Delayed 12:12 Leeds - Plymouth

[Darandio]

Couldn't have done, as your train arrived 57 minutes after the OPs train had departed Leeds. In actual fact as you arrived, the OPs train was sat in Chesterfield platform.

 

[jamesr]

Thanks for the complimentary comments, folks.

tbtc - The overcrowding on the PNZ-WAT service yesterday seemed to be (at least as far as Exeter) as a result of the preceding 0940 Arriva XC service not running yesterday. Additionally, with the reduced service FGW were running as a result of the Reading closure yesterday, I am guessing (and I don't know this) that there must have been spare HSTs somewhere yesterday. I'm sure there was an HST set at Eastern Green, Penzance as we set off - this might have been diagrammed later, of course. If the Arriva service had run, or a relief HST had run from Penzance to Bristol TM taking most of the "local" passengers, I think my overcrowding experience would not have happened.

Obviously, everyone in the world has an idea to make the railways run in such a way to make their own journey perfect!!

I do agree that any commercial business cannot be expected to accommodate the unexpected (i.e. Icelandic volcanoes) but I don't think the demand for that service yesterday should have been a surprise to FGW.

 

[Pumbaa]

Old Timer's very good post

Regardless, and regardless of the obsession of running the railway a) like an airline, b) to make a profit, c) selling it out to private companies, it is designed to be a public service, and as such will always lose money. The railway should restrict supply to decrease demand, but increase supply to match the demand.

I accept that the economics are not sound in having extra trains and such sat around while waiting for Christmas, Summer, the weekends; but we should not be turning people away from the railways. They can be cheaper, quicker, more reliable(!) in many cases for leisure travellers, families, students et al, and it should remain so. The railways exist as a public asset, and as soon we price off people to ease overcrowding or try to deter people from travelling again from not strengthening services, we shoot ourselves in the foot.

Money can be saved by restructuring within the industry and modernisation (after an initial heavy outlay of investment) and increased investment to trap extra income should be the taken method. NIMBYism will never disappear, but hopefully people can be persuaded that they are a national good, and the public benefit from a new line is far greater than their own benefit from an uninterrupted view from their garden.

In my humble opinion OT, you were in severe danger there of sounding like David Mapp and some of the other muppets from ATOC!

 

[Oswyntail]

But it isn't very good economics to have a fleet of trains which are idle 11 months of the year, is it?

....I accept that the economics are not sound in having extra trains and such sat around while waiting for Christmas, Summer, the weekends; but we should not be turning people away from the railways. ....

I think this illustrates one of the chief problems I see, and the start of an approach to addressing it. WillPS sees the extra provision I suggest as being for only one month a year; Pumbaa, however, has already extended its use to the summer peaks (I suggested Easter as well) and weekends. So already it is becoming more viable. I do not know what the technical answer to this conundrum is, but I am certain there must be one. Railways are currently essentially constrained by one limited resource, the infrastructure. Paradoxically, this is in parts full to capacity, but is also underused (eg a 4 coach Voyager is effectively the same user of infrastructure capacity as an 8- or 12-car Voyager). The question is how to maximise the use of the resource economically; the current approach seems to be that the constraint is absolute. New ideas, everyone, please!

 

[tbtc]

New ideas, everyone, please!

You want to find a way of giving the railways sufficient stock to deal with every peak demand, so I think there is some onus on you to show how it could be met.

I've explained why I don't think it should be done, and why we should concentrate on meeting the "day to day" demand instead (why are we worrying about spare trains for certain holidays whilst we can't meet daily demand on other routes?).

Do National Express/ Ryanair/ Stagecoach/ P&O keep significant numbers of spare vehicles just to meet holiday demand?

 

[Old Timer]

...In my humble opinion OT, you were in severe danger there of sounding like David Mapp and some of the other muppets from ATOC!

A well thought out and good post, if I may be so bold, old chap.

You do of course put the contrary position and I would find it hard to disagree with you, having held and sometimes holding such views myself.

The trick is of course to find a decent common ground, although that is easier to say than do.

I fully agree that money can be saved on Infrastructure, indeed I would go so far as to say that the savings to be made are considerable but to do so will require the Railway to return to either a form of vertical integration or to the previous Railtrack model.

I was critical of that but having had the benefit of both Railtrack and Network Rail, I believe that the Railtrack model is a better alternative.

What the opponents of that model forget or deliberately obscure is that given sufficent opportunity the Infrastructure Companies do invest in better equipment and research.

Network Rail (despite its spin) has embarked on practically no original research and such that it has done can be traced back to Infrastructure Contractors such as Jarvis, Balfour Beatty and GTRM for example, I give you the huge investment in new OTP by Jarvis, the introduction of the Kirow and the NTC by Balfour Beatty and the fore-runner of the NMT by GTRM, which also went down the route of developing remote monitoring equipment.

For an organisation that spins how good it is, it is less forthcoming about the fact that it is now downspeccing S&C renewals and is going back to 113lb and UIC 56 rail against the previous UIC 60. All very well and good to save money now but simply sowing the seeds for problems when upgrades are proposed.

 

[12CSVT]

On the subject of compulsory reservations, consider what is the lesser of two evils ?

Having to stand for five hours on a 4 coach voyager which is completely wedged or
not being allowed to travel because every train to where you want to go to is fully reserved.

On many occasions I have opted to stand throughout long journeys in order to get to my destination.

 

[xtradj]

trains need to be longer with more seats and more frequent services and less first class. Train companies dnt care if they squeeze u on aslong as the train is pretty and they can sell first class

 

[MCR247]

If only it was that simple You do realise that first class passengers probably subsidise the cost of your ticket?

 

[Failed Unit]

The problem with XC is well discussed 4 car voyagers are not long enough at anytime of year. I suspect this time XC didn't have serviceable trains in depots as many would be damaged by the recent weather so doubling up would help. But it is not a case of XC needing stock to cover peaks this level of overcrowding on XC is normal on the core so unless someone invests in 5 or 6 coach voyagers this is how it is going to be on Fridays, public holidays and at Christmas.

What could xc do? Reduce some service over Christmas like east coast do. East coast often reduce the Leeds route to hourly to give more trains to the busier (over Christmas) Edinburgh route. Virgin do the same with pendos to Edinburgh and voyagers on quiter services.

Could XC maybe only run to York and not Newcastle during this peak? Are Leeds - Edinburgh trains that full they need to be hourly? I have never seen a full XC service out of Edinburgh (that doesnt have a commuter flow to Dunbar). Save some units here for doubling on the core. Finally get some of the local flows off maybe make Sheffield stop to pick up only southbound at Christmas. Does Xc want tamworth - Birmingham passengers on the long distance trains? East coast run the 1200 London - Inverness service with the first set down at Newcastle.

Trains big advantage over air is people can stand. If a product is in demand you should pay more. I hope XC were not seling cheap APs when the could fill the train with full fares.

Xc does have these problems all year.

 

[nedchester]

Of course in the 'good old days' we had the relief train that used to run at peak times.

There are rolling stock providers like Cargo D, Riviera etc with decent condition air con stock that could be used at peak times. Remember Virgin XC using 12 coach trains in the summer a few years ago with 67s?

We this sort of thing could be tried but as usual the railway would get bogged down in nonsense like safety cases, untrained drivers/guards. The modern railway is all about making money and doesn't want to provide the extra capacity at peak times.

Also of course there should be generally more stock. Poxy 4 and 5 car trains are not suitable for a long distance service like that offered by AXC. Not AXCs fault you may say but they wanted the franchise and should therefore be making steps (getting more stock built?) to sort this out.

As passenger numbers grow ALL the TOCs should be looking at making more orders for stock to compensate.

 

[northwichcat]

Virgin, East coast and scotrail offer loyalty schemes.

Virgin's is for 1st class regulars only. Scotrail's is for 1st class passengers and season ticket holders. I can't find any details on an East Coast scheme.

This is hardly similar to airline schemes which include standard/economy passengers and allow you to travel to different destinations on different occasions.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Where would the railways in this country be if bus and coach operators didn't bail out the train operators during engineering works and emergencies? Probably most passengers would give up on the train. We expect bus and coach operators to help out the railways but say it's non-profitable to have spare trains to help out when there's road or/and air problems.

If railways need to be profitable then why don't we have train hire in the same way as schools and colleges, in particular, hire coaches for school trips?

 

[Failed Unit]

East coast is spend £1800 in 3 months. Any class is included. Scotrails is very easy to join. Flexi-passes are included as are first class tickets for short distances like Edinburgh - Haymarket. Worth buying that ticket to get the goodies!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
To be honest when you try to redeem miles on airline schemes once you have paid all the tax, fees and surcharges you are often not saving much money on buying a ticket anyway. Airlines loyalty schemes offer very little free apart from lounge access.

 

[gordonthemoron]

apparently you can donate Lufthansa award points to charity, I'll probably never be able to reclaim them

 

[Eric]

More than likely a Sheffield or BPN working (double two car 158s of course, unless something strange has happened at Neville Hill over Xmas!)

It had Leeds via Moorthorpe on the destination display so at a guess it was from Sheffield.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The basis of your complaint being - the late running (27 mins) or the fact you didn't book a seat ?

The complaint is XC putting a four car voyager on a route where the passenger numbers are far greater than the capacity of the train.

Paying £48 for the pleasure of standing on a packed train isn't my idea of fun.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Secondly people like the OP are usually the most vocal, and intolerant, as can be seen by the self-admitted rant. There is no loyalty shown to XC indeed there is anything but and clearly the OP has now demonstrated that by publishing on the international web, his comments. I suspect the OP may be benefitting from some sort of discounted ticket, therefore not only have XC not gained much revenue, but what little they have gained has probably been (or could be) lost many times over by the time the OP has vented their spleen with all their friends and hangers on.
QUOTE]

So you class my £48.70 adult return ticket to Birmingham as a discounted ticket :roll::roll::roll:

 

[MCR247]

Please tell me, what else could XC use?

Also, your complaining, but wasn't it last year when they decided to run a less than 50% service between Christmas and New Year?

 

[Failed Unit]

Please tell me, what else could XC use?

Also, your complaining, but wasn't it last year when they decided to run a less than 50% service between Christmas and New Year?

I suspect with winter damage they are short of sets were all the HSTs in service? That could have prevented doubled up the voyagers.

Anyway one thing I commented on earlier. About the Tamworth - new street passenger on the voyager. Thinking about it the pay more per mile than the Leeds - Bristol passenger so maybe XC don't want them discouraged.

As I said earlier I just hope no one on that train had an AP ticket. If xc can fill the train without them it is a big own goal to have an overcrowded train with passengers on cheap tickets forcing passengers on anytimes to stand.

 

[TheBigD]

I suspect with winter damage they are short of sets were all the HSTs in service? That could have prevented doubled up the voyagers.

With the Newcastle - Reading service not running south of New Street this gives XC 4 extra voyagers to play with. As Failed unit suggests there are a number of repairs to other sets to catch up with.

 

[Old Timer]

The complaint is XC putting a four car voyager on a route where the passenger numbers are far greater than the capacity of the train.

Rolling stock allocation is controlled by the Civil Servants in the DfT in London. XC have to operate with the rolling stock they were given, and had no say in its design or capacity

I suggest you complain there.

Paying £48 for the pleasure of standing on a packed train isn't my idea of fun.

Quite but then you travelled on an advance purchase ticket and would have been offered the opportunity of reserving a seat. Most people would consider travelling between the Christmas and New Year breaks to be a busy time, indeed as you so found out, and if a seat was important then you did have an opportunity to reserve one. Alternatively you can take your chances, as did so many others.

So you class my £48.70 adult return ticket to Birmingham as a discounted ticket

The normal return fare is £90.

By National Express coaches the fare is £36 but take twice as long as the train.

Leeds Coach station to Birmingham Coach station is 119 by the shortest route (Google maps). Using AA figures for a car doing 20,000 miles a year, your costs for going by car would have been £51.55.

Simply using the Inland Revenue figure of 25p per mile it would have cost you £29.75 but that excludes insurance, road tax, depreciation, etc, etc.

So you tell me if you think £48.70 represents a fair price.

Finally the late running of the train was not down to XC it was caused by other train operating companies. XC have little impact upon how the train services are regulated, that falls within the remit of Network Rail

 

[nedchester]

The normal return fare is £90.

£48.70 is price of a Saver which many including myself do not regard as a 'discounted' ticket.

 

[Old Timer]

£48.70 is price of a Saver which many including myself do not regard as a 'discounted' ticket.

It is not however the full fare ticket, which was what the comparison is about.

The particular ticket type is almost irrelevant. The OP could have paid the full fare for the journey.

 

[nedchester]

It is not however the full fare ticket, which was what the comparison is about.

The particular ticket type is almost irrelevant. The OP could have paid the full fare for the journey.

But would have been mad to do so as the Saver is the cheapest 'walk on' fare so why pay the full fare.

Oddly enough if he'd booked in advance and got an advance he would would have got a free seat reservation!!

 

[Anvil1984]

Does anyone see the irony of the OPs photo of a 153 in his profile and also complaining that a 4 car Voyager is too short.

WHilst agreeing that a 4 car 220 is not ideal for this service, you can not blame XC for this they only have a finite amount of HST's and the 1212 service from Leeds isn't usally one of the busiest services they have. XC have taken a lot of flak from a couple of posters on here recently for train length when they didn't choose them and Virgin (when running XC) made several requests to the SRA (IIRC) to have them lengthened and they feel on deaf ears. Most XC services through Leeds are marked as reservation
s recommended in the timetable, maybe we should go to compulsory reservations, however that may in turn bring down the Advance quota as companies will have to charge more to make up for the loss in income through less passengers being allowed on board

 

[Failed Unit]

But if they can fill the train then surely the Advance quota should be 0. Isn't the whole point of advance to fill seats that would not be used otherwise. Surely TOCs don't use advance to get more money on flows where they would need to share revenue otherwise to me having any APs at that time of day at this time of year is crazy!

 

[Old Timer]

But would have been mad to do so as the Saver is the cheapest 'walk on' fare so why pay the full fare.

Yes I agree. There is much within ticketing these days that just does not seem logical at all.

Oh for the days of Singles, Returns, Cheap Day Returns, Weekend Returns, Period (17day) Returns, and the good old Monthly Return.

Never had any of these problems in those days

 

[RochdalePioneers]

One radical option for Cross Country would be to lop off the extremities. On the parts of the network where it duplicates other operators - eg north of York - cap the service. We get a core York - Bristol, Birmingham - Basingstoke, Birmingham - Stansted, Nottingham - Cardiff network and thats it. Don't have sets tied up for hours running to Edinburgh and Penzance, or even to Newcastle and Plymouth, use them instead on the core route.

Yes, this will mean fewer through journeys due to the truncated routes. Which will mean more changing trains, which in the old days was seen as a Bad Thing. But since XC got so many punters having to change at BNS or substitutes for BNS, and stopped operating on duplicated routes (ie WCML) this is the next logical step.

In an ideal world they would have longer trains, or someone would build them longer trains. But on the system we've got where so much money is p!ssed away to paying operator and contractor "profits" of an unprofitable railway, reality isn't going to change. So instead of spreading the jam more thinly, lets cut off the crusts instead.

 

[Failed Unit]

I am sure east coast would love that, most of my northbound delays have followed late running XC services. One thing they (xc) have against it is the loss of ORCATs on the edge which is free money to them.

 

[nedchester]

Yes I agree. There is much within ticketing these days that just does not seem logical at all.

Oh for the days of Singles, Returns, Cheap Day Returns, Weekend Returns, Period (17day) Returns, and the good old Monthly Return.

Never had any of these problems in those days

Damn right! Easy to understand as well.

 

[TheBigD]

Oh for the days of Singles, Returns, Cheap Day Returns, Weekend Returns, Period (17day) Returns, and the good old Monthly Return.

Never had any of these problems in those days

You forgot about Pounds, Shillings and Pence!

 

[tbtc]

One radical option for Cross Country would be to lop off the extremities. On the parts of the network where it duplicates other operators - eg north of York - cap the service. We get a core York - Bristol, Birmingham - Basingstoke, Birmingham - Stansted, Nottingham - Cardiff network and thats it. Don't have sets tied up for hours running to Edinburgh and Penzance, or even to Newcastle and Plymouth, use them instead on the core route.

Yes, this will mean fewer through journeys due to the truncated routes. Which will mean more changing trains, which in the old days was seen as a Bad Thing. But since XC got so many punters having to change at BNS or substitutes for BNS, and stopped operating on duplicated routes (ie WCML) this is the next logical step.

In an ideal world they would have longer trains, or someone would build them longer trains. But on the system we've got where so much money is p!ssed away to paying operator and contractor "profits" of an unprofitable railway, reality isn't going to change. So instead of spreading the jam more thinly, lets cut off the crusts instead.

There's a lot to be said for that. A core service between Birmingham and York (via Doncaster), Leeds, Reading and Bristol. Maybe with a token service to the extreme (e.g. Edinburgh only had three direct XC trains a day down the ECML before Operation Princess). Maybe even give Manchester - Birmingham to Virgin or LM to run longer EMUs on?

Trouble is, apart from York - Newcastle (is there any need for five trains an hour?), a lot of the extremities see XC running in place of "local" trips (one reasons they end up stopping at some pretty small places), so you'd need to ensure that (for example) First Great Western got their hands on suitable stock to cover a regular Bristol - Plymouth service...

If the DFT decide this is to be the way forward for the next franchise then all the bidders will have to accept that (regardless of where prime ORCATS money may be)