Indeed ... but a couple of cancellations too ...

20090920   16:08   Portsmouth Harbour   18:44   Swindon   complete cancellation, rolling stock issues, knock-on effect

20090920   19:16   Swindon   21:48   Portsmouth Harbour   short working, rolling stock issues, knock-on effect
Full report: "This train will be started from Westbury.It will no longer call at: Swindon, Chippenham, Melksham and Trowbridge.This is due to an earlier train fault. Last Updated: 20/09/2009 19:05 "

I did, briefly, consider doing a publicity shout to get people on / off the train at Melksham during these two Sundays but, frankly, heard about them rather late and remained unclear as to whether they were calling at Melksham or not.   

When at the station the Thursday and Friday prior to the first weekend, there were no posters there saying about any extra services, so it looks like the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) wasn't publicising any extra services for the town - though the posters may have gone up very late.   I haven't been up to Melksham station for a few days - my Saturday appointment in Bristol was sandwiched between other things I had to do, so a 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. day was impractical and my preference for train had to give way to what was practical.

The "no personal attacks" stipulation on The Coffee Shop applies .... not only to attacking (or appearing to attack) other members, but also other people who are not members.  There may be a grey area in attacking politicians and public figures at times, but not in attacking members of the public who are nothing to do with this board, but can clearly (and permanently) be identified from such posts.

Should this thread be altered so that this post looks out of context, you won't find me complaining 

I know I've been critical of Passenger Focus in the past (and may do so again in the future as my concerns remain), but I would like to congratulate them on setting up and hosting the series of three meetings for Rail User Groups to discuss the GWRUS^▸ (Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy) that's currently in draft form, and to go through with us what the RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) - Route Utilisation Strategy is (and is not) about.  Mike Greedy of Passenger Focus has promised to email me the slides, and tells me that they are in the public domain so that we can republish them here (no time scale given, but I hope next week!) as something of a lay guide to the RUS process and how inputs from groups such as "The Coffee Shop" can be effective.

The Route Utilisation Strategy looks for gaps in capacity on current service / infrastructure, and looks at what Network Rail needs to do to (help) plug that gap.   To a very great extent, it's a shopping list of options - things to put forward to the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about), saying to them "look - how about buying into this". From the perceived gaps, possible options to plug the gaps are developed, and the Benefit Cost ratios calculated ... with any scheme with a BCR^▸ (Benefit Cost Ratio) of 1.5 or greater being considered viable.

Schemes are of varying types - ranging from a timetabling change (with very little cost) through to train lengthening, extra train provision, and up through minor infrastructure works to major such works.   And the whole RUS work is made the more complex by the lack of clarity as to whether Crossrail will reach Reading, and until very recently the electrification scenario.

Mike presented the Passenger Focus perspective, and also the Network Rail perspective - it was a great pity that Network Rail handn't sent a representative along, and I understand that was because they expected - wrongly, as it turned out - that the groups in Reading, Exeter and Bristol would comprise largely the same audience that had attended their 'stakeholder' meetings a week or two earlier. It didn't - in fact there was no-one in common (probably because those of us who take an interest from the passenger's perspective have day jobs, can't just take a day off during the week, so are very grateful for the evening or weekend opportunity)

The group at the meeting split into two separate 'working groups' to give some initial throughts / reactions to the RUS and concerns about it, which were presented back at the end.  It was striking how the two groups came up with a number of very similar points.

---

* It seems that low growth figures have been assumed for travel requirements by train, that don't take into account effects like increased road congestion, rising fuel prices and an increasing desire for people to use public transport.  Both groups were worried that the rates used were conservative to the point of being well below the probable range.

* Concern was expressed about population growth outside the immediate catchment areas of SSTC^▸ (Strategically Significant Towns and Cities) (Strategically significant Town and City) stations - that population growth elsewhere (much of which is planned) may not have been considered, as might other traffic such as that generated by park and ride passengers, and by connecting bus services from places that are not within a station's current catchment.

* Questions were asked about whether any options to extend the electrification recently announced had been considered, as they were not evident in the RUSanalysis, and the group wondered if (for example) electrification to Weston-super-mare had been considered.

* Car parking, car parking capacity, and bus connectivity seemed to be outside the remit of the RUS, even though end to end journeys involve travel to and from the station and those elements can make a considerable difference.

* The basis of calculation of BCR was raised, but no-one present (from Passenger Focus as there was no Network Rail) was able to answer.  It was wondered from the floor if the cost of a motorist's time was considered to be more valuable than a train passengers time, which in turn was more valuabkle than a a bus passenger's time, and whether the use of a litre of diesel in a road vehicle was considered more beneficial that the use of a litre in a rail vehicle, due to the tax income that road use would bring.  Although the answer was not know, it was concluded that these scenarios were likely, as they are part of standard methodology used in the evaluation of transport schemes.

* The RUS stops at the Severn Tunnel, which seems peverse as there are many cross-border flows which should be factored in.  It also seems to overlook / sidestep the quest / need for a seven day railway, with (?) minimal regard for engineering diversion works.   There seem to be holes there - with no diversionary routes for electric trains when the severn tunnel is closed, it has been suggested that the diesel IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) will be used to service south wales at the weekend. One member of the audience suggested that would mean that trains to devon and cornwall would be withdrawn ... all a long way from the RUS though.

A lot of these issues could so easily have been address - or at least started to be addressed - had there been someone there with the technical background to start to provide some answers.

* On a more positive note, discussion went on to overlaying faster services over connecting local ones - the fast Cardiff - Portsmouth passing the more local one at Westbury, for example ... cross platform interchange, etc.

---

Works being looked at in the RUS are making assumptions of works in the near future, and are looking ahead to the control periods for 2014 to 2019, and then to 2029.  At this distance ahead, the work is important but it's very hard to motivate the passenger to look so far ahead.   One of the Passenger Focus teams was talking about how we stood at a certain station a few months before the December 2006 cuts, telling passengers that they needed to make inputs ... but with limited response.   But when the cuts actually came, the response was there - but too late to be too effective.

There's a whole new subject in "how to get people to look ahead" ... and I'm very conscious that I travelled to Bristol on trains crowded with people, but attended a meeting that had less than 20 attending.

Ah, thanks, super tm - I really like that wording as it solves a lot of mysteries for me. 

I had often wondered how the sale of (example) a groupsave 3 could EVER be legal, as three tickets are sold in a single transaction and two are then transferred to someone other than the purchaser to cover their journey.  Similarly, my Trowbridge friend and his wife and children, headed out for a day at Weymouth, aren't required to queue individually at the ticket office and hand over their money one by one.

I'll level with you - I thought someone might try that very bright guess, but I'm afraid it's wrong

Having read (and considered) this thread - which is public readable - I took the unique decision to remove the poster's email address.  Tickets can only be sold by authorised agents; that's not something that you or me often think about - but having had it brought to my attention I cannot leave a post which, all be it inadvertently, encourages anyone who happens to find the page into a less that 100% allowed deal.   If it turns out that the particular deal is a valid one for some reason, I'll owe Andrew a huge apology.

Hi, Andrew, and welcome to the forum.

I'm pretty sure that you can get a refund for what you paid for the ticket, perhaps minus an admin fee, but to sell it independently to a third party is in effect acting as a ticket tout, and not allowed.   Tickets are technically "non-transferrable" so anyone who uses a ticket that's been bought from an unauthorised reseller risks being denied boarding / penalty fared, etc.

Sorry - nothing so subtle from me ... it was only roughly the right number of letters.


And not, perchance, Botanic

The passengers are getting home at the end of the day, and many need to cross the line - but how can they do so with neither bridge nor subway?

No, sorry.   I've tried to be helpful by having a look at what's online about the line; the wikipedia page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belfast-Larne_railway_line does list the station and includes a link to it, but I couldn't spot any specific clues.

I'm wondering if no. 3 is Llandudno, and if the gull is called "Jonathan"?

Not a clue ... It could just as easily be "Fred George Williams" as our local TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) ... Google for "1 FGW Bentley" brings me the Bentley Train Simulator, Bentley in Hampshire, and John Bentley school in Calne.  Also some other research gems which were new links to me and it somehow found:

http://www.canyoutrustthem.com/index.php?go=search&adv=yes&company_name=2100
http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Creedy_Allan_535074196.aspx

The $64,000 question ... with a number of the things listed above (and probably others) which are less than idea for the development / maintainence and running of a railway system which sees as its first priority the meeting of customer needs,  what can / should be done to help improve the situation?

Firstly, define "customer needs".

Reasonable trains, when and where they're wanted, reliable and with sufficient capacity, at a price that's understandable and affordable and doesn't break the taxpayer's bank either.

Secondly, work WITH the experts.

In ALL the organisations listed earlier, there are excellent and knowledgable people who are doing their very best within the system and DO take as much of a view as the system allows of customer requirements. That's not saying "everyone", it's not saying "they don't make mistakes" as we all do, and it's not saying that there are some people around who put the traveller's needs way down their priority lists. It's saying that there ARE good people there, they DO know there stuff, and we take an adversarial role that might leave them less helpful / able to help at our peril.  Much better to build on their skills, respect the information they can provide, and help build towards customer needs.

I'm probably not a good one to come up with a definitive $64,000 answer. After all, I've been looking for an appropriate service (you note merely appropriate - not 'good' or 'excellent') on the TransWilts since 2005 - and in that time we've dropped from five fairly sensible round trips a day to two which are frankly timed to meet the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) spec, and to save FGW^▸ (First Great Western) the cost of hiring a train for the line. There probably IS no definitive answer ...

Yes, 2 is Swindon, 3 is 'somewhere on the Belfast to Larne line', and 4 is indeed Taunton. I'll leave it for a few hours before I tell you just where on Belfast to Larne ... it's the really awkward question and I am not anticipating that the next follow up post will say "it's xxxxxxxx" where xxxxxxxx is correctly identifying a single station!

6 is indeed Trowbridge (not Yate - Sorry)

2, 3 and 4 to go.

Yes - Avoncliff, Bath Spa and the bonus was (of course!) Melksham.   Thanks for doing just one each ... I suspect Chris knows at least one more too (and can p.m. me if he wants to confirm!)



Good so see you becoming unquiet ... but I'm afraid No. 2 is not Westbury