Ideas for alternative ways of running the railways

[glbotu]

So, I've been on this forum for a bit now and it seems to me many threads get bogged down in an argument between:

- Running the railway like BR did (in various guises)

and

- The status quo (franchised rail operators, separating track/train etc)

As such, in order to have a more interesting discussion, why don't we, either collectively or individually, come up with a reasonable way of running the railways. Every aspect, from infrastructure, to rolling stock and ticketing, if you have an idea, put it forwards.

Thread rule: No means of running the railways used in Britain since 1825 can be put forward (be sensible about this obviously, there will probably be some overlap - I also obviously don't mean not using electricity/diesel etc, I mean from an organisational standpoint). As we're a bunch of intelligent and well thought out individuals, some with considerable experience in the railways (some with less), we should be able to come up with good ideas for discussion.

So, let's go.........

(PS: I will put my suggestion down later on, as I am at work, and it'll probably be quite a long post).

 

[sarahj]

So, I've been on this forum for a bit now and it seems to me many threads get bogged down in an argument between:

- Running the railway like BR did (in various guises)

and

- The status quo (franchised rail operators, separating track/train etc)

As such, in order to have a more interesting discussion, why don't we, either collectively or individually, come up with a reasonable way of running the railways. Every aspect, from infrastructure, to rolling stock and ticketing, if you have an idea, put it forwards.

Thread rule: No means of running the railways used in Britain since 1825 can be put forward (be sensible about this obviously, there will probably be some overlap - I also obviously don't mean not using electricity/diesel etc, I mean from an organisational standpoint). As we're a bunch of intelligent and well thought out individuals, some with considerable experience in the railways (some with less), we should be able to come up with good ideas for discussion.

So, let's go.........

(PS: I will put my suggestion down later on, as I am at work, and it'll probably be quite a long post).

Close them all down, tarmac the lot.

 

[dysonsphere]

Hmmm so you get very narrow roads with passing places not very usefull

 

[Bletchleyite]

Track owned by a central authority. Completely open access commercial intercity operations, with paths going to the highest bidder who can comply to relevant safety controls, with no other constraint.

Local services tendered by local authorities i.e. County Councils etc.

This is not all *that* dissimilar to the current structure of the German system, though.

Neil

 

[plannerman]

We need a massive move towards paperless e-ticketing. Make it much easier and simpler for people to pay for travel. Less trying to 'catch people out' and more trying to helpfully sell the correct ticket.

 

[The Snap]

Phone DB and get them to come and sort it

 

[glbotu]

We need a massive move towards paperless e-ticketing. Make it much easier and simpler for people to pay for travel. Less trying to 'catch people out' and more trying to helpfully sell the correct ticket.

One of the main ways we could do this is with server-side smart card ticketing. Effectively, everyone owns a smart card, which is basically just a small ID of the ticket (ie: not an ID of you, just of the ticket - like a GUID), onto which you can load any number of tickets online. The idea being that a "touch in" results in a get request for all tickets on the ticket ID and then lets you in or not based on whether you have a valid ticket on the card.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One of the main ways we could do this is with server-side smart card ticketing. Effectively, everyone owns a smart card, which is basically just a small ID of the ticket (ie: not an ID of you, just of the ticket - like a GUID), onto which you can load any number of tickets online. The idea being that a "touch in" results in a get request for all tickets on the ticket ID and then lets you in or not based on whether you have a valid ticket on the card.

Then when you have more than one?

That's why I like the idea of barcode based ticketing. You can print (or view on your phone, or whatever) the one you intend on using.

Neil

 

[dysonsphere]

Then when you have more than one?

That's why I like the idea of barcode based ticketing. You can print (or view on your phone, or whatever) the one you intend on using.

Neil

That depends on every guard/ ticket inspector/ gate barrier being internet enabled not going to happen yet.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That depends on every guard/ ticket inspector/ gate barrier being internet enabled not going to happen yet.

Could easily happen within 5-10 years though, certainly on IC routes.

Neil

 

[glbotu]

Then when you have more than one?

That's why I like the idea of barcode based ticketing. You can print (or view on your phone, or whatever) the one you intend on using.

Neil

It figures it out on the "touch out". You'd still need RPIs, much like you would for print-at-home. I mean, I'm not suggesting installing barriers at every railway station (that would be prohibitively expensive). Most small stations could do with just a smart card reader.

On top of this you could (although there may be some holes in this, feel free to pick at them) have a nationally available pay as you go (PAYG) system.

This would work on two basic premises:

1. The German passenger train classification system. Trains would be designated:

U - Local Metro (London Underground, Manchester Metrolink*)
S - Local commuter (SWT Commuter Lines, WYPTE Metro services)
R - Local Slow services (Cambridge GN Slows, Nunthorpe - Hexham)
RE - Local Inter-regional and fast regional services (XC Birmingham - Stansted, TPE)
IC - Intercity services (ECML, WCML, XC Main services)
ICE - Things that run on HS1 (HS2 in future)

Essentially, you could say that PAYG is valid on all services R and below (or RE and below if that works out better).

2. A basic regional premise that all trains are PAYG valid within a region.

An example that supports my case (because it's where I saw the greatest difficulty with the train classification system), is in the North-East. Durham - Newcastle is only served by RE services (TPE, East Coast and XC Main services) and above (except 2 in the morning and one late evening). It would seem ludicrous to force passengers to get pre-loaded tickets on a journey that would clearly benefit from PAYG. It would also seem way too convoluted to re-classify certain portions of journeys etc. This would make the system way too complicated. As such, one might consider the North East region as all railway lines North of Northallerton, South of Berwick-upon-Tweed and East of Hexham, with those 3 stations considered regional "overlaps" with the nearby regions (say a North Yorkshire region, a South East Scotland region and a Far North West region). As such, PAYG could be used on any train which stays within those regions.

*Metrolink is very similar to the Koln Stadtbahn, which is considered a U-Bahn for all intents and purposes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be honest I think having a PAYG system is fraught with problems unless we *were* able to clearly separate regional and IC, which (as in Germany) would result in lower frequency bases and a lot of duplication. The problem is basically that it would be too complicated for it to have anything other than Anytime Singles and Off Peak Singles with a clear, consistent definition of peak and off-peak, e.g. all travel where you touch in before 0930, and any travel where you touch in or out between 1600-1800, or something.

Without that, I wouldn't trust it as far as I could throw it, and would prefer to purchase a known product at a known price beforehand.

Neil

 

[Domeyhead]

I agree that smarter and simpler ticketing is the biggest inhibitor to new rail users. My suggestions to build on Pay as You go etc. are :
1) Integration with buses ( I know it's supposed to be integrated already but outside London it's often clunky and doesn't inspire confidence that the connection will actually be honoured hence......
2) A mobile app that plots the position and times of the plane/trains/buses/trams etc for the journey purchased and calculates how your journey is going to go. This would dynamically recompute both times and journey options based on real time incidents.
3) Through ticketing incorporating rail and bus - not just in cities but taking metropolitan area transport integration and rolling it out across the country.

Confidence in making an end to end journey using public transport is the aim.

 

[Flamingo]

Barrier every station and platform from first train to last, with a requirement to scan the relevant railcard if appropriate with the ticket. On smaller branch lines, have dedicated revenue staff travelling on every train between certain points.

I'm convinced that what it will cost will be more than made up for in the increased revenue.

 

[Senex]

Track owned by a central authority. Completely open access commercial intercity operations, with paths going to the highest bidder who can comply to relevant safety controls, with no other constraint.

Local services tendered by local authorities i.e. County Councils etc.

This is not all *that* dissimilar to the current structure of the German system, though.

Neil

And in Germany it seems to have been very good for local services, with good timetables and quality rolling stock -- and contracts with the tendering bodies that do requires real high standards of performance.

I'm not so sure about long distance. The rigid requirements of the local contracts mean that it's very hard for a newcomer to get decent long-distance paths or for the existing operator to introduce significant speed-ups. And the profitability requirement seems to have led to more and more contraction of the high-quality long-distance offering. (But then that is what we saw in Britain after the creation of an InterCity business, which originally had a good few more routes in it than it ended up with.)

 

[DarloRich]

if we are talking different options:

full privatisation with operations on a purely commercial basis without government support.

 

[WelshBluebird]

if we are talking different options:

full privatisation with operations on a purely commercial basis without government support.

I thought the title of the thread was "alternative ways of running the railways", not "ways to dismantle the railways".

 

[glbotu]

if we are talking different options:

full privatisation with operations on a purely commercial basis without government support.

I think this technically violates the "things tried in Britain since 1825" rule..............

 

[glbotu]

My thought for this is vaguely complicated.

The idea is to take control of the railways (and the rest of public transport - maybe not planes) out of the hands of both government and the private sector (but allowing them to "help").

Essentially, the idea is, assuming that "good public transport" is considered a "good thing", it should be subject either to the profit driven nature of private companies or the whims of rapidly changing governments. Railway projects can and often do take longer than governmental terms, which means that putting major projects in their hands can turn the tide frequently for and against them.

As such, I suggest putting all public transport in the hands of a non-governmental body, who's mandate is to get as many people out of cars and onto public transport as possible.

They would be responsible for track, trains, service specifications, ticketing etc, but in order to prevent inherent inefficiencies in large monolithic organisations, would be able to (note I said would be able to - not necessarily would) outsource to the private sector the lower level sections with "management contract" type deals for fixed fees. Effectively leaving the admin to the private sector (which it is arguably much better at doing than the public sector).

This organisation would operate either break-even or at a loss propped up by a spending budget from central government, however this would be the "transport budget" for everything, which would then be re-distributed in a manner that best meets its mandate, rather than what best suits London and the marginal constituencies (note many lines "saved" during the Beeching Axe were in such marginal constituencies).

In order to prevent government from making funding disappear, the transport body would have the power to secure future funds.

I note that this is quite "high-level", as it were, but the idea behind it would be to finally have long-term, strategic and rational planning for the railways and all public transport in the country.

 

[sadgit]

The same franchised system we have now, but with significantly more conditions on the franchised operators, much like London Overground and Scotrail, and with various abolitions:

• No individual branding; the British Rail branding to return or National Rail branding to be used with the double arrow symbol on all trains and passenger-facing materials. The service is run on behalf of the Department of Transport under the BR/NR brand, not run by SWT/LM/AGA/whoever under franchise. Funding/subsidy requirements remain exactly the same.
• Operators MUST co-operate with each other and act as if they are branches of the same organisation. No "London Midland only" fares, significantly better inter-franchise communications, no "sorry we can't help because your TOC is..." rubbish. One unified system which the franchisees are contracted to run and no more.
• ROSCOs abolished completely and their function absorbed by Network Rail. Franchises no longer pay fees for trains that were already paid for by BR. Procurement of rolling stock becomes concern of Network Rail under direction from DfT.
• Responsibility for all stations also passes to Network Rail. All stations to be barriered where practical, regardless of expense.
• All fares regulated. Shortfalls in budget to be paid for by DfT - more investment in the system but handled through general taxation rather than swingeing rises in fares, also incentivises train use through sense of "well, I'm already paying for it so..."
• DfT or DOR able/required to bid for franchises also with applications to be judged on same merits as private contenders.

This, I feel, would give the best of both worlds - British Rail's unified branding and system with the massive influx of Government and private funding that followed privatisation.

 

[glbotu]

I think there's something to be said for route or service specific branding though. Much though a unified image would help, it could work on a principle of similar branding, with noticeable differences (like colour). Also, this could be integrated with the German style service type split to make it incredibly obvious what train one was taking.

 

[route:oxford]

Develop the worlds most powerful scheduling and analysis software and rewrite the entire mainland timetable.

Software that can learn and take into consideration the acceleration and energy efficiency, and passenger flow of unit.

Use useful data from smartcards - right down to which train a wheelchair-bound passenger usually takes in the morning to accommodate an extra 20 seconds for ramps

 

[OLJR]

Commercial

Like others I support a 100% e-ticket system, with smart cards offering the ability to PAYG and load up specific tickets for specific trains.

I would have one railway and bus operator, owned by the state but with independence enshrined by statute, a bit like the Bank of England. Ticketing would operate across both.

I would then employ the world's best revenue management and scheduling people, offering them a generous proportion of annual network revenue as their salary and with bonuses for revenue growth ahead of RPI. This would give them good incentives to get it right.

Signalling, maintenance, engineering and other technical aspects

I will leave this to others.

Finance

I would remove public subsidy from the railway but at the same time exempt spend on tickets from income tax.

 

[TheKnightWho]

If we're going for completely crazy ideas, how about this?

Rip up the whole lot, and redesign everything using this stuff. It's a mold that creates networks between node points, which has evolved such that it creates the most efficient transport network given the layout of food sources.

Create nodes, weighted by population, on a map of Britain and then build the network based on the result Seems the Japanese got it right first time, but I'm highly sceptical that 19th century industrialists did, on the other hand...

http://www.wired.com/2010/01/slime-mold-grows-network-just-like-tokyo-rail-system/

 

[LLivery]

The same franchised system we have now, but with significantly more conditions on the franchised operators, much like London Overground and Scotrail, and with various abolitions:

• No individual branding; the British Rail branding to return or National Rail branding to be used with the double arrow symbol on all trains and passenger-facing materials. The service is run on behalf of the Department of Transport under the BR/NR brand, not run by SWT/LM/AGA/whoever under franchise. Funding/subsidy requirements remain exactly the same.
• Operators MUST co-operate with each other and act as if they are branches of the same organisation. No "London Midland only" fares, significantly better inter-franchise communications, no "sorry we can't help because your TOC is..." rubbish. One unified system which the franchisees are contracted to run and no more.
• ROSCOs abolished completely and their function absorbed by Network Rail. Franchises no longer pay fees for trains that were already paid for by BR. Procurement of rolling stock becomes concern of Network Rail under direction from DfT.
• Responsibility for all stations also passes to Network Rail. All stations to be barriered where practical, regardless of expense.
• All fares regulated. Shortfalls in budget to be paid for by DfT - more investment in the system but handled through general taxation rather than swingeing rises in fares, also incentivises train use through sense of "well, I'm already paying for it so..."
• DfT or DOR able/required to bid for franchises also with applications to be judged on same merits as private contenders.

This, I feel, would give the best of both worlds - British Rail's unified branding and system with the massive influx of Government and private funding that followed privatisation.

That is pretty much what I want to see (other than full re-nationalisation). Unified branding - have InterCity (VT, EC, GW, EMT, XC), Southern (SWT, SN, SE, TLGN), Midland (EMT Locals, LM, XC Stansted & Cardiff), Northern (NR, TPX), South West (Great Western rurals), Suburban (London, Brum, Mersey, G Manchester), Thames Anglia (Thames Valley, Crossrail, Anglia, c2c) and leave Chiltern alone. Keep Open Access possible and continue having freight private. Operate the Suburban Networks jointly with BR and the Transport Authorities of the Cities make sure there is none of this LO isn't National Rail nonsense.

Also work better with the buses, making sure through bus to rail (and vise-versa) is as easy as can be. Personally I want a London Bus style system for the whole country with regional bodies having a regional brand and deciding the bus contracts.

Bring back staffing on suburban trains. All this talk of panic buttons on trains would have been avoided if guards where still on London's trains. Funny that operators still claim its just as safe without them. I know its not a guards job to be the police but its nice when I'm on the SWT suburbans knowing there is staff on board who isn't busy driving. Bringing on board staff back to the rest of the network doesn't mean they have to dispatch at every station, but they could check tickets, answer questions etc. If there where staff on all trains more ticket barriers wouldn't really be as necessary either.

• e-ticketing is the way forward
• Self generation of power is an idea I heard a while back and it seems not to be a bad one. It would cost a lot in the short term but the long term it would save a fortune.
• Scrap third rail - wastes too much power.
• Bring station buildings back into use - sick of seeing lovely buildings brick/boarded up on platforms, while I'm in the freezing cold being rained on.
• Start calling people who misuse crossing idiots and actively fine idiot drivers £200 a time.
• Start calling trespassers idiots and say if they get killed its their own fault
• Scrap First Class on anything that isn't InterCity. Then greatly improve First Class on InterCity.
• Make sure all InterCity services have a buffet, wifi, power sockets etc.
• Bring back the great advertising BR had
• Have one rail website for all information, maps, tickets, timetables, offers, everything down to a fleet list. No need for 20+ of them.
• Work more with charters etc to get more people interested in the railway. (If more people understand it, less people will say stupid things like Southern should be stripped of the franchise because of the London Bridge disgrace or constant signal failures).
• Have the Double Arrow on everything!

If that doesn't work get on the blower to the Germans and re-nationalise the lot.