Arriva drops out of Welsh rail franchise bid

[Mike Storey]

The line to Whitby is another one that has been kept open by school traffic  ,buses cant reach many of the stations so the train is the answer and probably a much more pleasant way to travel .

 

That's for sure, but I recall when we lived in Pickering in the 90's, NYCC changed the contract to bussing, to save money (as ever for them) but the parents and schools kicked up so much fuss, that the kids were back on the trains within the year.

[caradoc]

The line to Whitby is another one that has been kept open by school traffic  ,buses cant reach many of the stations so the train is the answer and probably a much more pleasant way to travel .

 

Unless you are an adult en route to the North Yorkshire Moors Railway unfortunate enough to be on the school train !

[wombatofludham]

Sorry, I wasn’t replying to anyone in particular, just a general impression I’d got from the thread in general, possibly erroneously.

 

I do think the recent new franchises with lots of brand new stock make it less likely that the Welsh one will also have brand new. The fact that there will now be stock available for cascading, plus the ROSCOs realising that they are overpricing old stock when new stock is currently so (comparatively) cheap means that older stock leasing will have to come down in price.

There has been a period where the combination of lack of stock and the low extra leasing cost of new stock has meant that it has been worth bidders paying a little extra and gaining the points on the quality side of the bid. Now ROSCOs are going to have to reduce prices for older stock or risk having earning nothing and the extra ‘new stock’ quality points are going to cost more

​My apologies in turn for going the "full Wombat".

 

​I think you are right, the chances of the Welsh franchise getting new stock is less than Anglia where the Essex and Cambridgeshire commuters provide a good lucrative revenue stream to fund a comprehensive renewal across the network.  An uplift in capacity would be good and the 319 hybrid programme could offer some scope for use on the North Wales to Manchester Airport and Liverpool services allowing other units to be moved around.  In fact until the new franchisee has worked out what to do for the Cardiff Valleys (light, intermediate or heavy rail? Spin the wheel and see where the ball falls...) it would make more sense to make do with cascaded units if they can get them.

 

The school kids travelling to Barmouth don't just contribute to the line's revenue they prevented the route from being closed.

 

One of the very few public enquiries (maybe the only one), I believe around 1970, that recommended against closure on the grounds of hardship, the only grounds on which they are allowed to do so.

 

Fairbourne to Barmouth takes a matter of minutes, the same journey by bus a matter of hours.

 

Amazingly Fairbourne is a very busy station given the resident population size.  In the winter the old farts (and Fairbourne is the undertaker's waiting room, a living mortuary) can use their bus passes on the train and given the Gwynedd politburo have cut our bus service to a token daytime two hourly service to Dolgellau the train is actually the most frequent and most practical public transport option.  I doubt there are many places that can say that - the bus service is as good as useless to be honest.

 

​Mind you I do like to rub it in with relatives who live in Aldridge, near Walsall and the site of several abortive attempts to re-open the train service, that I have a more frequent train service to Birmingham than they have.

[John_Hughes]

Barmouth Junction to Ruabon - another line that should never have been closed, of course. The passenger number figures produced by BR were, to put it bluntly, made up for the purpose, but couldn't be challenged at the Enquiry as the only ground for challenging the closure was 'hardship' - and that, the Enquiry was told, could easily be alleviated by the wonderful new bus services that would be provided - and which in the event would just as suddenly vanish within a few months.

 

All water under Barmouth Viaduct now, of course.

[D854_Tiger]

Barmouth Junction to Ruabon - another line that should never have been closed, of course. The passenger number figures produced by BR were, to put it bluntly, made up for the purpose, but couldn't be challenged at the Enquiry as the only ground for challenging the closure was 'hardship' - and that, the Enquiry was told, could easily be alleviated by the wonderful new bus services that would be provided - and which in the event would just as suddenly vanish within a few months.

 

All water under Barmouth Viaduct now, of course.

 

These inquires always were designed to have no teeth and, even if they could have made a difference, arrived upon the scene rather too late to stop the worst of Beeching.

 

However, as it turned out and inadvertently, the inquiry process did end up making a huge difference to BR's strategy towards closing down services, because they were expensive to hold and, as BR found out to their horror, no guarantee of success.

 

The Cambrian Coast inquiry was a case of remote civil service incompetence, as any fool could have worked out the hardship that would entail had they bothered to go and find out, but it was later inquires that forced BR to think again about their whole closure process.

 

They went through a bitter and costly inquiry over the HoW and won it, only to find its outcome being trumped by Welsh politics and marginal constituencies.

 

But I believe the real game changer was the North Warwickshire Line inquiry, where a determined and wealthy local community, with access to the best legal resources, took them on and basically had the civil servants for breakfast, getting the whole thing thrown out for irregularities on BR's part, at the High Court.

 

BR realised they simply didn't have the money, the time or the right skill-set of resources to go up against that kind of thing and after that pretty much gave up.

 

Their alternative strategy wasn't much better, that of running down services (often to a parliamentary level), but at least it meant doubtfull services survived, weren't lost forever and the opportunity remained for other organisations to step in eventually with funding for improvements.

[Mike Storey]

These inquires always were designed to have no teeth and, even if they could have made a difference, arrived upon the scene rather too late to stop the worst of Beeching.

 

However, as it turned out and inadvertently, the inquiry process did end up making a huge difference to BR's strategy towards closing down services, because they were expensive to hold and, as BR found out to their horror, no guarantee of success.

 

The Cambrian Coast inquiry was a case of remote civil service incompetence, as any fool could have worked out the hardship that would entail had they bothered to go and find out, but it was later inquires that forced BR to think again about their whole closure process.

 

They went through a bitter and costly inquiry over the HoW and won it, only to find its outcome being trumped by Welsh politics and marginal constituencies.

 

But I believe the real game changer was the North Warwickshire Line inquiry, where a determined and wealthy local community, with access to the best legal resources, took them on and basically had the civil servants for breakfast, getting the whole thing thrown out for irregularities on BR's part, at the High Court.

 

BR realised they simply didn't have the money, the time or the right skill-set of resources to go up against that kind of thing and after that pretty much gave up.

 

Their alternative strategy wasn't much better, that of running down services (often to a parliamentary level), but at least it meant doubtfull services survived, weren't lost forever and the opportunity remained for other organisations to step in eventually with funding for improvements.

 

Completely agree, and would add that the "hardship" issue led to some other bizarre decisions. Whitby was a very good example, where three lines were to be pared down to one, but they kept open the one with the least probable commercial future and a whole host of infrastructure problems ahead. Whilst it is most excellent that that line still exists, it is crazy that the more obvious Malton link is still broken, only partially filled by the NYMR. The Scarborough route also had more potential, but I could at least see the infrastructure and operational problems with continuing that line.

 

Still, we must be thankful that whatever processes did exist, we still have the Cambrian route and the Heart of Wales, but whatever idiot decided that Caernarfon no longer needed a train service, or that no-one would want to travel from the Welsh north coast conurbations through to the Welsh west coast, should have been flogged repeatedly with a wet leak, or similar..... At least the Ffestiniog/WHR have restored a semblance of public transport to the area, but only a semblance.

[D854_Tiger]

Completely agree, and would add that the "hardship" issue led to some other bizarre decisions. Whitby was a very good example, where three lines were to be pared down to one, but they kept open the one with the least probable commercial future and a whole host of infrastructure problems ahead. Whilst it is most excellent that that line still exists, it is crazy that the more obvious Malton link is still broken, only partially filled by the NYMR. The Scarborough route also had more potential, but I could at least see the infrastructure and operational problems with continuing that line.

 

Still, we must be thankful that whatever processes did exist, we still have the Cambrian route and the Heart of Wales, but whatever idiot decided that Caernarfon no longer needed a train service, or that no-one would want to travel from the Welsh north coast conurbations through to the Welsh west coast, should have been flogged repeatedly with a wet leak, or similar..... At least the Ffestiniog/WHR have restored a semblance of public transport to the area, but only a semblance.

 

 

It was an age when railways were seen as an outdated 19th century technology, here in the UK at least, though you do wonder if BR's decision to hang onto steam, for as long as they did, helped play into that perception.

 

When I listen to predictions today of how in a few short years no one will have a job because of robots, I always think back to past predictions of the future and future needs and realise most of them turned out to be utterly bizarre.

 

Then consider how what have turned out to be some of the most important inventions, of recent years, almost happened by accident, in ways no one saw coming, least of all the inventors.

 

 

[Coryton]

. At least the Ffestiniog/WHR have restored a semblance of public transport to the area, but only a semblance.

 

I'd agree that they're not really public transport in the usual sense of the word (expensive and infrequent) but as an "experience" (which is of course all they are trying to be) they are both something rather special, especially the WHR.

 

I do find it very strange that a railway line could be shut down on the grounds that there was an alternative bus service without any obligation being placed for that bus service to continue.

 

I'm not sure what the solution would have been though. You couldn't suddenly tell bus operators that they would have to go through a public enquiry to stop their service because the trains were no longer there.

 

Perhaps BR should have been required to replace the bus service if it ever dropped below a certain level or to successfully make the case that it was no longer required?

[wombatofludham]

Barmouth Junction to Ruabon - another line that should never have been closed, of course. The passenger number figures produced by BR were, to put it bluntly, made up for the purpose, but couldn't be challenged at the Enquiry as the only ground for challenging the closure was 'hardship' - and that, the Enquiry was told, could easily be alleviated by the wonderful new bus services that would be provided - and which in the event would just as suddenly vanish within a few months.

 

All water under Barmouth Viaduct now, of course.

 

Actually the bus service, far from vanishing is now the T3 route of Traws Cymru, running from Ruabon to Barmouth with brand new vehicles.  However, I do agree that the line should never have closed and had it lasted just a couple more years probably wouldn't have.  It's not difficult to imagine the line having survived becoming in the 1990s radio signalled like the Cambrian and providing services to Manchester from mid-Wales.

 

Having spoken to some of the remaining staff who worked the line the consistent message they give is the "surveys" were perfunctory at best and suspiciously timed to avoid the times when the schools trains and holiday traffic used the route.

[lmsforever]

When the GC closed we were promised bus links toBrackley Bicester etc but they disappeared within weeks ,Bicester is now accessible only because of the shopping village at Bicester and is not heavily used as most commute by car.Agree about Whitby the line to Middlesborough is not exactly a route to a place that people would want to go ,York is the magnet and would hope one day access is regained but we have a long wait I think.

[corneliuslundie]

One thing i find worrying is the cost of any improvements. The projected bill of umpteen million for Bow Street reopening, albeit including a carpark, if given to a preserved railway would reopen miles of line. How have we got to the position where it is so expensive to do so little?

Jonathan

[D854_Tiger]

One thing i find worrying is the cost of any improvements. The projected bill of umpteen million for Bow Street reopening, albeit including a carpark, if given to a preserved railway would reopen miles of line. How have we got to the position where it is so expensive to do so little?

Jonathan

 

It's down to group standards, or whatever they're called nowadays, so, more to the point, how do we arrive at that position whilst not imposing those same standards on other modes.

 

I believe the Cambrian used to have halts without any lighting and, once trains with automatic doors were introduced, the trains were not allowed to stop after dark,.

 

So the alternative was the bus, after dark, with no guarantee of street lighting at the bus stop and, indeed, no guarantee of so much as a pavement.

 

I never did understand how that was supposed to be safer.

[Coryton]

It's down to group standards, or whatever they're called nowadays, so, more to the point, how do we arrive at that position whilst not imposing those same standards on other modes.

 

I believe the Cambrian used to have halts without any lighting and, once trains with automatic doors were introduced, the trains were not allowed to stop after dark,.

 

So the alternative was the bus, after dark, with no guarantee of street lighting at the bus stop and, indeed, no guarantee of so much as a pavement.

 

I never did understand how that was supposed to be safer.

 

I do find it fascinating to consider all the time, effort and money that goes into keeping me safe when I travel by train, then as soon as I leave the station I may have to get across a busy road with no proper crossing.

 

Horsham station used to deliver you straight into an access road...admittedly fairly slowly moving vehicles...but why no zebra crossing?

 

Then there was the time a Network Rail van was parked entirely on the pavement next to the steps to Coryton station, forcing anyone turning up for the next train to miss it while waiting for the van to move, or to walk into a very busy road. I'm sure anyone in control of a Network Rail van has had plenty of safety training...but perhaps all aimed at inside the railway fence?

 

There are plenty of bus stops on double carriageways that are a motorway in all but name, with the only protection for a passenger who needs to be on the opposite side to the bus stop being a small sign warning drivers of pedestrians crossing. We have very, very, different standards for safety on the railways and on roads.

Edited November 9, 2017 by Coryton

[RfDforever]

 

 

There are plenty of bus stops on double carriageways that are a motorway in all but name, with the only protection for a passenger who needs to be on the opposite side to the bus stop being a small sign warning drivers of pedestrians crossing. We have very, very, different standards for safety on the railways and on roads.

There's a good example near my home - though not involving a bus stop. When the Northampton-Blisworth line (alternative route to Euston; resignalled and work started on electrification as part of the LM modernisation but then closed) was open, there was a foot crossing W of the M1. To cross the line, you went through a 'kissing gate' looked up and down and crossed if no train was coming.

The alignment was used to re-align the A43; it's now a dual carriage at the National speed limit.

Presumably because the footpath was a right-of-way the highways people have coped with this by putting up a red triangle sign with "Pedestrians Crossing" each side of the site; but. nothing else.

I don't think it's ever possible to cross safely but you mustn't delay road traffic with pedestrians.

Meanwhile, not far away, two (lightly used) foot crossings across the WCML (near Blisworth) were replaced by footbridges (cost £3/4m each, it's said).

Different standards.

[Coryton]

There's a good example near my home - though not involving a bus stop. When the Northampton-Blisworth line (alternative route to Euston; resignalled and work started on electrification as part of the LM modernisation but then closed) was open, there was a foot crossing W of the M1. To cross the line, you went through a 'kissing gate' looked up and down and crossed if no train was coming.

The alignment was used to re-align the A43; it's now a dual carriage at the National speed limit.

Presumably because the footpath was a right-of-way the highways people have coped with this by putting up a red triangle sign with "Pedestrians Crossing" each side of the site; but. nothing else.

I don't think it's ever possible to cross safely but you mustn't delay road traffic with pedestrians.

Meanwhile, not far away, two (lightly used) foot crossings across the WCML (near Blisworth) were replaced by footbridges (cost £3/4m each, it's said).

Different standards.

 

Very much so.

 

If - as is often said - motorists more cover all the costs of road provision through fuel taxes etc., you'd think there'd be money for footbridges for rights of way, wouldn't you?

 

I lived in a village where the church was the opposite side of a dual carriageway. The only safe way to get there was to drive across.

 

I think it's not so much that railways have different standards to roads asthat railways have to keep to general modern safety standards and roads don't.

[BG John]

Very much so.

 

If - as is often said - motorists more cover all the costs of road provision through fuel taxes etc., you'd think there'd be money for footbridges for rights of way, wouldn't you?

Not a good idea for people who are scared of heights.

[Mike Storey]

One thing i find worrying is the cost of any improvements. The projected bill of umpteen million for Bow Street reopening, albeit including a carpark, if given to a preserved railway would reopen miles of line. How have we got to the position where it is so expensive to do so little?

Jonathan

 

I understand the sentiment but you must face the reality. I attach a link to the original cost/benefit analysis (yeah, I know I am sad, but this was a very interesting little exercise for a retired old ex-sponsor, who used to write these things before breakfast) by Crapita: http://www.tracc.gov.uk/uploads/media/Carno_Bow_St_May_2011_Revison_D_01.pdf See, if you walk through particularly the detailed costings used in the appendices. I would have asked for a fking refund.

 

In essence, the scheme is really a road improvement scheme, with a humungous new roundabout, a massive flood prevention scheme (you will note a new flood reservoir on the TraCC plans) and the requirement to purchase, not just a farmer's field, but an entire, detached house and gardens, to make it work. None of that was included in the original business case as written by Crapita. The fact that they showed no provisional sums in their estimate forming the basis of their report (for the 100 car park space version) and just used a 50% optimism bias, is verging on criminal. They also only estimated for a 4 car platform despite their consultation appendix showing that a 6 car platform would be vital. Not that their figures for some of the key elements of works are those that I recognise, even as at 2010, the cost period used when they wrote it.

 

More fundamentally, public access to any further detailed study seems to be missing. The 2010 report estimated £2m for the 100 car park space version, but also excluded all other significant aspects as stated above. It is now £6.5 million, and I have no access to any report which shows whether that is justified. But, HMG, via our DfT champions, have designated and authorised £4m this August towards it, from their £20m station improvements fund, provided the Welsh Assembly find the rest. You would have thought you could find a celebration of this fact somewhere on the Welsh Assembly's or Ceredigion's or TraCC's websites. Will you bu**er. The last entries of any substance are from 2016. Ceredigion just refers to funding authorised for a detailed design, as of this year.

 

Interestingly, the business case does allow for road safety improvements under its narrative, but I can see no valuation of that in the BCR. Much as many of you suspect, you can say it, but you cannot include it in the numbers.

 

But, if the demand forecast used by the BCR report still holds true (and given they used the PDFH, the standard bible, I have little evidence to doubt it) the Business Case now, at the revised capital cost, must be negative. So something has changed, to qualify for Westminster funding, but I cannot find out what it is, given that my wife's dog rescue TV programme has now finished....

[John_Hughes]

Actually the bus service, far from vanishing is now the T3 route of Traws Cymru, running from Ruabon to Barmouth with brand new vehicles.  However, I do agree that the line should never have closed and had it lasted just a couple more years probably wouldn't have.  It's not difficult to imagine the line having survived becoming in the 1990s radio signalled like the Cambrian and providing services to Manchester from mid-Wales.

 

Having spoken to some of the remaining staff who worked the line the consistent message they give is the "surveys" were perfunctory at best and suspiciously timed to avoid the times when the schools trains and holiday traffic used the route.

 

Yes, I agree that the T3 - like the other Traws services - is a pretty decent one, but there were long years in between the line's closure and the arrival of something decent, rather than Crosville's slow and unwieldy double-deckers (though they did give a spectacular view from the top deck, and it would be nice to have open-topped buses back there for the summer).

 

But offered the choice between a fast modern train, with its wifi and trolley service, and the bus queueing to get through the heavy summer Llangollen traffic, I know which I'd prefer!

[corneliuslundie]

An interesting local example of "standards application" near here which has no direct application to the railway but illustrates current thinking relates to the local mobile library.

The road from Newtown to Welshpool is on both the north-south and east-west trunk routes, but is two lane. The mobile library used to pull into the end of a lane which serves a couple of houses. Fine for the residents, as they could walk down the lane to the library unmolested except by a few suicidal game birds in season. It was decided for some reason that this was not safe so now the library stops a couple of hundred yards down the road in a lay-bye, no-where near any houses, but there is no footpath. So our friend does not use the mobile library any more. But of course safety "rules" have been followed.

Many thanks for the commentary on the Bow Street project. Very useful.

There has also been a long running campaign to re-open the station at Carno. This has considerable local support, but Powys County Council seems to take every opportunity to spend more money on consultants and redesign rather than actually supporting re-opening. I don't know all the figures but I suspect that the money spent over the years by Powys (and perforce by others) would have paid for the re-opening when the campaign first started.

That said, I am aware that re-opening Bow Street, Carno and Abermule (which has grown from a couple of houses when the station closed to a large dormitory area for the adjacent towns, would wreck the current timetable and require extra stock to provide the current frequency - and probably an extra passing loop somewhere - or even as the Carno campaigners have suggested, moving the one from Talerddig to Carno.

Jonathan

[Edwin_m]

It's a particular problem with single lines that any new stations or line speed improvements will throw the timetable out so the loops are in the wrong places, unless you're lucky enough to have the two cancel each other out so the resulting journey time between loops is unchanged. 

[Mike Storey]

An interesting local example of "standards application" near here which has no direct application to the railway but illustrates current thinking relates to the local mobile library.

The road from Newtown to Welshpool is on both the north-south and east-west trunk routes, but is two lane. The mobile library used to pull into the end of a lane which serves a couple of houses. Fine for the residents, as they could walk down the lane to the library unmolested except by a few suicidal game birds in season. It was decided for some reason that this was not safe so now the library stops a couple of hundred yards down the road in a lay-bye, no-where near any houses, but there is no footpath. So our friend does not use the mobile library any more. But of course safety "rules" have been followed.

Many thanks for the commentary on the Bow Street project. Very useful.

There has also been a long running campaign to re-open the station at Carno. This has considerable local support, but Powys County Council seems to take every opportunity to spend more money on consultants and redesign rather than actually supporting re-opening. I don't know all the figures but I suspect that the money spent over the years by Powys (and perforce by others) would have paid for the re-opening when the campaign first started.

That said, I am aware that re-opening Bow Street, Carno and Abermule (which has grown from a couple of houses when the station closed to a large dormitory area for the adjacent towns, would wreck the current timetable and require extra stock to provide the current frequency - and probably an extra passing loop somewhere - or even as the Carno campaigners have suggested, moving the one from Talerddig to Carno.

Jonathan

 

You may know this already, but just in case: The Carno evaluation was included in the same study for Bow Street, in the link above, and it showed a very poor business case. That is probably why Powys have spent more money on trying to find a solution with a better outcome.