Project Wareham

As has been said on many occasions if the booking office at Wareham is closed then the toilets and waiting rooms are also closed because it is the member of staff in the booking office who unlocks and locks them. The toilets have also been closed on occasion due to vandalism and faults.

The toilets on the DMU will be locked out of service because they discharge direct to the track which is forbidden on the national rail network. Whilst it is permitted to discharge direct to the track on heritage railways, imho retention tanks should be fitted and the practice of discharging direct to the track ceased.

 

He was told they would normally be unlocked after Bridge 4 on the DMU but were actually u/s yesterday.
If the Ladies was unlocked at Wareham must have been vandalism or some other issue with the gents.

 

Or they had another flood which has happened before.

I had to go in a bush...

 

...and caused a flood?!!!

 

Fire Risk prevention.

 

Having travelled on SWT/SWR there are some good staff, and others who are "jobsworth" and a pain.
Looking up the website strange the prices vary depending on times, as the Saturday 17.30 was only £2.40 more than the 17.53, if the train was not overcrowded (which I doubt it would be at the time) he should have been allowed to travel on the 17:30, and pay the guard the difference if needed.

 

If the original ticket was an Advance ticket valid only on the specified train then a new ticket is required not an excess to travel on an earlier train.

 

SWRs fares online are baffling and could do with simplifying (probably why Swanage and Corfe have not been added yet?)
For anyone booking tickets for the Road to Rail event Friday or Saturday (where the Wareham to Swanage DMU service is running this Friday only) they will have to take time booking tickets
It is now cheaper to buy 2 advance singles than returns, On the Friday the return 17.28 (which connects with the last DMU) is about £6 cheaper than the later 17.53. But on Saturday the return 17:30 is £2.70 more than the 17.53, so you have to be careful booking the right train to prevent waiting at Wareham (not selecting the cheapest)!.

 

That is just a normal day on the network. Of course with LNER (an OLR operator) now having moved to singles only, I expect the rest to follow shortly.

 

Not a good possibility: https://news.railbusinessdaily.com/concerns-for-the-future-of-community-rail-funding/

 

First question's answer is - no.
The answer to "tying up loose ends" was, I think, certain directors and managers of the Swanage Railway Company - who also had the responsibility for heritage railway operations.
Those people have worked over and above what should be expected of them.
In these post-COVID times, the Swanage Railway (like so many other organisations) has not had spare cash to pay for additional staffing. Rock and a Hard Place come to mind!

 

I've tried to get this point clarified over many years on NP but, seemingly, without success. So, I'll try once again.
One of the founding aims at the 1972 public meeting in Swanage [I was there] was 'to connect Swanage and Corfe Castle with the railway network'. No more, no less.
No mention of restoring an amenity service to Wareham - although it might have been a 'twinkle' in certain people's minds of course.
In any case, in those days BR would have had to run services and the formative project couldn't have afforded their charges as we had a railway to rebuild.
The decision of running heritage trains to/from Wareham only became a possibility since Privatisation.
I hope this is the last time I have to correct matters - but I'm not holding my breath!

 

Just to observe (and I wasn’t a twinkle in my parents eyes in 1972) that it’s not unreasonable to interpret “connect” as including a service, rather than just have tracks.

The persistence of the view that the original objectives were about an amenity service suggests that reading wasn’t uncommon.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

That was the impression I got from the London meeting. How naive we were back in them there days.
Pat

 

Oh dear. This would seem to further reduce the chances of external support (in whatever form) for a third year of the Wareham service.

 

Maybe back in 1972 no one had a clear idea of what to do, the Wareham to Furzebrook section was still used by goods trains, so getting the line from Corfe to Furzebrook reinstated and running steam trains to Wareham seemed feasible? But mainline standards increased and SR have done a good job with the DMU service.

"It has been revealed that funding for community rail could be cut by up to a quarter from train operators’ budgets from the government,"
So not set in stone, but the paid community rail officers will be worried their jobs will go and will have to be done by volunteers?
"Alongside working with train operators, we also continue to explore and develop wider sources of income."
So commercial sponsoring could be used more to support stations and perhaps the Wareham DMU as a tourist service? Perenco could be a possibility, but don't think it sells services direct to the public?

I think there is still some unallocated funds in the Restoring Railways" £500k fund which the Wareham to Swanage DMU could apply for for 2024 if there is a predicted shortfall when the business plan is updated after the peak Summer results.

Todays interest rate hike means families disposable income will be squeezed, which does not bode well for holidays and rides on heritage railways

 

Given a recent local event, Perenco may decide that they need to try and portray a more community supportive image locally which could bode well for SRC. On the other hand they may think that the lowest possible profile may be the better policy and thus not change what appears to be their current policy.

 

Given the negative publicity generated over the Poole Harbour spill a low profile is probably best or something that gives back to nature. Not sure supporting a Wareham service would give them the right sort of PR. But who knows maybe they subscribe to the O'Leary view that any publicity is good publicity.
Of course there is also the issue of any negative association for the railway, at least with local residents, I would think.

 

Given how low profile Perenco have been for the past 15? years I very much doubt they would deviate from that stance. Possibly worse for SRC would be that in light of the Poole Harbour spill they could decide not to progress the transfer of the Perenco sidings from themselves to Dorset Council and thence to SRT / SRC. If the sidings were transferred and then something untoward happened (a spill for example of diesel oil or contamination from a carriage somehow) any report or publicity would probably refer to the location as the (ex / or former) Perenco sidings either way the word Perenco is mentioned in a negative context.