• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

southern bias

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
21,175
Location
0035
Agreed, if you have a targeted campaign aimed at the right people (and not just a moan about the TOCs) then you can have a success. A campaign led by my organisation at the end of 2006/start of 2007 resulted in 99% of the responses to Bristol City Council's budget consultation asking for money to be spent on a more frequent service between Temple Meads and Avonmouth, and £1.2million was allocated to pay for an additional train, which started in May 2008. Passenger numbers have increased by 30% and over half a million passengers used the line in 2008 - for each period since the new timetable the highest number of passengers on record were recorded. Whilst the service is not comparable with good local rail/light rail transport in cities such as Birmingham, Manchester & Liverpool, it is a starting point for better services and future campaigns.

A more recent and far more ambitious campaign aimed at the Regional Assembly has so far seen over 1,000 responses asking for them to apply under the Regional Funding Allocation (RFA2) for reopening of local passenger railway lines.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Waverley125

Member
Joined
2 Sep 2008
Messages
1,010
Location
Leeds, West Yorkshire
it's quite simple TBH. The amount going on london in the next few years could electrify the TPE network, Leeds, Manchester & Liverpool regional trains, buy the new stock for them & reopen several key lines-Halton, Burscough, Todmorden curves and Skipton-Colne for starters, nevermind Guiseley-Otley, Leeds-Northallerton via Ripon and the Cleckheaton line.

Then we have extra platforms at City station, Leeds E.Parkway, expansion of Piccadilly-Oxford Road, reopening of Manchester Mayfield and the Leeds Supertram.
 

daccer

Member
Joined
11 Feb 2009
Messages
373
There is no doubt that the public hold the key to changing political perceptions of the railways and to promote their use and development. To change a political mindset can be difficult but not impossible. Lets start at the top - get onto your MP and bore them into bringing pressure to bear on the powers that be to change the policy of the last few decades and start looking at the railway network as an asset not a liability. All the parties now see the railways as beiong an issue at the next General Election - it is time to start holding them to the pre-election promises they make but then conveniently forget. The current conditions for reopening lines needs to be reviewed quickly. If Alloa is viable for Scotland not to mention Airdrie-Bathgate, GARL and the Borders line then how come numerous reopenings in England cant be justified. We are meant to be looking for ways to help rejuvinate the economy and to revitalise areas where investment has stagnated - rail has a proven record in these areas and can be done quickly, many lines do not require major civil engineering as the trackbeds still survive. If 20bn can be raised for two projects in London then it cannot be beyond the reach of the rest of the country to pressure the Govt into not just doing studies and appraisals but to get out there and to start laying rails. Demand suggests that we should be in the middle of a rail building boom - the fact that we are not means that more pressure needs to be exerted.
 

whoshotjimmi

Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
340
Location
Drighlington, West Yorkshire
As I said, if you want improved services you need to:

1) Use them. This might seem like an obvious point, but we could have the best railway system in the world if people used it.

2) Support it. I remember starting threads (such as re-open Woodhead) on this very forum, and got no-end of stick from several forum members. Indeed, I get people ranting at me on MSN and on here, saying I'm a 'greeny' and 'you're just trying to get us out of our cars', for supporting rail projects, or defending the railways. If that is the level of debate on a forum where people are supposed to know about [rail] transport, lord help the general populace.

3) Identify which projects need doing, set up pressure groups or join others, write to your MP. Again maybe an obvious point, but on this very thread not many projects have been identified and adequately argued for. The whole thread is very much a 'chip on the shoulder' augment we hear these days, where the world owes me a living and if I want something then I have a right to it or there is some conspiracy going on, when if people actually bothered to look into things, much of it is decided through consumer choice and the economic system people vote for.

There are two main national groups for supporting rail and public transport, they are:

http://www.railfuture.org.uk/tiki-page.php?pageName=RailFuture

http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/

There are many local groups, both passenger interest groups such as

http://www.clpg.co.uk/

and many others, or rail project groups like

http://www.norfolk-orbital-railway.co.uk/

and many preservation groups

Take time to look them up and give them your support. I'm a member of none of them, nor want to lead the argument or tell people what to do, but there is my humble suggestion aimed at the forum in general.


This is among the most ridiculous statements I have ever seen. The Leeds city region transport vision explains it better than my angry response to this ludicrous statement ever could.

http://www.wyltp.com/Archive/DraftWestYorkshireTransportVision.htm

Pay particular attention to pages 6 and 7 where it explains how appropriate investment on the network has increased mode share and that extra carriages have been immediately filled suggesting significant supressed demand.

What you are basically suggesting here is that people support and use a rail network that is inadequate and cannot support those who wish to do so, put up with it and then maybe some investment may happen?!!

Hell, even bus usage has increased where money has been spent.

And you have the nerve to suggest other people have no idea about the railways?!!!! Unbelievable
 

Metroland

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
3,212
Location
Midlands
So if the demand is so suppressed why does it need so much subsidy? Fares on average are much lower per mile than in the south.

No, don't bother answering, its much beyond this forum, tbh I've come to expect nothing more. Most people on here think Top gear is an intellectual debate.
 

bluenoxid

Established Member
Joined
9 Feb 2008
Messages
2,659
This is among the most ridiculous statements I have ever seen. The Leeds city region transport vision explains it better than my angry response to this ludicrous statement ever could.

http://www.wyltp.com/Archive/DraftWestYorkshireTransportVision.htm

Pay particular attention to pages 6 and 7 where it explains how appropriate investment on the network has increased mode share and that extra carriages have been immediately filled suggesting significant supressed demand.

What you are basically suggesting here is that people support and use a rail network that is inadequate and cannot support those who wish to do so, put up with it and then maybe some investment may happen?!!

Hell, even bus usage has increased where money has been spent.

And you have the nerve to suggest other people have no idea about the railways?!!!! Unbelievable

I am quite worried you have got the wrong end of the stick mate.

He is suggesting one of the best pieces of writing I have seen on this subject for sometime. I suggest you read it again and realise what he is actually saying which is

1) Use it when you can

2) Show support when you can

3) Use common sense

Yes some of the network is inadequate, but if its not used or support, it's not going to get the money.

I am not here to throw my toys out of my pram but I am going to be honest. It is the skill of certain moderators and senior members in here that keep this place going sometimes. Many on here are not mature enough to understand many basic facts of life or understand some of the complicated arguments which are coming through.
 

whoshotjimmi

Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
340
Location
Drighlington, West Yorkshire
I am quite worried you have got the wrong end of the stick mate.

He is suggesting one of the best pieces of writing I have seen on this subject for sometime. I suggest you read it again and realise what he is actually saying which is

1) Use it when you can

2) Show support when you can

3) Use common sense

Yes some of the network is inadequate, but if its not used or support, it's not going to get the money.

I am not here to throw my toys out of my pram but I am going to be honest. It is the skill of certain moderators and senior members in here that keep this place going sometimes. Many on here are not mature enough to understand many basic facts of life or understand some of the complicated arguments which are coming through.

Certainly haven't got the wrong end of the stick. Not in the slightest. I have spent lots of time in London and they have an excellent public transport network (though Londoners will have you believe otherwise). It is fast, cheap and regular and as such is a much better alternative to the car etc.

In the North, it is not fast, not cheap and not regular.

1) I use the railway whenever I feel it is convenient for me to use. I do not live within walking distance of a station, so mainly use it for leisure purposes. But even then, there has to be a significant benefit to myself ie cost, ease of use, time etc

2) I am an avid supporter of the railway in all its forms, but mainly support modernisation of the network to provide a better service for EVERYONE.

3) Common sense? Ok, lets use that. Woodhead line reopening - Manchester - Sheffield via Barnsley. Good idea, in theory. However, that is not an area where there are significant constraints that cannot be addressed by better use of the exisiting lines. 3 tph between Sheffield and Manchester is not enough to justify the reopening of a line, good as it would be.

If some of the network is inadequate, why would people support it? Not everyone has a mindless loyalty to the railway. People genuinely need to get where they are going and if they cannot rely on the railway to do it for them then they are bound to not support it. The railways are about providing a service, something it does well in the Southeast, something it doesn't do well in the North.

Mertoland - I am a huge fan of Top Gear. However, I am still going to answer your question. Services in areas such as Leeds/Manchester etc are subsidised becasue if they did not exist, such a service would not be supported by central government. I use Skipton/Ilkley as an example as it is a runaway success and explains thoroughly my point. Would that line have been given new trains if it was not due to the support of the PTE? I doubt it. As such, passenger numbers on that line would not have increased by anything like the amount they have. 75% mode share in an area that is now one of the most densely populated areas in the North.

Seems obvious to me. Make the investment, reap the rewards.

I apologise if anyone finds my argument immature and beneath them. I admit with a heavy heart that the view of someone who is passionate about their local service is not that important.

Just as an edit - Mojo makes a similar point to the one I have that has been met with derision.
 
Last edited:

bluenoxid

Established Member
Joined
9 Feb 2008
Messages
2,659
Yes you have. If it isn't used or demand can't be demonstrated then it isn't going to be funded. Throwing money at the system isn't going to make it better either. It needs to be targeted properly. There are plenty of areas where the service is inadequate. Heavens, some places it's a bus every Tuesday. The services that are provided are done thanks to historical routes and the determined grit of the railways and the people who support them.

Not everywhere has suppressed demand to validate the services that quite a few parts of the South East receive and we are also fighting for a limited pot of money. Yes there is passion but there is also realising that there are limits to the pot.
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,609
Location
In the cab with the paper
I think that this North-South thing is a little selective. There are routes in the North that have benefitted from brand new rolling stock and other investment while there are routes in the South that really are crying out for such treatment.

HST's aside (as they work equally in all regions), the South still has the oldest passenger rolling stock. Cl313's are now 30+ years old. The WA routes rely exclusively on stock that almost entirely predates the Pacer and Sprinter families of units. There are routes where platform lengthening is of dire importance and station upgrades are needed.

That's not to say that investment isn't needed elsewhere, as it most certainly is. However, things are not necessarily as straightforward as they might seem.

O L Leigh
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,053
Location
Reston City Centre
3) Common sense? Ok, lets use that. Woodhead line reopening - Manchester - Sheffield via Barnsley. Good idea, in theory. However, that is not an area where there are significant constraints that cannot be addressed by better use of the exisiting lines. 3 tph between Sheffield and Manchester is not enough to justify the reopening of a line, good as it would be

The Woodhead route wouldn't need to go anywhere near Barnsley. Trains would run from Sheffield Victoria via Deepcar (connecting for Barnsley and Huddersfield at Penistone).

Sheffield to Manchester compares poorly against most large cities seperated by that distance:

Edinburgh to Glasgow gets four fast trains an hour (Falkirk High), plus local trains via Shotts and some NXEC services

Leeds to Manchester gets four fast trains an hour (Huddersfield) plus local trains via Halifax

Manchester to Liverpool gets five trains an hour (could be wrong)

Sheffield to Manchester gets a half hourly service (the busy Norwich - Liverpool and the Cleethorpes - Manchester Airport), plus a "carefully" timetabled Northern "stopper" which leaves immediately after one train at Sheffield and arrives just before the next one at Manchester, meaning it's almost useless for a through journey.

The Woodhead route and the Matlock - Buxton route were closed, meaning that any frieght from the East Midlands/ Humberside/ South Yorkshire to Manchester/ Lancashire/ Merseyside/ Cheshire has only one route over the Pennines (which means there's no scope for additional passenger services on the Hope Valley line, due to all the freight). I'd call the freight on that line (plus "pinch points" on the single line at Dore) quite a "constraint".

(re)Opening the Woodhead line would allow more trans-pennine freight, it would free up Hope Valley paths to allow a faster/ better service from the East Midlands to Manchester, it might ease congestion at Sheffield Midland if a station at Victoria was around (Worksop/ Lincoln services could use this too).

Plus the Glossop end is already electrified ;)
 

Metroland

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
3,212
Location
Midlands
The Skipton/Ilkely corridor is a peculiarity, insomuch as its used by a very high percentage of ABC1 commuters from an attractive, relatively expensive area (where they can afford to live and commute) to Leeds city centre working in a high percentage of financial services and other well paid professional jobs, very much the mirror image of many lines in the south. There's no question that the investment in trains, electrification and resignalling has also helped its case.

I doubt very much if you applied a similar investment to say Middlesbrough - where there are a high percentage of low paid blue collar jobs, where people do not commute as far and generally don't travel much anyway - you are likely to get such good value for money for your investment. Understand, I'm not having a poke at Middlesbrough, but for historical and geographic reasons it has a completely different demographic to say Oxford or even Leeds.

In time, many of these towns and cities will change, especially if the labour market means better paid jobs, which require travel or commuting, start appearing in great numbers. Nottingham, Sheffield, Manchester and Leeds and good examples of up-coming cities. Others are still lagging, but in time, hopefully will recover from their post industrial decline.

Don't forget Leeds has recently had resignalling (controlled from York) and a large expansion in the track layout, because it needed it - and rightly so because its the second busiest commuter town in England very much because of local employment. But frankly, there aren't that many other areas where capacity is all that constrained and some of the load factors on northern lines are quite low - hence the need for subsidy.

As for line reopenings, like the south, there are several possibles, nevertheless they are are quite low BCR ratios. Whereas I'd like to see Woodhead, the peak lines, and various lines in Yorkshire re-opened, the finite pot of railway finances and resources means, again, they are lower priority.

In any case, I'm not sure I agree that things in the north are that bad.

Leeds - most lines in the area power signalled with 3/4 aspect signalling controlled from York. Some lines electrified.

Newcastle - ditto from Tyneside, although there are semaphores down the Durham coast and in Teeside - but it is a terrible pocket of unemployment and low paid jobs. Lines mostly electrified with AC or DC overhead (metro)

Liverpool - ditto, mostly controlled from Sandhills and Warrington. Most lines are electrified with DC or AC Overhead.

Manchester - ditto, controlled from Manchester Picadilly, South and various PSBs in North Manchester.

Sheffield, ditto, controlled from Sheffield. While there is not much electrification in the area at present, this could change in the near future with MML wiring, which would probably include the Doncaster and Leeds lines.

Hull and Middlesbrough seem to be the poor relation, with only recently introduced direct London services and mostly semaphore signalling.

Most lines are similar if not greater line speeds, compared to the south (have you seen the journey times to kent!) and the fares are generally cheaper.

The Transpennie lines have part mechanical signalling, although north transpennine is mostly 3 aspect signalling. But the linespeeds are a mostly fairly respectable, given the curvature and terrain.

But Northerners might be surprised at the pockets of semaphore or very old colour lights in the south!
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,053
Location
Reston City Centre
The Skipton/Ilkely corridor is a peculiarity, insomuch as its used by a very high percentage of ABC1 commuters from an attractive, relatively expensive area (where they can afford to live and commute) to Leeds city centre working in a high percentage of financial services and other well paid professional jobs, very much the mirror image of many lines in the south. There's no question that the investment in trains, electrification and resignalling has also helped its case.

I doubt very much if you applied a similar investment to say Middlesbrough - where there are a high percentage of low paid blue collar jobs, where people do not commute as far and generally don't travel much anyway - you are likely to get such good value for money for your investment. Understand, I'm not having a poke at Middlesbrough, but for historical and geographic reasons it has a completely different demographic to say Oxford or even Leeds

That's a fair point about the Aidedale/ Wharfdale lines (compared to other commuter routes in the north of England).

However, one that I'm surprised hasn't been upgraded in a similar way is the Manchester - Stockport - Cheshire - Chester route - surely this would be a similar combination of ABC1 commuters living in the "countryside" but working in the city.

Yet, whilst the West Yorkshire routes get four car modern EMUs, the Cheshire line has hourly Pacers.

I guess one difference is that the Leeds - Ilkley/ Keighley lines are covered by WY Metro (Skipton is only just over the border in North Yorkshire), meaning one public body can make a big positive difference (in the way that lines in Scotland/ Wales have benefitted), but the Cheshire line is outside GMPTE's control. Maybe Knutsford (etc) should have a petition to get their town(s) amalgamated into Greater Manchester?
 

Metroland

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
3,212
Location
Midlands
Yes that line is surprising, the other one has to be the York-Harrogate-Leeds loop, again, heavily used by a lot of professionals - but still sports semaphores and pacers!
 

whoshotjimmi

Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
340
Location
Drighlington, West Yorkshire
The Woodhead route wouldn't need to go anywhere near Barnsley. Trains would run from Sheffield Victoria via Deepcar (connecting for Barnsley and Huddersfield at Penistone).

Sheffield to Manchester compares poorly against most large cities seperated by that distance:

I am using Woodhead as one example. Let me try and clarify the point I am making. It is costs vs benefits. If passenger numbers between Sheffield and Manchester warranted, the first investment is to strengthen existing trains to carry more passengers. Relatively low cost, relatively high benefit - as opposed to opening a new line altogether (or should I say reopening?). I agree that reopening Woodhead would provide the benefits you state, but it is not feasable to do so. The passenger groups that Metroland names appear to be trying to reopen a number of rural routes that would only really benefit a small number of people as well as appearing to be using green concerns as an excuse to improve rail when, though a major topic currently, that is not the main issue.

Bluenoxid - you and I are trying to make the same point but in different ways. I agree that demand needs to warrant investment. What I am saying is that investment is not forthcoming to take advantage of that demand. Until that investment is made, that demand will not form part of the rail mode share. I am not saying money should be thrown at everything with the hope that more passengers will come along. But there are certain areas where the investment is desperately needed but for whatever reason, this is not happening.

I am also trying to make the point with the thread title in mind. Again, it is costs vs benefits. Proportionally, the cost and benefit to improve certain areas in the North would be similar to that of the South, yet, as Daccer quite rightly says, this investment is more forthcoming in the South. But, as yet, no one has been able to effectively display why that is so.

Metroland - I agree with everything you have to say there. All makes a lot of sense. Especially the Harrogate line comment. Things aren't that bad per se, but there are areas that desperately require the investment.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Southeastern operate 328 trains to 203 stations. All stock was built after 1990, with most being built at around the turn of the millennium. All stock picks up 3rd rail electric supply. They're also getting more Electrostars and the new Javelin trains.

Southern operate 298 trains to 213 stations. Most stock was built after the Millennium, although 455s do a decent job on inner suburban services, and 319s and 456s aren't too old. Only 16 diesel trains, and all are modern Turbostars operating on only 2 lines(?).

South West Trains operate 339 trains to 213 stations. Most of the trains are Desiros, built after 2000. There's also some Junipers. They do operate a lot of 455s on the inner suburban routes and several 158s and 159s to Salisbury, though. Only 43 diesel trains.

Northern operate 281 trains to 529 stations. Mostly Pacers and Sprinters. The only stock built after 2000 is the 3 Adelante trains. Their small electric fleet (36 trains) is limited to two small lines on the network.

Merseyrail operate 59 trains to 67 stations. All trains were built in the late 1970s, some in 1980. All are electrified.

The three Southern companies mentioned operate more trains than stations, whilst Northern operate less than half as many trains than stations. I've not worked out average fleet age, but it's easy to see it's lower in the South. In fact, Southeastern have dumped the same trains that are currently in use in Liverpool! There's much more electrification in the South too.

I'd also like to point out that the 3 Southern companies primarily cater for small parts of the London commuter network whilst Northern alone deals with all of Manchester, Leeds and several other cities with regards to rail.

With those details alone, I find it hard to see how there's not a Southern bias. The Southern companies get everything whilst Northern struggles with aging rolling stock on a huge network. I'm sorry if I'm missing the obvious here, but there's almost a thousand trains serving a fraction of London's commuter network, yet there's only 281 trains serving Northern services from Newcastle to Manchester, Doncaster to Carlisle?!? Something not right there if you ask me.
 
Last edited:

whoshotjimmi

Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
340
Location
Drighlington, West Yorkshire
South West Trains operate 339 trains to 213 stations. Most of the trains are Desiros, built after 2000. There's also some Junipers. They do operate a lot of 455s on the inner suburban routes and several 158s and 159s to Salisbury, though. Only 43 diesel trains......

......With those details alone, I find it hard to see how there's not a Southern bias. The Southern companies get everything whilst Northern struggles with aging rolling stock on a huge network. I'm sorry if I'm missing the obvious here, but there's almost a thousand trains serving a fraction of London's commuter network, yet there's only 281 trains serving Northern services from Newcastle to Manchester, Doncaster to Carlisle?!? Something not right there if you ask me.


I would just also like to add that South West are currently not employing all of their trains in order to save money whilst the likes of Northern are running at full capacity.

With regards to the entire Northern network vs the three southern companies mentioned, there are large areas of that network that are quite sparsely populated whereas South London is mainly people with the odd fountain. We also need to take the likes of FTPE into account. However, there is a large degree of truth to what you say regarding number of trains, especially on the main commuter lines.
 

bluenoxid

Established Member
Joined
9 Feb 2008
Messages
2,659
Bluenoxid - you and I are trying to make the same point but in different ways.

It's what I was thinking but couldn't work it out at all.

me123, you've been left behind in the argument. It's quite easily put down by the fact that those franchises have just got rid of 40 year old stock.

West Anglia/Thameslink will be the next big fleet expansion.

And also its weak to compare the networks, they are totally different. Just look at the area that Northern serves and how many stations have such a small population serving them.

We now have one of the oldest fleets and it's now that we need to sort this out.

London is our capital, end of in some books. The current network structure around London is so strained and its trains are rammed constantly through peak. It needs major investment and if you're in a city centre and its a big capital project its going to be high cost. Remember that in the long term its not a massive amount of money and that Crossrail is mainly being funded by London itself. The aim of Thameslink and Crossrail is to pierce a massive hole into the major congestion afflicting London.
 

Metroland

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
3,212
Location
Midlands
Me 123, Don't forget the Mk1s on many SR lines on the SWT and SE networks have only just been replaced. Most of the northern trains were new in the 80s. Look at the state of the LTS and Chiltern lines up to the 1990s, or the elderly signalling out of London Liverpool street at this time - much of which, further out, has only just been replaced.

There is slightly more electrification in the south, but much of this is because of the vast SR network which lent itself to it because of the housing expansion schemes of the 30s/40s and competition with trams in the early part of the 20th century.

The Great Western lines, whose route much of the British establishment live (especially the media) has, apart from the London area, 1960s track and signalling and 1970s HSTs. The turbo DMUs are not that much younger than the pacers/156s/158s of the north. It also has long sections of single track feeder route from the Cotswolds and Gloucestershire. Oxford, which handles nearly as many passengers Sheffield (and around 400 odd train moves per day) has 2 through platforms and a bay!

Many lines in kent are not electrified and have semaphore signalling, or very low speeds.

One of the big distortions in spend, is replacing the lines/trains for the above or the incredibly expensive Crossrail - which I agree is pretty marginal although probably needed to relieve intensive overcrowding, especially on the Tube.
 
Last edited:

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
Wonder which TOC DOES have the oldest overall fleet*? Certainly, around London I would guess NXEA- with the 315s (80/81), 317s (81/82 and 85-87), 156s (87-89) 153s (87-88), 321s (86-88), mark 3 coaches (75-88) and class 90s (87-90) forming the bulk of the fleet. The small fleets of Turbostars and Desiros being their only trains built this decade.

Grand Central and WSMR don't count towards this pondering; they do, after all, use coaching stock that had been replaced by franchised TOCs.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
OK, fair enough that the South has replaced a lot of old rolling stock. But look where new trains are going now; to replace some older stock in the South that is being cascaded up North. The South now have the youngest fleet, so why is more money going down there whilst the North have to make do with a smaller older fleet that looks like it will be replaced by cascaded rolling stock?

The point I'm trying to make is that we have one TOC serving a corner of the network not using all of their stock outwith peak times, whilst Northern are struggling to stop overcrowding. To me, that's not fair.

Comparing Northern with Southeastern; well, I just can't believe that there's not demand in Manchester, Sheffield, Newcastle and so on for a commuter train service. These areas will probably have lower car ownership than London suburbs and more people would, in theory, rely on public transport for their commute. How one city needs several times more trains than five or six cities does not make sense in my opinion; I think you'll all find that the majority of the population does not, in fact, live or work in London.
 

eezypeazy

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2005
Messages
626
Location
UK
What an interesting, lively and well reasoned debate this has been!

Could I just pick up on a point made earlier? It really does make sense to join your local Rail User Group. The RUG volunteer committees hold frequent meetings with TOCs and politicians and actually do manage to make regular, piecemeal improvements. Here in the Tyne Valley, our own group encouraged Northumberland County Council to build a transport interchange at Prudhoe, and Northern to stop all their trains, so that we now have (most of the day) a half-hourly stopping service in both directions. From the December 08 timetable, pressure from the RUG influenced Northern to increase the number of stopping trains at the large village of Haydon Bridge, filling what was a four-hour gap in the service!

Some of these developments will have marginal effects on rail usage, some will have a larger impact. But they all add up, which helps to build the business case for major service improvements, such as adding extra trains (not just carriages!) in the peaks - or even, line reopenings!

We even had the Leader of the County Council attend our last AGM - hey, this guy has some influence (if not a great deal of public money to spend on transport!). He can, to put it politely, knock heads together, particularly if he's given accurate information from us rail users.

So, find your local RUG, join today (there's usually a nominal fee - ours is a fiver a year), and make your voice heard!

Regards

eezypeazy
 

Metroland

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
3,212
Location
Midlands
OK, fair enough that the South has replaced a lot of old rolling stock. But look where new trains are going now; to replace some older stock in the South that is being cascaded up North. The South now have the youngest fleet, so why is more money going down there whilst the North have to make do with a smaller older fleet that looks like it will be replaced by cascaded rolling stock?

The point I'm trying to make is that we have one TOC serving a corner of the network not using all of their stock outwith peak times, whilst Northern are struggling to stop overcrowding. To me, that's not fair.

Comparing Northern with Southeastern; well, I just can't believe that there's not demand in Manchester, Sheffield, Newcastle and so on for a commuter train service. These areas will probably have lower car ownership than London suburbs and more people would, in theory, rely on public transport for their commute. How one city needs several times more trains than five or six cities does not make sense in my opinion; I think you'll all find that the majority of the population does not, in fact, live or work in London.

Well Me123, as the man says above. I think the answer is to make your voice heard and join some groups? At least Scotland seems better at campaigning for transport improvements than many in other parts, the Waverley line was given the green light really because of local pressure and the ability of the campaigners to get local politicians on side and make the argument.
 

87015

Established Member
Joined
3 Mar 2006
Messages
5,078
Location
GEML/WCML/SR
Comparing Northern with Southeastern; well, I just can't believe that there's not demand in Manchester, Sheffield, Newcastle and so on for a commuter train service. These areas will probably have lower car ownership than London suburbs and more people would, in theory, rely on public transport for their commute. How one city needs several times more trains than five or six cities does not make sense in my opinion; I think you'll all find that the majority of the population does not, in fact, live or work in London.

Except most places in the North simply don't have the commuting levels of London. Any SR terminus, and most others, will have 8, 10 or 12 coach trains wedged out and running almost 'on the block' for a good ninety minutes to two hours. I'd strongly recommend you go and visit London Bridge in the rush hour and just watch proceedings. I've nedded Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, Cardiff and Glasgow rush hours in recent years and nothing even comes close to London. Generalising, they are much shorter and concentrated onto just a few trains around 1700 whereas the, say, Euston rush hour lasts an easy two hours.

SouthEastern etc also are, IIRC, premium paying rather than subsidised franchises which will always have a large bearing on where new stuff goes.

£1.2m was mentioned earlier for the Severn Beach - is that really the best use of the funds to subsidise a loss making pacer shuttling up and down all day with a handful of people onboard outside of peak hours when it could subsidise an extra 158 centre car or two for Cardiff-Pompey which runs around weged all day?? Thats before any non-railway funding requirements are thought of...
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Well Me123, as the man says above. I think the answer is to make your voice heard and join some groups? At least Scotland seems better at campaigning for transport improvements than many in other parts, the Waverley line was given the green light really because of local pressure and the ability of the campaigners to get local politicians on side and make the argument.

I don't have a problem with Scotland, I think Scotrail are doing things well and we're expanding lines very well. Not every thing's perfect of course; it never is, but it's not bad. At the moment, we have SAK and Larkhall showing that these investments are worthwhile, and I'm sure the Waverley line won't disappoint. There's pressure on us to get more lines open as a result, but we know they'll be well used.

I just find it amazing and frustrating that in between these two extremes there's a large area served by two main TOCs (Northern and TPE) that get so little in comparison. I can't make any difference, but I'd like to. Joining a Scottish RUG wouldn't help this issue, but hopefully some money will finally go to help the North.
 

Metroland

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
3,212
Location
Midlands
Well life isn't fair and I suppose, to an extent, its going to be local people that make the biggest difference.

That said, I don't think there has ever been a time though where the individual can make so much difference, this is the age where 20,000 turned up at Liverpool Street for a jolly based on a simple internet message. We've also had a steam loco built from scratch and many lines re-opened by enthusiasts and interested parties - many of which are highly successful local tourist attractions.

A lot of people complain about things and we all like a good moan sometimes (me included!) but I suppose when push comes to shove if that same energy was put into positive causes, a lot of things could be achieved. If people have a pet cause and the groups don't exist (a web search is always a good start) I would have thought a website spelling out your message would be a good start, who knows where it may end. I should take my own advice on these things too I think!

For those that want the Skipton link putting back in, the very first stop would be here

http://www.selrap.org.uk/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=78
 
Last edited:

Royston Vasey

Established Member
Joined
14 May 2008
Messages
2,995
Location
Cambridge
Heated debate this. A couple of things I'd be interested in with regards to the London bias being suggested here. This seems to be a Northern Rail vs London franchises debate to a large degree.

- What proportion have the private companies themselves laid out to put new stock on the rails (e.g. the slam door replacements on the Southern network, Chiltern's post-priv stock, the Virgin/EMT intercity units) as opposed to the government themselves? That is to say, have these investments been made partly by private companies because they are making enough money from that market to justify this? This would be little to do with bias.

- Which TOCs pay a premium and which rely heaviest on subsidy?

The Northern advocates here may not be accounting for the fact that many services run by that TOC are not, in themselves, making money and already receive ongoing government subsidy year in year out to allow Northern to make a profit.

My point here is, First Capital Connect (i.e. we their customers) pay a premium to operate their franchise round here as the routes are busy all day long, crushingly so in the peaks (I'm not saying this is unique to London). Yes Northern serve a vast number of stations but don't those include many small and barely-used stations for which heavy subsidy is needed to serve? This indicates where the railways are making most money for most passengers. IMHO it is fitting that the premium paying franchises which suffer worst chronic overcrowding, i.e. the places where the railways are making money and are most used, should receive investments befitting the levels of use and overcrowding there.

I've travelled a number of times on the most overcrowded service in the land, the 0715 Cambridge to Kings Cross, boarding at Royston, having paid what is now £27 for a 38 minute journey and would consider it fair that the money I pay for that service to stand cheek to cheek with fellow passengers, should be ploughed back into improving that service. The cost:benefit ratio may well be lower per passenger mile for the London projects. There will always be individual projects in the North which do justify the investment however, particularly around the major conurbations.

As a northerner living in the South East, I do see both points of view and have commuted between Newcastle and Sunderland pre-Metro on packed sweatbox Pacers, but my point is that investment should be targetted at where it will benefit most passengers, and where it has the most economic payback. I'd have to say that would be on the routes into London.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
21,175
Location
0035
£1.2m was mentioned earlier for the Severn Beach - is that really the best use of the funds to subsidise a loss making pacer shuttling up and down all day with a handful of people onboard outside of peak hours when it could subsidise an extra 158 centre car or two for Cardiff-Pompey which runs around weged all day?? Thats before any non-railway funding requirements are thought of...
Well for a start the Severn Beach line is being paid for by Bristol City taxpayers and I am sure they wouldn't be too happy in paying for a service which makes one stop in the area. The money isn't for one train, it's to provide a second train running to provide more frequent services. A main problem in the Bristol area is the lack of an urban rail network such as the excellent one in Birmingham and other light rail transit in Sheffield, Manchester, Tyne/Wear, Nottingham. Even the proposals for Bristol (half-hourly services are laughable). Bristol is the most congested city in England and also the largest (or second largest - depending on who you believe) contributor to England's economy outside London.

Secondly, where local rail services are well used, there can be about £1.75 of benefit for every £1 spent wisely in local rail services.
 

whoshotjimmi

Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
340
Location
Drighlington, West Yorkshire
Heated debate this. A couple of things I'd be interested in with regards to the London bias being suggested here. This seems to be a Northern Rail vs London franchises debate to a large degree....

......As a northerner living in the South East, I do see both points of view and have commuted between Newcastle and Sunderland pre-Metro on packed sweatbox Pacers, but my point is that investment should be targetted at where it will benefit most passengers, and where it has the most economic payback. I'd have to say that would be on the routes into London.

I think we should try and ensure that this doesn't become Northern Rail vs London as that is not the main point of the thread. I am also sure that there are a number of people reading this in Lincoln/Nottingham/Derby areas who are quietly seething too!

As for routes out of London, yes, many, many journeys with many passengers. I would also agree that, regardless of investment, lines outside London will never be as busy as within it. However, we are talking about spending billions on crossrail while the likes of EMT and FTPE are screaming out for more carriages across the pennines, EMT especially. I also think that London benefits from the large number of termini. During the 60's, termini in the major Northern cities were closed and services rationalised into one (Leeds) or two (Manchester) for example whilst London retained most entry/exit points. This makes life difficult when trying to plan new services, especially since the likes of Leeds and Manchester Piccadilly run close to capacity most of the day, unlike the London termini where services are reduced outside peak hours.

Surely then, investment in a few extra carriages for EMT or FTPE would not be too big a problem compared to building another tunnel under London?
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
10,291
me123 said:
They're also getting more Electrostars and the new Javelin trains

Southeastern are getting more electrostars? I thought it was Southern (subleased to FCC)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top