A Tale of Two Towns (apologies to Charles Dickens)

[whole diary]

[grahame]

18:17 Marlow to Bourne End due 18:24
18:17 Marlow to Bourne End due 18:24 will be cancelled.
This is due to the train driver being taken ill.

Additional Information
Replacement road transport has been requested.

Sorry to read the driver has been taken ill - hope it's not too serious, wish him/her a speedy recovery.  Noting that this message was on Journey Check well in advance of many of the trains in the cancelled series being due to run.

Text we are far too used to on the TransWilts.

If you are travelling from an unstaffed station please use the Customer Help Point or contact National Rail Enquiries on 03457 484 950 detailing the total number of passengers in your party and your intended destination. This will enable us to get suitable replacement transport to you as quickly as possible.

324 trains pass each week between Bourne End and Marlow, conveying 275,740 paying passengers (last year's ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road, formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) figure).  That works out at 17 passengers per train

119 trains (should) pass along the line through Melksham each week, conveying around 247,000 paying passengers.  That works out at 41 passengers per train, of whom 13 are making journeys to or from the otherwise unserved and unstaffed station at Melksham.

Why is the Marlow Standard for 17 passengers to pre-arrange road transport, but the Melksham Standard for between 13 and 41 passengers to only arrange when people turn up, and then only if they realise they can get alternative transport provided?

[TaplowGreen]

Sounds like a question for GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)? Have you asked them?

I suspect your calculations and conclusions you suggest massively oversimplify the issue however and there are far more variables involved in any such decision....time of day, availability of replacement transport, likely gaps between services etc.....for one thing there's a great deal more than 17 people on that service during the rush hour.

[grahame]

Sounds like a question for GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)? Have you asked them?

I suspect your calculations and conclusions you suggest massively oversimplify the issue however and there are far more variables involved in any such decision....time of day, availability of replacement transport, likely gaps between services etc.....for one thing there's a great deal more than 17 people on that service during the rush hour.

Totally agree with your comments and I wouldn't want to advocate running buses and taxis that carried fresh air around.  I do have a lot more specific data, and it rubs both ways - "there's a lot more that 41 people on that service during the rush hour" equally true of the (rush hour) service I picked up my rural (ha, ha!) Wiltshire quote from.