In your opinion - which TOC has been the most experimental and why?

[Mikey C]

I'd agree with Virgin, as (for better or worse) they had a clear and distinct vision about how long distance railways should be operated, and uniquely were in a position to basically have an all new purpose designed fleet of Pendolinos and Voyagers, both completely new designs for the UK

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Has to be Virgin. Whatever you might think of them, for innovation nobody came close - and the end result was a pretty reliable TOC, too. Avanti have truly ruined it in a very short space of time, just like many of us thought they would.

Out of interest, how do you think Avanti have ruined it? (I'm curious because I travelled on Virgin a fair bit, but have very little experience post-the-Avanti-transition because of Covid having largely killed my long-distance travelling).

 

[gingerheid]

Define experimental.

Ian Yeowart would win, but for the "TOC" requirement! Most experimental proposed TOCs... Now that's his in the bag!

I feel Anglia Crosslink meets the dictionary definition most clearly, but that was a tiny part of the operation...

The biggest experiment in terms of the operation was definitely Virgin XC Princess? But then that was for a tiny length of the time the operation existed...

Does that mean it should be Chiltern's prize, because of the involvement in infrastructure and the transformation of the route? But then that was more innovation than experimentation; experiment suggests at least partial failure...

Does that mean the prize is Hull Trains' for... just coming into being?

Or Greater Anglia's, for trying to replace every train, mostly with stuff new to the UK?

I feel the prize should be Hull Trains', for being the first open access operator, for introducing unique stock, for attempting a unique customer service provision, and for introducing a new service. I feel the number of failures along the way suggests true experimentation!

 

[Doctor Fegg]

A lot more frequent trains, quicker trains, with more routes, with a completely different (and much better) customer service proposition, that grew the market 3 fold (or was it more?)

Sure - it was a massive investment in the service. I wouldn't call it particularly "experimental" though - it was a well calculated attempt to (massively) grow an existing market. Ok, "well calculated" is possibly not the best phrase to use of PUG2...

Didn’t end well for him, though.

Indeed not.

 

[eastwestdivide]

...The original Midland Mainline TOC introduced the 4tph MML long distance service - the basic template of which survives today to some extent.

... credit to Midland Mainline for doubling the number of services from London to the East Midlands (every forty five minutes thirty years ago, every half hour at privatisation, four trains per hour under National Express's franchise).

And don't forget MML's other experiments: extensions to Barnsley and Burton, which didn't last very long, plus free tea and coffee for everyone, which didn't survive the franchise change.

The free drinks even made a mention on Money Saving Expert:

Free tea/coffee on Midland Mainline services

I was traveling on Midland Mainline from London to East Midlands last night and my boyfriend went to get some tea for us.

forums.moneysavingexpert.com

And here's a blog lamenting the end of the freebies with Stagecoach taking over:

Farewell free tea and coffee - Jonathan Rawle's Website

 

[Bletchleyite]

Out of interest, how do you think Avanti have ruined it? (I'm curious because I travelled on Virgin a fair bit, but have very little experience post-the-Avanti-transition because of Covid having largely killed my long-distance travelling).

They're just a bit lackadaisical and rubbish. No sparkle at all. Not even any Italian flair, as I had slightly expected. Add to that the botched introduction of a rubbish new booking system, the abolition of the popular seat selector (taking over a year to return), the can't-be-bothered approach to the livery, the fairly rubbish brand.

They are very FirstGroup, to be honest, but not even the best example of that - I find GWR and TPE much better.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Because the whole thing is just lackadaisical and rubbish. While I await the new seats with bated breath, the only real improvement they can claim thus far is the removal of talking bogs.

ICWC has been under the DfT cosh since 2012, and neither Virgin nor Avanti have been allowed to develop the service.
Having said that, Virgin sorted out the Birmingham-Scotland service well and improved stock utilisation, allowing new Blackpool and Shrewsbury services.
Avanti are still marking time, but at least they have got new trains on order which will remove diesels under the wires.
It's down to DfT now how it develops, HS2 stock and all.
NR can also take a lot of credit from how the West Coast was turned round in the 00s.

 

[Ianno87]

They're just a bit lackadaisical and rubbish. No sparkle at all. Not even any Italian flair, as I had slightly expected. Add to that the botched introduction of a rubbish new booking system, the abolition of the popular seat selector (taking over a year to return), the can't-be-bothered approach to the livery, the fairly rubbish brand.

They are very FirstGroup, to be honest, but not even the best example of that - I find GWR and TPE much better.

Although they did introduce (in my opinion) the best and most vibrant Pride livery to date.

 

[The Planner]

They're just a bit lackadaisical and rubbish. No sparkle at all. Not even any Italian flair, as I had slightly expected. Add to that the botched introduction of a rubbish new booking system, the abolition of the popular seat selector (taking over a year to return), the can't-be-bothered approach to the livery, the fairly rubbish brand.

They are very FirstGroup, to be honest, but not even the best example of that - I find GWR and TPE much better.

They are the ones pushing and developing the non EPS speed increases though (even though NR will say what Avanti think and NR think are very different)and they are up to other things in the background that won't have broke cover yet.

 

[Ianno87]

They are the ones pushing and developing the non EPS speed increases though (even though NR will say what Avanti think and NR think are very different)and they are up to other things in the background that won't have broke cover yet.

Indeed - not many TOCs are radical in their first year beyond re-branding uniforms and stations. One might argue that Avanti have innovated by not just simply copying everything Virgin used to do!

 

[HarryL]

I'm not too convinced the work Virgin did was overly experimental, the growth and improvements are reasonably expected from a ToC. The most experimental thing I would credit Virgin for is attempting and succeeding at bringing tilting trains into service

Personally I would credit GNER for being quite experimental, not so sure anyone else would have tried to bring Eurostar trains beyond London and haven't since. Same with the 89 and whilst they ultimately decided against it, they also considered buying some Pendolinos.

 

[Ianno87]

Personally I would credit GNER for being quite experimental, not so sure anyone else would have tried to bring Eurostar trains beyond London and haven't since. Same with the 89 and whilst they ultimately decided against it, they also considered buying some Pendolinos.

Almost a response to circumstances, as (IIRC) the original franchise was very un-ambitious in predicted growth, and GNER got "caught short" and had to find solutions to unexpected growth.

A theme of the early franchises (and the late 90s boom) is that the operators that invested and innovated ended up worse off than the ones that sat back and let the extra fares receipts roll in.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm not too convinced the work Virgin did was overly experimental, the growth and improvements are reasonably expected from a ToC.

Not in 1996 they weren’t.

They are now (sort of), but that’s because Virgin set the bar.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They are the ones pushing and developing the non EPS speed increases though (even though NR will say what Avanti think and NR think are very different)and they are up to other things in the background that won't have broke cover yet.

That is very FirstGroup, to be fair - I've long thought FGW/GWR was quite operationally and technically competent but very poor at customer service and communication (so very BR, really), so we are probably just getting the same deal.

 

[hexagon789]

Deliberately open-ended question - this can be in terms of rolling stock, timetabling, branding, station facilities, or anything really! Including both current and past TOCs.

The experimentation also doesn't have to be positive - it can have been detrimental, or simply have gone absolutely nowhere...

I think this is pretty much decided by now but Virgin Trains.

I will add that many of the early TOCs did offer many innovations as well though.

GNER extended the HSTs, used Eurostar sets, increased frequency on KGX-Leeds

NatEx ScotRail introduced the 170s, doubled the Aberdeen and E&G frequencies

NatEx MM introduced 170s, later 222s and doubled and sped-up train service on the MML

But Virgin of course had two large franchises and they introduced an all-new fleet, faster services, the VHF timetable etc etc

 

[Purple Orange]

If We're going with Virgin for most experimental, i'd tender GNER as a close second, purely for running a regular timetable with Eurostar sets and returning one-off 89001 to service if nothing else.

Yes, GNER was a very good service. Although from a passenger perspective, I think Virgin demonstrated innovation which was followed by other TOCs. Although I might be giving them too much credit, because had the Pendolinos and Voyagers come in with a different TOC, or even a nationalised operator, we’d have still had an train with a similar look and feel, but different colours.

 

[tbtc]

Why have Avanti ruined Virgin's work?

Because the whole thing is just lackadaisical and rubbish. While I await the new seats with bated breath, the only real improvement they can claim thus far is the removal of talking bogs.

They're just a bit lackadaisical and rubbish. No sparkle at all. Not even any Italian flair, as I had slightly expected. Add to that the botched introduction of a rubbish new booking system, the abolition of the popular seat selector (taking over a year to return), the can't-be-bothered approach to the livery, the fairly rubbish brand.

They are very FirstGroup, to be honest, but not even the best example of that - I find GWR and TPE much better.

I'm surprised at the criticism of Avanti here - they've inherited a franchise that was working well, they inherited a modern fleet (compared to the 86s etc that ran the line when Virgin took over), there aren't many spare paths on the WCML to permit them to do much "new", there's not a huge amount of time before HS2 transforms the WCML (so any major improvements aren't going to have a long time to pay off)...

...but they are keeping the things that work, they are introducing over a hundred new carriages, they are doubling the Liverpool frequency... I'm not sure what more you expected them to do (given that people reaction to "flair" on the WCML seems to be a very divisive issue - for anyone who enjoyed Virgin's quirks, there was someone else bitterly complaining about gimmicks).

There are many poorer franchises to focus your ire on.

NatEx ScotRail introduced the 170s, doubled the Aberdeen and E&G frequencies

Y'know... I'd forgotten about the first ScotRail franchise - it is one that deserves more praise - given that National Express inherited 101s and 117s from British Rail ... the Fife Circle stations only had an hourly service... only three trains per hour over the Forth Bridge... the frequency through Falkirk High was only half hourly... but were quick to introduce new DMUs and increate frequencies.

Quite a transformation, which First and Abellio were able to build upon.

Plus, when National Express ran things, it was before the Scottish Parliament, before the current environment in Scotland where there's a clear consensus in favour of rail investment.

Sadly, for National Express, the catalyst for this was after they'd lost the franchise in 2004 - the 2005 decision to build the line to Tweedbank - with subsequent infrastructure spending (electrification, EGIP etc) - but NatEx had to do it without/before the purse strings allowed further expansion of the ScotRail network.

It's a shame that their efforts are so easily forgotten (including by me, now you've reminded me of what an improving franchise they had!)

 

[LowLevel]

Central Trains got it right in the end, by which point it was too late. Smart electric 350s replacing wedged 2 car trains between Liverpool and Birmingham started a cascade that away from Lincolnshire, which was as terrible as ever, finally produced a reasonably reliable service across their network with half decent rolling stock and a consistent timetable. Some routes saw cuts as a result but the overall picture was positive.

Lincolnshire of course was still the Dogbox Sanctuary with train times seemingly plucked out of the air but actually designed to meet the needs of school and college transport at the behest of the local councils.

Their behaviour in other regards was awful though - bustitution because it made them more money and supplying false passenger counts which caused the East Midlands franchise to have a massive shortfall in trains.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Of course it could be argued that Virgin Trains also stifled experimentation by invoking 'moderation of competition' conditionality to ensure that open access operators such as Wrexham and Shropshire never gained much of a toe hold.

 

[urbophile]

They're just a bit lackadaisical and rubbish. No sparkle at all. Not even any Italian flair, as I had slightly expected. Add to that the botched introduction of a rubbish new booking system, the abolition of the popular seat selector (taking over a year to return), the can't-be-bothered approach to the livery, the fairly rubbish brand.

They are very FirstGroup, to be honest, but not even the best example of that - I find GWR and TPE much better.

It's a bit unfair to criticise Avanti isn't it? They hardly had the chance to get going before Covid hit. The one trip I have managed this year was fine, admittedly in a virtually empty train. And getting rid of the talking toilets deserves a massive round of applause.

 

[BigCj34]

Because the whole thing is just lackadaisical and rubbish. While I await the new seats with bated breath, the only real improvement they can claim thus far is the removal of talking bogs.

While the services themselves are not any worse, I am very annoyed by the decision to cut the online only-single that was half the price of a return, when combined with an advance. Having a cheaper one way single in exchange is scant consolation. For the journey I make, I am paying for a full price return as two advance singles on the WCML are a rarity.

One could argue it is fares reform in action, giving with one hand and taking away with the other, although it is mostly taking away from those in the know). No-one wants to underwrite the risk of having single fares that were actually half the price of a return and having through fares which largely matched split ticket fares. Even when once this pandemic is over the railway needs to attract all the custom it can as electric cars are not going to solve everything for the environment.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Dec 2020 ==

Well, previous manifestations of Northern certainly tried to do a lot of things - a completely new tier of 'inter-urban' services ('Connect') or something; radical changes to train staffing/operation; new timetables to improve performance; getting rid of Pacers by 2018; re-staffing several stations; solving overcrowding.

The thing about experiments is that they aren't always successful as I discovered in school chemistry labs decades ago.

As to 'why'? The answer is surely, 'to win the franchise'.

It is a contender for sure, though largely because the DfT specified it of course with an overly ambitious implementation period and usage of line capactiy. Nonetheless it did provide a shot in the arm for rural lines, pre-pandemic the Furness Line had more Manchester Airport services than ever and the Cumbria Coast actually had Sunday services south of Whitehaven for the first time in decades. The Tyne Valley line had an hourly express service to compete with road travel times, while the Settle to Carlisle and Bentham lines received extra services.

While it won't beat Virgin to the award, the 2016 Northern franchise did show intent to take the rural northern railways seriously, even if there were severe teething difficulties.

 

[E16 Cyclist]

For some reason people seem to view virgin in a very rose tinted way, they always seem very adept in averting blame away from themselves and as someone else pointed out ensured they had no serious competition unlike virtually all other toc’s

Anyway surely the answer to the toc who’s been the most experimental technically isn’t a toc, it’s the open access operators such as Heathrow Express, Hull Trains, Grand Central as they were all born out of being experimental and have had to continue being experimental in order to survive

 

[kevconnor]

Surprised there hasn't been mention yet of GC, it has certainly been the most successful of Open Access operators and has been able to build on its original success with new routes. Would it be fair to say GC has also forced the different iterations of the ECML to also respond and innovate with locations served.

 

[Ianno87]

For some reason people seem to view virgin in a very rose tinted way, they always seem very adept in averting blame away from themselves and as someone else pointed out ensured they had no serious competition unlike virtually all other toc’s

I'd say having two competitors on the London-Birmingham market was pretty serious.

 

[py_megapixel]

I'd say having two competitors on the London-Birmingham market was pretty serious.

Are you counting Silverlink/London Midland/LNWR, or Chiltern?

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

TFW - Possibly a good shout, new trains (on the way) , new increased timetables (when they get back to a normal timetable) , all year round Sunday service to lots of place who have never had, they lowered prices on adult journeys within Wales by 10% and kids travel for free up to 11 years old (up to 16's free off peak) and half price for up to 18 year olds, smart ticketing, definitely some outside of the box thinking for Wales who usually just falls by the wayside for everything.

 

[The Planner]

Of course it could be argued that Virgin Trains also stifled experimentation by invoking 'moderation of competition' conditionality to ensure that open access operators such as Wrexham and Shropshire never gained much of a toe hold.

Virgin had to as they were directed/mandated to, it is a bit of "say it often enough and it becomes true" that it is their fault.

 

[pdeaves]

Someone mentioned Anglia Crosslink. Honourable mention to Grand Central's Blackpool offering!

 

[norbitonflyer]

Define experimental.

Ian Yeowart would win, but for the "TOC" requirement! Most experimental proposed TOCs... Now that's his in the bag!

I feel Anglia Crosslink meets the dictionary definition most clearly, but that was a tiny part of the operation...

The biggest experiment in terms of the operation was definitely Virgin XC Princess? But then that was for a tiny length of the time the operation existed...

Does that mean it should be Chiltern's prize, because of the involvement in infrastructure and the transformation of the route? But then that was more innovation than experimentation; experiment suggests at least partial failure...

Does that mean the prize is Hull Trains' for... just coming into being?

Or Greater Anglia's, for trying to replace every train, mostly with stuff new to the UK?

I feel the prize should be Hull Trains', for being the first open access operator, for introducing unique stock, for attempting a unique customer service provision, and for introducing a new service. I feel the number of failures along the way suggests true experimentation!

 

[hexagon789]

Y'know... I'd forgotten about the first ScotRail franchise - it is one that deserves more praise - given that National Express inherited 101s and 117s from British Rail ... the Fife Circle stations only had an hourly service... only three trains per hour over the Forth Bridge... the frequency through Falkirk High was only half hourly... but were quick to introduce new DMUs and increate frequencies.

Quite a transformation, which First and Abellio were able to build upon.

Plus, when National Express ran things, it was before the Scottish Parliament, before the current environment in Scotland where there's a clear consensus in favour of rail investment.

Sadly, for National Express, the catalyst for this was after they'd lost the franchise in 2004 - the 2005 decision to build the line to Tweedbank - with subsequent infrastructure spending (electrification, EGIP etc) - but NatEx had to do it without/before the purse strings allowed further expansion of the ScotRail network.

It's a shame that their efforts are so easily forgotten (including by me, now you've reminded me of what an improving franchise they had!)

I still consider that to be the best ScotRail franchise - I even think the timetabling was better, much more regular interval and regular stopping patterns.

All this talk of a much improved HML timetable and yet I think the post-Turbostar HML timetable once it was fully bedded in was pretty good afternoon the Sunday service was expanded in 2004, the only criticism would be that ideally you'd have more Glasgow-Inverness services but you could always change at Perth off an Aberdeen which isn't the end of the world.