Season ticket sales at 7 year low...

[phil-b259]

Who has caused the train disruption, by the way you are writing I assume you think its the nasty militant Unions and their lazy overpaid staff, because lets be honest what Wilkinson said in Croydon wasnt real was it!

 

So you would be happy to accept taking over the responsibility of the PTI what they get rid of the Guards would you, bearing in mind peoples complete lack of responsibility for their own safety and actions (getting pissed and drugged up and then trying to catch a train), plus of course the recent Court cases (warranted or not) but you wouldnt have a problem with that?

 

I do believe that DOO has a place on the railways but it certainly shouldnt be the default for every line in the Country, but lets not go round all that again.

 

Did you actually read any of what I said? (and please note I am a member of said union)

 

How about the sentence:-

 

This extends well beyond the specifics of DOO (where there are perfectly valid points to be made both for and against - as per the now locked threads on this forum will show).

 

While Wilkinson and his mates in the DfT were well out of order in picking a fight for purely ideological reasons, Mr Cash and co are just as bad for (i) Taking the bait, (ii) Successfully alienating the travelling public by prolonged industrial action (which is now totally ineffective) and (iii) Unwilling to make sensible compromises which reflect the environment we live in (and the Government we actually have - however flawed it might be).

[Mike Storey]

In case you had not seen it, the SMMT (Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders) announced yesterday that new car sales in the UK were down 5.6% in 2017, the first drop in 6 years. That is, overall, a greater drop than rail season ticket holders.

 

Despite the HMG pronounced economic "good news",  the SMMT blame "lacklustre" economic performance and loss of consumer confidence, as well as confusion over diesel emissions and future taxation. They polish the news by saying it is still the third highest total of sales in 11 years, but then admit that far from a blip, they expect sales to be even worse in 2018. There are now fewer cars on Britain's roads than the year before (around 2.5 million, down from 2.7 million in 2016, but well up on 2010 at c.2 million) which is good news environmentally and in other ways, but not economically.

 

There would appear to be something more disturbing than rail fares in play. Rail usage is driven far more by GDP growth than any other factor.

[NickC]

​Mike, In 2016 there were over 31 million cars on the road in 2016 so someone is feeding you false data.

I suspect there were 2.7 million new cars sold in 2016 and 2.5 million in 2017. The total number of on the road in 2017 is unlikely to have dropped unless more than 2.5 million were scrapped.

There was also a boost in car sales in 2016 with people trying to beat the changes in Vehicle Excise duty (Car Tax) which would not have been repeated in 2017 which is likely to count for some of the difference. 

Edited January 5, 2018 by NickC

[The Stationmaster]

In case you had not seen it, the SMMT (Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders) announced yesterday that new car sales in the UK were down 5.6% in 2017, the first drop in 6 years. That is, overall, a greater drop than rail season ticket holders.

 

Despite the HMG pronounced economic "good news",  the SMMT blame "lacklustre" economic performance and loss of consumer confidence, as well as confusion over diesel emissions and future taxation. They polish the news by saying it is still the third highest total of sales in 11 years, but then admit that far from a blip, they expect sales to be even worse in 2018. There are now fewer cars on Britain's roads than the year before (around 2.5 million, down from 2.7 million in 2016, but well up on 2010 at c.2 million) which is good news environmentally and in other ways, but not economically.

 

There would appear to be something more disturbing than rail fares in play. Rail usage is driven far more by GDP growth than any other factor.

 

From a study of the forecourts it is clear that that there is far more to the drop in new car sales than the headline figure indicates.  The first thing is the considerable drop in the prices of secondhand diesel vehicles and all the stuff being pumped out about emissions has hit sales of new diesels.  No doubt many diesel owners are doing what I'm doing and are waiting for a proper scrappage allowance - which in reality is what Govt owes us for changing its mind from encouraging to buy diesels to now branding us as something one step short of enemies of the state although we are already being accused of being social pariahs who go round killing children and old people with our vehicle emissions.  So that's market distortion No.1 and if you measure sales in money terms rather than by vehicle numbers it will tend to exacerbate that effect.

 

No.2 is undoubtedly the fall in the purchasing power of the £ and uncertainty over Brexit which has in turn bred economic uncertainty.  Plus of course the fall in the £'s international 'value' has led to general price increases across the board so disposable income is being hit for many people.  Add in numerous other factors - some social and some economic - plus a fairly hefty denouncing of the very heavily geared lease/buy arrangement (and the banks leaning on the funding of it) and its hardly surprising that car sales have suffered.

 

Another possibly pertinent point is that modern vehicles tend to last a darned sight longer than those of 3 o years ago so unless you are some sort of fashion freak or want the latest registration plate there is less incentive than used to be the case to buy a new/newer car.

 

However looking on the bright side it might be no bad thing in view of this country's never ending thirst for imported cars and a relatively limited part of the mass market 'buying British'. (and before anyone jumps on that one I will point out that my 8 year old car is French, as was the one before it, as was the one before that, and the one before that - and so on going back for nearly 30 years.

[Dunsignalling]

Did you actually read any of what I said? (and please note I am a member of said union)

 

How about the sentence:-

 

This extends well beyond the specifics of DOO (where there are perfectly valid points to be made both for and against - as per the now locked threads on this forum will show).

 

While Wilkinson and his mates in the DfT were well out of order in picking a fight for purely ideological reasons, Mr Cash and co are just as bad for (i) Taking the bait, (ii) Successfully alienating the travelling public by prolonged industrial action (which is now totally ineffective) and (iii) Unwilling to make sensible compromises which reflect the environment we live in (and the Government we actually have - however flawed it might be).

I think the RMT are just hanging in there waiting for the government to implode and be replaced by one more amenable to their wants and I, for one, wouldn't put money on them having got that wrong.

 

Also, of course, if their action really had become "totally ineffective", Southern et al would have ceased to cancel any trains or hire in any buses on strike days and passengers would be starting to get over their alienation. None of which I see happening..

 

John

Edited January 5, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[The Stationmaster]

Further to the car sales thing there was an interesting report on the BBC News this evening - diesel car sales in December dropped to 30% (thirty percent) below those for the previous year having already dropped by 20% in November.  The problem - apart from my point No.1 above (which was reinforced by the programme and interviews) is that many people simply don't know what car to buy if they want to buy one with local councils being given free rein to introduce local pollution taxation.

 

Incidentally the side effect of the drop in diesel car sales was also reported - for the first time for some time CO2 emission levels in London rose at the end of 2017.  I wonder when that one will be back to top billing or if we'll all get grants to build windmills in the garden?

[Mark Saunders]

Incidentally the side effect of the drop in diesel car sales was also reported - for the first time for some time CO2 emission levels in London rose at the end of 2017.  I wonder when that one will be back to top billing or if we'll all get grants to build windmills in the garden?

 

The law of unintended consequences, solve one to create another!

[royaloak]

Incidentally the side effect of the drop in diesel car sales was also reported - for the first time for some time CO2 emission levels in London rose at the end of 2017.  I wonder when that one will be back to top billing or if we'll all get grants to build windmills in the garden?

They cant have it both way, either diesel is best (but put up with the particulates) or petrol is best (and put up with the CO2* produced), I am sure they will soon have cars running on bionic duckweed** which will fix everything! 

 

 

* can anyone remember many years ago when the Government were informed that fitting catalytic converters to cars was not the best option at the time, but the Government ignored them and we are where we are!

 

** copyright Mr Meads.

[pete_mcfarlane]

This is the problem when policy makers listen to lobbying by single interest environmental pressure groups - fix one problem, and then cause another one outside of the limited sphere of interest of that group. 

[jjb1970]

The diesel gate affair and its aftermath was shocking. Watching governments feign ignorance on the limitations of engine certification (everybody who knew anything about certification knew full well the results were test bed results, not in-service values and that actual emissions could be completely different to the test bed values) and the obvious consequences of increased NOx and PM emissions was not very edifying, at best it was disingenuous and at worst outright dishonesty in some cases. Then there was VW adroitly spinning their blatant criminal actions and apparent contempt for legal requirements and public health as being because the test cycle wasn't very good and anyway every manufacturer in the world was doing the same thing (except the majority who weren't). Then there is a continent that preaches to the rest of the world about how to hug trees doing everything it could to put fires out and protect its car industry. And don't get me started on some of the green NGOs and their focus on single issues in isolation. I'm deeply involved in an environmental issue that will probably quite literally turn into a ship wreck (or several) if the green NGOs get their way because they're wilfully refusing to look beyond a single narrow concern. And I say all of this as a tree hugger myself that thinks we do need to be more serious about emissions.

[jim.snowdon]

The diesel gate affair and its aftermath was shocking. Watching governments feign ignorance on the limitations of engine certification (everybody who knew anything about certification knew full well the results were test bed results, not in-service values and that actual emissions could be completely different to the test bed values) and the obvious consequences of increased NOx and PM emissions was not very edifying, at best it was disingenuous and at worst outright dishonesty in some cases. Then there was VW adroitly spinning their blatant criminal actions and apparent contempt for legal requirements and public health as being because the test cycle wasn't very good and anyway every manufacturer in the world was doing the same thing (except the majority who weren't). Then there is a continent that preaches to the rest of the world about how to hug trees doing everything it could to put fires out and protect its car industry. And don't get me started on some of the green NGOs and their focus on single issues in isolation. I'm deeply involved in an environmental issue that will probably quite literally turn into a ship wreck (or several) if the green NGOs get their way because they're wilfully refusing to look beyond a single narrow concern. And I say all of this as a tree hugger myself that thinks we do need to be more serious about emissions.

And, rather amusingly, there has been some research that showed that, under real world conditions, the older diesels were actually cleaner than the new ones, if for no other reason than that the test conditions are rarely achieved in real world driving.

 

Jim

[jjb1970]

And, rather amusingly, there has been some research that showed that, under real world conditions, the older diesels were actually cleaner than the new ones, if for no other reason than that the test conditions are rarely achieved in real world driving.

 

Jim

There was certainly a deterioration in fuel consumption as tier I and tier II took effect for large engines as engine builders adjusted timing and combustion characteristics to suppress NOx at the expense of efficiency to avoid using techniques such as selective catalytic reduction.

I find it amusing to watch politicians demand a ban on diesel engines because of NOx emissions. If they are worried about NOx they should address it through NOx emissions regulation given that it isn't that difficult to abate NOx in diesel exhaust streams.

[Mike Storey]

​Mike, In 2016 there were over 31 million cars on the road in 2016 so someone is feeding you false data.

I suspect there were 2.7 million new cars sold in 2016 and 2.5 million in 2017. The total number of on the road in 2017 is unlikely to have dropped unless more than 2.5 million were scrapped.

There was also a boost in car sales in 2016 with people trying to beat the changes in Vehicle Excise duty (Car Tax) which would not have been repeated in 2017 which is likely to count for some of the difference. 

 

No-one is feeding me false data Nick! It is me!! You are quite right - I have used the total of new car registrations and typed total number of cars. Doh! Yes. 31.7 million in 2016, up from around 27 million in 2001. Cannot see any figure yet for 2017 without further work.

 

Vast majority of difference is in massive drop in diesel sales (according to SMMT).

 

Thanks

[Mike Storey]

From a study of the forecourts it is clear that that there is far more to the drop in new car sales than the headline figure indicates.  The first thing is the considerable drop in the prices of secondhand diesel vehicles and all the stuff being pumped out about emissions has hit sales of new diesels.  No doubt many diesel owners are doing what I'm doing and are waiting for a proper scrappage allowance - which in reality is what Govt owes us for changing its mind from encouraging to buy diesels to now branding us as something one step short of enemies of the state although we are already being accused of being social pariahs who go round killing children and old people with our vehicle emissions.  So that's market distortion No.1 and if you measure sales in money terms rather than by vehicle numbers it will tend to exacerbate that effect.

 

No.2 is undoubtedly the fall in the purchasing power of the £ and uncertainty over Brexit which has in turn bred economic uncertainty.  Plus of course the fall in the £'s international 'value' has led to general price increases across the board so disposable income is being hit for many people.  Add in numerous other factors - some social and some economic - plus a fairly hefty denouncing of the very heavily geared lease/buy arrangement (and the banks leaning on the funding of it) and its hardly surprising that car sales have suffered.

 

Another possibly pertinent point is that modern vehicles tend to last a darned sight longer than those of 3 o years ago so unless you are some sort of fashion freak or want the latest registration plate there is less incentive than used to be the case to buy a new/newer car.

 

However looking on the bright side it might be no bad thing in view of this country's never ending thirst for imported cars and a relatively limited part of the mass market 'buying British'. (and before anyone jumps on that one I will point out that my 8 year old car is French, as was the one before it, as was the one before that, and the one before that - and so on going back for nearly 30 years.

 

All true, except that it is worse than just individual consumer confidence. Company fleet purchases/leases were one of the biggest falls of all.

[Pandora]

There was certainly a deterioration in fuel consumption as tier I and tier II took effect for large engines as engine builders adjusted timing and combustion characteristics to suppress NOx at the expense of efficiency to avoid using techniques such as selective catalytic reduction.

I find it amusing to watch politicians demand a ban on diesel engines because of NOx emissions. If they are worried about NOx they should address it through NOx emissions regulation given that it isn't that difficult to abate NOx in diesel exhaust streams

 

 

.Iit is very diificult and expensive in terms of the SCR  exhaust hardware and Adblue fluid consumption needed to abate Nox in diesel emissions,  why do you think VW resorted to cheating and lying?,  Calibrate a diesel l car for low smoke leads to high Nox output,  requiring the use of SCR Adblue  injection into the exhaust stream  to neutralise the Nox,  VW found that a Tiguan 2.0 l diesel required 1 litre of Adblue every 68 miles,  the cost of the Adblue  at £2 / litre,  was greater than the fuel savings of diesel mpg over petrol.

[jjb1970]

 

There was certainly a deterioration in fuel consumption as tier I and tier II took effect for large engines as engine builders adjusted timing and combustion characteristics to suppress NOx at the expense of efficiency to avoid using techniques such as selective catalytic reduction.

I find it amusing to watch politicians demand a ban on diesel engines because of NOx emissions. If they are worried about NOx they should address it through NOx emissions regulation given that it isn't that difficult to abate NOx in diesel exhaust streams

 

 

.Iit is very diificult and expensive in terms of the SCR  exhaust hardware and Adblue fluid consumption needed to abate Nox in diesel emissions,  why do you think VW resorted to cheating and lying?,  Calibrate a diesel l car for low smoke leads to high Nox output,  requiring the use of SCR Adblue  injection into the exhaust stream  to neutralise the Nox,  VW found that a Tiguan 2.0 l diesel required 1 litre of Adblue every 68 miles,  the cost of the Adblue  at £2 / litre,  was greater than the fuel savings of diesel mpg over petrol.

 

 

SCR has been around for decades, it is a reliable and effective way to abate NOx. Urea (or ammonia) consumption is an expense but consumption isn't excessive. My Audi A6 has a 17Lt. tank and I just got the warning light to top it up after about 5,500 miles and with an expected 1500 miles remaining. As engine technology goes SCR is a very simple technology.

[Pandora]

 The first thing is the considerable drop in the prices of secondhand diesel vehicles and all the stuff being pumped out about emissions has hit sales of new diesels.  No doubt many diesel owners are doing what I'm doing and are waiting for a proper scrappage allowance - which in reality is what Govt owes us for changing its mind from encouraging to buy diesels to now branding us as something one step short of enemies of the state although we are already being accused of being social pariahs who go round killing children and old people with our vehicle emissions.

You are very misinformed  to blame the government for the diesel emissions  problem, the Govt owes you nothing, the car makers owe you the return of your money for selling a false bill of goods, cars which cheated past the conformance testsw.

Edited January 7, 2018 by Pandora

[Pandora]

SCR has been around for decades, it is a reliable and effective way to abate NOx. Urea (or ammonia) consumption is an expense but consumption isn't excessive. My Audi A6 has a 17Lt. tank and I just got the warning light to top it up after about 5,500 miles and with an expected 1500 miles remaining. As engine technology goes SCR is a very simple technology.

Your Audi A6 is equipped with a defeat device, the defeat device switches the car to "road mode" in every day driving, the "road mode" dosage of urea is a fraction of the correct and proper stoichiometric dosage for  "emissions test mode".  SCR technology is not new, but is expensive to implement, adding 50% to the cost of the car engine, expect to see zero small cars and only a few medium sized cars available in the showrroms with diesel engine options over the next three years.

The  figure of 68 miles per litre of Adblue  for the VW Tiguan came from a sworn statement in a  USA court  by a VW engineer on trial for the dieselgate fraud. So far two VW employees have received 3 year and 7 year gaol sentences for  their crimes

[Jonboy]

All true, except that it is worse than just individual consumer confidence. Company fleet purchases/leases were one of the biggest falls of all.

In my industry there has been a significant drop in the number of on the road sales reps across almost every company over the last five years or so. This is because of a significant shift in the interaction our customers want with us day to day and a move over to social media/online relationships.

 

I have also had a significant drop in the number of approaches to meet reps from everything from photocopier to freight suppliers in a similar period.

[royaloak]

You are very misinformed  to blame the government for the diesel emissions  problem, the Govt owes you nothing, the car makers owe you the return of your money for selling a false bill of goods, cars which cheated past the conformance testsw.

If it wasnt the Government of the time then who was it that encouraged everyone to buy diesel because it was 'greener' than petrol and then, a few years later, changed the rules so those who had bought diesel were left with a worthless car?

[jjb1970]

Your Audi A6 is equipped with a defeat device, the defeat device switches the car to "road mode" in every day driving, the "road mode" dosage of urea is a fraction of the correct and proper stoichiometric dosage for  "emissions test mode".  SCR technology is not new, but is expensive to implement, adding 50% to the cost of the car engine, expect to see zero small cars and only a few medium sized cars available in the showrroms with diesel engine options over the next three years.

The  figure of 68 miles per litre of Adblue  for the VW Tiguan came from a sworn statement in a  USA court  by a VW engineer on trial for the dieselgate fraud. So far two VW employees have received 3 year and 7 year gaol sentences for  their crimes

 

To be honest, based on some calculations I did I think my urea consumption is a bit light. Based on a few assumptions I estimated somewhere between 4,500 - 5000 miles from a tank of urea based on my driving style. 

[cunningduck]

You are very misinformed to blame the government for the diesel emissions problem, the Govt owes you nothing, the car makers owe you the return of your money for selling a false bill of goods, cars which cheated past the conformance testsw.

They didn’t cheat the test, they just followed the letter of the law, not the spirit. Perhaps it is the regulators fault for setting a test that can be foiled?

[jjb1970]

They didn’t cheat the test, they just followed the letter of the law, not the spirit. Perhaps it is the regulators fault for setting a test that can be foiled?

 

Two things got conflated after dieselgate (helped in part by VW's spinning). VW used a defeat device which is illegal, this got mixed up with the fact that the test regime isn't especially representative of real world conditions. The first was law breaking by VW and not the responsibility of government. Governments do have to take responsibility for the test regime. Certainly there are questions to be asked about the conduct of some tests and the checks made by those certifying engines. 

 

And I think Stationmaster made a fair point, governments encouraged diesels for years because it lowered CO2 emissions and reduced fuel use despite being informed repeatedly of the implications for other emissions.

[royaloak]

They didn’t cheat the test, they just followed the letter of the law, not the spirit. Perhaps it is the regulators fault for setting a test that can be foiled?

The tests are meant to be the same for everyone to give a good comparison between similar cars, VW took the wee wee a bit and were found out/ made a scapegoat*, it is nothing more than everyone else has been doing for years, I think I am correct that all the early computer controlled fuel injected cars were set to lean the mixture at the revs which corresponded to 56mph to show the maximum possible economy even though it would be impossible in the real world to replicate those conditions, I did try on quite a lot on my regular 75 commutes (full length of the M3 with a bit of ordinary road at either end) but could only manage a real world 62mpg in my 1993 Peugeot 106 1,4 diesel, the book said it did 70mpg so not too shabby.

 

* delete as applicable/ your viewpoint.

[jjb1970]

The tests are meant to be the same for everyone to give a good comparison between similar cars, VW took the wee wee a bit and were found out/ made a scapegoat*, it is nothing more than everyone else has been doing for years, I think I am correct that all the early computer controlled fuel injected cars were set to lean the mixture at the revs which corresponded to 56mph to show the maximum possible economy even though it would be impossible in the real world to replicate those conditions, I did try on quite a lot on my regular 75 commutes (full length of the M3 with a bit of ordinary road at either end) but could only manage a real world 62mpg in my 1993 Peugeot 106 1,4 diesel, the book said it did 70mpg so not too shabby.

 

* delete as applicable/ your viewpoint.

 

No, VW didn't do the same as everybody else. There is a fundamental difference between optimising performance for the test (entirely legal, if disingenuous and not good for consumers) and fitting a defeat device or using an irrational control strategy which is illegal.