Railway franchises in the coming year

[adb968008]

38 minutes ago, royaloak said:

100 new 2 coach trains=200 new coaches 

These replace 50 trains which are scrapped and 50 2 coach trains which are transferred to another franchise,so thats 100 'new' coaches for that franchise= 100 'new' coaches (total 300)

 

And so on and so on, thats how they arrive at these magical numbers.

I’m trying to work the numbers, al be it without science or precision...

using wiki.. Northern given up or plans to give up

102 pacers (214 vehicles) 

8 mk2’s 

20 cl 153s

4 cl 185s (12 vehicles)

24 cl 321/22/332 (96 vehicles)

1 cl 180 (5 vehicles)

 

So thats.. 350 vehicles plus change out...

 

and in...

16x cl 170 (48 vehicles)

25 x2 car, 33x 3 car cl 195 (149 vehicles)

33x 3 car, 12x 4 car  cl 331 (147 vehicles)

5x cl 321 (20 vehicles)

 

so thats... 365 vehicles...

 

15 extra vehicles there and about.. or 7x2 coach trains...

forgive me being underwhelmed by this.

 

ive excluded 319’s from this, they arrived 4 years back now.

Edited January 2, 2020 by adb968008

[mdvle]

49 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

what we need is longer trains, not just replacements.. a 2 car 175 from Manchester to Cardiff is not an improvement on a class 155 doing it in 1990..and remains a downgrade on a 33+5 Mk1’s, especially when numbers carried is higher than ever... the 5 mk1’s  offer much extra seating and a whole lot more usable space.

 

Is this a case, discussed elsewhere, where the length of train limit is because of at least one intermediate station not having the platform space for a longer train given the much larger number of trains operating compared to 1990? (I think discussed in the HS2 thread?)

 

Quote

Whilst there’s still time, they would be better swallowing some pride and allowing some non-PRM services on routes where PRM compliant services run, so that the 80% of the populace doesn’t have to suffer for the 20%.. who invariably wouldn’t benefit from a PRM compliant service if they are unable to board or use its toilet due to overcrowding.

 

Another thread mentions a whole lot of trains getting extensions, so a non issue for now.

 

But in a broader sense, the problem is that if what you propose is allowed then there is less incentive for the TOC to operate the required service properly, so that 20% ends up really suffering without the 80% putting pressure on the TOC.  Having dealt with family members confined to wheelchairs it is regrettable that far too many operations (and their employees) simply don't treat the issue seriously and giving an escape clause is unfortunately likely to make things worse.

[royaloak]

16 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I’m trying to work the numbers, al be it without science or precision...

using wiki.. Northern given up or plans to give up

102 pacers (214 vehicles) 

8 mk2’s 

20 cl 153s

4 cl 185s (12 vehicles)

24 cl 321/22/332 (96 vehicles)

1 cl 180 (5 vehicles)

 

So thats.. 350 vehicles plus change out...

 

and in...

16x cl 170 (48 vehicles)

25 x2 car, 33x 3 car cl 195 (149 vehicles)

33x 3 car, 12x 4 car  cl 331 (147 vehicles)

5x cl 321 (20 vehicles)

 

so thats... 365 vehicles...

 

15 extra vehicles there and about.. or 7x2 coach trains...

forgive me being underwhelmed by this.

 

ive excluded 319’s from this, they arrived 4 years back now.

Nope thats 133 'new' vehicles for other franchises (the displaced 153s, 185 etc) plus 365 new vehicles so a grand total of 498.

Edited January 2, 2020 by royaloak

[adb968008]

It would seem to me an easy answer is carrot and stick.. penalties applied but retrospectively credited when in compliance, with a deadline out there for the target to be in compliance....

 

Penalty pro-rated from day 1 to day of compliance, then compliance credit from compliance date to end of term.. sooner they reach compliance they are getting credits not debits... make sure the amounts stack up to be big enough in both directions to make management give it focus.

 

[adb968008]

12 minutes ago, royaloak said:

Nope thats 133 'new' vehicles for other franchises (the displaced 153s, 185 etc) plus 365 new vehicles so a grand total of 498.

Yeah i’m Missing something...

 

can you break that out for me as i’m Not sure I follow.. what’s Northern given away for re-use elsewhere ?

The 180’s & 185’s were a hire in and returned to their operators, there not Northern’s to begin with.

 

so may be 20 153’s could be new to someone else.. but everything else is scrap ?

 

even the 319’s are simply recycling to 768’s and back to Northern again.

 

Eitherway.. it’s not Extra vehicles growing Northerns overall fleet size, on top of what they had.. it’s barely like for like replacements..., which considering the size, scale, geography of the franchise, you would expect to be the largest benefactor of this 1000+ new vehicle growth... if not doubling of their current fleet size, which is probably what’s needed.

Edited January 2, 2020 by adb968008

[royaloak]

Who said it was extra vehicles, its new or new to the operator, thats how the brigade have been making press releases for ages.

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, royaloak said:

Who said it was extra vehicles, its new or new to the operator, thats how the brigade have been making press releases for ages.

rail delivery group..
 

Quote

Rail passengers across the country are set to benefit from 1,000 extra train carriages next year, with better technology on board to improve journey planning and accessibility. This will grow the nation’s fleet from nearly 15,000 train carriages today to almost 16,000 by the end of 2020.

https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/2019/469776113-2019-12-31.html
 

Quote

RDG chief executive Paul Plummer said: “Next year, passengers will be able to track their train, find out where accessible toilets are and even find a seat in the emptiest carriage as 1,000 extra train carriages come on track.
 

...

It said the majority of the 1,000 extra carriages will be new.

The return of refurbished carriages to the network will also increase the overall fleet size as most were replaced by new trains when they were taken out of service over the past two years.

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2019/12/31/1000-extra-train-carriages-in-2020-but-accessibility-deadline-will-be-missed/

 

3 new carriages a day... I guess 6 have arrived today and another 12 by end of day Monday... what ?, where ? On top of any fleet renewals...

 

its a lot less than last years claims...

https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/7-187-new-coaches-by-2021-but-up-to-3-934-for-scrapsome-only-three-years-old

 

Quote

7,187 new coaches by 2021 - but up to 3,934 for scrap

 

However the 2019 RDG statement lists..

 

Greater Anglia – a multi-year programme is seeing a thousand new train carriages replacing the entire fleet

 

- Isnt most of this scrap , except class 379’s reported sold to South Africa (pity Northern didnt get them eh ?), and some to GN to allow them to bin class 365’s.. so no gain there.

 

And 360’s to EMR...  + 109 vehicles.

 

 

Heathrow Express – 12 specially converted dedicated airport trains operating between Heathrow Airport and London Paddington

 

- Scrap / Replace

 

Hull Trains – 25 new train carriages continue to be rolled out on services between London and Yorkshire and the Humber

 

- cascade so + 20 carriages..

 

London North Eastern Railway – completion of the introduction of 65 new trains running between London, the East Midlands, Yorkshire, the North East and Scotland

Merseyrail – the introduction by the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority of a new fleet of cutting-edge trains

 

- Scrap HST/91’s.

 

Northern – continuation of 101 new trains on routes in the North of England

 

- Almost all scrap... except 153’s above.. + 20 ?

 

South Western Railway – the start of a fleet of 90 new trains will run from the middle of 2020

 

- replacing 455’s .. scrap 707’s going to storage.. so no gain if they arent being used.

 

TransPennine Express – continued introduction of 44 new trains on routes connecting northern England

 

- Only genuine true cascading of stock... about 120 or so vehicles..

 

West Midlands Trains – new trains next year will add more seats and space for people in and around the West Midlands

 

- Unsure on this.

 

not mentioned above was TfW getting GA’s sprinter cast offs but as this is 142/143 replacement.. theres no gain there really either.

Edited January 2, 2020 by adb968008

[rockershovel]

All this head-scratching about numbers suggests a lack of overall clarity, somewhere. 

 

It will be interesting to see what Boris Johnson actually does about all this nonsense. He is making increasing noises about “One Nation Toryism” and I can’t see how “breaking the Unions” squares with that; it’s bad publicity, if nothing else. He can’t afford for the Conservative Party to feel it has a licence to pursue its historic feuds and obsessions, he has too many marginals to think of. Nor can he afford to give the impression that he is continuing the perceived culture of rewarding failure from the public purse, least of all paying directors bonuses while staff jobs suffer. 

 

None of the specific numbers will matter, if he can create a perception of some sort of improvement, even if that improvement is more apparent than real. 

[phil-b259]

17 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

All this head-scratching about numbers suggests a lack of overall clarity, somewhere. 

 

It will be interesting to see what Boris Johnson actually does about all this nonsense. He is making increasing noises about “One Nation Toryism” and I can’t see how “breaking the Unions” squares with that; it’s bad publicity, if nothing else. He can’t afford for the Conservative Party to feel it has a licence to pursue its historic feuds and obsessions, he has too many marginals to think of. Nor can he afford to give the impression that he is continuing the perceived culture of rewarding failure from the public purse, least of all paying directors bonuses while staff jobs suffer. 

 

None of the specific numbers will matter, if he can create a perception of some sort of improvement, even if that improvement is more apparent than real. 

 

It WASN'T Boris who boasted of 'Breaking the Unions' - that comes from various individuals within the DfT and the Civil service. Also virtually all the disputes kicked off under the tenure of Cameron / May / Grayling and so the current Prime Minister / SoS in charge are actually innocent of that charge.

 

However, what IS true is the fact that repeated strike action eventually tends to turn the public hostile to the Unions actions, hence Boris's manifesto commitment to limit strike action on the railways will go down well with travellers on Southern, SWR, WMT and Northern who have suffered from prolonged DOO disputes with the RMT.

 

As for marginal constituencies - by FAR the biggest factor in constituencies changing from Red to Blue was Brexit! Providing Boris delivers on that key commitment to get us out of Europe ASAP he will retain significant support whatever happens to the railways. Its worth remembering that although rail travel is at it highest level for decades, it still only accounts for around 20% of all journeys made in the UK and consequentially is not quite as vital to electoral performance as the media might have you believe at this time of year.

 

Also with an 80 seat majority, Boris can afford to lose a few marginals next time round and still comfortably beat Labour

Edited January 2, 2020 by phil-b259

[royaloak]

46 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

rail delivery group..

That explains a lot, if that lot told me it was raining I would have to stand outside and get pissed wet through before I believed it!

 

If ever there was a complete waste of money on a quango they are it!

 

Anyone remember then Radio 4 interview where the berk from the RDG said DOO works fine for disabled passengers because the driver gets out and does the ramp, Tony Miles (who was in the studio but not allowed to speak, a requirement of the RDG sending a representative) couldnt believe what he was hearing, it was retracted the following week.

Edited January 2, 2020 by royaloak

[rockershovel]

That was more-or-less my point. However he might not have STARTED the “break-the-Unions” thing, but he now owns it, and needs to do SOMETHING. However I suspect that if he can damp down the general hoo-hah whilst producing some sort of perceived improvement, that’s probably his best option. 

 

100% agree about Brexit. Boris might play the fool at times, but he is no fool at all. He clearly understands the root of the problem, which is that we need a close economic relationship, but the political and ideological project is totally unelectable. 

 

I don’t doubt that our relations with Europe will be difficult and fractious for a long time to come, but I doubt that the electorate will much care.

 

[96701]

1 hour ago, adb968008 said:

not mentioned above was TfW getting GA’s sprinter cast offs but as this is 142/143 replacement.. theres no gain there really either.

 

The first mention of Wales in this thread (except for a reference to 2 car trains on Manchester = Cardiff services). New trains consist of Class 37s and MkII coaches and Class 170s. There are still plenty of Pacers around, so what is the reason for their continued existence? I work in the rail industry and have been aware for a very long time that there is no one person that knows how to run a railway, but there has to be a better way than the current method.

Edited January 2, 2020 by 96701

[royaloak]

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

However he might not have STARTED the “break-the-Unions” thing, but he now owns it, and needs to do SOMETHING.

 

Why do the Unions have to be broken rather than worked with?

[phil-b259]

24 minutes ago, 96701 said:

 

The first mention of Wales in this thread (except for a reference to 2 car trains on Manchester = Cardiff services). New trains consist of Class 37s and MkII coaches and Class 170s. There are still plenty of Pacers around, so what is the reason for their continued existence? I work in the rail industry and have been aware for a very long time that there is no one person that knows how to run a railway, but there has to be a better way than the current method.

 

There are - but none of them are acceptable to the Politicians in Westminster for a whole variety of reasons.

 

Its been said before but I will say it again, the best structure is one that keeps meddling Politicians (of whatever colour) out of operations. It was something that British Rail excelled at - and so did the initial post privatisation period when the ORR was truly independent and had Tom Windsor at the helm who wasn't shy of showing up Politicians when they screwed up railway decisions.

 

Whitehall will NOT let such situations happen again - whatever they do needs to be able to be sold to the Tory faithful as continuing privatisation / private sector involvement for ideological reasons while at the same time ensuring that Ministers (or their Mandarins like Peter Wilkinson) still have ultimate control behind the scenes on the basis that its taxpayers money (subsides for loss making services, etc) is needed to keep the railways going.

[mdvle]

17 minutes ago, 96701 said:

 

The first mention of Wales in this thread (except for a reference to 2 car trains on Manchester = Cardiff services). New trains consist of Class 37s and MkII coaches and Class 170s. There are still plenty of Pacers around, so what is the reason for their continued existence? I work in the rail industry and have been aware for a very long time that there is no one person that knows how to run a railway, but there has to be a better way than the current method.

 

As has been discussed elsewhere many times - delays in arrival of new rolling stock (which means unavailable to use or unable to allow cascades of rolling stock from other franchises, which has meant the forced withdrawal has been delayed.  The MkII coaches for example were supposed to be gone now.

 

With that said, in 3 years trains in Wales will look very different with the following stuff on order:

• 5  3-car Class 230
• 77 Class 197 (51 2-car units, 26 3-car units)
• 11 4-car Class 231 Flirt units
• 9 4-car Class 769 units
• 24 Class 756 Flirt units (7 3-car, 17 4-car)

And being kept (at least once they all arrive):

 

• 2 Class 170/2  (1 2-car, 1 3-car)
• 12 Mk 4 coaches and 3 Mk4 DVT

 

[caradoc]

13 minutes ago, royaloak said:

Why do the Unions have to be broken rather than worked with?

 

A very good question, but one Union is utterly hostile to the privatised railway and seems dedicated to disrupting it as much as possible; Maybe makes it difficult to work with them ? 

 

[phil-b259]

45 minutes ago, royaloak said:

Why do the Unions have to be broken rather than worked with?

 

Because they interfere with the Governments plan to make most trains DOO and cut staffing costs (thus meaning train fares don't have to rise as much if you believe the Government PR). If staff are required then the Government want to ensure they cost as little as possible - which you do by de-skilling them so you have a wider pool of labour available to chose from. Most inconvenient to certain political ideologies that Trade Unions get in way of this... well ... 'racer to the bottom' as some might put it with respect to workers pay / T&Cs / etc.

 

The problem is that although following the privatisation of all Government owned industry, the utilities, airports, etc most Unions have been forced to become far less militant and 'reasonable' to deal with that is not the case with the Railway Unions - and one Union in particular, the RMT.

 

Unlike most other Trade Unions, the RMT under the late Bob Crow positively revealed in being chief mischief maker and was known to castigate other Unions for going soft / caving in to Government or bosses when deals were made rather than striving for a socialist state as per the teachings of Karl Marx.

 

Hence if HM Government wanted any chance of pushing through more DOO then it would be necessary to 'break' the power of the RMT - there could be no negotiated settlement as the RMT would completely refuse to do anything which might alter the 'No Guard = No Train" situation.

 

While I admire this determination to look after members (which is what Trade Unions are there for - NOT to turn the country into a socialist utopia I might add*), there comes a point when a strategic retreat and compromise is needed. Winning individual battles is all very well but if you lose the war or the aftermath turns out to be worse than could have been achieved by negotiating a peace treaty then its all been a bit futile hasn't it?

 

 

* The RMT members rulebook  ( https://www.rmt.org.uk/about/rmt-rule-book/  ) , section 1, sub-section 4 states:-

 

Objects
4. The objects of the Union shall be:-

(a) to secure the complete organisation of all workers employed by any board, company or authority in connection with rail, sea and other transport and ancillary undertakings and offshore energy;

(b) to work for the supersession of the capitalist system by a socialistic order of society;

(c) the promotion of equality for all including through

(i) collective bargaining, publicity material and campaigning, representation, Union organisation and structures, education and training, organising and recruitment, the provision of all other services and benefits and all other activities;

(ii) the Union’s own employment practices.

 

Edited January 2, 2020 by phil-b259

[rockershovel]

I’m a bit disconcerted that that should still appear in the Constitution of a major Trades Union, at this stage. Still and all, there are attitudes every bit as adversarial in some corners of the present administration. 

 

It really doesn’t help reach a consensus. 

 

 

 

Edited January 2, 2020 by rockershovel

[corneliuslundie]

My thought, though until rockershovel raised it I was not going to comment, was that the political clause should prevent the RMT being accepted as a union in legal terms. Unions are not supposed to get involved in politics.

Jonathan

[62613]

47 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

My thought, though until rockershovel raised it I was not going to comment, was that the political clause should prevent the RMT being accepted as a union in legal terms. Unions are not supposed to get involved in politics.

Jonathan

What? Everything in the world is "political"; and that includes relationships between a workforce and its employees, whether you like it or not.

[lmsforever]

Watching the news today  they are hammering rail and Northern in particular,  the report on rail really has to be innovative and all involved in rail operation must get together and try toget the mess sorted.They must remember that its not for their own means but for passengers .No more silly disputes work together for a united front if a guard is needed put him on the train if a change in worker relations is required do it.This is a once in a lifetime chance to put right any wrongs from workers and management and it must happen .

[bimble]

There was the suggestion on the radio this afternoon that one of the reasons they were going after Northern so much today was to distract from the yearly increase in ticket price story...

[Talltim]

12 hours ago, woodenhead said:

But it will still have the same trains, the same drivers, guards, station staff as now - so it will make no immediate material difference except another lot of senior managers will need to be recruited by whoever runs it next be it the DFT or some other body.

 

Then will come the inevitable argument that where we end up in 12 months will be no different that where the current franchise would have been when it sorted out the new trains and the drivers.

 

If it was one bad apple when it came to the franchises I would agree replacing the incumbent may be the right answer, but when many companies are having problems then you begin to ask the question, are they all that bad or have we been led here by a failed privatisation system that over time has drained the industry and left us in a short-termism nightmare of governmental making (all colours).

OLR might not agree to take the franchise on under the same terms that Arriva did. If they don’t have to follow the same timetable prescriptions, they may trim it down to something practical. They may argue for greater freedom to recruit (admittedly a medium term fix). Arriva can’t do these without defaulting. There are other things that Northern management could do now that they seem unwilling to do, such a not arranging crew changes at the central Manchester stations, any delays to the incoming crews there cause massive ripples across the network. 

[rockershovel]

6 hours ago, 62613 said:

What? Everything in the world is "political"; and that includes relationships between a workforce and its employees, whether you like it or not.

 

.. this is something I learnt from my late father, and it was reinforced by my early career involvement with Americans. Politics was historically referred to as “the art of the possible”, a lens and medium through which issues of daily life can be addressed. 

 

This seems to be something of a “blind spot” for the English, and it’s probably related to the way that formal religion has little appeal for them; a lack of interest in ideology; and a consequent tendency to just accept that things “get done somehow”. The general paralysis in Parliament these past years has, ultimately, revolved around a clash of ideas, in which neither side has been able to demonstrate its case in objective terms. Make no mistake, if either side had been able to do this, the issue would have been settled, long ago. 

 

The same applies to the whole “railway franchise” issue. It was clear, by the late 1980s that nationalisation couldn’t continue as it stood. It was also clear that even in an ideologically capitalist society like America, some degree of state control, involving overall strategic direction of key functions, was required in practical terms. 

 

Now, we have a Parliament and an administration with a mandate which might be described as “ok, stop all this nonsense and get to work, do the job you’re paid to do”. The botched, ideologically driven privatisation of the railways needs to be revisited. This needs doing with no regard for the egos and careers of its authors and supporters, it needs to work objectively. It also needs to dissociate itself from the perception that failure is automatically rewarded from the public purse, and it needs to be framed in terms of a defined “national interest”.

 

Let’s see what develops. 

[APOLLO]

Northern rail (the organisation)  is despised by many (including my children who travel to Uni in Liverpool / Lancaster). They don't forget last years weekend action / no trains etc for over 40 weeks etc.

 

I'm amazed at the RMT rulebook objective re capitalism above. We have just seen what the public think of such thoughts in the election. Needs action.

 

Split Northern into East / West with further control etc by the big cities (Leeds, Liverpool & Manchester). Services outside these conurbations to be run by them but funded by central government.

 

Train more staff. New recruits on new conditions (equal pay though).

 

That's just for starters.

 

We need a "Brexit" on our railways, and the bolshy unions need sorting.

 

Brit15