Recent Public Posts - [guest]
| Re: Gatwick Airport - facilities, improvements and incidents - merged posts, ongoing discussion In "Buses and other ways to travel" [378671/20849/5] Posted by Mark A at 22:21, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
Trustpilot reviews. People of a nervous disposition may prefer not to read them.
The site's buried in a clearing in a laurel-infested wood east of Crawley - for good measure quite close to the old Crawley - East Grinstead line and with a high voltage electricity line carried on transmission towers.
https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/sapphireparking.co.uk
| Re: Pleasure boats, the Thames, and that tie-in with the railways In "Railway History and related topics" [378670/32405/55] Posted by Oxonhutch at 22:04, 24th August 2026 Already liked by Mark A | ![]() |
On the Salters's good ship 'Reading' - my daughter's 21st, an evening with food and music - Wallingford - Pangbourne - Wallingford. Wonderful trip, full of memories.
| Re: Pleasure boats, the Thames, and that tie-in with the railways In "Railway History and related topics" [378669/32405/55] Posted by TonyN at 21:50, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
Over about 5 years in the early 2000s I Travelled from Oxford to Staines on Salters public trips. and also from Runnymede to Hampton court on an ex Salters boat operated by French Brothers.
Staines-Windsor (also did the Windsor-Runnymede bit in 1967 on a school trip)
Marlow-Windsor
Marlow-Henley
Henley-Reading
Reading-Wallingford
Wallingford-Abingdon (This was on a modern plastic boat operated by Salters Due to scaffolding partly blocking the bridge arch at Clifton Hampton. I think it was the last trip as the Captain was doing his last trip before retiring and it was the end of the season)
Abingdon-Oxford (The only public point to point trip Salters still Run)
| Re: Pleasure boats, the Thames, and that tie-in with the railways In "Railway History and related topics" [378668/32405/55] Posted by eightonedee at 21:30, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
Reading this made me suddenly realise- I've not seen any Salters' "steamers" this year on our stretch of the Thames through the Goring Gap. Checking their website, it seems that they no longer run their Wallingford- Reading route. But on reflection, in recent years these often seemed poorly patronised. No longer any demand for this?
| Re: Corsham Station reopening In "Campaigns for new and improved services" [378667/226/28] Posted by Chris from Nailsea at 21:15, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
If they can indeed get all of that business case together by November 2026, that will be impressive in itself.

For the record, I was born in Devon, of native UK parents (through several generations, on both sides) in 1959.
CfN.
CfN.

That makes two of us! (Although in my case 1970!)

| Re: Gatwick Airport - facilities, improvements and incidents - merged posts, ongoing discussion In "Buses and other ways to travel" [378665/20849/5] Posted by ChrisB at 21:06, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
Let's hope the operator - who isn't Gatwick Airport - was insured - otherwise 140 owners might be looking for them on their return

| Re: UK population exceeds 60 million - BBC report, 24th August 2006 In "Campaigns for new and improved services" [378664/32402/28] Posted by Chris from Nailsea at 20:58, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
For the record, I was born in Devon, of native UK parents (through several generations, on both sides) in 1959.
I don't think I have managed to change society. Well, not much, anyway.

CfN.

From the BBC:
Fire destroys 140 cars at site used by Gatwick passengers

A fire service says about 140 vehicles were destroyed in a parking site used by Gatwick holidaymakers
Holidaymakers using Gatwick Airport are facing misery at the end of their travels after a fire at a car park used by people flying from the hub destroyed 140 vehicles.
The blaze at Caldyne Business Park near Crawley broke out shortly after 21:00 BST on Saturday, and images from the site show huge flames and massive plumes of smoke above rows of stationary cars.
A 67-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of arson, and has been bailed pending further inquiries, Sussex Police said.
A spokesperson for Gatwick Airport, which does not own the site, said it "understands how concerning and distressing this will be" for passengers.
Sapphire Parking, whose site was involved in the blaze, said: "At the moment, it is a nightmare for everyone. We lost a lot of business - we have had to cancel about 600 bookings. I know that customers are calling and are distressed, but we can't do much at the moment."
The airport added that the site "is not endorsed or operated by London Gatwick".
More than 2,000 homes were also left without power on Saturday due to the blaze, but electricity has since been restored to those affected.

Firefighters tackled the blaze on Saturday morning - Image © Eddie Mitchell
West Sussex Fire & Rescue Service advised people whose vehicles were damaged by the blaze to contact their parking operator directly. A spokesperson said crews remained at the scene on Monday to damp down hotspots. It added there were no casualties. A total of eight fire engines and water carriers attended at the height of the blaze.

A fire service says about 140 vehicles were destroyed in a parking site used by Gatwick holidaymakers
Holidaymakers using Gatwick Airport are facing misery at the end of their travels after a fire at a car park used by people flying from the hub destroyed 140 vehicles.
The blaze at Caldyne Business Park near Crawley broke out shortly after 21:00 BST on Saturday, and images from the site show huge flames and massive plumes of smoke above rows of stationary cars.
A 67-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of arson, and has been bailed pending further inquiries, Sussex Police said.
A spokesperson for Gatwick Airport, which does not own the site, said it "understands how concerning and distressing this will be" for passengers.
Sapphire Parking, whose site was involved in the blaze, said: "At the moment, it is a nightmare for everyone. We lost a lot of business - we have had to cancel about 600 bookings. I know that customers are calling and are distressed, but we can't do much at the moment."
The airport added that the site "is not endorsed or operated by London Gatwick".
More than 2,000 homes were also left without power on Saturday due to the blaze, but electricity has since been restored to those affected.

Firefighters tackled the blaze on Saturday morning - Image © Eddie Mitchell
West Sussex Fire & Rescue Service advised people whose vehicles were damaged by the blaze to contact their parking operator directly. A spokesperson said crews remained at the scene on Monday to damp down hotspots. It added there were no casualties. A total of eight fire engines and water carriers attended at the height of the blaze.
| Re: Corsham Station reopening In "Campaigns for new and improved services" [378662/226/28] Posted by John D at 20:33, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
Corsham Town Council update
Work on a new business case to be ready by November 2026
Following discussions between Wiltshire Council, GWR and Network Rail, AtkinsRealis has been commissioned to update the business case for Corsham’s proposed new railway station. This work will be completed by the end of November 2026.
The work will focus on updating existing evidence and improving the business case rather than redesigning the scheme. It includes:
Costs and Financial Assessment
A full update of the station’s capital cost estimates will be undertaken, using the same station design and scope that formed the basis of the 2022 submission.
Operational cost assumptions will be reviewed using comparisons with similar stations, including consideration of different staffing models and day-to-day operating costs.
The economic case will be strengthened through clearer benchmarking against comparable stations, particularly in relation to passenger demand and wider travel impacts. No new demand modelling is proposed.
Wider Benefits Assessment
The SOC will include an enhanced qualitative assessment of the station’s environmental and social benefits, identifying likely positive outcomes and areas for future detailed appraisal.
A more detailed assessment of wider economic benefits will be undertaken, considering potential impacts on investment, productivity and employment, with comparisons to similar schemes where relevant.
Timetable and Operational Feasibility
Additional consideration will be given to operational risks on the rail corridor and the implications of introducing a Corsham stop within an increasingly constrained timetable.
AtkinsRéalis will meet with Network Rail and GWR to discuss these risks.
Existing timetable analysis will be reviewed in light of current timetables and more recent studies, with any significant changes to previous conclusions recorded. No detailed timetable modelling is planned.
Funding and Development Support
The case will be updated to reflect discussions led by Wiltshire Council with potential third-party funders and clarify how external contributions could support delivery and operation of the station.
Further engagement with planning officers, developers and local stakeholders will be documented to demonstrate alignment with housing growth, regeneration and wider development objectives.
Stakeholder Support
The business case will be strengthened by incorporating evidence of support from key stakeholders, including relevant correspondence and endorsements.
Integration with Other Transport Modes
Greater emphasis will be placed on how the proposed station would connect with wider transport networks, including bus services, walking and cycling routes and links to surrounding communities.
Business Case and Carbon Updates
The case will be updated to reflect current Department for Transport business case guidance and policy requirements.
A high-level assessment of carbon impacts will be undertaken, alongside preparation of an outline Carbon Management Plan appropriate to this stage of development.
Overall, the work is designed to refresh and strengthen the existing Strategic Outline Case, improve its alignment with current guidance, provide up-to-date cost information, demonstrate wider benefits and reinforce the strategic and financial case for progressing the Corsham Station project to the next stage of development.
The work will focus on updating existing evidence and improving the business case rather than redesigning the scheme. It includes:
Costs and Financial Assessment
A full update of the station’s capital cost estimates will be undertaken, using the same station design and scope that formed the basis of the 2022 submission.
Operational cost assumptions will be reviewed using comparisons with similar stations, including consideration of different staffing models and day-to-day operating costs.
The economic case will be strengthened through clearer benchmarking against comparable stations, particularly in relation to passenger demand and wider travel impacts. No new demand modelling is proposed.
Wider Benefits Assessment
The SOC will include an enhanced qualitative assessment of the station’s environmental and social benefits, identifying likely positive outcomes and areas for future detailed appraisal.
A more detailed assessment of wider economic benefits will be undertaken, considering potential impacts on investment, productivity and employment, with comparisons to similar schemes where relevant.
Timetable and Operational Feasibility
Additional consideration will be given to operational risks on the rail corridor and the implications of introducing a Corsham stop within an increasingly constrained timetable.
AtkinsRéalis will meet with Network Rail and GWR to discuss these risks.
Existing timetable analysis will be reviewed in light of current timetables and more recent studies, with any significant changes to previous conclusions recorded. No detailed timetable modelling is planned.
Funding and Development Support
The case will be updated to reflect discussions led by Wiltshire Council with potential third-party funders and clarify how external contributions could support delivery and operation of the station.
Further engagement with planning officers, developers and local stakeholders will be documented to demonstrate alignment with housing growth, regeneration and wider development objectives.
Stakeholder Support
The business case will be strengthened by incorporating evidence of support from key stakeholders, including relevant correspondence and endorsements.
Integration with Other Transport Modes
Greater emphasis will be placed on how the proposed station would connect with wider transport networks, including bus services, walking and cycling routes and links to surrounding communities.
Business Case and Carbon Updates
The case will be updated to reflect current Department for Transport business case guidance and policy requirements.
A high-level assessment of carbon impacts will be undertaken, alongside preparation of an outline Carbon Management Plan appropriate to this stage of development.
Overall, the work is designed to refresh and strengthen the existing Strategic Outline Case, improve its alignment with current guidance, provide up-to-date cost information, demonstrate wider benefits and reinforce the strategic and financial case for progressing the Corsham Station project to the next stage of development.
https://www.corsham.gov.uk/amenities/railway-station/
| Re: UK population exceeds 60 million - BBC report, 24th August 2006 In "Campaigns for new and improved services" [378661/32402/28] Posted by TaplowGreen at 20:32, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
Why's that matter?
I think the demographics are as of much interest as the headline numbers, to help understand how society has changed.
| Re: RMT union plans rail strikes over train safety concerns at East Midlands Railway In "The Wider Picture in the United Kingdom" [378660/32266/51] Posted by John D at 20:11, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
I have just received the latest Modern Railways. It includes a detailed article by Roger Ford about the "issues" with the Class 810s. It makes quite sobering reading (and I have only glanced so far). In this case maybe the RMT are fully justified in refusing to work them when certain types of faults exist (listed in article - some appear to be "quite" safety critical).
The list of features not available during a reboot (or aux-on, aux-off reset to use EMR terminology) which takes 18-20 minutes is :
■ GSM-R communications
■ Doors interlock
■ Passenger communication systems
■ Fire detection systems
■ Public address and passenger information systems
■ CCTV recording
■ Train lighting Source: EMR instructions to staff
■ Doors interlock
■ Passenger communication systems
■ Fire detection systems
■ Public address and passenger information systems
■ CCTV recording
■ Train lighting Source: EMR instructions to staff
Of course many trains didn't have these features years ago, the 4VEP and 4CIG EMUs which were still being built in 1973, never had them when built. Some of these trains were still in use until about 20 years ago and number of these were never added.
| Network Rail sues companies for £5m over Llangennech derailment in August 2020 In "The Wider Picture in the United Kingdom" [378659/32406/51] Posted by Chris from Nailsea at 20:10, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
From the BBC:
Rail companies sued for £5m over oil spill caused by derailment

Ten of the 25 wagons derailed as a result of of the incident
Network Rail is suing two rail companies for more than £5m after a fuel spill caused by a train derailment threatened an "environmental disaster" at a designated site for protection.
The body filed a legal claim earlier this month against DB Cargo UK and Touax Rail over the derailment near Llangennech, Carmarthenshire, in August 2020.
The incident saw 10 wagons of the 25-wagon train derail, causing 446,000 litres of fuel to spill, and about 300 people had to leave the area due to the blaze.
In High Court documents, Network Rail claimed that the derailment occurred because the wagon had "not been maintained with reasonable care" and is seeking damages for negligence.
No one was injured, but 116,000 litres of fuel ignited while 330,000 litres drained into surrounding wetlands, which form part of a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and a Special Area of Conservation.
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) concluded in January 2022 that the derailment was caused by a set of wheels on one of the wagons locking, likely the result of a brake defect after "inadequate maintenance practices" were found in the investigation.
Network Rail, which owns, operates, maintains and develops Britain's railways, claimed that the derailment occurred because the wagon had "not been maintained with reasonable care" by Touax. It is also seeking damages from DB Cargo UK, claiming that the latter "breached a contractual duty to ensure that reasonable care was taken" in maintaining the wagon.
Lawyers for the body said it expected to recover "more than £5m" with DB Cargo and Touax yet to file defences. A hearing in the case is due to take place.
The locomotive was pulling the wagons from Milford Haven, Pembrokeshire, to Theale, near Reading, when the derailment occurred.
The line was closed for six months after the incident and did not fully reopen for almost a year, with 30,000 tonnes of fuel-soaked soil having to be excavated.
Bill Kelly, the then-Network Rail Wales route director, said when the line fully reopened in March 2021 that work following the incident was "one of the biggest environmental recovery operations Network Rail has ever been involved with". He added that the derailment could have caused a "total environmental disaster".
The RAIB said, in its 2022 report, that the train was travelling at about 38mph at the time of the derailment, and was carrying up to 75.5 tonnes of fuel. The RAIB did not establish blame or liability for the incident, but made nine recommendations to avoid similar accidents.
Network Rail and DB Cargo declined to comment, while Touax has been approached for comment.

Ten of the 25 wagons derailed as a result of of the incident
Network Rail is suing two rail companies for more than £5m after a fuel spill caused by a train derailment threatened an "environmental disaster" at a designated site for protection.
The body filed a legal claim earlier this month against DB Cargo UK and Touax Rail over the derailment near Llangennech, Carmarthenshire, in August 2020.
The incident saw 10 wagons of the 25-wagon train derail, causing 446,000 litres of fuel to spill, and about 300 people had to leave the area due to the blaze.
In High Court documents, Network Rail claimed that the derailment occurred because the wagon had "not been maintained with reasonable care" and is seeking damages for negligence.
No one was injured, but 116,000 litres of fuel ignited while 330,000 litres drained into surrounding wetlands, which form part of a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and a Special Area of Conservation.
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) concluded in January 2022 that the derailment was caused by a set of wheels on one of the wagons locking, likely the result of a brake defect after "inadequate maintenance practices" were found in the investigation.
Network Rail, which owns, operates, maintains and develops Britain's railways, claimed that the derailment occurred because the wagon had "not been maintained with reasonable care" by Touax. It is also seeking damages from DB Cargo UK, claiming that the latter "breached a contractual duty to ensure that reasonable care was taken" in maintaining the wagon.
Lawyers for the body said it expected to recover "more than £5m" with DB Cargo and Touax yet to file defences. A hearing in the case is due to take place.
The locomotive was pulling the wagons from Milford Haven, Pembrokeshire, to Theale, near Reading, when the derailment occurred.
The line was closed for six months after the incident and did not fully reopen for almost a year, with 30,000 tonnes of fuel-soaked soil having to be excavated.
Bill Kelly, the then-Network Rail Wales route director, said when the line fully reopened in March 2021 that work following the incident was "one of the biggest environmental recovery operations Network Rail has ever been involved with". He added that the derailment could have caused a "total environmental disaster".
The RAIB said, in its 2022 report, that the train was travelling at about 38mph at the time of the derailment, and was carrying up to 75.5 tonnes of fuel. The RAIB did not establish blame or liability for the incident, but made nine recommendations to avoid similar accidents.
Network Rail and DB Cargo declined to comment, while Touax has been approached for comment.
| Re: UK population exceeds 60 million - BBC report, 24th August 2006 In "Campaigns for new and improved services" [378658/32402/28] Posted by ChrisB at 19:52, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
Why's that matter?
| Re: UK population exceeds 60 million - BBC report, 24th August 2006 In "Campaigns for new and improved services" [378657/32402/28] Posted by TaplowGreen at 19:35, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
The BBC reported on 24th August 2006 that the UK population had exceeded 60 million - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5281360.stm . The report was from the Office Of National Statistics for the year ended 30th June 2005.
I have looked back - in 30 year increments
33,200,000 1876 (includes Ireland)
43,400,000 1906 (includes Ireland)
47,100,000 1936
54,600,000 1966 Railway modernisation as per the Beeching report
58,200,000 1996 Privatisation
70,000,000 2026 (guestimated as of 30th June)
At Sheffield Park on Saturday, I picked up an old timetable for British Rail's Western Region dated 1965, showing services on lines lost over following years. Some were - dire - in their frequency, not fast, and looking at the "diagrams" there were a lot of trains busy doing nothing for hours on end. I find myself wondering with a 28% increase in population since then, and modern environmental concerns at the inefficiency of modern cars for transporting people (not only fuel use, but congestion and the need for road and parking capacity) how different things might have been had the population been so much greater in those days.
I have looked back - in 30 year increments
33,200,000 1876 (includes Ireland)
43,400,000 1906 (includes Ireland)
47,100,000 1936
54,600,000 1966 Railway modernisation as per the Beeching report
58,200,000 1996 Privatisation
70,000,000 2026 (guestimated as of 30th June)
At Sheffield Park on Saturday, I picked up an old timetable for British Rail's Western Region dated 1965, showing services on lines lost over following years. Some were - dire - in their frequency, not fast, and looking at the "diagrams" there were a lot of trains busy doing nothing for hours on end. I find myself wondering with a 28% increase in population since then, and modern environmental concerns at the inefficiency of modern cars for transporting people (not only fuel use, but congestion and the need for road and parking capacity) how different things might have been had the population been so much greater in those days.
I wonder how many/what % of that number in 1966 were UK born, compared to today's figure.
| Re: Article: 'What's wrong with an empty bus' In "The Wider Picture in the United Kingdom" [378656/32404/51] Posted by grahame at 17:55, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
Turning this article over in the back of my mind for a bit.
https://humantransit.org/2020/04/whats-wrong-with-an-empty-bus.html
https://humantransit.org/2020/04/whats-wrong-with-an-empty-bus.html
This addresses so many of the questions that people wonder about.
| Pleasure boats, the Thames, and that tie-in with the railways In "Railway History and related topics" [378655/32405/55] Posted by Mark A at 17:40, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
Article in the Guardian, includes a chapter that's refreshingly honest on skiff camping, and the photo also includes the Salters pleasure boat 'Wargrave', built in 1913, which put me in mind of the passenger services that Salters ran on the Thames, many of which were tied in to railway services, allowing various one way trips to be taken.
At a time when there's likely to be a meticulously researched book on any small facet of the railway system, longer distance pleasure boat services on the Thames are a somewhat unexplored facet of transport. I've never come across a personal account of a trip on the very long running through service between Kingston and Oxford which lasted long after the majority of its passengers had disappeared.
I heard that what finally made this service and others struggle is that there was a change in policy at the Thames Conservancy - previously the Salters boats were given priority passage at locks, which allowed the services to maintain a timetable in the same way that you'd expect a bus or train to turn up on time, but after this was dropped and the services had to queue in turn at the locks, that did away with the punctuality.
https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2026/aug/23/my-best-ever-british-holiday
| Re: River Bann: Is it a bus? Is it a boat? The former Citybus taking to the water In "The Lighter Side" [378654/32396/30] Posted by Mark A at 17:29, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
At one time there was a swan on that reach whose attitude was beyond terrible: understandably he had come to the conclusion that boats were the absolute worst and anything with sculls was directing threat-signals at him. A tactic was to start a half flying half running approach from about 150 yards followed by a heavy landing at the stern of whatever had threatened him. Intimidating, especially when he overshot.
Mark
| Article: 'What's wrong with an empty bus' In "The Wider Picture in the United Kingdom" [378653/32404/51] Posted by Mark A at 17:21, 24th August 2026 Already liked by JohnM | ![]() |
Turning this article over in the back of my mind for a bit.
https://humantransit.org/2020/04/whats-wrong-with-an-empty-bus.html
| Re: IET's question In "Your rights and redress" [378652/32398/6] Posted by Chris from Nailsea at 17:07, 24th August 2026 Already liked by IndustryInsider | ![]() |
Thanks, as ever, for your very detailed and helpful reply here, IndustryInsider.

Chris from Nailsea.

| Re: IET's question In "Your rights and redress" [378651/32398/6] Posted by IndustryInsider at 16:56, 24th August 2026 Already liked by Mark A | ![]() |
In terms of route clearance for passenger services, I've attached a screenshot of the latest GWR IET Operational Restrictions file which should help.
You can also find more detail in the National Electronic Sectional Appendix at:
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/industry-and-commercial/information-for-operators/national-electronic-sectional-appendix/
There's a whole section on route clearances for different types of traction in each of the seven areas of Great Britain. In the document for the Western and Wales region it starts on Page 709. Though rather interestingly the Class 80x IET units are not included for some reason, but if you search for 'Class 80x' or 'IET' you will find lots of individual entries, usually in the Local Instructions section (starting on Page 866).
I have just received the latest Modern Railways. It includes a detailed article by Roger Ford about the "issues" with the Class 810s. It makes quite sobering reading (and I have only glanced so far). In this case maybe the RMT are fully justified in refusing to work them when certain types of faults exist (listed in article - some appear to be "quite" safety critical).
| Re: Sunday 23/08/26 - No Crosscountry services In "Cross Country services" [378649/32397/43] Posted by IndustryInsider at 16:24, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
What no one has considered is what they would have done in the case of an emergency - dealing with fatalities/derailment for example without a control would simply fall apart.
I very much considered it in post #7 yesterday!
| Re: Sunday 23/08/26 - No Crosscountry services In "Cross Country services" [378648/32397/43] Posted by broadgage at 16:15, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
What no one has considered is what they would have done in the case of an emergency - dealing with fatalities/derailment for example without a control would simply fall apart.
Surely the main response to an emergency is by the ambulance service and the police force and possibly also the fire brigade, all of whom were working normally, and could be called by any passengers, staff, or passers by. Clearing the line of any debris is done by network rail, again without any need for the TOC control.
| Re: Open foot access to tracks. In "The Wider Picture in the United Kingdom" [378647/32403/51] Posted by ChrisB at 16:04, 24th August 2026 Already liked by grahame | ![]() |
1. Network Rail should be fencing the rail boundary.
2. Network Rail would have been a consultee on the planning permission application.
3.Unfortunately not.
| Open foot access to tracks. In "The Wider Picture in the United Kingdom" [378646/32403/51] Posted by RailCornwall at 15:42, 24th August 2026 | ![]() |
I don't want a pile on on this one and I am being deliberately tangential so the actual case isn't revealed.
Previous Situation.
1. Main GWML runs through countryside with unfenced track.
2. Nearby business open for years within their own well contained grounds.
Happy coexistence.
Change in situation.
1. Business expands, lawfully with required planning consent, resulting in its containment being lost.
2. As a result of de-containment access now possible for customers via third party owned countryside from business premises to open GWML track.
Questions.
1. Who should be dealing with this situation?
2. Should planning have addressed this issue when deliberating granting the changes to the premises?
3. Does anyone have other examples of this type of issue?
I really get on with this business but the issue is there and it needs addressing before there is an incident. I will need a lot of tactical forethought before moving to report the matter.
Guidance welcomed.
15:14 Swindon - Westbury cancelled because of a safety inspection of the track earlier today
Sadly, not jiust thay one
14:18 Westbury to Swindon due 15:01
15:14 Swindon to Westbury due 15:58
16:23 Westbury to Swindon due 17:06
17:45 Swindon to Westbury due 18:26
17:45 Swindon to Westbury due 18:26 will be cancelled.
This is due to a safety inspection of the track earlier today.
15:14 Swindon to Westbury due 15:58
16:23 Westbury to Swindon due 17:06
17:45 Swindon to Westbury due 18:26
17:45 Swindon to Westbury due 18:26 will be cancelled.
This is due to a safety inspection of the track earlier today.
And has me wondering why an earlier safety inspection causes cancellations so many hours later.
15:14 Swindon - Westbury cancelled because of a safety inspection of the track earlier today
| Re: River Bann: Is it a bus? Is it a boat? The former Citybus taking to the water In "The Lighter Side" [378643/32396/30] Posted by GBM at 13:58, 24th August 2026 Already liked by Mark A | ![]() |
I note that the Windsor venture involves a new-build amphibus, can't think why.
Mark
Hey! We didn't sink or wreck it Mark

More amphibus than usual needing repair perhaps!
13:14 Swindon to Westbury due 13:57
13:14 Swindon to Westbury due 13:57 is being delayed at Swindon.
This is due to a fault with the signalling system.
13:14 Swindon to Westbury due 13:57 is being delayed at Swindon.
This is due to a fault with the signalling system.














