Swanage Railway General Discussion

The main aims of the Wareham service should not be £££s and passenger numbers. Before you rush for the Reply button to shoot me down, let me develop the point.

For the sake of the argument, at the end of a trial period you can have one of these but not both:

A) £££s and good passenger numbers

or

B) Have run a calm, professional, safe, regular, on time service without major mechanical problems or over-burdening paid staff or volunteers.

It’s a no-brainer right? You’d go for B) every time.

That doesn’t mean £££s and good passenger numbers don’t matter, just that the professionalism and quality of service must matter more, and providing an enjoyable and safe working environment and experience for paid staff and volunteers is vital.

I don’t think SR should set out to judge the success of the service by £££s and numbers.

 

Almost too many points to respond to however (and apologies if this has been said before) :

Wareham (Station)

1. What was the down bay is now Wareham Station Car Park. (69 spaces). There is some free on street car parking close by but this is often used by employees of the businesses along Sandford Lane and some commuters preferring not to pay for station car parking.
2. The up bay has an electrical cabinet in the middle of the track bed. The track bed is overgrown and IIRC now the home of several species of protected flora and fauna. There is no run round loop at the bay.
3. If DC (Dorset Council) was so minded they could / should compulsory purchase the Johns Road Industrial Estate (adjacent to the up bay) and build a new station car park. The industrial units are small and not exactly salubrious. This would require a serious investment which a strap cashed council may not have the wherewithal to make.
4. The serious congestion problem that operating services between Swanage <> Wareham does NOT solve is the congestion between the Bakers Arms Roundabout at the A35 / A351. I was informed (but do not know the source) that The A351 between the Bakers Arms and Wareham is the busiest section of single carriageway A road in Dorset. There are some remedial measures which could be adopted for the A351 which would reduce congestion.
5.Getting passengers to travel by rail from say Bmth, Poole to Wareham and then change onto the SR Wareham - Swanage service is a big ask given the less than competitive product proposition this is (length of journey, lack of frequency / convenience, fare levels) when compared to the car. IMHO catching the Purbeck Breezer bus 50 from Bmth (Station or Square) to Swanage is a very competitive proposition given its journey time (80 minutes) frequency (every 30 mins in peak season) and fare levels. (Adult £9 return. ENCTS passes accepted). Its is also usually an open top bus which give the views along the line of route is an attraction in itself.
6. Bringing the sidings to the east of Wareham station back into use requires the foot (level) crossing issue resolving. My understanding is, and I stand to be corrected, the sidings will only be brought back into use when the crossing has been permanently closed. Agreement including planning permission can not be reached on the design of the replacement crossing because either to get ramps to the required shallow angle of inclination requires very long visually intrusive ramps which have a large footprint or a conventional bridge with lift with concerns about the lifts being out of action or breaking down trapping disabled people. The locals (those who live on the North side) are vehement in their opposition to the closing of the crossing.
7. DC and BCP (Bournemouth, Christchurch, Poole Council) are more concerned about the year round congestion along the major trunk routes than they are about the summer season only congestion on tourist routes. That is not to say they are not concerned but are focusing resources on the "bigger fish first".
8. A significant proportion of the bus passengers between Swanage <> Wareham <> Poole (Morebus 40) are ENCTS pass holders, (In other words Senior Citizen Free Passes). I very much doubt that significant numbers would change from a free bus to paying for a rail service though some may do so occasionally if it was steam hauled.
9. I do believe there is sufficient demand to operate a viable "tourist" service between Swanage and Wareham during the summer season. However it needs to be carefully tailored to the demand and to meet customer expectations. The railway must not fall prey to being over optimistic or over ambitious or indeed over complicating it.

 

Many thanks to @80104 for those specifics. One noteworthy point concerns those protected flora and fauna. I'd imagine, in that neck of the woods, we're talking native orchids and reptiles (not any of the two-legged variety!). The presence of fire flies wouldn't surprise me either.

This bit is merely a generalised observation, rather than "How do we spend a ruddy fortune on providing a facility that isn't actually needed in tbe first place?". If it shows anything, it's that given just moderately undisturbed conditions, plus (more crucially) a lack of pesticides and fertilisers, nature finds a way to reestablish itself without any undue human effort. Some of the best heathland biodiversity we have is to be found on Army land, where the odd explosion, or tank track aside, nature gets on with it, just as it did before we started habitually poisoning the soil, willy-nilly, with agri-chemicals.

The considerations mentioned by @Jupiter make perfect sense too, certainly in terms of not slinging resources at a new venture for the very short remaining period of this summer's season. Just an idle thought here, but has Father Christmas ever done the honours for a new service?

 

Paint 'em green and convert them to run on used chip oil..shouldn't be hard to source in Swanage!!

 

The best thing about railways is that there are no traffic jams. To get into Swanage by road during the Summer peak periods, especially at weekends can be a nightmare. That is the main attraction of the Wareham to Swanage DMU service.

 

Yes avoiding traffic jams is an attraction of rail ( and in some cases bus because the Morebus 50 route to / from Bmth by passes the queue on the approaches to the chain ferry).

However those prospective passengers / customers have to get to Wareham first:
If that is by road there still remains the problem of the congested A351 between Wareham and the Bakers Arms (A35).
If that is by rail then they have to get to a railway station and then catch a service to Wareham.
The challenge of making rail appealing is, as I said previously, a combination of end to end journey time, frequency, fare and the "convenience".

Making the overall rail fare from for example Bournemouth to Swanage "attractive" is quite a challenge because the standard fares of the two legs when added together quite frankly is uncompetitive. The overall fare can be reduced by both parties effectively lowering their own fares by the mechanism of either a through fare or add on fares.

It would be up to SWR to decide whether it was in their commercial interest to agree to this.
The problem that Swanage Railway then faces is that the net fare they would receive would be similar to (slightly above or even slightly lower) than the Norden <> Swanage fare.

If the Norden <> Swanage return fare is £16, and the Wareham <> Swanage return fare is £20 then a diverted passenger (one who would have travelled to / from Norden but chooses Wareham because of the service) only an additional £4 return is earned. However obviously if a passenger travels by SR from Wareham to Swanage and would only do so because of the new service(ie they would not have travelled to / from Norden) then the full £20 return is earned.

If in the interests of creating an attractive add on fare, the fares from Norden and Wareham are common rated then there is no additional revenue from diverted traffic. Only new traffic would generate additional revenue.

Using the data from the 2017 trial service a reasonable attempt can be made at modelling the likely revenue from a Wareham service. Using a number of scenarios (e.g. (1) 20% new traffic, 80% diverted traffic, (2) 30% nt 70% dt (3) , 40% nt 60 @ dt etc etc) and varying the fare, a number of revenue outcomes can be calculated.

By operating to / from Wareham, the risk exists that Swanage Railway incurs more cost than additional revenue gained depending on the passenger mix of new or diverted traffic and the respective fare levels (differentials) as explained in an earlier post and of course the actual costs of operating the Wareham service.

The railway needs to operate a trial service in 2022, because only with that data set can a better understanding of the likely revenue performance of the Wareham service be gained.

 

There are a couple of Pacers at Eastleigh which were rumered the SR could use. But the current DMUs (and 31806?) will be enough if just a Wareham to Corfe shuttle is for 2022? And a better ride!

This requires the council, SWR and SR to promote the advantages of using the mainline rail interchange at Wareham, perhaps with promotional fares and coordinating timetables, but is do able for 2022.

 

They are not mutually exclusive you need both otherwise it will not get beyond a trial period.

 

..and if you take out some of the seats there will be room for bicycles as Scotrail has done to some 153s.

 

Aren't Pacers supposed to be no go on third rail lines or have I got that wrong?

 

It was a hypothetical point to try and move people away from thinking solely about £££s and passenger numbers. TBH if it was £20 return from Wareham to Swanage I'd probably do it once while it was still running.

 

A level of government made the resuscitation of the Okehampton line happen and that could happen at Wareham,Dormice and Dandelions notwithstanding. I am perhaps among the few who remember getting off a down train at Wareham, and,those Victorians had it figured!!.taking a few steps across the platform to the branch train. Same in reverse! Do we need run around loops if we are using DMUs?? and yes I think the good burghers of Northport(?) have got it right because the present crossing gives them foot or bicycle access to the old Town. Windswept overpasses are not friendly to humans on foot! Anyone who has visited Welshpool will know how tortuous it is to gain access to the platforms on the new fangled bridge!. I see Purbeck through the eyes of one who has been distanced many years,however it is relatively unchanged. If that is to continue then the Swanage Wareham Railway will play an important role.

 

Extreme caution is advisable when considering promotional fares.

For example if it was decided to offer a £10 return fare between Wareham and Swanage.
For Every new passenger (one who otherwise would not have used SR) the railway gains £10
For every displaced passenger (one who would have paid £16 return to / from Norden) the railway loses £6

Depending on the mix of passengers (new Versus displaced) the net revenue varies.

One of the problems is that previous customers / passengers are more likely to see and be receptive to promotional fares than those who have not used the railway before thus the take up rate of existing customers (those who would have paid the higher fare) is greater than the take up rate of new customers.
It is therefore quite possible that a promotion ends up with lower net revenue!

A further problem is the effect that promotions have on future sales. It is a well known fact of consumer behaviour that customers will bring forward (or postpone) purchases to take advantage of a sales period. Thus passengers who may have planned to travel the first week of July will bring forward their travel to the last week of June to get the lower fare.

One of the other challenges is the costs of promoting promotional fares. Quite simply it is all too easy to spend too much relative to the net revenue from a promotion.

Despite the foregoing I am not against promotional fares they have a part to play in any marketing strategy. I simply advise caution working out a range of scenarios and if possible having some form of "cut out" to avoid unnecessary fare dilution. The best example of this for Swanage Railway would be to make the promotional fare only bookable in advance (ie by midnight the night before). This way walk up passengers (not knowing of the promotion and thus obviously prepared to pay the full fare) do not get the benefit of the cheaper fare and the railway gets the benefit of the higher fare.

 

Are we getting close to the 2002 reasons why we cannot run into Wareham yet??

 

When I visited the SR and saw the DMUs in the sidings, looked like there was a guards area which could have room for bicycles, is this correct?

 

I understood, but perhaps I am wrong, that the importance of the sidings being available was it provided the SR "train" with somewhere to go to either layover or "get out of the way" of a mainline service to avoid delaying a mainline service with all that implies.

Yes either National or Local Govt could invest in capital works for SR and that would certainly help the resumption of services between Swanage and Wareham. Perhaps I am being overly pessimistic but the more the Govt invests, the greater the expectation of deliverables will be. The danger I foresee is that if a lot of money is invested, then the expectation will be a year round service possibly including commuter timed services. That is beyond the capacity and resource capability of Swanage Railway as it stands. The next step will be either an external TOC will come in, or SR will be compelled to hire more paid staff (grant funded) to deliver the service. Either way the "volunteer led" "enthusiast passion" dominant features of SR will be eroded to very great detriment. As has been said before "he who pays the piper calls the tune".

Swanage Railway is rightly very proud of its very considerable achievements over nearly half a century. Local and national politicians are rightfully appreciative and respectful of the railway and its accomplishments. We can only hope though that Wareham does not become the tail that wags the dog and that the opportunity that SR represents in enhancing public transport in Purbeck does not mean that control and strategic decisions are taken away from the railway and placed in hands elsewhere.

 

Isn't that dependant on the results of the feasibility study and updated business plan, the main cost left seems to be training, the TOC licence, promotion and getting door locks on the 5 coach Mk1 rake(which were already known)?
https://www.swanagerailway.co.uk/ne...-feasibility-study-into-wareham-train-service
Which if started in December should have have been completed and published by now?

 

The positive side is that trains to and from Wareham will be delivered by full time and fully trained staff. That is a criteria for any scheduled operation on the National Network surely? Without that the liability insurance cost would be prohibitive. The bottom line is does DCC and levels of government beyond think that overall an amenity service,be it seasonal or not,is of benefit to Purbeck and beyond?