Britain’s experiment in radical rail privatisation is over

[Joseph_Pestell]

I think that the 319s were the last design to include parcels accommodation (a lockable passenger area at one end of the 4-car unit indicated by the black triangle).

 

Is the network really so overwhelmed with passengers throughout the day that such compartments could not be used early morning/late evening?

 

Whenever I am on the main trunk roads, a huge percentage of the articulated lorries is the various courier firms' vehicles travelling from regional depots to their Midlands hubs. Most of these could be rail connected if there was the will to do it.

[mdvle]

5 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. 

 

Still to early to tell.

 

There have been media reports recently of managers/companies, accepting work from home as more than a few months, are now starting to insist on intrusive tracking/spying methods to monitor their employees working from home - think always on webcam to track whether you are putting in your proper workday.

 

Given that at least some employers are going to make work from home less pleasant many may decide that returning to an office is the lesser of evils.

[mdvle]

5 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

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.

 

Even if dwell time cancels out the capacity loss from extra doors/stairs, the additional purchase cost wipes out the budget - if you can buy 3 regular double-deck buses for the price of 2 Borismasters the regular bus wins.

[Quarryscapes]

On 25/09/2020 at 20:23, 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.  Chiltern, to be fair, have taken the concept and run with it, some would argue to the detriment of their core commuter market as they seem to focus more on competition with FGW at Oxford and Avanti and LNWR at Birmingham than providing stops and extra capacity at their monopoly commuter hubs, but the idea of the Chiltern line as competition to the London and Birmingham was very much a Network Southeast and Reggie Rail idea.

 

 

Ironically, as I understand it, the Welsh model is what the Dumbwits for Transport in London are adopting - management contracts at a fixed price.  In Wales, the so-called "Not for Profit" (which is rubbish as the management fee will include profit) concession was a combination of operating contractor and specialist procurement contractor to manage the South Wales Metro ideas and new rolling stock provision, but it is the Transport for Wales arm of the Welsh Government who specify the outputs pay out accordingly, except on the two former InterCity routes.  So, in Wales, nothing will be changing.  It might be the Cardiff Crachach running the show and obsessed with Greater Cardiff as a result, but they are our Crachach and we can have a greater say in the next set of elections to the Senedd.

Is your partner looking to join the Cambrian operations?

 

Didn't realise we already had a different model in Wales. Yes she's applied to be train conductor working from Machynlleth. There's a lot of hoops to jump through, but fingers crossed she gets it. 

[melmerby]

3 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

No, they don't. They have 2 (or even 3) doors to alight from while boarding passengers use another door.

They stopped using the second door to stop fare evasion, the reason no NXWM bus has had a second door for years.

Interestingly no other operator wanted these not particularly old buses and were scrapped at a max of about 14 years old. Double deckers bought around the same time are still soldiering on.

[phil-b259]

2 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

I think that the 319s were the last design to include parcels accommodation (a lockable passenger area at one end of the 4-car unit indicated by the black triangle).

 

Is the network really so overwhelmed with passengers throughout the day that such compartments could not be used early morning/late evening?

 

Whenever I am on the main trunk roads, a huge percentage of the articulated lorries is the various courier firms' vehicles travelling from regional depots to their Midlands hubs. Most of these could be rail connected if there was the will to do it.

 

That still doesn't solve the fundamental issue that railways do not go to everyones doorsetp, nor the reality that extra transshipment between modes (or between trains) is expensive. The growth in parcel deliveries has been mostly due to the direct home delivery of items - not of services requiring people to actively go out and collect the items themselves .

 

Many of the low cost couriers used by the likes of Amazon effectively make their delivery agents work from home - i.e. They get a big delivery sent directly to them in the morning or waiting for them at a local hub* for them to redistribute locally (Hence the use of private cars / vans rather than branded delivery vehicles)

 

For this sort of model to have any chance of making use of rail transport means you need to ensure sufficient time (and road access) for  ALL the delivery agents to pick up their parcels off the train - not remotely practical on anything other than a train which sits at a termini for an hour or more allowing this to happen.

 

Its worth noting that at one stage Network Rail tried to open a series of parcel shops at stations with the idea that commuters send or pick up parcels on their journeys to or from work. Granted this was using road transport - but it turned out to be a big flop! Not enough customers to justify taking up prime retail space. There is a reason the likes of Collect Plus, My Hermes, etc use newsagents / corner shops / garages as parcel drop off locations...

 

 

 

* This can simply be a HGV trailer parked outside an industrial unit during the day  that gets swapped over in the evening for example. Overnight the HGV driver drops off a trailer full of parcels for distribution locally the following day and picks up a trailer full of parcels for onward transport to the sorting hub. In the morning a local agent opens up the trailer and distributes the outbound parcels to the delivery couriers then in the evening meets the couriers again and fills the truck with parcels they have picked up during the day.

 

 

[corneliuslundie]

I completely agree that in current circumstances rail finds it hard to compete with road for things such as parcels. The point I was making is that we need a major shift in thinking. We cannot continue to use vast amounts of diesel fuel indefinitely for freight road transport, and there is no alternative fuel in sight, unlike rail, local buses and cars where electricity or hydrogen (?) are options. So it may be less efficient than the current arrangements, but we will need different arrangements long term whatever happens. The oil will not last for ever, even if we are willing to continue to use it for road transport. So now is the time to start blue sky thinking about the future, not when it is already too late.

But of course with our political and financial systems that is not possible.  Politicians think about the time to the next election and financiers the time to the next half yearly results.

And efficient? I recently ordered some paint from a well known model paint supplier. It first made a short journey south east from Hertfordshire to Essex. Then a longer journey from Essex to Aberystwyth. It was finally delivered from Aberystwyth (back along the same road 33 miles or so). So it was transhipped twice.

BTW I never understood why Red Star Parcels stopped. It seemed very successful and very busy. I have a feeling that the managers at the time just didn't want to do it because it didn't fit their idea of a railway.

I believe that another thing which needs to change is the attitude that whatever you do you must minimise manpower. That has caused untold harm over the years, and not just to the people then without jobs. But perhaps there I am getting onto dangerous ground.

Jonathan

[woodenhead]

There are options for road that does away with fossil fuels and allows them to charge on the road.

 

Think trolley buses and replace the bus with a lorry under wires on a motorway.  They put a power line above the first lane of the motorway, the tractor unit carries a pantograph - extends to pick up power , for overtaking it uses a diesel hybrid engine using batteries or diesel

 

Edited September 28, 2020 by woodenhead

[Joseph_Pestell]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

That still doesn't solve the fundamental issue that railways do not go to everyones doorsetp, nor the reality that extra transshipment between modes (or between trains) is expensive. The growth in parcel deliveries has been mostly due to the direct home delivery of items - not of services requiring people to actively go out and collect the items themselves .

 

Many of the low cost couriers used by the likes of Amazon effectively make their delivery agents work from home - i.e. They get a big delivery sent directly to them in the morning or waiting for them at a local hub* for them to redistribute locally (Hence the use of private cars / vans rather than branded delivery vehicles)

 

For this sort of model to have any chance of making use of rail transport means you need to ensure sufficient time (and road access) for  ALL the delivery agents to pick up their parcels off the train - not remotely practical on anything other than a train which sits at a termini for an hour or more allowing this to happen.

 

Its worth noting that at one stage Network Rail tried to open a series of parcel shops at stations with the idea that commuters send or pick up parcels on their journeys to or from work. Granted this was using road transport - but it turned out to be a big flop! Not enough customers to justify taking up prime retail space. There is a reason the likes of Collect Plus, My Hermes, etc use newsagents / corner shops / garages as parcel drop off locations...

 

 

 

* This can simply be a HGV trailer parked outside an industrial unit during the day  that gets swapped over in the evening for example. Overnight the HGV driver drops off a trailer full of parcels for distribution locally the following day and picks up a trailer full of parcels for onward transport to the sorting hub. In the morning a local agent opens up the trailer and distributes the outbound parcels to the delivery couriers then in the evening meets the couriers again and fills the truck with parcels they have picked up during the day.

 

 

 

The majority of courier work is still with the large firms: DPD, DHL, TNT and the like.

 

That still involves transshipment of parcels between the HGV and the local delivery 3.5t van. So long as the local depot is alongside the railway (as DPD is at Newbury, for example) there is no disadvantage to the trunk section being by train. 

 

Amazon is a rather different model with multiple distribution points rather than a central hub in the Midlands.

Edited September 28, 2020 by Joseph_Pestell

[woodenhead]

Amazon appears to be a very distributed network, having a single hub leaves you open to disruption if that hub fails for any reason, the more distributed you are the less risk of disruption.

 

Rail has proven itself to be most effective when it comes to bulk loads and containers from shore to distribution points.  Getting the smaller parcel traffic back is going to be difficult as there isn't really anyone with an interest as they are so invested in their current networks.  Containerised food has proven itself to be achievable but it's point to point with road distribution thereafter.

 

Whilst there is still growth for the railways I don't think there will be a massive return of freight to rail now because the distribution hubs are not integrated into rail anymore they are road integrated

[melmerby]

34 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

 

Whilst there is still growth for the railways I don't think there will be a massive return of freight to rail now because the distribution hubs are not integrated into rail anymore they are road integrated

https://goo.gl/maps/KFxshDDLmtpenpdT9

[Pacific231G]

1 hour ago, corneliuslundie said:

.....BTW I never understood why Red Star Parcels stopped. It seemed very successful and very busy. I have a feeling that the managers at the time just didn't want to do it because it didn't fit their idea of a railway.

 

 

I think you might very well be right about that CorneliusWhen I worked in a regional newsroom in the early 1980s we used Red Star to get newsfilm in from crews working out in the field so they and the reporters could go straight on to another job. Typical journeys were Newbury, Reading (probably the most common), Brighton or Bournemouth to Southampton and tapes being shipped to and from TV Centre in London. We knew which train the fim would be on so a runner could nip over to the Red Star office. Responsible BR staff signed it off at each stage of its journey and I don't remember a story ever missing the evening programme. It was a terrific service and when HST's appeared the fastest way of getting urgent packages around the country. Red Star finally closed in 2001 but I think by then it was a shadow of its former self.* .

 

I think part of the problem for railfreight, and perhaps also for parcels, was that politicians's got it in the neck from their constituents or their MPs if passenger services weren't good and both they and the media then gave put pressure on BR's management to fix things. When freight services weren't good shippers rarely complained to their MP and a load of widgets getting held up would never make the evening news; they'd just phone up a road haulage company.

 

I always thought that the one upside of rail privatisation was that with new companies whose sole business was carrying goods by rail with a financial incentive to carry as much of it as possible we'd see a massive switch from road to rail. To some extent that happened but, as the privatised railways ended up being effectively macro managed by the government, who'd still hear all about it if commuter services were poor,  but still needing to deliver private profits that seemed to peter out.  Neverthess and even despite sectorisation in the last years of BR, I still see far more goods trains on the GW main line than I ever remember seeing back then though nothing, apart from containers, that's not trainload.

I think part of the problem has been the leaky bucket factor, some traffics such as coal or oil have largely disappeared but the railways haven't been agile enough about finding new traffics to replace them. Whether that's because the railfreight companies haven't been sufficiently enterprising or because the priority on passengers has put too many barriers in their way I don't know.  What I do see is hundreds of trucks filling every layby in the country as their drivers have to take their rest periods and I cant help thinking that all that freight could be moving if it was on a train.

 

*Update

There is a company called  InterCity RailFreight Ltd, that I must admit I'd never heard of till I looked up Red Star, that uses the high speed rail passenger system to carry same day packages using local couriers for collection and delivery.

 

https://www.parcelandpostaltechnologyinternational.com/news/delivery/intercity-railfreight-expands-same-day-delivery-network.html and their website here https://www.intercityrailfreight.com)

 

It sounds like the rail companies they work with are making space available on their trains for this service. Airliners have carried freight beneath the feet of their passengers for decades so I see no reason why spare capacity on passenger trains shouldn't be used

Edited September 28, 2020 by Pacific231G

[stewartingram]

Once upon a time, in a far off land......

 

We had a railway network that was within reach of most towns & villages. (Ok not perfect, but within reach).

Railways had goods yards (including parcels); the latter were also handled at stations.

Goods were delivered to the depot, and could be collected by the client, or transferred to a railway delivery lorry. 

Separately, Royal Mail collected their own consignment, and delivered in their own vehicles.

Nothing was ever perfect, but it wasn't too bad a system.

 

We threw it all away.

 

 

Meanwhile, in the modern Utopia, we have a multitude of couriers delivering in every street.

Rarely are they heavily loaded, as there is competition between them.

Many couriers are not "full-fat" (aka Royal Mail), using various cost-cutting methods.

These include deliveries by householder's car (not really suitable, and often not insured for commercial use).

HGV delivering direct to the householder who distributes. (Think narrow domestic streets, lorry parking on pavement to unload, noise etc).

Drivers paid abysmal rates of pay, often a few pence per drop. (Think no care in delivery, very bad driving (and parking) to achieve time "schedule").

Numerous vans in same street every day (not an exaggeration).

Some firms pass the "last mile" of delivery over to Royal Mail, who are obliged to take it, but suffer a loss in doing so.

 

Isn't progress wonderful?

 

[phil-b259]

3 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

I completely agree that in current circumstances rail finds it hard to compete with road for things such as parcels. The point I was making is that we need a major shift in thinking. We cannot continue to use vast amounts of diesel fuel indefinitely for freight road transport, and there is no alternative fuel in sight, unlike rail, local buses and cars where electricity or hydrogen (?) are options.

 

 

There is PLENTY of oil left for road transport uses stretching well into the next century given improvements in extraction techniques - the issue these days is rather that we are wrecking the climate by using the stuff, not that there will be a shortage in years to come.

 

As with all folk who have gone before you - the fundamental truth you fail to acknowledge is you cannot 'dis-invent' technology / knowledge - and that includes the undoubted convenience of road transport door to door. Politicians are very well aware of this - hence moves to make cars / lorries cleaner rather than face the voter backlash that would come from attempts to curtail their general use outside of very specific situations (such as driving into the centre of a major cities)

 

I have made the point before that the ONLY reason railways were able to become the predominant method of transport for a time is the rail section of the journey was so superior in terms of time and capacity to the alternatives that the inherent disadvantages of transshipment at stations or the journey between the origin / destination and the railhead was worth the inconvenience.

 

In other words had someone invented the internal combustion engine and decent roads in the 1880s there would simply have been no need whatsoever for railways to have been become a major transport player - as evidenced by the many countries around the world who went straight for investing in roads as their economies transformed in the 1960s and 70s

 

These days with the motor car / lorry and paved, multi lane high speed roads, that advantage the railways had back in the 1800s which gave rise to the extensive pre-beaching network is well and truly lost. Railways are instead forced to compete on other terms - commuting into big cities being one example where most rail users (pre covid) positively hated the experience and would have loved to swap it for  a car journey were it not for road congestion and parking difficulties within said cities.

 

Rail may well have lots of advantages - but currently road transport has more / better ones in a lot of cases so unless you start infringing on the right of private commercial companies to trade / compete as they see fit and unless you are going to start annoying voters with restrictions on their personal freedoms then the changes you want to happen cannot happen!

 

Of course in a democracy parties that go round restricting personal freedoms don't tend to last too long - which is why the planet as a whole is in the state it is and Governments continue to dodge the hard decisions needed to tame our climate and preserve the bio-diversity of the planet. Ultimately if you want to force through radical changes in how society and business functions you need to be a dictatorship of some description because there will be an awful lot of pain to be endured by citizens while things are turned on their head building the new Utopia.

 

[wombatofludham]

8 hours ago, Quarryscapes said:

 

Didn't realise we already had a different model in Wales. Yes she's applied to be train conductor working from Machynlleth. There's a lot of hoops to jump through, but fingers crossed she gets it. 

Good luck to her, she'll probably pass through the village if successful.  I'll have to give the trains a wave if I'm held up at the level crossing just in case!

[Northmoor]

14 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. 

A one-off 10% drop in commuting on many major routes amounts to less than four years' traffic growth, based on the average over the last couple of decades.  Balance the temporarily reduced demand with the coming recession in construction, the smaller individuals civils sub-contracts for stations, bridges etc., are going to start coming in under budget as rates get driven down.

[xveitch]

Apropos modern rail-based parcel traffic, I presume you've not seen the (fairly) recent development from the Rail Operations Group (ROG), called Orion: https://orion.railopsgroup.co.uk 

 

They've ordered 5 Class 769 FLEX bi-modes and appear to have access to some 319's: https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/more-flex-units-for-rog-as-it-expands-logistics-traffic-plans

 

Given their experience with rolling stock management it will be interesting to see how they implement this service... 

 

I know very little about train pathing and priorities; maybe someone would be kind enough to answer a question: I presume that when delays occur, a passenger service will be prioritised over a freight service. Would the use of passenger-grade vehicles for this service increase it's priority (which would be very important for parcel deliveries, especially with the claims they're making), perhaps only over other freight services? 

 

Xander

[RJS1977]

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.

 

However, if you reduce dwell time at stops, the buses complete the route quicker, so you need fewer of them.

[mdvle]

1 hour ago, RJS1977 said:

 

However, if you reduce dwell time at stops, the buses complete the route quicker, so you need fewer of them.

 

Which if it was true that the Boris Bus was cheaper at moving people then more of them would have been sold.  The fact that nobody else wanted them tells the story.

[Zomboid]

6 hours ago, xveitch said:

Would the use of passenger-grade vehicles for this service increase it's priority (which would be very important for parcel deliveries, especially with the claims they're making), perhaps only over other freight services? 

If they can run in a passenger train path then they could presumably be given a 1xxx or 2xxx headcode, and would be treated accordingly.

 

The issue I can see with using passenger trains and stations for parcels is the station dwell times. It works with aviation because planes stop at airports for a long time, but you're not loading and unloading many parcels in 60 seconds, which limits the number of places that could be served.

[Zomboid]

5 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

Which if it was true that the Boris Bus was cheaper at moving people then more of them would have been sold.  The fact that nobody else wanted them tells the story.

Yes, ultimately they are an expensive luxury that bus operators ultimately couldn't really afford. They're also designed around the specific challenges of operating in London (not to mention rose tinted nostalgia for the Routemaster and its predecessors), and presumably don't suit many other places quite so well.

 

But as a passenger who just used them and didn't know all that, they're a really good product. Proving that you get what you pay for.

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

If they can run in a passenger train path then they could presumably be given a 1xxx or 2xxx headcode, and would be treated accordingly.

 

The issue I can see with using passenger trains and stations for parcels is the station dwell times. It works with aviation because planes stop at airports for a long time, but you're not loading and unloading many parcels in 60 seconds, which limits the number of places that could be served.

Which is why those organisations looking at re-entering the rail market for parcel transport are looking at dedicated parcel EMUs that will run at night / outside peak hours when train paths and lengthy platform occupations can be accommodated.

 

The other thing to consider is that given the volumes of parcels needed to make the service viable, the ability to easily transfer parcels to road transport for onward distribution is vital. In recent decades easy road access / ‘cab roads’ within main stations have been removed, either to allow for station rebuilding / expansion  / contraction or as part anti-terorism measures to frustrate chicle based attacks.

 

 

[phil-b259]

13 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

I think you might very well be right about that CorneliusWhen I worked in a regional newsroom in the early 1980s we used Red Star to get newsfilm in from crews working out in the field so they and the reporters could go straight on to another job. Typical journeys were Newbury, Reading (probably the most common), Brighton or Bournemouth to Southampton and tapes being shipped to and from TV Centre in London. We knew which train the fim would be on so a runner could nip over to the Red Star office. Responsible BR staff signed it off at each stage of its journey and I don't remember a story ever missing the evening programme. It was a terrific service and when HST's appeared the fastest way of getting urgent packages around the country. Red Star finally closed in 2001 but I think by then it was a shadow of its former self.* .

 

 

The Red star parcels service worked precisely because it was part of a vertically integrated structure. Many trains in use at the time were still carrying about Guards / luggage accomadation regardless of whether it was used or not - so the costs of providing the parcel service was basically limited to staff and depots etc.

 

Come privatisation and every TOC demanded payments for carrying about other people’s stuff. Combine this with new train fleets with little or no luggage accomadation and the costs of running the Red Star parcels business as a rail based operation became cripplingly large.

[Hobby]

13 hours ago, stewartingram said:

Rarely are they heavily loaded,

 

Have you ever looked in the back of the delivery van when they've just left the local hub? They are usually packed to the gunnels, and the poor sod has to deliver all of them before he can go home, no matter what time he finishes...

 

I'm with Phil on this one, the world has moved on, parcels could still go by rail for the trunk section but before and after that it's road. I suspect that dedicated trains are the only way as well, though how they would cope with overnight or weekend engineering works is anyone's guess. Carrying parcels in a big truck overnight as is often done now would have far less risks of something going wrong. Even if the lorry breaks down another unit can pick up the trailer and carry on, something that would take a lot longer (if possible) if the same thing happened on the railways.

[phil-b259]

13 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

I think you might very well be right about that CorneliusWhen I worked in a regional newsroom in the early 1980s we used Red Star to get newsfilm in from crews working out in the field so they and the reporters could go straight on to another job. Typical journeys were Newbury, Reading (probably the most common), Brighton or Bournemouth to Southampton and tapes being shipped to and from TV Centre in London. We knew which train the fim would be on so a runner could nip over to the Red Star office. Responsible BR staff signed it off at each stage of its journey and I don't remember a story ever missing the evening programme. It was a terrific service and when HST's appeared the fastest way of getting urgent packages around the country. Red Star finally closed in 2001 but I think by then it was a shadow of its former self.* .

 

 

The Red star parcels service worked precisely because it was part of a vertically integrated structure. Many trains in use at the time were still carrying about Guards / luggage accomadation regardless of whether it was used or not - so the costs of providing the parcel service was basically limited to staff and depots etc.

 

Come privatisation and every TOC demanded payments for carrying about other people’s stuff. Combine this with new train fleets with little or no luggage accomadation and the costs of running the Red Star parcels business as a rail based operation became cripplingly large.