Class 442’s for ATW?

[PHILIPE]

Tbtc, above, suggests that 442s are 'oddball trains'.... Well if 442s are oddball trains, then so are 175/180s... Yet no-one is suggesting that they should be sidelined during the current rolling stock crisis, nor that the railway could manage without them while passengers are being left on platforms...
Yes, any cascade of 442s (or even 180s) to ATW would necessarily need to be a fairly complex cascade to best release stock to where they are best needed... Conceivably involving services of a neighbouring TOC into S.Wales (GWR), services beyond the borders of Wales (to Manchester, to Bristol and beyond..).. In other words, a 'bigger picture' overview that current structures on the railway, or in governance, seem incapable of...
Current fragmented organisational structures are failing passengers, both on the railway and in governance..

There could be many diagrams that could be worked by 442s within Wales and Borders Boundaries. Why complicate it ? There has been no mention yet as to where the 442s would be maintained.

In ATW Twitter reply this morning re shortage of stock, the answer given was that what they have is the what the Franchise has allocated them. On replying to "buy or build some more with your profits", the reply was that a carriage costs approx 1 million to build.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In ATW Twitter reply this morning re shortage of stock, the answer given was that what they have is the what the Franchise has allocated them. On replying to "buy or build some more with your profits", the reply was that a carriage costs approx 1 million to build.

Which shows an incredible ignorance of how rolling stock is financed - or a deliberate attempt to mislead the public who are generally (understandably) ignorant of such things.

 

[D60]

Which shows an incredible ignorance of how rolling stock is financed - or a deliberate attempt to mislead the public who are generally (understandably) ignorant of such things.

Conclusion... They're insufficiently interested in finding solutions, preferring to hide behind misleading statements and obfuscation...
The same with the supposed 'decision-makers' in govt.. ('leaves on the line', 'blame someone else'..)..
Meanwhile, passengers in Wales continue to deserve better..

 

[Bletchleyite]

Conclusion... They're insufficiently interested in finding solutions, preferring to hide behind misleading statements and obfuscation...

Sounds like Arriva generally - the vast majority of my encounters with them in any form shout "can't be bothered". The last time they did anything genuinely clever or forward-thinking was the mobile bus ticketing, and that was ages ago now. Or I suppose XC TMR, but it isn't even implemented particularly well and is highly controversial.

 

[PHILIPE]

They always hide behind the DFT and the franchise conditions. Do no less in order to comply and do no more

 

[43096]

They always hide behind the DFT and the franchise conditions. Do no less in order to comply and do no more

To be blunt, what the hell do you expect them to do?

Arriva signed a contract which they have to deliver. I fail to see why they should just spend more and take a straight hit to their profits. The issue is with the original contract specification - it's not up to Arriva to fund variations to that. The one issue I do have with is Arriva is that they should be suggesting solutions to WAG/DfT and trying to get funding agreed.

Too many people on here who are utterly clueless about real world commerce, I'm afraid.

 

[gareth950]

According to BBC Wales Today yesterday evening, ATW is seeing 10% growth year on year currently - so not a 'no-growth' situation then, no doubt it's even higher on the valley lines which are always busy now. The only 'quiet' periods seem to be the middle of the day and very late evening on weeknights.

Taken from RAIL 813:

ATW is not popular in the principality because of it's poor performance, shortage of rolling stock and the lack of any investment. The company complains that this is not its fault since the franchise was specified very narrowly, and that the shortage of stock is not its fault either. But with annual profits hovering around the £20 million mark, Arriva and its German owners have done very well out of the deal while putting very little back, with a requirement to invest a notional £400,000 over a 15-year period, barely enough to buy a couple of shelters on a platform. In response, ATW claims to be investing £30m per year , but there is very little evidence of that and it receives more than three times that annually in subsidy.

So how exactly tbtc and others is the W&B franchise a loss making franchise when Arriva manages to make £20 million a year in profits from running it?

 

[dgl]

The problem is that the DFT gets mighty annoyed when you do things that weren't in the franchise specification and it might affect their standing in future franchise awards.

 

[D60]

To be blunt, what the hell do you expect them to do?

Arriva signed a contract which they have to deliver. I fail to see why they should just spend more and take a straight hit to their profits. The issue is with the original contract specification - it's not up to Arriva to fund variations to that. The one issue I do have with is Arriva is that they should be suggesting solutions to WAG/DfT and trying to get funding agreed.

Too many people on here who are utterly clueless about real world commerce, I'm afraid.

Back to "the market", and its failure to resolve the issue of passengers being left on platforms in Wales...
Yes, under the current model, a German-owned operator need not do any more than it is contractually obliged to do...
Maybe this is the question that needs to be addressed... (which is kind of what I havw been doing since my first posting on this thread..)..

 

[PHILIPE]

To be blunt, what the hell do you expect them to do?

Arriva signed a contract which they have to deliver. I fail to see why they should just spend more and take a straight hit to their profits. The issue is with the original contract specification - it's not up to Arriva to fund variations to that. The one issue I do have with is Arriva is that they should be suggesting solutions to WAG/DfT and trying to get funding agreed.

Too many people on here who are utterly clueless about real world commerce, I'm afraid.

First of all, I'm not clueless on this issue so an apology for this type of language would not go remiss.
Back to the post now, I'm merely stating what is the fact of life and agree with what you say. The thing is, I'm wondering if ATW do make any representations to the DFT on behalf of their passengers having to travel in cattle like conditions instead of just saying, that's the franchise spec so can't do anything about it.

 

[tbtc]

In reply to the last section of tbtc's response above...
It's not about harking back to the BR era, or even about 'privatisation' vs 'nationalisation'.. (isn't Network Rail effectively state-owned? And isn't Deutsche-Bahn effectively state-owned? And even the period of loco-hauled operation referred to in the retrospective linked to in KrusAragon's post 2 or 3 pages back, was in the 'post-privatisation' era..)..
No, it's about a chronic rolling stock crisis, passengers being failed, rolling stock resources standing idle, that were at one point considered as suitable for another TOC... And no-one having the wit (or even 'strategic overview') to pull things together to make things happen.. while instead they all find excuses, transfer blame, and fail to act..

Shake your head about the fragmented system as much as you want, but it's where we are now - if you've got a sensible solution for improving things (with or without 442s) then fair enough, but there's no easy answers here.

They'd probably still be operating the duties they were built for. BR would never have had the funding to displace them from the Bournemouth line.

Fair point!

What ATW need is some Class 180 Adelante trains for the long distance routes - such as Carmarthen to Manchester? GWR are releasing some of these in summer 2017 and transferring them to Hull Trains & Grand Central

Hull Trains are getting 802s IIRC? (so their 180s will be free in a couple of years)

Tbtc, above, suggests that 442s are 'oddball trains'.... Well if 442s are oddball trains, then so are 175/180s... Yet no-one is suggesting that they should be sidelined during the current rolling stock crisis, nor that the railway could manage without them while passengers are being left on platforms...

...and nobody is suggesting that the 175s/180s are made up of recycled 1960s parts.

175s and 180s have a future - they are post-privatisation trains - relatively young for DMUs. Finding a future for 442s is harder...

They always hide behind the DFT and the franchise conditions. Do no less in order to comply and do no more

To be blunt, what the hell do you expect them to do?

Arriva signed a contract which they have to deliver. I fail to see why they should just spend more and take a straight hit to their profits. The issue is with the original contract specification - it's not up to Arriva to fund variations to that. The one issue I do have with is Arriva is that they should be suggesting solutions to WAG/DfT and trying to get funding agreed.

Too many people on here who are utterly clueless about real world commerce, I'm afraid.

I'm with 43096 here.

Arriva are doing what they are required to, on a franchise where farebox income only covers around half of the costs. Nobody is going to take a risk on more stock without Cardiff Bay/ Westminster getting their hands in their pockets.

Arriva could be more proactive, but maybe they do make representations to politicians behind closed doors - I don't know - maybe they know that there's no point in wasting time coming up with investment strategies when politicians would rather engage in blue sky thinking about dreamy Metro proposals than invest in day-to-day things like existing railway routes (these are the same politicians who seem in no hurry to sign cheques for the Valley Lines electrification after all).

According to BBC Wales Today yesterday evening, ATW is seeing 10% growth year on year currently - so not a 'no-growth' situation then, no doubt it's even higher on the valley lines which are always busy now. The only 'quiet' periods seem to be the middle of the day and very late evening on weeknights.

Taken from RAIL 813:

So how exactly tbtc and others is the W&B franchise a loss making franchise when Arriva manages to make £20 million a year in profits from running it?

There's a huge difference between the franchise being loss making and any profit that the TOC make from it.

The money that Arriva make from the franchise is a drop in the ocean compared to the subsidies required to keep routes like the Heart Of Wales open.

If every extra pound in farebox income costs you two pounds in additional operating costs (staffing, track access charges, leasing the trains, fuel...), would you spend millions of pounds on additional services, without state funding?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If Hull Trains & Grand Central are in such need for new trains, surely they could be given priority to get their order the Hitachi AT200’s delivered ahead of those for GWR?

According to BBC Wales Today yesterday evening, ATW is seeing 10% growth year on year currently - so not a 'no-growth' situation then, no doubt it's even higher on the valley lines which are always busy now. The only 'quiet' periods seem to be the middle of the day and very late evening on weeknights.
Taken from RAIL 813:
So how exactly tbtc and others is the W&B franchise a loss making franchise when Arriva manages to make £20 million a year in profits from running it?

Some fundamental misunderstandings here.
Hull Trains and Grand Central are open access private operators, hiring stock from private ROSCOs.
The DfT/WG have no powers to force them to do anything.

ATW's profit is a very low percentage of the W&B revenue.
The contract was relatively generous compared to recent DfT ones, but at times the profit from ATW has funded losses at Chiltern and XC in the Arriva camp.
The important number to remember is the ATW subsidy of c£150m annually, and that any deployment of extra rolling stock means more subsidy.
They may be German-government-owned but that does not make them "nationalised".
The German government has absolutely no influence on train services in the UK bar expecting a return on its investment.

ATW are just delivering against the contract. What else would you expect them to do? If they are failing (shortage of stock etc), there will be penalties.
The WG/DfT can change the contract, but are choosing not to (because it would cost money).
The Treasury also hates renegotiating contracts just before they expire.
The 2018 franchise round is about to start and that is where long term solutions will to be found.

Finally, the latest ATW station passenger figures do not show a significant increase, at least in North Wales.
More like 1% than 10%, with some stations declining year on year.
I don't see much of South Wales services, but stations as diverse as Pontypridd and Carmarthen went down this year.
Most of the big stations went up but Swansea was flat.
All this weighs against the business case for more rolling stock.

So it's all down to Ken Skates to decide what to do, but he hasn't got a strong hand to play, and the 2020 clock (nothing to do with ATW) is ticking.

 

[D60]

In reply to tbtc above, (not sure how to do extracts from quotes on this phone)..
"It's where we are now", is precisely the problem.. and the fact that it's failing rail passengers in Wales so badly... Yes, I may be asking questions, and maybe not in a position to offer much in the way of solutions... that's because I am neither a politician nor a transport professional... But there are such people, in highly paid positions, in the DfT, the WG, in train operating companies... Maybe it's time some of them were held to account, and questions asked... And if not now, then when..? (Maybe this is what Rhodri Clark was attempting to do with his original article on Wales Online..)...

And with regard to the recycled 1960s bits on 442s, these are the bits that would be dispensed with if redeployed away from the third rail.. for instance on ATW... (assuming anyone at all out there was actually interested in finding possible solutions to chronic overcrowding in Wales..)..

 

[daikilo]

And with regard to the recycled 1960s bits on 442s, these are the bits that would be dispensed with if redeployed away from the third rail.. for instance on ATW... (assuming anyone at all out there was actually interested in finding possible solutions to chronic overcrowding in Wales..)..

Well, certainly the travelling public would be, which means their elected and appointed representatives should be. That the original franchise did not adequately cover the case where more people chose to travel than expected must be a contributing factor (if true) but not a justification to stick heads in the sand.

If locomotive hauled 442 non-powered coaches could help (after modification) then surely it should be evaluated and the result communicated to the distressed travellers. Eventually, it may not be a viable solution and there may be no others but the current buck-passing is not right.

 

[43096]

First of all, I'm not clueless on this issue so an apology for this type of language would not go remiss.

Well, you won't be getting one as a) your original post merited it and b) it was a general comment that could be applied to plenty of people on here.

 

[PHILIPE]

Well, you won't be getting one as a) your original post merited it and b) it was a general comment that could be applied to plenty of people on here.

Well,well, well. you castigate somebody for posting their opinion on the Forum. Not worth arguing with you because that seems to be your attitude so closed as far as I'm concerned

 

[Iskra]

While the situation isn't great, a few people slagging off ATW need to remember that they've brought in more (daytime) LHCS than any other operator to try ease the unit shortages.

 

[Gareth Marston]

While the situation isn't great, a few people slagging off ATW need to remember that they've brought in more (daytime) LHCS than any other operator to try ease the unit shortages.

One set was compensation demanded by DFT for Arriva being bought by DB and the other is paid for by the Welsh Government.

The ATW MD who bought 22 MK 2's in 2005 was sacked by head office and the coaches were left to rot.......

 

[Iskra]

One set was compensation demanded by DFT for Arriva being bought by DB and the other is paid for by the Welsh Government.

The ATW MD who bought 22 MK 2's in 2005 was sacked by head office and the coaches were left to rot.......

I'll take that back then!

So what happened to all the Mk2's then?

 

[Gareth Marston]

I'll take that back then!

So what happened to all the Mk2's then?

They sat in the sidings at Canton for years rotting away and then got scrapped.

 

[anthony263]

They sat in the sidings at Canton for years rotting away and then got scrapped.

Some did get refurbished and used on the WAG when it first started in December 2008 however that was only for just over 12 months before they got replaced by mark 3 carriaages.

Looking back perhaps it might have been better of they had been stored rather than scrapped as they could have been deployed on at the Rhymney route like they used to freeing up some 150/pacers

 

[Gareth Marston]

Some did get refurbished and used on the WAG when it first started in December 2008 however that was only for just over 12 months before they got replaced by mark 3 carriaages.

Looking back perhaps it might have been better of they had been stored rather than scrapped as they could have been deployed on at the Rhymney route like they used to freeing up some 150/pacers

Solutions were there..........

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Arriva could be more proactive, but maybe they do make representations to politicians behind closed doors

One would hope so! But assuming they do... shall we be charitable and say they don't appear to be very good at it?

FGW got the unwanted 180s back into service to accommodate growth and passenger aspirations when there was no franchise commitment to do so. Central Trains were the original "no growth, no new stock" franchise and they got 170s into service. MML had a franchise commitment for 170s: they got them, they filled them, they voluntarily replaced them with 222s. Many, many franchises have gone above and beyond the initial award. It is and has always been doable. Arriva have either chosen not to or been, by the evidence, less successful than the hardly-garlanded franchises of CT and FGW.

 

[D60]

One set was compensation demanded by DFT for Arriva being bought by DB and the other is paid for by the Welsh Government.

The ATW MD who bought 22 MK 2's in 2005 was sacked by head office and the coaches were left to rot.......

Thanks for those further insights...
Yep, I had actually forgotten about the sorry saga of the ATW Mk2s left to rot at Canton... Would the ex-MD of ATW have been what some might have described as a 'career railwayman of the old school', perhaps? The sort who worked to find solutions, to maintain a service? Which as we have seen from the foregoing, others elsewhere and at different times, have also seemingly been able to achieve..?
Or should we just be sitting back and saying "It's where we are now", or "What the hell do you expect them to do"... While operators hide behind (and exploit?) the stifling limitations of contractual obligations, and everyone at all levels is free to make excuses, transfer blame...
As well as questioning and unpicking where accountability and responsibility lies.. maybe it's legitimate at this time to be questioning the entire model of franchising and fragmentation... Which rather than being about improving the service for passengers (see above, for how that's going in Wales).. seems to have been more about 'opening up' the railway to 'competition' from certain state-owned continental operators..