Southeastern attack Network Rail

[ComUtoR]

Govia's profit from rail operations last year was in the region of £25 million.

Govia profit is different from Southeastern Profit.

 

[EM2]

Govia profit is different from Southeastern Profit.

Indeed it is. It's a lot higher for a start, so if you work on Southeastern's profit only, it'd pay for even less.

 

[Class377/5]

I suppose they could take their custom away from Network Rail in the same way that the thousands of commuters could take their custom away from Southeastern/Govia/SWT etc. Isn't that how a privatised free market is supposed to work?

.... Oh hang on.

Doesn't change fact that comlaining to the wrong party achieves nothing.

let he who is without sin cast the first stone. He who comes into equity must come with clean hands etc etc.

I would also consider what classes of fault are attributed to NR they cover all sorts of things outside of their direct control, such as the weather, road vehicle bridge strikes etc. It isn't just have "rails... fit for trains"

No but the example govern were NRs. MPs seem to attack NR for delays including fatalilties. That's a unfair add they are trying quite hard to reduce them but does weaken the attack again from the MPs etc.

 

[The Box Photter]

Govia's profit from rail operations last year was in the region of £25 million.
From http://www.railpro.co.uk/railpro-magazine/magazine-archives/spreading-signalling-costs:

so it wouldn't be going far.

If they only turn a £25m profit, why are they bothering?

£25m is the profit they declared against Govia, how much is syphoned off into the Go-Ahead Group as a whole?

 

[LAX54]

Sorry but how is a TOC deflecting blame when the infrastructure at fault? Its being honest. If the rails aren't fit for trains on the NR infrastructure then its not the TOCs fault.

Cheap qiup at best.

It's not 100% at a guess, NR would love to get in a do more work, but they have to get the agreement of the TOC, if the TOC says no, then the work does not get done, until 'they have to do it'
In our area, Pway would love to get in and do more, and they do the best they can within the restraints they have, but if a TOC refuses to cancel trains, and maybe replace with RRB, then so be it !
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This reply might upset a few posters on here who love having a dig at NR... but to be honest I don't really care.
For months now all I have heard is the constant moaning of local councillors and mp's about the state of the UK'S railways. Now the irony here is that it is those same mp's parties that are responsible for decades of chronic underinvestment which has led either directly or indirectly to the situation we now have.
The biggest gripe I have is listening to them bleating on about line closures for engineering works. They moaned about the closures over Christmas, they moan about overnight works which require an early end to service and they moan about diversions when those works are taking place.
Now if these same people had their way we would have a rail service that runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks of the year. Perhaps they are so stupid that they misguidedly believe that we can maintain the rail infrastructure whilst running trains!
You cannot have it both ways and for a TOC to blame NR for poorly maintaining the rails is a pretty cheap shot in my opinion.
Yes NR could and should do better but you can only play with the hand you are dealt, and I think NR do pretty well all things considered. Perhaps some of the motormouths who constantly criticise us need to get out on the tracks and actually see what is involved in maintaining a railway.
During the last couple of months this country has endured some horrific weather which has caused untold damage to the railway infrastructure, a lot of it repaired in a short space of time. The more major damage is still being repaired and all this on top of your normal everyday maintenance.
You cannot have your cake and eat it, and it's about time people realised this and stop whinging.

Where is the like button

 

[Bald Rick]

Personally, this makes me rather sad.

For the 90% of the population who have no interest in the railways except as a means of getting around, which they may or may not use, all this actually says is "railways and trains are cr*p". Which doesn't help the industry at all.

For the 9% of the population who have an interest in the railways, but don't understand it fully, this reads as "a part of the industry is cr*p, but it's not us", which may be understood, but ultimately it's the words 6-9 that hit home. Again, not helpful.

The 1% who do understand the basics of how the industry works, which includes most of the people on this forum, will see the message for what it is. Roughly half of whom will realise it is about corporate reputation management rather than trying to help energise the people responsible to resolve the issues.

If I was on the front line in NRs South East route, being blamed for all the ills of the railway would not exactly motivate me to try harder. But I'm not, so I can't comment.

Meanwhile, in a remarkable coincidence, I was delayed on my way to work today for nearly an hour due to a failed GoVia train, and delayed half an hour on the way home by a failed GoVia train. But I shan't be ringing the Standard.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If they only turn a £25m profit, why are they bothering?

Because there is not much capital at risk; the return on capital employed is relatively reasonable for similar low risk enterprises.

TSGN loses cash, SE was losing money until last year, most of the profit is from LM.

 

[bramling]

Personally, this makes me rather sad.

For the 90% of the population who have no interest in the railways except as a means of getting around, which they may or may not use, all this actually says is "railways and trains are cr*p". Which doesn't help the industry at all.

For the 9% of the population who have an interest in the railways, but don't understand it fully, this reads as "a part of the industry is cr*p, but it's not us", which may be understood, but ultimately it's the last four words that hit home. Again, not helpful.

The 1% who do understand the basics of how the industry works, which includes most of the people on this forum, will see the message for what it is. Roughly half of whom will realise it is about corporate reputation management rather than trying to help energise the people responsible to resolve the issues.

If I was on the front line in NRs South East route, being blamed for all the ills of the railway would not exactly motivate me to try harder. But I'm not, so I can't comment.

Meanwhile, in a remarkable coincidence, I was delayed on my way to work today for nearly an hour due to a failed GoVia train, and delayed half an hour on the way home by a failed GoVia train. But I shan't be ringing the Standard.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Because there is not much capital at risk; the return on capital employed is relatively reasonable for similar low risk enterprises.

TSGN loses cash, SE was losing money until last year, most of the profit is from LM.

I can see both sides of the issue. As a TOC I would feel frustrated being held responsible in minds for issues beyond my direct control, especially if I felt the owner of the problem could and should be doing better - be that Network Rail, the DFT or whoever. Especially if I were constantly the subject of media derision and being often flagged in surveys as being the "worst" operator or similar.

But the flip side is that the public see it as "the railway" and it looks really bad to see "the railway" seemingly at war with itself. So in the same way Hendy's intervention was seriously bad, so is this.

Personally I've always found Southeastern reasonably good. A lot of the issues are beyond their control, while others (eg state of the trains) in my view are overplayed. It's not Southeastern's fault there has been population growth on their routes, and they do operate over some of the most awkward infrastructure in the country - a far more complex operation than any TFL one for those who think TFL is automatically the solution.

 

[Class 170101]

hmmmmm - Perhaps if the TOC offered better access opportunities etc

NR need to use the access they do get more efficiently first before coming for more. On a regular basis I have passed possessions where no work is being carried out.

 

[LBSCR Times]

Meanwhile, in a remarkable coincidence, I was delayed on my way to work today for nearly an hour due to a failed GoVia train, and delayed half an hour on the way home by a failed GoVia train. But I shan't be ringing the Standard.

Even though it was the same units.....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Personally, this makes me rather sad.

For the 90% of the population who have no interest in the railways except as a means of getting around, which they may or may not use, all this actually says is "railways and trains are cr*p". Which doesn't help the industry at all.

Yes, as I regularly remind my work colleagues, it's an 'industry' problem, not one part or another. No wonder many of that 90% want BR back, if only for this reason!

Having said that, it frustrates me even more when there is in-fighting within the TOC itself, and there appears to be no one capable of bashing the various departments heads together, but that is for another thread...

 

[Llanigraham]

NR need to use the access they do get more efficiently first before coming for more. On a regular basis I have passed possessions where no work is being carried out.

That depends on the length of the possession, surely?
I would grant one for a section over 18 miles long, but they might only be working in one small patch.

 

[The Planner]

NR need to use the access they do get more efficiently first before coming for more. On a regular basis I have passed possessions where no work is being carried out.

We dont ask for more though, that is one of the issues but we quite happily reduce section 4s if the TOCs want it.

 

[EM2]

NR need to use the access they do get more efficiently first before coming for more. On a regular basis I have passed possessions where no work is being carried out.

It couldn't be that technicians are in relay rooms tracing faults or testing circuits, for example. Or on a scheduled rest break. Or simply working further up in the section.

 

[tsr]

It couldn't be that technicians are in relay rooms tracing faults or testing circuits, for example. Or on a scheduled rest break. Or simply working further up in the section.

It is of course also about access. Many times there are items in the WON which I look at and think "wow, they have to allow access to so many shunt moves, sidings and such that they can't have much room to work". If it is in the dead of the night, or even another time with reduced service, surprising flexibility is often built in, with the exception of some "blockade"-type possessions.

It may, however, become apparent that the train plan for the duration of the possession is materially inadequate. This is sometimes a different matter entirely. Overstretching available access is by no means unknown.

 

[The Box Photter]

Personally, this makes me rather sad.

For the 90% of the population who have no interest in the railways except as a means of getting around, which they may or may not use, all this actually says is "railways and trains are cr*p". Which doesn't help the industry at all.

For the 9% of the population who have an interest in the railways, but don't understand it fully, this reads as "a part of the industry is cr*p, but it's not us", which may be understood, but ultimately it's the words 6-9 that hit home. Again, not helpful.

The 1% who do understand the basics of how the industry works, which includes most of the people on this forum, will see the message for what it is. Roughly half of whom will realise it is about corporate reputation management rather than trying to help energise the people responsible to resolve the issues.

If I was on the front line in NRs South East route, being blamed for all the ills of the railway would not exactly motivate me to try harder. But I'm not, so I can't comment.

Meanwhile, in a remarkable coincidence, I was delayed on my way to work today for nearly an hour due to a failed GoVia train, and delayed half an hour on the way home by a failed GoVia train. But I shan't be ringing the Standard.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Because there is not much capital at risk; the return on capital employed is relatively reasonable for similar low risk enterprises.

TSGN loses cash, SE was losing money until last year, most of the profit is from LM.

Yes, operating a rail franchise is the economic equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel. Captive customer base, incompetent DfT, guaranteed profit with minimal risk plus compensation payments when NR fails to deliver a track to run on.

 

[EM2]

Yes, operating a rail franchise is the economic equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel. Captive customer base, incompetent DfT, guaranteed profit with minimal risk plus compensation payments when NR fails to deliver a track to run on.

And yet they barely make any money. As you said, why are they bothering?
If it were so easy, they'd be sitting on much bigger profits than that, surely?

 

[Bald Rick]

Even though it was the same units......

I did wonder if that was the case. There's a fleet engineer in Selhurst that owes me two beers.

 

[LBSCR Times]

That depends on the length of the possession, surely?
I would grant one for a section over 18 miles long, but they might only be working in one small patch.

Or there could be several worksites in the possession, and maybe one involves more than the others.

 

[talltim]

And yet they barely make any money. As you said, why are they bothering?
If it were so easy, they'd be sitting on much bigger profits than that, surely?

Low risk, low return. They can make a small profit without worrying about losing it all

 

[The Box Photter]

Low risk, low return. They can make a small profit without worrying about losing it all

Its pretty much a guaranteed after tax income that the larger groups (Go Ahead, Stagecoach etc) can use as a fund to pay for the bubbly at the shareholders' meetings.

As for Arriva (or should we say Deutsche Bundesbahn) it helps to keep fares low for passengers on German railways. Ironic isn't it that our Governments have been so hell-bent against a Nationlalised railway that they've allowed large chunks of it to be operated by German, Dutch and French State-owned railways.

 

[Llanigraham]

Or there could be several worksites in the possession, and maybe one involves more than the others.

True.
And the "problem" in Wales was that we couldn't grant a Line Block until we'd received ToS, therefore delaying it even more.
However I also agreed with that Rule, especially in a long section.

 

[MedwayValiant]

Please can I come back to something from earlier in the thread?

I think we would all accept that most things which can go wrong on the railway are not the TOC's "fault", but some absolutely are. In which category do we place rail replacement bus services not operating to time?

Southeastern does not operate the RRBs itself - it hires third division bus companies to do that - but presumably it does specify the timetable and the number of seats to be made available. Is it legitimate for a passenger to blame Southeastern if the RRB runs so late that the train into which it was supposed to connect leaves without it, or if the RRB is full and the passenger can't get on?

Actually, that causes another question to my mind. Is there any kind of monitoring of timekeeping on RRBs? Since there were no railway staff present at either end of the RRB journey I had to make today (Rochester to Meopham), I'm guessing that the answer is "no". In which case, how do they know whether or not a Delay Repay claim on the basis that the RRB failed to meet the booked train is genuine? There could be a very lot of those today, since I am led to believe that eight consecutive RRBs from Rainham failed to get to Meopham in time for the trains they were booked to connect into.

Do RRB contracts contain penalty clauses for failure to run on time, or to provide vehicles as booked?

 

[ComUtoR]

Actually, that causes another question to my mind. Is there any kind of monitoring of timekeeping on RRBs?

Yes. There is usually an inspector of sorts monitoring the bus fromthe bus company side.

Since there were no railway staff present at either end of the RRB journey I had to make today (Rochester to Meopham)

That's unusual. All the ones I have ever travelled on have staff both ends.

in time for the trains they were booked to connect into.

Again, from my experience the trains usually have a longer dwell time for connections.

I'll admit it sounds like something has gone very wrong. Was there a local traffic issue ? For that many buses to be running late I would hope that there was something beyond anyone's control that happened.

 

[moggie]

When the industry turns inward and begins fighting amongst itself you have to conclude that it's on a slippery slope to oblivion.

Ultimately this is a failure of leadership. Leadership from the industry partners (it takes two to run a railway - Infrastructure and train operator) who fail to stand up for the industry they represent but instead indulge in infighting, but also a failure of leadership from the regulator which campaigns tirelessly against the industry in the form cost reductions, performance penalties, network access time and cash handouts to passengers.

While these initiatives sound reasonable there is a consequence to them all. Many are incompatible with maintaining a sustainable railway. It may be possible in the short term but eventually cutting back on frontline staff, maintenance and essential renewals while sweating the assets at the same time will only lead to one outcome. That is what is being experienced now.

Another of those consequences is the friction stirred up in the relationships between industry partners which are essential to keep the railway going. WTF do the ORR understand about these? Well, now the cracks are showing and will do only harm to the interests of passengers.

What are the alternatives? A new TOC? Doesn't change the infrastructure management issues. Break up NR? Doesn't change the age, condition or opportunities to get in and do something meaningful about aged infrastructure without; a) inevitable disruption to carry out the work; b) funds to carry out the renewal. Then of course there's the other problem - lack of sufficient skilled resource to accelerate infrastructure works (another consequence of previous political leaders).

The only solution is a long term strategy, funding to go with it. Patience and willingness to see it through (something lacking in today's railway). Support and confidence in those tasked with the work (another attribute sadly lacking in all too many).

Sadly, while politicians have the ability to interfere on a frequent basis as has been the case for decades the rail industry is doomed to the eternal struggle. And so are its passengers.

If only industry would get together and mount a public campaign to educate its users even when it doesn't fit with the instant fixes politicians would like people to believe. In these times of social media / PR is king, surely someone has the wit and intelligence to inform users of what is involved, what has been achieved and why the railway is shut (big screen at principal stations). Even the maintenance / fault gang could carry a head camera to film what is found, beam it back to control for instant upload to ****ter with some nice commentary from the office added as a soundtrack. Normals would soon get bored with a constant barrage of maintenance stories but at least NR could point to the fact they were informed. The TOC's might learn something as well. Why, they could even do the same from the TMD.

 

[MedwayValiant]

Yes. There is usually an inspector of sorts monitoring the bus fromthe bus company side.

There was indeed. It was a harrassed looking woman in London General uniform, although only some of the buses had been provided by London General. When asked by a stroppy passenger, she claimed - albeit possibly not entirely truthfully - that she didn't even know the train times.

In any case, even if she does know that the bus missed the train into which it was meant to connect, is she likely to volunteer that information to Southeastern? Or will her bus company bosses have told her to keep it to herself unless asked in writing?

That's unusual. All the ones I have ever travelled on have staff both ends.

At old Rochester station, there always were. But at new Rochester station, up RRBs run from a coach stand across the road. The pedestrian crossing is in totally the wrong place which makes it a five minute walk, and none of the station staff chose to make that walk. Possibly for very good reasons, but it did look a bit poor.

Meopham was entirely unstaffed. Even the ticket office - normally open on Sat mornings - was closed. Again, there may be a good reason for that - but if you're short of ticket office staff you might perhaps prioritise a station which is the end of an RRB run, since lots of passengers getting off the bus probably haven't got tickets.

Again, from my experience the trains usually have a longer dwell time for connections.

It's a bit of an odd one. Trains were running between Vic and Sole Street, but the RRB for Rochester and points beyond is at Meopham, not Sole Street. That's because Sole Street station is a) very quiet and b) on a country lane not easily served by bus. So there's no dwell time at Meopham beyond the usual time required for people to board the train.

I'll admit it sounds like something has gone very wrong. Was there a local traffic issue ? For that many buses to be running late I would hope that there was something beyond anyone's control that happened.

Apparently it was in part an issue with traffic in Chatham, but I don't know of any reason why it should have been worse than it always is. There's also a rumour of an RRB being blocked in by a couple of Arriva service buses at Chatham station, annoyed at the RRB parking up on "their" stop, but I can't confirm that.

 

[Antman]

It has to be said that the old Rochester station was better suited to RRB operations than the new one is and there can often be problems at Chatham where the bus interchange can get congested in normal circumstances without RRB's on top.

There has always been somebody supervising bus operations at Meopham whenever I've been there during RRB operations.

Sole Street is always served by a separate shuttle minibus to and from Meopham.

 

[cjmillsnun]

When the industry turns inward and begins fighting amongst itself you have to conclude that it's on a slippery slope to oblivion.

Ultimately this is a failure of leadership. Leadership from the industry partners (it takes two to run a railway - Infrastructure and train operator) who fail to stand up for the industry they represent but instead indulge in infighting, but also a failure of leadership from the regulator which campaigns tirelessly against the industry in the form cost reductions, performance penalties, network access time and cash handouts to passengers.

While these initiatives sound reasonable there is a consequence to them all. Many are incompatible with maintaining a sustainable railway. It may be possible in the short term but eventually cutting back on frontline staff, maintenance and essential renewals while sweating the assets at the same time will only lead to one outcome. That is what is being experienced now.

Another of those consequences is the friction stirred up in the relationships between industry partners which are essential to keep the railway going. WTF do the ORR understand about these? Well, now the cracks are showing and will do only harm to the interests of passengers.

What are the alternatives? A new TOC? Doesn't change the infrastructure management issues. Break up NR? Doesn't change the age, condition or opportunities to get in and do something meaningful about aged infrastructure without; a) inevitable disruption to carry out the work; b) funds to carry out the renewal. Then of course there's the other problem - lack of sufficient skilled resource to accelerate infrastructure works (another consequence of previous political leaders).

The only solution is a long term strategy, funding to go with it. Patience and willingness to see it through (something lacking in today's railway). Support and confidence in those tasked with the work (another attribute sadly lacking in all too many).

Sadly, while politicians have the ability to interfere on a frequent basis as has been the case for decades the rail industry is doomed to the eternal struggle. And so are its passengers.

If only industry would get together and mount a public campaign to educate its users even when it doesn't fit with the instant fixes politicians would like people to believe. In these times of social media / PR is king, surely someone has the wit and intelligence to inform users of what is involved, what has been achieved and why the railway is shut (big screen at principal stations). Even the maintenance / fault gang could carry a head camera to film what is found, beam it back to control for instant upload to ****ter with some nice commentary from the office added as a soundtrack. Normals would soon get bored with a constant barrage of maintenance stories but at least NR could point to the fact they were informed. The TOC's might learn something as well. Why, they could even do the same from the TMD.

Spot on. The sad thing is none of them have the balls to do it.

 

[HH]

Perhaps they are so stupid that they misguidedly believe that we can maintain the rail infrastructure whilst running trains!

Men, it can be done.

 

[68000]

This reply might upset a few posters on here who love having a dig at NR... but to be honest I don't really care.
For months now all I have heard is the constant moaning of local councillors and mp's about the state of the UK'S railways. Now the irony here is that it is those same mp's parties that are responsible for decades of chronic underinvestment which has led either directly or indirectly to the situation we now have.
The biggest gripe I have is listening to them bleating on about line closures for engineering works. They moaned about the closures over Christmas, they moan about overnight works which require an early end to service and they moan about diversions when those works are taking place.
Now if these same people had their way we would have a rail service that runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks of the year. Perhaps they are so stupid that they misguidedly believe that we can maintain the rail infrastructure whilst running trains!
You cannot have it both ways and for a TOC to blame NR for poorly maintaining the rails is a pretty cheap shot in my opinion.
Yes NR could and should do better but you can only play with the hand you are dealt, and I think NR do pretty well all things considered. Perhaps some of the motormouths who constantly criticise us need to get out on the tracks and actually see what is involved in maintaining a railway.
During the last couple of months this country has endured some horrific weather which has caused untold damage to the railway infrastructure, a lot of it repaired in a short space of time. The more major damage is still being repaired and all this on top of your normal everyday maintenance.
You cannot have your cake and eat it, and it's about time people realised this and stop whinging.

Well said and spot on

 

[HH]

Low risk, low return. They can make a small profit without worrying about losing it all

But it's not low risk. The TOCs are at risk on a whole host of factors, many of which are way beyond their control, like the economy! Plenty of TOCs have made losses, plenty more have been on a knife edge.

People bleating about profits on here don't really have a clue. The main reason for the bid low returns is the low capital investment needed. With DfT asking for more bonds and pushing ever more risk onto the TOCs I'd expect margins on the riskier franchises to start edging up.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Its pretty much a guaranteed after tax income that the larger groups (Go Ahead, Stagecoach etc) can use as a fund to pay for the bubbly at the shareholders' meetings.

As for Arriva (or should we say Deutsche Bundesbahn) it helps to keep fares low for passengers on German railways. Ironic isn't it that our Governments have been so hell-bent against a Nationlalised railway that they've allowed large chunks of it to be operated by German, Dutch and French State-owned railways.

Go Ahead TOCs have made losses; even Stagecoach TOCs have, and they don't come much cannier than Souter.

Arriva has made lots of losses; I reckon that the German passengers are actually subsidising our railway!

 

[Class 170101]

That depends on the length of the possession, surely?
I would grant one for a section over 18 miles long, but they might only be working in one small patch.

On various occasions no work has been carried out for the whole distance as far as I can see.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

We dont ask for more though, that is one of the issues but we quite happily reduce section 4s if the TOCs want it.

Two instances I am aware of and NR keep saying no every year.

It couldn't be that technicians are in relay rooms tracing faults or testing circuits, for example. Or on a scheduled rest break. Or simply working further up in the section.

On occasions I was expecting to see stop boards etc in place with a particular possession - they were not present and trains were running past.