UK Railways, better now than they have ever been!

[xc170]

After reading a few threads on hear it has come to my attention that most people seem to dislike most modern trains, companies etc. When you take off the rose tinted specs you wll see that today the railways are better than they have ever been before, there is an excelent service on most routes (more than in BR days), clean stations & trains and since privatisation there has not been many times where there has not been new trains being built, now this raises the question WHY do so many people on hear have some kind of wiered hatred of anything post privitisation, Hears an examples of what I am trying to say,

HST, Alot of people on hear seem to drool whenever one is mentioned, I admit they are good trains but where they have been replaced there has been good reason, and the replacement has been a moden unit thats just as fast, clean and comfatable. OK in the case of the voyager they are a bit short of capacity but other than that there is nothing wrong with them!

Now as I have said railways are a business, they prvide a service to people who need to get from A - B so change is going to happen, get over it!

Regards

Adam

 

[Failed Unit]

BR built a lot of sprinters in the 1980's, all the mk1's would have been replaced no matter who was in charge. The 91's were built under BR so the new stock doesn't cut any ice to me.

The main reason I think that the rail network is a lot worse now is down to one word fragmentation. All these TOC's work on their own patch and don't even acknowledge that we have a national network any more. Connections are not held and it is not pleasent waiting on a station due to a missed connection now matter how good it is. Even AP's in a lot of cases are only available at stations in the TOC own area, although some such as the east coast do include local stations with their AP fares.

Take GNER which was one of the more respected operators, they only wanted passengers from Lincolnshire if they drove to their stations, not used the local trians.

Talking from a personal point of view before privatistion you could travel direct from Lincoln - Shrewsbury, the same journey now takes over an hour longer with 2 changes. When you London - Newark train was running 8 minutes late you knew that the connection would still be waiting at Newark, not left 1 minute ago. At times that train left Newark totally empty as all its passengers at certain times of day would have come off the mainline train. Try telling someone that used to travel direct from Berwick-on-Tweed - Oxford using XC that things have go better?

No national marketing, everything done at TOC level. Privatisation is great if you don't cross between TOC and make journeys like London - Leeds. However at the moment if you are travelling between Market Rasen and Newquay forget the train and take the car, as the current system is not interested in people making that kind of journey.

 

[Flyboy]

I would certainly agree that the railways seem to be in a better physical condition than a few years ago, (infrastructure, rolling stock etc) but my usage is limited to the ECML (Donny - Kings Cross) so I've no experience of the fragmentation problems that Failed Unit points out, which I'm sure do exist.

 

[Failed Unit]

I may reverse this question and ask why the railways are allegedly in better condition now then they were before they were privatised. New rolling stock? That would have been built anyway remember BR was not allowed to spend any money in the last few years of nationalisation. More money? Most of this has come from the taxpayer, I wonder what BR would have done with the amount of money we are now throwing at the Taxpayer? Better service, true to an extent, but I am sure BR would have made London – Leeds / Bristol etc ½ hourly the did lots of innovations in services remember.

Norwich – Liverpool, Cleethorpes – Manchester Airport, Lincoln – Shrewsbury, Skegness- Crewe to name a few were bought in by BR, apart from open access there have been very few improvements to regional services.

With all this money is NXEC better than Inter-City East coast? I don’t think so, BR made cutbacks to the east coast route yes, but the main reason for the Cleethorpes – London service removal was because it didn’t fit the privatisation model, not because it wasn’t well used.

I have yet to see anyone give good examples that privatisation has improved services which could not have been achieved quicker or cheaper under BR. Some may site the West Coast mainline, but BR did something just as good on the ECML in 1991. XC improves. I may reverse this question and ask why are the railways "alledgely" in betterments? For some, but for a lot of people on the route that can still travel direct have in reality a reduction of the number of seats they can take.

Money has improved some things, but the big winners are the franchise holders that upto now have made a lot of money for very little work! As I said on my previous post any passenger travelling long distances is now a lot worse off!

 

[FGWadmirer]

You can't lean out the windows on anything other than HSTs and the lymington pier brockenhurst EMUs! That's my only quarm about modern railways!

 

[First class]

You say a problem with Voyagers is capacity, but I get the impression you don't really think this is an issue. Why do you think XC actually obtained (older) HSTs?? Because the new trains couldn't meet what was required of them. Also don't forget that onboard catering has gone on some, and the onboard entertainment (radio) is unused.

Locally, Liverpool lost a lot of key routes in recent, franchised years. No longer can be go to Scotland or the South Coast... franchised operators are often unwilling to invest in the routes they have- never mind create new ones.

I think the network does need to be "re-structured". Usually I shudder when I hear that word from HR- but in reality, do we need 28 TOCs?

We should have 'regions' :

1. Scotland (pretty much self contained now anyway)
2. North West
3. North East
4. Wales
5. South East (to include LU)
6. South West
7. Midlands & Anglia

On top of that we should have one intercity operator- linking all these 'regions'.

 

[thefab444]

Privatisation started out acceptably, with service innovations from companies like Anglia Railways, Chiltern, Virgin Trains and Wales & Borders/Alphaline/South Wales & West Railway (etc). However, the current model of short franchises with large paybacks to the government does not work... surely the government could just as large paybacks by running the system themselves! Oh wait, then they'd be held accountable for the farce! The Cross Country network is a total and utter shambles these days, direct routes being hacked out every five seconds in favour of Standardisation. Looking back at my 2001 South West Trains' timetable, which includes Anglia CrossRail and a rather wide ranging CrossCountry timetable (just for the south coast!), generally things back then were similar to now, despite the huge Mark 1 replacement programme - mainly because of the like-for-like replacement, and not growth orders!

 

[xc170]

You can't lean out the windows on anything other than HSTs and the lymington pier brockenhurst EMUs! That's my only quarm about modern railways!

Isnt that a good thing? you have a smaller chance of having your head ripped off by a signal, bridge, tree etc.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Things that BR did on ECML which don't happen now:

Flying Scotsman (HST) non stop from Newcastle to KX (return only stopped additionally at York), this was ex-Aberdeen rather than GLC as at present
KX-Grantham non-stop (55 mins) in the evening peak
more direct trains from Hull to KX (2 or 3 a day) than NXEC, granted HT is a vast improvement

 

[87015]

Isnt that a good thing? you have a smaller chance of having your head ripped off by a signal, bridge, tree etc.

Because thats happened on such a regular basis in the past has it?

 

[First class]

Talking of heads out of windows- sleepers and motorail - at one point you could get everywhere by sleeper - out of 28 franchises, only 2 offer a sleeper.... as for getting your car about by rail- you have to contact DB for that now...

 

[me123]

There are several good things.

• VHF offers a fast, frequent and reliable service across the WCML. Manchester and Birmingham have 3 trains every hour to London!
• Scotrail is expanding its network by building GARL, and reopening Airdrie-Bathgate line and the Waverley Line.
• More and more cities and towns are bring added to the network. Wrexham and Corby are now getting direct links to London
• Cross Country have a huge demand for their services, although this has been a victim of its own success in many ways

There's probably more out there. That said, there's quite a lot of bad things, some of which are outlined above. Overall, it may not have changed all that much.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think the network does need to be "re-structured". Usually I shudder when I hear that word from HR- but in reality, do we need 28 TOCs?

We should have 'regions' :

1. Scotland (pretty much self contained now anyway)
2. North West
3. North East
4. Wales
5. South East (to include LU)
6. South West
7. Midlands & Anglia

On top of that we should have one intercity operator- linking all these 'regions'.

That would probably work, although I'd be tempted to just have a "Northern" franchise, to incorporate Merseyrail, Northern and TPE. I'd be all for this idea. And creating liveries for each area (like we have in Scotrail) would be good as well; it's a waste of money rebranding units every few years in my opinion!

Another thing I'd like to see is longer franchises, which would allow investment by the franchise holders. I don't think a lot of franchisees just now would see a return on investment in new rolling stock unless their contract was renewed. Although, on the other side of this argument, it's important that the TOCs are monitored closely to make sure they're not being complacent.

 

[Failed Unit]

There are several good things.

• VHF offers a fast, frequent and reliable service across the WCML. Manchester and Birmingham have 3 trains every hour to London!
• Scotrail is expanding its network by building GARL, and reopening Airdrie-Bathgate line and the Waverley Line.
• More and more cities and towns are bring added to the network. Wrexham and Corby are now getting direct links to London
• Cross Country have a huge demand for their services, although this has been a victim of its own success in many ways
  
  There's probably more out there. That said, there's quite a lot of bad things, some of which are outlined above. Overall, it may not have changed all that much.

• 
  
  None of these things would have happened under BR? ECML was improved under BR, BR had plans for IC250! A lot of people in Northern land have a worse service as a result of VHF.
  The Scottish improvements are funded by transport Scotland not the Franchise holder!
  I lot of places have lost through services as a result of privatisation, Cleethorpes - London and London - Shrewsbury are two good examples, ran down to make way for privatisation.
  
  The other major thing the vast majority of people are paying a lot more money then they used to! Yes we have some cheap AP's but they are for the lucky few, the majority have had massive increases in fares by both worsening restrictions and above inflation increase. Good example XC and FCC!
  
  BR also opened new lines and stations, was Edinburgh - Bathgate and Worksop - Nottingham not opened under BR? How about Outward, Arlesey and Birmingham snow hill? We had many years of privatisation before a single station or line opened in England!

 

[me123]

I was talking about the railways in general, and that these were examples of recent improvements. I'm not saying that these wouldn't have happened under BR, but they have happened and (in some cases) are happening.

I'm really not sure why you thought I was saying "this wouldn't have happened with BR".

 

[whoshotjimmi]

I was young when BR were around, but I can remember some things. One thing that sticks in my mind is how dirty everything was. I especially remember the class 142 for that - filthy inside and out. One only has to glance at a Northern liveried 142 now to realise the improvement.

Failed Unit and I have had a discussion regarding holding connecting trains before. From my own point of view, having missed connections myself, it is much better that one late train does not result in another which can then result in another. The vicious cycle has been pretty much erased.

 

[Snapper]

I lot of places have lost through services as a result of privatisation, Cleethorpes - London and London - Shrewsbury are two good examples, ran down to make way for privatisation.

A lot?

That's what - two?

Offset that against open access operators like GC and WSMR (and Virgin now running Wrexham - Euston and soon Shrewsbury - Euston).

As for the ECML under BR - there were less than half the number of daily intercity services running than GNER (and now NXEC) manage to run.

 

[bluenoxid]

After reading a few threads on hear it has come to my attention that most people seem to dislike most modern trains, companies etc. When you take off the rose tinted specs you wll see that today the railways are better than they have ever been before, there is an excelent service on most routes (more than in BR days), clean stations & trains and since privatisation there has not been many times where there has not been new trains being built, now this raises the question WHY do so many people on hear have some kind of wiered hatred of anything post privitisation, Hears an examples of what I am trying to say,

HST, Alot of people on hear seem to drool whenever one is mentioned, I admit they are good trains but where they have been replaced there has been good reason, and the replacement has been a moden unit thats just as fast, clean and comfatable. OK in the case of the voyager they are a bit short of capacity but other than that there is nothing wrong with them!

Now as I have said railways are a business, they prvide a service to people who need to get from A - B so change is going to happen, get over it!

Regards

Adam

There is a lot of inexperience on here. The railways have improved a lot since privatisation. There are still areas to improve.

BR built a lot of sprinters in the 1980's, all the mk1's would have been replaced no matter who was in charge. The 91's were built under BR so the new stock doesn't cut any ice to me.

Pendolinos, Voyagers, Junipers, 8GAT, Desiros, Pennines, 333's, Turbostars.

So yeah, nothing has been ordered

The main reason I think that the rail network is a lot worse now is down to one word fragmentation. All these TOC's work on their own patch and don't even acknowledge that we have a national network any more. Connections are not held and it is not pleasent waiting on a station due to a missed connection now matter how good it is. Even AP's in a lot of cases are only available at stations in the TOC own area, although some such as the east coast do include local stations with their AP fares.

That is the system in place. Delays cost money irrespective of how they are caused. AP's allow TOC's to make all the money off a ticket.

Try telling someone that used to travel direct from Berwick-on-Tweed - Oxford using XC that things have go better?

They have regular services with a brand new fleet that travels faster. They have incredibly cheap AP's.

Norwich – Liverpool, Cleethorpes – Manchester Airport, Lincoln – Shrewsbury, Skegness- Crewe to name a few were bought in by BR, apart from open access there have been very few improvements to regional services.

What about improved frequencies and a more reliable service

I have yet to see anyone give good examples that privatisation has improved services which could not have been achieved quicker or cheaper under BR. Some may site the West Coast mainline, but BR did something just as good on the ECML in 1991. XC improves. I may reverse this question and ask why are the railways "alledgely" in betterments? For some, but for a lot of people on the route that can still travel direct have in reality a reduction of the number of seats they can take.

In addition the ECML wasn't exactly a stunning upgrade

Oh come on. How do we know that BR would have delivered such good improvements. They would still have had to meet targets and laws that were introduced

Money has improved some things, but the big winners are the franchise holders that upto now have made a lot of money for very little work! As I said on my previous post any passenger travelling long distances is now a lot worse off!

Classic. Please ask the MD's about all that effort. I think the turnover of MD's at TOC's just shows how pressured this job is

You can't lean out the windows on anything other than HSTs and the lymington pier brockenhurst EMUs! That's my only quarm about modern railways!

One track mind, not even the third rail

None of these things would have happened under BR? ECML was improved under BR, BR had plans for IC250! A lot of people in Northern land have a worse service as a result of VHF.
The Scottish improvements are funded by transport Scotland not the Franchise holder!
I lot of places have lost through services as a result of privatisation, Cleethorpes - London and London - Shrewsbury are two good examples, ran down to make way for privatisation.

The other major thing the vast majority of people are paying a lot more money then they used to! Yes we have some cheap AP's but they are for the lucky few, the majority have had massive increases in fares by both worsening restrictions and above inflation increase. Good example XC and FCC!

BR also opened new lines and stations, was Edinburgh - Bathgate and Worksop - Nottingham not opened under BR? How about Outward, Arlesey and Birmingham snow hill? We had many years of privatisation before a single station or line opened in England!

Outwood. Surely those were down really to the PTE's and the local councils rather than British Rail.

 

[Techniquest]

The OP says something about people here frothing about HSTs and such. I for one always will as, which I've said before several times IIRC, they were the sole reason I discovered an interest in rail. Then there's the major change to the fleet that we've suffered now aka MTUs. It's just not the same.

So already that's one thing that is not better in my eyes. But that's not looking at the wider picture. One thing I am glad of is the much more frequent service up the Marches these days to a clockface timetable. Only 5 or 6 years ago you really did need to carry the timetable with you at all times as the services were bizarrely timed and nowhere near as frequent. These days we've got an hourly (twice-hourly on the even hours) up and down the core part of the Marches and with services that carry on to Swansea, Carmarthen and Milford Haven. Never had it so good under Wales and Borders and is the one thing I am grateful for under ATW.

But other things that have changed for the worse, and again under enthusiast eyes, is the lack of much in the way of ATW loco haulage. When I first got into things, we had 31s, 37s and 50s running fairly regularly, same for 47s actually. Now? Well we're left with 57s, 67s and occasional extras for sport with 47s or 67s and some summer Saturday work with 47s in Anglia. So that's one thing less to enjoy and what I consider to be worse.

Then there was the full-fat VHF that recently launched which annhilated the VWC services at Crewe going to/from Scotland. Forcing us to squeeze into already packed 221s when seemingly endless numbers of 390s storm past, hmm yeah that's fair. I refuse to touch VWC these days, I'd rather go LM to Birmingham, AXC to York and NXEC to Edinburgh now. Something else that's worse.

Giving XC to Arriva though, I just can't see any logic in that. Yes we got the HSTs but splitting the Voyager fleet up was a silly idea. Mind you, having a DMU shortage in the first place is ridiculous.

Getting jammed into a Voyager on AXC services is just not cricket.

The rip-off fares we see in many places is just not on either.

There's plenty of stuff that's worse these days, I just can't be bothered to type it all up. Granted there's plenty of stuff that's been improved in the last 5 years, namely Advance fares for the majority of the country and more sensible timetabling in some places. But things have changed too much since October 2003 for me to enjoy it so much now. Thankfully I realised that back in January 2009.

The day that I retire from spotting/bashing on the mainline gets nearer every day. No matter how much the network is improved, there's just too much plastic tack out there these days.

 

[Danielo]

Good thread and enjoyed reading those opinions. I think privatisation has certainly helped improve infrastructure, with upgraded track and signalling, and the multititude of modern trains.

However, what is sadly lacking, is harmonisation across the network. There are too many TOCs, and of those quite a few seem to have an unprofessional attitude towards the running of their network. Short franchises also affect long term planning, and customer relations appear non existant at times.

 

[Failed Unit]

I will address a few point various posters have commented on mainly Bluenoxid. Firstly apologies to me123 - wasn't meaning to have a go.

I gave 2 example of places that have recently lost direct services to London as a result of privatisation to provide a point, other places did as well Aberystwth, Blackpool to give another 2. Do some research and you will find others in the late 80's and early 90's

I also did not say no new trains had been ordered since 1996, we know they have, I pointed out BR build a lot of new trains to replace 1st gen DMU's. Most of the new trains have been built to replace mk1 EMU's something that would have happened anyway.

I stand by my claim that connections should be held on lines where it is to the benefit of the majority of passengers, yes on a route with a 30 minute frequency don't hold the connection the wait will do you no harm. On a branch line with a 2 hourly frequency the train should be held, what is the point of running an empty train followed by a full bus. If that happens to often people will just drive which is exactly what has happened on Grimsby - Newark, people don't trust the connection an now drive to Newark much to the delight of GNER (and probably now NXEC)

I am sure Leeds 1/2 hourly would have happened anyway under BR, new stock isn't everything anyway. East Coast passengers are mainly on BR stock and are very happy with the trains they have, more people dislike the Pendo's and Voyager than the mk3's and mk4's. On the East Coast the Leeds route frequency has improved Newcastle and Edinburgh is the same frequency but slower than BR in 1991. As I have said before people using AP's are the minority - that is a fact.

Timekeeping was always in the 90%+ under BR, fact. The passenger charter was bought in under BR so you can prove this for yourselves.

Finally electrification has really suffered since the network was fragmented. If North TPE were to be electrified now it would need agreement from 4 operators I can think about. Under BR they would have done it and Northern local Leeds - Huddersfield service would have been covered as well.

 

[Shinkensgone]

You can't lean out the windows on anything other than HSTs and the lymington pier brockenhurst EMUs! That's my only quarm about modern railways!

Ah, if only all passengers were "Sheepdogs" and so easily pleased

 

[The_Rail_WAy]

I thought you could lean your head out of NXEC trains?

 

[shinkansen09]

I thought you could lean your head out of NXEC trains?

Shame all you people don`t get your heads ripped off so we can talk some more sense and travel in HST`s without the aircon struggling against the draught you`re giving us you idiots!:-x

 

[Snapper]

As I have said before people using AP's are the minority - that is a fact.

If by AP you mean advance purchase tickets then the picture is far more complex than you suggest. The recent Passenger Focus report is well worth reading on this matter and highlights some interesting facts.

For example, just what pax really pay to travel compared to the highlighted 'full open' fares:

London - Cardiff:

Full fare £79. 75% pay £40 or less. 50% pay £30 or less. 25% pay £20 or less

London - Manchester:

Full fare £115. 75% pay £45 or less. 50% pay £35 or less. 25% pay £25 or less

London - Edinburgh:

Full fare £126. 75% pay £55 or less. 50% pay £40 or less. 25% pay £30 or less.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I gave 2 example of places that have recently lost direct services to London as a result of privatisation to provide a point, other places did as well Aberystwth, Blackpool to give another 2. Do some research and you will find others in the late 80's and early 90's

Asking others to hunt for evidence to prove your own assertions is hardly making your case. Nor do I see you recognising that some of the service cuts that you mentioned were actually cuts by BR...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am sure Leeds 1/2 hourly would have happened anyway under BR

Another dodgy assertion. Would you care to offer any evidence (other than your own belief) that BR ever seriously planned such a thing?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

more people dislike the Pendo's and Voyager than the mk3's and mk4's.

Really?

Then one would have expected passenger satisfaction ratings on the WCML to have gone down since the Mk3s were replaced by Pendolino's.

There's only one problem - they haven't. In fact they've gone up*...


* Source: PF National passenger surveys over the past 5 years.

 

[Failed Unit]

If by AP you mean advance purchase tickets then the picture is far more complex than you suggest. The recent Passenger Focus report is well worth reading on this matter and highlights some interesting facts.

For example, just what pax really pay to travel compared to the highlighted 'full open' fares:

London - Cardiff:

Full fare £79. 75% pay £40 or less. 50% pay £30 or less. 25% pay £20 or less

London - Manchester:

Full fare £115. 75% pay £45 or less. 50% pay £35 or less. 25% pay £25 or less

London - Edinburgh:

Full fare £126. 75% pay £55 or less. 50% pay £40 or less. 25% pay £30 or less.

This fact is very good but please take off your rose tinted specs, you can't dispute that only the minority of passengers can buy and use AP tickets! I will need to look up the report but if I recall it is less than 2% of journeys made have access to advance purchase fares! I am sure that for example not a single journey made with Northern (to name one TOC) offers an advance purchase fare. 50% of people are season ticket holders, yes they get discounts from the full fare but they have also had massive increases of their tickets! Season tickets discounts over full fare haven't altered since BR days.

We have people that use CDR tickets, again they have had massive increases as the ticket is unregulated. They also have had restrictions put on in the evening peak by FCC and XC to name 2. You can't get an AP ticket from Potters Bar to London, a journey more people do than London - Edinburgh!

I guess the full fares quoted above are singles as I know the open return is in the region of £250 for London - Manchester. If you look at the £67 saver return however, it has also had the restrictions when it can be used altered making it less useful. Small comfort to that some people pay £25 (single) or less when you are now forced into paying £250 or picking a less suitable time! Who would pay the full open fare to Edinburgh, the only train you can't use the saver on is the 0550!

From my local station previously if I needed to be in Birmingham by 0930 I could use a saver and travel on a direct train. Now it is an open return and I need to change twice! More money for a service which is a lot worse! Infact I can't even get to Birmingham by 0930 anymore now the direct trains have gone. Can I get an AP for this journey no chance?

Most people are paying more; BR also did AP's I used to use the Super Advance a lot. If they didn't have them on London - Scotland routes then everyone would fly. As stated more people use CDR / SDR than AP's, so the cheap fares the minority get are frequently quoted by ATOC and passenger focus but at least passengers focus does admit the majority have no access to AP's!

Someone also mentioned increases to frequency, again this are limited to IC to routes some routes have had cutbacks since privatisation. I know I live on one! I am sure to a lot of passengers the single direct train per day from Berwick - Oxford was preferred compared to the situation now with lots of trains and 1 connection. People prefer direct train, not only because they know they will get to their destination without been stuck somewhere due to a missed connection, but they also prefer not having to haul baggage between trains, over footbridges etc!

Snapper - to some of the other points since.
BR did cut back many IC routes in preperation for privatistation - I admit this freely, I am not going to hunt every IC cutback, I have already proved my point.

Satisfaction on the ECML route has been higher than the WCML ever since the Pendo's came on on-line. source passenger focus. Maybe I do have a point, try asking some passengers which they prefer!

Finally BR increased services during boom years, look at the past and you will see this. We have just been through a boom period. No we are hitting bad times we cutbacks are also happening. But look at the number of line reopening 10 years either side of privatisation, BR did much better on that front! Did GNER talk about Leeds every 30 minutes in 1996 no, it wasn't until they knew demand had grown, so how would BR be able to predict that far in the future?

 

[bluenoxid]

I gave 2 example of places that have recently lost direct services to London as a result of privatisation to provide a point, other places did as well Aberystwth, Blackpool to give another 2. Do some research and you will find others in the late 80's and early 90's

I would just like to point out that Skipton has gained. Many of the West Coast services were lost thanks to the government deal for MOC.

I also did not say no new trains had been ordered since 1996, we know they have, I pointed out BR build a lot of new trains to replace 1st gen DMU's. Most of the new trains have been built to replace mk1 EMU's something that would have happened anyway.

Voyagers, Pendolino's, Chiltern's Clubmans, much of the Turbostar fleet, would probably have not entered service.

I stand by my claim that connections should be held on lines where it is to the benefit of the majority of passengers, yes on a route with a 30 minute frequency don't hold the connection the wait will do you no harm. On a branch line with a 2 hourly frequency the train should be held, what is the point of running an empty train followed by a full bus. If that happens to often people will just drive which is exactly what has happened on Grimsby - Newark, people don't trust the connection an now drive to Newark much to the delight of GNER (and probably now NXEC)

And what happens when it gets to the end of its journey and is out of diagram. BR didn't have magical powers. BR didn't hold trains regularly anyway.

Finally electrification has really suffered since the network was fragmented. If North TPE were to be electrified now it would need agreement from 4 operators I can think about. Under BR they would have done it and Northern local Leeds - Huddersfield service would have been covered as well.

No, it is a lack of government policy which has annihilated electrification progress.

 

[Snapper]

This fact is very good but please take off your rose tinted specs, you can't dispute that only the minority of passengers can buy and use AP tickets!

What a wonderful way of ducking what the PF research shows. You can call a ticket what you like. What matters is what you pay for it. And as the PF research shows. The majority of passengers are picking up some pretty good deals.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Satisfaction on the ECML route has been higher than the WCML ever since the Pendo's came on on-line. source passenger focus. Maybe I do have a point, try asking some passengers which they prefer!

Once again you're ducking the issue. You stated that pax prefer Mk3s to Pendolinos'. It's clear they don't. Trying to suggest that WCML pax would prefer Mk4s is rather daft as its not a choice they have. Although I suspect if you said to them would you prefer a slower train to the one you have now - I know what the answer would be...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Satisfaction on the ECML route has been higher than the WCML ever since the Pendo's came on on-line. source passenger focus. Maybe I do have a point, try asking some passengers which they prefer!

Really?

Would you care to show exactly where PF say this? I'm looking at the latest NPS survey now, and when it comes to comfort (of the seating area - a good indicator of what people think about different vehicles) Virgin beat NXEC by 78% to 74% (something they have consistently done). And In the spring 2006 NPS both VWC and GNER tied on overall satisfaction at 90%, whilst in the Autumn 2007 survey Virgin beat GNER in overall satisfaction by 86% to 82%...

Your point about "asking some passengers which they prefer" is rather curious as that's exactly what PF do. 10's of thousands of them in fact - every year!

 

[whoshotjimmi]

I would just like to enter the debate at this point!

Failed Unit and Bluenoxid have started talking about electrification. As someone who is taking a keen interest in West Yorkshire electrification currently, I would like to point out that electrification is not something that privatisation has any control over. The money for these schemes mainly has to come from central government where the scheme must show considerable benefits and value for money. WYPTE is actively seeking investment from such organisations as Yorkshire Forward etc to secure part of the funding but, in essence, the DfT are the ones who sign the cheque. Skipton has benefitted massively over the last decade or so, but this is not as a result of privatisation. As an example of the value for money aspect, in the 80's, the route to Blackpool North was under consideration for electrification which would have resulted in some major benefits accross the North West but it was abandoned due to the low running costs of recently introduced sprinters.

As an aside, someone started talking about local stations reopened under BR. I would like to respond by saying that, in West Yorkshire, Bramley; Burley Park; Outwood; Cottingley; Streethouse; Frizinghall; Saltaire - all reopened due to the efforts of WYPTE and not BR. In a more modern context, the already opened Glasshoughton and the proposed Low Moor, Apperley Bridge and Kirkstall Forge as well as redevelopment at Castleford nd Wakefield Kirkgate are all due to the money raised by WYPTE and that of local developers and again not the privatised rail company. Even the extra trains needed to run these services will have to be funded by the PTE. PTE funded trains have a history in West Yorkshire - the class 144, 158/9 and 333 being those most recent in my mind.

The point I am trying to make here is that, maybe we are starting to get a bit off topic. Maybe we are struggling towards explaining our preference for BR or for Privatisation using examples that are/were in no way related to them. What cannot be questioned is that cleanliness levels have improved dramatically since Privatisation. There now appears to be a much more concerted effort to improve the image of rail travel as it is run as a business and requires the passenger numbers to give ensure it is making enough money. Obviously there are a few bad eggs around (NXEC anyone?) and standards at some TOC's are invariably higher than at others (Northern and FTPE being examples of the former and the former Central Trains one of the latter). I am also convinced that long distance services are now much better as BR policy was to mainly cater for First Class. I know there are issues with this currently in some areas (NXEC again) but to me, long distance travel seems much more inclusionary and less elitist than it did under BR and there are now more services to choose from. It is also painfully obvious that the provincial sector is cared for a lot more. BR fluttered their eyes at everything Intercity to the detrement of the provincial sector. Privatisation has addressed this imbalance and, as a result, expectations are now able to be much higher.

 

[Failed Unit]

What a wonderful way of ducking what the PF research shows. You can call a ticket what you like. What matters is what you pay for it. And as the PF research shows. The majority of passengers are picking up some pretty good deals.

That research does not show anything of the sort, it shows that a majority of passengers on IC routes are getting better deals than the open return ticket. Not that a majority of passengers are picking up some pretty good deals. As previously stated more passengers are now only getting the choice of an open return or an AP, that is not progress. The majority of passengers can not buy any for of advance purchase ticket - fact. I will give you a few examples, Market Rasen - Cardiff, Huddersfield - Leeds, Potters Bar to London. This kind of journey is made by the majority of passengers! Scotrails most profitable route with the largest volume of passengers route is Edinburgh - Glasgow, you can't get AP's on that route! Why should someone paying an full fare return on that route feel good about the fact that someone can get from Edinburgh - Inverness for only £5 more than they have paid for a much shorter journey. Even PF admit that the majority of people can't use AP tickets.
[/QUOTE]

Voyagers, Pendolino's, Chiltern's Clubmans, much of the Turbostar fleet, would probably have not entered service.

Maybe not but something would have needed to replace the mk3 as part of the WCML upgrade, remember IC250? Maybe MML would have been electrifed and HST's cascaded to XC, mk3's may have aslo been cascaded from the WCML. My point was new stock was made before privatiastion, it has not been a benefit of privatisation as it would have happened anyway!

And what happens when it gets to the end of its journey and is out of diagram. BR didn't have magical powers. BR didn't hold trains regularly anyway.

Do you remember BR? The timekeeping was better for a start about 90% on all routes, but yes they did hold trains every day. I frequently arrived at newark to find my train had been held by 5 minutes. By the time it got to Cleethorpes it had caught up time as recovery time is not new. If it was late in it was late out, but I am sure in a lot of cases on rural lines holding a local train 10minutes makes little difference to the diagram but a big difference to the viability of the line.

Getting back to the OP, railways better now then they have ever been? Answer yes if you are lucky enough to be travelling on a direct service, on an IC route with AP tickets. If this minority of passengers are the reason to look at privatisation through rose tinted specs then this is fine.
No if you commute, or go shopping from local stations to your nearest major city.
No if you need to travel long distances covering more than one franchise operator.
Definately not if you use to have a direct service and this has been lost as a result of privatisation - whether forced by the government or not. Would someone from Nottingham be happy that they have to change at Derby to get to Crewe just because they have a 1/2 hourly service to Birmingham instead I think not. I am sure they would rather have one per hour to each place instead.

Yes some routes into London have 2 trains per hour, but people can still make this journey easily if it is only one per hour. The person that can no longer travel direct between Lincoln and Birmingham or Skegness and Stoke-on-Trent that used to have one train per hour but now has none per day certainly doesn't see that railways are better than ever before now they have been forced into 55 minute connections or driving!

 

[gordonthemoron]

BR policy was to mainly cater for First Class

I think you'll find that BR tried to get rid of 1st class wherever possible, this was partially due to proportion of 1st class passengers who were BR managers