VT S&C Diverts

[L+Y]

When was the last time VC diverted trains over the S&C? Has it happened (either in service or as ECS) any time in the last five years?

 

[TheBigD]

Deleted

 

[PHILIPE]

Preston Drivers stopped refreshing the route some time ago now. Would appear that VTWC have no intention of diverting even though DFT encouraged the diversion of trains as much as possible rather than bustitution in the event of Engineering Work as passengers would prefer to stay on a train even if the journey took longer. I think it's more of case of "Where there is a will there is a way" with a NO inserted. There could be sufficient 221s to divert some trains without having to resort to Loco dragging.

 

[Carlisle]

I suspect Virgins general crewing costs may have risen considerably since the high frequency timetable and extra/longer trains were introduced a few years back, so savings have been made on things like diversionary route knowledge, only a guess though

 

[neilb62]

Preston Drivers have sadly lost S&C route knowledge, (I'm one of them) and all VT Depots are having certain diversion routes taken from them. Not going into details as I'm still not sure who's lost what, I guess VT are hoping to reduce refresher days and eventually depot compliments.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Not going into details as I'm still not sure who's lost what, I guess VT are hoping to reduce refresher days and eventually depot compliments.

I'm guessing that this is an industry term. What does it mean?

 

[class 9]

TOCs aren't interested in diverting trains as they make money from compensation payments from Network Rail & they don't incur any route refreshing costs for train crew.
Depot compliments are the agreed number of traincrew at each depot, TOCs often want less than the ideal number & cover work with overtime, again it's down to money.

 

[The Planner]

Yes and no, schedule 4 payments for engineering works should be cost neutral as the TOC finances that through track access charges.

 

[swt_passenger]

Depot compliments are the agreed number of traincrew at each depot, TOCs often want less than the ideal number & cover work with overtime, again it's down to money.

Compliments or complements, is the point being made by RichmondCommu here, I suspect...

 

[Condor7]

With the volume of traffic on our roads and the readily available paths on the S&C plus the millions spent to reopen the line I am amazed more pressure is not put on TOC's to use it!

 

[The Planner]

How do you do that? If they don't want to run the trains you cannot really stop them unless it is a franchise breach.

 

[Carlisle]

With the volume of traffic on our roads and the readily available paths on the S&C plus the millions spent to reopen the line I am amazed more pressure is not put on TOC's to use it!

I suppose it'll not have made much financial sense to keep all traincrew refreshed on a route only used for a maximum of 2 or 3 weekends a year for diversions, maybe a new franchise could include a regular or summer only service

 

[ac6000cw]

When I was at Banbury at Easter 2015, GWR were using Freightliner drivers (between Banbury and, presumably, Paddington) as conductor drivers for the Didcot - Banbury - High Wycombe - Paddington diversions that were running over the long weekend.

So having your own drivers trained on diversionary routes isn't the only way for a TOC to do it...

 

[The Planner]

Except GWR wouldn't have paid for them and would have likely demanded it or refused the block that required it.

 

[Class 170101]

How do you do that? If they don't want to run the trains you cannot really stop them unless it is a franchise breach.

Modify the compensation regime so it becomes less of an incentive to use buses.

Pressure from Transport Focus also helps, Given the recent blocks for Crossrail there has been an additional 00:15 (Sun) Cambridge to Norwich and 07:30 (Sun) Norwich to Cambridge operating.

 

[The Planner]

There is no incentive, they get the costs of the buses covered, thats it. They actually get more by diverting as they are compensated for journey time and mileage. Make it worse for them and they will refuse extended engineering blocks entirely.

 

[Class 170101]

There is no incentive, they get the costs of the buses covered, thats it. They actually get more by diverting as they are compensated for journey time and mileage. Make it worse for them and they will refuse extended engineering blocks entirely.

Perhaps if full costs of buses weren't covered there might be an incentive. As for refusing extended blocks how do they propose to maintain / enhance the railway?

Also how about making it a franchise requirement?

 

[The Planner]

Only way it can be done is in the franchise spec and the issues just getting the EAS agreed now are more than people would imagine.