Northern and TPE Consultation Document

[Carlisle]

I think the key is that the traditional method of DOO with sporadic ticket checks won't work. Whether they could justify the investment needed for DOO when the trains will still need to be fully staffed, I doubt it.

Surely the costs on the newly electrified routes would not be that high , GSMR is allready installed ,the 319s allready DOO equipped meaning only train or station monitors would physically need to be paid for ,is it not more the possible high costs and upheaval of a large staff restructuring process that Northern is rather reluctant to consider ,perfectly understandable on a short franchise

 

[muz379]

Surely the costs on the newly electrified routes would not be that high , GSMR is allready installed ,the 319s allready DOO equipped meaning only train or station monitors would physically need to be paid for ,is it not more the possible high costs and upheaval of a large staff restructuring process that Northern is rather reluctant to consider ,perfectly understandable on a short franchise

I dont necessarily think its the just restructuring of staff that would present a problem . .Although training drivers to do the doors could be another issue altogether because its not just a case of pressing some buttons it is a safety critical task so proper training is needed .

Nobody actually knows it drivers/ASLEF are going to support DOO in the next franchise period . We know for a fact the RMT wont . As soon as Northern start implementing DOO on one line the RMT would probably ballot for strike action bringing the rest of the lines to a halt . Northern have no franchise commitment to do it so they dont want to anger guards when they are already having issues with drivers threatening strike action over pay


The other problem you have with Northern is the fact that they operate a mismatch of rolling stock . Its all good and well to have 319 diagrams that are DOO but what happens then when A 319 breaks and you need to cover its diagram with a 142 that is not wired up for DOO . You have a train , a driver but no guard diagrammed to operate it which then leads to a cancellation and the fines and compensation to passengers that come with that . I dont think that whilst the northern franchise is operating stock that is not DOO it would be wise to start implementing it . Many a times traincrew will have expected to have a 158 and ended up with a 142 . I even remember on one particular day when a 3 car 158 was substituted with a single 153 .

 

[Bletchleyite]

The other problem you have with Northern is the fact that they operate a mismatch of rolling stock . Its all good and well to have 319 diagrams that are DOO but what happens then when A 319 breaks and you need to cover its diagram with a 142 that is not wired up for DOO . You have a train , a driver but no guard diagrammed to operate it which then leads to a cancellation and the fines and compensation to passengers that come with that . I dont think that whilst the northern franchise is operating stock that is not DOO it would be wise to start implementing it . Many a times traincrew will have expected to have a 158 and ended up with a 142 . I even remember on one particular day when a 3 car 158 was substituted with a single 153 .

That kind of thing can also work to the TOC's advantage. SBB operate DOO on all regional services (pretty much) and with guards on InterCity services (even though their dispatch procedure is somewhat lacking in safety terms and is pseudo-DOO anyway). When a guard is not available, a regional set sometimes shows up on an IC service, which while annoying (they're quite a lot shorter) means the train is not cancelled due to lack of guard.

Neil

 

[muz379]

That kind of thing can also work to the TOC's advantage. SBB operate DOO on all regional services (pretty much) and with guards on InterCity services (even though their dispatch procedure is somewhat lacking in safety terms and is pseudo-DOO anyway). When a guard is not available, a regional set sometimes shows up on an IC service, which while annoying (they're quite a lot shorter) means the train is not cancelled due to lack of guard.

Neil

Yes but the suggestion here is that the 319's are only going to be able to work DOO and over a particular route because that will be the only route with screens or mirrors etc .So its not like they will just be able to shove a 319 over another route just because there is no guard .

Northern dont have the neat division that other TOCS have between regional and IC services .

Not to mention there are going to be routes you cant operate a 319 over because it needs OLE .

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

They must have started somewhere to develop the current DOO operation in Glasgow.
It might take a decade, and be limited to electric routes, but it's difficult to see why it "wouldn't work" in the north but it does in Glasgow (and elsewhere).
All new/cascaded electric trains will come DOO fitted, surely?
I can see why the current Northern management aren't keen, with only a short time left, but a 10-year franchise resets the investment clock.
After all, Abellio, Northern's part owner, will soon be operating the Glasgow DOO network.

 

[WatcherZero]

Mmm, ITT in December, Autumn Statement coming up, I can smell some sort of an update on the franchising within the next couple of weeks.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Mmm, ITT in December, Autumn Statement coming up, I can smell some sort of an update on the franchising within the next couple of weeks.

Indeed so. This will hopefully make matters far more clearer in the very near future.

 

[Carlisle]

After all, Abellio, Northern's part owner, will soon be operating the Glasgow DOO network.

Do they actually operate any DOO trains at all at home in Holland? If not maybe they are not especially keen on the concept as a company generally

 

[yorksrob]

Surely the costs on the newly electrified routes would not be that high , GSMR is allready installed ,the 319s allready DOO equipped meaning only train or station monitors would physically need to be paid for ,is it not more the possible high costs and upheaval of a large staff restructuring process that Northern is rather reluctant to consider ,perfectly understandable on a short franchise

Maybe, and it would take someone more knowledgeable than me to confirm.

However, I would have thought the operational benefits were significantly reduced once there has to be someone in the passenger compartment all of the time.

 

[Carlisle]

Maybe, and it would take someone more knowledgeable than me to confirm.

However, I would have thought the operational benefits were significantly reduced once there has to be someone in the passenger compartment all of the time.

Yes I agree , to Justify the investment it would probably have to be similar Glasgows SPT where it's usual but not mandatory to have a second person onboard

 

[Class 170101]

In diagramming terms I believe the second person is mandatory, if on the day of the races there is nobody available the train can run DOO (in the true sense of the phrase).

 

[muz379]

They must have started somewhere to develop the current DOO operation in Glasgow.
It might take a decade, and be limited to electric routes, but it's difficult to see why it "wouldn't work" in the north but it does in Glasgow (and elsewhere).
All new/cascaded electric trains will come DOO fitted, surely?
I can see why the current Northern management aren't keen, with only a short time left, but a 10-year franchise resets the investment clock.
After all, Abellio, Northern's part owner, will soon be operating the Glasgow DOO network.

Im not saying it wouldnt work in the North .

However I dont think it will happen whilst 142's are the most popular class of unit in the northern fleet .
Quiet often you will be booked much better traction and end up with a 142 standing in for it . So as I said there is nothing to suggest that 319 diagrams will be exempt from this . If the choice is between cancelling a full unit diagram of putting a 142 on it IMO the right choice is to send the 142 .

However if you have 319's (or other units) operating DOO over particular routes , in this situation you are then causing yourself loads of problems . You might have a train ready to go and work the diagram but cant because of "crew shortages"
You wont have a guard diagrammed to work the services . You might not even have guards with route competency over particular routes anymore . You might find the RMT seek an agreement that prohibits guards from working any trains that are on a DOO diagram .

 

[Olaf]

Thus far we have unreliable new signalling systems like automated level crossings that are a nightmare for the TOCs and the maintenance staff who look after them. We also have smart card ticketing systems that don't work with the exception of oyster with pretty much universally low take up and serious implementation problems that are leading to constant contract re-lets as they fail to achieve the specification.

I don't doubt your beliefs on the matter however with the exception of possibly suburban lines served by the more modern trains I don't think anything will develop in the short to medium term. Believe it or not from my own views but I do associate in my personal life with some fairly senior consultants and managers responsible for in part for things like DOO proposals and implementations (you can't let work influence your personal life!) and their view is effectively that yes, you are paying guards on suburban lines to do nothing but slow the trains down while reading the paper and a better option is to increase station staffing in these areas instead and go DOO. However outside that the cost/benefit does not stack up for reasons including train dispatch issues with things like luggage and high levels of unconfident leisure travellers on long distance routes, concern over staff provision in rural areas in the event of incidents and heavy delay and also the cost of infrastructure changes to allow DOO to take place versus maintaining the current system with a less frequent service in operation compared to suburban lines and much reduced cost benefits from headcount reduction. Basically if you're going to retain a person on board the train outside the mainly electrified suburban routes it may as well still be the guard as they offer benefits to be considered alongside the cost of removal.

I can't say that I agree with them but that seems to be where they are working towards - we will see I suppose who was right in the next 10 years.

Yes, there are obstacles to be dealt with, but they are not show-stoppers. Time-scales, I agree are not confirmed, but nor are the factors involved in-transient.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Indeed so. This will hopefully make matters far more clearer in the very near future.

However, I think the details will not be known until October 2015 at the earliest:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...e/363173/oct-2014-rail-franchise-schedule.pdf

I expect that if there is a change in the Government next year, then the franchise process may be modified with perhaps the time-table being pushed out again.

 

[Carlisle]

Im not saying it wouldnt work in the North .

However I dont think it will happen whilst 142's are the most popular class of unit in the northern fleet .
Quiet often you will be booked much better traction and end up with a 142 standing in for it . So as I said there is nothing to suggest that 319 diagrams will be exempt from this . If the choice is between cancelling a full unit diagram of putting a 142 on it IMO the right choice is to send the 142 .

However if you have 319's (or other units) operating DOO over particular routes , in this situation you are then causing yourself loads of problems . You might have a train ready to go and work the diagram but cant because of "crew shortages"
You wont have a guard diagrammed to work the services . You might not even have guards with route competency over particular routes anymore . You might find the RMT seek an agreement that prohibits guards from working any trains that are on a DOO diagram .

An interesting post ,I can totally understand that quite rightly staff would fight hard for their jobs, wages ,conditions and futures, but after almost 20 years privitisation,when it comes to planning and implementing major changes like we're discussing here TOCs like Northern seem far more terrified of the unions than BR ever did, is that progress for our railways ?I best leave it to people far more qualified than myself to find the ansewer

 

[bramling]

They must have started somewhere to develop the current DOO operation in Glasgow.
It might take a decade, and be limited to electric routes, but it's difficult to see why it "wouldn't work" in the north but it does in Glasgow (and elsewhere).
All new/cascaded electric trains will come DOO fitted, surely?
I can see why the current Northern management aren't keen, with only a short time left, but a 10-year franchise resets the investment clock.
After all, Abellio, Northern's part owner, will soon be operating the Glasgow DOO network.

I have to say I'm not over keen on the Glasgow arrangement. I guess it works well operationally, however from a passenger's point of view it does get slightly irritating being asked to show a ticket on a seemingly constant basis, sometimes 2 or 3 times during a journey. And although it may eliminate much opportunist fare-evasion, I've seen that if someone simply says "I'm not paying what are you going to do?", nothing happens (which I'm not in any way criticising from the point of view of the staff involved).

 

[Hophead]

Im not saying it wouldnt work in the North .

However I dont think it will happen whilst 142's are the most popular class of unit in the northern fleet

Well, in that case, you're ok to get started tomorrow. I think you probably mean "most common"

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Well, in that case, you're ok to get started tomorrow. I think you probably mean "most common"

You could have put more emphasis on the word "common"....

 

[WatcherZero]

Couple of leaks from an event at York Museum tonight, according to the governments Rail Project director Julie Mills, 50% of the 20,000 respondents said they would accept fare hikes if they were for specific improvements so Governments going to press ahead with them. Overwhelming majority flagged Pacers as an issue so Government will require they be replaced and the franchise ITT will call for 'Innovative and Exciting' improvements rather than status quo with overcrowding and quality key tasks for bidders. Meanwhile Northern Managing Director Hynes has said the gap between rolling stock in the north and rolling stock in the south is growing and the country needs a new rolling stock strategy/approach. They also said there isn't enough DMU's and the Government is sounding out manufacturers on the possibility of a DMU order.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

They also said there isn't enough DMU's and the Government is sounding out manufacturers on the possibility of a DMU order.

Well, well, well. After all the "perceived wisdom" that has been brought to bear in various threads in the past two years on the RailUK website by certain forum members giving reasons why a new DMU order would never be considered, let alone placed......

 

[yorksrob]

Couple of leaks from an event at York Museum tonight, according to the governments Rail Project director Julie Mills, 50% of the 20,000 respondents said they would accept fare hikes if they were for specific improvements so Governments going to press ahead with them. Overwhelming majority flagged Pacers as an issue so Government will require they be replaced and the franchise ITT will call for 'Innovative and Exciting' improvements rather than status quo with overcrowding and quality key tasks for bidders. Meanwhile Northern Managing Director Hynes has said the gap between rolling stock in the north and rolling stock in the south is growing and the country needs a new rolling stock strategy/approach. They also said there isn't enough DMU's and the Government is sounding out manufacturers on the possibility of a DMU order.

I wonder if those acquiescing to fare hikes realise what they've let themselves in for.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Well, well, well. After all the "perceived wisdom" that has been brought to bear in various threads in the past two years on the RailUK website by certain forum members giving reasons why a new DMU order would never be considered, let alone placed......

Many a straw man argument was made.

 

[Masbroughlad]

Can somebody remind me when Northern and TP are re-let and at what stage we are currently at please?

 

[WatcherZero]

Feb 2016 with the Invitation to Tender due to be published next month and winner around the end of next year.

Which reminds me, surely the TPE emergency 170 replacement stock solution will have to be included in the ITT?
The details rolling stock would have to be available as it will affect the bids

 

[northwichcat]

Which reminds me, surely the TPE emergency 170 replacement stock solution will have to be included in the ITT?

Tony Miles posted on wnxx that TPE have said a solution is in place but they're not allowed to make it public.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well, well, well. After all the "perceived wisdom" that has been brought to bear in various threads in the past two years on the RailUK website by certain forum members giving reasons why a new DMU order would never be considered, let alone placed......

Claire Perry hinted at that when questioned by journalists at a recent event. Of course the pro-electrification posters on here dismissed it as 'never going to happen'

 

[Olaf]

Well, well, well. After all the "perceived wisdom" that has been brought to bear in various threads in the past two years on the RailUK website by certain forum members giving reasons why a new DMU order would never be considered, let alone placed......

It is that time in the life of a Parliament that promises of fruits to come are made. There is nothing there that suggests a change from the 2014 rolling stock plan - which does not rule out the possibility of DMU procurement but indicates that there is insubstantial justification.

That could change once the new north of England transport quango gets going - i.e. if they choose to expend their funding on DMUs, but they would still need to justify the expenditure against all the other demands on the funding. So in short, it would be a political decision, not a technical one.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It is that time in the life of a Parliament that promises of fruits to come are made. There is nothing there that suggests a change from the 2014 rolling stock plan - which does not rule out the possibility of DMU procurement but indicates that there is insubstantial justification.

That could change once the new north of England transport quango gets going - i.e. if they choose to expend their funding on DMUs, but they would still need to justify the expenditure against all the other demands on the funding. So in short, it would be a political decision, not a technical one.

I made reference in my posting to the statement that "the Government were sounding out manufacturers on the possibility of a DMU order", so that indeed would appear to be some political input into the equation as you state above.

 

[Class 170101]

Tony Miles posted on wnxx that TPE have said a solution is in place but they're not allowed to make it public.

Do we know when the solution will be made public?

 

[Olaf]

I made reference in my posting to the statement that "the Government were sounding out manufacturers on the possibility of a DMU order", so that indeed would appear to be some political input into the equation as you state above.

Yes agreed.

The DfT will need to see if manufactures are willing to produce a product for the UK, the life-cycle of the product, compliance, costs, and time-scales to delivery of design/product etc. I expect that there will be a premium to pay.

However, at the end of the day, it will be a politically motivated decision as to whether a procurement will go ahead. The roll-stock plan, produced by the operators, indicates that there is no near-term requirement for DMUs, and only the possibility of a requirement later on. Spending money on vote-buying will take the funds from elsewhere on the railway.

 

[Andyh82]

With lots in the press lately about devolved powers for the nations and regions, the press need to kick up a stink about the difference between the new Scotrail franchise and the proposed Northern franchise.

Scotrail get HSTs, brand new EMUs, lots more capacity, tourist coaches etc, Northern get no prospect of anything positive except being made to do more for less.

 

[tbtc]

I made reference in my posting to the statement that "the Government were sounding out manufacturers on the possibility of a DMU order", so that indeed would appear to be some political input into the equation as you state above.

The Government are being seen to do something (without committing to anything) - politics.

Yes agreed.

The DfT will need to see if manufactures are will to produce a product for the UK, the life-cycle of the product, compliance, costs, and time-scales to delivery of design/product etc. I expect that there will be a premium to pay.

However, at the end of the day, it will be a politically motivated decision as to whether a procurement will go ahead. The roll-stock plan, produced by the operators, indicates that there is no near-term requirement for DMUs, an only the possibility of a requirement later on. Spending money on vote-buying will take the funds from elsewhere on the railway.

True.

I appreciate that politicians have to be seen to "keep all options open" and at least give stressed commuters the impression that they aren't automatically ruling out brand new DMUs, but the reality is that it'd be incredibly expensive to procure new DMUs to enter service in around 2018 when we'll have maybe a couple of hundred surplus DMUs by the end of this decade (with the prospect of more to become surplus in CP6).

Paying a premium for having spare DMUs for a couple of years (and so that we can withdraw the final handful of Pacers a year or two earlier) hasn't been ruled out (yet), but as you say, it'd be an expensive option in the long term.

With lots in the press lately about devolved powers for the nations and regions, the press need to kick up a stink about the difference between the new Scotrail franchise and the proposed Northern franchise.

Scotrail get HSTs, brand new EMUs, lots more capacity, tourist coaches etc, Northern get no prospect of anything positive except being made to do more for less.

As a Scot living in northern England, I'm not particularly envious of the new ScotRail franchise.

Replacing the 21st century 170s with four coach 1970s HSTs doesn't seem like a huge leap forward (look at all the frothing about the age of the 1980s 319s coming to Northern!).

Plus some of the additional EMU capacity in Scotland is coming in the form of Class 321s from London (again, imagine the wailing about "ancient London cast-offs" on this Forum if the 321s were due in Manchester )

The much hyped "tourist trains" appear to be nothing more exotic than 158s with some seats taken out (plus, whilst it's going to be part of a separate franchise, Scotland will also see 21st century Class 67s on the sleeper replaced by 1960s Class 73s - grass isn't always greener)

Don't get me wrong, there's some positives with the new ScotRail franchise (as there are in virtually all franchise announcements) - I just don't think that it lives up to the hype.