Wales & Borders Franchise Consultation

[Gareth Marston]

There a parallel initiative from WG on the North East Wales Metro, which was covered in last night's BBC Wales Today.
http://gov.wales/topics/transport/public/north-east-wales-metro/?lang=en

The document is unexciting to say the least.
It lists all the minor improvements that are in the pipeline but offers nothing new beyond a few bus interchanges and grade separations on the A55.
There is the usual list of RUS-type rail projects on the drawing board, but with no hint of priorities or funding.

It does have some useful maps of transport patterns across the border, and does stress the importance of links with the north west and midlands.
Often forgotten is the reverse flow of traffic into Wales (to places like Airbus and Deeside, quite apart from the many tourists).
We might have to have a new A494 road bridge at Queensferry because the current one is in "poor structural condition".

It's very much a sop to North Walians because of all the talk of the South Wales Metro in the media at the moment. Noticeably all the old Roads to Prosperity road schemes listed all have date on them everything public transport is wishy washy- which is in line with Welsh Labour's approach to transport full stop.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One low-(infrastructure) cost could be to run a ~1.5-hourly service, crossing every train at Gogledd Llanrwst. The down side is that there'd be no room to run summer railtours down the branch without pulling a service train.

That wouldn't necessarily be a problem if the charter was required to take up the booked passenger calls.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Increasing the frequency beyond the current three-hourly will require either faster stock/ linespeed improvements or abandoning the clockface timetable (is it that relevant for such a low frequency line?).

It isn't a clockface timetable, not even nearly.

Departures from BFF are 0624, 0835, 1135, 1457, 1736, 2023.
From Llandudno you do have 0708, 1008 and 1308 but then 1620 and 1905.

A clockface timetable only has value if it is clockface all the time (or at the very least for most of the day) to avoid any need to look at the timetable. So I don't see any harm in changing those.

A departure from Llandudno around 1745-1800 and an arrival around 0815-0830 would be of more value than worrying about clockface timetabling on such an infrequent service.

 

[YorkshireBear]

The problem with tick box consultations i find is that you can very easily influence answers.

 

[gareth950]

Heres what National Express were promising in 2001 before the goalpost were moved.

Do you think Transport Wales will be as bold to go for 50 million users, £350 million investment in trains, £300 million in infrastructure and 1000 new jobs?

As someone who was too young at the time to understand and be aware of what was happening in the rail industry in the early 2000s, can you explain how on earth we went from the possibility of having that kind of proposal from National Express, to ending up with the no investment, no growth, basket case franchise for 15 years that we got from Arriva?

Aren't we supposed to be operating under a privatised railway where the best proposal wins?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

As someone who was too young at the time to understand and be aware of what was happening in the rail industry in the early 2000s, can you explain how on earth we went from the possibility of having that kind of proposal from National Express, to ending up with the no investment, no growth, basket case franchise for 15 years that we got from Arriva?

Aren't we supposed to be operating under a privatised railway where the best proposal wins?

Simple reason - "money" - in 2001 and for a few years later , Railtrack and it's successor had more or less bankrupted the railway , the Treasury took a very hard line and as many of the first generation franchises were being bailed out for all sorts of reasons, the wide ranging ideas that Morton at the SRA had were effectively kicked into touch.

There was considerable pressure to cut even base services - not just in Wales - so the Arriva deal was in some respects with the Standard Pattern timetable better than what could have transpired. Agreed that the handling of growth (which has been impressive) could have been a bit more proactive but the return of the VoG and Ebbw Vale lines were clearly welcome. The Treasury will always look at the bottom right hand figure. Period.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Simple reason - "money" - in 2001 and for a few years later , Railtrack and it's successor had more or less bankrupted the railway , the Treasury took a very hard line and as many of the first generation franchises were being bailed out for all sorts of reasons, the wide ranging ideas that Morton at the SRA had were effectively kicked into touch.

There was considerable pressure to cut even base services - not just in Wales - so the Arriva deal was in some respects with the Standard Pattern timetable better than what could have transpired. Agreed that the handling of growth (which has been impressive) could have been a bit more proactive but the return of the VoG and Ebbw Vale lines were clearly welcome. The Treasury will always look at the bottom right hand figure. Period.

It was around this time it was revealed that the same size privatized railway was consuming 5 times as much subsidy as BR did. The Treasury Privitsations Units model plan said that the subsidy should have come down! No one ever appears to have been held accountable for this fiscal cock up..........we've just had investment delayed and fares cranked up instead.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

As someone who was too young at the time to understand and be aware of what was happening in the rail industry in the early 2000s, can you explain how on earth we went from the possibility of having that kind of proposal from National Express, to ending up with the no investment, no growth, basket case franchise for 15 years that we got from Arriva?

Aren't we supposed to be operating under a privatised railway where the best proposal wins?

The NX map only has Cheltenham-Birmingham and Crewe-Liverpool as additions to the ATW map (though the services offered might have been different).
Cardiff-Birmingham became part of XC.
We are still waiting for Liverpool.
"No growth" was the mantra of the SRA around 2003 for a cluster of franchises including W&B and Northern, also XC.
The difference was that W&B got a 15-year franchise which locked it in place.
Northern (after extensions to the original 7 years) managed to escape earlier at a good time.

We'll have to see what passes muster next year by WG.
W&B is still a "poor relation" in many ways, with no profitable routes.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The NX map only has Cheltenham-Birmingham and Crewe-Liverpool as additions to the ATW map (though the services offered might have been different).
Cardiff-Birmingham became part of XC.
We are still waiting for Liverpool.
"No growth" was the mantra of the SRA around 2003 for a cluster of franchises including W&B and Northern, also XC.
The difference was that W&B got a 15-year franchise which locked it in place.
Northern (after extensions to the original 7 years) managed to escape earlier at a good time.

We'll have to see what passes muster next year by WG.
W&B is still a "poor relation" in many ways, with no profitable routes.

There was a huge amount of deceit and down right lying at the time. John Prescot had been huffing and puffing making promises galore in the late 90's and remember the publicly owned publicly accountable railway we'd been promised pre the 97 election?

There was no honesty - instead of New Labour stating that rail privatization had failed (in that costs and subsidy had gone up instead of down) and enacted genuine reform they tried to sweep the railway under the carpet. I can remember some SRA folk insisting they had run a model where rail use was going into decline as the reason for the no growth franchises - a complete lie.

No Railtrack all the first franchises coming to and end the early 2000's it was the perfect opportunity but New Labour weren't interested, they just wanted the railway headache to go away. Do Nothing Darling was appointed Transport Secretary with a brief to sit on things and we got Civil Servants blundering around pulling the levers in the signalbox.

 

[gareth950]

We'll have to see what passes muster next year by WG.
W&B is still a "poor relation" in many ways, with no profitable routes.

No profitable routes at all? What about Cardiff - Manchester and Aberystwyth - Shrewsbury - Birmingham?
ATW is making profit from the franchise: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-38721480

Thanks for the contributions re: events and circumstances leading up to the current ATW franchise award.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

No profitable routes at all? What about Cardiff - Manchester and Aberystwyth/Shrewsbury - Birmingham?
ATW is making profit from the franchise: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-38721480

There are no public figures, but modest revenues and a high cost base suggest there is no end-to-end route which covers its costs.
There is also no significant premium business traffic.
Most traffic is short-run local traffic on the valleys routes, with low fares and a one-way commuting character.
The busiest routes/longest trains in north and south wales are mostly served by GWR and Virgin, leaving only the dregs for ATW.
The operation is full of short double-manned stopping trains.
The long routes are mainly double track with manual signalling, with low utilisation (2-3tph short trains at best).
Freight continues to decline, especially on the Marches. There is hardly any left in the north.
It costs c£150m a year in subsidy.
Overall, not a pretty prospect.

 

[Llanigraham]

Working through that list:
There are no public figures, but modest revenues and a high cost base suggest there is no end-to-end route which covers its costs.
So you admit there are no figures but are able to make a pronouncement; interesting!
There is also no significant premium business traffic.
So what?
Most traffic is short-run local traffic on the valleys routes, with low fares and a one-way commuting character.
And? Why can't commuting services be profitable. And don't those commuters also go home at night?
The busiest routes/longest trains in north and south wales are mostly served by GWR and Virgin, leaving only the dregs for ATW.
And whose fault is that? Certainly not ATW's.
The operation is full of short double-manned stopping trains.
Again, and?
The long routes are mainly double track with manual signalling, with low utilisation (2-3tph short trains at best).
What about the Cambrian? Single tracked, advanced ERTMS control, highly utilised.
Freight continues to decline, especially on the Marches. There is hardly any left in the north.
That is a national problem!
It costs c£150m a year in subsidy.
Less than many others.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It costs c£150m a year in subsidy.

That's £2.50 per head of the UK population. Hardly a huge sum in Governmental terms.

50 quid a head in terms of the Welsh population, but all that highlights is why Wales is not a viable standalone country.

 

[northwichcat]

There are no public figures, but modest revenues and a high cost base suggest there is no end-to-end route which covers its costs.

Someone produced a link to a document once which the English sections combined were returning a premium to DfT but the level of the premium was minimal compared to the huge subsidy needed for the Welsh sections.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

With the exception of the basket case Island Line , the highest subsidised TOC's are Northern and ATW. Check ORR site for details.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Working through that list:
There are no public figures, but modest revenues and a high cost base suggest there is no end-to-end route which covers its costs.
So you admit there are no figures but are able to make a pronouncement; interesting!
There is also no significant premium business traffic.
So what?
Most traffic is short-run local traffic on the valleys routes, with low fares and a one-way commuting character.
And? Why can't commuting services be profitable. And don't those commuters also go home at night?
The busiest routes/longest trains in north and south wales are mostly served by GWR and Virgin, leaving only the dregs for ATW.
And whose fault is that? Certainly not ATW's.
The operation is full of short double-manned stopping trains.
Again, and?
The long routes are mainly double track with manual signalling, with low utilisation (2-3tph short trains at best).
What about the Cambrian? Single tracked, advanced ERTMS control, highly utilised.
Freight continues to decline, especially on the Marches. There is hardly any left in the north.
That is a national problem!
It costs c£150m a year in subsidy.
Less than many others.

That's £2.50 per head of the UK population. Hardly a huge sum in Governmental terms.
50 quid a head in terms of the Welsh population, but all that highlights is why Wales is not a viable standalone country.

OK, so maybe I'm being devil's advocate.
But it is how the DfT/Treasury/WG beancounters will look at it.
The ATW subsidy was last reported at 8.5p per passenger km - similar to Scotrail's, twice Northern's, but less than Merseyrail's.
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/18842/rail-finance-statistical-release-2014-15.pdf

Northern has some prospects of improving its performance (big population centres etc), but Wales hasn't.
There has also been no attempt to reduce costs in the 15 years of ATW.
The Cambrian ETCS system was gifted by NR, and 12tpd over some of it is not "efficient".
How can the 57-mile Pwllheli-Machynlleth operation be "profitable"?
This will be repeated over the Central Wales line and quite a few others.
The answer to "so what" responses is that it impacts the business case for any improvement in the service.

 

[northwichcat]

With the exception of the basket case Island Line , the highest subsidised TOC's are Northern and ATW. Check ORR site for details.

Plus the non-DfT let ones - Merseyrail, Scotrail and LO all get high subsides. LO's subsidy has probably fallen now it's more than just a few lines with brand new trains with TfL subsided fares.

 

[Llanigraham]

OK, so maybe I'm being devil's advocate.
But it is how the DfT/Treasury/WG beancounters will look at it.
The ATW subsidy was last reported at 8.5p per passenger km - similar to Scotrail's, twice Northern's, but less than Merseyrail's.
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/18842/rail-finance-statistical-release-2014-15.pdf

Northern has some prospects of improving its performance (big population centres etc), but Wales hasn't.
There has also been no attempt to reduce costs in the 15 years of ATW.
The Cambrian ETCS system was gifted by NR, and 12tpd over some of it is not "efficient".
How can the 57-mile Pwllheli-Machynlleth operation be "profitable"?
This will be repeated over the Central Wales line and quite a few others.
The answer to "so what" responses is that it impacts the business case for any improvement in the service.

The Cambrian is not just that section, but the whole route to Shrewsbury, and from a local's perception it is effective.

You appear to totally ignore the social aspect of many of the lines in Wales and appear to be happy if they all closed.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The Cambrian is not just that section, but the whole route to Shrewsbury, and from a local's perception it is effective.
You appear to totally ignore the social aspect of many of the lines in Wales and appear to be happy if they all closed.

Not at all. The principal of social support was established a long time ago.
I was responding to a query about how Aberystwyth-Shrewsbury-Birmingham and Cardiff-Manchester could not be profitable.
The costs are huge on both routes simply based on mileage/train frequency (not sure about the economics east of Shrewsbury/north of Crewe).

WG are facing an annual subsidy of £150m or so.
They will not want the future franchise to cost more than this.
It will be competing for Welsh funding along with hospitals and schools.
So any expansion has to consider the costs of the whole operation.
They will be judging 4 bids later this year, and I believe the cost structure of W&B will be a factor in this.
Adding trains currently increases the subsidy requirement.
New trains and operating methods might reduce it.
It's a difficult conundrum for the WG.

 

[Philip]

I don't think Holyhead-Cardiff should be as frequent as it is, let alone become even more frequent, but realistically I can't see the service level being reduced in the next franchise. Other services will have to work around it.

Assuming Holyhead-Cardiff remains bi-hourly and express, the suggested all-stops Holyhead-Llandudno could be bi-hourly, to make an hourly frequency between Holyhead and Llandudno Junction, with a couple of fast extras to each of Manchester and Birmingham via Stafford, along with the London trains.

Then hourly Bangor-Manchester semi-fast, with a couple originating at Holyhead as I say; the Holyhead ones could be portion workings, with the train splitting at Chester and the other half going to Birmingham via Stafford. Finally as mentioned above an hourly Llandudno-Liverpool stopper.

All in all a normal frequency of five trains per two hours between Llandudno Junction and Chester, two trains per hour between LLJ and Bangor, hourly between LLJ and Holyhead and bi-hourly between Holyhead and Chester, along with the extras.

It's hard to know what will happen to the 175s, since if they do decide to order coaching stock for the long distance services, it'll make the fleet largely redundant - completely redundant if W&B decide to go for the 185s that are soon coming off lease to work the North Wales inter-urban services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How can the 57-mile Pwllheli-Machynlleth operation be "profitable"?

Profitable no, but there are ways it could be improved. One particularly ridiculous situation is that the evening train to Aberystwyth doesn't carry a Pwllheli portion, you have to stand in the freezing cold at Mach for 40 minutes waiting for it. This is effectively throwing away valuable weekend tourist traffic. OK, it might not be viable to run another 4 coaches all the way from Brum, but you could at least time the connection more usefully so you get off one and in comes the other straight away. It'd even be an improvement if they'd just bring it off the sidings as soon as the other one has gone.

Similarly the Conwy Valley goes unmarketed with an infrequent, poorly-coordinated timetable and rotting, filthy 150s chugging their way down the branch - very much a local train for local people. Where's the Swiss approach? You could be selling it to coach parties of Japanese tourists (connecting on to the FfR) if you just ran it with properly suitable scenic stock and marketed it properly. Crikey, even the 101s drew an enthusiast crowd - but while 150s are now a bit classic they are also too ubiquitous to be interesting yet.

I doubt it'd be *profitable*, but it would be far less of a basket case.

 

[miami]

I was going to stay in wales for a weekend a couple of months ago on the blanaeu line. That fell apart when there was no Sunday afternoon service to get home.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Not at all. The principal of social support was established a long time ago.
I was responding to a query about how Aberystwyth-Shrewsbury-Birmingham and Cardiff-Manchester could not be profitable.
The costs are huge on both routes simply based on mileage/train frequency (not sure about the economics east of Shrewsbury/north of Crewe).

WG are facing an annual subsidy of £150m or so.
They will not want the future franchise to cost more than this.
It will be competing for Welsh funding along with hospitals and schools.
So any expansion has to consider the costs of the whole operation.
They will be judging 4 bids later this year, and I believe the cost structure of W&B will be a factor in this.
Adding trains currently increases the subsidy requirement.
New trains and operating methods might reduce it.
It's a difficult conundrum for the WG.

Any methodology based on dividing total cost by train KM/route KM is highly spurious and we must be on our guard as it discriminates against rural routes and favors short distance urban ones. i.e the supposed cost of the Cambrian Coast in train KM (8 trains a day 56 miles) will be about the same as the Cardiff to Ebbw Vale service (hourly 30 odd miles) but the latter has more stock operating on it and clearly has more resource allocated to it. Likewise the day in day out infrastructure maintenance costs will be higher on a line with double track sections and an hourly frequency service compared to the Cambrian Coast.

 

[PHILIPE]

Profitable no, but there are ways it could be improved. One particularly ridiculous situation is that the evening train to Aberystwyth doesn't carry a Pwllheli portion, you have to stand in the freezing cold at Mach for 40 minutes waiting for it. This is effectively throwing away valuable weekend tourist traffic. OK, it might not be viable to run another 4 coaches all the way from Brum, but you could at least time the connection more usefully so you get off one and in comes the other straight away. It'd even be an improvement if they'd just bring it off the sidings as soon as the other one has gone.

Similarly the Conwy Valley goes unmarketed with an infrequent, poorly-coordinated timetable and rotting, filthy 150s chugging their way down the branch - very much a local train for local people. Where's the Swiss approach? You could be selling it to coach parties of Japanese tourists (connecting on to the FfR) if you just ran it with properly suitable scenic stock and marketed it properly. Crikey, even the 101s drew an enthusiast crowd - but while 150s are now a bit classic they are also too ubiquitous to be interesting yet.

I doubt it'd be *profitable*, but it would be far less of a basket case.

I think the position of having to wait at Machynlleth is down to diagramming. Either have the train at the time it runs or not at all due to the unit requiring fuel before stabling at Pwllheli overnight.

 

[Rhydgaled]

the Conwy Valley goes unmarketed with an infrequent, poorly-coordinated timetable and rotting, filthy 150s chugging their way down the branch

The October 2016 issue of Modern Railways has an article on the Conwy Valley Line. Interestingly, in the context of your post, it apparently has been given an increased promotional budget and, apparently, a new line logo.

It's hard to know what will happen to the 175s, since if they do decide to order coaching stock for the long distance services, it'll make the fleet largely redundant - completely redundant if W&B decide to go for the 185s that are soon coming off lease to work the North Wales inter-urban services.

The problem with the 175s, as I see it, is the main regional expresss routes they work are getting rather too busy for 2-car units and even the 3-car sets struggle in places. You could just bang them together to make longer trains, but since they don't have UEGs that's not ideal (if I was writing the franchise agreement, I would want a ticket-checking, travel-advise-giving member of staff in both units if they did that, and would rule out in-service splitting of units without UEGs). The new Conwy Valley Line logo (page 74 of the October 2016 Modern Railways) has a train on it, and that train; wait for it; is a 175. Could be wishful thinking on the part of whoever designed it of course, but apart from not being able to make use of the unit's 100mph top speed I think it actually makes a lot of sense. The 175/0 fleet would be a reasonable choice for the Conwy Valley and Heart Of Wales lines I think (the other good choice would be 156s, but only 14 of those are up for grabs and if Wales got them at least half would be needed for Swansea-Pembrokeshire services; more in the summer). Give the tourists a nice comfortable train, not an inner-suburban unit (which 150s essentially are).

Going back to the 185s; if the 3-car 175s are inadequate then a 185 will be also, and the 175 is a higher standard of train. Plus, as far as I've been able to dig up online, the first 185s don't come off lease until Novemeber 2019, so how many will be available by the all-important 2020 PRM deadline is unclear.

I don't think Holyhead-Cardiff should be as frequent as it is, let alone become even more frequent, but realistically I can't see the service level being reduced in the next franchise. Other services will have to work around it.

Assuming Holyhead-Cardiff remains bi-hourly and express, the suggested all-stops Holyhead-Llandudno could be bi-hourly, to make an hourly frequency between Holyhead and Llandudno Junction, with a couple of fast extras to each of Manchester and Birmingham via Stafford, along with the London trains.

The current 2-hourly Holyhead-Cardiff is NOT express; only 'Gerald' is and even that has been slowed down since originally introduced (and always did use a stopping path northbound out of Cardiff). Although I propose cutting the frequency to 3-per-day, I do think they should all be express, going back to the original southbound calling pattern of 'Gerald' (except calling at Wrexham vice Crewe and allowing the franchisee the choice of whether or not to stop at Hereford in addition) and with hot food available. Thus, it could be spun as an improvement as the remaining 3 trains per day would be of a higher standard than most of the present services.

Then hourly Bangor-Manchester semi-fast, with a couple originating at Holyhead as I say; the Holyhead ones could be portion workings, with the train splitting at Chester and the other half going to Birmingham via Stafford.

That sounds a little backwards to me; since if you split at Chester while heading east you have shorter trains at the busier (England) end of the route. If we had enough suitable trains (the only design I can think of is the class 158/159 and all ATW's 158s are needed on the Cambrian-Birmingham-Wrexham/Chester curcuit) I would do it the opposite way round, with a pair of units coming out of Manchester (or Liverpool, or Birmingham) and splitting with portions for Llandudno and Holyhead, Llandudno and Caernarfon or Holyhead and Caernarfon.

 

[northwichcat]

The Cambrian is not just that section, but the whole route to Shrewsbury, and from a local's perception it is effective.

You appear to totally ignore the social aspect of many of the lines in Wales and appear to be happy if they all closed.

The railways should be considered as a network. If you close a few routes needing subsidies then a profitable connecting route could suddenly become unprofitable.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The railways should be considered as a network. If you close a few routes needing subsidies then a profitable connecting route could suddenly become unprofitable.

In the context of the Cambrian through passengers from there provide c15% of the traffic between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton with no doubt revenue allocated against it.

 

[Philip]

Going back to the 185s; if the 3-car 175s are inadequate then a 185 will be also, and the 175 is a higher standard of train. Plus, as far as I've been able to dig up online, the first 185s don't come off lease until Novemeber 2019, so how many will be available by the all-important 2020 PRM deadline is unclear.

If you're classing both the 175 and 185 as intercity trains then I'd agree that the 175 is better. However, as a commuter train (and a train in general), I'd say the 185 wins. North Wales to Manchester isn't really an intercity route, there is of course a fair bit of tourist traffic, but I'd class it as commuter due to the large number of stops. They're all getting a 'good-as-new' refurb soon and if you convert the first class bit to standard seating, then I think you have a very decent train for this route, without the possibility of a 2-car unit turning up, as at present.

 

[HH]

If you're classing both the 175 and 185 as intercity trains then I'd agree that the 175 is better. However, as a commuter train (and a train in general), I'd say the 185 wins.

On what basis? 185s are heavy and that makes them slow and expensive as commuter trains.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If you're classing both the 175 and 185 as intercity trains then I'd agree that the 175 is better. However, as a commuter train (and a train in general), I'd say the 185 wins. North Wales to Manchester isn't really an intercity route, there is of course a fair bit of tourist traffic, but I'd class it as commuter due to the large number of stops. They're all getting a 'good-as-new' refurb soon and if you convert the first class bit to standard seating, then I think you have a very decent train for this route, without the possibility of a 2-car unit turning up, as at present.

The route will soon have extra services with the Chester-Manchester Victoria-Calder Valley Northern service, probably run by 158s.
The timings and stopping pattern are not clear yet, but oddly we might end up with the W&B service being the stopper and the Northern being the fast.
But there ought to be effectively 2tph North Wales-Manchester instead of 1tph if they get the connections right at Chester.