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!
It wasn't just old trains. I caught a 465 Networker, and it was the most vandalised and filthy train train I'd ever been on. It was vandalism at another level. I didnt feel safe. Connex didn't appear to care. I know TPE are having problems, and their services have become unreliable, but their trains are well presented and clean.
It wasn't just old trains. I caught a 465 Networker, and it was the most vandalised and filthy train train I'd ever been on. It was vandalism at another level. I didnt feel safe. Connex didn't appear to care.
Thats appalling. No wonder they lost both franchises when they don’t care about stations, rolling stock, staff or passengers. Undoing the progress made during NSE Days.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
When was this.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Why did they privatise The network into 25 TOCs instead of like 5 to 10 TOCs?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Why did they go for more of pre grouping system instead of like Big Four style system. Surely it would mean more caring for passengers. Or I am talking nonsense? Idk
This is a much broader question and worthy of a new thread - tho it may be worth getting hold of a decent book on the topic - there will be several with differing points of view- you could try this as a start- should be easy enough to get via your local library
Thats appalling. No wonder they lost both franchises when they don’t care about stations, rolling stock, staff or passengers. Undoing the progress made during NSE Days.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
When was this.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Several years ago, not long before they had the franchise taken off them. I travelled from Brixton on a 465. You couldve used the glass in the windows in a bathroom, it was so badly etched. There was yellow spray paint all across the seats, flooring, walls and ceiling. The lights were smashed, and it was absolutely filthy. Litter and ground in dirt. You felt like you needed a shower after you got off.
This is a much broader question and worthy of a new thread - tho it may be worth getting hold of a decent book on the topic - there will be several with differing points of view- you could try this as a start- should be easy enough to get via your local library
It is a big topic, but very broadly the financial risks of much larger franchises were beyond what was practical. Bear in mind there was a hope that there would be some management-buyout franchises. Even the costs of bidding by ultimately unsuccessful tenderers would be enough to put almost all off.
"I'm sorry to announce..." seemed to be Virgin CrossCountry's catchphrase. At first, the punctuality was poor and the older rolling stock suffered badly from wear and tear on their "Cinderella service" (their own description). I seem to recall that one power car was literally borrowed from a museum. This was compounded when they were particularly badly affected by the post-Hatfield chaos of speed restrictions on their already long routes, followed by chaos of their own making with Operation Princess.
By Virgin's standards (particularly given the publicity flair of Richard Branson combined with the InterCity expertise of Chris Green) they were amazingly incompetent at marketing: thanks to conflating all of Virgin's trains together, they promised far too much for the new trains in general and when the Voyagers arrived behind schedule they offered fewer seats, overcrowding and inadequate luggage provision (they resorted to running luggage vans by road in parallel to some trains); and then they launched an unworkable timetable that made travelling a lottery for everyone on the tracks they shared, not just their own passengers. Plus someone decided that the best way to attract passengers back from a prolongued period of total chaos was to offer heavily discounted tickets - resulting in returning passengers 'enjoying' chronic overcrowding on services further delayed by too many passengers trying to board.
All things considered, their staff did a good job of putting on a brave face and providing as best a service as they could - which the Connex staff I met didn't.
Despite its flaws, the modern CrossCountry is considerably better - bringing back longer trains to the fleet made an obvious difference.
Whilst GWR Fine, their first class service on IETs is joke compared to LNER service. Such cheap food, hard seats , it can hardly be called ”first class”, whilst LNER and Avanti mantains a high quality catering.
I used Virgin trains in the 90's, and whilst that could be hit and miss as a service, I gave them the benefit of the doubt as the infrastructure was due it's forty year renewal and the rolling stock was generally smartly kept.
Connex ad a very recently upgraded main line and reliable (albeit oldish) rolling stock, so there was no excuse to let standards slide.
I grew up cosseted in the Great Western and South West Main Line world of reasonably modern long-distance rolling stock and smartly presented trains. Visiting the Connex regions was a genuine shock that provoked letters of complaint.
In their replies, Connex claimed:
The lavatories were locked or empty of water because the trains were old
The trains were late or cancelled because the trains were old
The staff who were aggressive, unhelpful, invisible or offered outright misdirection were doing their best, but it was very hard because the trains were old
The windows were scratched, the blue upholstery was green with dirt and a pool of vomit was left uncleaned for a week because the trains were old
It did not seem to have occurred to them that refilling lavatory tanks might make them flush; that they could carry out repairs to make the trains work; that staff could be motivated or managed no matter what trains were being run; or that cleaning trains might make them less dirty. Although in the latter case they were proud to say that they aimed to clean (ordinary clean, not deep clean) the interior of each train "at least once every 14 days".
They seemed to have given up ... because the trains were old.
I travelled on pretty much every operator in the early 2000s: all had their problems - heavens, travelling Virgin Cross Country was an uphill battle at times - but none were as downright dispiriting as Connex.
It’s rather ironic that many of Connex’s trains *weren’t* actually that old in the 90s. A significant proportion of the VEP and CIG fleets were only in the 20-30 years bracket, some of them at the lower end of this, so more mid-life than old. They did of course *appear* old because of the slam doors and Mk1 body shells, so a convenient excuse.
Their staff relations were poor, especially on south central, and as others have mentioned they allowed the trains to degenerate into a very poor state indeed, and the comparison with South West Trains is a fair one for people to make. I can also remember travelling on Connex units where the windows were so caked in grime it was barely possible to see out.
The windows were grimy and etched with grafitti. The first class compartments were ruined by the end. Some even had all the internal paneling ripped out under the windows. The only thing between me and the outside world was a two or three mm of sheet steel. I can't imagine how they though it acceptable to send out units in that state. In terms of reliability, they got away with it with the slammers because the gubbins below the floor was bascially bomb proof. The 319s were a different matter and failed rather more frequently.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
It’s interesting Prism are mentioned. The very original WAGN franchise wasn’t too clever - their reliability was poor, mainly due to driver availability issues, and whilst the 317/6 and 317/7 refurbs were good the bulk of the 317 fleet was left untouched.
I remember the ex LTS class 317s on WAGN. They were in a right state. I'm not sure whether the damage was inflicted on the LTS or WAGN. I suspect the former. The units still in NSE livery were less battered as I recall.
This might not be popular, but Stagecoach East Midlands Trains were pretty poor in my experience. Right at the start of the franchise they got a few 156s from Northern which they put snooty notices in apologising for the conditions... a few years down the line the quality of interiors had gone backwards, and pretty much every 153 and 156 had a horrible damp, foisty smell. That's just the regional stock too. The Meridian units were also allowed to deteriorate, with threadbare seats looking like sack cloth. Then there was the horrible job they did refurbishing the 158s, removing most of the table bays and squeezing airline seats in so tightly that you'd pray for a 153 instead.
This might not be popular, but Stagecoach East Midlands Trains were pretty poor in my experience. Right at the start of the franchise they got a few 156s from Northern which they put snooty notices in apologising for the conditions... a few years down the line the quality of interiors had gone backwards, and pretty much every 153 and 156 had a horrible damp, foisty smell. That's just the regional stock too. The Meridian units were also allowed to deteriorate, with threadbare seats looking like sack cloth. Then there was the horrible job they did refurbishing the 158s, removing most of the table bays and squeezing airline seats in so tightly that you'd pray for a 153 instead.
Also I think GWR InterCity Service is quite terrible, Not the HSTs, the IETS, basically uncomfortable seats, crap first class catering and first class in general. Much worse than HSTS. LNER Better.
SNIPPED to save space...!
Why did they privatise The network into 25 TOCs instead of like 5 to 10 TOCs?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Why did they go for more of pre grouping system instead of like Big Four style system. Surely it would mean more caring for passengers. Or I am talking nonsense? Idk
Answers to these and similar questions may be found in the book “All Change. British Railway Privatisation” edited by Freeman and Shaw and published by McGraw-Hill in 2000.
To set the scene — BR had been losing traffic practically since its formation. It had last covered all its costs in 1951-2 and a couple of years later it no longer covered its operating costs. Since then it had been in receipt of a subsidy and by the time active steps were made to privatise it these had been paid for 35 years.
The issue was how best to manage decline as economically as possible and it was recognised from the beginning that continuing subsidy would be needed. As taxpayers' money was to be routed to private companies the method selected had to be as clear and transparent as possible
At different times five models for privatisation of passenger train operations were put forward by different groups, being the Cabinet Office, the DfT, the Treasury and some outside parties. Very briefly these were:
BR plc
Regional - essentially re-creating the ‘Big 4’ (but could have been up to 12)
Sectorisation
A 'Track Authority'
A hybrid of these models.
So several models were available - and the supporters of each produced their own arguments. The was no ‘basic premise’ on the part of government that one model be selected over the others apart from the feeling that costs could be reduced and the quality of service improved if the private sector were to be involved.
There were all sorts of arguments within the working groups on how to handle the necessary on-going subsidy.
The ‘BR plc’ approach was ruled out because, unlike the privatisation of BAA and telecoms and similar, BR was not profitable. Selling shares to the small investor on the basis that any dividends were reliant on the level of subsidy received from the Government would not have worked. This was also true of the 'Regional' model.
In the same way any ideas of a ‘trade sale’ were abandoned as no company would take on the risk.
'Open Access' bidding for paths on a monthly or bi-monthly basis was not applicable because of the inter-related nature of railway operations. So that was dropped as well. It was decided the best way to handle the subsidy issue was for potential train operators to bid for a group of services (the 'Track Authority' model as the train operators would not be responsible for the infrastructure)- a clear figure was available for each area and any cross-subsidy between profitable and loss-making services was up to the individual operators to manage. This avoided the DfT having to identify costs and revenues on an individual service basis.
Comfortable
Reasonably priced
Could pay for a nice meal (not extortionate) and enjoy it with proper cutlery and crockery while watching Wellingborough go by.
Comfortable
Reasonably priced
Could pay for a nice meal (not extortionate) and enjoy it with proper cutlery and crockery while watching Wellingborough go by.
I assume you mean NL65 on the Hull diagram. EC64 also had IC70 seats but was part of the general East Coast fleet and didn't have a fixed diagram (NL65 was an 8-car set, hence a dedicated diagram; it also kept the VP185 power cars in Neville Hill's orbit).
I assume you mean NL65 on the Hull diagram. EC64 also had IC70 seats but was part of the general East Coast fleet and didn't have a fixed diagram (NL65 was an 8-car set, hence a dedicated diagram; it also kept the VP185 power cars in Neville Hill's orbit).
As this thread is in the section headed History and Nostalgia, I would have expected some railway historian to come up with some truly dreadful stories from the pre-grouping era. There were lots of tiny little companies at the start of the railways, plenty of whom would have made the slang expression "cattle-class" a realistic description of their services. And in the early days the actual concept of passenger safety was an entirely novel one.
British Rail in 70s and 80 was ridiculed by general public. British Rail sandwiches were the jokes, Passenger number lowest ever, allegedly “old trains” even if they were only like 25-ish years old. It was honestly 70s was wost period in railways history. The Network was put to neglect, unfortunately.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
