+- North East Buses (https://northeastbuses.co.uk/forums)
+-- Forum: Other Forms of Transport (https://northeastbuses.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Forum: Railways (https://northeastbuses.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Trains (/showthread.php?tid=322)
RE: Trains - Andreos1 - 19 Aug 2015
(18 Aug 2015, 9:44 pm)northern156 And just hours later (after reporting the same story this morning) Sky report this:
http://news.sky.com/story/1537669/rail-refunds-for-delays-of-just-two-minutes
And we wonder why...!
(18 Aug 2015, 9:53 pm)aureolin Typical Government. Capping something that's already too high. Restricting it to inflation isn't going to correct all those years of inflation busting price hikes.
On the point of refunds. Two minutes is ridiculous in my opinion. I'd say anything over 30 mins maybe? That shouldn't stop operators from issuing discretionary refunds, say if someones journey is constantly 10 mins late.
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/8003970?1439910687
Small fry compared to some of the profits being made by 'British' companies - but shows up the system for what it is.
RE: Trains - citaro5284 - 19 Aug 2015
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/11810857/A-state-owned-railway-would-be-a-costly-mistake.html
A state-owned railway would be a costly mistake
RE: Trains - Adrian - 19 Aug 2015
(19 Aug 2015, 5:38 pm)citaro5284 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/11810857/A-state-owned-railway-would-be-a-costly-mistake.html
A state-owned railway would be a costly mistake
"But the most important and possibly overlooked point is that even if billions of hard-earned taxpayer’s cash was to be squandered on this politically motivated project, the UK still wouldn’t be immune from competition."
I couldn't help but smile at the irony of this statement.
A conservative/centre-right newspaper too, so the opinion piece (not an editorial) is no real surprise. It's a bit like asking the Morning Star to write a piece on Socialism...
RE: Trains - northern156 - 19 Aug 2015
I don't understand why people wanting the railways publically owned again want it.
"Oh because it worked fine when it was British Rail" isn't going to work; to go back to that would mean one whole load of changes in the industry. Even then, in my opinion it will just fall apart as you lose the competition. Prices will no doubt rise (given it would be at least part-owned by George Osborne and his chums, that's a given anyway) and people will once again complain.
RE: Trains - Adrian - 19 Aug 2015
(19 Aug 2015, 7:12 pm)northern156 I don't understand why people wanting the railways publically owned again want it.
"Oh because it worked fine when it was British Rail" isn't going to work; to go back to that would mean one whole load of changes in the industry. Even then, in my opinion it will just fall apart as you lose the competition. Prices will no doubt rise (given it would be at least part-owned by George Osborne and his chums, that's a given anyway) and people will once again complain.
It's about people before profit for me. Or should that be people before funding other countries nationalised railways?
I also find that the argument is always made of how complicated it'll be to renationalise a public service, yet the private profiteers don't have much complaint when it comes to privatising an industry.
RE: Trains - Andreos1 - 19 Aug 2015
(19 Aug 2015, 7:12 pm)northern156 I don't understand why people wanting the railways publically owned again want it.
"Oh because it worked fine when it was British Rail" isn't going to work; to go back to that would mean one whole load of changes in the industry. Even then, in my opinion it will just fall apart as you lose the competition. Prices will no doubt rise (given it would be at least part-owned by George Osborne and his chums, that's a given anyway) and people will once again complain.
Back in the 70's and 80's, subsidy was a dirty word.
The Government and media (similar to the outcry over benefits we see and hear now), made sure that everyone knew how much the public purse was supporting the public railways.
Fast forward 40 or so years, and those subsidies still exist.
Except it isn't a dirty word, despite those public funds are now supporting the privatised railways.
We were all told in 91 (or whenever it was), that privatisation of the railways will lead to competition, lower prices and the end of subsidies.
However, it hasn't happened like that.
Millions of pounds are still pouring in to the private sector - see link and spreadsheets (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rail-subsidy-per-passenger-mile).
There is very little competition - just look at who operates on the WCML, ECML and Midland Mainline as well as the main player in the home counties/London.
Prices are rising annually, well above wages.
Look at the success story that was East Coast. The figures are in the spreadsheet.
If the bar can be set, to the standard set over the last few years with EC, why shouldn't it be renationalised?
Our pennies can be reinvested into the railways - and not sent off to whichever Island Branson lives, Holland, France or Germany.
edit: It may be worth comparing the link I put up yesterday about foreign ownership and compare it to those getting the biggest subsidies too.
RE: Trains - northern156 - 19 Aug 2015
I do understand and respect both of your posts' points.
However, money has to be a key part for any business. Any cut in money coming in can be pretty detrimental (not just to CEO bonuses) but to the services and quality of service provided.
I fully agree with reducing top leaders' bonuses etc. - however this is a finite resource to pump back into the companies.
I also agree with it being wrong that UK passengers are subsidising Deutsche Bahn, Govia, Keolis etc abroad. However this will probably not be a large percentage of the money earned; most going straight back into running costs or improvements.
Regarding the monopoly on the railways - the way I see it is that bidders who gained the franchises won them fair and square. If they also have other franchises, good play to them. I don't see the reasoning behind keeping them back from growth and expansion (like what the likes of Virgin want to do, and have done) just because they already have other business.
Regarding East Coast. Note this was a publically-owned operator which ran in a privatised industry. Yes it shows that money earned can go pretty much back into the railways, however it'd probably still be feeding some snotty-nosed specky man who works high up in Government first.
I don't believe the renationalisation will solve more problems; more so it will create more. It won't be a short-term solution for value for money (ie fares keeping/going down) with all of the work and payouts that will have to be made; nor will it be long-term as with the lack of competition and with George Osborne in charge of the kitty, we may see less maintenance and higher prices for the passengers and indeed taxpayer.
All above are my views btw.
Trains - Adrian - 19 Aug 2015
Interesting point about franchises being classed as competition, because it's apparently anti competitive when it comes to QCS? It'd be interesting to see which one it is, according to the operators.
The profit I was referring to was exactly that. Operating costs would already be taken into account of at that point, otherwise the TOC would be paying unnecessary tax. For example, I read something earlier that had Arriva down as making £12.9m in (declared) profit from CrossCountry in 2012. Not bad for providing a poor customer experience.
RE: Trains - Andreos1 - 19 Aug 2015
(19 Aug 2015, 10:03 pm)aureolin Interesting point about franchises being classed as competition, because it's apparently anti competitive when it comes to QCS? It'd be interesting to see which one it is, according to the operators.Whilst in the same period, obtaining 16.3p per passenger mile, in subsidies.
The profit I was referring to was exactly that. Operating costs would already be taken into account of at that point, otherwise the TOC would be paying unnecessary tax. For example, I read something earlier that had Arriva down as making £12.9m in (declared) profit from CrossCountry in 2012. Not bad for providing a poor customer experience.
On top of paying the leasing companies their chunk too.
Something is wrong there like...
RE: Trains - northern156 - 19 Aug 2015
Admittedly I've not been up-to-date with QCS however if decisions are essentially going through one body, being the local councils; it's not competitive as QCS does what it wants with the prices and operators; therefore making the market as equal as it can possibly be. While this is good for passengers (some could be drawn to use the bus with the scheme introduced) this offers very little leeway to challenge other operators.
It's a fine figure; I don't imagine all (or even most) customer experiences are negative with AXC however. Bear in mind that AXC operate across some routes that others don't - or at least without changing trains/operators (Birmingham to Leeds direct for example). It's been noted before that because of this uniqueness of the routes, they can set their own prices for certain journeys. This is usually why I find AXC so overpriced (although they seem to have made the mistake of carrying this over onto other competitive routes such as the ECML [therefore this indicates their target market is more long-distance travellers rather than short-hoppers]) for what they provide.
Going from my above point (now I've thought of a scenario to picture it) it is essential that competition stays (I imagine VTEC or TPE get more sales Newcastle - York than AXC. This means cheaper [advance] fares for passengers but more custom for operators) as, otherwise, the single operator can charge what they like, therefore potentially decreasing custom. Less money into the pot = less money coming out for customer service, staffing, maintenance etc. This could then result in higher fares or higher tax to cover the likes of maintenance and what would be the salaries of public sector workers.
RE: Trains - 8222 - 22 Aug 2015
(19 Aug 2015, 10:17 pm)northern156 Admittedly I've not been up-to-date with QCS however if decisions are essentially going through one body, being the local councils; it's not competitive as QCS does what it wants with the prices and operators; therefore making the market as equal as it can possibly be. While this is good for passengers (some could be drawn to use the bus with the scheme introduced) this offers very little leeway to challenge other operators.
It's a fine figure; I don't imagine all (or even most) customer experiences are negative with AXC however. Bear in mind that AXC operate across some routes that others don't - or at least without changing trains/operators (Birmingham to Leeds direct for example). It's been noted before that because of this uniqueness of the routes, they can set their own prices for certain journeys. This is usually why I find AXC so overpriced (although they seem to have made the mistake of carrying this over onto other competitive routes such as the ECML [therefore this indicates their target market is more long-distance travellers rather than short-hoppers]) for what they provide.
Going from my above point (now I've thought of a scenario to picture it) it is essential that competition stays (I imagine VTEC or TPE get more sales Newcastle - York than AXC. This means cheaper [advance] fares for passengers but more custom for operators) as, otherwise, the single operator can charge what they like, therefore potentially decreasing custom. Less money into the pot = less money coming out for customer service, staffing, maintenance etc. This could then result in higher fares or higher tax to cover the likes of maintenance and what would be the salaries of public sector workers.
I've used CrossCountry a fair few times as I did my undergrad and post-grad degrees at the University of Sheffield. I have to say, they seem to be a lot more competitively priced on the Newcastle-York stretch now. What I used to do, and still do do, to save money, is to travel from Sunderland - York on a Grand Central open then book a Cross Country ticket from York - Sheffield. Shaves off a fair bit of money, and if you're willing to give up an extra 30 mins, it can be well worth it.
RE: Trains - 8222 - 22 Aug 2015
(22 Aug 2015, 10:32 am)8222 I've used CrossCountry a fair few times as I did my undergrad and post-grad degrees at the University of Sheffield. I have to say, they seem to be a lot more competitively priced on the Newcastle-York stretch now. What I used to do, and still do do, to save money, is to travel from Sunderland - York on a Grand Central open then book a Cross Country ticket from York - Sheffield. Shaves off a fair bit of money, and if you're willing to give up an extra 30 mins, it can be well worth it.
And in 5 years of using CrossCountry on a regular basis, yes, their trains smell a bit funny (unless you're lucky enough to get an HST) but I've always found them alright and 9 times out of 10, to be on time. Now and again I would use East Coast from Newcastle - Doncaster and change and I always seemed to arrive about 8-10 minutes late. Speaking of which, it will be interesting to see the new franchise's on time performance. As a regular user of Grand Central, we always seem to be held up by a VTEC train running late.
RE: Trains - South Tyne Lad - 22 Aug 2015
(22 Aug 2015, 10:37 am)8222 And in 5 years of using CrossCountry on a regular basis, yes, their trains smell a bit funny (unless you're lucky enough to get an HST) but I've always found them alright and 9 times out of 10, to be on time. Now and again I would use East Coast from Newcastle - Doncaster and change and I always seemed to arrive about 8-10 minutes late. Speaking of which, it will be interesting to see the new franchise's on time performance. As a regular user of Grand Central, we always seem to be held up by a VTEC train running late.
Because VTEC and Cross-country have more of what I think are called Traffic Rights than Grand Central and also Hull Trains because VTEC and Crosscountry are government franchises which the governments pours money into, The Tories will not waste money on late running franchises.
If you buy tickets for VTEC and Crosscountry a certain amount of money made from that ticket goes to the government whilst if you buy a ticket with GC or Hull Trains which are Open Access operators, most of the money made goes to Arriva who own GC and the rest to Network Rail for the train paths.
so you may be getting a ticket for quite a bit less than VTEC on a service to Kings Cross but you will never make it there before the VTEC, even if the VTEC is running late.
RE: Trains - northern156 - 23 Aug 2015
(22 Aug 2015, 6:57 pm)South Tyne Lad Because VTEC and Cross-country have more of what I think are called Traffic Rights than Grand Central and also Hull Trains because VTEC and Crosscountry are government franchises which the governments pours money into, The Tories will not waste money on late running franchises.
If you buy tickets for VTEC and Crosscountry a certain amount of money made from that ticket goes to the government whilst if you buy a ticket with GC or Hull Trains which are Open Access operators, most of the money made goes to Arriva who own GC and the rest to Network Rail for the train paths.
so you may be getting a ticket for quite a bit less than VTEC on a service to Kings Cross but you will never make it there before the VTEC, even if the VTEC is running late.
Politics has absolutely nothing to do with certain operators' services running late.
Bearing in mind that the various signalboxes along the ECML are mostly computer-ran, that makes most of the decisions.
Not sure on exactly how it works. Say if train A is 4 minutes late and B is right time, it'll either hold train A for train B to be right-time still or it'll hold train B for train A to not lose more minutes. My money is on the latter because a train doesn't get counted as 'late' (thus no fines) if, being an express service, it arrives at its destination no more than 10 minutes late.
You're almost correct with the other statement about open access operations. However the money to Network Rail includes much more than pathing. It's track access, maintenance, signallers and also fines (for every minute other TOCs suffer because of your delay you pay the price).
RE: Trains - Andreos1 - 26 Aug 2015
http://data.transportfocus.org.uk/train/complaints/tocs/
An interesting read, if you have spare time.
It can be drilled.down by clicking on each co and then looking at the complaints.
RE: Trains - Adrian - 26 Aug 2015
Interesting opinion piece on rail fares...
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/commentisfree/2015/aug/25/german-student-swapped-flat-for-train-ticket-rich-masochist-in-uk?CMP=fb_gu
RE: Trains - abellgilbert45 - 31 Aug 2015
(19 Jun 2013, 9:18 am)Andreos1 Probably the best place to put this: www.passengerfocus.org.uk/research/national-passenger-survey-introduction
A link to the spring National Rail Passenger survey
The article is interesting about the survey to get the information about the people thinking.
RE: Trains - abellgilbert45 - 02 Sep 2015
The government of Pakistan is also working to renew the railway station and they are including the modern technology for their stations as well as they are going to but new model trains for the railway tracks so make their infrastructure strong. They not only working hard within the country but also trying to make their infrastructure stronger to connect with the Asian countries. I think it is the best platform to discuss about it. I am also sharing a post in which you can read this complete information.
http://luxurygates.pk/2015/08/pakistan-railway-plans-to-connect-with-gwadar-port/
RE: Trains - Michael - 04 Sep 2015
Wasn't sure where to put it so i'll put it here:
National Rail -
A signalling problem at Darlington is causing major disruption to journeys through the stations.
Trains cannot run between York and Newcastle.
Alternative transport is being arranged but there is currently no estimated time of arrival.
Northern Rail services between Saltburn / Middlesbrough and Bishop Auckland cannot run between Middlesbrough and Bishops Auckland.
There is no firm estimate yet of how long disruption will last but it is likely to continue until at least 20:00.
RE: Trains - tyresmoke - 04 Sep 2015
(04 Sep 2015, 4:45 pm)Michael Wasn't sure where to put it so i'll put it here:
National Rail -
A signalling problem at Darlington is causing major disruption to journeys through the stations.
Trains cannot run between York and Newcastle.
Alternative transport is being arranged but there is currently no estimated time of arrival.
Northern Rail services between Saltburn / Middlesbrough and Bishop Auckland cannot run between Middlesbrough and Bishops Auckland.
There is no firm estimate yet of how long disruption will last but it is likely to continue until at least 20:00.
Croft Coach Travel & M&D Travel are out covering for Northern according to their journeycheck