Great Western Coffee Shop

Open consultation
Great Western: specification for the the future franchise


https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/great-western-specification-for-the-future-franchise

Blimey - I'd been told about this by Passenger Focus yesterday - I didn't realise that they meant *that* imminent!

A response will shortly be submitted to the DfT on behalf of the Melksham Chamber of Commerce. Read it at:
http://www.melkshamchamber.org.uk/coc_to_dft_may2014.pdf

It calls for:
1. currently running service levels on the TransWilts to be maintained as a minimum
2. the TransWilts CRP to be recognised and used to help promote the service in the same way as other CRPs
3. improvements (can be done under existing stock levels) to be made when IEPs arrive
4. reliability and all stations calls to take priority over speeding up TransWilts services

Backup documentation is as follows (includes some threads here!)
http://atrebatia.info/may2014_stakeholder.pdf
http://melksh.am/4278
http://twcrp.info/m154931
http://twcrp.info/m152974

The Chamber is particularly concerned to emphasise item (1), as the consultation document could be read to only specify 75% of the current service. Dropping two of the busier round trips would cut the heart out of the service.

So IEP will go to Exeter on some occasions add some will carry on to Paignton. Yet plymouth is stuck with the old rusty HST. Sigh.

Nice to see here Alston to tavistock additional services on this.

The bi-modes I guess you mean?

They appear to have relaunched ...

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/have-your-say-on-the-great-western-rail-franchise?

Aren't your services a 'buy-in' from Wilts CC/Swindon Unitary? In which case, they need to respond confirming/guaranteeing their continued buy-in? Make sure they do?....

I suspect the concern is over the 2 original services which were effectively positioning movements to enable a unit to run the Swindon to Cheltenham service (but which now form useful second commuter services). They continue to run but are probably not part of the funding agreement. Once IEP is in, these may not be required, so could be withdrawn.

That is my concern, John ... especially as the consultation document says current level is now "2 hourly" rather than "hourly in peak, 2 hourly off peak" which is the effect of the extras.

If the early train in to Swindon and the later train out were withdrawn, "9 to 5" office staff would only be able to use the service if they could get to their place of work within a few minutes of Swindon Station ... here's a diagram with the yellow area being "9 to 5" capable now, and the green area being "9 to 5" capable if the 07:48 arrival and 18:52 departure no longer ran.

(http://www.wellho.net/demo/areas.jpg)

Further, onward commuting to Didcot / Reading / Oxford / Filton Abbey Wood / Bristol would be ruled out of these trains were lost, as would Swindon commutes for employees who work slightly different hours, or who need a fallback train if they have to stay late beyond the 17:36 some times.  See http://melksh.am/4278 for longer technical item

The Melksham Chamber of Commerce has written in already to ask for the level of service actually running at present to be the minimum.  And proposing that the train used runs back to / up from Westbury to form the service.  That answers most of the other flows that were originally identified, but could not be handled by a single train on the line. See full response at http://www.melkshamchamber.org.uk/coc_to_dft_may2014.pdf and please write in / add this to YOUR response if you agree!

There's also logic in sorting out the miss-mash of services south from Westbury to Salisbury at the same time; probably a net saving of a unit ... and a far FAR better service for Dilton Marsh and Warminster too, better links from Salisbury to Chippenham ....

Microsite about this - http://www.railcustomer.info

Edit to add extra links

My sympathy Graham, DfT seem very good at encouraging train users by gradually buiding up the service then they pull the rug from under it. Why?

The've done it once before with Melksham.  Now they've agreed to a more reasonable service and it seems to be being used why are they thinking of destroying it? What's the logic?

There was an interesting thread on here some years back about people chosing where to live and commute by the train service. I believe Willington was mentioned as another place where there was build up of commuters in both directions which then had the rug pulled from under it! I was looking up Willington to check my facts. If you want to go to Birmingham at this time of day you have a 10:25 and 12:25 change at Derby! A 1:02 journey as opposed to 0:37 direct. Admitedly the fares the same. But you do get a ride in both directions on a Vomiter.

Oh yes the 10:25 is 31 late today!

But are they?

The consultation makes it clear that they want you a) to include these additional trains in your submission so that they're added to the franchise, and b) asking you to justify it - which you've pretty much done above & elsewhere on this forum.

You have to remember that the bods at the DfT don't get out much, and all they do is to look at the current franchise and include any high-level political campaigning - they never get out to see the whole picture.

In the past, they thought that they knew better - these days, they give US the chance to influence THEM.....so get your bid in pronto....send it to me too if you want the Customer Panel to include it in their submission....

The service was two round trips in 2013.  Six extra round trips were added for 2014, characterised as being "every two hours" making a nicely integrate service of 8 round trips on Mondays to Fridays.

However, the consultation document says it is consulting on:
"Westbury^Swindon (twice daily); now increased to a two-hourly service".
when we would have much preferred it so say for clarity
"Westbury^Swindon (twice daily); now increased by a two-hourly service".

"once bitten, twice shy" ... if we go along with the suggestion, we're going along with service excluding the two old round trips ... and the 07:04 from Westbury is now the 2nd busiest train of the day, forming a good commuter opposite to the new 17:36 home.  Similarly, the 18:52 from Swindon has got much busier, forming a good return-home commute for people who go up to Swindon on later new trains, and so on ... the 06:12 off Swindon picks up significant traffic before Trowbridge, and the picture of Westbury that I've used to illustrate other articles on this shows the 19:40 ex Westbury with people waiting at all the doors to get on!!

Yes, we do have the chance to influence them - which is why we're writing in to do so ... Chris, you would be very welcome to include in your input a request to set the current TransWilts service level (which can be characterised as hourly peak / two hourly rest of day) as an absolute minimum.


(http://www.wellho.net/pix/stt2014_002.jpg)
Who says the 19:40 off Westbury is going to be quiet? ... and remember that it will get many more people joining it than leaving at Trowbridge, and also at Melksham.  Net drop in passenger numbers probably only at Chippenham; almost all change at Swindon before it goes on to Cheltenham Spa.

Inded - my email is in my profile - send it over once you've got it agreed....

http://www.northdevonjournal.co.uk/Westcountry-railway-risk-treading-water/story-21169590-detail/story.html?

The days of improvements for simply improvements sake are long gone.

Evidence for the *need* is now the case to show value foe money.

Two and a half hours to go ... respond NOW if you want to  ;D

I think I've become something of a specialist ... reading various inputs to the consultation, helping to write one for the TransWilts CRP, looking ahead ... and yet a quiet thread from most of our readers.   My inputs are at http://atrebatia.info/dft_resp.pdf for the TransWilts, and I hope I got them right.   They were formulated by a number of community and local government members of our team and backed up by individual submissions from some of our members too.    To all those who assisted me, and to those wrote in too, THANK YOU.

So - what now?

No matter who's running the trains (and how) in forthcoming years, we're still helping building traffic on the TransWilts line.  It was a pleasure to be invited to the FGW Stakeholder's Conference yesterday and to see Horace Prickett and David Phillips from Wiltshire Council present the TransWilts and the early rather good initial results from their LSTF supported activities, and from First Great Western's help, on the service.   Both FGW and Wiltshire Council have really pulled hard, and the two named gentlemen and others have done so much to help.   Talk is of 160,000 journeys this year, against an initial target of 45,000 and a third year target of 108,000.   Normally I wouldn't quote such a high estimated figure, erring on the side of caution to avoid making a rod for David and Horace's backs.   But actually it's realistic.   We've got to help get people on the TransWilts trains this summer now.   It was also really good hear how pleased Mathew Golton, bid Director of FGW, is with the results - singled out later - and how so much of that comes down to a working relationship between the parties in the rail industry and local government that was unheard of just a few years ago.

We're certainly not going to be in a steady state, though - so in addition to encouraging train use this summer and next summer, we need to go on and ask "what next".    Some of that is the side effect of the big  schemes around the area, some of it is the effect of growing numbers so that we'll run out of seats some time, and some is to do with changing needs in the wider area.   The "line plan" section of the CRP report mentioned above alludes to protecting certain assets for future (re)use, and to some joined up thinking and services, and as well as the short term train-filling tactics and the medium term next-franchise-period inputs we're tuning our thoughts to longer term strategy.  And yesterday was a further excellent networking opportunity to do that.  To start looking to having shovel-ready idea to dig into once a green button is pressed.

Thanks for the reminder. I managed to put something in, covering two points, one of which was the Transwilts service frequency.

 ;D   Thank you

As well as having copies of a number of TransWilts responses to the Franchise, I've also been copied on responses from almost every other CRP in the FGW area, and I'm delighted to say that they all follow much the same lines - looking at a big growth in ridership and capacity issues, at the success (and frustrations) of community rail and how it ca be nurtured to be even more effective, and at concerns over collecting fares from everyone who's travelling and the high proportion who don't pay - whether through deliberate evasion, or simply because they have no opportunity.