Melksham

[whole diary]

[oooooo]

Waste of rolling stock, diversionary route, no point in having booked services,

[oooooo]

(link below)

www.melkshamsucks.com

[grahame]

Waste of rolling stock, diversionary route, no point in having booked services,

Everyone is entitled to their opinion ... but you have missed rather a large body of overwhelming  evidence to the contrary.  The argument now is whether an hourly or two hourly service is the most appropriate for the TransWilts line, and how to achieve that.

[swlines]

hourly or two hourly

I consider myself to be an optimistic person but I can't really see hourly being viable!

[Chris from Nailsea]

In that case, Tom, I'm happy to continue to support an at least two-hourly service for Melksham.  That's still far better than the present inappropriate service.

[swlines]

I'd agree that the current service is inappropriate, but in my own mind I'd rather see an initial service that operates to a lesser frequency than the already agreed timings in order to stimulate the growth required in order to support a 2 hourly service which I agree would be needed - but I'm looking at an overall point of view for through journies between Swindon and Westbury, etc - Melksham is simply an intermediate station on the route that will benefit from an increased service.

[grahame]

I'd agree that the current service is inappropriate, but in my own mind I'd rather see an initial service that operates to a lesser frequency than the already agreed timings in order to stimulate the growth required in order to support a 2 hourly service which I agree would be needed - but I'm looking at an overall point of view for through journies between Swindon and Westbury, etc - Melksham is simply an intermediate station on the route that will benefit from an increased service.

I'm very much in agreement, Tom.

a) It's best to take stepping stones towards the appropriate service; something along the lines of the six trains a day that were suggested by First for next December (See url=http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/tp.html]here[/url] for one possible timetable[/url]).  With these six, well times, the service use would grow again.  With just the odd extra service, it's very questionable and the idea of a 4 hour gap from 3 p.m. to almost 7 p.m. for services out of Swindon which was also mooted would have been like building an arch without the keystone.

b) Melksham is, indeed, an intermediate station.  Swindon is the largest urban mass in Wiltshire, Salisbury 2nd, Trowbridge and Chippenham 3rd and 4th, and only then Melksham. You'll note that all five lie on the "TransWilts", together with the important junction at Westbury, and the large town of Warminster too.  2006 data shows 25% of passenger journeys to / from Melksham and 75% between places South thereof and places North thereof.

[TerminalJunkie]

www.melkshamsucks.com

All I get is a DNS^▸ (Domain Name Service (turns a computer's address into something more relevant)) error. That must mean Melksham doesn't suck

[johoare]

www.melkshamsucks.com

All I get is a DNS^▸ (Domain Name Service (turns a computer's address into something more relevant)) error. That must mean Melksham doesn't suck

I didn't dare click on it in case it broke my computer... But also I agree... Melksham doesn't suck...

[Chris from Nailsea]

I agree, too: Melksham doesn't suck.   

[Graz]

If I had a pound for every time I've overheard someone from Trowbridge or Westbury buying a ticket to Chippenham on my train, I'd be fairly wealthy by now! Of course, they had to change at Bath.

The demand and potential clearly *is* there. It should be pretty obvious that a service linking two very large towns (not to mention other large towns) and two very busy interchanges- where nothing suitable exists at the moment - will be popular!

[grahame]

I didn't dare click on it in case it broke my computer... But also I agree... Melksham doesn't suck...

Thanks ... EVERYONE ... for the follow ups here.

All the URLs posted in the "series" by this posted were checked out within the hour of them being added to the forum, and none of them that remain points to anything nasty. (It should not be possible for any links to be added here that will break your computer - if it were, it would make the life of all forum operators a misery!)

[swlines]

Want to put that to the test Graham?

[G.Uard]

I worked over the branch on two recent occasions and the 19.32 from Westbury  had no pax either to or from Melksham.  More experienced colleagues tell me that this is often the case.  That said, apart from lightly used connections, there is not much to generate interest at Westbury at seven thirty PM. Perhaps more imaginative timetabling would give this branch a shot in the arm.  Or is someone somewhere trying to raise the ghost of the good doctor?

[eightf48544]

Or is someone somewhere trying to raise the ghost of the good doctor?

One of my major criticsims of the good doctor was that he looked at services in isolation and costed each line and station individualy. There was no real attempt to add in the value of a particular line in the network as a whole.

Bearing in mind that even in 1960 many servies followed pre grouping routes, if it started GC^» (Great Central Railway - link to heritage line) it finished GC. There was little attempt to see whether the service could be diverted onto another route for for part of the journey and allow it to terminate in another station in the same town.

The only place where a concerted attempt was made to rationalise into a single station was Leeds and that was heavily criticsed and delayed at the time because of what was seen to be the rising cost. Who can imagine Leeds today with two main stations? However much that rationalisation cost it must have paid for itself ten times over.

This is the problem with Melksham. There is no mechanism to allow the "bean counters" to work out the additonal benefits to whole rail network of having an adequate service serving Salisbury to Swindon, including Melksham.

Another  problem with Melksham is that it can't be closed because it would  polictically unpopular as the government wants to be seen as pro rail and not shutting railway stations especialy given the general elections only a couple of years away. The TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) are quite happy for it remain open as  a diversionary and freight route. They will be even more happy when it's needed for diversions for electrification.

However, there is no reward under the current franchising arrangements for any TOC to volunteerily increase the service over and above that specified.

Maybe some clever person on this board can devise a formula to calculate the added value of an adequate train service at reasonable times to stations like Melksham, which also adds it's value to the network as a whole with the increased journey opportunities it would provide.

Therefore, I am afraid to say the argument for more services for stations like Melksham are political and with the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) in particular.

Link didn't work to melkshamsucks