No, I didn't go for such an £18.50 'stroll', in the end. I'm sure they still managed very well without me.

 
I take your point, ChrisB.

I have therefore amended (yet again) the heading of this topic.

CfN.

 

I know: that's why I got the excellent Faresaver X34 10:27 bus service from Melksham into Chippenham this morning - and free, with my 'old git' bus pass.

 
With respect, you are rather assuming that the loft's water container will survive the 'survival incident'.

Personally, I would prefer the basement. Big problem:- I don't have a basement; nor a hectare out the back to dig a bunker.

I live within 2 miles of an active secret RAF base, that mainly flies helicopters, and I expect it to be high on the target list of our country's enemies.  I know it is here, and its co-ordinates, and so does Ivan.

My food stockpile will be accessed if: 1: Ivan's rockets have had all of their guidance systems reservoirs depleted of their operational ethanol operating environment (oh, and also tritium with its rather short half life), 2: their rocket propulsion systems work as originally planned (given years of planned maintenance), and 3: their navigation is top notch (dodgy from past performance).

I will be either Ground Zero or looking for window glass replacement.

I have a wind-up radio.

But most of all, a sensible view of what happens if the balloon goes up. My initial survival might be the worst option..

 

In cases like these, where the professionals actually do the naming, I would strongly suggest that we report what they do, not what the press would like them to do!

 
I've never understood how singling an existing line gives any significant saving, except in the short-term if track needs imminent replacement or a problem such as subsidence can be avoided by taking one track out of use.  Longer term there will be minor savings such as less track to inspect, but double track would broadly deteriorate at half the speed with each line only having half the usage, and the track is less complex with fewer sets of points to maintain or go wrong at passing places.  Knock-on delays if one train is late and more widely the lack of flexibility in timetabling when trains can only pass at specific points on single tracks will also incur costs.

 

It is possible to install a reserve water supply, using cheap mains water, do this as follows.
Install a cold water tank in the loft, filled automatically from the mains water supply via a ball valve.
Connect an outlet this tank about half way up, use this to supply toilet flushing and the washing machine this will ensure regular use of the water and avoid stagnation.
Connect a second outlet near the bottom of the tank, and use microbore copper pipe, supply a hidden tap for reserve drinking water. Copper pipe is preferable to plastic as it is slightly anti bacterial.
 This innvolves a fair bit of DIY but it ensures a reserve of fresh water forever.

 
Born in Crewkerne and lived there until the late 1960s. My recollection that the WR took over the running of the train service at the change of timetable in autumn 1964. One week it was virtually all steam bar a couple of services. With the timetable change in September the Warships had taken over, with a couple of other working by Hymek and dmu. The two surveys we took seem to confirm that.
The Warships were working over the line before that. In August 1964,  D816 was on the 07.30 Exeter Waterloo on the 29th of August. On the same date the 09.30 Exmouth -Waterloo was hauled by D831. The 10.33 Exeter-Yeovil was a dmu, as was its return working to Exeter. D831 returned on the Brighton Plymouth, changing from a Pacific at Salisbury. D816 returned on the 13.00 Waterloo. The Yeovil shuttle was 6430. (Traffic survey at Yeovil Junction 07.30 to 21.44)
On December 24 1964 at Salisbury from 08.20 to 17.00.
 D816 06.20 Exd to Wat, D824 07.30 Exd to Wat, D804 09.00 Wat to Exd, dmu 09.48 Exd to Sal, D810 10.30 Exd to Sal and 34051 to Wat. D869 11.00 Wat to Exd, D813 Brighton to Plymouth (34039 from Brighton). Dmu 10.05 Okehampton to Salisbury, D816 13.00 Wat to Exd, D7046 10.55 Plymouth to Brighton/Portsmouth, change to 34039 at Salisbury. Train to Ilfracombe at 16.20 34012 change to D7046 to the west. D815 14.30 Exd to Wat. D824 15.00 Wat to Exd
All the SR services were steam hauled.
Feinnes p99 onwards gives his side of the story.
Singling took place in 1967 but it was realised that more double track was needed. Luckily the line between Yeovil and Templecombe was still double track so the closed line was reopened.

http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sr/se1967.html for further detail.

 

Delays to services between London Paddington and Reading

Following trespassers on the railway between London Paddington and Reading all lines have now reopened.

Train services running to and from these stations are returning to normal. Disruption is expected until the end of the day.

 

 
I am on a suburban train to Porto (so please excuse any typos)  - been to Braga for a couple of hours.  And coming back to the station, I knew there was a train about every hour.  With that frequency, I hadn't bothered to check on my return train simple turning up at the station.  Murphy's law applied, and I walked into an empty Braga station just after the train had left.   Never mind - for an occasional journey, a 58 minute wait wasn't a problem and my laptop, a chance to observe, and a cup of coffee the time soon passed.   No rush to do anything back in Porto.

So - what IS sufficient frequency for a service? 

A service with gaps significnatly longer than an hour only works for a very small proportion of people (and - Melksham note - thats a gap between when trains run and not when they are timetabled but get cancelled as both the 08:02 and 10:02 were this morning).

With a passing loop around Beanacre, an hourly passenger service could be supported - that's double the current service, and running "clock face".  And today I have received a notification that FIRST Great Western Limited is replaced as operator Great Western Railway Limited from 13th December - nationalisation that we have known is coming.  I - hope - that the reliability issues (trains running to timetable) will be sorted out, but I lack any convictions that they will be for that reason.

What the loop WOULD do is double the service and halve the delay when things go wrong.   Actually, it could be rather better - trains out of step including freights would have much shorter (and less obstructive tendencies) waits when something coming the other way is held up - freight trains are REALLY unreliable to the timetabble - often early or late. Futhemore, only 2 trains would be needed to provide the hourly Swindon to Westbury service; without a loop (and without frwight) it would need 3 trains as they have to pass somewhere, and could not do so on the single line.

Currenly trains leave Swindon at 06:03, 08:45, 11:05, 13:14, 15:14, 17:45, 18:44 20:12 and 22:31 and leave Westbury at 07:05, 07:45, 09:45, 12:17, 14:18, 16:23, 18:37 20:06 and 21:16. Just imagine if they left BOTH ends at those time - so that's from Swindon at 06:03, 07:05, 07:45, 08:45, 09:45, 11:05, 12:17, 13:14, 14:18, 15:14, 16:23, 17:45, 18:40, 20:12, 21:16 and 22:31 and Westbury at 06:03, 07:05, 07:45, 08:45, 09:45, 11:05, 12:17, 13:14, 14:18, 15:14, 16:23, 17:45, 18:40, 20:06, 21:16 and 22:31 ... look at all the gaps filled!



Pictured - the HOURLY train from Porto has just arrived in Braga and - oh look - the crowds are flowimg odd. It works!

 
It was interesting to see how these members of the House of Lords could sit around the committee table, and (notwithstanding their different political allegiances) have a civilised and constructive discussion with a remarkable degree of cross-party agreement. Possibly it was easier for milords Young, Grayling and Harper to support this freed from the departmental and Treasury pressures of office?

But, notwithstanding Lord Hendy's commitment, it is difficult to see priority being given to the constructive re-use or devotion of much valuable resource to these assets if they do end up in GBR's ownership. I have had recent experience of dealing with CRT on a "legacy" site, and temper my disappointment with the slowness of their actions by the thought of the vast estate of current and former canal assets (quite a few of which carry considerable potential liability if something fails, as has happened on more than one occasion in recent years) for which they are responsible. I am not sure that moving assets from one balance sheet to another does much to help safeguard them in a world when cost is king, and there are many calls on resources.

 
Many thanks for all the inputs.     Whilst 100% of you visit from the UK ... at least some of the time ... there's a substantial number from time to time outside the UK and all sorts of technological elements too.    Traffic has been very heavy of late, with numerous automated accesses failing to admit that they are automated - rather faking what type or browser that are, and doing in via all sorts of distributed places.  I am saying "oy" to a number of these - purely to keep traffic down and prevent congestion / gridlock but they are so hard to identify ...

 
From my email ...


and

 
"It is firmly a Government intention” to transfer the Historical Railways Estate to Great British Railways. That was the commitment made yesterday by Lord Hendy, the Minister of State for Rail, during his response to a debate around an amendment to the Railways Bill which is currently going through its Committee Stage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6poAoRnMp8

 




"Pulling the plug" - for however long - on the Melksham (and Westbury, and Beanacre bypasses) does not reduce the amount of freight travelling south-north through Wiltshire. 

It helps make the case for transfer to rail - where that's appropriate, and furthermore it's far less intrusive, less locally controversial, far environmentally better, and far cheaper to put in the infrastructure for rail.   If it can be done BEFORE our population explodes as planned, and with a "metro" frequency rail service in place ahead of time, then our economy and good housing stock will grow with people ready, willing AND ABLE to use rail where appropriate - and that in turn lessens the load and congestion on roads in the area from what it would otherwise be.

 
AI can be pretty good at this sort of thing, although it's not easy to tell whether it's correct or not:

 
I have a sentence on cycle.travel's "contact us" page saying "we don't accept sponsored posts, link exchanges or guest posts". Doesn't stop them incessantly trying. I just mark as junk and move on.

 

Love this! too much info maybe?

 
I'll try and find my copy later but Gerry Fiennes' "I Tried to Run a Railway" is very good on the decisions behind retention of the line. He was not impressed with the support forthcoming, or not, from local politicians.

 
I have lived alongside the Waterloo to Exeter line in or near Pinhoe for all bar three years of my Seventy years and have always been interested in the fortunes of the line. My A-Level Statistics project, which gained an A grade was on the subject of 'Re-doubling the railway between Wilton and Pinhoe'.

However, one significant event in the history of the line puzzles me and I'd like confirmation or correction of my memory please.

Every article I read on the reasons for reducing Wilton South to Pinhoe to mainly single track and thus the route to Secondary status, was down entirely to Dr Beeching. However, my recollection is that was only the beginning - with the closure of several intermediate stations. My recollection is that control of the Salisbury to Exeter route was transferred from BR(S) to BR(W) in the early 60s and that Senior Management of BR(W) did not want two fast routes into the westcountry (the ACE was faster to Exeter than the Cornish Riviera at the time). So, BR(W) throttled the ACE in the timetable and made the decision to reduce the route to Secondary status.

Can somebody confirm / correct my perception please?

*** Correction of unfortunate typo in the first sentence ***

 

 
Roger French also did some walking -
https://busandtrainuser.com/2026/10/27/how-to-ruin-five-more-central-london-bus-routes/
It’s finally happened. After years of controversy with Westminster Council and others objecting, Mayor Kahn’s vision for a traffic free Oxford Street, first launched in his 2016 manifesto, finally got under way yesterday when the 900 yard middle section, between Great Portland Street and Selfridges, of the 1.2 mile long road was pedestrianised with not even cycles allowed to use the road.

I blogged about this proposal two years ago expressing concern at the impact on passengers using the busy bus stops served by the five TfL routes still using the street – routes 7, 94, 98, 139 and 390.

............continues...........

 
Roger French article here -
https://busandtrainuser.com/2026/10/25/marking-40-years-of-deregulated-buses/

Sunday 25th October 2026

To mark tomorrow’s 40th Anniversary of bus deregulation here’s an article I wrote earlier this year for the Omnibus Magazine (the bi-monthly magazine of the Omnibus Society) explaining why deregulation worked so well in Brighton and Hove as well as a number of other British towns and cities. It perhaps also explains why deregulation manifestly didn’t work in other places most of which are now first in the queue for implementing the now available alternative of politically led and publicly controlled ‘franchising’, thanks to previously unheard of generous funding from Government.

.....continues..........

 
09:45 Westbury to Swindon due 10:28
09:45 Westbury to Swindon due 10:28 will be cancelled.
This is due to train crew being delayed by service disruption.

 


"ish" -  a handful of early Monday to Saturday service call at the station in Chippenham having left from Melksham, and a few mid to late afternoon service to Melksham call there.  Otherwise on Monday to Saturday, they don't. All Sunday service to Chippenham will call at the station ON REQUEST, and all outbound services call there.

For Melksham resident "in the know", it works fine as those are the most useful services for rail transfer; what we are short of is evening bus services from (any part) of Chippenham to Melksham.

 

 

You are almost certainly right. However, having a standard answer to hand and in public I can now just say "see here" to the various requests received, occasional ones of which have resulted in one post wonders.   Answer not just (or even really) for this enquirer, but far more general.  Next time it's quicker, and, further, guests / casual visitors who may have wondered are encouraged to join and post.

 
That's an agency trying to find outlets that they can *sell* to their 'clients'. Not that you'll get any money out opf it, and if its free, neither will they, and you won't get any content being supplied.

Don't waste your timer responding would be my suggestion.

 
It would seem that a significant number of people ARE stocking up on essentials as suggested by HMG.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5rmy84np001o

Proper "doomfood" would IMHO be preferable to regular tinned food as it has a warranted 25 year shelf life and should last almost forever.

Needs extra water and means of boiling same though.