested in Ormskirk - Preston metrics after Ormskirk became double terminus.  And indeed the SLC^▸ (Service Level Commitment) document for the current franchise says "may be joined to route xxxx" in a number of places including the TransWilts.

I can't help feeling that joining Westbury - Warminster shuttles onto something coming into Westbury from the north would provide a boost for both services - however, to do so on the current timetable would result in significant retiming of infrequent trains, and result in serious short-term disturbance of arrival and departure opportunities prior to longer term gains, and the ripple effects could (and perhaps should) go wider.  Alas, the opportunity and invitation to look 15 years ahead at service patterns has been replaced by one that's a 3 year holding term.

Beyond the three years, who knows?  Some longer distance linkages seem to come and go (Crewe to Skegness) and others remain or change (Waterloo to Manchester, Maesteg and Milford Haven; Brighton to Great Malvern), but with these there are / should be checks made to understand the level of through traffic at intermediate hubs such as Bristol.   I sometimes note "running later - this train will be terminated and restarted at Bristol Temple Meads" which means "we can't delay shorter distance services around Gloucester because of an earlier signal failure at Barnham; through people are a lower priority to us".

I can speculate beyond three years - and indeed we are and must continue to think to that future; there are opportunities for looking at services which come into both ends of a station and turn back there and saying "should they be though";  you're looking at timing, frequency, robustness, train length, stock type (75 mph / 125 mph) factors.    And where you add a new service onto an existing one, you're looking at co-ordinating growth rates, avoiding the tail wagging the dog, and avoiding an embryonic service leaching effectiveness from its better established host section (one hopes / tries to make it feed better life into its host).

Mixed message there, I think ... and a more serious answer than was solicited to an idea that perhaps had an element of jest in it.  But look back at what we're talking about in 2063, and I suspect we could find that some of the ideas that "will never happen" have done - and indeed are backbones of the then-current system.
 

[BandHcommuter]

I wonder what build up of demand is expected by the funders of this service, and how quickly they expect the passenger numbers to grow?

I have used two sources for the information below....

Thanks very much for this detailed information. To sense check for my own benefit, some very crude back-of-the-envelope scrawling suggests that 120,000 passengers per annum in year five would look like a broad average of around 20 passengers per train, although clearly there will be wide variations by time of day and day of week. Is this new traffic to the railway, or does it include passengers who reassign to Transwilts from other services? If the journey opportunities are well marketed, this level of demand seems well within the realms of possibility. If the year 5 targets are met, am I right in thinking that the service would be close to becoming profitable (subsidy free)?

[grahame]

Is this new traffic to the railway, or does it include passengers who reassign to Transwilts from other services?

There will be some straight reassignments - passengers from Westbury / Trowbridge to Chippenham / Swindon who presently dogleg via Bath.   There will be new traffic, which will build up slower as people learn of and try the service and others move homes and change / take jobs that make use of it.  That's from just about any station on the line to any other, as there are major employment areas and major residential areas in all the towns along the way.

But then it gets more complex. You'll get journeys which will be extended along the TransWilts - people who live in Chippenham, Malmesbury and Melksham and presently drive to Bradford-on-Avon or Westbury to go south, and who live in the west Wiltshire towns and drive to Chippenham for London, but who now have a better option from their local station.   And there will undoubtedly be some traffic from Melksham station (specifically Melksham in this case) to the Bristol area which currently drives to Chippenham or Bradford-on-Avon.

If the journey opportunities are well marketed ^, this level of demand seems well within the realms of possibility.

add:
^  - and the service runs reliably

If the year 5 targets are met, am I right in thinking that the service would be close to becoming profitable (subsidy free)?

The simple answer is "yes" .. the complex answer is ... complex / "based on current accounting methods and assuming no unexpected changes in the cost of providing and running rail services"

[mikestone]

I don't think I have ever seen an fGW TAA before the deadline for my TRUK^▸ (trailer, restaurant, unclassified, kitchen) article - usually I have to search for a copy of the fGW poster and then get the article edited! 
;
In fact the whole track access procedure is to my mind total nonsense - CrossCountry only got round to matching the track access contract to the service they ran from the start of the franchise in August this year, and the additional GC^» (Great Central Railway - link to heritage line) KX-Bradford which went to the disputes panel who decided (or didn't according to East Coast's interpretation) that they must be given the 16.08 KX-Newark's path now turns out to just require the latter to run one minute later!   
'
Incidentally the platform working shown in RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) at Swindon doesn't work - unless both these and the Gloucester locals are going to be 153s.

[grahame]

Incidentally the platform working shown in RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) at Swindon doesn't work - unless both these and the Gloucester locals are going to be 153s.

? ... Can you explain further?   There are platform considerations at both Swindon and Westbury, but my understanding is that the Swindon bay has 3 a car capacity, and that - at least at the times I looked at on RTT (I didn't check right through all three different day patterns), services typically arrive from Cheltenham, then from Westbury, then leave for Westbury and finally leave for Cheltenham.   In practise, there's quite a quick turn around at Swindon on many of the TransWilts sevices, so a reversal on one or other side of the main island shouldn't normally be a huge headache at times that trains are running out of pattern.

[John R]

Does that mean the Trans Wilts service is going to be restricted to a Cl 153?  Though Quail states capacity for 4 coaches, although whether that's the case when a second train is called on I'm not sure.

[grahame]

Things don't and won't stand still on the railways, even though we feel that things change very slowly at times; any "what traffic levels can we expect?" questions really have to be followed with "at the following date" with the tremendous growth seen in West of England / Wiltshire rail use:
http://www.wellho.net/demo/railuse.php?place=BS
http://www.wellho.net/demo/railuse.php?place=SN
http://www.wellho.net/demo/railuse.php?place=BA^» (British Airways - about)
But note that the changes aren't instant when a service improvement is put into place. There's also operational experience gained in the year or two after a service is introduced, allowing what was specified as minimalist and robust to be modified in the light of experience.

There have been a number of TransWilts studies and surveys and all of them have come very firmly out in favour of at least the improvements proposed, based on a minimum length train.  There's a very strong chance it will work well and grow, but just how well and how much growth over what time period depends on many factors and is pretty hard to predict.   The good news is that this difficulty is accepted, acknowledged, and will be monitored. Come December 2014, a timetable change to make use of redoubled Swindon to Kemble can come into effect. Two years later, you're looking at IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) coming into service and it's my understanding that will release the bay at Swindon, and four 150 / 158 carriages off than line alone. Finally, I suspect I should have said "at least" a 3 car capacity in the bay at Swindon; Quail is probably correct, and if it says 4 ...

[mikestone]

From memory I thought a 158 only just fitted platform 2, but having looked at photos  a 153 would fit on top.  The SA says 80 metres so you cannot accommodate anything other than a 153 on top of a Cl.158.
;
 

[IndustryInsider]

A 4-car 20m train can't be fitted within the signal overlap in Swindon bay, so up to 3 carriages of 20-23m is the most that can be accommodated.

[grahame]

A 4-car 20m train can't be fitted within the signal overlap in Swindon bay, so up to 3 carriages of 20-23m is the most that can be accommodated.

Thanks - that's what my educated guess would have thought.

For the record - nominal carriage lengths and carriages per set:
143 - 15 metres per carriage / 2 per set
150 - 20 metres per carriage / usually 2 occasionally 3 per set
153 - 23 metres / single carriage set
158 - 23 metres per carriage / 2 or 3 per set

[JayMac]

Advance Purchase fares from Melksham to numerous destinations for Monday 9th December 2013 are now in online retail systems. Good to see.

Booking horizon is currently 11th December for AP.

[Rhydgaled]

Incidentally the platform working shown in RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) at Swindon doesn't work - unless both these and the Gloucester locals are going to be 153s.

? ... Can you explain further?   There are platform considerations at both Swindon and Westbury, but my understanding is that the Swindon bay has 3 a car capacity, and that - at least at the times I looked at on RTT (I didn't check right through all three different day patterns), services typically arrive from Cheltenham, then from Westbury, then leave for Westbury and finally leave for Cheltenham.   In practise, there's quite a quick turn around at Swindon on many of the TransWilts sevices, so a reversal on one or other side of the main island shouldn't normally be a huge headache at times that trains are running out of pattern.

I saw the 3-car 158 in a bay platform at Swindon the other day. So, assuming Swindon has only one bay, it can definately take at least 3-car.

Direct trains are indeed attractive - the figures of 40% and 46% traffic loss have been quoted for commuter and irregular traffic loss if you replace a long standing direct train with one that involves a change along the way - the data is quoted by the folks looking west from Newbury when looking at the option of diesel shuttle from there westward, though I'm not sure of their source;

How much does journey time competitiveness matter in comparison? One of my concerns is through services at Swansea station. The much lower population west of Swansea appears to cause the use of short trains on the much busier east side (though this is probably due to lack of rolling stock too). Also, the journey time of a through service from Carmarthen to Cardiff via Swansea is quite a bit slower than the road journey time (except in the peak perhaps). Because of this last fact, I suspect the vast majority of passengers making through journeys from west of Swansea to east of Swansea by train have strong reasons for using the train (since the tedious diversion in and out of Swansea hasn't put them off) and would not be put off if they had to change at Swansea. Are my assumptions wrong there or can a service which is not time-competitive stand the addition of having to change trains without a significant drop in patronage?

[anthony215]

This Document may interest some of you especially as it concerns the additional Westbury - Swindon Servies as well as the extra services between Torquay and Newton Abbott.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225394/fgw-franchise-letter.pdf

Seems the DFT^▸ (Department for Transport)/FGW^▸ (First Great Western)  are going to use a class 153 on these extra services.
I do hope the loco hauled option comes off as well especially on the Cardiff - Taunton route