What's the greatest threat to rail?

[MidnightFlyer]

a) Domestic flights and other competition;
b) Lack of capacity (carriges);
c) Lack of capacity (actual track);
d) Lack of funding;
e) Network Fail, sorry, Rail;
f) Something else?

 

[Lampshade]

D. Easily.

Points B and C wouldn't exist if there wasn't a lack of funding. Point A is largely irrelevant because typical domestic travellers/leisure travellers will use rail anyway, only people like Alan Sugar or those who live out in the sticks tend to use domestic flights.

Network Rail, well, they can only do so much with the funding they're given, so point D again.

 

[atomicdanny]

I'll probably get shot for saying this but - The Conservatives :P, although I would have said budget cuts and the Department for Transport are the greatest threats to the railways, mainly because well both have a big effect on the lack of growth on the railways and the latter hates new trains of any sort it seems (although I think they love the pacers!)

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I'll probably get shot for saying this but - The Conservatives :P, although I would have said budget cuts and the Department for Transport are the greatest threats to the railways, mainly because well both have a big effect on the lack of growth on the railways and the latter hates new trains of any sort it seems (although I think they love the pacers!)

Labour hardly did a better job than the Tories... Lib Dems reopening scheme would pprobs have been scrapped anyway, what with the mess Labour left. Has it actually gone now? UKIP were largely the same as the Libs, reopen anything, but also carry o with airport and road expansions, which cold actually have been a good thing for rail - more people would need to get to Airport (more rail links/services), and more Parkways with the new roads

 

[atomicdanny]

Labour hardly did a better job than the Tories... Lib Dems reopening scheme would pprobs have been scrapped anyway, what with the mess Labour left. Has it actually gone now? UKIP were largely the same as the Libs, reopen anything, but also carry o with airport and road expansions, which cold actually have been a good thing for rail - more people would need to get to Airport (more rail links/services), and more Parkways with the new roads

It was supposed to be a joke hence the ":P" but I do agree though most things that the politicians say are normally cancelled anyway... (and that goes for all parties)

 

[MidnightFlyer]

It was supposed to be a joke hence the ":P" but I do agree though most things that the politicians say are normally cancelled anyway... (and that goes for all parties)

I know, just fancied a political rant

 

[222666]

B+D joint first with C runner up.

B+D:

In some places trains are too short, & certainly not enough units imo. I'd like to know what is so wrong with some of the trains we build that when we finish building them, we wait for a few years or a decade & move on to the next class? Trains today are 'modern' enough to suit peoples needs, what wasn't acceptable was the slam door stock with no central locking, so I say keep building the third gen stock!

For example, class 150 is a decent modern train but only two coach. Instead of tendering for brand new class years later, why not look at growth, & just build new carriages to fit spec of the original train. Then all you'd need to do is internal refurbs, repaints, maybe new engines, all done seperately down the line.

Starting with Turbo / Electrostars / Juniper / Desiro et al, let's re-open the projects (when needed). Surely it will be cheaper in the long run. 450 has a bigger brother in the 444, but no equivalent on LM WCML? I find this quite strange as there are too many places that need or would benefit from long distance E or DMUs. I think our government should support or supplement the trains & services we already have instead of dreaming up things like HS2. HS2 can come much, much later.

As for "C" I think we should be carefully selecting lines to re-open that would provide relief for congestion & link up more cities, even creating new cross country routes. I'm sure we all think Beeching went too far.

 

[43034 The Black Horse]

a) Domestic flights and other competition;
b) Lack of capacity (carriges);
c) Lack of capacity (actual track);
d) Lack of funding;
e) Network Fail, sorry, Rail;
f) Something else?

f) Pikeys

 

[attics26]

f) 180111 judging by last night!

 

[MidnightFlyer]

f) 180111 judging by last night!

Is that the HT set that failed at Cuffley last night. If it was

 

[attics26]

Is that the HT set that failed at Cuffley last night. If it was

sure was and as if midnight finish wasnt bad enough getting home at 0400 made it just wonderful and there is still todays shift to contemplate :roll:

 

[Aictos]

Lack of funding and too much interference by the DfT, for example FTPE wanted to introduce the 185s as 4 car trains but the DfT had to stick their oar in and said no they will only be introduced as 3 car trains.

Pacers would have been long retired to preserved railways or Iran, with additional carriages introduced to lengthen existing stock.

For example, if Reading to Redhill was electrified fully using the 3rd rail system then SWT could extend their 458s from Waterloo to Reading to Waterloo to Gatwick via Reading freeing up a number of Turbos to use elsewhere same if Reading to Basingstoke got done then SWT could use 3rd rail stock on it once again freeing up a number of Turbos and if the Waterloo to Exeter St Davids got done as well then the 159s could be cascaded to the Liverpool to Norwich route and have Desiros on the Exeter route.

I mean would the LM Liverpool to Euston route be better off with AC versions of the 444?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

sure was and as if midnight finish wasnt bad enough getting home at 0400 made it just wonderful and there is still todays shift to contemplate :roll:

When did they manage to clear it? What service were you on to get in at 0400? Unlucky

 

[LE Greys]

Lack of funding and too much interference by the DfT, for example FTPE wanted to introduce the 185s as 4 car trains but the DfT had to stick their oar in and said no they will only be introduced as 3 car trains.

Pacers would have been long retired to preserved railways or Iran, with additional carriages introduced to lengthen existing stock.

For example, if Reading to Redhill was electrified fully using the 3rd rail system then SWT could extend their 458s from Waterloo to Reading to Waterloo to Gatwick via Reading freeing up a number of Turbos to use elsewhere same if Reading to Basingstoke got done then SWT could use 3rd rail stock on it once again freeing up a number of Turbos and if the Waterloo to Exeter St Davids got done as well then the 159s could be cascaded to the Liverpool to Norwich route and have Desiros on the Exeter route.

I mean would the LM Liverpool to Euston route be better off with AC versions of the 444?

F - Bad planning from having the wrong people in charge of decision-making. Ajax's example is just one, what about the Pendys going into store from new? What about all the vacillation over whether to electrify certain lines. Put the operators in charge and give them control of the funding of new stock and new projects. Look at Chiltern, using their own money to fund Evergreen 1, 2 & 3. We need more of that kind of thinking and less hidebound DfT Rail thinking.

 

[attics26]

When did they manage to clear it? What service were you on to get in at 0400? Unlucky

2000 EC ex KX terminated Doncaster at 0127 (overheads off and NR wouldnt wait) 2100 ex KX arrived Darlo 0321 and after securing station I finally went home.

Wasnt helped by coupler being bagged on 180111 which prevented assisting loco helping out - eventually went forward 20mph to Stevenage but I forget exactly when!

 

[Oswyntail]

F - Bad planning from having the wrong people in charge of decision-making. ... Put the operators in charge and give them control of the funding of new stock and new projects. Look at Chiltern, using their own money to fund Evergreen 1, 2 & 3. We need more of that kind of thinking and less hidebound DfT Rail thinking.

Prtly agree - and with the whole low funding answer. But Chiltern are a very bad example, IMHO, as they are able to act within their own bubble. What I would say is needed is an over-arching, but rail experienced, body to specify stock developments, rather than the current very muddled system where each operator goes for their own spec. E.g. If there was a standard intra-city diesel design (rather than 180, 185, 220, 221, 222) there would be economies of scale, interoperability and a fairly assured eventual cascade. And, once that design was set, builders could concentrate on the next development. But this does need central planning.

 

[trainfanatic]

Trying to operate a high speed/high capacity rail system in the 21st Century designed and built 140 years ago

 

[yorksrob]

A certain mindset that assumes that just because the railway isn't always profitable in the classical sense, it is automatically a drain on society/not carrying anyone. This mindset has done untold damage to the railway in the past and needs to be stamped on when it rears it's head.

The flip-side of this is that the railway needs to be organised enough to be in control of it's costs to prevent the above mindset gaining credence.

 

[Drsatan]

A certain mindset that assumes that just because the railway isn't always profitable in the classical sense, it is automatically a drain on society/not carrying anyone. This mindset has done untold damage to the railway in the past and needs to be stamped on when it rears it's head.

The flip-side of this is that the railway needs to be organised enough to be in control of it's costs to prevent the above mindset gaining credence.

True: investing in road construction and road improvement works has always been classed as an investment whereas investment in railways has always been seen as a subsidy.

 

[MCR247]

The DaFT. FGW wanted to order new stock replacing HSTs, but DfT says no

 

[LE Greys]

The DaFT. FGW wanted to order new stock replacing HSTs, but DfT says no

So why the heck can't they? New Labour control-freakery seems the most likely answer. Really it ought to be a case of 'Order and be damned!'. After all, they would be spending their own money and investing directly. DfT wouldn't lose anything but their pride.