• 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!

FGW To be or not to be that is the question

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Metroland

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
3,212
Location
Midlands
Hmn, people do point their fingers at FGW because they are ones with the shiny livery on the side of the trains. The majority of the delay on the route is caused by Network rail, who admittedly pick up some of the tab for the suicides – the line is a suicide hot spot. Nevertheless the restrictive track layouts and worn out equipment play their part.

The DfT are of-course pulling the strings, indeed there was a huge dump in public transport company shares last week after Go-ahead revealed that because of the rising costs of fuel its bus division would be hit, and its rail division would be hit by cuts in government subsidy. Network rail is shortly to have all its government loans cancelled, replaced by pure private sector finance – subject to the whims of ebbs of the market.

As everyone knows, the current system is very expensive. Short time franchises do little to attract long term investment, save glossy new station signs and fresh staff uniforms. Just ask Virgin, whose requests for extra coaches for the Pendolinos have been turned down because the DfT refuse to lengthen their franchise. Sensibly they would extend it, as the new coaches would fit into the maintenance regime – the first big Pendolino exams being around 2011 when they want to introduce the new coaches. However, don’t underestimate political dogma getting in the way of plain common sense.

Either way whoever runs the franchise, the same old underlying problems will remain, rather like the East coast wires coming down on a National express train last week, the result of cheapskate BR trying to satisfy its treasury paymasters. It’s funny how the worlds most reliable railways in Japan and Switzerland manage with near 100% electrification.

Never has so much money been spent for so little, but it keeps the consultants, middle management, bureaucrats and lawyers in jobs. In the new labour world not only are we all middle class, but all middle management. I may send the DFT Tainter’s ‘The Collapse of Complex Societies’ to them for Christmas.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
the line is a suicide hot spot.

Given the reliability of services, it's not really surprising ;)

I've always thought that FGW were given a poor deal. The stock is pretty inadequite for most services and, sadly, FSR have piles of 158s sitting in carriage sidings outside Edinburgh.

But there's no way that all the hastle is down to DFT. I'm a big fan of First Group, and admire their service standards north of the border, but the refurbished HSTs look stupid inside (IMO, there's something wrong when all seats are airline seats). There must be something wrong with announcements, customer service etc, and from what I've read on here this is a problem.

Give GW a new franchise holder; it could improve service to customers. But the DFT need to give FGW reliable, new, longer trains. This is the key issue, and tell them to buck up their ideas as far as service is concerned.
 

Metroland

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
3,212
Location
Midlands
Well the DFT is the worst thing that ever happened to the rail network. While First GW isn't blameless, I do think these short term franchises are a fools game. I also think that re-livering trains every 5 mins is a bad use of money, especially as the real Great Western had a livery for over 100 years.
 

devon_metro

Established Member
Joined
11 Oct 2005
Messages
7,714
Location
London
The Greater Western region needs investment basically.

A new fleet of trains would be fantastic!
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Having heard of 153s from Cardiff to Portsmouth, definately new rolling stock is the top priority.

I'm pretty sure Scotaldn have minimal contact with DFT, which is quite good. We regulate the franchise ourselves, and I think Scotland's government works better with rail transport (and buses too) than you do in England. Of course, this is an outsider's persepctive, but this is one of the better things brough around by devolution.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
21,197
Location
0035
I'm pretty sure Scotaldn have minimal contact with DFT, which is quite good. We regulate the franchise ourselves, and I think Scotland's government works better with rail transport (and buses too) than you do in England. Of course, this is an outsider's persepctive, but this is one of the better things brough around by devolution.

Wouldn't say the same about the buses, as they're effectively run in the same way, with the Scottish Government (or whatever they're called this week) and local authorities still being made to finance 'congestion busting' and socially necessary (LA funding) bus services. But certaintly the former has a bigger pot of money to play with compared to the population it serves which causes the congestion.
 

djw1981

Established Member
Joined
10 Jul 2007
Messages
2,642
Location
Glasgow
Bus service are funded through regional transport authorities (SPT, Sestrans, Nestrans, Hitrans), as are P&R services, new road building and ferries. Ideally this goves more of a multi-modal approach. Though there is growing pressure for re-regulation of the bus industry (surprisingly the SNP did a volte-face about this after getting a donation from a Mr B Soutar of Perth). The previous Labour administration (who received funding from a Mr M Lockhead of Aberdeen) were also cool on the idea.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
I'm not up on how the buses work (that makes railways look simple), but we do have more money for trains than you do in England, and more than we did under the UK Government.
 

djw1981

Established Member
Joined
10 Jul 2007
Messages
2,642
Location
Glasgow
Hmmmmm well, erm no we don't, or at least we didn't. Scotland only had transport devolved to it in 2005/6, so all investment prior to that was DfT / SRA doing. The Scottish Parliament has opened A-B, and added the Larkhall line but the latter was added partly due to SPT's actions, and is similar to other capacity boosting plans lead by English PTE's, such as the metrolink extension in Manchester. SAK was a capacity enhancement driven by Railtrack / NR, whose business case was helped by adding passenger stops, and thus received support from local politicians.

Funding has always been on a combination of per-capita and social scale, hence why rural areas get more, and so do deprived areas. Glasgow has the lowest car ownership rate in the UK, and thus has comparatively good public transport, because more people use it. Our funding may be higher than the UK average, but the characteristic of an average is that half are above and half below......
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Well, whatever the case, railways receive better investment in Scotland than they do elsewhere. That is my opinion, and I'm sticking by it.
 

djw1981

Established Member
Joined
10 Jul 2007
Messages
2,642
Location
Glasgow
Indeed, opinion are like an orrifice. Everyone has one.

I can see your point, but the issue is not that it is only wonderful post devolution of transport powers. Also, I;d like to point out that past investment is no guarantee of future investment, and the HLOS was very tight, and the Scottish Government list of Tier 1 & 2 improvements was nothing more than keeping pace with capacity, as the one in England seems to be. the crunch for the new administration will be with the next EMU order, due very soon - 4car or 3car (ie will there be capacity enhancements in Ayrshire); how many units will be ordered? Will there be a cascade of units to England, or will we just replace the 314's or will we actually get more units to allow for service strengthening.?
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Lots of questions. To be honest, I've been waiting for the SNP to insist on a referendum or reverse their decisions; it wouldn't surprise me. But investment ATM has impressed thus far.

The EMU order is certainly the hot tpoic ATM. With GARL (which requires luggage space), and old (but useable) 318s potentially retiring from Ayrshire, we are looking at whether or not they will make the sensible decision and elongate platforms now. May not be the demand ATM, but there will be long before the next new fleet is due in.
 

djw1981

Established Member
Joined
10 Jul 2007
Messages
2,642
Location
Glasgow
The 318 are unlikely to be retire in this control period (2009-2014). They maybe reallocated to Inverclyde / Argyle /North Clyde services only.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Well, they will then be retired from Ayrshire ;)

Might be a step back for NClydes, but the allocation to these lines makes full sense given that the 90mph speed capacity on A-B could be utilised (to supplement 334s or temporarily replace if required, for example in case of breakdown, failure, refurb etc. ).
 

djw1981

Established Member
Joined
10 Jul 2007
Messages
2,642
Location
Glasgow
Hardly a step back on the N clydes. The reason they went to Ayrshire and not the newer 320's was their speed advantage.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
I could see people arguing that it is, due to the age of said units. Personally, I'd prefer them (although that didn't come across in my previous post).
 

djw1981

Established Member
Joined
10 Jul 2007
Messages
2,642
Location
Glasgow
They have been recently refurb'd and most people notice the interior. As long as they remain fit for purpose and the MPC rate doesn't plummet they should be fine.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
To be fair, there aren't many enthusiasts in Airdrie.

You're right, particaulrly since the 318s have been refurbished beyonde recognition. Some of my non-spotting friends (who don't have a clue about trains) sadi they preferred their "older new trains" (they meant 334s) to the "newer new trains" (318s).
 

Techniquest

Veteran Member
Joined
19 Jun 2005
Messages
21,846
Location
Nowhere Heath
Ooh, FGW, always an interesting topic for me!

No matter how much they tell the DfT to get rid of FGW, the way franchises are going at the moment means that FTPX and FSR would/may be affected too. Least that's what I'm told.

New trains for GW? Not much chance of that. Even if they got new trains, people may be skeptical on them after the farce with the 180s.

Give Haines a chance to get his restructured management team to work on the biggest issues. It may take some time, but I'm promised by people who saw SWT (under his control) turn around from terrible to awesome that he will get GW sorted out, albeit the time to do so may be a lot.

Either way, it is worth remembering Network Rail need to get their act together and get on with sorting out the infrastructure on GW. Sorting out Reading is the biggest issue in my book. Once that's done, IC services will, no doubt, be improved considerably.

The MTUs are finally settling in nicely now, which means that there are considerably less major failures on the IC side of things causing cancellations. Vastly improved dispatch at Newport and Oxford are two issues they need to sort out as well. Of course, Newport dispatch is something they have little to no control over but the fact remains that it is one of the biggest causes of delays to South Wales GW services.

Re-introducing fast services on the IC network would be most welcome though. Long ago we had HSTs running express services to Wales, nowadays they are almost crawling along. NXEC and EMT manage it, GW need to do it again. Even only having one crack express would be nice. Which one would I speed up? The one that goes the furthest distance on the Welsh side of GW IC, the 0740 Carmarthen - Paddington and 1733 Paddington - Carmarthen. Seeing as NXEC can manage to run around 77 miles to their first stop on the long-distance services, so will these trains. The calling patterns I'd introduce for these two are as below:

Carmarthen > Pembrey and Burry Port > Llanelli > Swansea > Neath > Port Talbot Parkway > Bridgend > Cardiff Central > Bristol Parkway > Swindon > London Paddington

London Paddington > Swindon > Bristol Parkway > Cardiff Central > Bridgend > Port Talbot Parkway > Neath > Swansea > Llanelli > Pembrey and Burry Port > Carmarthen

But that's what I'd do. It's high time we stopped farcing around with forcing virtually everything (bar the flaming Oxford - Paddington and vv runs) to stop at Didcot Parkway and got some trains running faster to their destinations.
 

djw1981

Established Member
Joined
10 Jul 2007
Messages
2,642
Location
Glasgow
If FGw was strippe dof the franchise, First Group would have to hand back Scotrail, Capital Connect Thameslink and Transpenine.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
In that case, I hope FGW retain FGW!!! I like FSR and don't want to see Arriva or some other people ruining a good company.
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
5,022
Surely First being stripped of the GW franchise doesn't effect the other franchises? As they are run by seperate companies who are owned by the First Group?

I hate travelling by FGW. The staff always seem unwilling to cooperate, and the refreshed HSTs just annoy the hell out of me. It's worse than travelling by tube sometimes!!
 

djw1981

Established Member
Joined
10 Jul 2007
Messages
2,642
Location
Glasgow
Ah............deep breath.... the DfT have said that they view a franchise handing back the keys as a decision by that holding company (who provide the ?£20million? bond to the DfT) to cease activity in the Uk rail market. If First hand back the ketys to any of their franchises, they lose them all. Leaving them with a part share in HT and FirstGBRf as their TOC/FOC involvement in the UK.

Ditto for NX, who would lose NXEC, C2C and NXEA. Stagecoach would lose EMT & SWT (not sure about Virgin since technically it is in a different name......TPE could be in a similar boat???). Arriva would lose AXC & ATW. GoVia would lose Southern, Southeastern and LM.

Would NX losing its franchises affect their involvement in Eurostar? And if Serco pulled out of Northern / Merseyrail, what would happen to the DLR / NR contracts??? No doubt some highly paid lawyers at DfT have cast a thought across these options.

The company surrendering the franchise, would not be allowed to rebid for any of them at that time, and would thus desimate their Uk rail operations for 2-3 years until the next round of franchises came around.

Of course, a rival company could jump in before that point, as DB did with Chiltern (albeit under different circumstances) but that could get stuck at the Competition Commission if itw as felt that one company would have a monopoly of traffic where previously there had been competition (eg anglo-scottish, or London - Birmingham)
 

alex57601

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2008
Messages
269
Might be a step back for NClydes

I don;t think using 318s on the North Clyde route will be a big step back. They were only built a few years before the 320s and could be considered more luxurious - the 318s have a toilet whereas 320s don't. Plus from the side they look the same anyway.

I can probably see the fleet becoming used like this...

Inverclyde routes - New build
Neilston, Newton, Cathcart - 320s
A-B services - 334s
North Clyde and Argyle line - 318s and 334s
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top