Wishlist for Upcoming Franchise Competitions

[pt_mad]

No 2 priority - extra capacity for Trent Valley which could be achieved in a number of ways 1. Scrapping the existing LM fast service and replacing it 2 services which split off Birmingham services at Northampton or keep the existing direct Weedon service and supplement it by a 'splitter' off a Northampton service.

Plan for the next West Midlands Franchise which begins October 2017 is that the Euston - Crewe Trent Valley service will go direct from Stafford - Crewe throughout the day and therefore will be able to be formed of longer 8 car trains (or possibly even capacity for 12 car trains if desired). Its all in the documents below. This is the plan for whoever wins the new franchise and is the minimum that will be offered.

(The local stations around Stoke on Trent and Stoke itself will instead be served by an hourly Birmingham New Street - Crewe via Wolverhampton stopping service).

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/west-midlands-franchise-competition-invitation-to-tender

Also note at the last timetable change (December just gone), the 0521 London Midland service from Crewe - Euston (calls Nuneaton at 0631) is now formed of 8 coaches from Crewe rather than the previous 4.

 

[The Ham]

A two fold question, given the mess with DMU cascades due to lack of progress with electrification; how quickly could new DMU's be ordered and delivered? With the follow up being, would there be enough capacity from manufacturers to deliver an order prior to 2020?

 

[LLivery]

Why not Wandsworth Road as well ? It seems odd to stop at one but not the other. Also, the Sectional Appendix shows a 4 car limit. So you would limit train length along the whole route. We did run them once but it was very short term.



Which route and stations ?



Sevenoaks is coming I believe but Stone and Greenhithe I couldn't support. Dartford is a natural termination point for services so serves as a good zone boundary. It's also, in part, due to Local buses using Oyster but not the train.

I would like to see more SE services going via the Beckenham Spur as I think that side could be served by Charing Cross better and it may save some cross London transfers.

Pipe dreams :

Via Linford Street and into Waterloo.

New Station on Stewarts Lane for when Battersea opens. Maybe a Vic popper or services going Via Stewarts Lane and then down the Atlantics for maybe Clapham, Wandsworth, Denmark Hill, Bromley South etc.

GoVia not to get it.

Because Clapham High St is much busier than Wandsworth Rd and is a interchange for the Northern line. As for platform length, could it not be lengthened from 5 to 8 cars?

Never thought about the exact stations, but somewhere like Ashford or Ramsgate via Canterbury. Then key stations through to Redhill and Gatwick. If theres no business case then fair enough.

Stone Crossing and Greenhithe is mainly down to Bluewater shopping centre, which TfL buses do indeed serve. In fact I say it should go out to Gravesend and maybe Ebbsfleet, as Oyster goes out to Grays across the river.

 

[JamesT]

Sorry, have I read that right, you want to reduce train lengths and amount of seats on a train to use as crowd busters? Surely the very idea of 'crowd busting' would be to use longer trains with more seats. Or have I not had enough tea this morning to understand this idea of fewer seats and train lengths as a means of improving capacity

I believe the idea is most trains are a standard 5 coaches, rather than the mix of 4 and 5. But through the core, you tack on a 3 coach unit to give you a 8 coach unit where demand requires.

 

[FordFocus]

A two fold question, given the mess with DMU cascades due to lack of progress with electrification; how quickly could new DMU's be ordered and delivered? With the follow up being, would there be enough capacity from manufacturers to deliver an order prior to 2020?

Is there a spare production line at Derby once the 387 have finished delivery? The forum rumours suggest that a 172 can now have an EU emissions friendly engine.

 

[route:oxford]

The forum rumours suggest that a 172 can now have an EU emissions friendly engine.

They won't be delivered until post Brexit anyway.

 

[Clip]

I believe the idea is most trains are a standard 5 coaches, rather than the mix of 4 and 5. But through the core, you tack on a 3 coach unit to give you a 8 coach unit where demand requires.

Still a waste.

 

[Clansman]

I'd like to think by the time the Scotrail franchise comes around again in 2025...

• There will be plans drawn up to replace the 318/320/334s in a mass order of fixed formation 6-car Desiros - similar to the 700s.
  
• The replacing of the 156/158s initially with Turbostars whilst plans for new modern DEMUs can be drawn up and ordered for the following franchise.
  
• A draft publication for new Intercity rolling stock to replace the HSTs, which in my opinion should be formed of at least 5 x Mk5 coaches sandwiched between purpose built bi-mode locomotives with high-powered engines with efficient enough performance to cope with the HML.
  
• Amid Scotrail plans to extend services to Berwick upon Tweed there could be scope to extend 2 x Inverness and Aberdeen (to Edinburgh) Intercity services to Newcastle during peaks to improve connectivity, should new Intercity stock be procured.
  
• Half hourly peak time services on key routes between;
  -Glasgow/Edinburgh to Perth/Dundee
  -Montrose/Insch to Aberdeen
  -Kingussie/Ardgay to Inverness

One can only hope...

 

[The Ham]

Sorry, have I read that right, you want to reduce train lengths and amount of seats on a train to use as crowd busters? Surely the very idea of 'crowd busting' would be to use longer trains with more seats. Or have I not had enough tea this morning to understand this idea of fewer seats and train lengths as a means of improving capacity

(sorry noted that the last section of my post should have read 39 x FIVE coach units rather than the 4 stated, I have corrected this in my original post)

In partnership with running 8 coach trains (80x's with circa 550 seats) on the Manchester to South Coast services or :

One option could be make the 222's so that they were too long to run in service as pairs of units (say 8 coaches or longer). That way the would be no need to worry about a 222 and a 220/221 turning up to run in service together.

With 89 central coaches you could have 5*10 coach units and 7*9 coach units.

The 10 coach units could cover the current HST services with the 9 coach units covering those services which are current run by double units (comparable to a pair of 221's in terms of seating capacity). That would mean that 14 diagrams which aren't currently run in pairs could be. That would probably be enough to allow all the 220's to be run in pairs on services that run north of Reading and Plymouth but south of York with all other services through the core being a minimum of a single 221.

The plan was to reform 2/3 of the 22x fleet so that they were all 5 coach trains (250 seats), then use the other 1/3 of the 22x (now standard class only 3 coach units) to run in pairs with the 5 coach units over the core (so 400 seats minimum through the core and 250 everywhere else as a minimum rather than 200 or 250 for most services with a very few 400, 450 or 500 depending on pot luck).

In doing so the minimum length of train that is timetables would be 5 coaches, however through the core all units would be 8 coaches long, but with some very long (8 coach 80x's or 9/10 coach 222's) providing extra capacity over and above this minimum.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

West Coast Partnership prospectus published by DfT today: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...t_data/file/582779/west-coast-partnership.pdf
It's all very generic, but majors on quality and realising the benefits from HS2 for West Coast passengers.
There's nothing about specific service levels or rolling stock types.
The "Stephenson" route will be managed similarly to current franchises (ie revenue/cost risk with the franchisee), but the HS2 route will be a management contract with revenue/cost risk staying with DfT.

Different risk allocations will be needed at different stages of the Partnership.

Prior to introduction of HS2 services:
• The Department will seek to ensure that any revenue risk sharing is commensurate with the market’s ability to bear it, and employ a robust revenue sharing and support mechanism designed to incentivise market growth, passenger satisfaction and ensure financial stability. As such, the Department is considering a full range of revenue share and support mechanisms to deliver the most appropriate risk allocation to achieve these aims
• The Partnership will have cost risk in respect of the ICWC operations prior to the launch of HS2 services
• It is envisaged that standard compensation mechanisms will be used in relation to track possessions. A form of alliance may be considered between Network Rail and the operator, to align incentives, improve efficiency and minimise the impact of track possessions

HS2 Shadow Operator:
• Cost risk will be transferred to the Partnership to the extent appropriate as part of the tender process, with other costs being agreed as part of an annual review process in line with an appropriate contractual mechanism

HS2 launched and operational:
• Revenue and operating costs are not known at this time and so revenue and cost risk will not generally be transferred to the Partnership
• It is anticipated that there will be a performance-based management contract with incentive mechanisms in place for the period after HS2 services are launched

Profits
• There will be a proportionate profit-sharing mechanism

The brochure has been nicely illustrated.
I noted photos of Birmingham, Windermere (I think), Edinburgh, Chester, Liverpool and Llandudno.
There's even a thumbnail of LMS 6229 Duchess of Hamilton.

 

[JamesT]

Looks like a 10-12 year Franchise?
Starts 2019, talks about 3-5 years after HS2 opens in 2026.

 

[The Ham]

A slight change to my suggestion, the extra Sunday stopping service from Salisbury should run up to Woking and then down to Haslemere and then back again.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Number 1. a new fleet of regional express units, with a layout similar to class 175s but with unit-end gangways (UEGs). Ideally, they would be available in diesel, OHLE and 3rd rail variants (prefrably all three at once as a tri-mode unit), but just a DMU would do. These would either be 5-car units for SWT's Waterloo-Exeter route, 5-car units for Cardiff-Portsmouth or 2/3-car units for Liverpool-Norwich (with portion for Cambridge or Ipswich). Also have SWT swap their 2-car 158s (or some of them, at least) for class 166/165 units from GWR. The 166s/165s would then be used on the figure-of-six and the 158s on Cardiff-Portsmouth.

As for my desires for the next Wales & Borders franchise (my area):

1. fit 175s with UEGs, cascade 158s to the franchise or obtain more LHCS to make up Swansea-Manchester services to 5-car (change at Swansea for Carmarthen/Pembrokeshire)
2. use 158s or 175s to introduce a new hourly express service between Cardiff and Carmarthen (maintaining through services given Manchesters terminate at Swansea), extending to Milford Haven every 2hrs (except one service to Fishguard instead as the boat train) boosting the Milford branch to hourly
3. replace 150s on Pembrokeshire, Heart Of Wales and Conwy Valley services with 156s, 2-car 153s (reformed 155s) or 2-car 175s (the latter only if you aren't equipping them with UEGs) and increase Carmarthen-Swansea services to half-hourly with one every two hours extending to Fishguard (except when the boat train runs).
4. Cut the Birmingham-Shrewsbury-Wrexham-Chester-North Wales service back to Birmingham-Wrexham/Chester only, to concentrate the ERTMS 158s on hourly Aberystwyth-Birmingham services (with a portion alternating for Pwllheli and Wrexham/Chester).

• Build Bangor-Caernarfon line
• 3 daily express services (with buffet car serving hot food) each way between Holyhead and Cardiff
• all other Holyhead-Cardiff services split at Chester, allowing Holyhead, Llandundo and Caernarfon services to run through to Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham (via Crewe) and/or London
• franchise to be more approachable with comments, full public consultions on their timetable changes etc. (getting a reply to letters sent to Arriva can be like getting blood out of a stone, that needs sorting out)
• and much more, probably, but this post is long enough already

I would like no franchise requirements that are likely to cause prolonged industrial action

I agree, good idea. Would mandatory driver-open, guard close operation of doors, plus penalties for failling to provide a customer service person (selling/checking tickets, providing connection advice etc.) on routes which are currently driver-only operated please the unions?

I've said it before on here but given that everywhere south of Whitchurch is in Shropshire, with one of the constituents of 'West Midlands Rail' being Shropshire, I had imagined an hourly Shrewsbury to Crewe stopper being a part of the WM franchise. What with the stopper running entirely in England and there being a LM/WM depot at each end, it makes perfect sense to me. Wasn't in the WM ITT though and the whole ATW border change thing seems to have died away, so I can't see it happening.

I too think that Whitchurch/Nantwich services belong in an English franchise. Personally, I think it should be as close as possible to an hourly Crewe-Shrewsbury/Birmingham service, with calls at the smaller stations every two hours. That would speed up the Manchester-Swansea services and make Nantwich and Whitchurch timetables closer to clockface, at the cost of passengers from Whitchurch and Nantwich having to change to get beyond Crewe, but possibly gaining through links to or from Birmingham (vice Cardiff) at the southern end.

A two fold question, given the mess with DMU cascades due to lack of progress with electrification; how quickly could new DMU's be ordered and delivered? With the follow up being, would there be enough capacity from manufacturers to deliver an order prior to 2020?

If there is a manufacturer with a design ready and an available production line then it might just be possible if ordered very soon, but production of the CAF and Stadler DMUs seems to take us to almost 2020 anyway, so I doubt either of those designs can be used. If I recall correctly the delivery dates of new fleets in the Jan 2017 Modern Railways looked like the only prospect of tagging onto an existing order for non-EMU stock before 2020 is the mrk5 coaches. So, is there anyone who could build DMUs but doesn't currently have orders for any?

Is there a spare production line at Derby once the 387 have finished delivery? The forum rumours suggest that a 172 can now have an EU emissions friendly engine.

Interesting development if true, and if there is a production line spare. Could a Turbostar with end-doors and UEGs be produced or is the design locked into the suburban door arangment?

 

[Roast Veg]

Bombadier are not keen to produce any diesel units, I assume that as far as they're concerned the Turbostar design should be wrapped up just like the Electrostar. Most likely the 387 line will be turned into another Aventra assembly line.

 

[Geogregor]

For Southeastern:

4. Real investment in London stations, re-open boarded up buildings, new CISs, benches etc.

This is really needed as some stations feel like a dump.

For example Hither Green, it is leaking left right and centre. The whole platform canopies should be replaced.

Also the foot bridges, they feel like they might collapse any day. Wobbly, broken steps etc.

The whole station looks like it wasn't touches since 1960s (at best, probably for longer) Step free access would be welcome but admittedly difficult to implement.

 

[yorksrob]

This is really needed as some stations feel like a dump.

For example Hither Green, it is leaking left right and centre. The whole platform canopies should be replaced.

Also the foot bridges, they feel like they might collapse any day. Wobbly, broken steps etc.

The whole station looks like it wasn't touches since 1960s (at best, probably for longer) Step free access would be welcome but admittedly difficult to implement.

At least Hither Green has ample canopy provision. On my station when it rains, not everyone can fit in the bus shelter !

 

[ChrisHogan]

This is really needed as some stations feel like a dump.

For example Hither Green, it is leaking left right and centre. The whole platform canopies should be replaced.

Also the foot bridges, they feel like they might collapse any day. Wobbly, broken steps etc.

The whole station looks like it wasn't touches since 1960s (at best, probably for longer) Step free access would be welcome but admittedly difficult to implement.

Assuming standard industry station leases and Station Access Conditions apply to South Eastern, this, of course, is a Network Rail responsibility not the TOC. How much money NRIL has to spend on station renewals depends on the Periodic Review so don't hold your breath!

 

[ChrisHogan]

Bombadier are not keen to produce any diesel units, I assume that as far as they're concerned the Turbostar design should be wrapped up just like the Electrostar. Most likely the 387 line will be turned into another Aventra assembly line.

With electrification likely to be off the agenda for some time other than some of the already announced schemes, Bombadier might realise soon that the future is probably back in diesels or hybrids. There is likely to be a surplus of emus in the early 2020s at a time when replacement of many Sprinters is likely to be necessary with no prospect of their routes being wholly electrified.