-
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!
Govia get Thameslink Franchise
- Thread starter jopsuk
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I agree. I think the ASA need to receive a complaint before they can investigate...
I think those figures back up the OPs point. All the days when it appears to run on time, clearly contain spurious data.
Last edited:
EM2
Established Member
I don't think they actually claim that it's FGW that are making the investment, are they?
For example, this one says quite clearly 'Network Rail is investing £7.5 billion in our region'.
http://static3.thedrum.com/uploads/...additional_media/FGW_HANDS_96_SHEET_RGB_0.jpg
Slightly O/T but related to Southeastern route capacity: I noticed that a whole road out of Victoria (Southeastern) and the eastern most road over the Thames bridge is disused.
Might there be any benefits to capacity (even just space to await free platforms?) by reinstating this?
That space disappears pretty much the minute the river is crossed, but looking at the overall Power Station site, a clip-on could easily be made to carry it a bit further south. And at one point (near where the NLE station is planned) the track looks all new, with a new bit of space alongside.
I also wonder if capacity could be improved by having the third bi-di track extend beyond Clapham High Street station, and slewing the tracks northwards a bit to accommodate that?
Might there be any benefits to capacity (even just space to await free platforms?) by reinstating this?
That space disappears pretty much the minute the river is crossed, but looking at the overall Power Station site, a clip-on could easily be made to carry it a bit further south. And at one point (near where the NLE station is planned) the track looks all new, with a new bit of space alongside.
I also wonder if capacity could be improved by having the third bi-di track extend beyond Clapham High Street station, and slewing the tracks northwards a bit to accommodate that?
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
FGW explain that it's Network Rail money when you look at the smallprint on the poster.
But your point still stands: it's private companies trying to justify their existence by claiming the credit for other people's hard work.
gordonthemoron
Established Member
see Virgin ad infinitum
Regardless of the semantics (which, by the way, I agree with these points) Joe Public doesn't care which company it is in 'the railway' that is stumping up the cash, just that 'the railway is'.
Given the train operator current gets the blame for just about anything that goes wrong on the railway (much of it down to Network Rail), I suppose we can't be too surprised that the TOC would seek to get some credit for improvement works on the same railway.
Although the FCC only tickets are going, the department is acutely aware of the price differential and required bidders to propose a plan so that season ticket holders of FCC only fares did not face undue hardship by unreasonable or sharp price increases in the early years of the franchise. As a result I expect there to be new tickets introduced with a London Bridge only destination, or with route restrictions, eg via norwood Junction or not via Clapham Junction
But surely you can get a Southern train to London Bridge or not via Clapham? I expect the differentials to go on all but the Gatwick Express.
True. Although in my opinion there's one element that Southern should get rightly criticised for, and that's their lack of communication in times of severe disruption. Given that this seems to be an almost common theme running through the Govia franchises it'll be interesting to see if they learn with this new TSGN or whatever GoAhead brand it from one day to the next - Especially more so given that FCC made several improvements in this area, especially on the Great Northern side with the closer working with NR.
RJ
Established Member
I undestand the flows I've listed below all have FCC Only 7DS fares available
Code:
Origin Destination
THREE BRIDGES LONDON TERMINALS
BRIGHTON. LONDON TERMINALS
PRESTON PARK LONDON TERMINALS
WIVELSFIELD LONDON TERMINALS
BURGESS HILL LONDON TERMINALS
HASSOCKS LONDON TERMINALS
HAYWARDS HEATH LONDON TERMINALS
BALCOMBE LONDON TERMINALS
PETERBOROUGH. LONDON TERMINALS
HAYWARDS HEATH LONDON BRIDGE
HASSOCKS LONDON BRIDGE
GATWICK AIRPORT LONDON BRIDGE
BURGESS HILL LONDON BRIDGE
WIVELSFIELD LONDON BRIDGE
PRESTON PARK LONDON BRIDGE
BRIGHTON. LONDON BRIDGE
PETERBOROUGH. BAYFORD
PETERBOROUGH. CUFFLEY
PETERBOROUGH. POTTERS BAR
PETERBOROUGH. HATFIELD (HERTS)
PETERBOROUGH. WELHAM GREEN
PETERBOROUGH. BROOKMANS PK
PETERBOROUGH. ASHWELL & MORDEN
PETERBOROUGH. BALDOCK
PETERBOROUGH. HERTFORD NORTH
PETERBOROUGH. KNEBWORTH
PETERBOROUGH. LETCHWRTH GN CTY
PETERBOROUGH. ROYSTON (HERTS)
PETERBOROUGH. STEVENAGE.
PETERBOROUGH. WATTON AT STONE
PETERBOROUGH. WELWYN NORTH.
LONDON TERMINALS PETERBOROUGH.
WELWYN GDN CITY PETERBOROUGH.
PETERBOROUGH. LONDON CLIPPER
BRIGHTON. LONDON CLIPPER
PRESTON PARK LONDON CLIPPER
WIVELSFIELD LONDON CLIPPER
BURGESS HILL LONDON CLIPPER
HASSOCKS LONDON CLIPPER
HAYWARDS HEATH LONDON CLIPPER
THREE BRIDGES LONDON CLIPPER
BALCOMBE LONDON CLIPPER
PETERBOROUGH. ENFIELD CHSE/TWN
PETERBOROUGH. FARRINGDON UND
PETERBOROUGH. DALSTON KINGSLND
PETERBOROUGH. CANONBURY
PETERBOROUGH. LONDON BLKFRIARS
PETERBOROUGH. CITY THAMESLINK
PETERBOROUGH. LONDON BRIDGE
PETERBOROUGH. ELEPHANT & CSTLE
PETERBOROUGH. DRAYTON PARK
PETERBOROUGH. ESSEX ROAD
PETERBOROUGH. CREWS HILL
PETERBOROUGH. HIGHBURY & ISLTN
PETERBOROUGH. HARRINGAY
PETERBOROUGH. HORNSEY
PETERBOROUGH. NEW BARNET
PETERBOROUGH. NEW SOUTHGATE
PETERBOROUGH. OAKLEIGH PARK
PETERBOROUGH. PALMERS GREEN
PETERBOROUGH. WINCHMORE HILL
PETERBOROUGH. ALEXANDRA PALACE
PETERBOROUGH. BOWES PARK
PETERBOROUGH. GORDON HILL
PETERBOROUGH. GRANGE PARK
PETERBOROUGH. HADLEY WOOD
PETERBOROUGH. FINSBURY PARKSeeing as some of those tickets from the south are valid as far as City Thameslink, I think any restriction for the TL side would require at least two qualifiers. There would need to be permitted routes through Forest Hill, Gipsy Hill and Selhurst, but not Balham or Clapham Junction.
Last edited:
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
We have to hope so. Though it'll be interesting to see whether it does happen, as the Thameslink and South Central franchises are scheduled to merge after the General Election.
Cynical? Moi?
If tickets did change, could that occur at any time or do they have to stick to set slots in the year?
Does the government regulate any of the FCC 7 day tickets? Would I be right in thinking monthly or longer season tickets are not available for FCC only.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Does the government regulate any of the FCC 7 day tickets? Would I be right in thinking monthly or longer season tickets are not available for FCC only.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Interesting that they have a Gatwick Airport to London Bridge ticket but not a Gatwick Airport to London terminals ticket, yet other stations south have both types, including Balcombe where no FCC trains run from on Sundays.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
And what about the (possibly deliberately abusive?) FCC set fare I posted earlier, the Any time, Any Permitted HRH - HEN Return, priced at 30% less than the Southern set HRH - London Terminals ticket (and perfectly usable for the journey to London Terminals and also valid on the Gatwick Express...) I expect TSGN will get rid of, but this will affect their ability to raise other fares across the basket? £24.90 (HRH-HEN) vs. £37.60 (HRH-London Terminals) vs. £42.60 (HRH - London Terminals with the Gatwick Express)
Last edited:
RJ
Established Member
It's common knowledge among the regulars who frequent the fares section that there are a number of fares like this. Unless you have a vested interest i.e working for the TOC pricing teams, it's not the kind of thing that warrants complaining about, or shouting from the rooftops!
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
Already hearing stuff about Govia mostly they're wanting to bring more stuff in house such as station cleaning from what I've heard, could be a good thing to keep everything in house.
Regarding the 365s, I seem to recall a discussion around 40 being too many for the residual services they will operate? Is 29 (387s) closer to what the service pattern would need, would the 110mph be advantageous on the Southern ECML - theres the introduction of ERTMS, and higher operating speeds associated, to consider too.
Does "Via Tottenham Hale" have the desired validity?
Does "Via Tottenham Hale" have the desired validity?
Sounds good to me, more staff in house the better! Looking forward to hearing more details, hopefully towards the end of this week once the 10 day cooling off period (standstill, whatever you want to call it) is over!
CockneySparrow
Member
Not surprised, one its a big contract and two they won't want third party companies eating into their profit
GatwickDepress
Established Member
I'd hope Govia would also extend their advance tickets, as they seem to be really popular.
Milton Keynes to Luton via Kensington Olympia, East Croydon, and London Bridge anyone?
Milton Keynes to Luton via Kensington Olympia, East Croydon, and London Bridge anyone?
greatkingrat
Established Member
- Joined
- 20 Jan 2011
- Messages
- 3,305
No, because then they could be used out of Waterloo.
No. The issue is that at the moment from Cambridge to London FCC (to become part of TSGN) are the "fast" operator, with AGA the "slow". From London to Portsmouth, SWT are the "fast", Southern (to become TSGN) are the "slow". The routing keeps you on the slower tickets.
Would "via Gatwick and Bishop's Stortford" (VIA GTW & BIS) be workable? Or too confusing in its shortened form?
87015
Established Member
Are they protected fares? If not why would TSGN want to share revenue GA regardless, re-route them via TSGN only and you still attack SWT, grab back the GA portion and arguably have a better product to offer customers - there will be no need to undercut yourself on the GN/WA part...
- Status