Having them staffed by teachers makes them sound more like a private school halt, but it is a very good idea and having seen the chaos caused by bus companies who refuse to run more than an hourly bus in contempt of traffic created by school children, who then attempt to crush load a bus in an attempt to avoid waiting another hour to home, when a disused railway trackbed runs immediately behind the school field, so I couldn’t agree more. The station could also be used by more passengers including parents on parents evening or teachers to get home for example.
When a school is located somewhere similar to Lancaster University, e.g. adjacent to the WCML but otherwise not much else, why couldn’t a station be provided on a loop with land taken from the school to allow it to be served without stopping trains blocking the main line?
This will be because current teachers are oblivious to the fact that the school was entitled to direct access to the station before it originally closed.
Wouldn't it just be cheaper to pay the bus company to provide another bus [if the school traffic is insufficient to pay for it?], than to spend millions on a new halt (Soham cost £14m?) or even worse a reinstated line??
Not so, and it wouldn't be their decision anyway. That would for the Governors, and they definitely knew; the engagement events took place at the school, for one thing.
I was just about to say something similar! By far the better, and cheaper, way. Brockenhurst College, a few miles up the line from me, has a lot of students that travel by train, some from a reasonable distance. Back in the day, after we were electrified down here, the stopping services were a 4-VEP - at 'school' times this was strengthened with a 2-HAP. Current practice is a normal service train, given that none of the 'students' appear to be 'at school' all day. Having said that, a Weymouth 0725/Brockenhurst 0852 service does run (2W26) - very well loaded. Prior to Covid, this was a useful connection for me into the 1M34 0845 Bournemouth/Manchester.
1. Outside a few special cases (such as the Cambrian) I suspect there are very few schools where any significant number of pupils would travel by train.
Yes I agree but that requires sense. Because of car culture demand will be created away from public transport routes. Town centres are thus becoming marginalised.
So there is no point providing rail access to schools when school children don’t travel by train, when the only reason school children aren’t travelling by train is because there is no rail access to schools…
Having spoken to a headteacher about his negotiations with Arriva on this issue, the bus companies will simply refuse to provide any increased service for any price even after acknowledging that their present service is inadequate and even unsafe for the level of demand created by a school, so it may actually be cheaper to build a private branch line for a few hundred feet from the main station to serve the school than continue negotiations with a bus company based in Germany.
There are no capacity issues on the main line if the school has its own infrastructure. If there are concerns about it being destroyed then simply build it well enough that it can’t be destroyed by school children. Is there absolutely nothing that was done better (or more sustainably) in the past?
If the governors are equally oblivious to the benefits to society of rail transport then that is even worse.
What power do schools have over local bus services who see school children as a nuisance rather than regular passengers?
It's a little bit cheeky to accuse 2 different posters of 2 different opinions of hypocrisy. Read my full post. The majority of Schools don't have a catchment area that lines up with a train line.
At what cost? And who would pay? A loop would be north of £20m even without the platform, rather a lot for something in use twice a day less than 75% of the year.
Governors who are realistic about where the students come from are being very mindful of the benefits to society access to a rail station would bring. Also, school security and safety has changed massively since the access was originally provided - it may well be that providing a back gate would have been a huge risk if either kids getting out or anauthorised people getting in.
Depends who specifies the contract. But between the school and the Local Authority extra buses could be run.
That misses the point that it's all well and good having a station next to a school, but if there's no station near their home why would they bother getting the train? School catchment areas are not linear spreads along nearby railway lines. The % of pupils that would find such a station useful must be pretty small surely?
You can't be serious. Building a branch line and station, any works at the main station (new junction, or platform?), providing rolling stock to an appropriate standard and maintaining it to the standards demanded by ORR, crewing the unit and meeting Network Rail regulations if you want to run on the national network into the existing station? It'd be cheaper to buy a couple of buses and employ part-time drivers.
If you're planning a branch line into an existing station with no new platforms you'd need to get a path over a junction into the station, and find platform occupancy time. If you put a station on a loop on an existing line, is it an existing service that stops or a new service that needs a path? Is there space for it to get into and out of the loop without delaying following trains?
They can run their own bus services if they so wish (see the Grammar School at Leeds for an example of this). It'd be cheaper and actually take people where they wanted to go.
Schools tend to be scattered around the country within the communities that they serve. Many schools will not accept children that live further away. So the children do not have far to travel to/from home. It is most likely that the distances travelled are walking distances - although the parents may unfortunately prefer to use the car for that !. For children living further from the school the bus or mini bus will be more appropriate.
Correct.
But no point if the train is not fulfilling the transport need. far more likely to get take up of bus use.
Sadly very few Train Operating Companies are British.
I do not think you understand how the railways operate. A lot of railway lines are running at capacity (OK ignoring Covid) Adding a station reduces capacity a lot if all the other trains are not stopping there - even if the platform is on a loop.
I recommend the school run their own busses. The roads are free for use and the kids live along some of the roads that will be used.
I suspect that all has not been revealed to you! The Headteacher could approach another bus company too. Why would these bus companies refuse to provide additional capacity for any price ? I suspect any price or anywhere near it has not been offered
Demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of what teachers do. However much I love railways I do not want to spend part of my working day supervising a platform, I have enough to do in the classroom, planning and marking to keep me in school 11 hours a day! How do some of the railway staff on this forum feel about doing some classroom teaching as an add on to their job?
Agreed. The larger catchment areas will be in rural areas, where the railway is already sparse or conversely already meeting the need as outlined in examples above.
Really? Bus companies are run by professional traffic managers with the appropriate qualifications. Buses are driven by drivers with suitable training and qualification. Teachers have neither of these skill sets. Do you want your children driven by unqualified staff, most of whom would probably be knackered after a day teaching? Think back to the M40 minibus crash in the 1990s to see what can happen when teachers moonlight as bus drivers!
Really? A small minority of students meet your criteria. The vast majority are decent human beings. Be nice to them, they will be your future colleagues and / or paying taxes to fund your state pension and healthcare as you get older!
I'm closer to their age than most on here
. My experience at secondary school c.10-15 years ago was it was about 10-50 out of a school of 800-1000 that had the smash it up mentality, but it only needs to be a tiny minority for it to add up to huge costs forever replacing platform furniture.
Two things. Firstly, people seem to be confusing "schools" and "teachers". If a school wanted to provide meals they'd employ catering staff - not get the teachers to do it!
Obviously the school bus is not going to be driven by a teacher. If it is a normal bus then the law dictates that the driver be qualified for such a vehicle. I am not saying the school staff do the whole job but just that the school organises the service for themselves. At least then the school can see and manage the costs for themselves.
Only takes one apple to spoil the bunch.
It is why the roads are so bad at school starting/finishing times. I notice a dramatic improvement in traffic when the schools are closed. But it would cause class timetabling problems. I know designing a timetable for a secondary school is very complicated - my mother had that pleasure for a decade or two.
It is true that it only takes a minority of negative to paint a picture that is not 100% fair. Also I the damage is done then it does not matter if 99% did not do it.I'm closer to their age than most on here
