Mass cull of ticket offices

[jjb1970]

Money is the elephant in the room. I find the political willingness and popularity with electors to indulge in deficit spending, run up debt and leave a complete mess to future generations in preference to taking difficult decisions and doing the hard work to improve what government does to be reprehensible.  And it's not a party political issue,  they're all as bad, and are that way because electors want it.

 

The most obvious way to start improving things would be to spend the existing budget efficiently and to good effect. Roger Ford has written extensively on boiling frog syndrome and you don't have to look too hard to find examples of wasteful spend and bungled delivery on the railway. That money comes from somewhere and the meter isn't just reset to zero after a  bungled electrification program or some such like.

 

It doesn't matter which party is in power, the budget is a complete mess with no easy way out of it. Personally I think if government was well managed it'd ease things significantly  but hoping for that would be a triumph of optimism over experience. 

[phil-b259]

11 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

Automatic gates are all very well but if the station is unmanned, what's to stop people climbing over them and how do you evacuate the station in an emergency?

 

 

It is a DfT requirement that stations with automatic ticket barriers in operation MUST be staffed with someone monitoring the barriers at all times precisely because of safety concerns about access / egress

 

Thats why you get barriers left open sometimes - it means the person who should be monitoring them is not present - which can include because they are out on the platform getting ready to deploy a wheelchair ramp, going round emptying bins, taking a toilet break or are simply not on duty due to sickness / holiday.

 

Note that the rules do not require every barrier to be manned - its permissible to have them covered by CCTV and fitted with two way voice comms so that only one person is required to keep an eye on 3 separate entrances / exits for example - but obviously if that happens and the person is unable to remain at the monitoring station then all gates must be left open.

 

 

[phil-b259]

13 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Simple answer for Khan would be to increase TfL fares and not hold down increases 'to avoid hitting those on low incomes' (as he said last time round).  Because all of those in the GLC area on really low incomes get free travel on TfL anyway as a friend of ours pointed out yesterday when we were talking about this very issue.  So all that 'socially engineered' free travel is effectively paid for by TfL through revenue lost.

 

Simple fact is that TfL and Khan have screwed up and are now grabbing at whatever straws they can find to get some money in.  They overspent and then needlessly wasted money on Crossrail by extending services beyond Maidenhead to Reading (they had to order extra trains to do it and they have to pay additional track access and electricity charges as a result).

 

 Their attempted 'land grab' in seeking to extend Oyster Cards beyond West Drayton was kicked out because basically it's no more than ORCATS raiding (and that is effectively what they are doing between Maidenhead and Reading as well).   And with the way the timetable has been since the most recent change what they are now doing between Slough and London also amounts to ORCATS raiding because it is obvious from ridership that people heading for Central London are opting for the much quicker, non-stop, GWR trains and changing to TfL at Paddington,

 

For example, albeit from further out, if we had opted to use a direct Liz Line train to get us to Moorgate yesterday instead of GWR/H&C it would have not only been a much less comfortable trip but would have got us to our final destination more than 20 minutes later.

 

So if they put their own house in order they'd need no stealth taxes.  And as for 'weaponising' transport that would seem to be exactly what Khan has done with not only his (so far unsuccessful) efforts to end Travelcards  but even more so with the ULEZ expansion which for thousands of people amounts to taxation without representation.  

 

I fear you are forgetting the way the Pandemic rather blew all previous assumptions out  of the water in your analysis. Did YOU or your family members plan your 2020 household budget expecting there to be lockdowns and the complete collapse of travel!

 

Though I agree some of Kahns initiatives will have worsened TfLs finances (freezing TFL fares while the DfT were busy raising the ones they control above inflation for example) none of them will have materially contributed to the situation TfL find themselves in now as all of them were properly costed before introduction.

 

Were it not for the Pandemic then TFLs finances would have probably been fine - and its noteworthy that as far as I am aware talk of pulling out of the Travelcard scheme only started after the pandemic and the need to plug the resulting financial hole occurred.

 

In that respect TfL are no different from HM Treasury - or indeed yourself. In the years running up to 2020 it never entered anyones head to model a situation where a pandemic and lockdowns decimated the economic outlook and travel patterns.

 

You also seem to be attributing things to Mayor khan which were in fact agreed to by Mayor Boris and the Conservative Government of the day - the extension of Crossrail to Reading being a prime example of this. As such the effects on TfLs costs would have been factored in to the bid at the time by Boris's team at TfL and presumably they judged affordable under all foreseeable circumstances. Of course as we subsequently found out (in all sorts of areas - including the NHS) foreseeable circumstances did not include the effects of a Global pandemic....

 

Also don't forget taking Crossrail to Reading suited the DfT / HM Treasury as TfL receives no day to day subsidy for their operations - GWR do! Again making TfL shell out on trains would have been welcomed by the DfT because it saved the department money! GWR could redeploy some of its fleet meaning less trains would need to be leased. Additional trains also mean extra track access and electricity charge receipts for the state owned Network Rail from a 3rd party (where as those payments GWR makes are effectively just the DfT paying itself)

 

As for ULEZ - I would also point out that the whole thing was the brainchild of a certain conservative Mayor Johnson and whats more the recent Conservative Government were, up until a couple of years ago encouraging its widescale adoption in numerous cities across the UK as part of its clean air strategy INCLUDING its extension into outer London. Moreover the principle - you encourage people to buy cleaner vehicles (or use them less) by making it more expensive to use polluting ones is perfectly reasonable as a concept. The fact the current Government have decided to make an issue of it (rather than helping residents of Surrey, Kent with its own scrapage scheme / funding to extend TfLs one etc) is straight political opportunism of the worst kind. Air pollution doesn't suddenly go away because there is a cost of living crisis!

 

 

Edited August 31, 2023 by phil-b259

[eatus-maximus]

15 hours ago, Chris116 said:

When London Underground closed all their ticket offices they made a lot out of there being more staff to help passengers around the station. This was true for about a year during which time all the ticket office staff spent their shift outside the now bricked up ticket office helping passengers to buy their tickets. Personally, I found it took twice as long to serve such passengers as it would have done when I was in the ticket office!

 

Then around a year after the ticket offices had closed most of us took voluntary severance and that meant my station went from having two or three staff for 90% of the day to having one member of staff. So much for more staff to help passengers.

 

In my view what happened on London Underground is exactly what DfT are planning on National Rail.

 

DfT stands for Disastrous for Transport.

 

Let's also note here that the Underground is a far simpler system with a far simpler fares structure, and yet many British people still struggle, nevermind the tourists.

 

I remember once working at City Thameslink a good few years ago, at the Holborn Viaduct entrance, on a LUL strike day and a smartly dressed woman walked down to the ticket office. She asked if she could get to King's Cross from there due to the strike. "Yes" I said, "there's a direct service, eight trains an hour". "Brilliant" she exclaims, "from there I can get home to St Albans". At which point I had to break it to her that there were also eight trains an hour (four 'quick trains') direct to St Albans. Turns out, she had been changing from train to tube at King's Cross Thameslink for the Circle line to Barbican and then walking along Long Lane and up Snow Hill to the Goldmann Sachs building across the street (in fairness the station entrance is well hidden from the street... aside from the massive BR sign). City Thameslink had been open for twenty years at that point and even Farringdon was direct train from St Albans. Not only was she making a longer journey than she needed to, but she was also paying more for the privilege.

 

What happened on the Underground will not work for the railway, but yes, that does appear to be the plan. 

 

6 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

It is a DfT requirement that stations with automatic ticket barriers in operation MUST be staffed with someone monitoring the barriers at all times precisely because of safety concerns about access / egress

 

Thats why you get barriers left open sometimes - it means the person who should be monitoring them is not present - which can include because they are out on the platform getting ready to deploy a wheelchair ramp, going round emptying bins, taking a toilet break or are simply not on duty due to sickness / holiday.

 

Note that the rules do not require every barrier to be manned - its permissible to have them covered by CCTV and fitted with two way voice comms so that only one person is required to keep an eye on 3 separate entrances / exits for example - but obviously if that happens and the person is unable to remain at the monitoring station then all gates must be left open.

 

 

 

The DfT are behind these plans to close ticket offices and remove Guards, so you can expect that rule book to be ripped up and single control rooms being placed in charge of many station ticket barriers remotely to cut down on staff, probably with low hours agency workers contracted out by profit making TOCs.

[APOLLO]

8 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

you don't have to look too hard to find examples of wasteful spend and bungled delivery on the railway. That money comes from somewhere and the meter isn't just reset to zero after a  bungled electrification program or some such like.

 

Correct. Went by train Wigan Wallgate to Manchester yesterday, train every 20 mins or so, clean and on time. 

 

Coming home the train was a bi mode class 769 (319 conversion). Ran on the Juice to Bolton then the diesels kicked in for the run to Wallgate and on to Southport. The line from Lostock Junction (just north of Bolton) to Wigan North Western is (very slowly almost stopped) being electrified - probably on hold now as the civils constructor Buckingham Group went bust last week and off the job - half rebuilt platforms & bridges at Hindley etc.

 

Anyway, all  4 trains from Man to Wigan and beyond run to Wallgate, The £millions lengthened bay platform at North Western now not used (was for the Leeds service which now reverses at Wallgate).

 

Walgate station CANNOT be electrified due to the state of the bridge, with station buildings (listed) and shops on top. It is being held up with steelwork and in poor condition.

 

 

So when this line's electrification is finished, all trains will still run on diesel power - no way round it as the Leeds service which formerly ran to NW has to be diesel as it goes via Atherton. The others carry on to Southport or Rainford. Even if Bimodes are used the change over will be Bolton station so the electrification is as much use as a chocolate teapot.

 

Does Nobody talk to each other these days ?

 

Edited to add - The ticket office at North Western, on the West Coast main line is to be closed and NW has no barriers. The ticket office at Wallgate (barriered) is to be retained. Madness.

 

Brit15

Edited August 31, 2023 by APOLLO
add info

[Mallard60022]

7 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I fear you are forgetting the way the Pandemic rather blew all previous assumptions out  of the water in your analysis. Did YOU or your family members plan your 2020 household budget expecting there to be lockdowns and the complete collapse of travel!

 

Though I agree some of Kahns initiatives will have worsened TfLs finances (freezing TFL fares while the DfT were busy raising the ones they control above inflation for example) none of them will have materially contributed to the situation TfL find themselves in now as all of them were properly costed before introduction.

 

Were it not for the Pandemic then TFLs finances would have probably been fine - and its noteworthy that as far as I am aware talk of pulling out of the Travelcard scheme only started after the pandemic and the need to plug the resulting financial hole occurred.

 

In that respect TfL are no different from HM Treasury - or indeed yourself. In the years running up to 2020 it never entered anyones head to model a situation where a pandemic and lockdowns decimated the economic outlook and travel patterns.

 

You also seem to be attributing things to Mayor khan which were in fact agreed to by Mayor Boris and the Conservative Government of the day - the extension of Crossrail to Reading being a prime example of this. As such the effects on TfLs costs would have been factored in to the bid at the time by Boris's team at TfL and presumably they judged affordable under all foreseeable circumstances. Of course as we subsequently found out (in all sorts of areas - including the NHS) foreseeable circumstances did not include the effects of a Global pandemic....

 

Also don't forget taking Crossrail to Reading suited the DfT / HM Treasury as TfL receives no day to day subsidy for their operations - GWR do! Again making TfL shell out on trains would have been welcomed by the DfT because it saved the department money! GWR could redeploy some of its fleet meaning less trains would need to be leased. Additional trains also mean extra track access and electricity charge receipts for the state owned Network Rail from a 3rd party (where as those payments GWR makes are effectively just the DfT paying itself)

 

As for ULEZ - I would also point out that the whole thing was the brainchild of a certain conservative Mayor Johnson and whats more the recent Conservative Government were, up until a couple of years ago encouraging its widescale adoption in numerous cities across the UK as part of its clean air strategy INCLUDING its extension into outer London. Moreover the principle - you encourage people to buy cleaner vehicles (or use them less) by making it more expensive to use polluting ones is perfectly reasonable as a concept. The fact the current Government have decided to make an issue of it (rather than helping residents of Surrey, Kent with its own scrapage scheme / funding to extend TfLs one etc) is straight political opportunism of the worst kind. Air pollution doesn't suddenly go away because there is a cost of living crisis!

 

 

 

7 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I fear you are forgetting the way the Pandemic rather blew all previous assumptions out  of the water in your analysis. Did YOU or your family members plan your 2020 household budget expecting there to be lockdowns and the complete collapse of travel!

 

Though I agree some of Kahns initiatives will have worsened TfLs finances (freezing TFL fares while the DfT were busy raising the ones they control above inflation for example) none of them will have materially contributed to the situation TfL find themselves in now as all of them were properly costed before introduction.

 

Were it not for the Pandemic then TFLs finances would have probably been fine - and its noteworthy that as far as I am aware talk of pulling out of the Travelcard scheme only started after the pandemic and the need to plug the resulting financial hole occurred.

 

In that respect TfL are no different from HM Treasury - or indeed yourself. In the years running up to 2020 it never entered anyones head to model a situation where a pandemic and lockdowns decimated the economic outlook and travel patterns.

 

You also seem to be attributing things to Mayor khan which were in fact agreed to by Mayor Boris and the Conservative Government of the day - the extension of Crossrail to Reading being a prime example of this. As such the effects on TfLs costs would have been factored in to the bid at the time by Boris's team at TfL and presumably they judged affordable under all foreseeable circumstances. Of course as we subsequently found out (in all sorts of areas - including the NHS) foreseeable circumstances did not include the effects of a Global pandemic....

 

Also don't forget taking Crossrail to Reading suited the DfT / HM Treasury as TfL receives no day to day subsidy for their operations - GWR do! Again making TfL shell out on trains would have been welcomed by the DfT because it saved the department money! GWR could redeploy some of its fleet meaning less trains would need to be leased. Additional trains also mean extra track access and electricity charge receipts for the state owned Network Rail from a 3rd party (where as those payments GWR makes are effectively just the DfT paying itself)

 

As for ULEZ - I would also point out that the whole thing was the brainchild of a certain conservative Mayor Johnson and whats more the recent Conservative Government were, up until a couple of years ago encouraging its widescale adoption in numerous cities across the UK as part of its clean air strategy INCLUDING its extension into outer London. Moreover the principle - you encourage people to buy cleaner vehicles (or use them less) by making it more expensive to use polluting ones is perfectly reasonable as a concept. The fact the current Government have decided to make an issue of it (rather than helping residents of Surrey, Kent with its own scrapage scheme / funding to extend TfLs one etc) is straight political opportunism of the worst kind. Air pollution doesn't suddenly go away because there is a cost of living crisis!

 

 

Thank God that someone actually recognise the real situation. Well put matey.

P

[ruggedpeak]

8 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I fear you are forgetting the way the Pandemic rather blew all previous assumptions out  of the water in your analysis. Did YOU or your family members plan your 2020 household budget expecting there to be lockdowns and the complete collapse of travel!

Of course, all sensible people plan for a "rainy day" where something unexpected happens - don't have to be specifically a pandemic, might be getting hit by the proverbial bus.

 

And it is not credible to suggest TfL could not predict a pandemic given that airborne pathogen pandemics have been flaring up in the Far East for many years and they have been assumed to be coming to London - I know this as I (and many others) received bird flu and related training via City Hall and London Resilience some years ago as part of preparedness if one of the Asian pandemics reached Europe, so TfL were fully aware of the possibility. And economic crashes and pandemics are a normal part of life, so anyone competent running important functions in a major city should at least scenario plan for them. The 20th century saw millions die in pandemics, nothing has fundamentally changed to stop a pandemic happening as we have seen. And economic crashes are cyclical, just take a bit longer these days due to endless printing of money to delay them. And perhaps TfL had not heard of the internet, or laptops, or Zoom and couldn't conceive of a scenario where people thought that paying a fortune to travel on an unrelaible, strike ridden transport system to a city with poor services, high crime, overpriced housing and sandwiches was less attractive than doing the same job for the same money at home? Strange given that this trend was well under way before the pandemic and the pandemic only accelerated it.

 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2023 by AY Mod
Political narrative removed.

[Michael Hodgson]

10 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

Of course, all sensible people plan for a "rainy day" where something unexpected happens - don't have to be specifically a pandemic, might be getting hit by the proverbial bus.

 

That's much more likely these days as more and more buses are electric and you can't hear them coming.

[Mallard60022]

Interesting here to read the moans about the City that has one of the most integrated and efficient Public Transport systems in  the British Isles and yet that system, in the main,  has little in relation to the way the British Railways system operates outside of that integrated and hugely busy City operation.

This thread is about the proposed closure of Ticket Offices on the National System, some of which will fall within TFL but most of which does not. 

The Political to and fro about the pros and cons about the TFL area and it's management, is really redundant here and, in fact, has probably got a bit too 'Political'. However the varying opinions are very interesting, especially those from those working within the Industry at the moment.

The time for debating the original issue of Culling, is almost up.

Would it not be better if we all shoved our knowledge and often strong feelings, towards  helping the people that are attempting to create/retain where necessary, a safe and people centered service for Rail users?

Pub Table discussion is wasted and really of little use other than to express personal opinions or provide knowledge of actual facts.

Come on folks, let's get behind the cases to retain TOs and decent Staffing where it is needed. Then maybe attempt to influence the relevant Authorities to really look at the provision of a truly customer focused PUBLIC service.

I think we all know what the real reason is for these so called efficiency plans and that they are being introduced far too rapidly instead of progressively.  

Phil   

[Reorte]

13 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

Of course, all sensible people plan for a "rainy day" where something unexpected happens - don't have to be specifically a pandemic, might be getting hit by the proverbial bus.

 

Have to say I don't plan for that sort of thing - I don't think it is sensible to plan for the very unlikely. There's a line somewhere between ridiculous recklessness on the one extreme and being the sort of paranoid person who builds a bunker stuffed with tin cans and bottled water in their garden at the other.

 

Plan for the sort of contingencies that stand a reasonable chance of popping up in day to day life and just deal with the freak circumstances if and when they happen. This is a personal perspective, the further up you go the more it's reasonable to have some sort of plan against the more unlikely (both because there's more responsibility and the decisions at a higher level affect more people).

[rodent279]

Predicting something is not the same as budgetting for it.

[Fishoutofwater]

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

Walgate station CANNOT be electrified due to the state of the bridge, with station buildings (listed) and shops on top. It is being held up with steelwork and in poor condition.

3rd rail then?

presumably the 769s still retain DC capability if not the actual shoes.

[Mallard60022]

12 minutes ago, rodent279 said:

Predicting something is not the same as budgetting for it.

 

Absolutely. Pandemic predicted and even a strategy practised (2016 or 18?). Government absolutely unprepared. 

Phil

 

[62613]

17 hours ago, andyman7 said:

It may want to but overall Government spending has gone relentlessly upwards in the past few decades. The popular notion of 'cuts' belies the facts. We are all living longer, health technology gets progressively dearer as innovations create treatment possibilities that previously didn't exist, wages have risen in real terms, expectations have risen. And of course the elephant in the room is the pandemic, everyone demanded that all activity must cease and swathes of people were paid to stay at home. This is not the place to debate that but the bill has come due and it is absolutely crippling. 'But the pandemic wasn't my fault, why should I have to pay' - except who else will? It blew a £4bn a year hole in railway finances and the chickens are coming home to roost. 

Since 2007, wages have barely kept up with costs

[eatus-maximus]

34 minutes ago, Fishoutofwater said:

3rd rail then?

presumably the 769s still retain DC capability if not the actual shoes.

 

Northern's units had shoes and shoe fuses removed. It should be possible to refit them though. Failing that, the stored GWR 769s are tri-mode I believe.

 

No-one likes fitting 3rd rail these days though, even the Merseyrail extension has seen batteries fitted to the units.

[The Stationmaster]

10 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I fear you are forgetting the way the Pandemic rather blew all previous assumptions out  of the water in your analysis. Did YOU or your family members plan your 2020 household budget expecting there to be lockdowns and the complete collapse of travel!

 

Though I agree some of Kahns initiatives will have worsened TfLs finances (freezing TFL fares while the DfT were busy raising the ones they control above inflation for example) none of them will have materially contributed to the situation TfL find themselves in now as all of them were properly costed before introduction.

 

Were it not for the Pandemic then TFLs finances would have probably been fine - and its noteworthy that as far as I am aware talk of pulling out of the Travelcard scheme only started after the pandemic and the need to plug the resulting financial hole occurred.

 

In that respect TfL are no different from HM Treasury - or indeed yourself. In the years running up to 2020 it never entered anyones head to model a situation where a pandemic and lockdowns decimated the economic outlook and travel patterns.

 

You also seem to be attributing things to Mayor khan which were in fact agreed to by Mayor Boris and the Conservative Government of the day - the extension of Crossrail to Reading being a prime example of this. As such the effects on TfLs costs would have been factored in to the bid at the time by Boris's team at TfL and presumably they judged affordable under all foreseeable circumstances. Of course as we subsequently found out (in all sorts of areas - including the NHS) foreseeable circumstances did not include the effects of a Global pandemic....

 

Also don't forget taking Crossrail to Reading suited the DfT / HM Treasury as TfL receives no day to day subsidy for their operations - GWR do! Again making TfL shell out on trains would have been welcomed by the DfT because it saved the department money! GWR could redeploy some of its fleet meaning less trains would need to be leased. Additional trains also mean extra track access and electricity charge receipts for the state owned Network Rail from a 3rd party (where as those payments GWR makes are effectively just the DfT paying itself)

 

As for ULEZ - I would also point out that the whole thing was the brainchild of a certain conservative Mayor Johnson and whats more the recent Conservative Government were, up until a couple of years ago encouraging its widescale adoption in numerous cities across the UK as part of its clean air strategy INCLUDING its extension into outer London. Moreover the principle - you encourage people to buy cleaner vehicles (or use them less) by making it more expensive to use polluting ones is perfectly reasonable as a concept. The fact the current Government have decided to make an issue of it (rather than helping residents of Surrey, Kent with its own scrapage scheme / funding to extend TfLs one etc) is straight political opportunism of the worst kind. Air pollution doesn't suddenly go away because there is a cost of living crisis!

 

 

As GWr still run trains calling at some intermediate stations between Reading and Paddington (and I use them in preference to the Liz Line 'sort of trains' any saving in subsidy only really really applies  to the inner area and intermediate stations, except Slough, out to Maidenhead.  It makes no difference west of Maidenhead where the GWR semi-fast off peak services still call at every station (all three of them) and the peak hours service does more or less the same.

 

As for ULEZ it doesn't really matter who started it - the real problem is Khan extending something of no proven medical value to the outer boroughs despite a number of them not wanting.  As Mr Khan seems more than happy for ever more buildings to be built taking in even more people and getting rid of green spots thatt seems somewhat opposite to creating a ULEZ situation.  People are by far the worst polluters demanding and needing more of everything from electricity, more transport, more food & water,  and more waste disposal plus the huge environmental costs of constructing ever more tower blocks.  Any annual gain from ULEZ (where the numbers are still far from proven) will be wiped out by that in weeks.

 

And yes - we all underwent unforeseen budgetary change due to the pandemic but that was something to be managed.  Any sensible business cut its cloth to suit the situation and applied for the very generous lay-off subsidies to cover those people who were taken off regular work.  In managing a business - for that its what it is - TFL is no different from anyone else and had many ways in which it could have reduced current costs.  Similarly the GLC could have increased some of its taxes because plenty of people were far better off working from home and not paying travel costs or able to go out for leisure reasons etc had money to spare.   That is what managing a. business, and any transport network, is all about - reducing your offer (i.e. frequency and even routes if possible) in order to reduce costs  - fewer trains using less electricity, fewer 'buses burning less fuel, fewer train and 'buses to wash & service overnight, extended overhaul intervals due to reductions in miles run, fewer staff required so laid off with payment from Govt.  Staff lay-offs cycled where necessary to preserve frequency related competencies (as some train operators did).  Major schemes delayed or paused if capital inflow is reduced - that goes on all the time.  And no wasting money on 'sideshow tricks' such as fare rises restricted to avoid 'hurting people' etc. Mind you let's not forget that the biggestn area of expenditure - Crossrail - was in a mess long before the pandemic bit and it was already going over budget and suffering delays which suggest some major managerial and control shortcomings.

 

Back to booking offices perhaps?  

[Michael Hodgson]

If a bridge is so rough it needs reinforcement like that, it's overdue for replacement.  Probably a question of who pays for that.

 

A few years ago we had a flyover in Huntingdon that carried the extemely busy dual carriageway A14 over the top of the structurally sound Brampton Road bridge carrying the old road across the ECML just north of the station.  I have never seen as much additional steelwork on a bridge as that had and it couldn't cope with the conintuous heavy traffic, and it was such a strategicallly important road they couldn't close the flyover.  Most of the road traffic from Felixstowe etc to the Midlands and North used that route.  They have now removed this flyover, but they had to divert the A14 round the town via a completely new route to make a new junction with the A1 slightly further south, and after doing that they could still only demolish the old structure during a Xmas shutdown of the railways.  With all the associated works it must have cost an absolute fortune.

[rodent279]

2 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

2 hours ago, rodent279 said:

Predicting something is not the same as budgetting for it.

 

Absolutely. Pandemic predicted and even a strategy practised (2016 or 18?).

But to be honest, how can you budget for something like the pandemic? You can wargame it, but if Khan/Bozo/whoever had said "we're not going to do xyz because we need to put £xbn aside in case there's a once-in-a-couple-of-centuries pandemic", they'd have been pilloried for it.

And I can't honestly see that raising fares across the board would be any more popular or acceptable a way of easing TfL's financial woes.

As stated before, it's all a big game of political blame shifting. If as much effort went into resolving issues as went into trying to shift the blame somewhere else, we might actually get somewhere.

Edited August 31, 2023 by rodent279

[The Stationmaster]

4 hours ago, eatus-maximus said:

 

 

The DfT are behind these plans to close ticket offices and remove Guards, so you can expect that rule book to be ripped up and single control rooms being placed in charge of many station ticket barriers remotely to cut down on staff, probably with low hours agency workers contracted out by profit making TOCs.

They are definitely behind theproosals to close booking offices (the originator was a certain Minister who has moved on to other things he also doesn't understand any more than he understood transport)d.

 

But have there actually been any changes to the conditions required to be met for the introduction of DOO for passenger trains?   I haven't heard of any although the wide availability of GSM(R) might well facilitate its introduction in some places where it wasn't previously feasible?

[Reorte]

18 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

If a bridge is so rough it needs reinforcement like that, it's overdue for replacement.  Probably a question of who pays for that.

In this case the bridge has buildings on it too - https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.5445746,-2.6330071,3a,90y,28.57h,88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syxciZM4KukMhyQ_IGkyRGw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?ucbcb=1&entry=ttu

is the top of the bridge.

[eatus-maximus]

12 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

They are definitely behind theproosals to close booking offices (the originator was a certain Minister who has moved on to other things he also doesn't understand any more than he understood transport)d.

 

But have there actually been any changes to the conditions required to be met for the introduction of DOO for passenger trains?   I haven't heard of any although the wide availability of GSM(R) might well facilitate its introduction in some places where it wasn't previously feasible?

 

Yeah, I presume he has friends with access to AI war machines that definitely aren't made on a budget..... anyway....

 

I don't know of any specific changes to conditions yet, however, Northern and the RMT are technically still in dispute over DOO (DCO), several BR era units have been noted with new monitors installed in the cab, albeit plated over, and of course the 195s and 331s at Northern were all designed with DOO (DCO) in mind. I would expect all of the new units Northern might want to also be fitted for DOO (DCO). I believe the last pay offers to the RMT/ASLEF still had DOO in them, though more as an agreement to consider at a later stage on a more local level. It's difficult to know what TSSA agreed to because they didn't even know they had agreed to close the ticket offices.

[Wheatley]

4 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Walgate station CANNOT be electrified due to the state of the bridge, with station buildings (listed) and shops on top. It is being held up with steelwork and in poor condition.

The Royal Border Bridge is listed. 

[Mallard60022]

1 hour ago, rodent279 said:

But to be honest, how can you budget for something like the pandemic? You can wargame it, but if Khan/Bozo/whoever had said "we're not going to do xyz because we need to put £xbn aside in case there's a once-in-a-couple-of-centuries pandemic", they'd have been pilloried for it.

And I can't honestly see that raising fares across the board would be any more popular or acceptable a way of easing TfL's financial woes.

As stated before, it's all a big game of political blame shifting. If as much effort went into resolving issues as went into trying to shift the blame somewhere else, we might actually get somewhere.

Absolutely however I wasn't thinking about budgeting I was thinking about OMG there's a Pandemic and running around like headless chickens! It really shouldn't have been a surprise ... or should it?

Anyway, this aside, it's got almost zero connection to closure of TO's.

P

[caradoc]

5 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Even if Bimodes are used the change over will be Bolton station so the electrification is as much use as a chocolate teapot.

 

Why could bi-modes not change between electric and diesel at Hindley or Ince, depending on stopping pattern?

 

[jjb1970]

12 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

Absolutely however I wasn't thinking about budgeting I was thinking about OMG there's a Pandemic and running around like headless chickens! It really shouldn't have been a surprise ... or should it?

Anyway, this aside, it's got almost zero connection to closure of TO's.

P

 

I think the connection is government competency (or rather lack of). I think we should give governments some latitude in how they react to exceptional circumstances but ultimately disaster preparedness is within their remit and it's not unreasonable to expect them to have some contingency plans. I observed responses in a few Asian countries, they weren't perfect either and plenty of mistakes were made but if I look at how, for example, the Republic of Korea managed pandemic response and compare it with the UK it's not a very flattering comparison for us. The excuse seems to be that Asia has had other flu pandemics and so took things more seriously, quite but the rest of the world had every opportunity to learn from the various earlier flu outbreaks in Asia and to consider their own responses. And we did, I was working in electricity generation in London in 2008 - 2010 and we did a lot of work with the London government on it at that time.