Why are new trains so awful

[Ron Ron Ron]

 

Edited May 2, 2018 by Ron Ron Ron

[Ron Ron Ron]

A Guardian article from 2016, titled "Why German Trains don't run on time anymore".

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/11/why-german-trains-dont-run-on-time-any-more

 

 

German report on the French Rail strikes....

 

http://www.dw.com/en/french-rail-workers-begin-months-of-rolling-strikes/a-43230359

 

 

A news report from only a few days ago, on how awful German railway punctuality has become....

 

http://www.dw.com/en/quarter-of-german-long-distance-trains-late-in-month-of-march/a-43581427

 

 

The German's think their railways have become a shambles.

 

.

Edited May 2, 2018 by Ron Ron Ron

[Glorious NSE]

The difference being, of course, that in the former case one will often be able to create a lap on which to locate ones laptop and in the latter, not in your wildest dreams.......

Not sure that matters, these new fangled mobile telephones seem to be popular these days. That said, I suspect you'll see more laptops out on average if you ride on a 700 than you will on a 150 half way up a Cornish branch line...

 

[The Stationmaster]

A Guardian article from 2016, titled "Why German Trains don't run on time anymore".

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/11/why-german-trains-dont-run-on-time-any-more

 

 

German report on the French Rail strikes....

 

http://www.dw.com/en/french-rail-workers-begin-months-of-rolling-strikes/a-43230359

 

 

A news report from only a few days ago, on how awful German railway punctuality has become....

 

http://www.dw.com/en/quarter-of-german-long-distance-trains-late-in-month-of-march/a-43581427

 

 

The German's think their railways have become a shambles.

 

.

 

In my experience the Germans are absolutely right in what they think - punctuality took a deep dive some years back although I suspect the reasons are more complex than those articles present.

[The Stationmaster]

This is a common UK response - but it completely fails to deal with the fact that other countries manage to do things better.

 

...R

 

Perhaps you'd care to name those countries.

 

 I'll give you a tip tho' - leave out SNCF which is probably the most inefficient railway in Europe and has some of the most dated employment conditions of all;  leave out DB where punctuallity went to pot some years ago and doesn't seem to have improved since; leave out SNCB where - notwithstanding their operational skills which I greatly admire - staff promotion depends depends more on your religion and 'race' than on ability; leave out FS whose competence in various aspects of timetable planning makes them a laughing stock among European railways; leave out all the countries which operate very thin (infrequent) train services over long stretches of country because they don't exactly count as networks notwithstanding their employment of some excellent staff.  Oh and leave out the ones which receive greater total subsidies, on whatever measure you care to choose, than the British rail network.

 

PS As a matter of interest my job involved me in regularly working with a number of railways I have mentioned above, plus others, so I have seen them from the inside as well as seeing the trains they do, or don't, operate.

[wombatofludham]

I went to a Plandampf back in 2005 and having a smattering of German I was talking to a lovely old gentleman who I had helped get his wife, who was crazy about trains but had mobility issues, onto the train. I was astonished when he burst out laughing when I told him I was surprised that all the trains we'd been on that week, including the non-steam Intercity and Interregional regular trains, had been late. Every one. I explained that in the UK we thought German railways were efficient and punctual. He described DB as being the one swear word in German I know, and that they were always late, and, much to my and my friend's surprise, he thought Britain's railways were excellent. Now he may have been being polite, but I agree with what others have said, my limited experience of European railways is beyond the showcase high speed lines things are worse than the UK in frequency and no better in accommodation or level of service than the UK, although their fares tend to be good. In terms of frequency the UK is often ahead of all but the Netherlands and Belgium, and France, Germany and other countries are fast replacing older trains with units or fixed formation rakes. Even their fares can be as bewildering as the UK with supplements being added the further you move up the food chain from local all-shacks services. That's always assuming your off-peak train hasn't mutated into a coach funded by the Regional Government as is happening in France and parts of Germany.

 

It's about time we started countering the average numpty's view that all European railways are better and our trains are a load of Eartha Kitt, and started crowing about what we do get right and how our trains are in many instances just as good if not better than most.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Back OT, I don't think that these new trains are all bad - far from it.

 

But in the case of the 700s, they are simply being used on the wrong routes. Not many people will be travelling right through from Kings Lynn to Littlehampton but that is not the point. These trains represent a serious reduction in basic passenger comfort by comparison with what was offered before even for journeys just as far as London.

 

Thameslink "2000" (ha,ha) would offer far better value in terms of numbers of people moved (there are going to be a hell of a lot of empty seats at the outer reaches of the network) if the service was restricted to an area roughly within the M25. People wanting to travel from Kings Lynn to Littlehampton would have good cross-platform interchanges at Finsbury Park and East Croydon.

 

I understand that people prefer a through train but, in this case, the costs of that far outweigh the benefits. I think that it will have to change.

Edited May 2, 2018 by Joseph_Pestell

[Oakydoke]

 But in the case of the 700s, they are simply being used on the wrong routes.

 

Not many people will be travelling right through from Kings Lynn to Littlehampton but that is not the point.

 

Thameslink ... would offer far better value in terms of numbers of people moved (there are going to be a hell of a lot of empty seats at the outer reaches of the network) if the service was restricted to an area roughly within the M25.

 

People wanting to travel from Kings Lynn to Littlehampton would have good cross-platform interchanges at Finsbury Park and East Croydon.

 

I understand that people prefer a through train but, in this case, the costs of that far outweigh the benefits. I think that it will have to change.

I think Joseph has hit the nail on the head.

The Thameslink service should have been reigned in years ago, to a much smaller range from central London.

The 700's shouldn't be running out as far as they do, but who is going to make such a drastic change to the scope of this route and franchise?

[The Great Bear]

I think Joseph has hit the nail on the head.

The Thameslink service should have been reigned in years ago, to a much smaller range from central London.

The 700's shouldn't be running out as far as they do, but who is going to make such a drastic change to the scope of this route and franchise?

The peak hour service on my line (East Grinstead) to London Bridge is switching from Southern to Thameslink. At the moment the LBG trains are unreliable but at least are (in modern terms) relatively comfy 377s especially those formed of the 3 car variant. Come later this month it'll be uncomfortable 700s and I suspect more unreliable. For business I occassionally do have cause to go to Bedford which you would have throught a through Thameslink service would be ideal but the uncomfortable seats and even more so lack of tables means my preference would be get train to Victoria get the tube and pick up East Midland Trains fast service to Bedford so I get the laptop out and work on the train.

 

My experience of Thameslink (ok as an occasional user) is that much of the patronage south of the river is simply to London Bridge so when I've used it in the last few years with trains taking the scenic route through south London they have been less busy because the through Thameslink traffic has been separated from the London Bridge only stuff.

[APOLLO]

A Guardian article from 2016, titled "Why German Trains don't run on time anymore".

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/11/why-german-trains-dont-run-on-time-any-more

 

 

German report on the French Rail strikes....

 

http://www.dw.com/en/french-rail-workers-begin-months-of-rolling-strikes/a-43230359

 

 

A news report from only a few days ago, on how awful German railway punctuality has become....

 

http://www.dw.com/en/quarter-of-german-long-distance-trains-late-in-month-of-march/a-43581427

 

 

The German's think their railways have become a shambles.

 

.

 

The R.A.F. didn't help much !!

 

http://www.dw.com/en/wwii-bomb-removal-to-force-evacuation-around-berlins-main-station/a-43432597

 

Long, long time since I went around West Germany in search of steam. The trains were superb clean and punctual back then. Lots of photos on my Flikr site below.

 

Honestly, I'm a little shocked with what I've read above.

 

Brit15

[phil-b259]

Back OT, I don't think that these new trains are all bad - far from it.

 

But in the case of the 700s, they are simply being used on the wrong routes. Not many people will be travelling right through from Kings Lynn to Littlehampton but that is not the point. These trains represent a serious reduction in basic passenger comfort by comparison with what was offered before even for journeys just as far as London.

 

Thameslink "2000" (ha,ha) would offer far better value in terms of numbers of people moved (there are going to be a hell of a lot of empty seats at the outer reaches of the network) if the service was restricted to an area roughly within the M25. People wanting to travel from Kings Lynn to Littlehampton would have good cross-platform interchanges at Finsbury Park and East Croydon.

 

I understand that people prefer a through train but, in this case, the costs of that far outweigh the benefits. I think that it will have to change.

 

 

 

I think Joseph has hit the nail on the head.

The Thameslink service should have been reigned in years ago, to a much smaller range from central London.

The 700's shouldn't be running out as far as they do, but who is going to make such a drastic change to the scope of this route and franchise?

 

And where exactly do you two propose to terminate services from Bedford then? Or maybe you want to turf everyone from the East Midlands off at Luton so the remaining 4 high level platforms at St Pancras can actually cope with the services you want to divert away from Thameslink.

 

You also need to address the fact that the fast lines from East Croydon now merge directly with Thameslink - and there will have to be a significant service reduction if everything is going to do a slow - fast or fast - slow at New Cross Gate.

 

So while yes, in an ideal world Thameslink wouldn't get any further than Luton / Stevenage / Gatwick, the world isn't ideal so get used to it.

 

Face facts, if commuters* from Wimbledon have sufficient political clout to retain Thameslink (over a doubling of the service frequency) simply so they can continue to have direct trains to City Thameslink instead of being turfed out at Blackfriars (a mere 800 yards or so away from City Thameslink) then there is no way on earth that Thameslink can retreat from Brighton or Bedford. In such circumstances the designers if the 800s have done the best they can - its not their fault that British Rail set up Thameslink mainly as a long distance operation, nor that the Great British commuter is so fearsomely protective of 'their' train service pattern that  the end result has to be a compromise solution.

 

True extension of services to Cambridge / Peterborough and Littlehampton (note this is only 3 peak hour services that used to start / terminate at London Bridge rather than anything 'new' service wise) increases this long distance dependence - but look at the realities. The MML is crowded enough as it is and like the GWML (where at least half the Elizabeth line trains from the east have to terminate there) the options for significant increasing the suburban service is limited. Meanwhile on the GN section commuters from Welwyn / Hertford have got used to 'their' trains going to Moorgate and like their compatriots in Wimbledon, they would create an almighty political stink if services went elsewhere.

 

Thus if services from the GN section have to be outer suburban in charterer - it makes sense to link them with similar services south of the river.

[Robin2]

So, stimulated by my comments, it seems that, contrary to the title of this Thread, UK trains are not awful after all?

 

Aren't Forums wonderful

 

...R

[Joseph_Pestell]

And where exactly do you two propose to terminate services from Bedford then? Or maybe you want to turf everyone from the East Midlands off at Luton so the remaining 4 high level platforms at St Pancras can actually cope with the services you want to divert away from Thameslink.

 

You also need to address the fact that the fast lines from East Croydon now merge directly with Thameslink - and there will have to be a significant service reduction if everything is going to do a slow - fast or fast - slow at New Cross Gate.

 

So while yes, in an ideal world Thameslink wouldn't get any further than Luton / Stevenage / Gatwick, the world isn't ideal so get used to it.

 

Face facts, if commuters* from Wimbledon have sufficient political clout to retain Thameslink (over a doubling of the service frequency) simply so they can continue to have direct trains to City Thameslink instead of being turfed out at Blackfriars (a mere 800 yards or so away from City Thameslink) then there is no way on earth that Thameslink can retreat from Brighton or Bedford. In such circumstances the designers if the 800s have done the best they can - its not their fault that British Rail set up Thameslink mainly as a long distance operation, nor that the Great British commuter is so fearsomely protective of 'their' train service pattern that  the end result has to be a compromise solution.

 

True extension of services to Cambridge / Peterborough and Littlehampton (note this is only 3 peak hour services that used to start / terminate at London Bridge rather than anything 'new' service wise) increases this long distance dependence - but look at the realities. The MML is crowded enough as it is and like the GWML (where at least half the Elizabeth line trains from the east have to terminate there) the options for significant increasing the suburban service is limited. Meanwhile on the GN section commuters from Welwyn / Hertford have got used to 'their' trains going to Moorgate and like their compatriots in Wimbledon, they would create an almighty political stink if services went elsewhere.

 

Thus if services from the GN section have to be outer suburban in charterer - it makes sense to link them with similar services south of the river.

 

I feel that perhaps you are putting the cart before the horse. But I do accept the point you are making. Bedford services would be an issue, and one that might have to make an exception for, at least in the short term. Would it really be so difficult to add a couple of platforms to the west side of St Pancras?

 

As a former commuter (1985/1987) from Tooting and East Dulwich - both towards Wimbledon and towards Peckham Rye/London Bridge , I have always had a keen interest in that issue. It seems to me that it would be far more sensible for Wimbledon to be a terminus for Thameslink / London Bridge trains with the "Wall of Death" (Wimbledon - Sutton) incorporated into Tramlink. That would remove a lot of conflicting movements at Sutton and enable enhanced service towards Epsom and Dorking including Thameslink.

Edited May 2, 2018 by Joseph_Pestell

[phil-b259]

So, stimulated by my comments, it seems that, contrary to the title of this Thread, UK trains are not awful after all?

 

Aren't Forums wonderful

 

...R

 

 

To borrow a certain comedic phrase, I think the [original post / thread title], such as it was, was too broadly based.

 

There are certainly aspects of new trains that are awful - but that does not mean the end product is awful in all respects, nor that it was possible to come up with a realistic alternative given the constraints at the time  and by implication its only the railway industrys hamfistedness / stingeyness / uncaring attitude which is to blame.

 

i.e. The need for XC to platform share / use short bay platforms at key hubs or the need for Thameslink to design its trains around the 45 second dwell time requirement.

Edited May 3, 2018 by phil-b259

[Joseph_Pestell]

To borrow a certain comedic phrase, I think the [original post / thread title], such as it was, was too broadly based.

 

There are certainly aspects of new trains that are awful - but that does not mean the end product is awful in all respects, nor that it was possible to come up with a realistic alternative given the constraints at the time  and by implication its only the railway industrys hamfistedness / stingeyness / uncaring attitude which is to blame.

 

i.e. The need for XC to platform share / use short bay platforms at key hubs or the need for Thameslink to design its trains around the 45 second dwell time requirement.

 

Yes, design by committee. The outer reaches of Thameslink need a horse and they have got a camel.

[phil-b259]

As a former commuter from Tooting and East Dulwich - both towards Wimbledon and towards Peckham Rye/London Bridge , I have always had a keen interest in that issue. It seems to me that it would be far more sensible for Wimbledon to be a terminus for Thameslink / London Bridge trains with the "Wall of Death" (Wimbledon - Sutton) incorporated into Tramlink. That would remove a lot of conflicting movements at Sutton and enable enhanced service towards Epsom and Dorking including Thameslink.

 

Good luck convincing your former commuting colleagues of that.

 

NRs original plan would have seen a 4tph service round the loop all day and far less chance of it being suspended / cancelled / etc due to Thameslink problems (as is currently the case). Instead, to preserve direct trains to the City said commuters were willing to forgo a doubling of the train serve as well as the opportunity to have a more robust train service.

[phil-b259]

Yes, design by committee. The outer reaches of Thameslink need a horse and they have got a camel.

 

Indeed - but given the conflicting requirements inherent in Thameslink (which go right back to the establishment of the service in 1988 by British Rail) means a Camel was inevitable.

 

The only way to avoid this would have been to make politically unacceptable changes to the established service pattern.

 

Look on the bright side though, at least Thameslink passengers get toilets and a first class area while Thames Valley commuters from Twyford get overgrown tube trains.....

[caradoc]

It never ceases to amaze me how creative people can be when trying to distract attention from the main point.

 

And are French, German, Dutch, Swedish, Danish railways less safe than those of the UK?

 

...R

 

In terms of fatal rail crashes in the last 10 years, yes. Stating facts is not being creative, just trying to redress the balance when the UK rail system is compared unfavourably with elsewhere.

[caradoc]

So, stimulated by my comments, it seems that, contrary to the title of this Thread, UK trains are not awful after all?

 

Aren't Forums wonderful

 

...R

 

Some of them certainly are, but not all of them, and in some respects UK rail has a better record that those other systems frequently held up as a model of how things should be done.

[roundhouse]

There's more to it than that Jim, for example the Thameslink ones this thread cites has seats which comply, but with the space between the two seats removed. Effectively the seats become narrower as the space the user has when sat in them has reduced...

I work next to someone who commutes from Harpenden. He is tall. He cant use the airline seats in a 700 as his knees dont fit in the gap so has to use the 4 bay seats and fight for space to put his legs unless he can get the disabled seats with slightly more leg room.

[Northmoor]

For most of my life, I've been accused of being something of a 'Thatcher lackey' just because I point out regularly to my Union, and my previous Union, that in fact Liebour are filth when it comes to railways.

 

Look who signed off the death warrant on Woodhead for example (it was only Ken Clarke who sealed the bid 15 years later and yes for that I'd still take the greatest pleasure in chinning him) and for those who think that Liebour are friendly towards railways, I present Barbara Castle...

 

Wish they would allow RAILWAY people to administer the railway for once.

Never going to happen though.

A summary:

 

Minor railways were closing in Britain in the 1930s.

Just after WW2 the process quickened as so many returned from military service having learned to drive.

The Modernisation Plan contained huge purchases of new versions of what the railways already had, without addressing some Victorian operating practices.  

Closures continued to accelerate through the 50s as traffic levels on minor lines didn't recover.

Conservative-appointed Richard Beeching proposed accelerating the closure process further, closing about five years' worth in two years.

Labour were elected partly on a promise to stop the closure programme.  Once elected, they speeded it up and approved quite a lot of closures not even proposed in Dr. B's report (Midland Line through the Peak, anyone?).

 

Politicians ALWAYS promise what they think you want to hear.  The only problem is we, the general public, are ALWAYS stupid enough to believe that this time, it will be different.

[Coryton]

Politicians ALWAYS promise what they think you want to hear.  The only problem is we, the general public, are ALWAYS stupid enough to believe that this time, it will be different.

 

But when all the parties you can vote for are doing the same, what choice do you have?

[rodent279]

But when all the parties you can vote for are doing the same, what choice do you have?

Ahhh well, that's the clever bit. Make the difference between them a very very thin line, then it's all down to who can mobilise their vote best.

 

Giving you the illusion that you control your own destiny.

Edited May 2, 2018 by rodent279

[John M Upton]

Thankfully my exposure to a 700 was only from Gatwick Airport to Haywards Heath but that was bad enough.

 

Perched on the edge of a seat with all the comfort of an old wooden park bench, nowhere to park my cup of tea and I stood up again around Ouse Valley Viaduct as the seat was so uncomfortable.

 

No wonder many Sussex Coast commuters have been scrutinising the new timetable in a desperate attempt to avoid them...

Edited May 3, 2018 by John M Upton

['CHARD]

My experience of Class 700 has been so far confined to St Pancreatitis to City Thamestink or Blackfriars, in and out of rush-hour.  I would categorise these journeys as distress purchases.