There really is an obsession involving Melksham isn't there?!?!
So there should be to remind
DaFT» and
FGW▸ that the matter will not go away
Let me give a bit of background as to why I asked.
Those of us who are concerned that the current TransWilts service is too sparse to be fit for purpose have often looked at (and continue to look at) units parked up for 35 minutes in every 120, at Cheltenham, 70 minutes in every 120 at Swindon, and during the day between peaks at Westbury and various other places. We've also looked at hourly services in our area where - suddenly in the middle of the day - an extra train runs 10 minutes behind the hourly service, calling at just one other station, and we've looked at some strange sorties by trains into areas served predominantly by other franchises - running so close to those other trains at times that we wonder at the minimum headway that the signals must provide there!
We do this so that we can understand. To help us better ask sensible questions, and to make good suggestions as to where a small change could make a big difference. And indeed I have three examples that I can immediatey think of where such suggestions have been taken up, or perhaps where a similar though has come to the professionals and the result has been that what we may have hoped for - small things thus far - have happened.
My question about the extra 153 that's just been added to the service to Swindon was to help us understand the disposition of an extra train that's possibly in the area for part of the day - and many thanks, fatcontroller, for providing that information. We now know it sits at Gloucester for 232 minutes. It's another piece in our jigsaw of understanding. Alas - I'm not sure if it will lead to any useful suggestions, or simply be a blind alley that's examined and then found to be blind ... let's see ...
If the 153 formed an 09:15 service from Swindon to Salisbury, then a 10:30 Salisbury to Swindon, it could carry on with the 11:54 to Gloucester and be in place there in excellent time for it's 14:22 onward service. BUT there are multiple concerns there. Firstly, would such an extra service alone tip the balance from a service that's run at such a low level, and such strange times, that it fails to attract reasonable custom into one which naturally grows? I personally would guess that at least an equivalent service would be needed late afternoon to tip the balance. Secondly, there are more complex issues to look at on the Westbury / Salisbury 'leg' - a danger of doubling up in exactly the same way I have described above as being a potential waste of resources, and thus perhaps an opportunity to sort out something more radical there.
If the 153 dettached from the Gloucester - Swindon train at Bristol, Bath or Chippenham and ran via Westbury or Warminster (reverse) to Swindon ... but then what about route and platform capacities along the way? And we've still not quite tipped the balance, or have we? For we have provided an arrival in Swindon at around 10 a.m., which when linked with the 18:44 Swindon to Southampton provides an 8.75 hour day from Warminster (perhaps), Dilton Marsh (perhaps) Westbury, Trowbridge and Melksham to Swindon (in contrast to current 11 hour offering) and would provide a 9.25 hour day from the same stations to Chippenham (in contrast to the current 11.5 hour day)
If ... - yes - there are other suggestions too. Experience tells me that for every 9 blind alleys, there may be one that works. Of course, I'm an amateur who's not really equipped to know which is which - but we've seen various proofs over the years that from apparently fully utilised resources a little extra can be squeezed and that the little extra can have a dramatic effect. 19:37, Sunday, Westbury to Swindon. Average passengers - 200 when there's an 08:20 Swindon to Westbury on Sunday morning, 20 when the 08:20 Swindon to Westbury does not run. And the 08:20 is use of a set that would otherwise be parked in the siding at that time.
There is, indeed, a natural tendency for many of us to look at the TransWilts line more strongly than others. The TransWilts 'service' is, frankly, inappropriate for the needs of the corridor served unlike other services in the area. So it needs for discussion and attention.
