Train Alert - All over the place

[Lord Bracknell]

Weren't you once a transport bigwig LB ?

Not a bigwig. Merely a public servant, trying to make the public transport system serve the well-being and economy of the nation. They decided they could do without people like me.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

1. The private companies ran into financial difficulties;
2. The government realised how important the rail network was to the well-being and economy of the nation;
3. The government forced the private companies to reorganise themselves;
4. The re-organised private companies still had financial difficulties;
5. The government realised again how important the rail network was to the well-being and economy of the nation;
6. The government nationalised the private companies;
7. The nationalised railway still had financial difficulties;
8. The government realised how important private wealth creation opportunities were to the well-being of entrepreneurs;
9. The government privatised the railways, and paid much more subsidy than ever before, even though fares went up;
10. The entrepreneurs laughed all the way to the bank;
11. The government forgot that the point of the railways was the well-being and economy of the nation.

12. What happens next?

I disagree with number 11. The John Major government DIDN'T CARE that the point of the railways was the well-being and economy of the nation.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

On the subject of timetable flexibility, I was told this by someone I know who works on raiway timetables. A few years ago a lot of work was being done on the approaches to Euston Station - the so-called "Euston throat." Many of you probably remember this from trips to the north-west. So they tacked an hour onto journey times to allow for delays to trains coming into London. In they event, they found that most services only needed an extra 40 mnutes. But guess what? Suddenly their punctuality figures were massively improved. So when the work was all done, instead of reinstating the original timetable, they allowed for a little, er, extra leeway. It's the sort of creativity that could make this country great again - trains running on time without the extreme measures taken by Hitler or Mussolini ...

 

[beorhthelm]

1. The private companies ran into financial difficulties;...

so how did that come to be? re-organisation then nationalisation didnt fix the financial problems, seem privatisation hasnt either. is it just inefficient? if so, lets say so.

 

[sydney]

Did anyone watch that programme on ITV last night. f***ing train companies, they're all gash.

In this country, a season ticket for a 25 mile journey into the capital costs about £3,000
In Germany, a season ticket for a 25 mile journey into the capital costs about £1,500
In Italy, a season ticket for a 25 mile journey into the capital costs about £900

Time to re-nationalise. Wankers.

they have to get their money from somewhere mate........2.5 mill on the dole = 130 million p/w going out......it's all about the taxes innit....

 

[Postman Pat]

Great South Run in pompey on Sunday. 30,000 runners + family etc... descending onto Portsmouth...... guess what Network rail are doing this weekend.......

Trains between London Victoria / Brighton and Portsmouth Harbour are diverted to start / terminate at Bognor Regis and will not call at Chichester, Fishbourne, Bosham, Nutbourne, Southbourne, Emsworth, Warblington, Havant, Hilsea, Fratton, Portsmouth & South Sea and Portsmouth Harbour.

The train shuttle service between Bognor Regis and Littlehampton will not run.

Trains between Brighton and Southampton Central will start / terminate at Barnham.
Buses will run between Bognor Regis and Havant.
Buses will run between Barnham and Cosham.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

so how did that come to be? re-organisation then nationalisation didnt fix the financial problems, seem privatisation hasnt either. is it just inefficient? if so, lets say so.

The original construction of the railways in the nineteenth century was a huge speculative venture by great Victorian entrepreneurs and engineers. It was speculative, in the sense that the capital spending required to build the railways was massive, and the hope was that the revenues generated would not only repay the initial outlay, but would also cover the running costs and generate healthy profits.

This was NEVER achieved, and companies either went out of business or were forced into mergers to try to rescue the situation. Even that didn't work, though.

But the infrastructure proved incredibly valuable to the nation and governments couldn't allow it to be torn up and thrown away.

It is inevitable that public funding is needed to keep the railway system going and allow it to be developed and modernised. For 170 years, the issue has been how to get the balance right between private investment, taxpayers' input and contributions from passengers, via fares. The current mix seems to be the only one that STARTS from the principle that shareholders' interests are paramount. Inevitably, this demands a bigger input from taxpayers and farepayers. Throughout the history of the railways, the key decisions have been made by government. It seems increasingly obvious that the current model of a privatised, subsidised railway with massively increasing fares, is the WORST solution that has ever been tried. Eventually it will collapse. But it WILL be replaced by something different, because there is no question that a flourishing railway DOES make a major contribution to the well-being and economy of the nation.

 

[Brovion]

The original construction of the railways in the nineteenth century was a huge speculative venture by great Victorian entrepreneurs and engineers. It was speculative, in the sense that the capital spending required to build the railways was massive, and the hope was that the revenues generated would not only repay the initial outlay, but would also cover the running costs and generate healthy profits.

This was NEVER achieved, and companies either went out of business or were forced into mergers to try to rescue the situation. Even that didn't work, though.

But the infrastructure proved incredibly valuable to the nation and governments couldn't allow it to be torn up and thrown away.

It is inevitable that public funding is needed to keep the railway system going and allow it to be developed and modernised. For 170 years, the issue has been how to get the balance right between private investment, taxpayers' input and contributions from passengers, via fares. The current mix seems to be the only one that STARTS from the principle that shareholders' interests are paramount. Inevitably, this demands a bigger input from taxpayers and farepayers. Throughout the history of the railways, the key decisions have been made by government. It seems increasingly obvious that the current model of a privatised, subsidised railway with massively increasing fares, is the WORST solution that has ever been tried. Eventually it will collapse. But it WILL be replaced by something different, because there is no question that a flourishing railway DOES make a major contribution to the well-being and economy of the nation.

I know on transport issues we don't see eye-to-eye on Brighton in-city bus fares and the need to build a proper trans-Sussex A27 largely in addition to the current local road, but you're bang on the money here.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I know on transport issues we don't see eye-to-eye on Brighton in-city bus fares and the need to build a proper trans-Sussex A27 largely in addition to the current local road, but you're bang on the money here.

The issues are the same.

As long as there is a tension between the interests of shareholders, taxpayers and fare-payers, with public well-being and the economy lurking in the background, there are issues to be resolved. We agree that the balance is wrong, as far as the railways are concerned. We might even agree that it's wrong as far as buses and roads are concerned.

People are waking up to the fact that the railway system is wrong. Until they reach the same conclusions about buses and roads, we are lumbered with what we've got.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Trains between Brighton and Southampton Central will start / terminate at Barnham.

Seems a rather short journey.

 

[Peever]

You mean to tell me that leaves on the line are actually slowing down the trains? Or is their some sort of hidden meaning to this all that us foreigners don't understand

 

[HawkTheSeagull]

Great South Run in pompey on Sunday. 30,000 runners + family etc... descending onto Portsmouth...... guess what Network rail are doing this weekend.......

Trains between London Victoria / Brighton and Portsmouth Harbour are diverted to start / terminate at Bognor Regis and will not call at Chichester, Fishbourne, Bosham, Nutbourne, Southbourne, Emsworth, Warblington, Havant, Hilsea, Fratton, Portsmouth & South Sea and Portsmouth Harbour.

The train shuttle service between Bognor Regis and Littlehampton will not run.

Trains between Brighton and Southampton Central will start / terminate at Barnham.
Buses will run between Bognor Regis and Havant.
Buses will run between Barnham and Cosham.

Maybe blame the organisers of the run since engineering work is (generally) planned over a year in advance (read it on here around the same time fixtures came out, may or may not be right).

You mean to tell me that leaves on the line are actually slowing down the trains? Or is their some sort of hidden meaning to this all that us foreigners don't understand

All the leaves and stuff get turned into a thin layer of mulch which sits on the top of the rails, making them slippery so for trains to brake in time for a station, they run at lower speeds. Much like if there your driving and there is ice, you drive a bit slower. Cant cut all trees down either as eco-warriors would go mental too.

Ended up getting to Victoria a little bit late, but travelled on an earlier train so met my train at Euston.......wish i didnt as i had to stand all the way to Preston

 

[Storer 68]

firstly i commute and secondly, its pretty reasonable - except the price. so rather than the pettiness back to the point: how will nationalisation help? you say so it can be subsidised - why didnt you just say that instead, it needs more subsidy?

fair enough thats one solution, let everyone else pay to subsidise one tiny cohort of the population. ?

works for road, schools, hospitals , armed forces. Why not trains?

 

[Storer 68]

The original construction of the railways in the nineteenth century was a huge speculative venture by great Victorian entrepreneurs and engineers. It was speculative, in the sense that the capital spending required to build the railways was massive, and the hope was that the revenues generated would not only repay the initial outlay, but would also cover the running costs and generate healthy profits.

This was NEVER achieved, and companies either went out of business or were forced into mergers to try to rescue the situation. Even that didn't work, though.

But the infrastructure proved incredibly valuable to the nation and governments couldn't allow it to be torn up and thrown away.

It is inevitable that public funding is needed to keep the railway system going and allow it to be developed and modernised. For 170 years, the issue has been how to get the balance right between private investment, taxpayers' input and contributions from passengers, via fares. The current mix seems to be the only one that STARTS from the principle that shareholders' interests are paramount. Inevitably, this demands a bigger input from taxpayers and farepayers. Throughout the history of the railways, the key decisions have been made by government. It seems increasingly obvious that the current model of a privatised, subsidised railway with massively increasing fares, is the WORST solution that has ever been tried. Eventually it will collapse. But it WILL be replaced by something different, because there is no question that a flourishing railway DOES make a major contribution to the well-being and economy of the nation.

I wouldn't bank on it happening tho under either this, the next or the one after that government. The present systems benefits the Train Operating Companies, their shareholders, the fanchise holders, their shareholders, and the government (takes the cost out of the public sector). the only element that it does not benefit at all is the fare paying passenger.

 

[Lower West Stander]

I wouldn't bank on it happening tho under either this, the next or the one after that government. The present systems benefits the Train Operating Companies, their shareholders, the fanchise holders, their shareholders, and the government (takes the cost out of the public sector). the only element that it does not benefit at all is the fare paying passenger.

Shareholders benefitting? You seen FirstGroup share price performance this year?

 

[Norman Potting]

Weren't you once a transport bigwig LB ?

Well put - I would add at 4.5 "The railways worked themselves into the ground to support the war effort couldn't afford to catch up with the maintenance backlog"

 

[red star portslade]

A mate of mine is a signal man and works along the Arun valley. The signalling system is so antiquated along the route that the signals were until last year still lit by parafinn.

 

[Peever]

Maybe blame the organisers of the run since engineering work is (generally) planned over a year in advance (read it on here around the same time fixtures came out, may or may not be right).



All the leaves and stuff get turned into a thin layer of mulch which sits on the top of the rails, making them slippery so for trains to brake in time for a station, they run at lower speeds. Much like if there your driving and there is ice, you drive a bit slower. Cant cut all trees down either as eco-warriors would go mental too.

Ended up getting to Victoria a little bit late, but travelled on an earlier train so met my train at Euston.......wish i didnt as i had to stand all the way to Preston

Cheers for the info. Did not think of it like that. Makes sense.

 

[Westdene Wonder]

I can understand Simster`s feelings when a connection is allowed to depart several minutes before his arrival,there is a reason,his train is late, if the connection is held then two services are late,the problem is statistics, train companies have targets,if they hold connections they dont meet their targets,end of story.

 

[Norman Potting]

A mate of mine is a signal man and works along the Arun valley. The signalling system is so antiquated along the route that the signals were until last year still lit by parafinn.

...But it generally worked ok??