2018 - A cursed year for the railway ?

[DarloRich]

I can't speak for the other posters on here, however my opening description of the service throughout 2018 is how I've experienced it, so you can disagree all you like from the home counties, however this is the worst its been up here in the North, and there are plenty who've had it worse than me.

Nice try at a sindy comment but I have been up north most weekends thanks. I know it has been really difficult. It is also like I have never travelled on thameslink this year

Perhaps, unlike you, I have a bit more grasp of the bigger picture and the causes of any problem

 

[yorksrob]

Hmm! Passenger traffic buoyant? From the start of the nationalised railway passenger traffic in terms of passenger-journeys was 20% lower than the inter-war average. There was a peak in 1955/6 which is largely explained by the Suez Crisis and short term petrol rationing.

The point about the freight traffic was that it essentially cross-subsidised passenger traffic. When the freight went away the passenger traffic had to support itself.

The long term effects of the 1955 ASLEF strike were disastrous. It certainly had more significant long term effects than Saturday strikes on a couple of parts of the railway network.

We don't know what the long term effects of the current disruption will be. Already we have had comment on here from people generally inclined towards the railway who have given up using it. The general public will be far less forgiving.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Hmm! Passenger traffic buoyant? From the start of the nationalised railway passenger traffic in terms of passenger-journeys was 20% lower than the inter-war average. There was a peak in 1955/6 which is largely explained by the Suez Crisis and short term petrol rationing.

The point about the freight traffic was that it essentially cross-subsidised passenger traffic. When the freight went away the passenger traffic had to support itself.

The long term effects of the 1955 ASLEF strike were disastrous. It certainly had more significant long term effects than Saturday strikes on a couple of parts of the railway network.

Once the war was over - and road transport which had been seriously curtailed could run again - "BR" suffered from all the usual well known constraints (lack of steel , labour and so on) , - but the "high value" goods traffic was rapidly dissapearing and the railway was effectively moving bulk stuff like coal etc - of course it was handling parcels and high value freight in seriously deficient depots etc - watch "Fully Fitted Freight" done by the BTF which shows the nonsense of a long distance consumer freight being loaded in an open yard by hand - with transfers of perishables shifted from a covered depot (the UK's biggest incidentally)- by road !! - madness.

Careful perusal of commercial freight records at Kew (Archives) shows the impact of road traffic was serious pre - war. The railway was onto a hiding from nothing - the WW2 was a heroic experience - but the decline was truly in before that. By the time the "modernisation" plan was partly implemented , it was way too late.

 

[yorksrob]

Nice try at a sindy comment but I have been up north most weekends thanks. I know it has been really difficult. It is also like I have never travelled on thameslink this year

Perhaps, unlike you, I have a bit more grasp of the bigger picture and the causes of any problem

Well, the "bigger picture" whatever that is, doesn't get me where I need to be.

As a long term rail traveller, I have long accepted that occasionally things will go wrong and there will be disruption. It goes with the territory. However, the level of disruption this year has been unacceptable, particularly as so much of it has been caused by a conspiracy between a union, a TOC and a government department who are content to sit back and not reach a resolution over an obscure technical detail of operation, however much disruption to the local economy it causes.

 

[DarloRich]

Well, the "bigger picture" whatever that is, doesn't get me where I need to be.

As a long term rail traveller, I have long accepted that occasionally things will go wrong and there will be disruption. It goes with the territory. However, the level of disruption this year has been unacceptable, particularly as so much of it has been caused by a conspiracy between a union, a TOC and a government department who are content to sit back and not reach a resolution over an obscure technical detail of operation, however much disruption to the local economy it causes.

I don't think anyone suggests performance has been acceptable. It isn't and that should be obvious to anyone with the semblance of intelligence, even chris grayling. I simply take issue with the silly hyperbole in your opening post.

This isnt the worst year ever. It simply isnt. Post Hatfield was much worse on a national basis. I also maintain you are simply unwilling to acknowledge the complex issues that have contributed to this situation. The quoted post shows that.

That said it MIGHT be accurate to say this is the worst year ever for the Northern franchise. Might.

 

[vlad]

An interesting post, given the massive re-modelling at Derby. Whilst the Crewe service is one of relatively few that terminate there rather than continuing my impression from other services in the area is that they are much more ‘fluid’ now. And the actual work, replacement buses, publicity, etc. was rather well done by many accounts.
If Derby wasn’t regarded as a definite success the industry really is in trouble. (I refrain from commenting on other matters in this post.)

That's the thing - given that the Crewe service doesn't go beyond Derby the remodelling hasn't had any obvious effect apart from the fact the train no longer uses platform 2 or 5.

I'd assume the Derby remodelling was successful but as I always have to change trains in Derby I couldn't tell you the benefits.

 

[yorksrob]

I don't think anyone suggests performance has been acceptable. It isn't and that should be obvious to anyone with the semblance of intelligence, even chris grayling. I simply take issue with the silly hyperbole in your opening post.

This isnt the worst year ever. It simply isnt. Post Hatfield was much worse on a national basis. I also maintain you are simply unwilling to acknowledge the complex issues that have contributed to this situation. The quoted post shows that.

That said it MIGHT be accurate to say this is the worst year ever for the Northern franchise. Might.

If you don't like the hyperbole, that's tough I'm afraid. I've been building it up to it throughout the year.

Some of the issues are complex - timetabling issues, some bad luck - buried cables, some due to self-inflicted stupidity by the industry and its masters - the industrial dispute, some inexplicable - the closure of the Atherton line for almost every weekend of the year due to an electrification its not even part of.

It all adds up to a very bad passenger experience as problems which maybe aren't entirely the fault of the railway are compounded by those that are entirely avoidable.

For passengers, this year has to be down there with the post-Hatfield nervous breakdown, and the general public will be far less forgiving than those on here.

In terms of Hatfield, there was a considerable drop in performance, however during that time were as many passengers left without a service at all on a recurrent basis ? I don't think so.

 

[DarloRich]

If you don't like the hyperbole, that's tough I'm afraid. I've been building it up to it throughout the year.

Some of the issues are complex - timetabling issues, some bad luck - buried cables, some due to self-inflicted stupidity by the industry and its masters - the industrial dispute, some inexplicable - the closure of the Atherton line for almost every weekend of the year due to an electrification its not even part of.

It all adds up to a very bad passenger experience as problems which maybe aren't entirely the fault of the railway are compounded by those that are entirely avoidable.

For passengers, this year has to be down there with the post-Hatfield nervous breakdown, and the general public will be far less forgiving than those on here.

Trying to be respectful: the impact of the Hatfield fallout had a much wider impact on the national railway than issues this year. Those of us with a wider viewpoint can see that.

I do not agree with you on your general assertion but it is good we do agree your opening statement is hyperbolic.

 

[yorksrob]

Trying to be respectful: the impact of the Hatfield fallout had a much wider impact on the national railway than issues this year. Those of us with a wider viewpoint can see that.

I do not agree with you on your general assertion but it is good we do agree your opening statement is hyperbolic.

It will be interesting to see what the passenger figures from Northern stations are like over the next couple of years are. I'm sure they will expose your cavalier attitude to be a major underestimation of the gravity of this years debacle for the railway.

 

[TheSel]

Well, the "bigger picture" whatever that is, doesn't get me where I need to be.

As a long term rail traveller, I have long accepted that occasionally things will go wrong and there will be disruption. It goes with the territory. However, the level of disruption this year has been unacceptable, particularly as so much of it has been caused by a conspiracy between a union, a TOC and a government department who are content to sit back and not reach a resolution over an obscure technical detail of operation, however much disruption to the local economy it causes.

I don't think anyone suggests performance has been acceptable. It isn't and that should be obvious to anyone with the semblance of intelligence, even chris grayling. I simply take issue with the silly hyperbole in your opening post.

This isnt the worst year ever. It simply isnt. Post Hatfield was much worse on a national basis. I also maintain you are simply unwilling to acknowledge the complex issues that have contributed to this situation. The quoted post shows that.

That said it MIGHT be accurate to say this is the worst year ever for the Northern franchise. Might.

The trouble is that you both agree that this year's performance - and indeed the current situation - isn't acceptable. But what can we do, as commuters / shoppers / socialisers whose journey is twixt two stations served only by Northern Rail?

If I consider the "service" at my local supermarket to be unacceptable, I can go to another one. OK, it may not be quite so handy, it might cost a few bob more, or I might not get the same brands, but I have a choice. I can say that Supermarket "A" is unacceptable, and take my custom elsewhere.

If I consider my local MP's performance to be unacceptable, I can vote against him/her next time, and if there are enough like minded people, he/she will be out of that job at the next election. (Well, OK, he/she will probably walk into another highly paid opportunity somewhere with few or no "failure standards" to be bothered with - life's like that!)

But what can we do about an the "unacceptable" performance of the incumbent rail operator who essentially has a monopoly over the provision of this service? Particularly when you find this message on Northern's own website (https://www.northernrailway.co.uk/stations/SOP):

(DIRECT QUOTE) Despite our best efforts, we are unable to provide a service from this station

Well, Guys, you've said it - that was your best effort, and you delivered diddley squat. Surely it is time for Failing Graying and his back-room guys and gals to kick Northern into touch once and for all. No point in putting them on an improvement plan - they've condemned themselves by their own words - "Despite our best efforts, we are unable to provide a service from this station".

 

[Bald Rick]

If I consider the "service" at my local supermarket to be unacceptable, I can go to another one. OK, it may not be quite so handy, it might cost a few bob more, or I might not get the same brands, but I have a choice. I can say that Supermarket "A" is unacceptable, and take my custom elsewhere.

If I consider my local MP's performance to be unacceptable, I can vote against him/her next time, and if there are enough like minded people, he/she will be out of that job at the next election. (Well, OK, he/she will probably walk into another highly paid opportunity somewhere with few or no "failure standards" to be bothered with - life's like that!)

But what can we do about an the "unacceptable" performance of the incumbent rail operator who essentially has a monopoly over the provision of this service?

Use another mode of transport. There’s plenty available. Granted they might be more expensive / longer journey time / less comfortable.

 

[DarloRich]

It will be interesting to see what the passenger figures from Northern stations are like over the next couple of years are. I'm sure they will expose your cavalier attitude to be a major underestimation of the gravity of this years debacle for the railway.

Passenger numbers may fall a bit but I suspect they will return once people figure out what a ball ache driving into Leeds and Manchester is at rush hour. Coupled with the costs of parking and wear and tear on the car the train is still cheaper.

Standing in the rain at the bus stop will also become tiresome when you could be on a dry station waiting for a much quicker train.

Also I STILL maintain the effects of Hatfield were much worse on a national scale than this year.

 

[Bald Rick]

Also I STILL maintain the effects of Hatfield were much worse on a national scale than this year.

There’s no doubt that is correct. It was hell, every day, for the best part of a year. Performance was in the 60s sometimes 70s on a good day. My regular commute at the time saw 30% of services cancelled, and journey times of what did run extended by between 50-100%. My experience was by no means unusual.

Nevertheless I maintain that 1982 was worse. Endless national strikes, resulting in an all out strike that caused BR to issue redundancy notices to all drivers, effectively putting the whole industry on a closure notice.

 

[DarloRich]

The trouble is that you both agree that this year's performance - and indeed the current situation - isn't acceptable. But what can we do, as commuters / shoppers / socialisers whose journey is twixt two stations served only by Northern Rail?

If I consider the "service" at my local supermarket to be unacceptable, I can go to another one. OK, it may not be quite so handy, it might cost a few bob more, or I might not get the same brands, but I have a choice. I can say that Supermarket "A" is unacceptable, and take my custom elsewhere.

If I consider my local MP's performance to be unacceptable, I can vote against him/her next time, and if there are enough like minded people, he/she will be out of that job at the next election. (Well, OK, he/she will probably walk into another highly paid opportunity somewhere with few or no "failure standards" to be bothered with - life's like that!)

But what can we do about an the "unacceptable" performance of the incumbent rail operator who essentially has a monopoly over the provision of this service? Particularly when you find this message on Northern's own website (https://www.northernrailway.co.uk/stations/SOP):

(DIRECT QUOTE) Despite our best efforts, we are unable to provide a service from this station

Well, Guys, you've said it - that was your best effort, and you delivered diddley squat. Surely it is time for Failing Graying and his back-room guys and gals to kick Northern into touch once and for all. No point in putting them on an improvement plan - they've condemned themselves by their own words - "Despite our best efforts, we are unable to provide a service from this station".

Without wishing to be rude: get the bus!

I suspect a few months of bus travel will soon have you back on the train.

 

[yorksrob]

Passenger numbers may fall a bit but I suspect they will return once people figure out what a ball ache driving into Leeds and Manchester is at rush hour. Coupled with the costs of parking and wear and tear on the car the train is still cheaper.

Standing in the rain at the bus stop will also become tiresome when you could be on a dry station waiting for a much quicker train.

Also I STILL maintain the effects of Hatfield were much worse on a national scale than this year.

I must have had a quiet post Hatfield, as my commute wasn't overly affected by the meltdown. The remodelling of Leeds had more of an effect on my travel, however days without trains were rare.

 

[coppercapped]

Once the war was over - and road transport which had been seriously curtailed could run again - "BR" suffered from all the usual well known constraints (lack of steel , labour and so on) , - but the "high value" goods traffic was rapidly dissapearing and the railway was effectively moving bulk stuff like coal etc - of course it was handling parcels and high value freight in seriously deficient depots etc - watch "Fully Fitted Freight" done by the BTF which shows the nonsense of a long distance consumer freight being loaded in an open yard by hand - with transfers of perishables shifted from a covered depot (the UK's biggest incidentally)- by road !! - madness.

Careful perusal of commercial freight records at Kew (Archives) shows the impact of road traffic was serious pre - war. The railway was onto a hiding from nothing - the WW2 was a heroic experience - but the decline was truly in before that. By the time the "modernisation" plan was partly implemented , it was way too late.

I quite agree with you - and the poor financial results in the 1930s were one of the reasons for the BIg Four's "Square Deal" campaign.

My point was more that the 1955 strike was a tipping point. Suddenly it became clear to the general public that they were no longer beholden to the rallway - there were other ways to get your strawberries to market than on the 9.53 and you could get to work by car - even in central London although that wasn't quite so easy as in Cardiff or Leeds.

The aftershocks of the 1955 strike were one of the reasons the opposition to many of the service withdrawals proposed by Dr. Beeching only six years later was so muted. In many cases no objections were raised at all as people had discovered that they could get around without the railway.

This is in complete opposition to the current position on Northern and South West Railway - no lines are being proposed for closure and people now travel much longer distances to work so when the service recovers in reliability the passengers will return as train travel is preferable, in many cases, to driving in current traffic conditions.

 

[yorksrob]

The aftershocks of the 1955 strike were one of the reasons the opposition to many of the service withdrawals proposed by Dr. Beeching only six years later was so muted. In many cases no objections were raised at all as people had discovered that they could get around without the railway.

This is in complete opposition to the current position on Northern and South West Railway - no lines are being proposed for closure and people now travel much longer distances to work so when the service recovers in reliability the passengers will return as train travel is preferable, in many cases, to driving in current traffic conditions.

We have a situation where passengers making discretionary journeys at non-commuting times, many of whom have alternatives such as motor transport, are being targeted week after week, and you think people won't permanently change their travel habits ?

I'm surprised you can't see the obvious parallels.

Beeching came six years after the ASLEF strike.

 

[bramling]

Use another mode of transport. There’s plenty available. Granted they might be more expensive / longer journey time / less comfortable.

Or they may be less expensive, quicker and/or more comfortable - particularly the car. The railway needs to be careful - trains are generally acknowledged to be getting less comfortable. For many journeys car is quicker and/or cheaper. This isn’t leaving much incentive to go by train. I certainly know people who have ditched it in the last year or two - and the number of journeys I make has nosedived this year.

 

[DarloRich]

Or they may be less expensive, quicker and/or more comfortable - particularly the car. The railway needs to be careful - trains are generally acknowledged to be getting less comfortable. For many journeys car is quicker and/or cheaper. This isn’t leaving much incentive to go by train. I certainly know people who have ditched it in the last year or two - and the number of journeys I make has nosedived this year.

Driving isnt cheaper for the majority of commuting when you factor in the full cost of that activity. It also isnt easier when you consider the trouble that is using our motorways at peak hours. I cant imagine anyone driving from mk to london and paying for parking everyday ( the same is true for the routes into Manchester and leeds)

As I said a few weeks of longer journeys and having to fill the car up all the time versus a half decent train service will make many decisions for people.

 

[bramling]

Driving isnt cheaper for the majority of commuting when you factor in the full cost of that activity. It also isnt easier when you consider the trouble that is using our motorways at peak hours. I cant imagine anyone driving from mk to london and paying for parking everyday ( the same is true for the routes into Manchester and leeds)

As I said a few weeks of longer journeys and having to fill the car up all the time versus a half decent train service will make many decisions for people.

Not everyone travels at peak times though. Who on earth would use the train for a local journey like Stevenage to Biggleswade at the moment?

I took a day-trip to Ramsgate a few weeks ago. Last year that would have been a dead-cert train journey. This time it took all of a few seconds to unilaterally decide we were going to go by car. Yes it worked out more expensive and yes we got held up for 20 minutes crossing the Dartford bridge, but it also allowed us to do a couple of other things on route which we wouldn’t have been able to do by train.

Ditto the East Lancs railcar weekend last month - again that would have been a prime candidate to do by train, wouldn’t have cost a penny as we both had spare boxes to use - yet again the car was used.

The railway simply isn’t getting it right at the moment.

 

[yorksrob]

Use another mode of transport. There’s plenty available. Granted they might be more expensive / longer journey time / less comfortable.

Well, if this is the considered opinion of the railway industry, heaven help it.

 

[yorksrob]

Without wishing to be rude: get the bus!

I suspect a few months of bus travel will soon have you back on the train.

Ditto.

 

[yorksrob]

Not everyone travels at peak times though. Who on earth would use the train for a local journey like Stevenage to Biggleswade at the moment?

I took a day-trip to Ramsgate a few weeks ago. Last year that would have been a dead-cert train journey. This time it took all of a few seconds to unilaterally decide we were going to go by car. Yes it worked out more expensive and yes we got held up for 20 minutes crossing the Dartford bridge, but it also allowed us to do a couple of other things on route which we wouldn’t have been able to do by train.

Ditto the East Lancs railcar weekend last month - again that would have been a prime candidate to do by train, wouldn’t have cost a penny as we both had spare boxes to use - yet again the car was used.

The railway simply isn’t getting it right at the moment.

Indeed. I suspect that some in here will continue to stick their fingers in their ears and go "la la la" until falling passenger numbers focus their minds.

 

[DarloRich]

Well, if this is the considered opinion of the railway industry, heaven help it.

It is true though. Get the bus to work if you don't like the train. The bus is slower, prone to traffic delays, expensive ( unless you have a granny pass) less frequent, less convenient and stops running much earlier. You have to stand in the rain at the side of the road with less good service information to rely on to make decisions is there a real time bus app? There are also the real dregs of society on the bus and for many the views of Mrs Thatcher about those who use the bus hold true even today.

Driving: on the face of it more convenient. You can depart on your terms and control your own destiny . The reality is you have to run to a timetable to miss traffic which means you set off earlier than the train and get home later. There is then the fun of getting into and out of our bigger cities and finding somewhere to park. The cost of fuel, tax, insurance, repairs, parking and depreciation of your asset are all high. Many also have thier PCP mileage to consider.

You also extended your working day by having to be switched on for your drive to and from. Cant have s kip on the m62! I suspect it leads you to sacrifice more family time. Many work on the train in the morning to help thier day. That is gone in the car.

Walking - only practical over short distances and more of a competitor for inner city bus travel

Cycle - possible over longer distances but slow and in my view often dangerous because of poor drivers. Also what sort of stare will you be in when you arrive? Do all offices have showers and changing facilities and somewhere safe to store your bike?

I suspect there will be a fall in numbers due to the current poor service on northern (which you are trying to extended nationwide) but I suspect this will be short term once service is improved and people see what the other options are like.

Indeed. I suspect that some in here will continue to stick their fingers in their ears and go "la la la" until falling passenger numbers focus their minds.

Or you will continue to blow everything out of proportion?

 

[yorksrob]

It is true though. Get the bus to work if you don't like the train. The bus is slower, prone to traffic delays, expensive ( unless you have a granny pass) less frequent, less convenient and stops running much earlier. You have to stand in the rain at the side of the road with less good service information to rely on to make decisions is there a real time bus app? There are also the real dregs of society on the bus and for many the views of Mrs Thatcher about those who use the bus hold true even today.

Driving: on the face of it more convenient. You can depart on your terms and control your own destiny . The reality is you have to run to a timetable to miss traffic which means you set off earlier than the train and get home later. There is then the fun of getting into and out of our bigger cities and finding somewhere to park. The cost of fuel, tax, insurance, repairs, parking and depreciation of your asset are all high. Many also have thier PCP mileage to consider.

You also extended your working day by having to be switched on for your drive to and from. Cant have s kip on the m62! I suspect it leads you to sacrifice more family time. Many work on the train in the morning to help thier day. That is gone in the car.

Walking - only practical over short distances and more of a competitor for inner city bus travel

Cycle - possible over longer distances but slow and in my view often dangerous because of poor drivers. Also what sort of stare will you be in when you arrive? Do all offices have showers and changing facilities and somewhere safe to store your bike?

I suspect there will be a fall in numbers due to the current poor service on northern (which you are trying to extended nationwide) but I suspect this will be short term once service is improved and people see what the other options are like.

The true spirit of Beeching and Marples. "We can't be bothered to run a train service, so sling yer hook and get a bus".

 

[DarloRich]

The true spirit of Beeching and Marples. "We can't be bothered to run a train service, so sling yer hook and get a bus".

Goodness me. What a silly pointless post. I am out

 

[yorksrob]

Goodness me. What a silly pointless post. I am out

Cheerio then.

 

[al78]

Well, if this is the considered opinion of the railway industry, heaven help it.

If it is, it is because they can afford to take that attitude, because they know full well that no matter how bad it gets on the railway, the vast majority who use it have no choice because it is the only practical way to get to work. Unfortunately the danger is that if people are forced to use a service, there is little incentive to invest in it, the convenient fallacy of relative privation comeback being "if you don't like it try driving".

For those who think the train is cheaper than driving, it isn't. Wear and tear is not a marginal cost for a car journey. Depreciation is not a marginal cost. Tax is not a marginal cost. Insurance is not a marginal cost. If cost is a factor in decision in choice of mode of transport the comparison is between the rail fare plus taxi/bus/tube if required and cost of fuel plus parking. The first four expenses of owning a car above are part of owning a car, they are effectively fixed costs, they are at best marginally related to annual mileage, and are not factored into costs of a single journey.

It is likely pointless getting into circular debates on subjects like this anyway. For those that work in the rail industry and are proud of their job, their identity will be tied in with the industry, so any attack on the rail industry is an attack on their identity, and they must defend defend defend retaliate, using an arsenal of logical fallacies if necessary.

 

[Randomer]

Certainly for my current commute the bus is currently quicker (ends up closer to where I work in town so slightly slower journey is offset by walk), cheaper (First bus only ticket vs. Metrocard), more frequent (every 5 mins or less in morning and evening peak train is roughly half hourly) and finishes later when I work evenings (last one 2330 Vs 2300 for train).

However my real point is that everyone's commute is unique and the current performance on parts of Northern and TPE has made them completely unsustainable for people on my office who commute. The latest timetable change has improved things slightly but huge overcrowding in the morning peaks on Northern isn't going to be helped by introducing trains of the same number of carriages.

 

[yorksrob]

If it is, it is because they can afford to take that attitude, because they know full well that no matter how bad it gets on the railway, the vast majority who use it have no choice because it is the only practical way to get to work. Unfortunately the danger is that if people are forced to use a service, there is little incentive to invest in it, the convenient fallacy of relative privation comeback being "if you don't like it try driving".

For those who think the train is cheaper than driving, it isn't. Wear and tear is not a marginal cost for a car journey. Depreciation is not a marginal cost. Tax is not a marginal cost. Insurance is not a marginal cost. If cost is a factor in decision in choice of mode of transport the comparison is between the rail fare plus taxi/bus/tube if required and cost of fuel plus parking. The first four expenses of owning a car above are part of owning a car, they are effectively fixed costs, they are at best marginally related to annual mileage, and are not factored into costs of a single journey.

It is likely pointless getting into circular debates on subjects like this anyway. For those that work in the rail industry and are proud of their job, their identity will be tied in with the industry, so any attack on the rail industry is an attack on their identity, and they must defend defend defend retaliate, using an arsenal of logical fallacies if necessary.

Indeed, some very good points.

And to be fair, it is an important industry with a long and important history, so it's understandable that some will defend it against all criticism.

However, as you imply, it's also a modern customer service industry and it has to turn up and compete if it's going to remain an important industry, particularly away from the commuter routes of the South East.