I'm confused...

[whole diary]

[Burty76]

I have no knowledge of the area, but Im confused as to why an off-peak Swindon-Westbury can't run?

Presumably the lack of service is due to the perennial lack of available units in the Bristol area.

But I would presume the unit that forms the early morning TransWilts then forms a commuter service into Bristol from Westbury?  And would then be spare until the evening peak from Bristol.

So why couldnt the unit run something like :

6am Westbury - Swindon
7am Swindon - Westbury
8am Westbury - Bristol
9am Bristol - Westbury
10am Westbury - Swindon
11am Swindon-Westbury
12pm Westbury - Swindon
1pm Swindon - Westbury
2pm Westbury-Swindom
3pm Swindon-Westbury
4pm Westbury - Bristol
5pm Bristol - Westbury
6pm Westbury-Swindon
7pm Swindon-Westbury

Surely this is possible?  Doesnt provide many peak services on the TransWilts but does provide a regular off-peak service.

[Ollie]

I think you getting a bit ahead of yourself, as much as the TransWilts line needs a more regular service, I don't think the costs associated could possibly justify an that kind of service. I remember Graham's plan, which looked good.

Edit: http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/pledge.html and http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/tp.html

[grahame]

Let me come in with some answers on this one.

The lack of service on the TransWilts is (now) not so much to do with the lack of a train - with a fleet of over 700 vehicles, the re-allocation of 1 or 2 is not necessarily a huge deal. "No rolling stock" can be used as an excuse;  the real issues are financial and political.

Running a train service (single train, to cover both morning and afternoon peaks and stretch a little beyond the peaks) would cost of the order of 800k per annum. That comprises one third train hire, one third crew costs, and one third split between fuel, maintainance, access charges, and to offset against ORCATS^▸ (Operational Research Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Services) loss pulling a coach off another line which has competing operators.  Farebox income on the TransWilts would bring in around three quarters of this in the first year or two, provided that the train was at the place it was needed at the right times.

How to make up the shortfall?  The local transport authorities in Bristol, Devon and Cornwall amongst others make contributions to help both rail and bus in their areas, and you'll have seen real growth as a result.  But in Wiltshire, the current County Council has taken the view that they support buses, and financial support for trains should be provided centrally alone.  Which is a shame, because indications are that if they were to chip in with 1p per home per week, the funding would be matched and a service provided (halving many public transport journey times in the county!).  Furthermore, a recent announcement by Geoff Hoon says that services provided over and above the minimum specification in the current franchises will be built into (and supported by) the next franchise round in 5 or 6 years time.

It's my view (and I welcome discussions on this) that without a peak hour service on the TransWilts line, you would not have sufficient and reasonable round trip travel opportunities for the service to encourage enough passengers for it to grow and flourish. A gap from 6:45 to 10:45 a.m. in arrivals in Swindon, and in departures between from there between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m., yet two-hourly for the rest of the day would be like having a football club without any players.  Sorry - but with such a service, I think it would be 'designed to fail'; people want to travel from West Wiltshire (Warminster, Westbury, Trowbridge, Melksham) to college in Chippenham, and to work in to Swindon to arrive at around 08:30, and to return at around 17:30.   And they also want to be able to travel, and without 4 hour peak gaps, from Swindon, Chippenham and Melksham to Trowbridge, Warminster and Salisbury.

The service validated for this year (but stillborn for reasons give above) had services from Salisbury to Swindon 06:12 - 07:40 - 10:31 - 13:31 - 16:24 - 18:41 and from Swindon to Salisbury 06:18 - 09:02 - 12:02 - 15:02 - 17:55 - 18:45. A few were "change at Westbury", and this gives an excellent starter.  But actually, Burty76, you're right in suggesting that a somewhat more frequent service would be appropriate.  And it *could* be done ...

Note:

1. First Great Western already run a lot of trains (2 an hour) from Chippenham to Swindon, and there are plenty of seats on them for that leg of their journey - they get busy as they get nearer London.

2. It is possible to reverse trains at Chippenham, and for a more frequent service people would be prepared to change there.

3. Rather than providing extra capacity between Swindon and Chippenham, a train could be usefully redeployed to provide the capacity more frequently between Chippenham and Westbury, and to enhance the capacity (needed) south from there to Salisbury. [Logic, then, in end to end linking it to one of the services that terminates at Salisbury from the East or South]

In the near future, a train every 2 hours IS the appropriate level. And with 50% growth in 20 years planned along the way, you'll find (if plans come to pass) that hourly would be appropriate in a few years.  Do remember that - already - Salisbury, Chippenham, Trowbridge and Melksham are the largest urban centres in the administrative county of Wiltshire, and Swindon is very much 'Wiltshire' too in people's lives, even if it is separated for admin purposes.

[grahame]

... I remember Graham's plan, which looked good ...

I'm just one of the people who has been shouting about it.   The timings came from the professionals, including (as key players) FGW^▸ (First Great Western), and their schedulers deserve the credit.

Further update on this plan: http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/keynote_2010.html

Interesting to note that Network Rail plan to add a track back in at Chippenham against the spare platform face and this should add extra robustness to a Salisbury - Chippenham proposal in a couple of years, as service levels build up.   And [I understand] that pushing the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) for a Chippenham turn around would be somewhat like pushing on an open door as it would help maximise revenues rather than running even more seats Chippenham < - > Swindon.

[Burty76]

Thanks for the reply.  Obviously my lack of knowledge of the politics and finances of the area hampered my view.
Just that, having read about chronic overcrowding on Bristol services, particularly from Westbury to Bristol, I presumed that the problem was not being able to find a unit to run the service.
Hopefully your plans for a 2 hour service will come to fruition soon. 

[grahame]

Burty, I'm delighted to have had the opportunity to provide updated information on what is a complex situation, and one which helps to show that 'every line is different' 

Ironically, some of the Westbury and Trowbridge to Bath crowds change at Bath and dogleg back to Chippenham and Swindon, so a TransWilts service at the right time would actually ease at least that part of the route.  First do have stats ... and the fact that people are willing to make this longer, ovecrowded and  indirect journey makes the case for a direct train slightly harder to justify in financial terms, as First are getting their money anyway.  Like I say - 'every line is different' 

[Burty76]

Interesting point Graham, Ive just had a quick check, and you can do Westbury to Swindon in an hour, every 30 minutes by travelling via Bath. A lot of these trains will have come from Salisbury/Portsmouth/Weymouth etc. as well.  So perhaps this is why First arent concerned about providing a regular service on the direct route.

Of course, this doesnt help Melksham passengers!  Difficult one, can see it from both sides....

[grahame]

Burty76 - I'm coming back further on this one to add another update.

Since I wrote previously on this thread, I have been give some commuter figures that show a net outflow from West Wiltshire of some 6000 employed people (53,000 jobs but 60,000 workers in the area), and at the presentation the top of the list of destinations for those jobs was .... Swindon.   Which rather makes the case even stronger for a decent TransWilts service with a bias towards sensible commuter timings!

We have Unitary elections coming up in a couple of months.  We have an economy in which people need to change their travel patterns (and perhaps will be running one car per family rather that two).  We have a need to make transport more sustainable. And we need to provide local support for businesses and tourism in these difficult times, which means that NOW is the time for the local transport authority, the government and the train operators to work together and start an appropriate service running.  Fortunaltley, a good starting point is a service along the lines that has been proposed already, costed, validated, resourced ...

But there are a lot of time pressures on the local government people at the moment, with the officlals naturally concerned about their own jobs after 1st April when it goes unitary, and the elected representatives concerned to get back in (if they want to!) on 4th June. So it's a good time to send them a reminder about our transport needs and aspirations ... can I ask you to take a look at our support pledge and sign up if you agree.  And it gives you the opportunity to write - in your words or in ours - to the officials concerned and say "please don't overlook this one - for the sake of the public ..."