Minehead Rail Link Group

[whole diary]

[Puffing Billy]

A very well attended meeting in Minehead this evening. Chris Austin from the WSR was, in my opinion, the most lucid and diplomatic voice among those speaking - I hope his involvement in the negotiations to run a trial service between Taunton and Bishop's Lydeard next year are productive. Alex de Mendoza remains unconvincing in his attempts to persuade the less gullible among us of the ease with which the WSR can co-exist with through trains from Taunton to Minehead, repeating the glib assurance he made in the press some time ago that the line is only running at 30% capacity (probably true in strictly mathematical terms if you are basing your calculations on a 24/7 target, but meaningless otherwise). He also won no friends among WSR supporters with his observation that the typical age of volunteers is rising (I myself see plenty of youngsters among their staff). David Latimer (chairman of the group) assured us that they had been running train planning projections, but did not actual offer a sample timetable. The local councillor who chaired the meeting seemed very much to be Mendoza's yes-man, chasing a few votes. Grahame Ellis gave us some thoughtful encouragement with the success story of the Trans-Wilts link, but, with all respect, I found the relevance to the Minehead line somewhat limited, as the Trans-Wilts does not have to co-exist with a heritage line, nor does it have to worry about infrastructure or maintenance.

No doubt the Group's press office will make sure that the meeting will be reported in the local press; will be interesting to see how the account compares with the experience of being there!

[grahame]

A very well attended meeting in Minehead this evening. ....

Many thanks for that report, Puffing Billy ... I came on to file a brief report, but you have noted many of the key points well and I can't disagree with them. 

Key to the meeting - despite differences, ruffled feathers and irrelevance of some of what was said to some of the audience - was that everyone should work towards a first step linking Taunton to Bishop's Lydeard during the heritage train season and time of day.  View would be to extend that on to Minehead during times (of year and of day) that the heritage service is not running in due course. Plenty of unknowns along the way, plenty of elephants to be dealt with, plenty more to be said and presented that couldn't be done in 90 minutes last night.   

With doubt and lack of knowledge of the great things possible from the other side, there's a natural fear and reticence on one hand, and an ability not to appreciate what's already been achieved and how it can be nurtured for the common good.  Also in a specific situation there are so many variables that lessons from elsewhere can only be guidance that's cherry picked rather than providing a total recipe of how it was done in [anywhere].

[grahame]

No doubt the Group's press office will make sure that the meeting will be reported in the local press; will be interesting to see how the account compares with the experience of being there!

Here's their press release ...

Minehead Rail Link Group’s meeting in the Old Hospital last night (Tuesday) was described as an ‘overwhelming success’ by the Group’s Secretary, Councillor Benet Allen.  About sixty seats were available in the meeting room, which was standing room only, and many speakers were met with applause.

West Somerset Railway (WSR)’s Chris Austin announced that the railway was seeking funding for a trial 60-day period next summer for a conection from Taunton to Bishop’s Lydeard.   The Rail Link Group supported the move as a ‘useful first step’ towards an end-to-end service between Minehead and Taunton, said Alex Mendoza, the chairman of the group.

Consultant Graham Ellis gave a talk on his experience with the Swindon-Westbruy route, where passenger journeys were well above the planned figure.  The original single-car train has been replaced by a three-car service.

Volunteers from the WSR were worried that the Rail Link group haven’t made a fully costed plan.  But, says Alex Mendoza, “We don’t have all the answers yet.  We’re here to build a campaign - this is the start of the journey."

Councillor Allen said, “The new service would have the support of the 20,000 people who live down the line - and the 70,000 people who live at the other end. And a thousand times more across the country who will be able, finally, to get to Minehead by train.”

Not sure how on earth they came up with my job / title - probably because of my "Well House Consultants" tag line - which is IT consultancy and training ... never mind, I guess I am a sort of consultant, even if it's like asking someone with a doctorate in ancient greek to diagnose your medical symptoms!

My reply to the press release:

Many thanks for inviting me to the Minehead Rail Link meeting last night, and giving me the opportunity to speak / confirm by example that event the most difficult-looking transport  campaigns can be won;  not everyone found my contribution entirely relevant (see http://gwr.passenger.chat/17237, reply no. 45 ) but then I think your objective in inviting me was to help shine a beacon of possibility, when there is actually nowhere else quite like Minehead!

The presentation I used is online at
   http://www.passenger.chat/TFNH_oct18.pdf
and the support documents I drew up to help inform me prior to the meeting (in addition to the forum chat above) are at
   http://gwr.passenger.chat/minehead_thoughts.pdf
   http://gwr.passenger.chat/heritagevnational.pdf
They’re my own notes - but you may find them useful

This morning, I left Minehead by train at 10:15 … arrived at Bishop’s Lydeard at 11:40.  Walking across the the bus stop, a couple seated there told me I had just missed the Taunton bus … and indeed I had to wait until 12:04 for a bus which then got stuck in traffic and didn’t drop me off until 12:39 …. for the 12:46 train which - thank goodness - I caught, bearing in mind that I had a further connection at Westbury that would have meant I wouldn’t have been home until nearly 5 p.m. had I missed it.    And that’s just 10 miles beyond Somerset … hardly a “long distance” journey.    Certainly confirms the case that there should be a better way;  that bus I connected into had actually left Minehead at 11:00 and had I wished for speed rather than a learning experience I would have taken it.

[broadgage]

It was indeed a most interesting evening and well attended.

It is beginning to look as though action might be forthcoming after a great many years of talking. No mention of Norton Fitzwarren as an interchange facility.

The discussion centered around GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) running to Bishops Lydeard, with a connecting WSR service onwards to Minehead, or in the longer term through GWR trains to Minehead.

It is to be hoped that the proposed trial next summer does proceed. I can foresee one near term problem, and other longer term issues.

In the near term, from where are GWR going to obtain the rolling stock to run from Taunton onto the WSR ? For most of the last summer GWR have routinely been short forming existing services for want of rolling stock. I refer here NOT to the IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) which are irrelevant in this case, but to the repeated short formation of branch line services, throughout the recent summer.
A Taunton/bishops Lydeard shuttle should only need a single unit, but will GWR have even one to spare ? Observation recently suggests they need at least two or three more units to run the existing branch line services properly.

The longer term issue, IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion),  is how are the commuters/shoppers/through customers to be conveyed onwards to Minehead ?
In the "off season" it would seem relatively simple to run a heritage (or modern? DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit).)

In the "high season" the West Somerset is effectively full with no spare paths for extra services for most* of the day*. The obvious solution would be to convey the through passengers on the existing steam hauled trains. This is entirely doable, but raises a problem regarding fares.
If these connecting services are to be affordable and therefore popular, then the fares need to be broadly similar to GWR fares for similar length journeys, or similar to the fares on the existing bus route (and preferably be interavailable between train and bus)
The present WSR fares are appreciably higher per mile than most national rail fares. This is reasonable, and gladly paid by enthusiasts and leisure travellers.
I doubt however that ordinary passengers simply getting from A to B would pay these premium fares.

Various options could be considered, but some means needs to be devised to prevent steam enthusiasts enjoying an expensive to operate heritage line at local bus fare prices, but also ensuring that through tickets are reasonable in price.

*Extra trains could be run before the start of heritage services, and after the end thereof, even in the high season. The problem is during the day.

[Puffing Billy]

I am sorry if you think I was disparaging your contribution to the meeting, Grahame - I absolutely recognize and applaud your achievements in getting a train operator to revolutionise its services; but I thought it was important to emphasize the ways in which running services on a heritage line is different from doing so on the national network. I have a couple of friends who work on the WSR, and take a keen interest in it myself, but am conscious that many people I talk to have only a partial picture of what is involved in the operation of the railway - they may glance at the timetable as they walk past the station and observe that there are typically 4-6 scheduled departures, but they are as likely as not unaware of the Quantock Belle services, Driver Experience courses, visiting charters and empty stock movements, and think that maintenance is something that magically happans overnight like on the "real" railway. It is not the fact that the MRLC group think that these operations may have to be compromised in the interest of providing a service for visitors/commuters that irks me - their interest is as valid as mine; it is the way that their publicity conveniently avoids enlightening would-be supporters on the issues I have raised. Their website makes fantastical claims like the aforementioned "30% capacity" figure, and the assurance that the journey from Minehead to Taunton can be covered in an hour (no mention of the signalling changes and level crossing upgrades that this would necessitate).

I stress that I am 100% behind the Taunton-Lydeard link and/or Lydeard/Norton parkway idea (as well expounded by Bignosemac) - not only will this be good for visitors; it could also be really useful for people like me desperate for better access to the wild lands beyond Taunton. For visitors, surely a change of trains at Bishop's Lydeard would be no great hardship? A bit of clever marketing on the idea of through tickets could perhaps be beneficial to both WSR and GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)? I believe that a bit of work has been done in this area already. I have a slightly different slant from you, Grahame, on the idea of through trains; rather than running them when the WSR is closed, run them Mondays-Fridays at times when it is open - then the necessary staff will already be there. I do not think it is unreasonable for the powers-that-be to mandate that one or two paths in either direction should be made available to an operator other than WSR. For reasons (capacity) I gave earlier, I do not think this would be possible at weekends.

I am sorry that your journey into Taunton was a little fraught - this may be because of roadworks near Taunton, about which warning has been given recently. I not infrequently catch the bus into Taunton (as a change from the train or the automobile!), and have rarely found it to be delayed. More generally, I expressed opne or two thoughts on the bus service in a previous post, so I will not repeat them again.

[grahame]

I am sorry if you think I was disparaging your contribution to the meeting, Grahame

I didn't think that ...

Many thanks for that report, Puffing Billy ... I came on to file a brief report, but you have noted many of the key points well and I can't disagree with them.

For forum members who have probably been over-immersed in TransWilts over the years, little of what I said would have been any surprise.  But I suspect there were only three or four such members in the audience, and for the others a little of the background to how "it" can be done and that "it" can be done was there to encourage.    Totally agree that WSR is not TransWilts ... every line different.  "You" have a vibrant heritage operation ... "we" had a vibrant freight and diversion operation.  "You" have a branch to a terminus ...."we" have interchange junctions at both ends.  Etc ... need to go back to first principle, not assume we can compare from second base.

So, so good to be discussing onwards and looking at what can be done, and how costs / staff / etc can be shared.  I sensed that the WSR is not flush with money and there could be real benefits for everyone (and, yes, real fears, real risks).  I sensed that there's such a breadth of elements that need to come together that few if any of us appreciate them all, or even the existence of them all ... and that leads to worry, and at times comments that are wrong and hurtful ...

[broadgage]

The statement by Mr Alex Mendoza that the WSR is "only 30% utilised" was undoubtedly misleading and may have lost the support of SOME WSR  volunteers and supporters.

Taken as a year round average it might well be factually correct that the WSR is only 30% utilised, but averages are of little relevance in such cases.
The fact that there is undoubtedly a lot of unused capacity on a Monday in mid January, does not alter the fact that the WSR is largely full during the high season.
To provide a more frequent service than that in the present "gold" or high season timetable would require infrastructure works such as double tracking portions, extra passing loops, and the re-instatement of the second platform at some stations.
All this is entirely possible, and might well be justified in the future but looks unaffordable in the near term.


Passenger capacity could be somewhat increased by longer trains to the same timetable, the extra passengers conveyed thus could justify the expense or running a larger engine, or double heading some trains. (both of which would also enhance the appeal to enthusiasts.)

[JayMac]

It's not just infrastructure costs though. Additional trains require more staff. Signal boxes have to stay open longer. Increase train numbers and you start getting into the realm of needing to find/train more volunteers or start paying for qualified staff. Making the line attractive to those wanting to get to and from Taunton means manning from at least 7am until late evening. Getting volunteers to cover what would be two 7-8 hour shifts is not going to be easy.

Just one late running steam special off the network last year caused no end of problems for WSR. I was at one intermediate station photographing this train and got chatting to the station master. He wasn't particularly happy having had to stay on for an additonal two hours after the last WSR service. He also told me that the signalman at Bishops Lydeard had to close his box immediately after the special left BL, then drive to Blue Anchor to open the box there to pass the special on.

It may be the start of the journey according to Alex Mendoza, but if they want their plans to get anywhere then they need to start looking at costs and a drawing up professional business plan. Merely saying that the line has capacity for scheduled services between Taunton and Minehead is not enough.

[grahame]

It's not just infrastructure costs though. Additional trains require more staff. Signal boxes have to stay open longer. Increase train numbers and you start getting into the realm of needing ....

Totally agree.

Before I let myself say anything the other evening, I had done a whole lot of calculations.  My figures may need significant update being based on nothing better than educated guesses, but in some elements (not others) I am actually quite well educated.

It may be the start of the journey according to Alex Mendoza, but if they want their plans to get anywhere then they need to start looking at costs and a drawing up professional business plan. Merely saying that the line has capacity for scheduled services between Taunton and Minehead is not enough.

Yes.  Agree there too.  There were timetable /path diagrams around (though not shown or shared - I noted them within people's folders of papers) and there might have been some costings around ... but I was the only one to wave a piece of paper with figures on and say "you need to do the sums" (no-one came back with "we have done", I noted!)

[Puffing Billy]

From today's West Somerset Free Press :

"A packed meeting overwhelmingly backed a Minehead-Taunton rail-link proposal and welcomed a possible trial shuttle service which could be the forerunner of a major commuter scheme ..."

and so it goes on with a lengthy, and pretty accurate report of the proceedings. The one particularly questionable aspect of the meeting, and the reporting of it, was the vote which gives credence to this "overwhelming backing". Although at a couple of points in the meeting it was emphasized that the LYDEARD-Taunton link was something that we could all get behind, whatever else happens, this was something that we were NOT asked to vote on. If I remember correctly, we were simply asked if we wanted a MINEHEAD-Taunton service with no elaboration on whether this meant the availability of a connection at Bishop's Lydeard, or a direct service. I believe, especially given previous publicity from the MRLG, that most people present took it to be the latter, and wonder if Mr Mendoza's support will continue to thrive when people realise that, at least in the short-to-medium term the reality will prove to be short of the dream that they are being sold.

I believe that the Lydeard-Taunton link is a no-brainer, and that, once the dust from the trial service has settled, it would be right and proper to offer a limited number of weekday paths, within WSR operating hours, to another operator to give them a chance to show what they can do. This could benefit leisure travel both into, and, to a lesser extent, out of, Minehead. However, the opening sentence of the Free Press article, together with some of the pronouncements during, and prior to, the meeting, put an emphasis on COMMUTER travel, and this opens quite a different can of worms...

If the group want to pursue this latter aim, they have to identify their commuter market: journeys as far as Taunton might be popular, but it is difficult to see how they could be run economically at an affordable fare. Journeys to Bristol, London, Birmingham etc. might be more attractive, because you can factor in the saving made by not having to pay for daily parking at Taunton. But at the times of day when such commuters would have to depart from Minehead, traffic is not an issue, so people would probably still drive to Taunton anyway! You would have to be pretty confident, also, of getting back to Taunton on time in the evening (remember that the last bus departs at 8.00 p.m., so there is no back-up there). I could see GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) quickly racking up the bus/taxi bills for missed last connections. There is also the consideration that a service for Bristol commuters would have to depart Minehead at 7.00 a.m., and for London commuters at 6.00 a.m., bring with it the widely-discussed problem of keeping the WSR open for such long hours (perhaps it would be feasible and helpful if all the intermediate signalboxes could be "switched out" during the extended hours to save some staff). And, unless it would be practical to stable GWR units at Minehead overnight, there is the cost of empty-stock workings to and from Minehead to consider.

However, there is one solution that seems to me to be screamingly obvious :

First Group do not only run the trains in Somerset - they run the buses as well. Furthermore, they have a depot in Minehead where they stable a number of buses overnight. One of these buses, departing at 6.00 a.m or 7.00 a.m. when traffic is light, and travelling directly down the main road with a limited number of stops, could comfortably reach Taunton station in 45 minutes, and in the evening could wait for late connections with fewer logistical problems than sometimes is involved with holding train connections. As an afterthought, commuters are unlikely to have the bulky luggage which can be a nuisance on buses.

I am sure that there is flaw in my reasoning somewhere down the line (or road), but perhaps there is some food for thought. 

[broadgage]

The only flaw in your reasoning that I can see, is that a through train service, or at least a connecting train service, is being increasingly demanded, rather than an improvement to the bus service.

[grahame]

Having had a few days to settle (and deal with other matters), my thoughts have returned to the Minehead.  Always had a fondness for the place, and the excellent company and food last Tuesday / Wednesday as well as the envigourating meeting won't be quickly forgotten.

It seems to me - and I've seen much agreement - that there's so much of great benefit already being done, and so much addiitonal that could be done.  But there are already so may ideas about what should and shouldn't be in that additional stuff and what it should be setting out to achieve, and individuals or groups with even moderate insight into the total picture are few and far between.  And those rare people are perceived as having a foot in one camp or another. While that fragmentation and feeling remains, few high ranking civil servants, politicians, or rail industry folks are going to risk getting too involved / being too supportive.  And for things to change, political goodwill and support are going to be needed.

So is the likely route forward the steady state, do nothing one?  Perhaps it is, or perhaps it's the steady state with a few seeds thrown toward some sort of change - but whether those seeds are enough to germinate and grow, or sewn too thinly to do any good, is an interesting question. And if the seeds are thown but don't grow, what an excellent "proof" that things won't work ... except that maybe the way they weres sewn was flawed.

So - steady state forward?   Maybe.  But even there, there are clouds on the horizon.  At the meeting, the high cost of maintaining the line was raised, and the econimic are not brilliant.  What if the balance tips from profit to loss?  What then any form of railed transport at Minehead?  Let's say there's a 300k recurring cost for the permanent way of the current operation.   And that there would be a 400k recurring cost for a regular national network line.  If the services can share / co-exist, perhaps the total permanent way bill would be only 500k rather than the 700k sum of the two parts.   And you start to geneate an economic case stronger than either of its two components.  Even better than that, with crossticketing sorted, return trip opportunities - so traffic - will be much higher than either individual operation, or even the sum of the operations.  Then apply the same algorithms / approach to volunteers and staffing ...

Sadly, it seems to fall back to having too many people fighting their corners at the moment, and too few people promoting partnership. There is the odd ray of light around - a few people - and what's neeeded, IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), is for someone who's not widely viewed with deep suspicion to map out a long term strategy, and start to develop the tactics to move towards it. Such an approach, with wide principled endorsement of the outcome even if things remain to be sorted, will then start to attract the political and industry goodwill which no doubt is very much there under the surface, but dare not yet be risked in the current atmosphere of mistrust.

[broadgage]

On a relatively lightly used railway, a fair part of the maintenance costs are fixed or largely fixed and not related to the amount of traffic.
For example, timber sleepers rot and need replacement after a number of years, and not after a certain number of trains.
Rust attacks steel parts of signaling and level crossing equipment at a roughly constant rate.
Buildings suffer from weather, storms, rot and rust, and not primarily from the passage of trains.
Boundary fences suffer also from rot of the posts, rusting of the wire, and animals, not from the passage of trains.
Vegetation grows continually and requires labour intensive cutting back, but it does not grow any quicker with more trains !

2000 trains a year wont double infrastructure costs if compared to 1000 trains a year.

[ellendune]

Even then those costs that do relate to the loading (mainly maintaining track alignment (both vertical and horizontal) will depend on the axle load so the odd steam locomotive is likely to do more damage than a modern dmu.

[grahame]

Silly question - on the occasional days that Taunton to Bishop's Lydeard shuttle services have been run by GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway), how is the interchange to the West Somerset Railway handled?   Does the shuttle use one side of the loop and the Minehead train the other, with passengers crossing the road bridge or barrow crossing, or is there a way for the shuttle to arrive into the Taunton facing bay?  Or does the shuttle arrive at leave at the main platform at a time that it's not occupied by a Minehead service?