What changes do you want for the railway?

[david.hill64]

As the thread on Ticket office closures has morphed into a 'what sort of railway do I want' discussion, I thought it worthwhile to start a new thread for this discussion, so that views on the pros and cons of ticket closures could be aired without distractions.

 

In an ideal world there would be ample funding for whatever lifestyle we want, but in the real world funds are limited so please keep that in mind. I think that demographic trends are actually working for rail travel. We have an aging population who still want to travel and are less likely to drive. At the other end of the generation gap, younger people are now less likely to drive than in previous years. Across the whole population environmental concerns are also higher in people's priorities than before. So I think that demand for rail travel (passenger and freight) is likely to increase. So how do we achieve this safely, reliably and economically?

 

What are your views? How would you spend what money is available?

 

It is clear that the current system is not ideal. I have little time for DfT, believing that they lack engineering competence to manage what is essentially an engineering system (the same criticism I have of the civil service in general). But there are signs that some intentions are right. The goal of an unified ticketing system for the non-open-access operations seems good. I already use a multi mode (conventional rail, metro, bus taxi and car parking) smart card in Taiwan. It works very well. In my world we would all use such a card, or phone app. Tap in, tap out on gates at commuter routes and by train manager smart card reader/issuer on rural or intercity routes. It would be nice if it were linked to bus fares. (In Taiwan the bus journeys are free if combined with an MRT journey).

 

I would continue with DOO on commuter routes where trains are frequent and distances between stations relatively short, but I would have train managers on all other services. As well as revenue protection they would be trained for emergency operations. 

 

Having written, or assessed, safety cases for the operation of driverless trains I am convinced that we will never see this level of automation on the ex BR network (nor LUL for that matter). However, I do see more widespread use of ATO (as per Thameslink) when ETCS role out is more widespread. With smart control centres regulation of trains then becomes far easier to achieve. This will help alleviate capacity constraints.

 

It is a pity, though understandable, that Network Rail has opted for ETCS level 2 with fall back signalling. Railtrack's vision of adopting ETCS level 3 (no track circuits, no axle counters, no lineside signals) is a better way for a safe reliable railway. Shame it has taken 30 years to agree the specifications.

 

In my view electrification is a no-brainer for all except very lightly used routes. Now that we once again have our own safe standards there is no reason to delay.

 

 

 

 

[Kris]

Electrification should being being pushed a lot more than it is. 

I would also like to see more freight being put on the rails to help remove lorries from the road. This would likely require some subsidies and a change in mine set from arriving now to arriving in a couple of days. 

[david.hill64]

1 minute ago, Kris said:

I would also like to see more freight being put on the rails to help remove lorries from the road. This would likely require some subsidies and a change in mine set from arriving now to arriving in a couple of days. 

Agree, but I think the issue is capacity. HS2 will help a lot but more needs to be done.

[Jeremy Cumberland]

Before looking at anything else, I want a timetable that I can trust. I have pretty much stopped using trains because I can never be sure I'll be able to complete my journey or get back home. It's not just strikes - these at least can be predicted and strike days avoided (and the days either side, too), but ordinary all-too-regular cancellations for staff shortages (mostly).

 

Next would be proper a properly-thought out fares structure. I don't want to spend half an hour trying to work out the cheapest fare, which is what I usually need to do for any long journey. Any system that makes it cheaper to buy two or three tickets for different parts of the journey rather than one for the whole is clearly flawed.

[Oldddudders]

A fully-integrated passenger railway, without commercial considerations among services on the same route, and a consequently-simplified fare structure, would seem to be in the customers' interest. Holding connections etc ceases to be punishable, and as we slowly see secondary railways re-emerging/re-opening, their contribution to the network would be enhanced.

 

Engineering is so dispersed to the four winds, it seems, that it is ridiculously expensive, with everyone in the contractual chain needing their cut, and QC is no doubt enormously difficult. How we get that toothpaste back in the tube is beyond me. 

 

In 1967  the Victoria Line opened with no drivers, but what amounted to front cab attendants. AFAIK they are still there. I agree little chance of much change.

[darrel]

I would like to see the dft stop micromanaging every aspect of the railway and let the people who know how to run the railway get on with it. 

More electrification at least here in Scotland we have a plan which has already started unlike England. 

Simplified rail fares. The current system is way too complicated and passengers are unwittingly paying more than they need to. 

A proper rolling stock policy with standardisation. Too many different types of trains for no reason that are incompatible with each other. A proper cascade of rolling stock instead of perfectly good trains going for scrap before they should while older trains that should be scrapped are still running around.

More freight on the railway. 

HS2 built all the way to Glasgow and Edinburgh. With a connection from HS2 to HS1 

A strategy for reopening railway lines not all the ones that were closed. But the ones with the best business case. 

Building new lines to all airports. 

New light rail / tramways for all big cities to take buses off the roads. 

[Kris]

36 minutes ago, darrel said:

HS2 built all the way to Glasgow and Edinburgh. With a connection from HS2 to HS1 

 

Building new lines to all airports. 

The top one makes total sense (even if of no use to me 😁 ).

The second one would make sense at the largest airports, the smaller ones are better served by either light tram or better buses. 

[jjb1970]

There are changes which need large capital expenditure, such as electrification, and others which should be achievable with little need to spend a lot, such as addressing some of the issues identified by Olddudders. The former will be difficult in the current financial circumstances we are in, but I see no reason why the latter couldn't be progressed.

 

The big issue I see is with DfT and their control, the ideal would seem to be to restore something like the old BRB, but good luck with wresting things back from DfT (even if we were to see something like the BRB it'd probably be established to serve as an extension of DfT. I'm sure most people at DfT are well intentioned, but their track record isn't impressive and they are in the in some ways enviable position which tends to have baleful consequences of holding power without accountability.

 

On the former I think they need to address the structural inefficiencies and culture that has seen the steady increasing temperature of boiling frog syndrome (before anyone points it out, I know literal boiling frog syndrome is a myth). The railway is paying a price for squandering so much money in the good times when funding was there to pay for major electrification programs, now the country is in belt tightening mode and it's probably going to get a lot tighter before it loosens again.

[DY444]

What I want is for the whole railway industry to wake up and smell the coffee.  I am getting sick to the back teeth of everyone and his wife jumping on the "it's all this nasty government's fault" bandwagon when the origins of the current mess are all squarely in the industry's court.  If NR, Crossrail and HS2, roared on by the ridiculous, unaccountable and arrogant ORR, hadn't treated project planning, budgeting, cost benefit analysis and cost discipline as something which only applied to others then it's highly probable that none of this would be happening now.    

 

I always used to think the BBC were the gold standard when it came to a publicly funded body wasting money but they are absolute beginners compared to NR who have raised it to an art form.  By any metric you care to mention everything NR does costs way more than it should.  The examples of wasted money are everywhere from the ole structures on the GWML which would hold up an office block to a station near me which received a platform extension of literally a couple of metres even though every single class of train which has ever served the station, or is ever likely to serve it, already fits comfortably.  From miles of nice new cess walkways which have barely been used and are now overgrown through to pointless signage.  From the traffic management fiasco to the Ordsall chord farce.  It's everywhere and is bordering on an unreported national scandal.

 

  Then we come to covid where the supine response of the TOCs to the DfT's abject stupidity at two critical points contributed greatly to the current financial situation.  First, it was very obvious, very quickly, that the level of train service provision, at the DfT's behest, in the period after March 2020 was hugely excessive for the demand on many routes.  Cutting the service level to meet the demand would have saved a fortune in train maintenance, access charges etc.  The TOCs, as usual thinking solely about today and never about tomorrow, coupled with the industry's legendary oil tanker with failed engines nimbleness, said nothing.  Second, when the restrictions began to be lifted, the DfT, unbelievably, vigorously pursued a policy of discouraging rail travel.  The TOCs again failed to push back against this in any meaningful way and meekly accepted it thus losing the opportunity to drive journey numbers back up earlier and improve the revenue line sooner.  I saw reports that they were scared of what the DfT would do to them if they argued.  Well whatever it was I can't conceive of it being worse than what they have now which I gather they are pushing back against.  Stable doors and all that.

 

Worse still, despite all of this, the industry continues to mess it up.  HS2 costs soaring out of control, NR remodelling and resignalling track layouts it resignalled and remodelled barely 5 years ago (eg Stalybridge), structures installed to historically proven totally safe electrification clearances rendered useless by the ORR and its cost benefit agnostic diktats, the obsession with expensive battery trains instead of calling out the ORR's hypocrisy (eg Headbolt Lane), resignalling schemes abandoned (eg Marches) or severely curtailed because of ludicrous SEU costs, the vast cost of ETCS for questionable benefits, and plenty of others.  Even the much heralded traction decarbonisation plan somehow totally managed to misread the room and is now in the bin. 

 

Yes the geniuses (sic) at the DfT and the freezing cold hand of the Treasury are making life immensely difficult but boy did the industry go out of its way to hand them a lengthy list of reasons for doing so.  At least try and give yourselves a chance and start by looking long and hard at your own major contribution to how we got here and do something about continuously making the same mistakes.      

Edited July 20, 2023 by DY444

[Phil Parker]

3 minutes ago, DY444 said:

I always used to think the BBC were the gold standard when it came to a publicly funded body wasting money but they are absolute beginners compared to NR who have raised it to an art form.

 

The Ministry of Defence would like to say "Hold my gin and tonic."

[Mike_Walker]

I really have to agree with almost everything that's been said so far.

 

As for NR's ability to control costs that is a complete farce.  A few years ago I did some work for a TOC which was involved in preparing the "yellow peril" for a line reopening on behalf of Network Rail (who usually produce such documents themselves but in this case the TOC was the main promotor of the project).  My quotation for the work had been accepted by the TOC and I submitted my invoice.  The TOC presumably added their "cut" and passed it on to NR.  To everyone's amazement NR rejected it because the sum involved was "too small"!  The TOC suggested I add a couple of extra zeros and "buy myself a steam loco".  I refused and the TOC duly paid my invoice, what final agreement was reached between them and NR I don't know.  But working in the industry for the past quarter century I've heard of many cases where NR have thrown money away in a scandalous if not criminal way.

 

Having done work for many TOCs and OA operators during that time it has been my experience that they are extremely cost conscious.

 

The rising costs for HS2 are hardly surprising when the government bows to every pressure group to extend tunnels or make other enhancements.  Then to delay the project to save costs is farcical.  It might reduce the expenditure in the current FY and short term but will only increase costs in the longer term if only down to inflation even if back to normal levels.  But, of course, it kicks the can down the road and hopefully becomes someone else's problem.

 

[Reorte]

What changes do I want? A big winding-back of very large proportion of changes, "improvements" and "modernisations" over many years. What do I think are practical, or necessary? Sadly a very different question.

[Southernman46]

I don't want or need change - please, please, please just run the trains reasonably on time to provide a Service and stop this capitulation policy of service curtailment when there are delay issues - BR may not have been great but at least they got people home when the snow fell or the embankment collapsed or the fuel supply gets contaminated .......................................... (might be a bit SWML / WOE specific)

Passengers don't want insulting amounts of money back after the event - they WANT and NEED to get where they are going .................. 42 years in the industry ................................

IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT !!!!!!

Edited July 21, 2023 by Southernman46

[Steven B]

Double the length of all trains and halve their frequency - fewer trains on the lines means less chance of a delay.

Increase station to station times so that delays can be made up.

 

Introduce standard design of passenger train that can be built under license by different manufacturers with the only differences being changes to the interior or door locations to suit the typical use of the unit. e.g. 2+3 seating for a primarily commuter set, whilst a longer distance cross country set getting 2+2 seats and a decent buffet counter.

 

Introduce a rolling program of stock upgrades - no more waiting for 20+ years without introducing a new design, only to attempt to replace everything in one go and struggling to maintain services when new stock has problems.

 

Make the toilets smell fresher.

 

(Only slightly tongue in cheek)

 

Steven B.

 

 

[Steadfast]

What do I want to see? Simple day to day improvements.

 

TSRs and ESRs that have the fault corrected in a timely manner.

 

Dead AWS magnets that are fixed in a timely manner. I'm convinced there will be an incident caused by people getting used to cancelling the AWS and not having to take action. Over one 40 - 50 mile run, I can think of at least 4 long term dead magnets, repeatedly reported and nothing is done. At least one has been like it for over 2 years.

 

Long term it'd be nice to see everyone pulling together and not fighting to take freight contracts off each other, but to get more freight from road to rail and, selfishly, since the question is what to I want to see, to thus look after the long term future of my career! It's funny how the government see money to roads as investment, but money to railways as subsidy and additional cost. We need more than the occasional poster here and there claiming one train takes 76 lorries off the road. Let's see some action and not just empty words!

 

Jo

[Mallard60022]

Several posts here sound like a Politician of a certain hue, slagging off everything they find somewhat to their dislike. 

I have no idea about how NR waste or don't waste money, but they are not a 'Private' Company are they? Are they not 'linked' to the Government now? I really have no idea.

As for the BBC being slagged off here...why? 

If some 'civilian' posters thinking and those of actual or retried Railway Staff, makes someone "sick to the Teeth" then maybe this isn't the Platform for you?

Governments have been and are certainly now, hugely to blame for the way things have become. It's now out of hand.

The teeny dig/hint also that 'we' now have our own Regs rather than EU Regs will make things easier. Really?

Anyway, what is needed is almost exactly what Dudders, an experienced and thoughtful ex Railwayman and Model Railway Enthusiast  said.

WE must never forget this is a service for the Public, not for the satisfaction of us here or any Politican, most of whom have not got a clue about anything to do with Public Service these days.

Don't like this? Fine!

Phil

 

[jpendle]

I'd like to see all liveries frozen for at least 25 years to stop the pernicious problem of model liveries becoming out of date before they've even hit the shops. 🤔

 

John P

[33C]

I want to know why our 4 car units are being replaced with 5 car units equal to 6 coaches? With a 12 car train, if one unit develops a major fault, we knock it off and go as a 4 or 8.

Now, if the 5 (equal to 6 remember) develops a fault, it's all out. Caped. How is that better?

[johnofwessex]

I suggest that a lot of the Rail Networks problems are simply the Managerial and Political issues the whole of the UK suffers from but we lack the insight or will to solve.

 

My suggestion is that we need a Public Transport service that integrates rail, buses, trams, ferries etc and provides a reliable affordable service that meets public need.

 

If we can keep that in mind then how do our proposals meet with the objective?

[Phil Parker]

2 minutes ago, johnofwessex said:

My suggestion is that we need a Public Transport service that integrates rail, buses, trams, ferries etc and provides a reliable affordable service that meets public need.

 

God god man. That sounds like Communism!

 

We are not at home to joined up thinking... 😁

[LNER4479]

Politicians to regard our railway system as a national asset to be developed for the benefit of future generations; not a national liability to be tinkered with only until the next election.

 

Somehow, I don't think I'll see that in my lifetime but it felt good saying it.

[Nearholmer]

Biggest issue IMO is the extremely indirect nature of public accountability for what is, to a very significant extent, a publicly funded rail network.

 

That may sound very politico-geeky, but having a convoluted, opaque, mandarin-mediated relationship from the user to those accountable for provision is really, really unhelpful, it taints everything else with a not-user-centric flavour.

 

So, devolve to empowered regional government so far as is reasonably practicable, TfL style, and let empowered regions decide which bits they see fit to wholly bring into public control, London Underground, vertically-integrated style, and which bits to contract out.

 

Inter-regional passenger and freight I reluctantly conclude have to remain at a national level, and those I would pass to an executive body that has very high autonomy, owns the relevant infrastructure, and is charged with service provision, which it can choose to achieve directly or by contracting-out, accountable either to the Secretary of State (deep groan), or, if a mechanism could be invented to a Select Committee of the HoC.

 

I would get national civil servants right out of it except in advising as regards budget allocation.

 

Fares: simplified, unified, with a universal interface/ticketing.

 

Lots more, but I’d honestly start with accountability, because it is the longest lever.

 

 

Edited July 20, 2023 by Nearholmer

[The Stationmaster]

Simples -

1.  Keep out the policos noses', along with  their inept sloganisation of various ideas and projects (e.g HS2 and the laughable GBR) 

 

2 DafT to really be the DfT and kept arm'sl;ength merely seeing that Govt policy is followed by those in the railway contracted to follow it.  And take franchising away from them and give it to someone who actually understands it and can manage it properly

 

3. NR appears to live in barmy land over spending and over-egging anything and everything with more irrelevant nonsense that I can think of,   And that includes their attitude to safety where it seems that paper is more important that real safety..

Get rid of much of the upper layer and let Andrew get on with the job.  Might also help for them to involve some people who understand how to run a railway and what it is being run for.  

(BTW GWML ohle seems to have stood up reallyw ell to recent high wonds so it really does do in that respect what it was eant to do - anda lot of it is dead simple compared with earlier stuff in Britain.)

 

4. Dissolve RSSB and put the responsibility for safety back inside the railway where it belongs with people who can relate to everyday railway operation and safety needs and not just create a mountain of paper.

 

5. Re-impose proper safety  audit procedures on all parts of the industry. (yes it costs but applied correctly it would have avoided some of the nonsense we have seen such as relying on lots of Rest Day Working in order to run a booked train service

 

6.. Run franchising properly without accepting nonsensical bids or giving bidders stupidly misleading information in the first place (see Iten 2 above).

 

7.  Let a properly re-established timetable conference do its originally intended task (and keep DafT's noses out of it).

[adb968008]

A return to loco hauled passenger stock, a railway using a standard coupling and a gauge profile used on all lines.

An end to airline seats, and some stock that is non aircon, so I can breathe without allergies.

introduction of a just eat style delivery service of food to stations/platform enroute,  booked in advance so ive a chance of something decent to eat that wasnt made out of cardboard yesterday.

 

50’s on the Penzance sleeper would be nice.. theres more of them than 57/6’s.

:-)

[Nearholmer]

11 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

just eat style delivery service of food to stations/platform enroute,  booked in advance so ive a chance of something decent to eat that wasnt made out of cardboard yesterday

If you know where the restaurants are, you can do this already. There was a famous case of a party ordering a full curry dinner as they boarded at Euston, having it delivered to the train as it stopped at Milton Keynes, and enjoying it en-route to Birmingham.