Without vision and money, not even Harry potter could fix FGW▸ .
I do not pretend to have the answers for FGW problems, but if Andrew Haines could consider ...
Andrew Haines does come with an excellent reputation - so I suspect the vision is there. And from the little direct evidence I have so far, he listens internally and externally so that he can piggyback on the visions of others. I was notably disappointed in the days that First were bidding to take over the Wessex servivces as to how little they listened - "we know all about the services through Melksham" they told me. But those days are a distant memory and constructive inputs and realistic discussions do now take place at various levels.
However - he's right - he's not Harry Potter (who I understand has only limited railway experience anyway, and would not have been considered suitable even if he was available
)
Money ... in some areas, a little can go a long way and it might not be needed at all. The proposal for a major improvement to the TransWilts service which you picked up in your suggestion list called for NO EXTRA INVESTMENT but promised three extra round trips a day, including a key morning peak one that would give the return of a viable service.
I have not studied the finances of the other ideas you put forward Simon, but I would imaging that late evening service increases would incur extra staff costs but would not mean any more trains were needed (unless there's an issue about time to service them all overnight and some have to be pulled after the peak).
And alas peak provision is always a nightmare; it was put to me that it's not efficient to hire an extra train to cure gross overcrowding for 10 minutes, twice a day, as that train runs from Keynsham to Temple Meads in the morning peak, and back in the evening. I know the point was made to me in that way to stress tje issues that need to be considered, but it does make you think.
Barriers / gates / ticket queues. It's struck me that there is scope to simplify some elements of the system, and a simpler system should be more efficient to operate if only by reducring the number of buttons and menu options. Why can there be 27 different single fares listed when you ask for a SINGLE from Melksham to London ... currently just two practical trains (07:17 and 19:50) per day?
On price reductions .... the cynical view says that if the trains are full, and there's no easy way to add capacity, then there is no point in the commercial operator reducing prices. What would the effect be? Overcrowding, more unhappy customers, and less money to boot. No point in trying to create a market you can't cope with.
I've actually spoken, and on the record too, that certain fares would stand an element of increase - emphatically NOT the ones you're mentioning, but rather others where the cost per mile is much lower - Melksham to Swindon is about a third of the Chippenham to London rate per mile, and could be increased at the same time that the service is increased to an appropriate level by around 20 to 25% with little complaint or effect on traffic levels.
Click on the map to explore geographics
