Heritage lines and supporting the town they serve. Proper mass transit.

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Mass transit public transport is about combining lots of small "flows" of passengers. Combining the micro-uses of me wanting to take visitors to Oxford for the day with the people with business trips to London, the folks called up for Jury duty in Swindon, the folks who live in Melksham and commute to Swindon and those who commute to Bristol and Filton Abbey Wood, changing trains at Chippenham, and those who work in Chippenham or go to school or college there.  Don't forget the people travelling in to visit Melksham businesses (and some come from a long way away) and those who have delivered a motor vehicle to the town and are using the train home.  And please don't overlook the people travelling with children who are living with mum but spend weekends with Dad, and the people headed out for a day in the country, at the seaside, or to visit friends.

Individually, each of these flows of people to of from Melksham is quite small. In combination, they make a chunky gathering who can all efficiently travel on the same train.  And Melksham is just one of five stations on the line.  For every passenger who joins a train at Melksham, there are two more who have joined at Westbury or Trowbridge.   And so it is that you'll have 60 or 70 people on the train.  There are, though, large numbers of people - in the groups mentioned above - who do not use the train because it is too infrequent. We are pretty sure (and I can provide evidence that if you double the service, that 60 or 70 people will rise to around 100 on the same train, and whilst the puts the operational cost up, it certainly does not even double it because you already have the railway line there. You're looking at 1.5 times the cost for 3 times the passengers. Of course, you can't keep doubling the service and our analysis suggest that a future doubling (so 4 times the current service - half hourly) at this stage would result in only a modest further passenger increase at this stage.

Heritage Railway lines run to Swanage and to Minehead in the South West of England, and both of those are connected to the national rail network.  The Swanage Railway ran through services (using a heritage diesel train) last summer and I used it a couple of times.   Sadly, they report that the economic of it didn't work and it won't be happening again this summer; the way I read the report, this is not just a "breather year" - rather a long term change that culls the connecting service to Wareham on a permanent basis of until something changes that allows it to make sense. The Railway to Minehead has supported a number of limited services - not of them permanent - in which GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have provided a connecting train form Taunton to Bishops Lydeard from where the heritage train may be taken to Minehead. Again, nothing permanent there either.

Both Swanage and Minehead are significant towns - so why are the linking services so parlous and basically failing when many hearts wish them to work?  Read back to the start of this article and you'll see how so many passenger flows are combined to make economic sense on a single mass transit system. And contrast that to the trains which provide a rail link in these experiments to Swanage and to Minehead.  They are aimed at and tunes for just a single market - the railway based arrivals to the heritage railway and whilst they may do an excellent job of trawling that pool and catching all the fish, the pool is not big enough to justify the cost of the trawler - not cheap when you include special network trains or through running of heritage ones.  So - I'm disappointed but not shocked that the through services / regular rail connections all the way to Swanage and Minehead have failed to have a firm ongoing financial foundation.

So what's the way forward? I'm going to offer two solutions:

1. Run through trains on no more than a handful of days, generally using trains and crews from main line special or open access operators; DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) contracted service providers such as SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) and GWR would need DfT clearance - may be possible, I suppose, but ea extra level of complexity.  The financial model is that lots of punters who will pay though the nose on an excursion, and the daily operating costs of main line stock and crews will not be there.

2. Take the bull by the horns and provide a service that works for the commuters, the people going to court or to hospital, the students, the people travelling to and from their holidays, the people going shopping and all the other flows IN ADDITION TO the heritage / connecting services.  Mass Transit 101 - design your transport system to provide for as many people as possible as well as possible.

I am writing this from Sicily.  There is a lot of old stuff around here and it's looking really sad. A number of stations have been closed and there are rusted and part pulled up tracks.  But in the midst of that, from where I have been so far new platforms and new infrastructure is being built within or replacing the old. Deep breath to see some of the losses at times, but wonder at seeing all the work that's going on, and indeed today being on a modern electric train busy it was uncomfortable.

Is there something from these Sicily comments to learn for the Swanage and Minehead branches?   Today I went to Agrigento (population 55,000) and saw some of what has been done and is being done on that branch. Some stations gone. Other renewed or being renewed.  Some sections of line re-aligned. Signalling all modernised - colour lights, automated on and off single lines so there's about 30 seconds from one train coming off the single track to another one going on, and electrics overhead. They look spindly compared to the hardware we see on GWR.  Now that is the reality of modernisation.  What might it mean for the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) branches I am mentioning?

Let's look at a model for them.  And this is dangerous speculation stuff from me. In both cases I would look to providing an all day, every day, all year service to cover as many of the major flows that could be covered as possible.   That's the general area traffic, PLUS the heritage traffic, PLUS the arriving and departing holiday makers because these are holiday destinations.  Much as I would like to see overhead wires to Minehead and third rail to Swanage, I'm thinking bi-mode technology to keep the infrastructure electrically safe and keep places like Blue Anchor and Corfe Castle with a degree of heritage retained.  But there is going to need to be a degree of updating to cut down on the staffing needs, and a degree of stations missed out on at least some journeys. 

Looking back, I speculated about a timetable for Minehead that runs heritage trains in season during the day (and those are short days) and national network trains at other times - and a lot of the traffic they pick up will be the leisure traffic - holiday arrivals, day trips to the seaside (sorry, we may abstract some traffic from Weymouth) and also a huge opportunity for one way heritage trips - arrive on a steam train, have a great day in [Minehead/Swanage] and leave on the late network train.  It's all about mass transit and handling all of the thousands of individual opportunities to make up the mass. The heritage operation becomes a part of mass transit - supporting the whole population and economy of the area, and with a financial model that will work for the future without a desparate need to push up heritage fares to break even - rather an ability to grow income by growing passenger numbers.

Where am I going?

I am nothing is not a public transport campaigner - a supporter and a promoter of the good systems for getting people around.  And a heritage return trip is marginal to public transport; slightly less marginal where it connect in by rail.  Frustratinly, we have the elements to do something really, really good, reliable, long term stable for Swanage, Minehead and we could add others. It need at element of give and take from both the Network Rail "side" and the heritage "side" - so much that they are no longer "side"s but partners in the same operation.

It's a dream. It's not going to be Utopia, but could it still be reality.

Edit - to add picture.  Please note my pictures show people in a railway setting and not trains.

[grahame]

Not the final one - I'm still looking for that - but here's a iteration of one I suggested earlier for Minehead

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=17237.msg293260#msg293260
and
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=17237.msg293536#msg293536

[Mark A]

Both Swanage and Minehead are significant towns - so why are the linking services so parlous and basically failing when many hearts wish them to work? 

Isn't it that most parts of the rail system do not and will not cover their costs - and that this has long been recognised, including formally as long ago as... was it the 1968 transport act. That laid out the principle of underwriting the costs of loss making but socially valuable lines. This is a subsidy that's not available to cover the costs of additional services to connect heritage lines via their rail connections to the national network.

There's also been recognition that rather than thinking of money to support a socially valuable railway as passive 'Subsidy', it's important to endow a sense of enterprise so that the supported asset returns the greatest value in terms of social benefit and it's certainly reasonable to immediately consider how to support and enable services to support heritage railways - or to run services over heritage railway metals - and at that point, running the services on certain days only, simply to enable travel to a heritage railway, can be a thin starting point.

Historical trimming of the periphery of the rail system has had unwanted consequences in terms of removing attractive destinations from the system. That's 'Attractive' in the sense of passenger travel and income generating, Thinking particularly of Dartmouth here, especially given its odd geographical setup. Perhaps in a more well funded world, the railway could rebuild traffic to these destinations in a variety of ways.

It's also worth looking at current opportunities that would involve little other than ticketing system tweaks and marketing. If I were the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) I'd identify the Severn Valley Railway, as travel to it is a quick walk between adjacent stations, existing GWR services in conjunction with West Midlands services have plenty of capacity. Then, remove the ticketing system anomaly that pushes the day return to Worcester from Bristol from £17.50 up to £54 for the additional half hour trip from there to Kidderminster, promote the destination, perhaps include through ticketing to Bridgnorth, and start putting bums on seats.

Mark

[RichardB]

I very much sympathise with what you say, Graham, and hope a way can be found for a heritage railway to accommodate an everyday regular service alongside their heritage operation but the compromises that would need to be made are immense which I think is really why it hasn't happened yet.

On the Swanage Railway, at a guess, I'd be fairly confident a regular hourly SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) 158/159 in each direction could be fitted onto the line around a heritage service but the Swanage Railway itself performs an important public transport function between Norden, Corfe Castle and Swanage at heritage railway fares so, while the SWR service, at SWR-style fares, could miss out Norden, it certainly couldn't miss out Corfe Castle and if it then took part of the Corfe Castle - Swanage traffic, that would damage the Swanage Railway's revenue, probably quite badly.

On the West Somerset, things would need to be radical - the line would need to be relaid (like Okehampton was), resignalled and the line speed increased (it's a long way at 25MPH if you're just trying to get from A to B).  Would be good in many ways but understandably complete anathema to many on the West Somerset who, while seeing a heritage service retained, would see much else thoroughly changed. 

None of us who'd like to see a regular everyday service reintroduced should ever forget the railway was lifted to Swanage by BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) and the Swanage Railway rebuilt it and were it not for the West Somerset, the Minehead line might today be a long distance cycle trail with miniscule, at best, prospect of reopening as a railway.

Quite a conundrum.

[broadgage]

IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), Running at 40+ MPH should be allowed in some circumstances on heritage lines, subject to steel bodied coaches equipped with air brakes and central door locking or power doors.
I do not believe that an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) at 40 MPH is more dangerous than a steam hauled vacuum braked slam door train at 25 mph.

[CyclingSid]

Difficult questions. More thoughts are not exactly about heritage lines.

I am always amazed by the Brockenhurst - Lymington branch, who is supporting who, who is the bigger contributor the town or the ferry/IoW? If the ferry stopped would the branch follow?

Is a certain amoint of this about ingrained habits. Reading Green Park station was first planned 20 odd years ago. If it had been built then would people have got in the habit of using when the moved into Green Park? Once the have moved in and established the habit of getting in the car, the railway with pricing and changes is going to have to work miracles to change some habits. I would be delighted to be proved wrong as the figures emerge over the coming years.

Swanage for most people will not have any memory of a railway service, so it would effectively be starting from scratch. How does the Borders Railway compare with building a customer base from nothing. What are the road links like in both cases, are the similar or radically different. If the chain ferry died would that make a differecne to the Swanage case.

I am old enough to remember and have travelled on the Gosport chain ferry, it is along way round by car or lorry between Gosport (and Lee on Solent etc) and Portsmouth. In that case the Gosport branch had already gone. In my case a chain ferry/bridge/tunnel would get the vote over re-establishing the Gosport branch, but then I am no longer a resident.

[grahame]

Difficult questions. More thoughts are not exactly about heritage lines.

I am always amazed by the Brockenhurst - Lymington branch, who is supporting who, who is the bigger contributor the town or the ferry/IoW? If the ferry stopped would the branch follow?

Interesting to look at the traffic mixes of the two - and I suspect they support each other in the total cause / symbiotic.  Noticing a longer distance nature to the pier traffic than the town:





Numberwise - 214,000 from Town and just 81,000 from pier in the year to March 2023 - but 20% from Pier and just 10% from Town are to Waterloo.

[Noggin]

I think it's fair point. Whilst we owe a tremendous debt to the enthusiasts who have saved our lines and heritage, places like Minehead could be transformed with full reconnection to the National Rail network and a full rail service, something which as we've seen from Okehampton, can be done cost-effectively and with great results.

How do we do that sensitively? To my mind, a preserved railway serves two purposes:
1) To show people how things were, preserving material and skills for future generations to see
2) To maintain the line as a living part of the community within which it operates, preserving it from encroachment.

If you want to achieve the second point, surely the better option is to have it run for the benefit of the whole community as a full time National Rail operation?

So how do you achieve the first point effectively and not "throw away" the hard work of the volunteers? 

1) Give significant public funds to national/regional centres of excellence, enabling them to have full-time professional skills in conservation, maintenance, education - lines acting as examples of "how things were" and enabling them to build additional income streams such as events, filming, acting as a base for railtours etc. Why not run fewer centres really well and give enthusiasts a chance to earn real money? 

2) For railways that would be better reincorporated into the national network:
a) The railway gets taken over in its entirety with significant funding to "lift and shift" items like museums, engineering workshops, stock, signalling and trackwork to a heritage operation, plus a binding commitment to maintain heritage features which remain. As far as possible, maintain old buildings for community use rather than leveling for parking, look for community organisations to take over station catering e.g. Yatton 
b) Partial takeover e.g. Monday to Saturday the line is run as a conventional NR^» (Network Rail - home page) line with a heritage operation keeping workshops and station buildings, running on Sundays on something like a "one engine in steam" principle. The Avon Valley in Bristol springs to mind here.
c) "Upskilling" whereby the more capable operations are given capital and operating grants to run a professional service to a revised rulebook. Perhaps a suitable model can be found amongst the Swiss / Japanese private railways? 

[CyclingSid]

Thanks Graham interesting figures, does your source also include YMH (Yarmouth IoW). Not saying it would make a great difference but the various IoW "stations" in the booking engine always intrigue, not just from saving money over separate tickets.

My original point was partly about changing habits, which they want to in health. Difficult to achieve because we all tend to be resistant to change, work, travel, health or whatever. Some years ago DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) created a geodemographic segmentation (akin to Mosaic etc) in relation to travel and transport. Can't remember the details, but was probably heavily car-orientated. Never entirely convinced by geodemographics, especially in the public sector.

[Chris from Nailsea]

IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), Running at 40+ MPH should be allowed in some circumstances on heritage lines, subject to steel bodied coaches equipped with air brakes and central door locking or power doors.

... and a Pullman dining carriage, obviously. 

[grahame]

Thanks Graham interesting figures, does your source also include YMH (Yarmouth IoW).

There are no records for Yarmouth (Isle of Wight).  As an educated guess they are included in Lymington Pier.

[grahame]

I very much sympathise with what you say, Graham, and hope a way can be found for a heritage railway to accommodate an everyday regular service alongside their heritage operation but the compromises that would need to be made are immense which I think is really why it hasn't happened yet.

[snip]

None of us who'd like to see a regular everyday service reintroduced should ever forget the railway was lifted to Swanage by BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) and the Swanage Railway rebuilt it and were it not for the West Somerset, the Minehead line might today be a long distance cycle trail with miniscule, at best, prospect of reopening as a railway.

Quite a conundrum.

I very much agree - the way it could (I am a perhaps impractical dreamer sometimes) work is for it to be in the interests and desire of all parties for it to work.  On Sunday, I visited Trapani.  The station there has or had half a dozen platforms. But at present, one platform would suffice and others are rusted or trackless.  Some of the reason for only a tiny part of the station being needed is the low traffic level, but much is because modern trains can just drive in and drive out half an hour later - no need for water columns, coaling stages, run round loops, wheel tapping and so on ... and passengers can (and do) turn up for their services a few minutes before the train leaves and not hours ahead, with back packs and their own luggage if need be without call on porters, without restaurant cars or catering outlets that are needed.

I look at Minehead and I see a heritage station - and remaining so.  I see Bishops Lydeard and Willton and Washford as simple stopping points for modern national services, passing through heritage operations there.  If the National operation pays for the track and infrastructure maintenance, what a huge gain for the heritage team; shared costs.  Minehead National Station - outside the level crossing (which has been modernised anyway) needs only a single platform.









The first two pictures show the train at Trapani and the available space that *could* be there for a heritage operation. The other two pictures from the train passing though an intermediate station.

This thread is a discussion - not for me personally to pick up a campaign; rather just pointing out, uncomfortably perhaps, some of the issues and options. We do indeed owe debts of gratitude to those who have preserve / kept / re-instated infrastructure and give us the option to even consider these possibilities and I would love to be saying "let's help you keep what you have achieved in the last fifty years so it's assured a way forward for the next 50".

[broadgage]

IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), Running at 40+ MPH should be allowed in some circumstances on heritage lines, subject to steel bodied coaches equipped with air brakes and central door locking or power doors.

... and a Pullman dining carriage, obviously. 

Not really needed for a service confined only to a heritage line, a proper buffet would suffice. For a through service to London, Bristol, or other relatively distant place then yes a buffet on every train and a restaurant on selected services would be good.