By reducing maintenance regimes: Cleaning less thoroughly, letting smaller faults go unchecked, giving mechanical components less regular attention. All the sorts of things that have happened before with older rolling stock when TOCs have taken delivery of a new train fleet, and probably when a franchise has changed hands, too.
Of course, this would be down to Alstom who maintain the trains rather than Virgin and hence seems less likely than if the TOC was responsible for maintenance themselves. Although perhaps it is because I have been travelling on Virgin services daily over the last few months rather than weekly or fortnightly as I did previously, but over the last couple of weeks I have noticed a lot more issues with the trains interiors: Rubber seals around windows and door frames loose, hanging off or ill-fitting, water dripping through the lighting panels into the passenger saloon, ceiling panels coming loose and hanging down into the passenger saloon.
Maybe virgin's managers are too busy urging people to sign petitions to focus on the day job and pick Alstom up on this sort of thing? Or maybe you are just noticing things more because of the current situation? Who knows? Just sounds like a pretty typical state of affairs with a hard-worked train fleet.
@Realfish
What I find completely dispiriting is the belief by some here (and in the Railway press) that in December, you'll be able to stick a new uniform on these people and everything will be the same. It won't, and to suggest it will be mises the point that a 'vanilla' get what you're given railway is no longer what the customer wants.
In the work that I did until recently, I was involved in supporting the implementation of three siginificant mergers or takeovers. In each case, directors completely underestimated the cultural implications of change - if they recognised them at all, that is. Here be danger for FWC, Sunrise trains or whatever they want to call themselves. Get it wrong (and the early signs are not promising) and everyone will regret it.
It won't be the same, amazing deduction, but nor will the staff turn into three-headed snarling monsters - I say this from experience, having seen the transition from Thames Trains to FGW Link, then to FGW. And First have a great deal of experience in this sort of situation, having taken over Scotrail, Thames Trains, Wessex Trains and Thameslink from other operators. They will not be starry-eyed about what lies ahead - and what are these "early signs"? I would like to know, as, like lfc84, I'm struggling to understand what you are referring to. Do you have some inside track to First's mamagement plans?
SkinnyDave
Quote:
Originally Posted by snail
Not only is my dismay at Virgin's antics growing with every pronouncement I am quite impressed with First's restraint and common sense responses. They are simply saying what they intend to do and keeping quiet about some of Beardy's more outrageous claims.
Much of this is spin of course - from both sides - the proof will come only after December when things get underway for real.
Or is the transport comitee gets ripped into it before then
You seem to assume there is universal agreement on the transport select committee, when pretty much the only member we have heard from is the chair, Louise Ellman, who is a Labour MP, and, like her party's transport spokesman Maria Eagle, sees this as a stick to beat the Government with.
I wondered previously whether Ms Eagle ever did anything while Labour was in Government to try to change the supposedly flawed franchising system. I could say the same for Ms Ellman. Both are Liverpool MPs, so on Virgin's patch. Would either take such a close interest if they represented seats away from Virgin-land, other than, as I say, as an excuse to have a go at the Government? This is indeed the job of the opposition, but they have yet to suggest an alternative. Running a new bidding process, perhaps? After millions and millions have already been spent, before we even get near the courts with the attendant army of barristers?
And the Tories on the committee are going to be caught between a rock and a hard place, with dynamic thrusting entrepreneurialism on the one hand and a franchise system their party invented on the other, so if you think the committee will come up with some unified position, you are mistaken. Never mind that they have no power whatever in this situation.
Maybe Branson hopes that if he delays things long enough, First will just walk away and the Government will come cap in hand to him asking him to carry on. Dream on. NX, East Coast. Need I say more?
Yes slack in timetables is now common in the industry, On my trips on the 1630 London - Glasgow service, it is very possible to do this in under 4 hours. (and it is never full) However the main problem seems to be other trains in the Glasgow area.
Just like on the East Coast route many trains could probably do this in 4h13 comfortably (remember pre Eureka the 1500 London - Edinburgh managed it with the same stops as now). However the problem with the slack is that if the train does get stuck behind a late runner it has no way of recovering. It is very frustrating for us on the East Coast when we leave your 3 minutes late and follow the XC service all the way to Edinburgh simply because we then have to stop at the stations it stops at. I am sure the same problem exists on Virgin, the only reason we make it to Edinburgh "on time" is because of the slack in the last 2 stops, which again I am sure it would be a big risk to Virgin if they removed.
You make it sound as though the 10 minutes allowed at the end of journeys is a recent phenomenon. It is copyright BR Intercity sector way back when. Watford-Euston on Birmingham-London trains was timetabled for 10 minutes longer than Euston-Watford was 20 or more years ago.
