Swanage Railway General Discussion

Yes you have to match service provision to demand (fare income) but if the Wareham is a diesel and the core service is a steam:diesel combination then to the customer it looks and sounds like a diesel railway. This can only harm future patronage.

My view has always been that the true cost of Wareham is greater (and will always be greater) than the revenue it will generate. If the old yellow timetable (2 X steam every 40 mins) can not be justified financially then the old green (1 x steam 1 x dmu every 40 minutes) is surely the best compromise of providing frequency (and capacity) at an affordable cost and giving customers the choice of steam traction if that is essential to them.

Going to Dorset Council for a subsidy is all very well but make a mistake in the subsidy requested / the subsidy given is less than really needed then SRC will soon be in a very very difficult position. Remember he who pays the piper calls the tune.

 

Indeed, that is the perception my work colleague came away with after his visit this week.

 

That feels very much like the tail wagging the dog! To me, it would seem important that the Wareham service doesn't strategically threaten the "core" service, which has to be Norden - Swanage, surely? Even if in the slaying of sacred cows, that means being open that operating on the mainline has been shown not to be viable without unsupportable financial and operational impacts.

Tom

 

Friday, Sunday and Monday the SR could have run Manston or Eddystone for the 2nd train (3186 running the first), rather than a 33 diesel on the days when there is no Wareham DMMU, but for some reason did not.
Also the running of some 6 car trains?

Hopefully as well as getting passenger numbers, there would be people getting the opinions of passengers to be part of the 2023 trial report and an updated business case.
Doesn't the Chairman and Treasurer usually give a report to the October AGM or the Swanage Railway magazine rather than social media/Nat pres?.

 

I am hardly a keyboard warrior as I am basing my comments on many visits and close observation. Things need changing.Therc are too few services at peak times and the underlying steam operation of this railway must be maintained or they will suffer.

 

The Chairman and Treasurer brush off the more difficult questions or bounce it back with the "lack of resources" to do x y and z. They like having to only answer questions once a year because they can give the old "that was in the past / too late to do anything about it, (unspecified) lessons have been learned, looking forward" responses.

The opinions of potential passengers who chose not to travel on Swanage Railway or chose not to travel to / from Wareham are far more important than those who did.

 

No it’s those who have done both like me and find it wanting who surely count most.

 

With all due respect @gricerdon you are a Heritage Rail enthusiast and therefore more likely to put up with its failings than someone who is not a heritage rail enthusiast.

Having said that the question has to be did you not travel and subsequently travelled or was it the other way around. If it was travelled then decided not to repeat the experience what did you find wanting?

After a bit more thought: (a) asking someone who did not choose to visit the Swanage Railway is asking what was not appealing about the product offering (b) asking someone who visited the Swanage Railway but will not visit again is asking what was the failing in the service delivery / or the representation of the product.

It would certainly be interesting to see some professional customer experience research.

 

Yes that would be interesting. I went last Saturday knowing that some trains would be top and tail with a DL mainly because I wanted to go to the MRE at Harmans Cross

 

You say you are not a keyboard warrior, , but you don't come across as someone who helps to run the Swanage Railway. Your posts seem to be implying that "they" should run the railway to the demand you believe to be there, rather than run it in a way that they know they can sustainably deliver. If "they" can improve on that all well and good, but unless you are prepared to take a more active role in that I'm afraid your contributions can only be regard as being those from a keyboard warrior.

 

What has happened to the M7?
It has been in Herston Works for a major overhaul and was meant to be operational this summer. There is no mention of the loco in the new SRM issue 131 and I just wonder how it is progressing

 

I live too far away to be an active volunteer plus I am not in the best of health so need to visit by train and bus most of time. My contributions are aimed at being helpful to the railway I have known since 1962. Also of course my many visits are helping financially

 

Though historic, the following notes might illustrate the traffic demands of the 'core' service. However, the changes to the mode of operation of the park-and-ride (which now includes an additional charge for parking) mean that these statistics are not directly transferable to the present day - and there are no doubt other factors that would mean that historic loading patterns from 1999 and 2006 may not be reliable in planning services in 2024/5!

From some of the notes I have of loadings in the period from 1995-2007 there was a consistent pattern of loadings, with definable morning peak flows from Norden to Swanage and Swanage to Corfe. These were balanced by a definite but less acute peak flow from Swanage to Norden in the afternoon, and a more balanced return of passenger from Corfe from lunchtime onwards.

As a quick summary on a busy summer day, the following loadings would not have been impossible (remembering that 80% loading is actually pretty much the maximum achievable, as not everyone is in neat groups of 4!):
Norden to Swanage (1999):
1030 - 75-80%
1105 - 70-75%
1140 - 60-70%

Swanage to Corfe (1999):
0955 - 15-20%
1030 - 50-55%
1105 - 55-60%
1140 - 45-50%

Norden to Swanage (2006):
0950 - 55-60%
1030 - 65-75%%
1110 - 65-70%
1150 - 55-60%

Swanage to Corfe (2006):
0950 - 15-20%
1030 - 50-55%
1110 - 50-55%
1150 - 50-55%

What is not shown in these banded loading figures is the fact that the 'peak' down train could be any of the first four trains from Norden - partly dependent on weather, but almost impossible to predict.

Afternoon 'peak' flows were much less predictable, and very much weather dependent. On a good day with weather that stayed sunny, but not too hot then the 1655 and 1730 were the busiest - with one often running at 80% capacity and the 1805 (2-car DMU) sometimes leaving Swanage with standing room and passngers not insignificant numbers of passengers still returning to Norden on the 1910 ex-Swanage (from my notes, passenger numbers to Norden on this service in August varying between 15 and 70). However, (anecdotally rather than statistically) I also remember a particular day that started off with lovely weather and had an early afternoon thunderstorm when we ran into Swanage and found the whole area under the canopy jam packed. That departure (I remember 828 as the loco!) left full and standing, with people left behind for the following train.

The presence of these peak flows (only partly balanced by flows in the opposite direction), and the fact that it was difficult to predict when the flows would be on a particular day was what lead to the continued practice of a 40 minute interval service throughout the day. Whilst there were almost always some relatively lightly loaded trains in the lunchtime period, it did mean that there was always a series of closely spaced services either side of the particular 'peak' train on a particular day.

(As a side-note, the change from 35 to 40 minute intervals in, I think, 2005 was two-fold in intent: providing an easier to remember 2-hourly cycle of trains, and to allow an easier integration of future Wareham paths - as became the reality in 2017)

 

Everyone is entitled to suggest, but sometimes you comments come across more like instructions. I'm sure the Swanage management are always interested in helpful observations and comments, but are probably less receptive to what the perceive to be more akin to instructions or demands. I suggest giving them time to draw their own conclusions from what they have experienced and try to translate that into what needs to be done - they are there day in and day out and so have a better grasp of the bigger picture than someone who just gets an occasional "snapshot" of what is happening. The fact that your visits contribute financially is a gratuitous irrelevance in this context, I'm afraid, unless you can demonstrate, with verifiable evidence, that your views are shared by a significant proportion of other fare-paying passengers.

 

I'm not trying to make friends. I just think we have to give some credit to the Swanage managers. This is the first season that they have operated this timetable and I'd accept that it may well need tweaking some extent, but the middle of the peak season is not the time to try to adapt it on the fly.

 

My thoughts are intended to help the Railway plan for the future not to criticise especially as this summer is the busiest I have ever seen the railway and they have had to react as best they can. Anyway I will not be visiting again this year so your critical comments have had some effect.

 

It would be something of a shame if you have decided not to visit Swanage on the basis of the opinions of someone who is not connected in any way with the Swanage Railway, other than commenting on your comment on a forum that is not directly connected to Swanage! (Though I might have misread your comment regarding the effect that the comments of 61624 on your intentions...)

 

I must ask if you have any role with the railway or if you are a volunteer and if not how many times you have visited this year and indeed have you made any contribution at all?