How can the railway cut operational expenditure?

[HSTEd]

My bad, I misread to get the impression you were saying we needed to build coaches in discrete tranches (mk1, 2, 3 etc), but talking of interoperability I agree fully.

As my final sort of comment on this sort of thing, It'd be nice to have an intermediate sort of approach.

There are a lot of bits of equipment that don't have to be fully cutting edge that could be shared across designs.
Noone will complain if you use the same model of lightbulb holder across all designs, stuff like that, but it might help with spares and maintenance.
Or the same control panel in the toilets.

Kind of like "parts bin" parts on cars.

 

[The Ham]

I don't claim my opinions are popular, but the question posed in the OP was "how can the railway cut operational expenditure" and I have already saved £10m, (okay, minus the £200,000 or so you'd need to employ analysts in my solution) from Network Rail alone.

I suspect that you've fallen into the trap which many people do when it comes to railways in that they are a big number and therefore think that it's a big part of the expenditure.

I don't recall exact latest figures but rail expenditure in the UK is about £20 billion a year, even at £20 million that's 0.1%.

Whilst it would be good to see if there's savings to be made without impacting on the overall reliability and operation of the railways I suspect that those savings would likely to be small.

The big expenditure on the railways is things like enhancements to the existing network (around £4 billion/year which is about 1/5 of all expenditure).

However cutting that would also be a bad move, as often that spending results in more income/lower costs.

 

[Bald Rick]

I look at my systems (I know that you know how TRUST works, I'd probably suggest binning that and replacing it with something more 21st century too but even I have some sense of realism) and identify there is a trend of delays occurring at a certain time between x and y. That then allows me as the analyst to ask, why is that delay occurring disproportionately there? Is the timetable reliant on the train being booked for a DeLorean? Is there an exceptionally high passenger flow at a station causing increased dwells because it's just after all the offices kick out? Therefore, I am not wasting time trying to investigate the cause of minor delays which are statistically irrelevant and in the grand scheme of things do not matter.

A passenger falls over on the train, breaks their leg and causes a 55 minute delay waiting an ambulance

But this is the point. Without the delay attribution staff you won’t know why any train is delayed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But this is the point. Without the delay attribution staff you won’t know why any train is delayed.

That's not true. If you're just recording it for stats, the driver or guard or signaller would be able to enter that directly. It only has to be investigated to the Nth degree when money depends on it.

 

[Bald Rick]

That's not true. If you're just recording it for stats, the driver or guard or signaller would be able to enter that directly. It only has to be investigated to the Nth degree when money depends on it.

There’s nothing stopping drivers and guards entering delays now.... except for two things - a) they won’t know why they are being delayed most of the time and b) it won’t be in their job spec.

 

[Camden]

TOCs trying to ensure their own company is financially not responsible for delays, or rather gaming the system to minimise the financial impact on themselves, has probably not has the effect it intended to when franchises were originally conceived.

Money could be saved, and the system made to work as a whole, by refunds being handled centrally and billed quarterly to each and every TOC in proportion to their passenger share at the time they took the franchise on. One TOC letting the team down and costing them all money might focus a better level of cooperation between parties.

Other cost savings:
Declare the railway an essential service and ban industrial action
Make DCO A-OK
End the leasing companies, so govt own the rolling stock and include the cost in the franchise bid
Withdraw from European agreements so maintenance and construction costs can come back down
Govt reinvest in govt owned rail powering power stations, to reduce electricity prices (and help Britain build its way out of recession).

A lot of this requires the UK to no longer be constrained by EU competition rules

 

[Bald Rick]

Govt reinvest in govt owned rail powering power stations, to reduce electricity prices (and help Britain build its way out of recession).

Give that wholesale electricity prices so far this year have been the lowest ever (and roughly half what they were this time last year), I’m not sure why you think that railway power stations would be any more worthwhile to build, or efficient, than those built by the electricity generating industry.

 

[The Planner]

But this is the point. Without the delay attribution staff you won’t know why any train is delayed.

Glad it not just me who thought it odd!

 

[Camden]

Give that wholesale electricity prices so far this year have been the lowest ever (and roughly half what they were this time last year), I’m not sure why you think that railway power stations would be any more worthwhile to build, or efficient, than those built by the electricity generating industry.

And petrol has been its lowest price for a long time...

 

[Alfie1014]

AFAIK, the staff at the SRA (including some ex-BR managers) were all TUPEd across to the DfT when the SRA was disbanded, so presumably the same set of staff would TUPE back to a SRA2 (although clearly some individuals will have come and gone in that time and many ex-BR managers will have now retired).

There are very few ex SRA staff left at the DfT (after all it was 15 years ago) as you say many moved on, some transferred to NR and other organisations, or have left/retired since.

The abolition of the SRA was a ‘political’ move to wrest power back to the DfT (and the Treasury). The SRA wasn’t perfect (and I say that as someone who worked there and at DfT and OPRAF) and made a few too many enemies in its short tenure (only 5 years) which in railway strategic terms is barely a moment. When you add in the power struggle with the then ORR, the demise of Railtrack and it’s amazing as much was achieved in hindsight.

A new SRA(2) could be the solution going forward but most of the corporate memory of those working at that time, including those who came from BR (with in many cases their broad experience of the wide spectrum of railway operations) and the privatisation process are long gone. It will now need a whole new skill set which if only or mostly secured from the Civil Service won’t necessarily the best way forward.

 

[millemille]

I think that before you can consider what op ex cost reductions could be made it needs to be understood, if at all possible, what the end game looks like?

Are we to assume that in the future, say 2 years time, passenger numbers have recovered to something approaching what they were pre-COVID?

And that the rate of recovery will be fairly linear, period on period?

 

[SussexLad]

I think that before you can consider what op ex cost reductions could be made it needs to be understood, if at all possible, what the end game looks like?

Are we to assume that in the future, say 2 years time, passenger numbers have recovered to something approaching what they were pre-COVID?

And that the rate of recovery will be fairly linear, period on period?

Digital predictive maintenance is the only meaningful way I can think of reducing costs across the whole network. But that would require a lot of investment that realistically the treasury wont have at the moment.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

DOO would reduce opex costs (runs for cover)

 

[SussexLad]

DOO would reduce opex costs (runs for cover)

Disabled people at unstaffed stations getting very angry...

Trying to resist going on a rant about this in the "death kneel for high floored trains thread"!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Look I am a rail enthusiast and love the railways but am trying to stay On topic about reduced OpEx. Something will have to give because the tax payer can not foot the bill forever. The Elizabeth line will be DOO.

 

[SussexLad]

Look I am a rail enthusiast and love the railways but am trying to stay On topic about reduced OpEx. Something will have to give because the tax payer can not foot the bill forever. The Elizabeth line will be DOO.

Don't you think disabled people have had it tough enough over the last 10 uears??

Yes the Elizabeth line will be DOO. I just hope it has level boarding....

 

[popeter45]

Don't you think disabled people have had it tough enough over the last 10 uears??

Yes the Elizabeth line will be DOO. I just hope it has level boarding....

at heathrow and the core section yes it will be level boarding i believe and i think other stations are having work done to raise there platform height to enable this too?
heathrow has pretty high platforms so the 332's could be level boarding for luggage so as a result the entire liz line ends up with high platforms

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes the Elizabeth line will be DOO. I just hope it has level boarding....

Yes, it does.

 

[SussexLad]

Thinking about it, a long term strategy for reducing costs is to have level boarding. That way passenger assist has less demand so you don't need as many staff.

 

[millemille]

As far as cost cutting within rolling stock maintenance, periodicity extensions - the suggested example of 28 day checks pushed to 30 days - are unlikely to render any savings. Firstly because of the cost of doing the supporting work to risk assess, condition assess, review, approve/attestation, implement etc. is unlikely to be offset by any, if at all, cost savings. As a consultant I specialised in maintenance deferral and extensions and these were rarely, if ever, done to render a direct cost saving in op ex; they were done to increase train availability or to push a planned overhaul past a franchise date or push a whole round of overhauls past a fleet's disposal date. Secondly, the only real saving you can make on level 1-4 running maintenance is to be able to reduce head count, and you've got to be making huge reductions in the amount of maintenance to do that.

I had a brake pad manufacturer's rep try to tell me that using his brake pads would reduce my maintenance costs. "How?" I asked him. "Because you will be changing fewer pads per exam because they last longer" he says. "Ok, I say. Your pads are more expensive than our current ones so £ per mm of pad material they don't give a saving". "Yes" he says "but you will be changing fewer pads per exam". "But that's not a cost saving" I say. "Yes it is" he says. So I get out the org chart for the maintenance teams and point to it and say "who can I sack because we're using your pads?". Answer? No one....

 

[Non Multi]

Yes, it does.

All Elizabeth Line/TfL Rail stations have at least 1 member of staff at each station from the first to the last train for passenger assistance.

 

[SussexLad]

All Elizabeth Line/TfL Rail stations have at least 1 member of staff at each station from the first to the last train for passenger assistance.

I've been told before that they're busy and my partner didn't book so struggle on your own.

 

[Merle Haggard]

There’s nothing stopping drivers and guards entering delays now.... except for two things - a) they won’t know why they are being delayed most of the time and b) it won’t be in their job spec.

Well they certainly used to.

 

[Non Multi]

I've been told before that they're busy and my partner didn't book so struggle on your own.

TfL: "Every Journey Matters" That's their slogan...

Can't see the existing EL western side platforms ever being raised to vaguely level boarding. Massive chasm between platform and train. Hopefully the new stations will be though.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Thinking about it, a long term strategy for reducing costs is to have level boarding. That way passenger assist has less demand so you don't need as many staff.

That will reduce OpEx but increase Capex. Long term the cost would be spread - but yes level boarding has to be a long term aspiration.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

As railways are resignaled, there are less signal boxes and move to ROCs - so in time signalling costs should go down.

 

[Bald Rick]

Well they certainly used to.

Enter delays on TRUST DA?

If so I stand corrected.

 

[Bald Rick]

As railways are resignaled, there are less signal boxes and move to ROCs - so in time signalling costs should go down.

That has been happening for as long as power signalling has been around. Some of the big PSB projects in the 60s, 70s and 80s took out scores of signalboxes. There isn’t that much left to go.

 

[London Trains]

I just hope it has level boarding....

I'd assume all of the new core stations (Paddington to Abbey Wood) will. Heathrow should also have level boarding as it does now with its higher platforms. The existing platforms Acton Main Line to Reading and Stratford to Shenfield more than likely will not.

 

[coppercapped]

Disabled people at unstaffed stations getting very angry...

Trying to resist going on a rant about this in the "death kneel for high floored trains thread"!

Driver Only Operation does NOT mean that there is only one member of staff on the train. It simply means that everything to do with starting, running and stopping the train and letting the passengers on and off by opening and closing the doors is done by the driver.

There is nothing to stop the train operating company employing train staff to assist passengers in the situation you describe.