Britain’s experiment in radical rail privatisation is over

[The Stationmaster]

16 hours ago, Claude_Dreyfus said:

 

Actually, whilst I suspect that commuting may change, it will actually be more suitable for the likes of HS2 in the future.

 

Until March I was a daily commuter into London. I live in a small rural town, about fives minutes walk from countryside, and I have had a lot of colleagues saying they are fed up with living in London and the larger satellite towns (with the lack of space in their homes, as well as lack of green environs) want something more rural. For employers such as mine, I can see the working from home approach staying, with one or two days in the office and the rest at home.

 

This will result in people moving out of London and other big towns, happy to put up with a long commute if it is only for a couple of days a week (and given many trains are now wifi fitted, quite a lot of work can be done on the commute). You hear of regular commuters to London from Leeds or Birmingham and I think this, and other further destinations, will become more regular. Especially given the disparity of house prices and other costs of living. 

 

I was in Hereford the other week. A nice city and surrounding area, and nowhere near as busy as Sussex. I found myself checking the trains to London to see if a regular (not daily!) commute is viable.

 

This, of course, won't be the death of the suburban network and we won't see a wholesale move of city workers out to more far flung locations, but  there will be a reasonable proportion who do, and it will be interesting to see if rail companies recognise and address this.

 

For HS2, if they do achieve the journey time from Birmingham to London to 52 minutes, then anywhere within 30 minutes of the HS2 station in Birmingham becomes faster to commute than parts of West Sussex! 

This is really the big unknown about what is likely to happen but it seems to be rapidly becoming a 'known' situation which will involve all sorts of changes.  Here, 36 rail miles from Paddington, larger houses are zooming off the estate agents' books quicker than they can find more to sell.  OK long  a commuter place but there are definite signs of people moving out to a smaller town. And long distance commuting is nothing new - small stations such as Kemble and Stroud became well established as commuter (to London) towns back in the 1990s and some of the folk I saw on my regular morning train back then only travelled once or twice a week so the idea isn't new, but it will become more common.

 

And yes, as Andi pointed out, it will have a far wider impact than on those who can work remotely but sad though it will be for some change has never stood still and it will no doubt continue.   People who move out of the close-in commuter areas will still need to eat and they will still - to whatever extent - make some use of local shops in their new place of residence.  But even that will be balanced by the continuing rush to online shopping.  What has over the last couple of decades happened to model shops could next happen to various other types of shop but we don't yet know what the post Covid situation will be for retail of any sort except it probably won't be the same as it was pre Covid.    

 

All of this is obviously wider than rail's current problems but the big difference remains - if you can find a house or an empty shop you can, finance permitting, start to make permanent changes today.  With the rail network and its capacity the changes you make today will be based on a project life of at least 25 years so you inevitably have to plan over a longer term.  Equally of course taking away means things might not be there when they are needed 20 years down the road.

['CHARD]

4 hours ago, Zomboid said:

I agree that they only exist because of Boris' ego. And I'm sure I'm in a minority here, but having used them as part of my commute for about a year, the actual product knocks the other buses they use in London out of the park. In my opinion.

 

Not that they don't deserve any criticism, but the 2 sets of stairs and 3 door boarding made a big difference to how long they sat at stops for, and I personally have no complaints about the on board environment.

 

During the bid for the Northern franchise in 2014-15 I always encouraged team members to use the Borismasters when we had to travel out and about from Holborn to visit the leasing companies, DfT, suppliers or whatever. 

 

I was soon branded the team bus nerd due to this BUT, my colleagues unanimously had as much fun riding around on them as I did; we'd stake out a few rows of seats and chat on about the views of streetlife - far more interesting, and less claustrophobic, than the tube!

[caradoc]

Perhaps the combination of Working from Home and HS2 will actually make long distance commuting more rather than less attractive; Imagine living near, say, Lancaster, and being able to get to London, in a reasonable time, a couple of days a week !

 

[caradoc]

16 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

Except BR DID introduce the Snow Hill to Marylebone service.  OK it was worked by Class 165 units but was aggressively marketed as a cheaper, fun way to London, especially from the outer suburban stations south of Birmingham.  Admittedly it was in the period of "shadow franchising" but it was definitely pre privatisation. 

 

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that, but the fact remains that post electrification BR singled Princes Risborough/Aynho Jc and subsequently reduced the through London/Birmingham service via that route to a token one train a day each way. It took sectorisation, and the resulting commercial freedom that gave, to restore a half-decent service, (and privatisation to redouble the route ?); It can and will of course be debated for evermore what would have happened if BR had been allowed to continue (or indeed re-incarnated in 1997 when the anti-privatisation party won power, as they had promised).  We can never know !

 

My personal view of the nationalised railway is inevitably coloured by the fact that in my 38 year railway career, only once was I threatened with redundancy, and that was under BR ! In contrast, I felt well-treated by both Railtrack and Network Rail. 

 

[woodenhead]

Contentious view time:  Ministers don't throw money at a government owned organisation because 'people' cannot invest in it.  Put it in private hands and that same money can create dividends for shareholders and thus wealth.  The fact that those shareholders might also be friends and acquaintences of ministers of course would have no bearing on this.

 

Example, a certain housing scheme on the banks of the Thames given ministerial approval just days before a law was to be enacted making the planned scheme impossible.  The major investor in the scheme seen many times having dinner with said minister and there being records of conversations stating that perhaps they shouldn't be seen together for a bit.

 

I don't doubt this sort of thing happens within both main parties, I am of the belief that power ultimately corrupts, but whilst some may honestly believe in certain ethos for others it is simply a means to an end to get rich.

[mdvle]

7 hours ago, Zomboid said:

I agree that they only exist because of Boris' ego. And I'm sure I'm in a minority here, but having used them as part of my commute for about a year, the actual product knocks the other buses they use in London out of the park. In my opinion.

 

Not that they don't deserve any criticism, but the 2 sets of stairs and 3 door boarding made a big difference to how long they sat at stops for, and I personally have no complaints about the on board environment.

 

But one extra door, and one extra set of stairs, reduces capacity - so more buses required to move the same number of people.

 

Now add in the Boris Bus being significantly more expensive, and you quickly reach a point where you need to cut services to make up for the reduced fleet size of a bus with reduced capacity.

 

It's great that some on here think they are a wonderful (luxury), but at the end of the day the bus network is about moving people around and leaving people behind because the bus is full and you don't have enough buses fails that simple goal.

[kevinlms]

22 hours ago, Dagworth said:

Don’t forget that “city workers” are not just the ones sat at desks. The cleaners and maintenance staff, the people who sell you your coffee and lunch, the people building the office block next door are all commuters too. They just aren’t able to work from home. 
 

Andi
 

 

Not only that, but those not able to work from home, will have less customers too, so less will be required. 

[woodenhead]

There is a massive supply line if you look at the simple act of commuting:

• The trains
  • require drivers / guards
  • require timetablers
  • require maintenance
  • require track
    • requires steel for track
    • requires maintenance / upkeep
    • requires signallers
      • signalling
      • signalling upkeep
  • require leasing companines to provide the stock
    • leasing company employees
• The stations
  • require staff
  • require upkeep
  • require ancilliary service
    • cafes & shops
      • require staff
      • requre supplies
        • requires supply chains
      • require inspections
  • require connections with local services
    • public transport buses
    • taxis

The list could go on and on and this is just to and from work, then there is the whole build up of shops, services and infrastructure around the workplaces.  If less people need offices then the whole supply chain that keeps those offices running becomes affected and ultimately it means less jobs.

 

Covid has decimated the holiday market - some 30,000 air crew without jobs and it's not like it's one airline where many will ultimately find employment with other airlines who buy up the capacity created by the loss of one.   They are all suffering and will continue to suffer well into 2021 and probably beyond.  I've read EasyJet was in the uneviable position of owning it's jets, to keep afloat is is now selling it's aircraft and leasing them back - this is a major shift for the airline, what happens when it has no more aircraft to sell?

[Pandora]

When they run out of planes to lease for cash, then they could fold,  their name added onto  a long historic list of fallen flags, including national carriers once household names.  A merchant  banker, describing the financial horrors of the air carrier loan books, said, if the merchant bankers had known, at Kittihawk they would have shot down the first Wright Brothers  flight  

Edited September 28, 2020 by Pandora

[SouthernBlue80s]

Nothing to add. But I have found this a very interesting largely objective discussion. 

[corneliuslundie]

Will this be a chance to get more freight back on rail? I know that a big problem is that many of the sites needed for transhipment have been sold off. But if government is serious about reducing both pollution and CO2 emissions, then it needs to reduce road freight traffic. At the moment there is no alternative to diesel for road freight.

Of course, we then come to the reason why BR wanted to get rid of wagonload traffic in the first place. The cost of managing many small consignments and the facilities needed to deal with them. But Amazon's operation and tracking of deliveries by many suppliers have shown that there are now easy ways to deal with the first.

Thoughts?

Bring back C licences for goods vehicles? (probably an easy way to lose an election!)

Jonathan

[fezza]

Work from home has released about 2 extra hours a day for me. I probably work slightly more hours and am more productive in them. If that is true for others, will companies want to go back to office working, with all the real estate costs that involves? Even a 5%-10% drop in commuting has big implications for the railways and HS2. 

[Joseph_Pestell]

On 26/09/2020 at 15:31, mdvle said:

 

But one extra door, and one extra set of stairs, reduces capacity - so more buses required to move the same number of people.

 

Now add in the Boris Bus being significantly more expensive, and you quickly reach a point where you need to cut services to make up for the reduced fleet size of a bus with reduced capacity.

 

It's great that some on here think they are a wonderful (luxury), but at the end of the day the bus network is about moving people around and leaving people behind because the bus is full and you don't have enough buses fails that simple goal.

 

Dwell times at stops add up to a significant reduction in overall capacity on urban bus routes. So, theoretically possible that the Borismaster shifts as many people along a route as buses with a nominally greater capacity.

 

The ideal way to increase capacity on a bus route is articulated buses, But Boris has a pathological dislike of them and experience in London was not particularly positive (although that may just be a perception caused by a whipped-up press campaign against them).

[chris p bacon]

10 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

The ideal way to increase capacity on a bus route is articulated buses, But Boris has a pathological dislike of them and experience in London was not particularly positive (although that may just be a perception caused by a whipped-up press campaign against them).

 

Having followed some in London I think you'll find that no one liked them as they were incapable of operating with narrow streets.  Having seen one wedged between traffic lights at a junction I can understand why.

 

I did see the ex London buses in Malta after they were shipped there. They didn't work there either and after several fires and complaints from passengers they languish(ed) in yard outside Valletta.

[PaulRhB]

41 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

Will this be a chance to get more freight back on rail? I know that a big problem is that many of the sites needed for transhipment have been sold off. But if government is serious about reducing both pollution and CO2 emissions, then it needs to reduce road freight traffic. At the moment there is no alternative to diesel for road freight.

Problem is Amazon etc have built their network around speed and rail doesn’t have the network to serve the small shipments network as fast or efficiently. Short of massive taxation of road transport it can’t hope to compete on price either let alone speed. The fuel isn’t a major factor as it will increasingly apply to rail too. You’re going to see diesel units banned from congestion zones in a few years which will affect city centre stations and why hybrid units are now on the cards to replace the 159/8 fleet on SWR. 
Railfreight is much better suited to wagonload or really larger these days as the packed network doesn’t allow many free access paths to build a sophisticated distribution network that can adapt as fast as road transport. Rail is good at serving hubs and that’s one of the reasons I’d have integrated high speed freight into HS2 plans with the future taxation of roads in mind to build the facility for shifting long distance road haulage to rail and letting the lorries do the flexible bit from hubs. Unfortunately a political four to five year plan doesn’t really look that far ahead so the integration of the two policies gets lost in short term populism for votes. Spending to build infrastructure like that for the future is too long term to be able to shout about at the next election as it’s looking 15-20 years ahead  

[melmerby]

42 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

The ideal way to increase capacity on a bus route is articulated buses,

Only if you can't use double deck buses, the road footprint of an articulated bus is greater with less capacity.  (58 or 59 against 73 - 79)

It does have greater standing capacity however, but most passengers want seats.

National Express West Midlands had two batches, Mercedes & Scania bought from 1999-2004 and now all withdrawn, but they haven't been replaced.

Most purchases have been Enviro 400s of various types.

[31A]

These guys seem to be having a go at breaking into the logistics business:

 

https://orion.railopsgroup.co.uk/#how

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

44 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

 

Having followed some in London I think you'll find that no one liked them as they were incapable of operating with narrow streets.  Having seen one wedged between traffic lights at a junction I can understand why.

 

I did see the ex London buses in Malta after they were shipped there. They didn't work there either and after several fires and complaints from passengers they languish(ed) in yard outside Valletta.

 

The roads in Malta would defeat most modern buses. It was also at a time when there was major change (unpopular) in the way that the Malta bus system was worked (nationalisation/franchise).

 

I don't know why that type of Mercedes bus (in both single and articulated form) was so prone to catching fire but that is not relevant to the overall question of articulated buses which have worked perfectly well in other locations for many years.

 

9 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Only if you can't use double deck buses, the road footprint of an articulated bus is greater with less capacity.  (58 or 59 against 73 - 79)

It does have greater standing capacity however, but most passengers want seats.

National Express West Midlands had two batches, Mercedes & Scania bought from 1999-2004 and now all withdrawn, but they haven't been replaced.

Most purchases have been Enviro 400s of various types.

 

Double-deck buses are intrinsically inefficient in a busy urban location. The stop dwell times increase massively as passengers have to wait for alighting passengers to get downstairs before they can board. I accept the point that passengers want to be seated rather than stand but its not a necessity for most given a short journey time. Perhaps we need to look at more "perch seats".

[chris p bacon]

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

but that is not relevant to the overall question of articulated buses which have worked perfectly well in other locations for many years.

They do work well in some European cities I've visited, but they seemed to be those that have large 'Strasse' where the length and manouvreability of the buses aren't an issue. In cities like London they just didn't seem to work as well.

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

 

Double-deck buses are intrinsically inefficient in a busy urban location. The stop dwell times increase massively as passengers have to wait for alighting passengers to get downstairs before they can board. I accept the point that passengers want to be seated rather than stand but its not a necessity for most given a short journey time. Perhaps we need to look at more "perch seats".

Likewise passengers have to walk from the back of a very long artic before others can board. In busy areas they also take up twice the bus stop frontage.

If there was any advantage NXWM would have expanded services with more buses but they didn't.

They served out their 10/12 yr life and were replaced by double deckers.

 

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

4 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Likewise passengers have to walk from the back of a very long artic before others can board. In busy areas they also take up twice the bus stop frontage.

If there was any advantage NXWM would have expanded services with more buses but they didn't.

They served out their 10/12 yr life and were replaced by double deckers.

 

 

 

No, they don't. They have 2 (or even 3) doors to alight from while boarding passengers use another door. Also, it is relatively safe for passengers to approach the exit door on a single decker while the bus is still moving. Many passengers hesitate to use the stairs until the bus is stationary.

 

Yes, they take up more road space at the bus stop which may require some level of prioritisation of road space use (and same for any difficult turns at junctions). With regard to bus stops, I think that many cities, including London, have bus stops at spacings that are far too close. Apart from passengers with mobility issues, point-to-point journey times would probably be quicker with fewer bus stops even allowing for a longer walk to/from their nearest bus stop. Even in outer London there are very few locations where one is more than 500 metres from a bus stop (I know that as I mapped it many years ago as part of a Geography project).

 

Other factors are involved. If the driver takes fares, dwell times will be long anyway. So time taken to alight is less significant. But in a busy environment, drivers should not be tasked with taking fares precisely because of the long dwell times involved. This, of course, is what has happened in Central London - possibly because they read someone's degree thesis which proposed this change back in the 1980s.

 

But perhaps we need another thread for this???

[Hobby]

4 hours ago, SouthernBlue80s said:

Nothing to add. But I have found this a very interesting largely objective discussion. 

 

I must have been reading a different thread to this one, then! Most of the pages have been about either HS2 or Buses, not a lot on the original post or thread title...

Edited September 28, 2020 by Hobby

[corneliuslundie]

They introduced articulated buses in Pristina, capital of Kosovo, about 13 years ago. Soon after, a driver of a car at a junction hit one amidships because he had never heard of articulated buses and assumed that the bus had got out of his path. It jammed up one of the major city centre junctions for hours.

Completely off topic - and I have been one of those complaining about the thread being off topic!

Re my mention of Amazon, I was thinking of the IT systems it uses rather than the physical distribution. Quite a lot of what Amazon sells can go by post anyway. And that is one  transport user which should be encouraged (forced?) to make more use of rail.  But of course over the past two decades the railway system has been more and more difficult for freight to use except for trainload or container traffic. I have feeling it is as much attitudes to freight at the higher levels of railway management rather any intrinsic difficulty in handling it. Over the years  railway management has been extremely innovative in handling new traffic flows.

Jonathan

[Oldddudders]

Parcels and postal traffic, which were handled and moved at pretty marginal cost on passenger trains, became distinctly unfashionable when passenger numbers started to increase in the later 1980s. New rolling stock was designed without any space for them. If we believe that WFH is truly going to become far more of a norm, then creating capacity for these traffics might be less contentious. But rolling stock lasts for decades, so it can't happen overnight.

[Pandora]

4 hours ago, fezza said:

Work from home has released about 2 extra hours a day for me. I probably work slightly more hours and am more productive in them. If that is true for others, will companies want to go back to office working, with all the real estate costs that involves? Even a 5%-10% drop in commuting has big implications for the railways and HS2. 

I assume you are a 5 days a week worker,  by working from home, using those  extra 2 hours per day for productive work , and not to the purpose of commuting, then in  4 days at home, you have  performed 5 days  at the Office,  You can then have a 3 day Friday to Sunday  weekend, far more civilised  than only two!  

Edited September 28, 2020 by Pandora