Project Wareham

I feel you are deluding yourself. Even at £12.50 it would not compete with a freedom pass that so many in Purbeck have.
The other issue is timings of what you call a "commuter service" for locals which has been mentioned many times before.
As an example as a Swanage resident I have recently had a 15:30 appointment at Dorchester Hospital (drove) and an 11:15 at Poole Hospital (took the 09:00 bus). Neither of those work using the rail service, (nor are they especially early or late appointments) before you even factor in the not unusual occurrence of late running or cancelled SWR trains. Currently I would never rely on rail getting me to an important appointment without leaving at least over an hour earlier than I need to.
A Poole or Bournemouth commuter would need a service to leave Swanage about 07:00 to get the 07:53 from Wareham. Never going to happen.

 

As a long time supporter of the efforts to return to Wareham, sadly my inclination is now to agree with you.

A founding aim of the Swanage Railway was to restore a year amenity service to Wareham. They have pressed ahead with this aim , despite the fact it has become more obvious in recent years that this isn’t possible. Especially as evidenced by the £25 fare that is now required to run the service.
I think people will pay that as a novelty this year, but perhaps not sustainable going forward.

I hope to be proved wrong though.

 

To get locals to use it really needs to run from anout 7 a.m. to at least early evening at a reasonable frequency, it needs to be quicker that the bus with possibly a small premium for that and people need to know it exists, most schemes usually use a heavy publicity campaign when they start up.

 

I can't see the Wareham service ever being more than a convenient means of leisure travel from the national network to the Swanage Railway for the sake of the ride and/or to reach destinations on the line. The question is whether it can be made viable for those purposes. It will be a pity if the apparently poor publicity and difficulty of through ticketing for the present experimental service lead to a pessimistic conclusion about future viability.

 

I think "amenity service" is a better name than "commuter service", i.e. as a catch all for any usage that is not the existing "heritage" service.

I can see three use cases:

1. An outbound commuter service to allow Swanage residents to get to Bournemouth / Poole for normal working hours. (I'd include in that as a subset sixth form students travelling to college)
2. An outbound shopping service to allow Swanage residents to go to larger commercial centres
3. An inbound leisure service to get people to Corfe Castle, Swanage and local campsites.

Number 1 is I think a non-starter: to make it viable, you need to run 365 days of the year (or at least 364) and with early starts / late departures. You are never going to get volunteers to cover that use case for e.g. signal boxes, train crew; and the moment you employ paid staff, the costs rocket (Bear in mind having an outgoing service probably at or around 7am, and an inbound at or around 7pm or later means at least double shifts for signalmen and train crew, 7 days per week). Plus you have to consider the operational impact on the maintenance of the railway. Most heritage railways rely on periods of downtime during quiet months to enable more extensive infrastructure repairs to take place - which you couldn't do with a 365 day service. I can't imagine too many volunteers being happy with the way the big railway does it: "you can have a possession between 11pm and 5am to relay that section of track ..."

Number 2 is also I think a non-starter. The working hours are shorter, and maybe you could make the service just run on one or two days per week, perhaps to coincide with local market days. But now you are faced with the issue that the major users of such a service would likely be retired people, who would be faced with the choice of a free bus ticket, or a £25 train ticket to e.g. Bournemouth to do some shopping. Not much choice there.

That leaves number 3, which is basically what is being trialled, and even that I suspect is probably a bit marginal in cost terms. Assuming you restricted the service to just a summer peak (and the local town traders and council would keep wanting to extend that if they could, given that such a service would disproportionately benefit people who weren't actually paying for it!), it would be interesting to know how you assign costs for resiliency. For example, how many miles per year is it realistic to push a DMU, and how many years before it needs a major overhaul? That would all need costing.

I've got no skin in the game, but unless there is some transformation of the cost model, I'd be surprised if regular services continued. I suspect the connection will settle down to being like most other heritage railway mainline connections, being used for a mixture of engineering trains, inbound charters and so on - but not a regular amenity service. The NYMR model of running what is basically a "heritage" service over Network rail to a remote (from the heritage railway) station is complicated by virtue of the operational complexities of running into Wareham over an electrified two-track mainline without any segregated route and minimal facilities at Wareham.

Tom

 

I was under the impression that operating two Wareham trials (one of 60 days and one of 90 days) was a condition of the 2014 lease between Dorset County Council (now Dorset Council) and Swanage Railway Trust? for the trackbed between Northbrook Road Swanage and where it meets Network Rail at / close to Worgret. A failure to operate the trials would put SRT? in breach of the lease and technically at risk of forfeiture. (Whether DC would actually do that of course is another matter).

Whilst a lot is said and speculated about passenger numbers, revenue and costs the reality is that the true additional revenue generated by operating to / from Wareham is very unlikely to exceed the true additional costs. The question then becomes whether any funding would be made available to make up the deficit for operating further "trials" and indeed whether SRT / SRC would wish or be able to operate services to / from Wareham - having discharged their liability by operating the two trial years - should such funding be made available. A concern would have to be how to reasonably accurately calculate the level of financial support required given the number of variables in what we know is a very challenging economy currently.

Issues such as central and local govts commitment to public transport, reducing road traffic, reducing carbon emissions*, reducing isolation etc etc should be included in the "benefits" of funding a further trial year but one may question whether funding enhanced bus services would deliver more per £ of taxpayers money than funding the SRT SRC Wareham service. DC and other funding partners are bound to consider alternatives as part of the value for money test (Green Book Method and DfT Value for Money Framework). It is also imperative that if the money is coming from local tax payers that what is being funded is made explicitly clear - ie a service (by virtue of its times and dates of operation) aimed at inbound tourism and not a service aimed at commuters etc.

A further consideration by both Dorset Council and SRT may be the amount of public funds which have facilitated this project and whether or not they consider that additional "trial" years should be run to "spread out" the sunk costs of the project. Certainly spending £1.3M+ on refurbishing a DMU set (technically a 3 car set and a single car) to mainline standards seems an extraordinary level of expenditure given (a) the potential alternative uses for (and deliverables from) those monies (b) the costs of alternative traction and rolling stock to operate the Wareham service for the two trial years.

*On the basis of emissions per passenger carried and carrying say 60 passengers, I wonder which generates more emissions: (1) a 3 Car Class 117 DMU with 4? pre Euro Standard Diesel Engines, (2) a MCV EvoSeti double decker bus with Euro VI standard engine (3) 30 generally available cars in the UK with an average age of 5 years (each to carry 2 persons).

 

Just to note the NYMR run a service from the heritage line to somewhere visitors want to go to, not from somewhere where nobody really wants to visit to a tourist attraction. So NYMR cash I on people who want to go on the NYMR and visit Whitby, I.e. 2 tourist attractions in one go.

 

Disregarding all the perhaps conflicting government initiatives, the fact remains that even non bankrupt councils are significantly short of funds, and I do not see that changing anytime soon regardless of who wins the next G.E. There have been councils who have made noises about trying to get out of nationwide Freedom Pass scheme due to the cost so I personally even if the trial is a rip roaring success would not be looking for any funding from a council source.
Even in London where in theory there is much more money Sadiq Khant has reduced the "offering" on transport to London Council Tax payers.

 

Yes Councils are struggling to meet their statutory responsibilities and with the demand on those responsibilities increasing relentlessly there is very little money for non statutory activities however having said that public transport seems to be one that does get some funding. That then comes back to whether the future funding of the SRC Wareham service is a sufficiently good use of scarce resources.

The benefit of the Wareham service can be debated endlessly and certainly this years results would be useful in informing that debate. However I still can not help feel that SRT SRC will have enough on their plate with the core heritage service and that actually not continuing the Wareham service may in time turn out to be the best outcome (for SRT SRC).

 

I think transport funding and subsidy is now under central Government rather than local Government, December 2020 SR got some cash from the the Department for Transport’s national ‘Restoring Your Railway Fund’ to update the feasibility study and business case for Project Wareham.
https://www.swanagerailway.co.uk/ne...-feasibility-study-into-wareham-train-service
I presume after this years trial the business case will be updated and hopefully published to see the impact and finances?
It could be that if local volunteers are trained to replace the DMU WRC crew, then might make another service in 2024 viable? We will have to wait and see?
Also if there is a small shortfall possible the ‘Restoring Your Railway Fund’ might fund a service in 2024, especially if reducing road traffic will be a benefit.
Possible that SWR might take an interest in the 563 LSWR loco back in steam soon, and promote the Wareham connection more?

Yesterday on BBC2 Great Coastal Railway Journeys Series 2 ep 17 (and now on the iplayer https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episo...eys-series-2-17-kimmeridge-to-brownsea-island) showed Michael Portillo getting off the Weymouth to Wareham train to explore Purbeck and travelled on the Swanage Railway. It was filmed before the Wareham service was announced, but does mention a connection to the mainline.

 

I admire the optimism, but a grant of £50k is loose change. Tom's post above summarised the problems nicely. Seriously reducing road traffic would mean a regular hourly 'commuter' service throughout the year which would need to be staffed professionally, the line would need to be upgraded to 50mph running and access into Wareham would need to change. You can't do this running wrong road. For example, the Lymington branch is completely separate from the main line. To give an idea of the cost, the proposal to reinstate the Waterside branch to Hythe has a £43million budget. And that's with a cost/benefit ratio of 4.7. My guess is that the Swanage business case would not be as strong so would be further down the list for getting any money. Plus goodness knows how you mix a regular service with heritage trains.

I agree with Tom. The Wareham link will end up being used for engineering trains, charter trains, plus maybe a very limited number of heritage diesel services at the height of the season from Wareham as per the trial to keep the enthusiasts happy.

 

The link can only ever be a novelty under current conditions. The Swanage have marketed Norden as the Swanage "Park and Ride" for many years yet corfe Castle village remains horribly clogged with traffic. So there can be no hope that the Wareham link can have any more than a pin prick effect on the traffic levels.
It is an enthusiast link and I really don't see how it can keep going apart from excursions and high days and holidays.

 

The moment you consider 50mph running you kiss goodbye to the Swanage Railway as we know it. Every loco running on the line will require TPWS fitting and that would include gala visitors. Then there’s CDL. You might get away with an exemption if slam door stock is limited to 25mph as the NYMR has negotiated. TPWS & CDL aren’t network requirements, they are the law.

 

It appears at the moment it takes 10 min or so longer to go by wareham by train than by bus, I guess restricted by paths, speed limits on the railway. So if I was a resident no contest really.

 

Which was kind of my point. A commuter railway and a heritage line don't really mix. You would lose everything that the SR currently stands for. Which is why the link to Wareham will only have limited use.

 

There is a lot of negativity in this thread about 2024.
Let's see how the 2023 trial goes, the SR management hopefully will publish a report and update the business case for 2024. Also depends on general SR running.

Hopefully there will be enough of a case to run another limited DMU service for enthusiasts and other SWR leisure passengers in 2024 changing at Wareham and coming to Corfe or Swanage, perhaps with lower cost and an earlier train if trained volunteer drivers and guards replace the WCR crew?.

The 25 mph limited DMU service may not have a major impact on reducing road traffic on the Wareham to Swanage road, but may have enough people using rail, rather than cars to visit Corfe and Swanage, to continue?.

If the updated business case at the end of the end of the 2023 trial shows a potential financial shortfall for a 2024 service (which should be much less than the 2017 trial shortfall), then no reason why the SR can't apply for a small part of what's left of the DFTs £500m Restoring railways fund?.

 

I think you misspelt realism

 

Well put!

This is probably a best-case scenario although by no means impossible. No doubt at the end of this year's trial, the SR management will be studying the figures closely to ascertain if there is any sort of pattern which will justify running a limited number of profitable trains in 2024. Although happy to be proved wrong, I'd be surprised if the number of operating days comes anywhere near the 90 of this year's trial. Still, at least the connection between NR and the SR has been completed and the signalling upgraded to allow through running. Who knows what the future might hold? As things stand, however, I'm with the majority who don't expect this year's trial to be a precursor to any sort of regular service any time soon.

 

Hopefully the SR Management Team are looking at the figures daily and trying to gather as much intel as possible to inform future decisions. Whether Swanage Town Council would make the data available I doubt but it would be interesting to compare the daily car park usage data in Swanage with the daily Swanage Railway patronage particularly on Wareham running days.

 

It would, but all of that analysis will also depend on how much spare money the various local authorities have to support access.