Ron Ron Ron

Cyril Connelly ?

Same as with politics and the HoC's then? .

Sorry for the late response Stovepipe. No, I don't believe I made it sound like that at all. At no time in that quote, did I say, suggest or imply that the DfT set out the level of premiums to be paid. VTEC bid, DfT accepted, contract terms (including payment levels and schedule) agreed and the franchise agreement was signed by both parties. No one forced VTEC, but in deciding to enter the bidding game, there must have been an intention to win, otherwise what's the point of playing? They either got their sums badly wrong, or as you later suggested, may have been gaming the system. Regardless, the DfT willingly signed up to that deal. .

Virgin Mobile, which is part of Virgin Media, has nothing to do with the Virgin Group whatsoever, other than using the Virgin branding, which they pay a licence fee for. Virgin Media is a subsidiary of American company Liberty Global. .

As Mike (The Stationmaster) said, the Treasury has up to now done very well out of VTEC, who have made a far higher return out of the franchise than EC did during its tenure. The problem has been that the Treasury have been doing far too well out VTEC, due to the overambitious and many would say, unrealistic franchise terms. Had the terms required a much more conservative level of premium payments, VTEC could have returned almost double what EC were able to do, over a similar time period. If you are referring to the premiums, yes it was written into the franchise agreement. As explained above, the agreed level of payments was set far too high, based on flawed revenue growth assumptions and an expectation that increased capacity would have been deliverable. VTEC pitched their bid too high (as I'm sure the other two bidders did) and the DafT and Treasury were far too greedy. .

They've lost so much money because they've had to pay all the profits and more, to the government in premiums. Operationally, the franchise has been making a very good profit, but not enough to cover the price they have to pay to run the franchise (the premium). To date, VTEC have handed over a reported £800 million to the DafT or Treasury. This is more than they've earned in profits, leaving them with a £200 million loss. Had the premium payments been set at a lower level, VTEC would be in the black and the government would have continued to receive a regular healthy payment from them.

I hope you like it. Just one more point. Check that the supplied user manual is the latest version, the current one is.... Versions SC V1.1.0 SB V4.1.3 Extra sections have been added. PIKO can supply a hard copy if you ask nicely. .

I suspect part of the answer...it might be a large part....is not being discussed anywhere, that I can see. Government finances are heavily squeezed. Every government department is having to double down on their budgets. The DafT will be under the same severe financial pressure as every department. Just taking the railway element of their much wider remit, they will have to balance the books as required and where they can't cut, they'll be robbing Peter to pay Paul. Passenger rail services are breaking even, but it needs those large premium payments from the profitable franchises to achieve this. Then there's the subsidy to the network, which is effectively all infrastructure and capital projects. I can't remember the latest figure...is it around £5 billion still? Where does that come from? Major projects are late or overrunning their budgets. Knee jerk reaction becomes the latest dance craze in Whitehall. Meanwhile the Treasury is breathing down their necks. Even if half of that is the case, can we be confident that sensible policy and decision making will prevail? .

The Government and the civil servants at the DafT, who feed the politicians with their understanding of the world are not only incompetent, but ill equipped to run the whole show. Criticism of the extensions announced for ICWC and the MML, mask the fact that the number of franchise and management contract extensions are mounting up, in a backlog that probably won't be cleared for years. Following the aborted ICWC franchise award in 2012, the backlog has been growing. Will the DafT be able to clear it? .

(My bold) Unfortunately, a great majority of our "sophisticated electorate" will not have more than a superficial and slanted understanding of what has actually happened, or what the real issues are. The cries for nationalisation are quite loud, even from some Tory voters. The media with their propensity to deliver nothing but negative angles on almost every subject they cover and their desire to twist every story into a more convoluted political argument than is often necessary, are loving this and will milk it for all they can. Objective analysis on the actual issue at hand, will be very rare from that quarter. They'll major on the political ramifications and damage. The ECML and passenger railway services will just be the latest convenient coat hanger on which to hang the story. Popular opinion formed in this environment is fertile ground for the snake-oil salesmen as this story is manner from heaven for them. Even the brightest and sophisticated can be stupid and easily fooled. .

Which they (VTEC) were easily doing until the inevitable happened. They were bringing in more than EC did by a considerable margin, said to be some 30% higher per month. .

This is precisely the whole root of the problem and this particular franchise's history of failure. Even if the expected infrastructure improvements had been and were to be delivered on time, as a layman, I strongly suspect that the premium payments were set far too high. Look at the recent history. EC under DOR were able to return approx. £1 billion to the DafT or Treasury. The equivalent of premium payments. Not withstanding a growth in passenger traffic, an increase in services and improved yields; it just doesn't seem plausible that VTEC could increase those returns by more than three times (from £1 billion to £3.3 billion) over 7 years. Had the premiums been set at a more realistic figure, say £1.5 billion, with an additional windfall provision if that figure was significantly exceeded, then this whole debacle would not have arisen. According to last summer's financial report, VTEC were on track to bring in something like £1.5 to £2 billion for the taxpayer over the term of the franchise. Although that flagged up that they were falling well short of their target, it was clear VTEC would be able to operate profitably, given more realistic commitments on premium payments. To date they've paid around £800 million to the taxpayer, but suffered a £200 million loss to their own company in doing so. To put it in simplistic terms, had they only been committed to pay £600 million over the same period, then VTEC would be breaking even. .

There are a variety of different types of posts made in the DCC section. Questions requesting help and/or advise on a particular issue Requests for problem solving Fitting guides and advice DCC sound topics News items and passing on information about new products and services General discussion on various aspects of DCC. People relating their experience, in the hope that it might help inform others etc. What was very clear in the past, as the DCC section became quite heavily trafficked, is that the section became rather cluttered and muddled. The introduction of the sub-sections has helped enormously in bringing some order to this part of the forum. Somewhere along the way, in order to further declutter and rationalise the section, DCC Help & Advice was separated from general discussion, news etc, to make it clearer where members could ask for specific help. This sort of organisation is mirrored in other places across the forum, for good reason. Regards discussion topics morphing into questions. I cannot see the problem as most conversations naturally give rise to questions and answers. It's in the vary nature of a discussion on a particular topic. This is very different from somebody making a new post, with the specific aim of getting some help or advice. The subsequent answers and posts do often develop into a small discussion, but the context of replies to a request for help remains. We can look at past experience that lead to the current arrangements. When combined, the section was often a bit of a muddle. You can also look at some other forums, both model railway related and for other interest groups, to see that where such subject sections are not used and there's poor forum organisation, the forum becomes difficult to browse or navigate. I'm coming from a pragmatic angle on this. I don't believe playing semantics is being terribly helpful. .

The DCC section was deliberately split into these sections to declutter what had become a very busy and popular section. Posting everything under one heading created an impenetrable mess, due to the large volume of posts. The search function wasn't much help and if you wanted to go back and see how a discussion in which you had taken part, or were interested in, had been going, then it meant wading back sometimes for pages. The same for questions, help and advice. I cannot see your problem, the section headings are very clear. Despite this, sometimes people, usually newer members, unfortunately post in the wrong section. When the section headings were adjusted to try to help people out, it cut down the amount of misposting, but there were still people who appeared to ignore them and posted without regard. Hence the inclusion of the (not questions) in brackets. Thankfully that appears to have worked well, as it has done in dealing with similar posting issues in the U.K. prototype section. However we still get the occasional post in the DCC Discussions section asking for help or advice. Usually this is moved pretty swiftly to the right place, but it usually relies on members to point out the error to Andy and the Mods. As Chris says above, the admin cannot keep tabs on everything that goes on. As for discussions leading to questions, that isn't an issue. It usually occurs as part of the discussion and subsequent development of a topic. When an OP ( original post) is an outright request for help, or a similar question, then it makes absolute sense to put this where it would be more easily spotted and dealt with. A help forum. Any suggestion to merge the two back together again will be a massive retrograde step and will on past evidence result in a mess. In turn this will almost certainly reduce the effectiveness of the DCC sections in providing help and advice, not only to novices and those with less technical understanding, but to all members. I strongly advise it remains as it is. Regards Ron

Here is a video statement by Martin Griffiths, CEO Stagecoach Group. https://players.brightcove.net/1555966121001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5726503939001 ./

You are right Bob, but the competing bids for the franchise would have all been in the same ballpark, all dancing to the same DfT and Treasury looney tune. Non of the participants can escape blame here. If either of the other two final bidders, First Group or Keolis/Eurostar had won the ICEC franchise, I've no doubt the outcome would have been pretty much the same. .

Shop prices for a SmartControl are very high, particularly in the UK. There are only a certain number of model shops who will stock PIKO products or be able to obtain one for you, usually the continental specialists. The cheapest prices are to either do as njee20 has done and split a SmartControl train set and sell on the unwanted bits, or buy a brand new SmartControl already split from a train set, by a retailer. These are usually from German sellers, via eBay, but there is at least one UK based seller who does this, Price should be around the £290 - £310 mark, but I've seen them go for a bit less. I paid just over £220 for mine, which is not one split from a train set. A certain UK retailer is selling them at £435. Need I say, do your homework. Regards Ron .

Well no. They can't afford to, having already gone into the red by £200m and paying a reported £175m out of their own pockets to make up the amount owing on the last set of premium payments. The VTEC CEO has said that the amount of money they've paid to the DfT in premiums, has reached £800m. The franchise has clearly been very, very profitable under VTEC, until the chickens came home. .

Virgin Train/Stagecoach hasn't worked purely because of the overbidding and excessively high and unrealistic premium payment commitments. VTEC have met all their payment commitments to date. It was last reported that £525 million had already been paid to the DfT/Treasury by the end of the last financial year in April 2017. That's after only 2 years of operation. By now the total should be much higher. [Edit: we are now being told it has reached £800 million] However, in order to achieve this, VTEC has ended up going into the red to the tune of £200 million. Clearly it was not sustainable to continue, even at the current lower level of premium payments, never mind the expected higher payments required to be paid in the final years of the franchise term. If the franchise had been let on realistic terms, which required achievable premiums to be paid, VTEC and the DafT wouldn't be in this mess and the franchise would have run smoothly, paying back to the taxpayers through the premiums and making a reasonable profit for the operator. Note that VTEC were paying premiums back to the government at a significantly higher level than when DOR operator East Coast ran a caretaker service. .

I think the Grauniad will have a heart attack when they find out that "returning to the public sector", actually means that a private partnership consisting of Arup Group, Ernst & Young and SNC-Lavalin Rail & Transit, will actually be taking over the running of the franchise. .

Hi Steve The PIKO SmartControl (PIKO 55040) and the ESU CabControl (ESU 50310) are indeed the same DCC system, but differ in their track power output capacity. PIKO = 5 amp ESU. = 7 amp Both use the standard ESU MobileControl 2 wireless handsets. (note: MobileControl 2 is a wireless handset add-on system, for use with ESU's ECoS console based DCC system.) The SmartControl was announced 2 years ago and has been on sale for about 18 months or so. The CabControl was announced (in the USA) only about 4 or 5 months ago and went on sale just a few weeks before Christmas 2017. At the moment, as you say, ESU are only marketing and selling the CabControl in the US & Aus markets. Why that is the case is anyone's guess. It could be part of the licence deal for PIKO to sell a version branded as their own, possibly for a limited timescale; or it could be for other reasons? ESU previously sold an entry level system, the Navigator, which they dropped from their product range about 2 years or so ago. The CabControl may eventually be released in European markets to fill the market space left by dropping the Navigator. However, at full list price, it has turned out to be much more expensive than its predecessor. I have recently acquired a PIKO SmartControl, but as yet haven't had much time to get to grips with it. There are a couple of other members who have them, so hopefully they might be able to give their own opinion on the system. Regards the size of the layout, no problem as the handset is wireless. It can operate without connecting to a router, other than for setting up and acquiring data. The control wheel is motorised and easy to use with a finger or thumb. In addition to the control wheel, there are some physical buttons along the sides which can be user configured to operate whatever functions. Programming and access to other controls is via the touch screen and well thought out Android app. Locos fitted with RailCom plus equipped decoders, automatically register on the system. etc, etc. .

You've posted in the wrong section Phil. Have a look at the various DCC section headings. [Edit: Now moved to DCC Help & Questions] As for the adapters, they work OK, but take up extra space, so it depends on what space is available in your loco as using an adapter + a decoder may not fit. If the loco has extra accessory functions (e.g. various lighting options etc) the 8-pin decoder might not be able to operate these, if it doesn't support the required number of functions. They also cost extra money, so the best solution will be to just buy some 21-pin decoders instead. The adapters are just dead money IMHO. Ron .

Ah! that explains why there was no railway modelling hobby back then. Hardly anyone made it to the age where people take it up. .

Scant information has been released by both Hitachi and First Group ....and that which has, is rather ambiguous. However, according to this article, the TPX 802's appear to have similar, if not identical spec. to the ones heading to GWR. Note that the sentence in the article, "Similar vehicles have been ordered by Hull Trains", could mean absolutely anything. http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/transpennine-express-trainsets-under-construction-in-japan.html . . .

First of all, apologies to Z21 users if they've already seen this. Also, I'm not familiar with the existing Z21 app, so I've no idea if what Roco are calling a "new app" is very different or just an improved update. The video is an interview, in German, but there are glimpses of some of new functionality. Die neue "Z21 App" von Roco(The new Z21 app from Roco.)