Soham station re-opening: could this be the catalyst for service improvements?

[21C101]

Main Line to the West, Part 1, Irwell press, page 202, states "In 1973, just ten years after the Beeching Report, British Railways reported that the Waterloo to Exeter line was one of the top ten earners when measured on revenue per coach mile."

By then the service had increased to 9 each way a day (10 on Saturdays)

This top 10 figure was achieved despite the London to Exeter traffic going via Paddington and Salisbury, the principal intermediate destination, being less than half way to Exeter and despite one of the 8/9 coaches being a full restaurant car and two being brake seconds with half the coach used for parcels etc.

As to the idea that there was insufficient stock to run a semifast from Paddington to Exeter in the 60's thats for the birds. The one thing that BR wasn't short of in the '60s was stock, given all the lines that had shut.

In fact SWR rather proved the point in the last few years by operating a semifast service from Frome, Bruton, Castle Cary and Westbury to Waterloo and it being so sucessful that additional services were added, despite the much longer journey time to Waterloo via Salisbury from those places.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

I think in the locomotive hauled era the Waterloo-Exeter trains every two hours had more than 3 carriages?

Yes, the core service was 8 or 9.

Yes, you're both right. However, the other points in my post are still valid and even an eight coach train every two hours would not have achieved the same profitability as trains on much busier routes.

 

[RT4038]

Yes, you're both right. However, the other points in my post are still valid and even an eight coach train every two hours would not have achieved the same profitability as trains on much busier routes.

Quite. High 'Revenue per coach mile' is, as you point out, not a particularly reliable indicator. It implies full trains, high percentage of premium (1st Class) traffic and plenty of passenger churn. It is possible that the service in 1973 fitted at least the first two criteria. It could have been in the top 10 out of 12 route groups in total? It is pretty meaningless without knowing the 'cost per coach mile'. I am dubious that this service was in any way a beacon of profitability. It certainly wasn't treated as one by the management in the allocation of resources, which should give a pretty good indication of its overall financial standing.

As to the idea that there was insufficient stock to run a semifast from Paddington to Exeter in the 60's thats for the birds. The one thing that BR wasn't short of in the '60s was stock, given all the lines that had shut.

Looking through the posts in this thread I can't see any which imply that insufficient stock was any reason not to run a Paddington-Exeter semi-slow service in the 60s. Whether the stock released from lines that had been shut, or indeed the local services that had been withdrawn that served these intermediate stations, were suitable for this semi-slow service is a moot point; however the same could probably not be said for motive power. The Waterloo-Exeter line was not exactly endowed with a surplus fleet of reliable traction, and any allocated to a speculative Paddington line service would have taken locomotives away from the steam replacement programme, which was seen as a major cost reduction source. This speculative service would have to have been spectacularly successful to justify that. You suggested that it would take time and good management to make the service worthwhile, both of which were in short supply in 1964.

In fact SWR rather proved the point in the last few years by operating a semifast service from Frome, Bruton, Castle Cary and Westbury to Waterloo and it being so sucessful that additional services were added, despite the much longer journey time to Waterloo via Salisbury from those places.

The demographic of the area has completely changed in the intervening 50+ years, largely due to improved road network and road vehicles, backed up by rail service. In 1964 anyone regularly commuting to London from Basingstoke or Newbury would have been considered brave (and wealthy), whereas Yeovil or Bristol is now commonplace. Closure of the stations and services was well justified in the circumstances of 1964.
I do not know on what basis this new service (much less than 'two-hourly clockface') is 'so successful' ?

 

[70014IronDuke]

The demographic of the area has completely changed in the intervening 50+ years, largely due to improved road network and road vehicles, backed up by rail service. In 1964 anyone regularly commuting to London from Basingstoke or Newbury would have been considered brave (and wealthy), whereas Yeovil or Bristol is now commonplace. Closure of the stations and services was well justified in the circumstances of 1964.
I do not know on what basis this new service (much less than 'two-hourly clockface') is 'so successful' ?

Surely there were most definitely sizeable numbers of commuters from both Basingstoke and Newbury to London in 1964?

Nonetheless, your point - at least regarding places like eg Pewsey, Westbury, etc is overall correct, and applies to others, eg stations beyond Didcot such as Wantage Rd.
I think it is the key factor. And, as you imply, the money available for discretionary spending today that simply wasn't there in 64.