Why does it have to be letters or numbers? There's names already in common parlance (and they can always tweak them/give them new ones) and that's how all the other lines are done.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Remaining Great Northern services post Thameslink to be rolled into London Overground and LNER?
- Thread starter plcd1
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Envy123
Member
I also don't have issues with Thameslink either, except for the engineering works when I have to drive to get somewhere but that affects LNER, HT and GC too. In fact, I'm thinking for when I buy a house, I'll stick with being close to a Thameslink station as there are direct trains to my work in Farringdon and when I travel, it's at least 3tph (4tph pre-COVID). LNER would be too costly for a daily commute and less frequent too.
choochoochoo
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2013
- Messages
- 1,318
How are TfL going to afford this ?
So many questions.
Extra Station Staff at shared stations (Finsbury Park, Potters Bar, Hatfield, WGC, Stevenage). Separate Driver Facilities at Signing on and PNB points ?
Will the 717s all be berthed at Hornsey/Hertford North (Or will they 'rent' siding space at Welwyn/Letchworth from GTR) ? Are they going to keep driver depots at Welwyn and Hitchin ? Or transfer those drivers with the additional PT&R costs
How will the maintenance contract with Siemens work ? Am I right that GTR's contract with Siemens works on the premise that Siemens guarantee GTR a set number of operational 700/717s every day. Sure they can split the contract, but suspect it'll be altogether more expensive to GTR/TfL and that cost will then be passed on to tax payer/passengers.
Will it be run by a TOC on behalf of TfL like Overground is now with Arriva?
What's the TfL pension pot like ? Won't the transfer of GTR staff burden that pot ?
Was it not only a few weeks ago that TfL almost had to stop running the Overground because they'd got that short of money ?
I cannot see how it will be cost-neutral at all. It's going to cost the tax-payer/passengers a fortune.
So many questions.
Extra Station Staff at shared stations (Finsbury Park, Potters Bar, Hatfield, WGC, Stevenage). Separate Driver Facilities at Signing on and PNB points ?
Will the 717s all be berthed at Hornsey/Hertford North (Or will they 'rent' siding space at Welwyn/Letchworth from GTR) ? Are they going to keep driver depots at Welwyn and Hitchin ? Or transfer those drivers with the additional PT&R costs
How will the maintenance contract with Siemens work ? Am I right that GTR's contract with Siemens works on the premise that Siemens guarantee GTR a set number of operational 700/717s every day. Sure they can split the contract, but suspect it'll be altogether more expensive to GTR/TfL and that cost will then be passed on to tax payer/passengers.
Will it be run by a TOC on behalf of TfL like Overground is now with Arriva?
What's the TfL pension pot like ? Won't the transfer of GTR staff burden that pot ?
Was it not only a few weeks ago that TfL almost had to stop running the Overground because they'd got that short of money ?
I cannot see how it will be cost-neutral at all. It's going to cost the tax-payer/passengers a fortune.
I don't think it would be a good a for Great Northern 'outer suburban' services to be put with LNER.
As @bramling mentions there would be a dogs breakfast of operators at Stevenage, as well as at Cambridge. At the moment when things go wrong it's straightforward for GTR control to add additional stops but with 2 or 3 organisations involved this becomes far harder and probably wouldn't happen.
GTR provide cheaper fares from Peterborough, these are particularly popular on the class 365 operated additional peak services operated under the Great Northern brand. Imagine if these services transferred to LNER, the price would no doubt increase as LNER would be unable to offer cheaper fares from Peterborough as they set the Any Permitted fare. The unintended consequence would be the 365s would cart fresh air around and price sensitive commuters would switch to the slower Thameslink services causing overcrowding towards London.
As @bramling mentions there would be a dogs breakfast of operators at Stevenage, as well as at Cambridge. At the moment when things go wrong it's straightforward for GTR control to add additional stops but with 2 or 3 organisations involved this becomes far harder and probably wouldn't happen.
GTR provide cheaper fares from Peterborough, these are particularly popular on the class 365 operated additional peak services operated under the Great Northern brand. Imagine if these services transferred to LNER, the price would no doubt increase as LNER would be unable to offer cheaper fares from Peterborough as they set the Any Permitted fare. The unintended consequence would be the 365s would cart fresh air around and price sensitive commuters would switch to the slower Thameslink services causing overcrowding towards London.
Seeing as GTR/GN won't be using it anymore, the stabling arrangements will be transferred over. Much the same way that LO didn't have to build new rolling stock depots upon taking over the lines out of Liverpool Street or even the original WLL/NLL/GOBLIN
700s are on the 'set diagrams/day' system but the 717s are on a 'normal' manufacturer maintenance scheme - no contracts to be unwoven, just the 717 contract moved to TfL (assuming it isn't handled indirectly already by the ROSCO - Rock Rail)
choochoochoo
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2013
- Messages
- 1,318
But GTR use Welwyn for 700s and Letchworth for every traction.
Also is there some sort of discount for GTR for having 2 contracts with Siemens- one for 700s, one for 717s. Would that discount not be lost if they were split between 2 operators. Again assuming maintenance isn't taken care of by the ROSCO.
bramling
Veteran Member
The crewing would be interesting for sure. What do Hitchin drivers do now? I presume given, as you say, Letchworth stables a mix of 365, 387, 700 and 717 each night, Hitchin drivers must work all of these?
Is the longer term plan that Hitchin will work Stevenage to Moorgate, peak Baldocks, and a few Maidstone-Cambridge services? At present there seems to be a lot of “pass” travelling from Hitchin to both Welwyn and Finsbury Park, which is presumably Hitchin drivers. One presumes this can’t be the permanent plan as it is extremely wasteful.
The 717's are under a standard rolling stock agreement, the same type of agreement that the 313's were under. They are maintained by the same staff that maintain the 387's that operate north of the thames, the only agreement between GTR and siemens in relation to the 717's will be a service contract to maintain rotating spares and to provide consumables so as to maintain train/component warranties, however this will normally be in agreement with the ROSCO as they will invest in the 'stock' spares to hold on depot as well as investing in the trains at time of build. There is no 'linked' financial gain for operating two Desiro City fleets apart from the ease of traction conversion for train crews, which would always have been a bonus rather than a necessity.
choochoochoo
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2013
- Messages
- 1,318
Hitchin drive 717s mainly with some 387 work I believe.
bramling
Veteran Member
Presumably they must do some 365 work, if for no other reason that 3x 365 pairs stable at Letchworth every evening? Or are these all crewed from the London end?
choochoochoo
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2013
- Messages
- 1,318
365s are brought in by king cross drivers i think
Envy123
Member
If Huntingdon had LNER style fares for the "faster services", I would indeed just stick with Thameslink. Thameslink actually is faster if you're going to any core stations, taking into account wait and interchange time.
Ilford is used by LO, MTR Crossrail, and Greater Anglia. Willseden was used by Caledonian Sleeper and Chiltern in addition to LO. Splitting depots/stabling isn't beyond the wit of the railway industry
No - the 700s are on a completely separate system to the 717s, there is no 'discount'. The 700 contract was arranged through DfT, GTR have very little input into it.
AlbertBeale
Established Member
Sorry - but what are "PT&R" costs?
The blockades on the ECML may be a thing for a while, with the KGX works and then the new signalling, but once done it would stand to reason that this would be a line you'd value living near given the extra capacity boost (and maybe by then HS2 taking off some pressure for IC services and more local services being possible).
The GN inners, or perhaps LO one day, has its own capacity constraints but we may well be seeing a shift towards more people working from home as a matter of course - and the City of London that these trains serve will potentially see the biggest changes. Some of those new office blocks going up, or existing ones, may one day be partially or completely remodelled for residential living.
whoosh
Established Member
- Joined
- 3 Sep 2008
- Messages
- 1,892
'Promotion, Transfer and Redundancy'
In this instance, if work were moved from one train crew depot to another resulting in drivers being forcibly transferred, there could be additional costs of travelling time/car mileage payment. In certain circumstances of distance and extra travelling time taken, interest payments on a mortgage if a house move has to take place is also written down in the arrangements.
I think Grant Shapps has wanted LO to take over for some time and has been very vocal about it - having once shown a letter from TfL that specifically mentioned more services to/from Brookmans Park (his home station). This was during the 2018 timetable fiasco, when anger was quite high and justified.
I too have 'predicted' this would happen for around 15 years!
However, it seems more unlikely today given the integration of GN inner services with other GN and TL services, as well as the financial troubles of TfL, plus now it seems Grant prefers to travel from Potters Bar and presumably on faster trains. Maybe he's less bothered as he once was!!
We shall see, but if TfL was going to do it then all the changes at Stevenage and the all-new trains, plus recently revamped inner stations, clean tunnels, new signalling due to be done and talk of leaky feeders to provide phone coverage, it seems that they won't have much to spend besides the logistical issues mentioned by others.
I too have 'predicted' this would happen for around 15 years!
However, it seems more unlikely today given the integration of GN inner services with other GN and TL services, as well as the financial troubles of TfL, plus now it seems Grant prefers to travel from Potters Bar and presumably on faster trains. Maybe he's less bothered as he once was!!
We shall see, but if TfL was going to do it then all the changes at Stevenage and the all-new trains, plus recently revamped inner stations, clean tunnels, new signalling due to be done and talk of leaky feeders to provide phone coverage, it seems that they won't have much to spend besides the logistical issues mentioned by others.
Although he has just bailed out TfL and put two DfT people on its board as one of the conditions.
The question is how is anyone going to afford anything. That question applies to pretty much any form public transport. With usage subdued probably for years...
Funding of public transport infrastructure and its operation post-Covid need a proper rethink. In that respect moving GN to TfL is a small change...
Envy123
Member
I already value the ability to go direct to the core and GTR's smart ticketing. Being able to tap and go is a convenience that I wouldn't get if I went further north (to Peterborough). But yes, even more capacity would be great.
choochoochoo
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2013
- Messages
- 1,318
Judging by the number of people I saw out and about using trains yesterday, it won't be long before the money comes back.
Ok for a while there will be less commuters, but there were too many travelling for the capacity available in the peaks anyway.
Logistics aside, I think taking the inners into LO makes sense….
...especially after you've bailed out TfL and might potentially seek to take further control.
Maybe London Overground, which is already a normal railway service anyway, will actually be taken out of TfL control? Then it merely becomes a brand. Far easier to manage then.
People involved in GTR have long expected it be split up again, as GTR was only expected to be temporary due to the mass disruption to the franchise. However in the current circumstances, I suppose it is more in doubt.
This would clearly have an effect on any LO takeovers.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,290
You don’t need to have been that involved in GTR, splitting up was always in the public domain from the TSGN franchise spec onwards.
Indeed, was very publicly clear. A lot of people have started considering this breakup again now having spent years cobbling it together!
James90012
Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 186
I think there is a case to move the Moorgate services over to TfL - for example the May 18 timetable change saw severe disruption to the Moorgate services which seemed to be solely a factor of being part of the integrated GTR operation despite being largely segregated operationally.
I also think removing the GN peak inners from an integrated operation with Thameslink would be a mistake, there's no reason that these need to be branded Great Northern either - I would just subsume these within Thameslink as the services from King's Cross and St Pancras work together to provide the peak capacity needed on the ECML.
The GN King's Lynn and Cambridge are more interesting - clearly if GN was abolished the choice is for the service to stay with the new Thameslink or to move to LNER - which is a choice for the DfT - retaining within Thameslink potentially with it's own brand wouldn't make Thameslink much smaller, and moving to LNER could generate a case for upgrading the level of service albeit at a cost.
I also think removing the GN peak inners from an integrated operation with Thameslink would be a mistake, there's no reason that these need to be branded Great Northern either - I would just subsume these within Thameslink as the services from King's Cross and St Pancras work together to provide the peak capacity needed on the ECML.
The GN King's Lynn and Cambridge are more interesting - clearly if GN was abolished the choice is for the service to stay with the new Thameslink or to move to LNER - which is a choice for the DfT - retaining within Thameslink potentially with it's own brand wouldn't make Thameslink much smaller, and moving to LNER could generate a case for upgrading the level of service albeit at a cost.
The other alternative might be for the King's Lynn service to move over to Greater Anglia, sharing traincrew resource at Cambridge and King's Lynn. Don't think the service really needs "upgrading".
Where was that? Trains in SE London are deserted...
- Status