Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum
from GWR - Travel with confidence
Forum in and beyond Coronavirus
Great Western Coffee Shop
[home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 tomorrow - Tuesday Club - ONLINE
23/09/20 - ConnectedCities Oxford, ONLINE
24/09/20 - Reform Pub Trans / Closes
26/09/20 - Railfuture Severnside - CANX
Random Image
Train Running Polls Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
September 21, 2020, 04:42:32 am *
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
[232] Beyond current Emergency Measures - where will we be on 21st S...
[96] 2020 - TransWilts cancellation and amendment log
[82] Reading Green Park
[69] Chris Grayling does it again - and is now gone
[49] IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent pe...
[20] Train fire at Mortimer Station
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Somerset and Dorset - Shillingstone local traffic changes  (Read 241 times)
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4429


View Profile Email
« on: August 16, 2020, 11:33:34 am »

The next bit is completely off topic! Having done much research on the matter over the years, I have concluded that one of the starkest examples of misplaced blame concerns the Somerset & Dorset. When you compare the final S&D timetable of 1965 with the Bradshaw 1922 reprint you find that, excluding the expresses that were diverted in 1962, the local passenger service hardly changed over those 43 years. Also remember that the expresses over the line didn’t actually serve intermediate stations, and the only people who were even mildly inconvenienced were those who wanted to go from Bath to Bournemouth and in future would have to change at Southampton.

In 1965 the S&D was being run in almost exactly the same way as it had in 1922, and in 1922 its only real competition was the horse and cart. It didn’t stand a cat in hell’s chance against the Morris Oxford or the Austin A35...

I suspect there will be some readers who disagree with all this, so let’s have a discussion  Grin

I slightly disagree that the S&D didn't have any local traffic and that the timetable wasn't degraded. A freind of mine Mother lived at shillingstone and used the train for shopping in Blandford Forum. Originally ther were several trains she could catch both ways with varying time to shop in Blandford. Gradually these trains were reduced and you either had 5 minutes or 4 hours in Blandford. So the train became unuseable.

I do agree with you that on most local lines up to Beeching that timetables had hardly changed since grouping. The other thing was where there competing routes the services were still for instance still GN. GC of  Midland eg up the Leen Valley which resulted in all three lines being closed North of Annersley apart from a stub of the Midland to serve a couple of collieries. Cutting Mansfield off from Nottingham and Worksop and the rest of the pasenger network. However the good news is the route has been restored using parts of the GN and to link the Midland lines North of Annersley and serve Mansfield.

My big argument with Beeching was that each line stood alone. Very little thiught was given how competing routes could be amalgamated and links put in place to allow lengths of one line to be used and the other closed. Istead of closing both lines..

I blame to cost of Leeds rebuilding it put BR off trying to rationalise/combine any more stations or lines. Although there was a link put in at Netherfield to link the Midalnd line to Lincoln with the GN to Grantham. Thus diverting GN services from Grantham to Midland and helping close Victoria. One other comes to mind Barnsley. However i am sure there were more that could ahve been done and saved services.

However BR freight were more successful managed to single serve all the remaining colleries in East Norttinghamshire with a East to North Spur at Shirebrook  and a link at Rufford.  BR freight alss built several links in South Wales and the Yorkshire coalfield enablinling lengths of line to be closed.
Logged
Robin Summerhill
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 815


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #1 on: August 16, 2020, 02:55:56 pm »

The next bit is completely off topic! Having done much research on the matter over the years, I have concluded that one of the starkest examples of misplaced blame concerns the Somerset & Dorset. When you compare the final S&D timetable of 1965 with the Bradshaw 1922 reprint you find that, excluding the expresses that were diverted in 1962, the local passenger service hardly changed over those 43 years. Also remember that the expresses over the line didn’t actually serve intermediate stations, and the only people who were even mildly inconvenienced were those who wanted to go from Bath to Bournemouth and in future would have to change at Southampton.

In 1965 the S&D was being run in almost exactly the same way as it had in 1922, and in 1922 its only real competition was the horse and cart. It didn’t stand a cat in hell’s chance against the Morris Oxford or the Austin A35...
I suspect there will be some readers who disagree with all this, so let’s have a discussion  Grin

You write a lot that I can agree with. There is however this:  Wink

Quote from: eightf48544
I slightly disagree that the S&D didn't have any local traffic and that the timetable wasn't degraded. A friend of mine Mother lived at Shillingstone and used the train for shopping in Blandford Forum. Originally there were several trains she could catch both ways with varying time to shop in Blandford. Gradually these trains were reduced and you either had 5 minutes or 4 hours in Blandford. So the train became unusable.

There are few things I enjoy more than testing anecdotal evidence, especially when it’s third hand. So I dug out the Bradshaw reprint from 1922 and the 1959 and 1965 WR timetables to see what the evidence was to back it up. There was a minor issue that, in 1959, the S&D timetable in the WR book only gave full details as far as Templecombe, because beyond that was SR territory. So what I had  to do there was look at the 1959 WTT which shows trains arriving and departing Templecombe to the south, and extrapolated the times for Shillingstone and Blandford (not that there was much extrapolating to do because the times were all identical within 8 minutes).

Draw your own conclusions


The only caveat I would throw in is that in 1965 there were two trains (0953 ex-Bath down, 1140 ex-Bournemouth up) that were semi-fasts and didn’t stop at Shillingstone. Both called at Blandford, but the 1140 up was non stop between Blandford and Evercreech Junction.

Personally I can see no evidence to fully support your friend’s mother’s assertion of five minute or four hour waits (unless of course she was going down on the 0935 and couldn't get back for the 1032, but that in itself would not render the whole service unusable for the journey she wanted to make)


Note to mods - as this has absolutely nothing to do with Gloucester to Hereford can some of it be split into a new topix, especially if the discussion develops further?
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 30601



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: August 16, 2020, 03:26:52 pm »



Note to mods - as this has absolutely nothing to do with Gloucester to Hereford can some of it be split into a new topix, especially if the discussion develops further?


Split off from http://www.passenger.chat/23538  .  Perhaps I should also move it from the "Campaigns for new and improved" services board to something more historic?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4956


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: August 16, 2020, 04:17:59 pm »

Split off from http://www.passenger.chat/23538  .  Perhaps I should also move it from the "Campaigns for new and improved" services board to something more historic?

Like what - "Campaigns for old services"?
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 30601



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #4 on: August 16, 2020, 04:34:41 pm »

Split off from http://www.passenger.chat/23538  .  Perhaps I should also move it from the "Campaigns for new and improved" services board to something more historic?

Like what - "Campaigns for old services"?

Dunno ... I really doing want to suggest too much fragmentation but I come across certain topics and wonder about
... "History Corner" - the way it was, but not looking to get it back
... "Passenger Experience" - taking some topics from "across the west" that are passenger facility based
... "Crayonist Central" - silly way out speculation - we know it will never happen, but ...

Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
Robin Summerhill
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 815


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #5 on: August 16, 2020, 05:22:46 pm »


Split off from http://www.passenger.chat/23538  .  Perhaps I should also move it from the "Campaigns for new and improved" services board to something more historic?

I didn't reply straight away because I was thinking about it.

It doesn't easily fit into any of the other categories and, IMHO, the last thing this forum needs is yet another bloody sub-heading!

So, bearing in mind that there is at least one outfit out there who seem to think reopening the S&D could be a "runner," it is probably best to leave it here and see if any of them crawl out of the woodwork...  Smiley
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 30601



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #6 on: August 16, 2020, 06:49:18 pm »


Split off from http://www.passenger.chat/23538  .  Perhaps I should also move it from the "Campaigns for new and improved" services board to something more historic?

I didn't reply straight away because I was thinking about it.

It doesn't easily fit into any of the other categories and, IMHO, the last thing this forum needs is yet another bloody sub-heading!

So, bearing in mind that there is at least one outfit out there who seem to think reopening the S&D could be a "runner," it is probably best to leave it here and see if any of them crawl out of the woodwork...  Smiley

Not the last thing, Robin ... I can think of several other thing we need less.     We *have* combined board in the past  so it's not all branching ... and there are one or two quite ones which I can see combing in due course.  Ears and eyes always open.  Sometimes not much comes back out; at other time it rather floods.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
CyclingSid
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 996


Hockley viaduct


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2020, 07:08:32 am »

Is a new "Mr Beeching" thinking of closing branches!
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 30601



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2020, 07:40:37 am »

Is a new "Mr Beeching" thinking of closing branches!

 Grin Grin

As an example, with through services from London to Cheltenham Spa being dominant through Kemble, there may be sense in merging London to Bristol and Swindon to Cheltenham Spa into "London to places in England via Swindon".
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
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

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page