Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
 today - Magor Action on Rail
22/09/2018 - Acton Depot open weekend
22/09/2018 - Somersts Festival of Transport
23/09/2018 - Somerset Consultation closes
24/09/2018 - Bus consultation closes
24/09/2018 - RCTS / Windsor & Maidenhead
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
September 20, 2018, 09:55:08 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[127] Great Western Railway: on-board catering, buffets, Travelling ...
[56] Walking Britain's Lost Railways
[56] 2018 cancellation and amendment log
[53] Another Bristol Parkway Closure - for three weeks
[44] JourneyCheck ... reasons given
[32] Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Through Journeys on the Trans Wilts  (Read 1288 times)
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2950


View Profile
« on: January 18, 2018, 09:44:53 am »

Yesterday I caught the 07:50 train from Swindon to Cheltenham and as I walked along P3 as to reach P2 I was interested that the shear number of people who had got off made it difficult to walk along the platform.  I had assumed that everyone had got off and it was essentially a new service to Cheltenham.

However, in the evening I caught the return 1741 Cheltenham to Southampton Train as far as Swindon.  As I, like most of the passengers, got off at Swindon I was interested in that fact that there were quite a few who did not who were therefore travelling onwards to - somewhere? 

This is all the more interesting given that the 17:32 departure from the same platform at Cheltenham goes to westbury via Bristol and Bath, so presumably anyone going to Trowbridge or Westbury from Cheltenham or Gloucester would have caught that train. 

Since the Golden Valley Trains are all going to be Paddington Trains in future, how much through traffic is there? And what are the origins and destinations?
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21797



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2018, 10:11:52 am »

Yesterday I caught the 07:50 train from Swindon to Cheltenham and as I walked along P3 as to reach P2 I was interested that the shear number of people who had got off made it difficult to walk along the platform.  I had assumed that everyone had got off and it was essentially a new service to Cheltenham.

However, in the evening I caught the return 1741 Cheltenham to Southampton Train as far as Swindon.  As I, like most of the passengers, got off at Swindon I was interested in that fact that there were quite a few who did not who were therefore travelling onwards to - somewhere? 

This is all the more interesting given that the 17:32 departure from the same platform at Cheltenham goes to westbury via Bristol and Bath, so presumably anyone going to Trowbridge or Westbury from Cheltenham or Gloucester would have caught that train. 

Since the Golden Valley Trains are all going to be Paddington Trains in future, how much through traffic is there? And what are the origins and destinations?

Although it's a hideous dogleg, there is a noticable bunch of passengers Trowbridge / Melksham / Chippenham to Kemble (in particular) and beyond. Quite a "green" college and employment culture in the Cirencester area.

The evening train from Cheltenham Spa via Swidnon to Westbury and beyond leaves Cheltenham after the train that runs via Bristol, but overtakes it and gets to Westbury first.  It then waits at Westbury for the train via Bristol to catch up and have onward passengers make a connection, so at first glance you could thing that the Bristol service gets to Westbury first (to make the connection) rather than the Swindon one.

Glad you noticed that significant flow of passngers to Swindon / changing at Swindon on the 07:04 from Westbury - and that's not even the busiest tran!

P.S. The change at Swindon will probably NOT loose us too many of the through passengers to Kemble.  But those who take their bicycles will be severely inconvenienced if they have to start booking cycle places for 2 journeys a day!
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
SandTEngineer
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2266


In a Linemans Hut in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2018, 06:06:35 pm »

Didn't quite know where to put this so mods please move if wanted.

Quote on the WNXX Forum:
Quote
Platform extension underway at Trowbridge (down platform) and Freshford to take 5 car formations. Vegetation has been cleared at the north end of Melksham in preparation of the lengthening of the platform to accommodate a 3 car formation. Dilton Marsh is in the process of being lengthened to accommodate a 2 car formation. As mentioned, not to call orders issued for class 166 trains not equipped with modified local door controls at Avoncliff, Chetnole, Dilton Marsh and Thornford. Mottisfont & Dunbridge now has 'Local Guard Door Release' signs for 16x traction so unmodified class 166 units cannot be given a Special Stop Order for there when the SWR service has been cancelled.
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1083


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2018, 06:19:36 pm »

Quote
Mottisfont & Dunbridge now has 'Local Guard Door Release' signs for 16x traction so unmodified class 166 units cannot be given a Special Stop Order for there when the SWR service has been cancelled.

Is that statement correct ?

If 'Local Guard Door Release' signs have been erected at the stated station surely unmodified class 155's can be given a SSO in the circumstances quoted !!!!
Logged
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1083


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2018, 06:21:32 pm »

Finger trouble, 166's.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21797



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2018, 06:36:20 pm »

Quote
Mottisfont & Dunbridge now has 'Local Guard Door Release' signs for 16x traction so unmodified class 166 units cannot be given a Special Stop Order for there when the SWR service has been cancelled.

Is that statement correct ?

If 'Local Guard Door Release' signs have been erected at the stated station surely unmodified class 155's can be given a SSO in the circumstances quoted !!!!

Finger trouble, 166's.

I suspect that the statement is wrong.    Not sure about the situation at Mottisfont or at Dean .. and special stop orders for them are quite rare anyway.

On the regular lines, Stonehouse and Melksham have special arrangements in place and any 166 can call.  Chetnole, Thornford, Dilton Marsh and Avoncliff cannot be served by 166 units that have not yet had the SDO mod done; the number of such units available has increased from 3 to 5 (?) now ... and will carry on increasing, but it won't have been done to all the 166 units for several months yet.

Passenger numbers at Chetnole and Thornford are very low - they should not be missed but there's no big stink.   Dilton Marsh has 4 times the number of recorded passenger journeys of Chetnole and Thornford together (and a significant revenue leakage problem!) and a service with such massive gaps that people get really upset if they get skipped.   IMHO, Dilton Marsch could have the same treatment is Melksham and Stonehouse, but that has been ruled out on safety grounds.  Avoncliff there is a safety issue in the Bristol direction due to signal spacing and the canal aqueduct too.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
RA
Full Member
***
Posts: 90


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2018, 06:39:22 pm »

Quote
Mottisfont & Dunbridge now has 'Local Guard Door Release' signs for 16x traction so unmodified class 166 units cannot be given a Special Stop Order for there when the SWR service has been cancelled.

Is that statement correct ?

If 'Local Guard Door Release' signs have been erected at the stated station surely unmodified class 155's can be given a SSO in the circumstances quoted !!!!

Finger trouble, 166's.

I suspect that the statement is wrong.    Not sure about the situation at Mottisfont or at Dean .. and special stop orders for them are quite rare anyway.

On the regular lines, Stonehouse and Melksham have special arrangements in place and any 166 can call.  Chetnole, Thornford, Dilton Marsh and Avoncliff cannot be served by 166 units that have not yet had the SDO mod done; the number of such units available has increased from 3 to 5 (?) now ... and will carry on increasing, but it won't have been done to all the 166 units for several months yet.

Passenger numbers at Chetnole and Thornford are very low - they should not be missed but there's no big stink.   Dilton Marsh has 4 times the number of recorded passenger journeys of Chetnole and Thornford together (and a significant revenue leakage problem!) and a service with such massive gaps that people get really upset if they get skipped.   IMHO, Dilton Marsch could have the same treatment is Melksham and Stonehouse, but that has been ruled out on safety grounds.  Avoncliff there is a safety issue in the Bristol direction due to signal spacing and the canal aqueduct too.

That was my original post that has been lifted from WNXX and the statement regarding Mottisfont & Dunbridge IS correct!
Logged
RA
Full Member
***
Posts: 90


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 12, 2018, 06:42:01 pm »

Quote
Mottisfont & Dunbridge now has 'Local Guard Door Release' signs for 16x traction so unmodified class 166 units cannot be given a Special Stop Order for there when the SWR service has been cancelled.

Is that statement correct ?

If 'Local Guard Door Release' signs have been erected at the stated station surely unmodified class 155's can be given a SSO in the circumstances quoted !!!!

Unmodified class 166 units do not have the local door controls fitted so no is the answer.
Logged
RA
Full Member
***
Posts: 90


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: March 12, 2018, 06:56:05 pm »

I suspect that there is some confusion regarding the 'Guard Local Door Release' signs. At short platform stations such as Avoncliff, Dilton Marsh and Mottisfont & Dunbridge, the sign can be found at the end of the platform, meaning that the FRONT carriage of the train is stopped next to the platform. At these stations, the guard has to walk through the train to the leading coach to use the local door controls in that vehicle. If there are no local door controls fitted, the train is unable to call at the station.

A different temporary method of operation is in place at Melksham and Stonehouse. The stop car and 'Guard Local Door Release' signs are positioned so that the REAR carriage of the train is stopped adjacent to the platform. The guard exits the train by the cab crew door and operates a passenger door by using the external door emergency egress valve from the platform. The benefit of this method is that any type of class 166 can call at the station, regardless of whether the train has been fitted with modified local door controls.

Hopefully this will clear up any confusion.
Logged
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1083


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: March 12, 2018, 08:06:42 pm »

Thanks for the explanation RA, it seems barmey to me that with the simple solution of driving a new pole into the drivers side of the PW at a measured distance from the platform with a STOP HERE notice to drivers which means the rear cab crew door is on the platform hasn't been done already at the stations affected. Removal of the currently platform located signs in these circumstances is taken as read. I'm sure it could be done on all stations affected at the rate of one station per night between the last train of the day and the first of the next day rather than make pax using the likes of Dilton Marsh wait months for the 166's to be modified.
Logged
bobm
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6906



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: March 12, 2018, 08:10:41 pm »

It is all a bit of an adventure at the moment.   I was on a three car 158 the other day and itís the FRONT coach on those at Melksham.  Confused the regulars!
Logged
RA
Full Member
***
Posts: 90


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: March 12, 2018, 08:17:38 pm »

Thanks for the explanation RA, it seems barmey to me that with the simple solution of driving a new pole into the drivers side of the PW at a measured distance from the platform with a STOP HERE notice to drivers which means the rear cab crew door is on the platform hasn't been done already at the stations affected. Removal of the currently platform located signs in these circumstances is taken as read. I'm sure it could be done on all stations affected at the rate of one station per night between the last train of the day and the first of the next day rather than make pax using the likes of Dilton Marsh wait months for the 166's to be modified.

I completely agree. With the exception of the down Bath bound platform at Avoncliff (automatic signal just beyond the platform and no space for a stop sign in the restricted arch underneath the canal) and less importantly the down Salisbury bound platform at Dunbridge (stop signal protecting a level crossing that remains at red until the train has stopped), it just requires a post to be stuck in the cess approximately 2 carriage lengths beyond the platforms (as per Melksham) to allow 166 trains to call regardless of door modifications.
Logged
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1083


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: March 12, 2018, 08:37:20 pm »

What about this solution. Unmodified 166's to approach the short platform stations concerned at very slow speed and when rear cab crew door platforms guard gives a one bell on the buzzer and the driver stops almost instantaineously, or paint  'STOP HERE' on a sleeper in lieu of a sign if there is no room to locate a sign.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21797



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #13 on: March 12, 2018, 08:46:50 pm »

Thanks for the explanation RA, it seems barmey to me that with the simple solution of driving a new pole into the drivers side of the PW at a measured distance from the platform with a STOP HERE notice to drivers which means the rear cab crew door is on the platform hasn't been done already at the stations affected. Removal of the currently platform located signs in these circumstances is taken as read. I'm sure it could be done on all stations affected at the rate of one station per night between the last train of the day and the first of the next day rather than make pax using the likes of Dilton Marsh wait months for the 166's to be modified.

I completely agree. With the exception of the down Bath bound platform at Avoncliff (automatic signal just beyond the platform and no space for a stop sign in the restricted arch underneath the canal) and less importantly the down Salisbury bound platform at Dunbridge (stop signal protecting a level crossing that remains at red until the train has stopped), it just requires a post to be stuck in the cess approximately 2 carriage lengths beyond the platforms (as per Melksham) to allow 166 trains to call regardless of door modifications.

That now makes four people who have suggested that (here and away from the forum). However, the two stations that were done were intended for a very short period and at a minimum of stations to reduce the risk of doing the procedure too many times. Requests to do it at more stations have been turned down by the decision maker, and some staff are concerned at using the method even at Melksham and Stonehouse.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2018, 08:54:39 pm by grahame » Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants