Great Western franchise to be broken up?

[D1009]

Did London Underground, by which I expect is meant TfL, not want the extra business?

I suspect not, as the extra business would be a drop in the ocean compared to the rest of their business, particularly if Alliance wasn't proposing any investment in the infrastructure at Queens Park station.

 

[coppercapped]

I suspect not, as the extra business would be a drop in the ocean compared to the rest of their business, particularly if Alliance wasn't proposing any investment in the infrastructure at Queens Park station.

Alliance weren't, to my knowledge, proposing a train every 30 minutes - so any extra infrastructure is not likely to break the bank.

 

[mrcheek]

"Welcome aboard the 07:45 Easy rail service to London Woking, Calling at Southampton (Totton), Winchester (Eastleigh), Basingstoke (Hook) and London Woking."

In seriousness, an "EasyRail" type operator would simply have to get passengers into London, at a point where they could dump them onto the Underground. So where would be a good stopping point?

 

[Bletchleyite]

In seriousness, an "EasyRail" type operator would simply have to get passengers into London, at a point where they could dump them onto the Underground. So where would be a good stopping point?

If you'd asked me 20 years ago I'd have said Kensington Olympia.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In seriousness, an "EasyRail" type operator would simply have to get passengers into London, at a point where they could dump them onto the Underground. So where would be a good stopping point?

Only if it saves them money over using a terminal station.
Airports charge individually for facilities, which is why the LCCs often use remote stands or make you walk to the terminal, even when there are spare jetbridges.
At places like Geneva and Budapest, there are special LCC terminals with spartan facilities to avoid the expensive mainline ones.
Network Rail, as far as I know, does not charge for specific facilities, only vehicle type/mileage and (eg) electricity consumption.
So terminating at places like Finsbury Park or Ealing Broadway wouldn't be significantly cheaper, quite apart being just as complicated for NR as using the terminus.

The SNCF Ouigo brand is interesting in this context.
They use high-density TGVs with limited on-board facilities, with web-only booking.
They use out of town stations to turn round (eg Marne-la-Vallée), and to avoid direct competition with SNCF mainline services.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouigo

 

[daikilo]

The SNCF Ouigo brand is interesting in this context.
They use high-density TGVs with limited on-board facilities, with web-only booking.
They use out of town stations to turn round (eg Marne-la-Vallée), and to avoid direct competition with SNCF mainline services.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouigo

The Ouigo TGV operation was initiated with iDTGV which used standard TGVs but with booking only possible via the web. They openly state that they are trying to compete with low-cost coaches (which they also operate) and car-share schemes.

The wikipedia article is misleading as all the stations are also served by TGV, however the part on paid baggage and lack of the bar car are currently correct.

 

[swt_passenger]

The submission I recall reading to the ORR from London Underground, who manage Queens Park station, wasn't exactly glowing with enthusiasm of this proposal given the issues it would bring.

TfL's opinion didn't prevent approval of the service by ORR. It can theoretically start any time Alliance get their act together regarding rolling stock, but I'm not holding my breath...

 

[Chris M]

In seriousness, an "EasyRail" type operator would simply have to get passengers into London, at a point where they could dump them onto the Underground. So where would be a good stopping point?

If there was any spare capacity then Stratford would make a good hub from the north and east.
From the north west, perhaps Harrow and Wealdstone, but I'm unsure what capacity issues there are there?
From the west/south west I have to agree that Kensington Olympia is not a bad choice - if TfL could be persuaded to run District line services to connect.
Old Oak Common interchange, if it ever gets built, would not be a bad destination point either.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

I was a regular traveller under BR, so no rose pink glasses here, but I'd never describe it as flabby. Much of the nationalised railway was run on stock well past its sell by date and the infrastructure was "tired" to say the least.

Those were a symptom of lack of investment, not imagination. Ticketing wasn't the labyrinthine obstacle course it is now either.

the 'flab' in BR (and the NHS, Royal Mail group etc etc) is down to the Spanish practices encouraged by the unions meaning that part of the reason stock and infrastructure is in a poor state is becasue it is allowed , nay encouraged, to fail