Great British Railways: Thoughts, predictions, speculation

[destere]

I'm not sure, but I really hope it's the latter, just forum wibble. There's something so horribly arrogant about describing a country as broken as this one as "great".

Yes, I know it's the name of the island - but I've never heard anyone unironically describe themself as "Great British", and most previous nationalised industries have just been named "British X" or "National X", so the inclusion of "Great" here just seems stuck-up.

The "Great" in Great Britain isn't and has never been a superlative but a reference to extent/size.

 

[py_megapixel]

The "Great" in Great Britain isn't and has never been a superlative but a reference to extent/size.

I know. But I feel it's so commonly dropped from the name that choosing to include it sends a pretty clear message, and considering the connotations of the word "great", it's not a message that I agree with.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Have they thought this through - it's going to be nicknamed Late British Rlys isn't it ? Seriously, it sounds like the ADIF model in Spain which not only has the functions of our Network Rail but also runs and maintains all stations including booking-offices etc. It now also awards tenders for services with the recent opening-up of competition - the first being the newly launched SNCF 'Ouigo' service between Madrid and Barcelona.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I'm not sure, but I really hope it's the latter, just forum wibble. There's something so horribly arrogant about describing a country as broken as this one as "great".

Yes, I know it's the name of the island - but I've never heard anyone unironically describe themself as "Great British", and most previous nationalised industries have just been named "British X" or "National X", so the inclusion of "Great" here just seems stuck-up.

Well it’s there on Great Western Railway, and that is anything but. Especially over the past week

 

[Dunnyrail]

Good news if it means genuine improvements like this

(but bad news if it's just a bit of PR, a bit of flag waving, some positive headlines for nostalgics- just like the way that the Government keep re-announcing "Beeching re-openings" to generate Good News Stories without delivering very much)

I really don't care what font they use or what colour they paint the trains - but if it means more secure funding for the railway to take longer term strategic decisions then I'm all for it, regardless of arguments about the names

Fonts are quite important, get it wrong and any signs get lost and are unreadable which is why the BR one has been so long lasting and some of the TOC inspired flashy ones confuse passengers. I believe that there had been recent contact with the lady that designed the BR one in 1964 to come up with a modest upgrade to account for modern conditions.

As for livery a lot of fuss is made about it and a lot of money spent when franchises were relet to a different Country or set of Bus Bandits, EMT still upgrading to their particular “brand”. Ok I know it costs little if you do a repaint but a Station where there are multiple different colors of train is meaningless and confusing to the non railway enthusiast. Perhaps 2 or 3 may make some kind sense, IC, Local and London.

 

[Purple Orange]

I'm not sure, but I really hope it's the latter, just forum wibble. There's something so horribly arrogant about describing a country as broken as this one as "great".

Yes, I know it's the name of the island - but I've never heard anyone unironically describe themself as "Great British", and most previous nationalised industries have just been named "British X" or "National X", so the inclusion of "Great" here just seems stuck-up.

The Times are claiming that this will be the name in their article.

Hmmm. I can see how it will appeal to the reactionary side of Little England. Personally I would just call it British Rail. This organisation will get the same stick as BR did/does, so may as well jump in with both feet.

Alternatively it could be given a more modern twist with GBR being the core brand. We all refer to the “NHS”, despite its longer title.

 

[py_megapixel]

Have they thought this through - it's going to be nicknamed Late British Rlys isn't it?

Probably so... I'm sure "Worst Late Western" was a thing, as was "Worst Crapital Disconnect", "Northern Fail" etc.

To be fair, though, it's pretty hard to come up with a name that you can't twist in this way.

 

[Djgr]

Fonts are quite important, get it wrong and any signs get lost and are unreadable which is why the BR one has been so long lasting and some of the TOC inspired flashy ones confuse passengers. I believe that there had been recent contact with the lady that designed the BR one in 1964 to come up with a modest upgrade to account for modern conditions.

As for livery a lot of fuss is made about it and a lot of money spent when franchises were relet to a different Country or set of Bus Bandits, EMT still upgrading to their particular “brand”. Ok I know it costs little if you do a repaint but a Station where there are multiple different colors of train is meaningless and confusing to the non railway enthusiast. Perhaps 2 or 3 may make some kind sense, IC, Local and London.

Standard Class in First Great Western rolling stock springs to mind for logo confusion

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Hmmm. I can see how it will appeal to the reactionary side of Little England. Personally I would just call it British Rail. This organisation will get the same stick as BR did/does, so may as well jump in with both feet.
Alternatively it could be given a more modern twist with GBR being the core brand. We all refer to the “NHS”, despite its longer title.

Doesn't it depend on who you buy your ticket from?
It doesn't sound like GBR with be the visible operator, just the umbrella body that controls, operates and maintains the system.
You may still have GWR, LNER and Avanti on the side of the train and on the tickets.
I doubt Scotrail and TfW are going to change their branding, or Merseyrail.

The NHS is different, as its core brand and logo are everywhere, but it is under different management in England, Scotland and Wales.

 

[450.emu]

Great British Railways... I was hoping it was another documentary with Michael Portillo

 

[LAX54]

GBRail aka Great British Rail

Will that not clash with GBRf GB Railfreight ?

 

[JaJaWa]

Readers’ poll: should the state be more involved in running Britain’s railways?

The government is to create a new state body, Great British Railways, which will set fares and timetables, manage ticketing and award contracts to private companies to operate trains. The move is being seen as a third way, in between full state ownership and privatisation.

Those who favour increased state involvement argue the railways are too important to the nation to be subject to market forces or exploited for profit. Others say governments have a poor record of running transport infrastructure and the private sector brings efficiency and investment.

What’s your view?

Poll closes at noon on Friday, May 21. The final result will be published in The Sunday Times on May 23.

Source: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...volved-in-running-britains-railways-p5v72jlz7

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Just to say that the state already (pre-Covid) controlled many fares (notably season tickets) and specified service frequency and quality, and also funded Network Rail for enhancements.
It also largely mandated which rolling stock was to be used, occasionally buying large fleets directly and mandating its use on certain routes.
Covid means it has temporarily taken control of revenue as well, leaving the TOCs to run the specified reduced service, collect fares and hand to the DfT for a usage fee.
There isn't a lot more for the state to control (on the passenger railway).
There's plenty of scope, though, to change how it delivers that level of control over the industry.

 

[yorksrob]

I don't know about the state (it runs a lot of the railway as it is) however I'd like to see more involvement of the travelling public in running the railway. Perhaps through some sort of "passengers board" which would send a representative to the BRB (or whatever it will be called).

 

[zwk500]

I don't know about the state (it runs a lot of the railway as it is) however I'd like to see more involvement of the travelling public in running the railway. Perhaps through some sort of "passengers board" which would send a representative to the BRB (or whatever it will be called).

I agree the end users need more input, not just consideration, however sending an individual representative (or group of them) will not have the desired effect. Each person will be looking out for the lines they use, and the frequent discussions seen on here of 'why can't you just run another train when it's busy' will be played out again. I especially look forward to when the commuters of Surrey meet the representatives of the shipping industry, because if there is such a board it will need to consider all end customers of the railway, which includes Hansons and DHL as well as the population of Hemel Hempstead.

Greater engagement should probably start with a visible presence at stations, so that satisfaction surveys and consultations on proposals get a proper cross-sectional response, not just those on either extreme.

 

[alistairlees]

​

Source: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...volved-in-running-britains-railways-p5v72jlz7

As usual, this presents the options as:
1. Wholly nationalised; or
2. Wholly privatised

Naturally the vote will overwhemingly be "Nationalise".

Of course, the railways are (all but) nationalised, and have been for at least the last 15 years (after the demise of Railtrack, the SRA and the increasing prescriptiveness by DfT). For the last fifteen years privatisation has largely been a sham, with a few small exceptions (such as open access and freight, though freight is not really in scope in this poll). Few members of the public understand or care though.

The poll could be more honestly (and correctly) worded:

How much more nationalised would you like to see the railways?
1. Completely nationalised, no private involvement at all
2. A bit more nationalised, with some private involvement left, but certainly not making any actual decisions.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 May 2021 ==

I don't know about the state (it runs a lot of the railway as it is) however I'd like to see more involvement of the travelling public in running the railway. Perhaps through some sort of "passengers board" which would send a representative to the BRB (or whatever it will be called).

Customers, rather than passengers. But otherwise, yes, I agree. Listening to actual customers at all levels is essential.

 

[Jim the Jim]

Fonts are quite important, get it wrong and any signs get lost and are unreadable which is why the BR one has been so long lasting and some of the TOC inspired flashy ones confuse passengers. I believe that there had been recent contact with the lady that designed the BR one in 1964 to come up with a modest upgrade to account for modern conditions.

As for livery a lot of fuss is made about it and a lot of money spent when franchises were relet to a different Country or set of Bus Bandits, EMT still upgrading to their particular “brand”. Ok I know it costs little if you do a repaint but a Station where there are multiple different colors of train is meaningless and confusing to the non railway enthusiast. Perhaps 2 or 3 may make some kind sense, IC, Local and London.

On the contrary, I suspect many passengers appreciate different colour schemes as a helpful way of reassuring themselves they're going to the right train.

 

[yorksrob]

I agree the end users need more input, not just consideration, however sending an individual representative (or group of them) will not have the desired effect. Each person will be looking out for the lines they use, and the frequent discussions seen on here of 'why can't you just run another train when it's busy' will be played out again. I especially look forward to when the commuters of Surrey meet the representatives of the shipping industry, because if there is such a board it will need to consider all end customers of the railway, which includes Hansons and DHL as well as the population of Hemel Hempstead.

Greater engagement should probably start with a visible presence at stations, so that satisfaction surveys and consultations on proposals get a proper cross-sectional response, not just those on either extreme.

Yes, those approaches would be useful too.

 

[zwk500]

On the contrary, I suspect many passengers appreciate different colour schemes as a helpful way of reassuring themselves they're going to the right train.

There are very few situations where a livery alone gives you that information. I think there is value in a small set of different liveries for indicating service types, such as Intercity, Regional and Commuter. There is also an argument for using stock that is dedicated to certain lines to use a special livery for promotional purposes.

 

[Purple Orange]

Doesn't it depend on who you buy your ticket from?
It doesn't sound like GBR with be the visible operator, just the umbrella body that controls, operates and maintains the system.
You may still have GWR, LNER and Avanti on the side of the train and on the tickets.
I doubt Scotrail and TfW are going to change their branding, or Merseyrail.

The NHS is different, as its core brand and logo are everywhere, but it is under different management in England, Scotland and Wales.

Clearly there is appetite for there to be a form of a nationalised brand identity, even though the operator would be a private company. We have specified brand names across the country (Scot Rail, Metrolink, Merseyrail, Tyne & Wear Metro) but they are operated by private operators whose name is secondary. We could have:

• GBR Intercity or GBR Express
• GBR South East
• GBR Scotland
• GBR Wales
• GBR North
• GBR Midlands
• GBR South West

Each operated by different company.

 

[Bald Rick]

I don't know about the state (it runs a lot of the railway as it is) however I'd like to see more involvement of the travelling public in running the railway. Perhaps through some sort of "passengers board" which would send a representative to the BRB (or whatever it will be called).

Transport Focus fill that role - Anthony Smith already sits on some industry boards / meetings.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There are very few situations where a livery alone gives you that information. I think there is value in a small set of different liveries for indicating service types, such as Intercity, Regional and Commuter. There is also an argument for using stock that is dedicated to certain lines to use a special livery for promotional purposes.

That's so BR-era.
Everybody (as in every body) that funds or controls a piece of the railway pie wants its own distinctive brand applied.
So that's Scotland, Wales, all the English PTEs (and quite possibly the new city regions), as well as the individual TOCs (if we have any left).
Even BR had cornish pasty adverts on its 158s based there, and quietly branded its suburban mini-TOC stock ("Northampton Line", "Southwestern Lines" etc).

If you think that's outlandish, visit "nationalised" France or Germany where every regional authority has a specific brand with its local trains shouting the tourist slogans and/or featuring products of the region.
They are rolling tourist/business promotional brands, covering all that boring train mono-colour.
Italy has gone for painting names on its new trains (like "Jazz") to distinguish them from everything else.

 

[zwk500]

That's so BR-era.

Which part of the BR era? Some things BR did worked very well. Some things didn't.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Which part of the BR era? Some things BR did worked very well. Some things didn't.

Yes, but the branding industry is light years away from where it was in the 1980s.
Even if the client is in public hands.
It can also be changed almost at the click of a button, not something that has to last 20 years or so as it works its way round the estate.
I do remember the drab "BR Blue" phase, when every train looked the same.
I also remember "Consignia" as a brand that did a lot of damage to its (nationalised) owner.

 

[450.emu]

Boak

British Overground Access Key (Boak) will replace the Railcard, with more functionality as a Contactless App with integrated payment such as Google Pay or PayPal

 

[XAM2175]

If you think that's outlandish, visit "nationalised" France or Germany where every regional authority has a specific brand with its local trains shouting the tourist slogans and/or featuring products of the region.

It was done here too; Strathclyde Transport, GMPTE, a few variations on the standard Regional Railways scheme. For local and regional services I think it's decent quite a good move, especially if linked through the regional co-ordination branding to bus services too.

The distinction here is that the differentiating factor is the co-ordinating authority, not the operator. You'll see the same in Germany - for example; local and regional trains in Baden-Württemberg are co-ordinated by the state Ministry of Transport under the "bwegt" brand. Trains from both DB and GoAhead are painted in the bwegt livery and the actual operator is irrelevant to passengers.

By contrast, the British approximation of German intercity service provided by DB Fernverkehr (one operator, one brand, one basic livery with only a handful of modifications) would be to recreate most of BR's Intercity sector.

 

[tbtc]

The poll could be more honestly (and correctly) worded:

How much more nationalised would you like to see the railways?
1. Completely nationalised, no private involvement at all
2. A bit more nationalised, with some private involvement left, but certainly not making any actual decisions.

What would a "completely" nationalised railway be?

Nationalised WH Smith and M&S shops at stations?

Nationalised train builders?

All designers and marketing to be done by public sector employees?

Where do you draw the line? Can the public sector buy in goods and services from the private sector?

The model of railway we've had for the past few years has been one where pretty much every decision is either taken directly by a part of the public sector or can only be done in agreement with the public sector - whether that's train times, most fares too - about the only thing the private sector can do without public sector involvement is change the colour of paint on trains. Yet still people complain about too much private sector involvement.

 

[zwk500]

Yes, but the branding industry is light years away from where it was in the 1980s.
Even if the client is in public hands.

So why does GTR keeps it's trains to just 'Southern' or 'Thameslink', with a few photos on the Class 313s for the seaside? (Ignoring the faux-BR blue 313).

It can also be changed almost at the click of a button, not something that has to last 20 years or so as it works its way round the estate.

You can repaint a train at the touch of a button? That'll be welcome new, as the revinyl of the Pendos took several months worth of special moves.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

This is the version just published on the Guardian web site (no paywall).
It's a better summary of the situation and what is expected to be announced this week.
It looks like much of the detail has still to be worked out, but Peter Hendy and Andrew Haines will be pivotal to that.
UK railways brace for shake-up and cuts as long-overdue review arrives | Rail industry | The Guardian

The long-delayed – and heavily re-edited - review of the industry, initially led by Keith Williams, is expected to be published as a white paper on Thursday. Control of both the infrastructure and the contracting of train operations will be given to the arms-length public-sector body, with private firms bidding to run concessions.

Despite three years having elapsed, the white paper will still leave much of the detail to be decided. The head of Network Rail, Andrew Haines, and its chairman, Sir Peter Hendy, will be tasked with drawing up the processes and structures of the new GBR, which will eventually subsume Network Rail.

Another rail source said: “The cost of the industry has got to be reduced – how those cuts are made is up for vigorous debate. Rail is basically in financial crisis, structural reform was needed – once this is published at last we can get on with it.”
Unions warned of a “national fight” if the outcome of the white paper were to target cost-cutting on the workforce while still paying guaranteed sums to private firms.

Note - first use of the term "fat cat" by the new RMT Gen Sec Mick Lynch.

 

[alistairlees]

What would a "completely" nationalised railway be?

Nationalised WH Smith and M&S shops at stations?

Nationalised train builders?

All designers and marketing to be done by public sector employees?

Where do you draw the line? Can the public sector buy in goods and services from the private sector?

The model of railway we've had for the past few years has been one where pretty much every decision is either taken directly by a part of the public sector or can only be done in agreement with the public sector - whether that's train times, most fares too - about the only thing the private sector can do without public sector involvement is change the colour of paint on trains. Yet still people complain about too much private sector involvement.

I was not seeking to define what "nationalised" means; merely to correctly frame the question. Although the public thinks that the railways are privatised, they are of course nothing of the sort.

My point is that it is not a binary choice, though it is presented as such. And railways have never been either wholly privatised (they required Acts of Parliament to come into being), or nationalised (BR used private contractors, suppliers etc.).