Is the Great Western franchise too big?

[jimm]

OK. Things have improved since Mark Hopwood arrived. I recall all the issues when they first took over Wessex Trains though; and what happened when they first took over Thames Trains - ask any ex-TT staff.

And many of the issues when FGW took over Wessex Trains were not of their making - chief among them the DfT deciding that they wouldn't need all the rolling stock Wessex had previously used. How was that FGW's fault?

What 'happened' when they first took over Thames Trains? Please enlighten us?

My experience was that things started to improve rapidly, after a last year of Thames Trains when anything and everything they could think of to cut costs and scrape up every last penny of income for Go-Ahead before handing in the keys was implemented with zeal.

At my local station we lost the afternoon booking shift - with the experienced booking clerk moved to train dispatch duty at another station - and car parking charges were implemented, accompanied by claims that passengers would benefit through the installation of CCTV and lighting in a section that had no lights.

We're still waiting for the CCTV and lights, though FGW did bring back the booking clerk to reinstate the afternoon shift, which continues to this day.

Really?

The last time I attempted to travel on GWR from a local station within the Bristol area the ticket machine was out of order and the ticket office was closed. The member of staff on duty was refusing to sell tickets and advised the 30 or so waiting passengers to buy a ticket on the train. How would that even be possible when the conductor also needs to open/close the doors and perform other duties on such a short journey into Bristol? Anyone needing to buy a ticket in order to leave a station is then inconvenienced by having to buy a ticket at their destination and often have to queue in order to do so.

No, we need an operator that better looks after passengers who make local journeys than GWR do now.

None of which ever happens at stations or on trains run by other TOCs, of course:roll::roll::roll:

 

[HH]

What 'happened' when they first took over Thames Trains? Please enlighten us?

My experience was that things started to improve rapidly, after a last year of Thames Trains when anything and everything they could think of to cut costs and scrape up every last penny of income for Go-Ahead before handing in the keys was implemented with zeal.

You are absolutely right about Go Ahead, which is why the staff were looking forward to FGW taking over, especially after what FGW said they were going to do. However, FGW changed their plans, didn't consult or even inform TT staff and ****ed off a lot of people.

These days FGW have become very VT-like, in that they take every opportunity to try and bash DfT/NR on contractual issues to make up for the fact that they over forecast revenue.

The PPM dataset for TOCs can be found here: http://www.orr.gov.uk/statistics/published-stats/additional-datasets

I made this into a graph for GWR which I attach. Since the initial boost back in 2009 they haven't exactly set the world alight.

 

[jimm]

You are absolutely right about Go Ahead, which is why the staff were looking forward to FGW taking over, especially after what FGW said they were going to do. However, FGW changed their plans, didn't consult or even inform TT staff and ****ed off a lot of people.

These days FGW have become very VT-like, in that they take every opportunity to try and bash DfT/NR on contractual issues to make up for the fact that they over forecast revenue.

The PPM dataset for TOCs can be found here: http://www.orr.gov.uk/statistics/published-stats/additional-datasets

I made this into a graph for GWR which I attach. Since the initial boost back in 2009 they haven't exactly set the world alight.

Bit hard to set anything alight with the level of Network Rail infrastructure failures - see Wednesday and Thursday just gone - and the odd bit of work going on for a long time now on GWML resignalling, electrification and Crosssrail...

And however doggedly determined the engineering teams are, the express train fleet is of pension age in railway terms, and the fleet until very recently has been effectively all-diesel (Heathrow Connect aside) which is less reliable than electric traction, so the level of TOC-related delays is going to be higher as well.

Nor does GWR have their own private bit of railway to play with, unlike certain other operators with better PPM records.

Against that backdrop, I doubt the PPM would look any better with another franchisee or if the organisation had stayed in smaller pieces.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

and what happened when they first took over Thames Trains

Ah yes, I remember that. We got a greatly improved service and much more suitable stock on the Cotswold Line:

http://www.wycherail.co.uk/Timetables/2004-Adelante.pdf

 

[coppercapped]

Really?

Ah! Quotation Wars...

Say, what do I care about Napoleon? What do we care about what they did 500 or 1,000 years ago? I don't know whether Napoleon did or did not try to get across and I don't care. It means nothing to me. History is more or less bunk. It's tradition. We don't want tradition. We want to live in the present and the only history that is worth a tinker's dam is the history we make today.

Henry Ford 1916

 

[HH]

Ah yes, I remember that. We got a greatly improved service and much more suitable stock on the Cotswold Line:

http://www.wycherail.co.uk/Timetables/2004-Adelante.pdf

180s are nice trains - when they run.

 

[HH]

Against that backdrop, I doubt the PPM would look any better with another franchisee or if the organisation had stayed in smaller pieces.

We'll never know. I just don't see anything Great.

 

[HH]

Henry Ford 1916

There wasn't any car history at that point; there are plenty of lessons to be learned from automotive history today. But Ford himself tried to backtrack from that quote in later life...

https://www.thoughtco.com/g00/henry-ford-why-history-is-bunk-172412?i10c.referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.uk%2F

The art of a good quote is to make it apposite - not just pick something that sounds vaguely like it supports your argument.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

One thing I can honestly say in GWR's favour is that they are genuinely trying to improve staff engagement and build a culture of empowerment. A lot of people have criticised the brand but in truth it is meant as an internal rebranding. Obviously some staff won't buy inot it but a lot of people are trying to be as positive as possible about it. Not many TOCS are taking such a proactive approach to customer experience, so even if it fails or is let down by poor performance or infrastructure failings, at least they tried something new.

 

[HH]

One thing I can honestly say in GWR's favour is that they are genuinely trying to improve staff engagement and build a culture of empowerment. A lot of people have criticised the brand but in truth it is meant as an internal rebranding. Obviously some staff won't buy inot it but a lot of people are trying to be as positive as possible about it. Not many TOCS are taking such a proactive approach to customer experience, so even if it fails or is let down by poor performance or infrastructure failings, at least they tried something new.

It's not something new; Virgin Trains (not Stagecoach!) have been trying to do this for some time. Still, I wish them every success, because it is the right approach.

 

[fgwrich]

And many of the issues when FGW took over Wessex Trains were not of their making - chief among them the DfT deciding that they wouldn't need all the rolling stock Wessex had previously used. How was that FGW's fault?

What 'happened' when they first took over Thames Trains? Please enlighten us?

My experience was that things started to improve rapidly, after a last year of Thames Trains when anything and everything they could think of to cut costs and scrape up every last penny of income for Go-Ahead before handing in the keys was implemented with zeal.

At my local station we lost the afternoon booking shift - with the experienced booking clerk moved to train dispatch duty at another station - and car parking charges were implemented, accompanied by claims that passengers would benefit through the installation of CCTV and lighting in a section that had no lights.

We're still waiting for the CCTV and lights, though FGW did bring back the booking clerk to reinstate the afternoon shift, which continues to this day.



None of which ever happens at stations or on trains run by other TOCs, of course:roll::roll::roll:

I completely agree with you, FGW has worked hard to revolutionise the fortunes of the Devon and Cornwall branches with a far more frequent service pattern, just about as many units as Wessex had and greater interconnectivity with the Intercity services. They also fully refurbished their entire fleet in nearly one big hit and have in my eyes been improving ever since the well published darker days of 2006. Yes the start of the franchise got off to a rocky start, but the rather quick replacement of Ms Forster with the excellent Andrew Haines and Mark Hopwood soon rather put paid to the darker days and turned it around to the operation we have to this day. Yes I still have mixed feelings about the GWR rebrand - I can understand many of the points put across for it including the one above about the internal rebrand, but I would still consider it to be the best of the larger and longer distance franchises out there. The retention and overhaul of the Night Riviera for example, the retention and increase of the Pullman Dining services, the increase in capacity and the HST refurbishments - all big positives in my book.

As for splitting off the West Country parts to the franchise - I've seen those proposals, and no. It would loose the interconnectivity the FGW Franchise has brought us, it would probably create maintenance issues and headaches - Remember when Wessex couldn't provide a service because they were short of a unit or two - because they were actually being maintained over at Cardiff Canton by ATW who's infamous maintenance regime led to First leaving Canton and building their own DMU sheds in St Phillips Marsh instead, and ultimately would bring us back to the days of Wessex all over again. I'm all against it frankly.

 

[coppercapped]

There wasn't any car history at that point; there are plenty of lessons to be learned from automotive history today. But Ford himself tried to backtrack from that quote in later life...

https://www.thoughtco.com/g00/henry-ford-why-history-is-bunk-172412?i10c.referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.uk%2F

The art of a good quote is to make it apposite - not just pick something that sounds vaguely like it supports your argument.

Thank you for the lecture.

I frequently find the general tenor of posts made here to be deeply hidebound and generally depressing- along the lines of "<some change> can't possibly work because it was tried in 19XX and it was dropped a year (or two or more) later." Or your attempt to imply that the GWR of today can't be any good - or rather its managers must be incompetent - because of some real or perceived issues which occurred when a TOC was wound up 13 years ago.

I am, in the nicest possible way, trying to tell you that I, like many other people who use the railways, are bored with this constant harping about the past. Most users don't care whose nose was put out of joint a decade or more ago and to use it as a explanation as to why things don't work quite the way now as one would hope seems - well - far fetched and lacking in substance.

In this sense - History is Bunk.

 

[HH]

Thank you for the lecture.

I frequently find the general tenor of posts made here to be deeply hidebound and generally depressing- along the lines of "<some change> can't possibly work because it was tried in 19XX and it was dropped a year (or two or more) later." Or your attempt to imply that the GWR of today can't be any good - or rather its managers must be incompetent - because of some real or perceived issues which occurred when a TOC was wound up 13 years ago.

I am, in the nicest possible way, trying to tell you that I, like many other people who use the railways, are bored with this constant harping about the past. Most users don't care whose nose was put out of joint a decade or more ago and to use it as a explanation as to why things don't work quite the way now as one would hope seems - well - far fetched and lacking in substance.

In this sense - History is Bunk.

Most ideas in the railway have been around a few times, which is probably why you probably see what you see. It's like leaf fall - every few years it seems to catch out NR, who then have a blitz, before gradually letting it slip again...

Nevertheless I take your point. I, too, always challenge received wisdom.

 

[hassaanhc]

Bit hard to set anything alight with the level of Network Rail infrastructure failures - see Wednesday and Thursday just gone - and the odd bit of work going on for a long time now on GWML resignalling, electrification and Crosssrail...

And however doggedly determined the engineering teams are, the express train fleet is of pension age in railway terms, and the fleet until very recently has been effectively all-diesel (Heathrow Connect aside) which is less reliable than electric traction, so the level of TOC-related delays is going to be higher as well.

Nor does GWR have their own private bit of railway to play with, unlike certain other operators with better PPM records.

Against that backdrop, I doubt the PPM would look any better with another franchisee or if the organisation had stayed in smaller pieces.

I do agree that GWR have been unlucky with things. The Thames Valley service does seem to have a "unreliable and overcrowded" reputation, but with Crossrail having been on the horizon for many years, GWR were never going to be able to order new inner suburban DMUs. They do their best to have services as long as possible in the peaks, and the extra HSTs/180s freeing up Turbos has really helped. Sure there are sometimes infrastructure issues, but the GWML isn't alone in having them. Many of the inner suburban stations could do with a bit of paint, but again with TfL soon taking over operation of those, GWR were not going to spend money on that. And freight can sometimes cause delays, again something GWR can't go much about.

I myself had previously been taken in by the above reputation, not helped by experiences during the time I wasn't familiar with National Rail (and found it very difficult to use compared to the Tube), so always avoided the route. This was until just over 3 years ago, when I decided to give it a try for off-peak travelling to/from Southall, as an alternative for the Piccadilly Line, the SWT Hounslow Loop, or the bus (I live between Southall and Hounslow areas). Turns out off peak, the trains were emptier than I thought, especially the Heathrow Connect ones, and many busy-looking trains were actually caused by people deciding to not use the full length of the train :roll:. The frequency was originally an issue, with a couple of 20+ minute gaps in the morning peak, and 23 minute gaps twice an hour throught the off peak period, but the diversion of the Greenford service to Hayes & Harlington has really helped there .
Yes I still try to avoid the route in the morning peak on the rare occasion I have to travel that early (as Hounslow Loop trains effectively start at Hounslow so you get a seat ), but I've found 5 and 6 car Turbos not being much of a struggle to board around 0730 on many occasions that I've travelled (on the other hand last week an 8-car 387 from Maidenhead at that time was surprisingly difficult to board). But obviously trains won't be empty at that time, so not getting a seat isn't a surprise! And again in the evening peak especially people don't use the full length of the train, often causing booked dwell times to be exceeded as they try to squeeze out of the front 2 coaches (although dwell times appear to be a bit tight anyway, not helped by poor DOO equipment).

Of course there are things that GWR could improve on. The level of info given during disruption does seem to struggle sometimes, but they don't appear to be alone in that. The Turbos could sometimes be cleaned a bit better. But things could be much worse than what exists right now.

 

[hassaanhc]

Another example of why GWR sometimes cannot win (passengers not wanting to move to a slightly quieter train that takes only 7 minutes longer)
http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...ustrated-reading-passenger-slams-gwr-13310681
(my bold)

"I don't know why GWR could not have put on extra trains or at the very least extra carriages to account for this - surely they knew big events were happening and they should have factored this in to the timetable."

James Davis, spokesman for GWR, said extra provisions had been made for some services on the night.

He said: "We did provide extra carriages on services on Saturday evening; the 11.20pm was increased from three to five carriages; as was the 0.05am.

"There is also an 11.33pm service which departs three minutes after the 11.30pm and arrives into Reading at 0.11am (the 11.30pm arrives into Reading at 0.04am).

"It is possible passengers were advised of this."

The train was delayed by around 15 minutes, claimed the passenger, due to GWR asking people to move trains.

Services to Reading from London run until the early hours, although take longer than the standard time of around half an hour.

He added: "The guard basically blamed us [the passengers] for the train being delayed. We were all there way before the train was meant to leave. He kept telling us to move to trains which would have taken an age to get back to Reading.