Northern City Line not fit for purpose

[Mercurii]

Yeah, and since TfL have no shareholders, the money usually earmarked for those shareholders goes back in to TfL's account to make small improvements like deep cleaning of stations that other operators just won't do.

Plus, I'm sure TfL have considerable economies of scale across all their operations: admin, cleaners, maintenance, signage, ticketing machines, websites, social media. I'm sure there's a huge amount of pooling that goes on across their various services which likely saves a lot of money. Although I know Govia does a similar things with GN/TL/SE/SN, it's a much smaller operation overall with many more things contracted out to other companies who want to make a profit for their piece of the pie too.

Also, just putting a route on the tube map usually corresponds with a huge increase in ridership as we've seen with the NLL, ELL and Lea Valley Overground lines, and more fares money as a result.

Indeed, it always boils down to money to be made and not self sufficient enterprise.

 

[jon0844]

Nobody really knows how the core will cope with more usage because of the timetable and rostering issues so far.

The problems today aren't because the core is full.

 

[bramling]

Yeah, and since TfL have no shareholders, the money usually earmarked for those shareholders goes back in to TfL's account to make small improvements like deep cleaning of stations that other operators just won't do.

Plus, I'm sure TfL have considerable economies of scale across all their operations: admin, cleaners, maintenance, signage, ticketing machines, websites, social media. I'm sure there's a huge amount of pooling that goes on across their various services which likely saves a lot of money. Although I know Govia does a similar things with GN/TL/SE/SN, it's a much smaller operation overall with many more things contracted out to other companies who want to make a profit for their piece of the pie too.

Also, just putting a route on the tube map usually corresponds with a huge increase in ridership as we've seen with the NLL, ELL and Lea Valley Overground lines, and more fares money as a result.

I don’t get what benefits people think TFL will bring.

New trains = already coming on stream.
Station staffing = many stations already staffed first to last.
Gates = many stations already have these.
More services = route already running near capacity.
Longer trains = trains already at maximum unless they run a few longer services to KX, but with what rolling stock?
Oyster = the London part of the route already has it.

So we’re down to better reliability - which *shouldn’t* need TFL to deliver, gormless TFL staff hanging around everywhere, and some station enhancements - for stations which let’s be honest are in most cases perfectly fit for purpose today.

As regards ridership, the expression be careful what one wishes for springs to mind. So the route is already busy at times - do users *really* want it to become busier when capacity is highly limited by the infrastructure?

Then consider the inefficiencies of having a small operator running a small subset of services, or being bolted to another LO concession and thus lost in a larger monolith?

TFL was able to be transformational on some of its existing routes because of the investment opportunities. Much of this doesn’t apply to the GN inners. They’re quite content to plod up and down like they’ve been doing for the last four decades, lest someone sorts out the current reliability issues.

Remember also that TFL is financially broke at the moment, and may very well get more broke over the next couple of years with Crossrail being delayed, the SSR resignalling slipping to the right, and political government versus mayor games going on - perhaps a Conservative government happy to let a Labour mayor take the rap for issues. Will they actually be able to afford the orange paint?

 

[jon0844]

Assuming Oyster isn't upgraded and rolled out beyond zone 6 on the ECML, that's one key benefit for users. As you say, bar the timetable issues, the GN inners are pretty frequent and reliable. But people seem to want TfL to take over, and my local MP thinks it means he'll be able to get 4tph at Brookmans Park (which I expect is the primary reason in him being so vocal about the takeover!).

I just think it's inevitable no matter what. As it is likely to be very profitable, TfL having reduced income makes this a very logical move.

 

[marko2]

I don’t get what benefits people think TFL will bring.

New trains = already coming on stream.
Station staffing = many stations already staffed first to last.
Gates = many stations already have these.
More services = route already running near capacity.
Longer trains = trains already at maximum unless they run a few longer services to KX, but with what rolling stock?
Oyster = the London part of the route already has it.

So we’re down to better reliability - which *shouldn’t* need TFL to deliver, gormless TFL staff hanging around everywhere, and some station enhancements - for stations which let’s be honest are in most cases perfectly fit for purpose today.

TfL already operate three of the stations on the south end of the line: Moorage, Old Street and Highbury & Islington, and it's highly unlikely they'd take over Finsbury Park high level.

 

[bramling]

Assuming Oyster isn't upgraded and rolled out beyond zone 6 on the ECML, that's one key benefit for users. As you say, bar the timetable issues, the GN inners are pretty frequent and reliable. But people seem to want TfL to take over, and my local MP thinks it means he'll be able to get 4tph at Brookmans Park (which I expect is the primary reason in him being so vocal about the takeover!).

I just think it's inevitable no matter what. As it is likely to be very profitable, TfL having reduced income makes this a very logical move.

I suspect Brookmans Park et al would have had 4 tph at this timetable if it could robustly have been done. The moment the Cambridge slow services went onto the slow lines, which I have a feeling was not the original plan, meant compromises were always going to have to be made with the local services. I’d suggest 2ph is still a pretty decent service for a station which isn’t all that busy during the day. To be fair, the current timetable is actually quite nicely worked out - the problem is it relies on everything running right time, which just doesn’t happen thanks to the Thameslink effect.

As to whether it’s inevitable, I guess that depends on what happens next with GTR. If they go back to a FCC setup, I can’t see any value in breaking things up any further. If they decide to keep the Thameslink/Southern marriage then perhaps the residual GN services will get hived away in which case TFL becomes more likely. Personally I think it would be daft to split the GN service three ways, but that’s not to say it won’t happen.

To my mind the net result of a TFL takeover would simply be more overcrowding and not much else apart from lots of orange paint everywhere, but perhaps that’s just my cynical mind!

 

[jon0844]

It does seem to be a pretty odd arrangement with the TOC and TfL. I recall (somewhat speed) reading the documentation of the FCC franchise and the special rules for the Northern City Line route. It always makes me wonder how the buck is passed on who funds upgrade works and cleaning, to the extent that we have not only the NSE station name signs (which is perfectly fine and fit for purpose) but also a lot of things that weren't/aren't so good.

It's only fairly recently that signs have been updated to say National Rail instead of Welwyn (just Welwyn, not north or garden city) at Old Street and Stevenage at Moorgate. The lights were cleaned out so they were a lot brighter, but have since filled up with brake dust and other dirt.

Some attempts are being made to clean things up, with more significant works planned in the tunnels themselves, but how has it been allowed to get as bad as it has? Given the fact there have been quite a few reported fires (or smouldering) over the year, even before the 717 testing began.

 

[jon0844]

To my mind the net result of a TFL takeover would simply be more overcrowding and not much else apart from lots of orange paint everywhere, but perhaps that’s just my cynical mind!

Given LO often performs badly PPM wise, it's certainly true that the grass isn't always greener.. but this year most people seem to want rid of Govia and hearing that TfL (with the wonderful Oyster card and a fares freeze) is seen by many as utopia. They may change their mind later on, but it will be too late then!

 

[Fred26]

TfL already operate three of the stations on the south end of the line: Moorage, Old Street and Highbury & Islington, and it's highly unlikely they'd take over Finsbury Park high level.

Only the TfL parts of those stations. GTR run their parts with their own staff.

 

[bramling]

Given LO often performs badly PPM wise, it's certainly true that the grass isn't always greener.. but this year most people seem to want rid of Govia and hearing that TfL (with the wonderful Oyster card and a fares freeze) is seen by many as utopia. They may change their mind later on, but it will be too late then!

A fares freeze which has completely screwed TfL’s finances. And why should Welwyn Garden City get a fares freeze (on just TFL services?!), but Welwyn North not?!

You’re probably right though. I guess it depends on how much local MPs can convince Grayling. One does question the logic of largely Conservative areas handing control over their rail service to a body accountable to a Labour mayor who has no incentive to serve their area...

TFL’s rail operation is not a shining success story at the moment. Crossrail months late. LU performance declining, station closures and train cancellations both up, with major structural issues showing up as a result of poor management decisions over the last decade or so. SSR resignalling a total farce - coming up to two decades now and still not a millimetre of resignalled railway brought into use. Central Line fleet left to degenerate to a state where every day is a list of rolling-stock failures. ER issues on an increasing list of lines. A serious near-miss on LO at Peckham Rye. And not forgetting seven people killed on a TFL tram in Croydon - the only rail passengers to be killed in the last decade. Not a good record all in all.

 

[Hadders]

I've spend some time travelling the 'new' Overground routes out to CHingford, Cheshunt and Enfield Town over the last few days. I know they're using old trains but they were all repainted when TfL tooj over and I have to say that externally they are starting to become quite dirty and shabby. Stations were all painted orange upon takeover but even that's starting to peel, especially on hand rails.

I suspect that dealing with the Network South East signage on the NCL isn't simple. I doubt you can install temporary signage or stickers because of the fire regulations. Dealing with the signage would be a major issue, and I'm sure that WAGN, FCC and GTR would have replaced signage if it was simple.

 

[jon0844]

I didn't say there would be a fares freeze 'out here', rather people go on about how much cheaper it is to use Oyster and what a rip off normal rail fares (paper tickets) are. That's the perception from a lot of users, which doesn't have to be reality!

As for my MP. I really think he just wants more trains for himself. The letter from TfL he posted (saying they were 'ready to go') actually mentioned Brookmans Park in it, as an 'example' of extra stops. Must have been a coincidence to bring up one station, and not even a major one at that.

If GTR decided to run 4tph all day to his station, I'm sure he'd lighten up considerably and get off their back!

As for NCL stations. The wall signs with the name are surely just fine as they are, and it's the other signs which TfL have just fixed by putting stickers over the old text. New posters for the route maps and so on and you're basically done. It just needs a good clean and repaint here and there.

Fundamentally, there's nothing wrong with the stations. Wi-Fi would be a nice addition down there though, for when there's disruption and you really feel cut off from the world.

 

[ijmad]

As for my MP. I really think he just wants more trains for himself. The letter from TfL he posted (saying they were 'ready to go') actually mentioned Brookmans Park in it, as an 'example' of extra stops. Must have been a coincidence to bring up one station, and not even a major one at that.

If GTR decided to run 4tph all day to his station, I'm sure he'd lighten up considerably and get off their back!

For the moment, it appears TfL have given up on running 4tph to Cheshunt and Enfield Town, let alone any other service they might pick up, as the business case isn't there. They don't have the money to be running extra trains that don't have decent passenger loadings.

 

[jon0844]

For the moment, it appears TfL have given up on running 4tph to Cheshunt and Enfield Town, let alone any other service they might pick up, as the business case isn't there. They don't have the money to be running extra trains that don't have decent passenger loadings.

GTR has committed to 4tph all week, and perhaps the improved 717 acceleration times will allow the missing stops to be put back in, so they all return to all stations. Of course, that will not be possible until ALL 717s are in operation so if this is to happen it still won't be for a while... quite possibly December 2019.

I expect TfL wouldn't be able to go back on that - at least straight away.

 

[higthomas]

I don’t get what benefits people think TFL will bring.

New trains = already coming on stream.
Station staffing = many stations already staffed first to last.
Gates = many stations already have these.
More services = route already running near capacity.
Longer trains = trains already at maximum unless they run a few longer services to KX, but with what rolling stock?
Oyster = the London part of the route already has it.

So we’re down to better reliability - which *shouldn’t* need TFL to deliver, gormless TFL staff hanging around everywhere, and some station enhancements - for stations which let’s be honest are in most cases perfectly fit for purpose today.

As regards ridership, the expression be careful what one wishes for springs to mind. So the route is already busy at times - do users *really* want it to become busier when capacity is highly limited by the infrastructure?

Then consider the inefficiencies of having a small operator running a small subset of services, or being bolted to another LO concession and thus lost in a larger monolith?

TFL was able to be transformational on some of its existing routes because of the investment opportunities. Much of this doesn’t apply to the GN inners. They’re quite content to plod up and down like they’ve been doing for the last four decades, lest someone sorts out the current reliability issues.

Remember also that TFL is financially broke at the moment, and may very well get more broke over the next couple of years with Crossrail being delayed, the SSR resignalling slipping to the right, and political government versus mayor games going on - perhaps a Conservative government happy to let a Labour mayor take the rap for issues. Will they actually be able to afford the orange paint?

I think as a regularish NCL user, the things I'd want are a more frequent/regular service. Not 15-15-30 or 30-30 on Sundays, and cheaper fares. There's a £1.50 difference or something between fares from Enfield Town and Enfield Chase.

 

[Clip]

Running rail franchises is usually a profitable endeavour... that's why companies bid for these things in the first place.

And you say that but on the main page there are tales of woe from a couple of TOCs right now and VTEC recently going kaput

Yes, I can't imagine this being a loss making route! And the new trains will just need some new vinyls, seat covers and posters. The platforms would be renovated over time, perhaps with temporary signs to begin with.

You need to have the money upfront to pay for it though and does TfL have that? Id probably say no.

Plus, I'm sure TfL have considerable economies of scale across all their operations: admin, cleaners, maintenance, signage, ticketing machines, websites, social media. I'm sure there's a huge amount of pooling that goes on across their various services which likely saves a lot of money.

Well ticketing machines on LO are different to the POMs for LUL - cleaners and maintenance(?) is contracted out and ive no idea what websites and social media have to do with the large scale of works these stations would need to get them to a decent usable stae

 

[Clip]

For the moment, it appears TfL have given up on running 4tph to Cheshunt and Enfield Town, let alone any other service they might pick up, as the business case isn't there. They don't have the money to be running extra trains that don't have decent passenger loadings.

Yet you think they have the money to do infrastructure works on old decrepit stations? The mind boggles

 

[ijmad]

Yet you think they have the money to do infrastructure works on old decrepit stations? The mind boggles

Suspect they could do deep cleaning and signage if they were running the whole NCL franchise and reinvested what would be profits.

But anyway, it's the end of austerity now (!) so surely the government might give them a grant if it agreed to punt off more poorly run suburban railways in TfL's direction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yet you think they have the money to do infrastructure works on old decrepit stations? The mind boggles

TBH City Thameslink is as run-down, and it's right slap bang in the middle of the part of the UK with by far the highest GDP. It doesn't have NSE signs, but it's filthy and half the lights don't work. Using it feels like a trip back to the 1970s, at least until a Class 700 shows up.

 

[Clip]

Suspect they could do deep cleaning and signage if they were running the whole NCL franchise and reinvested what would be profits.

But anyway, it's the end of austerity now (!) so surely the government might give them a grant if it agreed to punt off more poorly run suburban railways in TfL's direction.

The government wont give them anything anymore and if you think any profits made from the line would be invested then Id think again - it would be swallowed up elsewhere within TfL where they need funding for much bigger and better programmes

TBH City Thameslink is as run-down, and it's right slap bang in the middle of the part of the UK with by far the highest GDP. It doesn't have NSE signs, but it's filthy and half the lights don't work. Using it feels like a trip back to the 1970s, at least until a Class 700 shows up.

City Thameslink is grim but theres generally a train every couple of minutes so its not like you have to wait a while for one to turn up to escape

 

[jon0844]

You have Internet connectivity there too, which probably helps too.

 

[bramling]

The government wont give them anything anymore and if you think any profits made from the line would be invested then Id think again - it would be swallowed up elsewhere within TfL where they need funding for much bigger and better programmes



City Thameslink is grim but theres generally a train every couple of minutes so its not like you have to wait a while for one to turn up to escape

Ha! If you’re travelling to somewhere like Arlesey you can be in for some *very* long waits in the core. Indeed at times I suppose one may as well while away the time by travelling south to London Bridge to get pick of the seats.

 

[Hadders]

TBH City Thameslink is as run-down, and it's right slap bang in the middle of the part of the UK with by far the highest GDP. It doesn't have NSE signs, but it's filthy and half the lights don't work. Using it feels like a trip back to the 1970s, at least until a Class 700 shows up.

The signage at City Thameslink is very Network South East style. it might not say Network South East but the colours, font etc give the game away.

 

[Helvellyn]

So I thought earlier in the year Chris Grayling floated that the Northern City services would go to London Overground anyway once the GTR franchise ends, as well as the remaining Great Northern services out of King's Cross going to LNER to give them more guaranteed income from a Cambridgeshire commuter base.

 

[Mercurii]

So I thought earlier in the year Chris Grayling floated that the Northern City services would go to London Overground anyway once the GTR franchise ends, as well as the remaining Great Northern services out of King's Cross going to LNER to give them more guaranteed income from a Cambridgeshire commuter base.

You believe Chris Grayling words?

 

[sprunt]

The platforms at Moorgate are being re-tiled - they've started removing the old tiles (presumably it's being done overnight, as there seem to be a few more gone each morning).

 

[jellybaby]

The platforms at Moorgate are being re-tiled - they've started removing the old tiles (presumably it's being done overnight, as there seem to be a few more gone each morning).

Call my a cynic but unless they have started to put new tiles up I'd say they are just removing the old. Could be generations before anything new goes up!

 

[Mikey C]

Are they selling the tiles to nostalgic commuters?

"You too could own a piece of unique transport history"

 

[ijmad]

Are they selling the tiles to nostalgic commuters?

"You too could own a piece of unique transport history"

Under H&S I imagine they're being taken away in biohazard containers

 

[jon0844]

Are they selling the tiles to nostalgic commuters?

"You too could own a piece of unique transport history"

Merlin did it at Alton Towers to raise money, with bits of random wood that came from the construction of the new wooden rollercoaster.

To be honest, I think Network Rail/TfL is missing a trick by not selling off random bits of station to enthusiasts!

Under OSHA I imagine they're being taken away in biohazard containers

There is that I suppose!