Great Western Coffee Shop

Wiltshire Times article link.
http://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/latestheadlines/display.var.2068739.0.rail_chiefs_pledge_on_melksham_service.php

It's not as black and white as just serving Melksham, there's also the many who commute from Westbury/Trowbridge to Chippenham/Swindon, and London.

Not to mention the services will help relieve the overcrowding on the Westbury-Salisburt route, providing more oppertunities from Bath and Bristol. Not only this but Frome will benefit as Dilton Marsh will be served by these trains so Great Malvern/Gloucester services can terminate at Frome instead.

On the lighter side though, the article looks much more promising than the last one :)

Yes, I also noticed that FGW seem to be suggesting that improved services would only benefit Melksham.

My reply to the Wiltshire Times, who have asked me for input:

The groups campaigning for an improved service from West Wiltshire to Swindon, which would include a decent service for Melksham, very much appreciate all the work the First Great Western are putting in to help achieve this.

There is regular overcrowding in many places, including from Trowbridge to Bath on which  most regular rush hour travellers have been turned away from overfull trains. Some of that overcrowding is caused by travellers from Frome, Warminster, Westbury and Trowbridge to Swindon who (at present) have to change in Bath.  A direct morning train from the West Wiltshire towns of Warminster, Westbury, Trowbridge and Melksham arriving into Swindon at about a quarter to 9, and a return service leaving Swindon shortly before 6 p.m. would reduce the numbers of people turned away from the West Wilts to Bristol services AND would improve travel to / from Swindon.  We should remember that some 120,000 journeys a year were made on the line from West Wilsthire to Swindon prior to the service cuts made by First in December 2006 - but the current service which First admit is "hardly an attractive proposition" is used (my estimate) for less that 10,000 journeys a year. That gives you some measure of the overcrowding that would be pulled off surrounding train services, and roads such as the A350, by a more appropriate service.

In rail company terms, the stock allocation for a carriage to run on the line is relatively minor.  According to published industry figures, First Great Western run 776 carriages and we're talking about ONE.  So First's comment that they have other priorities too is appreciated.

Yes - it does rather seem as is First Great Western are trying to play off the town of Melksham specifically against the other calls for service improvements - when in practise a sensible TransWilts timetable would be a huge benefit for journeys from Trowbridge to Swindon, from Salisbury to Chippenham, would cut overcrowding (where people are turned away at times) from Bath to Bradford-on-Avon and Westbury ...

The printed article in the paper (29th Feb) varies somewhat from the online versions - have a look here (http://www.wellho.net/pix/wtitem.jpg) to see the changed wording.

Headline - "FGW Chiefs vow to improve town's service" - oh if only it was *that* cut and dried - it's far from it!

I imagine action may be taken once all units have been refurbished and there is maximum stock available.

Would a single 153 suffice on the services you propose?

To be honest, that's very hard to judge. You're looking at commuter flows and growth over the next few years, and these things take time to grow. Looking at the 2001 - 2006 experience, I'll take an educated guess that a 153 would suffice for 2009, although it might start to get pretty darned crowded in the autumn on the 08:24 from Melksham and the 17:55 from Swindon

But the suggestions include a degree of disipation.  One of the huge problems with the current service as a commute train is that it makes the day far too LONG for anyone with a sane work pattern.  With the current service retained (part of the idea), the train that arrives in Swindon at a quarter to eight will get traffic that it can't at present - people who can return at lunchtime, mid afternoon, and normal commuter time.  And the existing evening train - quarter to 7 from Swindon - would gather extra traffic from new Swindon arrival just before 9 and and late morning.

Summary a year after the new service starts - a busy 153 in at 07:45, a packed one in an hour later.  Two comfortable (but not quiet) arrivals during the day.  The train that would get to Swindon about 17:30 would actually be pretty darned busy (we know this from the past) and the 20:20 arrival will be the only quiet train that's left on the line in that direction.  I'm sure you can see how the reverse would work with the 06:18 being the only quiet train!

I do wonder about 142 or 143 instead.  They would certainly provide somewhat more capacity and they ride well on high quality track (which we have - we're not a branch!) so they would be more than welcome hereabouts.  The issue there might be the through working to Salisbury as they're not presently allowed south of Warminster - but I do find myself wondering if that could be overcome as they wouldn't be going into 3rd rail territory.

I'm also wondering about the Westbury - Salisbury trip, there's a good chance people from Bath/Bristol will soon know they can change at Westbury for an extra Salisbury service, and people from Salisbury will be changing at Westbury for Bath and Bristol. So that part of the journey may soon become rather busy for a 153 (I'm not saying the Westbury-Swindon trip won't though, as I'm sure it will after a month or two ;) ) and it may well be worth investigating the possibility of allowing 143/142s down to Salisbury.

TBH, decide - Frome or Salisbury!!!!

This thread is so badly named, Jim - FGW might have been interpretted to say it's "more Melksham services or less crowded trains towards Bath and Bristol", and it might also appear at first glance to be schemes that benefit either Frome or Salisbury. But note - you run a 153 or 14x (with clearance) or even 150 (whos place is taken by a 14x running an extra diagram on a line it's already allowed to use) or extend a 158 /9 from Salisbury to Swindon and back and you provide a whole load of extra benefits.

a) You provide a more appropriate Melksham service to everywhere
b) You provide a useable Trowbridge to Swindon Service
c) You provide a useable service from Salisbury to Chippenham
d) You provide a practical service from Swindon to Salisbury
e) You strengthen services northbound from Salisbury to Warminster, Westbury and Trowbridge

f) With the Warminster - Great Malvern terminators duplicated by the new TransWilts service within a few minutes, you can divert at least two of those service to Frome to fill in serious gaps that we all acknowledge that town has.  Becomes hourly (at worst) in peak, 2-hourly (at worst) middle of day.

g) With the new service for items (b), (c) and (d) above - all of which are substantial travel requirements between major Wiltshire towns - you take away the need for rail passengers on these journeys to travel via Bath - diverting demand from Trowbridge - Bath (- Bristol) trains onto the re-instated direct service. So you won't be turning people away at Trowbridge and B-o-A as has been happening.

I make that seven immediate benefits, covering the whole county and many, many travel requirements that are not Melkshamcentric.  But I would agree that Melksham makes the biggest gain - after all, it has been the worst treated in the last two timetable changes.

But my point is, is that really your only going to get 1 unit - yeah? So, would you use it to Frome (to give it a better service) or Salisbury (to cut crowding down there)

But also remember, the Portsmouths carry most people the other way at Bradford JN, as the demand is really to Bath/Bristol, and in my opinion, that is where it is. To be honest, I think it should be easy enough to spare a 153. The thing is, it is hard to tell at Bath how many people get off to do the through journey.

If I were to propose something, I would propose Swindon-Frome - purley because that gives you the option of having Pacers.....

Oi, I named that thread  ;D And it does accurately sum up what FGW said :


I do think, though, that there are options floating around that would both ease crowding in the Greater Bristol area and provide better TransWilts services.

Remember though Jim even if the TransWilts service was to go to Salisbury, Frome would still benefit as the current Great Malvern-Warminster terminators can go there instead. Dilton Marsh would be catered for by the TW.

This would provide a decent evening service for me although there still would be that rediculous 3 hour gap in the morning peak. Interesting thought about the Pacers though...

I think I've found a way of getting Melksham an additional earlier Westbury - Swindon in the evening, making the 1722 both for Portsmouth Harbour & Frome. The return working of that Frome is a Melksham service. That then returns from Swindon to form a Southampton Central service... and then returns to Bristol replacing the 2120 to allow later connections (and PR buzz from later running). Oh, and it's resource neutral.

O great - we are going to have more confused passengers then!