New South Western franchise: Awarded to First/MTR

[swt_passenger]

For the Portsmouth-Waterloo route if the loadings really are busy all the time, what about another order of 707s but with bogs installed?

The Portsmouth - Waterloo route comes under the "no standing" PIXC rules, because of the first calls being 20 mins out of London, so the 12.450's 2+3 seating gives vastly more capacity (as far as there DfT are concerened) than a pair of 707 variants, even if they were scaled up to 12 x 20 car equivalent.

However another Desiro City based variant, similar to but not a 707, fitted out more like a 450 internally. would be the likely solution IMHO.

 

[infobleep]

I am sure First/MTR would have put out tenders as well.

But First/MTR can't place any tenders for rolling stock as they haven't won anything yet, assuming I've understood correctly what was meant. In the other hand South West Trains are the current franchise holder.

 

[infobleep]

The Portsmouth - Waterloo route comes under the "no standing" PIXC rules, because of the first calls being 20 mins out of London, so the 12.450's 2+3 seating gives vastly more capacity (as far as there DfT are concerened) than a pair of 707 variants, even if they were scaled up to 12 x 20 car equivalent.

However another Desiro City based variant, similar to but not a 707, fitted out more like a 450 internally. would be the likely solution IMHO.

Could they not scrap the no standing rules. I'm sure it would be popular but then 3+2 seating isn't popular with some.

 

[3141]

According to a member of SWT tweeter staff just now, they said they are working towards staffing their Tweeter feed 24/7.

I wouldn't have thought a rail company would want to work towards something they might not end up doing if they lose a franchise or are they obliged to work towards things even if there's a chance they might lose the franchise?

I don't want SWT to lose, even if they did badly on the communication front last night. No one is perfect. Hopefully if they win the franchise they can work towards finding a way of avoid last night's communication difficulties, aka lack of communication late at night when people are catching their last trains or connecting trains home.

If Stagecoach have lost, the question would be how far down the staffing structure the information would go. It ought not to go down at all at this stage. So the person who would take the initiative to improve their twitter staffing would currently be unlikely to know the outcome of the DfT's bid evaluation. Somewhere above that person somebody may know, but they can't issue instructions "No, don't do that, because we're losing the franchise".

We can sometimes read too much into quite normal things. Yesterday the class 159 forming the 14.50 from Waterloo hadn't been cleaned when I boarded it. I didn't conclude that Stagecoach had lost the franchise, and a cleaner came through collecting the rubbish at about 14.48.

Like you I hope Stagecoach keep the franchise.

 

[3141]

But First/MTR can't place any tenders for rolling stock as they haven't won anything yet, assuming I've understood correctly what was meant. In the other hand South West Trains are the current franchise holder.

Bidders often ask for tenders for rolling stock so that they'll have relevant information to include in their bid. There was a thread here two or three years ago about Stagecoach (who were then a joint bidder with Abellio for Greater Anglia) having sought tenders for a large number of new trains. But it's only the winner who actually gets a ROSCO to place an order.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Portsmouth - Waterloo route comes under the "no standing" PIXC rules, because of the first calls being 20 mins out of London, so the 12.450's 2+3 seating gives vastly more capacity (as far as there DfT are concerened) than a pair of 707 variants, even if they were scaled up to 12 x 20 car equivalent.

However another Desiro City based variant, similar to but not a 707, fitted out more like a 450 internally. would be the likely solution IMHO.

Personally I think these rules have unintended consequences - 3+2 and poor seat pitch. I think sensible minima need defining for seat pitch and width based on an average adult male - 3+2 seats are narrower than an average adult male's shoulders, and I find this unacceptable, similarly seats that someone of average height can't sit down in without clouting the seat back in front or interlacing legs with the person opposite. Then if TOCs want to use 3+2 they will have to be more innovative to gain width, such as designs with thin interior panelling and short, articulated vehicles. Certainly 3+2 is only even vaguely acceptable when you get to thin-walled, wide vehicles like classes 165/6. A Desiro is too narrow, having 2.76m wide vehicles.

 

[HH]

If Stagecoach have lost, the question would be how far down the staffing structure the information would go. It ought not to go down at all at this stage.

In fact they wouldn't even know officially that they have lost; they would just infer it. Certainly they wouldn't make even a supposition known down the line. DfT would get very upset at any leak if it were found out.

Given the poor record of recent franchise rumours I had wondered if DfT were deliberately putting out misinformation, but it may be simply that sometimes, if the competition is close, the second place bidder is kept on a parallel path to the likely winner, in case the leader falls at any hurdle (there are quite a few). This late though, I don't see that as possible.

Still hoping someone has sight of that article.

 

[HH]

But First/MTR can't place any tenders for rolling stock as they haven't won anything yet, assuming I've understood correctly what was meant. In the other hand South West Trains are the current franchise holder.

Of course they can put out tenders. I've done it before it was even known that the pre-qualification was successful. An invitation to tender is not an order.

 

[swt_passenger]

Could they not scrap the no standing rules. I'm sure it would be popular but then 3+2 seating isn't popular with some.

That would be for the politicians to agree. Do you think it's at all realistic that they'd declare that the "inner suburban PIXC rules" should apply on fast trains to Guildford, or Haslemere, or wherever - Portsmouth even?

That would be the thin end of a very big wedge, because if they did that they could justifiably do the same to about a 70 mile radius around London on every route...

 

[Bletchleyite]

A more sensible option may be for the PIXC rules to be rescinded in cases where the service cannot be increased or lengthened due to the infrastructure constraints not within TOC control.

 

[swt_passenger]

Of course they can put out tenders. I've done it before it was even known that the pre-qualification was successful. An invitation to tender is not an order.

Concur, they are effectively obliged to put out tenders because of the way the ITT is structured. How could they do this otherwise:

Bidders must provide Term Sheets for any rolling stock forming part of the Bidder’s Train Fleet within the Franchise and evidence to support proposals for new build rolling stock (including any offer letters from manufacturers including new build project plans, maintainers including the detail of the offer and financiers which includes assumptions around maintenance reserves.

From: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/550983/swf-itt.pdf

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What's PIXC short for anyway?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What's PIXC short for anyway?

Passengers In eXcess of Capacity.

 

[Goldfish62]

I can't access that article, what is the basis for First being tipped to win the franchise?

It's pure industry speculation on the basis that DfT have effectively stopped talking to Stagecoach but are still talking to First MTR. Claimed as a reliable indicator but not always accurate.

 

[Bletchleyite]

MTR = good.

First, well...draw your own conclusions.

The effectiveness of that will depend on who in practice leads it.

 

[Suraggu]

It's pure industry speculation on the basis that DfT have effectively stopped talking to Stagecoach but are still talking to First MTR. Claimed as a reliable indicator but not always accurate.

So no actually confirmed sources?

 

[HH]

MTR = good.

First, well...draw your own conclusions.

The effectiveness of that will depend on who in practice leads it.

It's First 70% MTR 30%. It's also a little outside MTR's comfort zone. I would hope that First make use of MTR in areas where they are clearly superior, but that would be a change in First's normal approach.

 

[HH]

So no actually confirmed sources?

You won't get any confirmed source until Mid-April, at the earliest.

 

[3141]

It's First 70% MTR 30%. It's also a little outside MTR's comfort zone. I would hope that First make use of MTR in areas where they are clearly superior, but that would be a change in First's normal approach.

In 2006, in the previous bidding for the SW franchise, Sea Containers and MTR were preparing a joint bid and I went to a consultation meeting with Christopher Garnett. He spoke about the reliability of MTR's trains and their very precise timekeeping. Since then SWT have continued to improve reliability and some of their fleets are among the best. The timetable isn't under the control of the train operator, and the growth in passenger numbers in recent years is one of the factors that causes delays. Perhaps the scope to make use of MTR's strengths is not as great as it was eleven years ago.

 

[HH]

In 2006, in the previous bidding for the SW franchise, Sea Containers and MTR were preparing a joint bid and I went to a consultation meeting with Christopher Garnett. He spoke about the reliability of MTR's trains and their very precise timekeeping. Since then SWT have continued to improve reliability and some of their fleets are among the best. The timetable isn't under the control of the train operator, and the growth in passenger numbers in recent years is one of the factors that causes delays. Perhaps the scope to make use of MTR's strengths is not as great as it was eleven years ago.

Possibly not, but I was rather thinking of MTR's UK experience with London Overground and TfL Rail, rather than their Hong Kong.

 

[infobleep]

That would be for the politicians to agree. Do you think it's at all realistic that they'd declare that the "inner suburban PIXC rules" should apply on fast trains to Guildford, or Haslemere, or wherever - Portsmouth even?

That would be the thin end of a very big wedge, because if they did that they could justifiably do the same to about a 70 mile radius around London on every route...

Unless the train is really packed, it does seem the middle seats are wasted. People prefer to stand. I don't know what, if anything, they could do to encourage people to use the middle seat more.

 

[HH]

Unless the train is really packed, it does seem the middle seats are wasted. People prefer to stand. I don't know what, if anything, they could do to encourage people to use the middle seat more.

Put in armrests so fat buggers couldn't take up a seat and a half...

 

[infobleep]

In 2006, in the previous bidding for the SW franchise, Sea Containers and MTR were preparing a joint bid and I went to a consultation meeting with Christopher Garnett. He spoke about the reliability of MTR's trains and their very precise timekeeping. Since then SWT have continued to improve reliability and some of their fleets are among the best. The timetable isn't under the control of the train operator, and the growth in passenger numbers in recent years is one of the factors that causes delays. Perhaps the scope to make use of MTR's strengths is not as great as it was eleven years ago.

Lots of travelers don't make the connection that is the volume of passengers that causes delays. They just blame the TOC, in this case SWT. Today I was on a stopping train that goes through Surbiton and it arrived and departed there on time and the train before it wasn't even cancelled. That's extremely rare event and I'm sure a lot of it is due to passenger numbers.

 

[infobleep]

Put in armrests so fat buggers couldn't take up a seat and a half...

How about only people who can fit in the width of one of the seats can use one. I imagine it would rule out many people, due to the seat widths.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How about only people who can fit in the width of one of the seats can use one. I imagine it would rule out many people, due to the seat widths.

How about the railway provide seats that are wide enough for the average adult male to fit entirely within them?

3+2 is a joke.

 

[northwichcat]

How about the railway provide seats that are wide enough for the average adult male to fit entirely within them?

3+2 is a joke.

I'd suggest anyone with a healthy BMI should be able to fit in a seat, unless they are exceptionally tall e.g. it wouldn't be practical to make all trains suitable for 7ft passengers, just in case one turned up. In theory you could have an area with larger seats and extra leg room where taller people get priority but in practice I don't think that would work.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd suggest anyone with a healthy BMI should be able to fit in a seat, unless they are exceptionally tall e.g. it wouldn't be practical to make all trains suitable for 7ft passengers, just in case one turned up. In theory you could have an area with larger seats and extra leg room where taller people get priority but in practice I don't think that would work.

From a bit of Googling, the worldwide average shoulder width for adult males is 17 to 18 inches. The UK typically is at the larger end of people worldwide. 3+2 seats are about 16 inches wide with no divider.

A seat that cannot fit an average adult male fully within it is not acceptable.

FWIW trains do have priority extra legroom seats, which are typically not occupied by their intended passengers but rather by taller people like me (My observation is that most people who are typical cases for those seats actually prefer a tighter pitch or table because they can use the seat in front or the table to help them sit down and stand back up - I don't recall ever having had to move from one!)

 

[3141]

From a bit of Googling, the worldwide average shoulder width for adult males is 17 to 18 inches. The UK typically is at the larger end of people worldwide. 3+2 seats are about 16 inches wide with no divider.

A seat that cannot fit an average adult male fully within it is not acceptable.

People have been getting wider during the past 25 years (probably more). I don't recall complaints about 3+2 in 4VEPs or 313/315s. Or even about 6 a side in compartments in 4SUB/EPBs. When class 165s arrived in 1991 I found the rows of three adequate, though I was narrower then, and their coaches are wider than most.. If collectively we eat more and can no longer fit into a row of three seats on a train we'll have to accept the consequence that fewer of us will be able to sit down.

 

[infobleep]

People have been getting wider during the past 25 years (probably more). I don't recall complaints about 3+2 in 4VEPs or 313/315s. Or even about 6 a side in compartments in 4SUB/EPBs. When class 165s arrived in 1991 I found the rows of three adequate, though I was narrower then, and their coaches are wider than most.. If collectively we eat more and can no longer fit into a row of three seats on a train we'll have to accept the consequence that fewer of us will be able to sit down.

If that is the case then would it not make sense to remove the middle seat of three, as fewer of us are able to sit down anyway due to people's width.

 

[Clip]

How about the railway provide seats that are wide enough for the average adult male to fit entirely within them?

3+2 is a joke.

Its not like you to be so ranty about seating including layout,pitch, cushioning and who is best and your frame not fitting in them Neil