Extra Virgin West Coast services rejected by NR

[The Planner]

"Paths worked" presumably means "Paths complied with the Timetable Planning Rules". If this is the case, it would be interesting to know exactly what the Route were unhappy with.

More trains equals more risk which is the case with any timetable. The route was obviously not prepared to take on that risk, but to my knowledge im not aware of any modelling that suggests that this was the straw that would break the camels back.

 

[tbtc]

I think Blackpool may have a stronger business case. Extra Warrington-Crewe services are needed, while the Scottish Pendolinos carry a lot of local traffic so moving that on to other services can reduce any overcrowding and speed up journey times between Scotland and London, if some stops can be omitted.

At least putting 390s on the Birmingham - Scotland services should add a good bit of extra capacity for those local passengers

 

[Gareth Marston]

Illogical choice of way to do it anyway, operationally it has to be an extended EBW service.

 

[Eagle]

Illogical choice of way to do it anyway, operationally it has to be an extended EBW service.

But as mentioned earlier that would require replacing a Pendolino with a Voyager, which is certainly not a good idea.

 

[Tramfan]

Blackpool services have been rejected as well.

Blackpool’s dream of a direct rail link to London is in tatters after Network Rail refused Virgin’s application.


In a move that has outraged MPs, businessmen and councillors, the country’s rail operator claims the west coast main line is already too busy and could not accommodate extra routes.

Link

 

[cjp]

Then there would be no track access charges to collect so where would the business (Network Rail) get any money from?

As now from you and me as taxpayers financing the governments direct subsidy?

 

[Pumbaa]

Not going to comment further (and can't for various obvious reasons) but Virgin do have a right to be slightly miffed by what has occurred with this in my opinion.

Subject to the wonderful new social media policy (ahem) I get the feeling that this has been slightly, err, cooked. Like you say, all worked swimmingly and DafT had been very supportive and pleased it was progressing. The excuses being wheeled out feel politically motivated and flimsy at best (personal opinion).

 

[Quakers Yard]

Bring back WSR!

 

[Goatboy]

Yes, there are paths there, however, when the brown sticky stuff hits the fan, NR would rather have those paths free, in order to speed up service recovery and reduce the overall delay minutes.

Who benefits from not running services to reduce the chance of delay minutes? Passengers?

 

[SkinnyDave]

It seems a bit interesting the timing of these rejections after network rail get notification of Virgins legal action.
Next thing is Virgins negotiations for 135mph will be dismissed out of hand very soon.
Network Rail better be up for a fight if Virgin put their PR machine into automatic gearbox as they will lose in my opinion!
But then again Virgin may not have to as other people ie people wanting these services may see it as toys been thrown out of the pram by NR.

 

[Whistler40145]

Would Network Rail have made a totally different decision had First Group been awarded the WCML franchise?

If yes, are Network Rail just been bloody minded?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[SkinnyDave]

It seems a bit interesting the timing of these rejections after network rail get notification of Virgins legal action.
Next thing is Virgins negotiations for 135mph will be dismissed out of hand very soon.
Network Rail better be up for a fight if Virgin put their PR machine into automatic gearbox as they will lose in my opinion!
But then again Virgin may not have to as other people ie people wanting these services may see it as toys been thrown out of the pram by NR.

I can see Branson going down the log flumes on his Blackpool to Euston service campaign in my mind

 

[The Planner]

I seriously doubt it, this is about perceived perfomance, not the colour of the train.

 

[Whistler40145]

So does this now mean Blackpool to Preston has in the future an electrified line, but never a direct service to London?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Eagle]

So does this now mean Blackpool to Preston has in the future an electrified line, but never a direct service to London?

There are lots of places around the country where that is the case.

 

[Whistler40145]

So couldn't a current Euston or Birmingham to Preston service be extended through to Blackpool instead of trying to provide an extra path, or am I just being daft?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Goatboy]

So does this now mean Blackpool to Preston has in the future an electrified line, but never a direct service to London?

As long as passengers have electric trains, it doesn't really matter where they go. Because all that really matters is getting wires up, right?

 

[Philip Elliott]

So couldn't a current Euston or Birmingham to Preston service be extended through to Blackpool instead of trying to provide an extra path, or am I just being daft?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

There is only the 20.30 & 21.10 off Euston SX to Preston - too late.

 

[Starmill]

As long as passengers have electric trains, it doesn't really matter where they go. Because all that really matters is getting wires up, right?

Steady on! The wires are coming, you aren't expecting new trains for them as well are you!? And as for new destinations as well!? Pah!

 

[Goatboy]

The best thing about the wires going up is the great new low fares everyone will get as a result of the reduced operating costs of electric trains (reduced operating costs are the primary driver for electrification on non high speed rail lines).

 

[moggie]

Presumably NR don't give a stuff about service recovery if the original problem is attributed to TOC/FOC delay minutes?

So I assume what NR are getting bothered about is their ability to make use of 'spare' paths to use in service recovery, thus minimising delay minutes when it's the infrastucture that's gone nap.

So how many paths / hour are truly spare for use or just reserved for use for service recovery purposes. Pehaps more interestingly, do NR have free reign to allocate 'paths' for this puropse and who has the power to decide if NR are being reasonable if they choose to adjust their risk profile by reserving (or even removing) paths at the expense of train operators rather than allocating them? Anyone ITK care to explain?

One things for sure, it will all turn ugly and help no one, least of all the TOC's who are by no means perfect. And there was I thinking NR's big new thing was all about collaberation. If the net result of the DA system and VT's lawyers are the behaviours now being reported it's going to implode. I wonder what government does then???

 

[Masbroughlad]

A very sad and short sighted decision. Surely train planners have all the information when proposing such a service?

More innovation and new ideas binned!

Working in Shrewsbury and Telford, we definitely need more through trains. Will this ever happen now?

 

[HSTEd]

So Virgin takes Network Rail to court because it claims that infrastructure on the WCML is not up to standard, simultaneously Virgin wants NR to provide additional paths for it, putting yet more strain on the infrastructure and on the available recovery capability.

You couldn't make this up.

 

[The Planner]

Could you not argue though that if the infrastructure was in a better situation than it is that it could cope with the extra use? Surely that is what Virgin is on about? As people have already mentioned, i think this now leads to the chat about if the WCML south is now full, or whether the paths could be released once a better handle on the infrastructure has happened.

 

[merlodlliw]

A very sad and short sighted decision. Surely train planners have all the information when proposing such a service?

More innovation and new ideas binned!

Working in Shrewsbury and Telford, we definitely need more through trains. Will this ever happen now?

I expected the Blackpool service to get the same treatment as the Shrewsbury by NR.

It is bizarre why NR have left it to now, when I know at meetings of stakeholders NR staff present could have killed the service from Shrewsbury months ago.
It is also strange on the very day NR received the letter from ORR (cut your costs etc or else)) NR give flimsy reasons for saying no,VT & Stakeholders only went ahead on the positive messages from NR staff at stakeholders meetings in Shrewsbury, my source for this comes from stakeholders feedback to SCRUA.

 

[Goatboy]

Have NR considered disallowing the running of any trains at all? This would be the obvious answer to the problem of precious delay minutes.

 

[junglejames]

Not going to comment further (and can't for various obvious reasons) but Virgin do have a right to be slightly miffed by what has occurred with this in my opinion.

I dont know that they do. No doubt if they hadnt threatened legal action, then NR would have had no problem. This makes perfect sense to me. I myself would be miffed if NR did allow the extra service.

 

[anthony263]

Pity the line to Shrewsbury isnt wired maybe then London Midland could run a class 350 on the Shrewsbury - Birmingham local services as well as a few faster services per day which continue to London after attaching to one of London Midlands Birmingham - London services.

Its a pity there isnt any room for Chiltern to run some of their services to Shrewsbury again especially with the Chiltern line having been upgraded. If Shrewsbury wants direct trains to London, maybe a 5 carriage IEP attaching to another 5 carriage unit at Newport. (This is meant as a joke )

 

[junglejames]

Would Network Rail have made a totally different decision had First Group been awarded the WCML franchise?

If yes, are Network Rail just been bloody minded?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

They may well have made a different decision, but thats not the point. Virgin want to sue NR for perceived poor performance. Some of the reasons given by Virgin seemingly quite unfair. So obviously this must be Virgin saying that they want NR to do more, not less. Virgin should have been the ones to scrap plans for the extra services. The fact they didnt shows they expect everything given to them, but to give nothing back in return.

First Group have not threatened unfair legal action. They seemingly fairly happy. So no reason to scrap a Shrewsbury plan if it is them wanting it.

You cannot expect to threaten legal action, asking for NR to do more to improve performance, then complain when they give themselves the breathing space to do more. It wont exactly look good in court if NR admitted they couldnt care less, and were doing nothing to improve. Virgin should be extremely happy with this outcome. It shows NR have listened, and taken the threat of legal action onboard, and are wanting to do something about it.

 

[pablo]

It's all about pressure points. Given three, the pips squeak.