Said to be four pages in the Middelton Press book "Slough to Newbury"
ISBN:978 1 901706 56 7

https://www.middletonpress.co.uk/books/railways/western-main-lines/slough-to-newbury.html

Perhaps you were taught chivalry?   Beware - you could cause distress by offering your seat ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/christina-kenny/being-mistaken-for-a-pregnant-lady_b_5669880.html

Historic footage ... showing the grand-daddy of light rail systems as it should be - full of people.   

http://www.southwales-eveningpost.co.uk/Cameras-roll-reminders-past/story-22727494-detail/story.html?

Dated 30th April 2014 -

http://www.which.co.uk/campaigns/train-delays-compensation/track-our-progress/


http://www.which.co.uk/campaigns/train-delays-compensation/train-company-feedback-hand-in/


For First Great Western:

http://www.staticwhich.co.uk/documents/pdf/first-great-western-376832.pdf

There appears to be a statistically significant correlation between the presence of ChrisB on the train and it running via a more direct route than the one booked.    How odd ... ChrisB - is this, perhaps, a train which you only catch when there are significant delays, thus biasing your sample?

A very interesting set of metrics from each station, thank you ... and an excellent current measure of the flows.   In the bald "how are we doing against target" it reads 26/12 - that's 26 passenger journeys on the Trowbridge - Chippenham section that's not potentially just abstracted from other services.

So ... what might we have expected from this train on a typical day in the third year of operation - 2016 - when the target was / is an average of 20 passengers per train?   An educated guess would have a distribution of the 160 journeys needed northbound as follows: 35 - 35 - 20 - 12 - 12 - 20 - 15 - 11 on trains at 07:20, 07:48, 10:04, 12:03, 14:30, 16:31, 18:48 and 19:47 at Melksham with numbers just 42% of those in 2014, with an initial target of 45,000 (versus 108,000 for the third year)

In other words (!) we get rather blas^ about numbers just a bit over 20, or at least I do, but we forget that the 20 is supposed to be an average and not what every train achieves ... and we forget that we're talking third year not first year.  In practise, we're looking at exceeding passenger numbers expected this year massively - and had that train carried under a half of what it actually had, it would most likely have been part of a pattern which was on target.

There are precedents for a station to be closed where it is replaced by an alternative facility ... a couple I can think of since I got involved in rail stuff are North Woolwich (replaced by King George V) and Abercynon North (replaced by combined station at Abercynon South / renamed Abercynon).

And here are some other specific maps ...

Cycles
https://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/bicycles-on-public-transport.pdf

Step Free
https://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/step-free-tube-guide-map.pdf

Avoiding Escaltors - for those with dogs too large to carry.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/avoiding-stairs-tube-guide.pdf
(see green circle with red surround for stations to avoid)
Note that TfL^» (Transport for London - about) staff will stop escalators for guide dogs, and guide dogs can be trained / certified to use escalators.

I think it's a parliamentary service to be able to say that the west chord remains open for (and served by) passenger trains.

An excellent question, and one I've been somewhat remiss in following up.

Thanks to dozens of volunteers (including Alan, who did much more than most - THANK YOU ....), between 85% and 90% of Melksham's households were leafletted at the end of July about the free bus fortnight which has been running on the town's metro bus service - routes 14 and 15.  The regular fare of ^1 single and ^1.50 return has been waived for the two weeks to encourage people to use the bus, and 8,000 promotional flyers, together with 10,000 maps and TransWilts timetables were printed and distributed, ensuring that we covered the various sectors of route 14, and Berryfield and East Melksham's new housing on route 15.   Funding - an LSTF^▸ (Local Sustainable Transport Fund) transport promotion.  Objective - to get people to try the local bus ... CRP^▸ (Community Rail Partnership) helping with the distribution as it was a chance to give wider local transport publicity.

Feedback ... formally will come after the conclusion of the fortnight, when the bus operators tally the figures and send them through to Wiltshire Council.   I don't know how long after that will be, nor whether the figures will be published in any way or regarded as commercial in confidence.   Informally ...

Bus drivers report significantly /noticably more people riding since the start of the month, and there being a particular marked increase in the number of people who are younger than the typical passenger on these buses.   In fact I had quite a chat with one of the drivers I know, and the extra youth traffic has been such that it has in some cases caused concern to the regular senior passengers who rarely interact with the town's youth.   No suggestion of any impropriety in any way ... just a rather sad reflection on the society we live in that the elderly are sometimes in fear of the teenager wearing his "hoodie".

Additionally, noteworthy addition of young mums / 20-summats using the bus noticeably more.  Bus driver wondered if it would be better for them / more healthy for them to walk ... I'm really not sure whether or not that's the case in the detail of journeys over they fortnight, but the objective of having them try out the bus and then know about how to do so for appropriate journeys in the future is being met.

Yesterday, I was down at Sainsbury's late lunchtime and it started raining REAL hard ("cats and dogs" type stuff), accompanied by a gentlemen who really didn't want to walk up back through town and get soaked.    So we used the No. 15 bus from "The Bear".  The No. 14 left well loaded (most seats taken) ahead of us ... the No. 15 had a total of six of us riding when it left the Market Place, none of whom was old enough for a senior card.   I did note the driver - one I don't know - carefully check with us to make sure that it really was the 15 and not the 14 that we wanted;   seemed in doubt as to whether I knew where I was going    ... tell me we still have work to do on getting that route up to the level of the 14.

Long term effect / rail publicity effect?   We'll have to see.  On the rail side, the publicity is out there in many ways and they're adding up.   Snapshot of our hotel ... five rooms, this week four customers for courses / activities in town.   One is commuting from Swindon on a daily basis and complaining like h**l about how long it's taking and how bad the roads are.   Two arrived by train on Sunday (1) and Monday (1) and are leaving by train this afternoon (the 16:31).   Final guest's first time in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom), and was collected from a London airport by hosts at another activity in town.  Here over the weekend though and will be using public transport to do a bit of sightseeing. 

Summary ... the bus fortnights' running 'to plan' and forms a part of the whole change of emphasis on transport that we're seeing coming through in Melksham in particular as it catches up with where one might have expected it to be had it had appropriate public transport for the last decade.

John,  I've stopped short of getting into the labyrinth of financial arrangements (which I have only some elements of insight into, not a full picture) when it comes to the success, monitoring, and future direction of the service.     Whilst I'm sure that farebox income is greatly in excess of the forecast, it's not going to be in excess in direct proportion to the ratio of passenger numbers over target. Numerous reasons:

a) The journey mix will differ from what was anticipated. All categories are probably meeting the passenger number targets, but full line length (Swindon -> Salisbury) journey numbers are less dramatically over than more local traffic. Interestingly, traffic for beyond the boundary of Wiltshire past Salisbury (Southampton direction) seems good - no official data at the moment.   With the journey mixed varied, the average fare per journey will vary.

b) I am unclear as to whether the lower level "via Melksham" fares were factored into initial calculations, and at what level.  A commercial decision by First to make this change, and do so at such an excellent level as far as passengers are concerned, will have reduced the average fare per passenger but has (I believe) increased the business - a net improvement of the income, but meaning that it's not above target in proportion to the passenger numbers

c) The target was a conservative one, and I don't know if it was used for the calculation of pricing models, or whether First took a commercial risk in bidding for and starting up the service in the belief that it would do rather better than it needed to in order to make the BCR^▸ (Benefit Cost Ratio) add up.  Few people are surprised that passenger targets are being exceeded, although many are gobsmacked by just how far.

d) The cost of collecting the extra fare numbers to date has been marginal (I believe). However, there's a limit to that fare collection capability without further cost / investment.  At times, it gets beyond practical for the conductor to check / issue tickets where necessary to everyone on the train who's joined at a station where they can't pay - remember that in addition to Melksham, you're looking at Trowbridge outside the hours it's staffed too.  On the TransWilts at peak times, the conductor needs to be able to issue / check tickets every 8 seconds ... checking possible at this rate, issuing implausible if a lot are needed.   We know from many discussions that there are difficult revenue collection issues on many lines; TransWilts is no worse than most, but the proportion of passengers not paying (either by deliberate avoidance or because they have no opportunity) is going to be far higher than it would have been if passenger numbers had been 45k per annum rather than the 160k we seem to be headed for.

It probably looks like I'm "going on a bit" there, but there's also the issue of the new TransWilts service being a commercial deal like all other line operations, with train company motives (long/franchise/agreement term profits), governmental motives (best achieved BCR) and community motives (good passenger numbers, maximum quality of life benefits) usually but not always pulling us in the same direction.  Motives have been simplified in this paragraph - a whole new story to be had there!

The 18:48 is an excellent example of an evening return commuter train that doesn't do terribly well.   It's a little later than idea for returning commuters from Trowbridge (e.g. Wiltshire Council staff) leaving there at 18:38, and from Westbury (West Wilts Trading Estate) leaving there at 18:32 ... but the big "gotcha" is that there's no suitable morning commuter train to balance it.   The 06:38 from Melksham arrives at Trowbridge at 06:47 and Westbury at 06:55 (and that makes for far too long a day for commuters) and the following train doesn't dawdle into Trowbridge until 09:31 and Westbury at 09:42,  somewhat after even flexible hour employers like Wiltshire Council will accept.

There would be an immediate improvement for commuter traffic to Trowbridge and Westbury if the morning train were to be retimed to arrive at Trowbridge at 09:12, and Westbury at 09:20 as it already does on Saturdays; it would still have 13 minutes to turn round at Swindon after the "up" run, arriving there at 08:18 and leaving at 08:36.   And that would also have that morning train arrive in Westbury before the connections to Frome (and Weymouth) and Warminster (and Salisbury) left.

What you currently see in the 18:32 from Westbury is exactly what you used to see in the 18:44 from Swindon - lots of empty seats.  And for the same reason that the 18:44 used to be empty - nothing sensible into Swindon to match it for commuting.   The 18:44 (now 18:52) is now much improved, and the current 18:32 also would be if there were a matching morning service ... so my diagnosis of the issue is very much evidence based. Please, Mr FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and Mr Network Rail, move your Monday to Friday train to match your Saturday one!

There would be a huge improvement for this same commuter traffic if an extra service was provided in the morning within the peak gap that's currently 164 minutes into Westbury - 06:55 to 09:42.   That's a plugging of a gap which makes the service unusable to most people who might wish to use it in the same way that the current extra services (6 each way per day) have boosted passenger numbers from around 60 to around 450 per day.

If there were a spare 153 (!) it could attach to the 07:04 Westbury to Swindon, then form an 07:52 back (same timings in the hour as the 18:52), giving a Melksham departure at 08:19, Trowbridge arrival of 08:28, and Westbury arrival of 08:35.  In the evening, running a 17:15 from Westbury (17:21 Trowbridge, 17:31 Melksham) would take the 153 back to Swindon, where it could join the 18:52 train mirroring its morning behaviour.  You've then established a similar pattern in down commuter services to up commuter services, with a true "tight" peak and a backup service in each direction, and our "into Swindon" research which shows just how many people use a mixture of the old and new trains would apply ... so I predict (with some degree of authority!) a huge boost to commuter traffic to the south.

One of the reasons for suggesting the 153 working in this way is because there is an element of doubt over whether there will still be a local service from Swindon to Cheltenham once bimodes from London are in use on the route, so there's a change that the unit being coupled up to in my suggestion - currently the Tranwilts extension train - won't be around.   By adding in an extra unit very soon, an assurance of continuity and a route for that continuity is provided, as well as solving the very real southbound commuter flow which, although small in comparison to the Swindon flow, is worthwhile.

Finally, have I gone and specified an extra carriage just for 2 round trips a day?  No! ... it would also form the other TransWilts extension trains into the future, an additional very early service from Westbury to Swindon, and an additional late train back.   And allow a little bulking out of the daytime service too, together with a sensible service extension to Salisbury, sorting out the "curiously erratic" service at Dilton Marsh when the timetable of West of England services gets recast in a few years, and releasing other unit(s) at Westbury either for efficiency, or to provide a resource which would remove the one of the stumbling blocks to improvements south from Westbury on the Heart of Wessex line.

P.S.  The current 18:48 is the return working of the 18:03 arrival from Swindon (using Melksham times as per TeaStew) which is oft reported "full and standing".  That's pretty good going in 6 months from a zero start ... and it's perfectly within (or rather over) target for the 18:48 to run as it is.  However, we can do much better as outlined above. 

Here's the booking for today

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C72843/2014/08/13/advanced

1M79 Reading to Birmingham New Street
21:46 ex Reading
22:05 to 22:13 at Foxhall Junction
22:27 at Oxford

Yesterday's shows it as on time arriving at Foxhall, leaving 3 minutes early, 4 early into Oxford
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C72843/2014/08/12/advanced

1M78 - previous train on same route - takes 24 minutes direct from Reading to Oxford:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C72836/2014/08/13/advanced
So extra jaunt adds 17 minutes to the schedule.

From a purely theoretic view, there are lots of places that trains popping out "at Paddington" could go with a "bit" of extra construction.  Some sensible and some rather silly.  Inner junction options include ...

* Hammersmith, via Hammersmith and City
* Watford and the up the West Coast
* Cricklewood and then up the Midland Main Line
* Richmond, via link to North London Line
* High Wycombe, via Greenford

Taking traffic out beyond Acton Main Line on the GW^▸ (Great Western) main line ...
* Greenford, from West Ealing
* Heathrow, from Hayes and Harlington
* Staines, from West Drayton
* Windsor and Eton Central, from Slough
* Bourne End, from Maidenhead
* Henley-on-Thames, from Twyford
* Reading
And I have left out Marlow and Brentford so as not to require reversals!

Someone mentioned Aylesbury too ... via Princes Risborough is included above; getting on the "Met" somewhere would be possible (multiple "bits" extra) and you could then look at Aylesbury, Chesham, Watford and Uxbridge.    Getting silly, yet Baker Street to Aldgate is a bottleneck and perhaps better suited to underground services than to outer suburban stuff.