If TPE and Northern merged...

[Bletchleyite]

GWR, TfW Rail, Scotrail, Greater Anglia, EMR anyone? All have a similar mix of services and nobody complains.

Indeed GWR is a very good example of why a TOC having both types of service is a good idea.

 

[Bald Rick]

Indeed GWR is a very good example of why a TOC having both types of service is a good idea.

Although GWR services into Paddington are (or at least were) two separate travk access contracts, and separate terms and conditions for the drivers / conductors split between Thames Valley and long distance.

 

[Neptune]

Although GWR services into Paddington are (or at least were) two separate travk access contracts, and separate terms and conditions for the drivers / conductors split between Thames Valley and long distance.

There are 3 different t&c’s amongst Northern’s staff so no different (ex RRNE, ex NWRR and ex TPE). A 4th won’t make much difference.

 

[Bald Rick]

There are 3 different t&c’s amongst Northern’s staff so no different (ex RRNE, ex NWRR and ex TPE). A 4th won’t make much difference.

I don’t disagree, my point was more than merging the operations doesn’t necessarily bring traincrew efficiency.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don’t disagree, my point was more than merging the operations doesn’t necessarily bring traincrew efficiency.

Fair enough. My point was more that the GWR service can for example be marketed as a whole, and things like holding connections for the mainline (which does happen, whether it's meant to or not) are easier to arrange.

It wouldn't really work for Avanti West Coast + connecting services as that's all rather more complex at both ends, but for Northern+TPE it would. And Northern might be less of a target for cuts etc because it would look less of a basket case. Indeed, wasn't the split originally designed for Northern (the SercoNed franchise) being the target of major cuts including potential line closures which didn't happen?

 

[YorksLad12]

Fair enough. My point was more that the GWR service can for example be marketed as a whole, and things like holding connections for the mainline (which does happen, whether it's meant to or not) are easier to arrange.

It wouldn't really work for Avanti West Coast + connecting services as that's all rather more complex at both ends, but for Northern+TPE it would. And Northern might be less of a target for cuts etc because it would look less of a basket case. Indeed, wasn't the split originally designed for Northern (the SercoNed franchise) being the target of major cuts including potential line closures which didn't happen?

The "no-growth" franchise, which ended up doing quite a bit of growth! The report into cutting services came, and went. Labour government as well, for shame.

The 2016 franchises were let as 7+2 for TPE, 9+1 for Northern. Rail North as-was wanted them to be one franchise before the DfT got its way, but the staggered end dates and extensions meant that, with the greater devolution promised, the two could have been merged into one operator in 2025. Not going to happen now (not that way, anyway), of course.

 

[Anvil1984]

Well the last sentence doesn’t stack up. York crews sign both 802’s and Mk 5 sets as well as 185’s.

Last time I heard there was 2 links at York, a 802 link and and Mk5 link (both signing 185s as contingency), this might have changed however