Future of TPE

[Meerkat]

So what are they going to do? Pay them to sit at home doing nothing?

I know they're incompetent, but they're surely not that incompetent.

Would they have the stock/paths to run unadvertised reliefs if they have spare crew and full platforms - ie if its going well today stick a Leeds-Huddersfield short service in to clear a rush hour platform?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would they have the stock/paths to run unadvertised reliefs if they have spare crew and full platforms - ie if its going well today stick a Leeds-Huddersfield short service in to clear a rush hour platform?

Certainly they could put in some unadvertised services diagrammed separately which they run if they can resource them and it's busy. Avanti I think did that too.

 

[Meerkat]

Certainly they could put in some unadvertised services diagrammed separately which they run if they can resource them and it's busy. Avanti I think did that too.

Do those still show up on RTT etc - ie risk of much chatter that unadvertised services got cancelled?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do those still show up on RTT etc - ie risk of much chatter that unadvertised services got cancelled?

RTT shows "Q" paths as "runs when required", so that should be OK.

 

[Tetchytyke]

So what are they going to do? Pay them to sit at home doing nothing?

I know they're incompetent, but they're surely not that incompetent.

Presumably that’s what they were doing last year when they couldn’t run 1 Liverpool, 1 Airport and 1 Piccadilly each hour.

I think you have more faith in TPE management than I do

 

[Bantamzen]

I think @Bantamzen is making the very valid point that we currently ARE in a “temporary emergency timetable” and, even then, TPE are unable to operate it properly. Giving them further scope to reduce it further won’t improve things and won’t make the service any more reliable.

It also wasn’t any more reliable last year when we did have a more-reduced “temporary emergency timetable” of 1x Liverpool-Newcastle, 1x Airport-Redcar and 1x Manchester-Hull each hour, plus the stoppers. And the number of times the Redcar ran as a single 185 was beyond belief.

I don’t see how reducing the timetable back down will improve anything. The issue is far beyond staff availability.

Indeed, letting them further curtail services only then to still fail really sounds like madness. In fact in some ways the current chaos has one small advantage in that TPE can't simply brush the problem under the carpet the way Avanti did.

I wonder how feasible it might be to bring them in under the current Northern public company, then offer some Northern staff the chance to train on the unit types and sign some limited routes, giving them a chance to bid for overtime on TPE to help cover?

Before the big guns come out and shout me down, its just a thought. I seen it used in other industries from time to time, an maybe it might offer a bit of relief for TOC and staff alike?

<Runs away>

 

[MattRat]

Indeed, letting them further curtail services only then to still fail really sounds like madness. In fact in some ways the current chaos has one small advantage in that TPE can't simply brush the problem under the carpet the way Avanti did.

I wonder how feasible it might be to bring them in under the current Northern public company, then offer some Northern staff the chance to train on the unit types and sign some limited routes, giving them a chance to bid for overtime on TPE to help cover?

Before the big guns come out and shout me down, its just a thought. I seen it used in other industries from time to time, an maybe it might offer a bit of relief for TOC and staff alike?

<Runs away>

Well also it's the only logical conclusion of the DFT plans. Either to have a merger or to split TPE up. Either that or it's sheer incompetence/hatred of the North. Place your bets!

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I wonder how feasible it might be to bring them in under the current Northern public company, then offer some Northern staff the chance to train on the unit types and sign some limited routes, giving them a chance to bid for overtime on TPE to help cover?

Before the big guns come out and shout me down, its just a thought. I seen it used in other industries from time to time, an maybe it might offer a bit of relief for TOC and staff alike?

I suspect all this will achieve is a total breakdown in industrial relations.

 

[Bantamzen]

I suspect all this will achieve is a total breakdown in industrial relations.

Why though? If the two TOCs end up operating under the same publicly owned company, and that cross brand cover was only offered when cover could not be found within, surely this would be a possible solution? After all, outside of any current industrial action, keeping both sides of the operation going successfully and giving willing staff to earn a bit more ans gain knowledge & experience would be productive for all?

 

[MattRat]

Anyway, how would people feel if Avanti absorbed the entirety of TPE into them? There's already been talk of giving them the North WCML services, so why not go all the way.

There are two reasons I think this might work. One is they are both owned by First, so are already operating under the same roof, it would just streamline operations. Two is that Avanti management has already had to clean up a similar mess, so have the knowledge to do it again (makes the process easier instead of doing it from scratch).

Another more minor thing would be the idea of Avanti then also ordering more 805s to get rid of 185s and 68s, to improve fleet commonality for maintenance and driver training. Since TPE already have 802s, it shouldn't be too hard to get 805s cleared for most TPE routes, which makes it overall easier.

But I want to hear the forums thoughts on whether the whole idea has merit or not, or if my idea is a huge mistake for some reason, or some merit/potential if you so choose.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

And that might well work on longer distance services where significant volumes of passengers do actually plan in advance, and can amend accordingly. This is often not going to be the case with other passengers.

Could it be the case where travel agents have arranged travel itineraries for customers going on long distance holidays from Manchester Airport, when on their return back to the UK, they then encounter the current TPE hiatus to travel back home to places many miles away using the pre-booked TPE rail tickets?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Could it be the case where travel agents have arranged travel itineraries for customers going on long distance holidays from Manchester Airport, when on their return back to the UK, they then encounter the current TPE hiatus to travel back home to places many miles away using the pre-booked TPE rail tickets?

Then they will be accommodated on the next service to their destination same as all other passengers.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Then they will be accommodated on the next service to their destination same as all other passengers.

All well and good, but place yourself in that same scenario with a family group who have already spent some hours travelling by air to Manchester Airport then then face the current hiatus. As the head of the family group, how would you react to being told "You will be accommodated on the next available service" when then not being told when such a service will actually depart.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

All well and good, but place yourself in that same scenario with a family group who have already spent some hours travelling by air to Manchester Airport then then face the current hiatus. As the head of the family group, how would you react to being told "You will be accommodated on the next available service" when then not being told when such a service will actually depart.

Which is why an emergency timetable would be far more suitable as it gives people certainty.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which is why an emergency timetable would be far more suitable as it gives people certainty.

Indeed. And if travelling to a flight, wouldn't you rather know what time train would run than miss it?

Seriously, there's no possible valid argument for having a timetable you can't operate.

 

[Bantamzen]

Could it be the case where travel agents have arranged travel itineraries for customers going on long distance holidays from Manchester Airport, when on their return back to the UK, they then encounter the current TPE hiatus to travel back home to places many miles away using the pre-booked TPE rail tickets?

To be fair return tickets from Manchester Airport can be bought where they allow up to three hours flight delay. So I would hope that would also apply for passengers whose flights arrive on time, but where TPE are causing delays.

 

[RailWonderer]

Anyway, how would people feel if Avanti absorbed the entirety of TPE into them? There's already been talk of giving them the North WCML services, so why not go all the way.

There are two reasons I think this might work. One is they are both owned by First, so are already operating under the same roof, it would just streamline operations. Two is that Avanti management has already had to clean up a similar mess, so have the knowledge to do it again (makes the process easier instead of doing it from scratch).

Another more minor thing would be the idea of Avanti then also ordering more 805s to get rid of 185s and 68s, to improve fleet commonality for maintenance and driver training. Since TPE already have 802s, it shouldn't be too hard to get 805s cleared for most TPE routes, which makes it overall easier.

But I want to hear the forums thoughts on whether the whole idea has merit or not, or if my idea is a huge mistake for some reason, or some merit/potential if you so choose.

If you read the previous pages the generally agreed on way to dissolve TPE was to move the Newcastles to XC, the Anglo - Scots to Avanti and the rest would go to Northern but then you have the costs of training all crew on extra routes and stock, which won't be cheap. The few TPE staff who are all trained could move over to one of those operators.

Central Trains and Wessex trains were dissolved, and Thames Trains/FGW link was merged into FGW. It could happen, although this government in all areas of policymaking seem to be to be stalling and unwilling to take decisive action, all to serve costcutting of course.

 

[JonathanH]

It’s pretty clear why TPE aren’t using the 68s and it isn’t because of the snow.

Is it now likely that the 68+Mk5 sets will be put out of their misery and permanently withdrawn in the next few weeks? They seem surplus to requirements on the diminished TPE, and would no doubt go some way to meeting TPE's share of the DfT budget cuts if the lease can be terminated. Wasnt there a suggestion they were on a fairly short lease anyway?

 

[adrock1976]

My suggestions for a temporary timetable are as follows:

Liverpool - Newcastle via Man Vic and Huddersfield every 60 minutes (would also call at Chester-le-Street, which previous posts seem to have overlooked if curtailed to York)
Liverpool - Middlesborough via Man Vic, Huddersfield, and Yarm every 60 minutes
Man Pic - Huddersfield via Guide Bridge every 30 minutes (either TPE or Northern)
Huddersfield - Leeds every 30 minutes, with alternate trains extending to Selby, Brough, and Hull every 60 minutes
Man Pic - Cleethorpes via Stockport, Sheffield, Doncaster, and Scunthorpe every 60 minutes (could be split at Doncaster depending if Plat 5? (the south facing bay on the left hand island platform looking towards Leeds/York) is long enough)
York - Scarborough shuttle every 60 minutes (made permanent and doubled to every 30 minutes when Flaxton station reopens). Either TPE or Northern.
Edinburgh - Berwick upon Tweed/Newcastle every 2 hours - transferred to Scotrail or joint operation with Scotrail and Northern.

This would give frequencies on the following common sections of route:

Liverpool - York/Northallerton every 30 minutes
Manchester - Huddersfield via Stalybridge 4tph (2 each from Vic and Pic)
Huddersfield - Leeds 4tph

Furthermore, comments have been made about splitting TPE, but how about splitting Northern back into the former Regional Railways North West and North East (TPE was once part of RRNE - the Glasgow/Edinburgh via Preston could go to North West)? I am thinking back to the Northern dispute four or five years ago where it was only one side of the Pennines that there was a problem (was it rest day working or something like that?).

 

[HamworthyGoods]

My suggestions for a temporary timetable are as follows:

Liverpool - Newcastle via Man Vic and Huddersfield every 60 minutes (would also call at Chester-le-Street, which previous posts seem to have overlooked if curtailed to York)
Liverpool - Middlesborough via Man Vic, Huddersfield, and Yarm every 60 minutes
Man Pic - Huddersfield via Guide Bridge every 30 minutes (either TPE or Northern)
Huddersfield - Leeds every 30 minutes, with alternate trains extending to Selby, Brough, and Hull every 60 minutes
Man Pic - Cleethorpes via Stockport, Sheffield, Doncaster, and Scunthorpe every 60 minutes (could be split at Doncaster depending if Plat 5? (the south facing bay on the left hand island platform looking towards Leeds/York) is long enough)
York - Scarborough shuttle every 60 minutes (made permanent and doubled to every 30 minutes when Flaxton station reopens). Either TPE or Northern.
Edinburgh - Berwick upon Tweed/Newcastle every 2 hours - transferred to Scotrail or joint operation with Scotrail and Northern.

This would give frequencies on the following common sections of route:

Liverpool - York/Northallerton every 30 minutes
Manchester - Huddersfield via Stalybridge 4tph (2 each from Vic and Pic)
Huddersfield - Leeds 4tph

Furthermore, comments have been made about splitting TPE, but how about splitting Northern back into the former Regional Railways North West and North East (TPE was once part of RRNE - the Glasgow/Edinburgh via Preston could go to North West)? I am thinking back to the Northern dispute four or five years ago where it was only one side of the Pennines that there was a problem (was it rest day working or something like that?).

You would need to retain some services between Newcastle and Edinburgh as the Hitachi Depots for the 802s for this route are at either Edinburgh or Doncaster, neither of which are particularly close to Newcastle.

 

[Killingworth]

Is it now likely that the 68+Mk5 sets will be put out of their misery and permanently withdrawn in the next few weeks? They seem surplus to requirements on the diminished TPE, and would no doubt go some way to meeting TPE's share of the DfT budget cuts if the lease can be terminated. Wasnt there a suggestion they were on a fairly short lease anyway?

Persisting with training on these units has been eating up resources that could have been better employed running the other units in service. 3 car 185s instead of 6 would be better than no train.

I first saw a Class 68 on South Pennine in November 2021. Well over a year later they're still timed to haul ECS back and forwards once a day - but very often don't! That's removing the path for a regular service from the public timetable. They aren't very noticeable in public service, although it has happened.

 

[LittleAH]

Persisting with training on these units has been eating up resources that could have been better employed running the other units in service. 3 car 185s instead of 6 would be better than no train.

I first saw a Class 68 on South Pennine in November 2021. Well over a year later they're still timed to haul ECS back and forwards once a day - but very often don't! That's removing the path for a regular service from the public timetable. They aren't very noticeable in public service, although it has happened.

Rumour is the Nova 3 is going in 3,2,1...

 

[JonathanH]

Persisting with training on these units has been eating up resources that could have been better employed running the other units in service.

Yes, totally the point, not to mention the bizarre decision to reopen the traincare facility at Scarborough.

It seems pretty clear that TPE won't ever return to the 2019 timetables. It has been clear that the 68+Mk5 sets didn't have a long term future for a long time.

 

[MattRat]

If you read the previous pages the generally agreed on way to dissolve TPE was to move the Newcastles to XC, the Anglo - Scots to Avanti and the rest would go to Northern but then you have the costs of training all crew on extra routes and stock, which won't be cheap. The few TPE staff who are all trained could move over to one of those operators.

Central Trains and Wessex trains were dissolved, and Thames Trains/FGW link was merged into FGW. It could happen, although this government in all areas of policymaking seem to be to be stalling and unwilling to take decisive action, all to serve costcutting of course.

I know it isn't the agreed way and of course there's always getting past the DFT, but I was more airing an idea to see the thoughts on it, and to see if my logic had merit, or if I was barking up the wrong tree.

Also part of me just really like the idea of ordering more 805s to give more general fleet commonality and of course bi modes. The 185s and 68s could then go elsewhere.

 

[WAB]

Yes, totally the point, not to mention the bizarre decision to reopen the traincare facility at Scarborough.

It seems pretty clear that TPE won't ever return to the 2019 timetables. It has been clear that the 68+Mk5 sets didn't have a long term future for a long time.

I know of a certain open access operator in need of a few new trains and the flexibility to switch to bimodal operation

 

[JonathanH]

I know of a certain open access operator in need of a few new trains and the flexibility to switch to bimodal operation

They would be totally inappropriate for them as although they don't need high diesel speeds, they do need 125mph operation on electric, and such a bi-mode locomotive doesn't exist.

 

[tbtc]

There’s some noble aims here but it’d take months to do things like train sufficient Northern staff on TPE routes (and if increased staffing is the aim, why not just recruit more new entrants rather than deprive Northern of staff whilst their existing drivers/ guards are taught TPE routes?)

Same goes for getting existing TPE staff trained for longer distances again, that’ll take months before it pays any dividends… we don’t have that luxury

Capitulating over industrial relations seems unlikely, given how generous the “Old” terms were (which seems to be the Union’s benchmark)

Divvying up the operation to other TOCs or getting OLR involved may have merits but doesn’t affect the number of qualified staff available to work at the coal face

So the only option (to make improvements that can be delivered in the short term) seems to be some sort of emergency timetable

If the minimum staffing levels you can guarantee are just 40% of the numbers needed to deliver the 2019 timetable then cut your cloth accordingly, but ensure that the 40% of chosen services run day in, day out… guarantee that baseline… maybe that’s only half hourly through Huddersfield plus a bi-hourly stopper… Maybe that’s only bi-hourly through Sheffield… maybe Newcastle/ Middlesbrough/ Scarborough/ Hull go down to bihourly, maybe there’s a conversation to be had locally about whether a train every two hours to Manchester is preferable to an hourly shuttle with single 185 to York (or Leeds in the case of Hull), i dunno… maybe that’s nothing beyond Middlesbrough …But make sure that passengers can have faith in this new timetable

Then plan for growth. Show passengers your plans for bouncing back. Maybe the plan is that with every tranche of newly trained staff, you’ll sprinkle some resources on each branch, but give your regular customers something to look forward to, whilst ensuring that nothing gets cancelled

Because I don’t know what other options there are for keeping passengers, it might be fun for some enthusiasts to have random timetables but if we are seeing three services in a row cancelled then there’s only so many times that you can test the faith of some passengers

 

[Peter Sarf]

Indeed, letting them further curtail services only then to still fail really sounds like madness. In fact in some ways the current chaos has one small advantage in that TPE can't simply brush the problem under the carpet the way Avanti did.

I wonder how feasible it might be to bring them in under the current Northern public company, then offer some Northern staff the chance to train on the unit types and sign some limited routes, giving them a chance to bid for overtime on TPE to help cover?

Before the big guns come out and shout me down, its just a thought. I seen it used in other industries from time to time, an maybe it might offer a bit of relief for TOC and staff alike?

<Runs away>

My feeling is that TPE are currently sweeping the problem under the carpet. Forcing TPE to publish a realistic timetable makes it more obvious that there is a problem BIG practical PLUS is it gives passengers and staff a better idea of what will run.

Why though? If the two TOCs end up operating under the same publicly owned company, and that cross brand cover was only offered when cover could not be found within, surely this would be a possible solution? After all, outside of any current industrial action, keeping both sides of the operation going successfully and giving willing staff to earn a bit more ans gain knowledge & experience would be productive for all?

This might work to a certain extent but the core of the current problem is lack of drivers. Your right though - any sort of cooperation between Northern and TPE might bring some benefit to passengers at least.

Anyway, how would people feel if Avanti absorbed the entirety of TPE into them? There's already been talk of giving them the North WCML services, so why not go all the way.

There are two reasons I think this might work. One is they are both owned by First, so are already operating under the same roof, it would just streamline operations. Two is that Avanti management has already had to clean up a similar mess, so have the knowledge to do it again (makes the process easier instead of doing it from scratch).

Another more minor thing would be the idea of Avanti then also ordering more 805s to get rid of 185s and 68s, to improve fleet commonality for maintenance and driver training. Since TPE already have 802s, it shouldn't be too hard to get 805s cleared for most TPE routes, which makes it overall easier.

But I want to hear the forums thoughts on whether the whole idea has merit or not, or if my idea is a huge mistake for some reason, or some merit/potential if you so choose.

You raise an important point - the Avanti approach to getting out of the driver shortage problem is obviously better than TPE's current head in the sand approach.

In terms of stock your right. The West coast side of TPE uses 397s (under the wires all the way) mainly so the only obvious need/excuse to get more IETs for that side is to be common with 805s. But there must be benefits to simplifying the fleet - benefit for maintenance resource and driver resource. I would say the 68+Mk5s are the microfleet that would go which would mean more 802s (or spare 185s ?) for services across the Pennines.

All well and good, but place yourself in that same scenario with a family group who have already spent some hours travelling by air to Manchester Airport then then face the current hiatus. As the head of the family group, how would you react to being told "You will be accommodated on the next available service" when then not being told when such a service will actually depart.

An emergency time table is the only way to manage that.

Which is why an emergency timetable would be far more suitable as it gives people certainty.

Indeed. And if travelling to a flight, wouldn't you rather know what time train would run than miss it?

Seriously, there's no possible valid argument for having a timetable you can't operate.

It loudly demonstrates an inability to understand the situation a business is in. A failing formula that would normally lead to a failure of the business.

Persisting with training on these units has been eating up resources that could have been better employed running the other units in service. 3 car 185s instead of 6 would be better than no train.

I first saw a Class 68 on South Pennine in November 2021. Well over a year later they're still timed to haul ECS back and forwards once a day - but very often don't! That's removing the path for a regular service from the public timetable. They aren't very noticeable in public service, although it has happened.

I only see a future for the 68s+Mk5s once more drivers are recruited and TPE steadily improves back to a 2019 timetable.

There’s some noble aims here but it’d take months to do things like train sufficient Northern staff on TPE routes (and if increased staffing is the aim, why not just recruit more new entrants rather than deprive Northern of staff whilst their existing drivers/ guards are taught TPE routes?)

Same goes for getting existing TPE staff trained for longer distances again, that’ll take months before it pays any dividends… we don’t have that luxury

Capitulating over industrial relations seems unlikely, given how generous the “Old” terms were (which seems to be the Union’s benchmark)

Divvying up the operation to other TOCs or getting OLR involved may have merits but doesn’t affect the number of qualified staff available to work at the coal face

So the only option (to make improvements that can be delivered in the short term) seems to be some sort of emergency timetable

If the minimum staffing levels you can guarantee are just 40% of the numbers needed to deliver the 2019 timetable then cut your cloth accordingly, but ensure that the 40% of chosen services run day in, day out… guarantee that baseline… maybe that’s only half hourly through Huddersfield plus a bi-hourly stopper… Maybe that’s only bi-hourly through Sheffield… maybe Newcastle/ Middlesbrough/ Scarborough/ Hull go down to bihourly, maybe there’s a conversation to be had locally about whether a train every two hours to Manchester is preferable to an hourly shuttle with single 185 to York (or Leeds in the case of Hull), i dunno… maybe that’s nothing beyond Middlesbrough …But make sure that passengers can have faith in this new timetable

Then plan for growth. Show passengers your plans for bouncing back. Maybe the plan is that with every tranche of newly trained staff, you’ll sprinkle some resources on each branch, but give your regular customers something to look forward to, whilst ensuring that nothing gets cancelled

Because I don’t know what other options there are for keeping passengers, it might be fun for some enthusiasts to have random timetables but if we are seeing three services in a row cancelled then there’s only so many times that you can test the faith of some passengers

Yes - more drivers need to be recruited and trained.

Forget luxury - it will take many months (a year or more) but its that or continue with heads in the sand. A temporary timetable would also theoretically make training more predictable so easier to achieve.

Yes- TPE need to cut their cloth according to what they have. Then - as you say grow steadily.

The black cloud is how many services post Covid19 do the TPE passenger levels justify. At least a predictable time table would prevent unnecessary further loss of passengers - has the stable door already been open too long on that one ?.

In terms of bounce back from Covid19 demand loss there is a parallel. Airports were poorly staffed once demand started to recover. Big difference is the airport staff were in roles that required a lot less training than a driver role.

Questions :-
Are DfT and TPE sitting on their hands waiting for as long as they can to see how much demand recovers to pre Covid19 levels ?.
Are we backseat managers in danger of demanding a long hard look too soon - that might lead to some unpleasant conclusions ?.

 

[L+Y]

Capitulating over industrial relations seems unlikely, given how generous the “Old” terms were (which seems to be the Union’s benchmark)

For those with more knowledge than me- is this really the roof of the TPE issues? If an RDW agreement was signed, would problems be eliminated, or merely somewhat reduced?

And just how generous were the previous terms, and what's been offered since?

 

[RailWonderer]

Questions :-
Are DfT and TPE sitting on their hands waiting for as long as they can to see how much demand recovers to pre Covid19 levels ?.
Are we backseat managers in danger of demanding a long hard look too soon - that might lead to some unpleasant conclusions ?.

1: I think so, kicking the can down the road is their stock approach. I think a lot of demand for the TPE has moved to other TOCs and the roads. It's possible it won't recover unless proper investment is made, beyond the TRU, I mean actually getting the TPE routes back to health again.
2: No. What 'unpleasant conclusions' did you have in mind? If TPE was dissolved tomorrow and operations were split up even assuming the costs of training would be absorbed by the DfT other TOCs are far more competant in managing crisis and getting up to scratch and being efficient. TPE is just an unfit operation full stop. It's an oportunity to gut the current management is how I see it. Obviously all academic as DfT will not be coughing up.