Is rail REALLY that bad in the North?

[johnnychips]

My cynical view is that in the past those funds went towards to areas that helped politicians, of the two main parties, get votes. Railways and the associated infrastructure were not seen as politically important. I note that you don't seem that bothered about the south-west which is why I tend not to be that bothered about "the north".

Unfortunately, you might be right. Bristol apart, I would guess that car ownership in the south-west (I might be talking rubbish, I haven’t looked this up) is greater and congestion is less than London and the northern cities, so that when people decide who to vote for, rail development is well down the list: therefore it’s not something politicians make a song and dance about.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

What I was trying to get at was, if elecrification is as stupid a policy as some on here argue, why have so many countries spent decades pursuing it? BTW, we did start large-scale electrification and other modernisation not long after WWII, but seem to have had difficulty with consistent and well-directed investment eg putting a ludicrous number of unproven diesel locomotive designs into service in the 50s

First, I haven't noticed anyone posting that electrification is a stupid policy. A few are arguing that there are other ways substantially to improve our railways, and I agree with that.

Second, the main reason electrification has been done in fits and starts since 1948 is that the decision making has been done by Government Ministers unduly and badly advised by Civil Servants who were not as intelligent as they thought they were.

Third, the fiasco of the dieselisation programme in the mid-1950s was the consequence of a Government policy to give as many private manufacturers as possible the opportunity to participate in the modernisation process. That lesson was learned the hard way, the mistake has not been made again, and the episode has little bearing on today's railway problems.

Fourth, if you want any kind of consistent and well-directed policy, stay away from professional politicians. It's as simple as that. One of the major problems facing our national railway system is that politicians have an enormous influence.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Exactly. At the moment, TPE's seem to travel fast enough through the hills - its the crawl into Manchester that seems to take an age. If four tracks could prevent them getting caught behind the Glossop stopper that would be a help - particularly as the track bed is largely intact.

Can anyone with full technical knowledge of actual railway usage of the land area of those four tracks say if there are any "hidden" infrastructural problems that currently exist that could be a problem to resolve in order to return to four-track running.

 

[Senex]

Fourth, if you want any kind of consistent and well-directed policy, stay away from professional politicians.

Amen to that — and not just with regard to railways!

It's as simple as that. One of the major problems facing our national railway system is that politicians have an enormous influence.

Substitute "... politicans and their civil servants have a wildly excessive influence". (And think paricularly, at the present time, bi-modes and IEP.)

 

[dewsnapsliding]

Can anyone with full technical knowledge of actual railway usage of the land area of those four tracks say if there are any "hidden" infrastructural problems that currently exist that could be a problem to resolve in order to return to four-track running.

You’d need to rebuild the other half of Guide Bridge station which was ridiculously demolished a few years ago, and there would be an issue with the current platform access at Gorton (as from memory a long path runs across what would be one of the tracks) but is probably not insurmountable.
Money would be my guess as to why it doesn’t happen, but the point about the Odsall Chord was to avoid as many trains using the Guide Bridge - Piccadilly corridor which meant there wouldn’t be the need to 4-track it in the first place. From memory, the initial consultation for the Odsall Chord did consider runnng via this corridor as an alternative (including a dive-under on the approach to Piccadilly through the old bus/container yard) but it was ruled out.

4-tracking may return at some point in the future, but only if tied into increased desire to route Sheffield trains away from Stockport (to relieve Slade Lane - Stockport capacit) but even then the route via Belle Vue is quicker I think. Would also need to sort the junction at Hyde North out as well I would’ve thought, but if you routed trains for Stalybridge onto Northernmost tracks from Ardwick, there would be no conflicting movements at Guide Bridge.

 

[B&I]

My cynical view is that in the past those funds went towards to areas that helped politicians, of the two main parties, get votes. Railways and the associated infrastructure were not seen as politically important. I note that you don't seem that bothered about the south-west which is why I tend not to be that bothered about "the north".

Nail on the head there. Our absurd electoral system encourages infrastructure spending on the basis of pork barrel nonsense, rather than any sensible appraisal of need.

 

[B&I]

First, I haven't noticed anyone posting that electrification is a stupid policy. A few are arguing that there are other ways substantially to improve our railways, and I agree with that.

Second, the main reason electrification has been done in fits and starts since 1948 is that the decision making has been done by Government Ministers unduly and badly advised by Civil Servants who were not as intelligent as they thought they were.

Third, the fiasco of the dieselisation programme in the mid-1950s was the consequence of a Government policy to give as many private manufacturers as possible the opportunity to participate in the modernisation process. That lesson was learned the hard way, the mistake has not been made again, and the episode has little bearing on today's railway problems.

Fourth, if you want any kind of consistent and well-directed policy, stay away from professional politicians. It's as simple as that. One of the major problems facing our national railway system is that politicians have an enormous influence.

Take a look back up this thread if you want to see certain people taking that approach to electrification. As for the rest, sadly you're right, but I mentioned the diesel loco fiasco as one (very well-known) example of policy failure, rather than something with a direct bearing on the state of today's railways.

 

[theironroad]

Funny thing is that everyone in the country wants brand new trains and as soon as they arrive it seems they don't like them and want trains from 40 years ago.....

 

[AndrewE]

Funny thing is that everyone in the country wants brand new trains and as soon as they arrive it seems they don't like them and want trains from 40 years ago.....

Not at all... most people [around] the country just want enough trains (i.e. railway vehicle capacity) that they can get on board. Admittedly they also want to see the back of the Pacers, which have done their job by supplying dirt-cheap stock to prevent line closures, but are now way past their sell-by date.
I have heard no gripes about the nice bright 30-year old 4-car EMUs now running between Liverpool and Preston, even if they are cast-offs from the south east... and the only thing wrong with the new-ish TPE EMUs between Manchester Airport and Scotland is that there should be at least twice as many of them! Which also goes for the DMU stock on the "real" Trans-Pennine services which could all be doubled capacity-wise and would still be needing more. If it is fit for purpose, then let's have it!

 

[Olaf]

Nail on the head there. Our absurd electoral system encourages infrastructure spending on the basis of pork barrel nonsense, rather than any sensible appraisal of need.

Sorry, no. There is plenty of material available to demonstration that is not the case, though locally elected officials will tend to suggest otherwise - as arguments both for and against their agendas.

 

[dcsprior]

Funny thing is that everyone in the country wants brand new trains and as soon as they arrive it seems they don't like them and want trains from 40 years ago.....

People probably assume that a new train will be more comfortable and capacious, as they get this on other modes of transport - then they're disappointed to not get it on the railway. For instance:
* since passing her test, my wife has owned 3 cars: a mk3 VW Golf, a Seat Toledo (based on the MK4 Golf) and a mk2 Ford Focus (similar size to its contemporary, the mk5 golf). Each has been more comfortable than the one it replaced - and if she had stuck with one brand, each would've been roomier than its predecessor too.
* I fly easyJet weekly. Their newer planes with the seats made by Recaro are a lot more comfortable (despite appearances) than their older ones. They're about to introduce the A320NEO which I've read will be a lot quieter than the current model
* I used to travel by East Coast trains weekly. Their mk4 coaches offered no noticeable improvement in comfort over their mk3s.

 

[ole17]

Funny thing is that everyone in the country wants brand new trains and as soon as they arrive it seems they don't like them and want trains from 40 years ago.....

One day, the railways will appoint a 'passenger comfort' team who specifically look after how well the seats are and what the interior should be to enhance passenger experience. Just like the airlines.

I think the railways have gotten much more media attention than needed. Very robotic as well. It's always either rail fare increase, engineering works fail. Naturally, psychologically, anything bad like hard seats just exponentially increase the negative feeling towards the railways. Also very typical to compare other countries and proclaim their positives. Not to mention rail fares......

People might not realise but, for many years, the bus seats have already changed to a semi-soft seat padding. Harder than those bus seats 10 years ago where it felt like a sofa, but still not rock hard though. I've not tried the recent ones on the 700s or similar new stock as a comparison, but as a commuter on the Donny line into Leeds, the 321 seats are still better than the bus, i would agree.

I find it difficult to understand, but how was the aire/wharf lines in Leeds deemed more important to electrify than the entire GWML & southwest?

 

[yorksrob]

I find it difficult to understand, but how was the aire/wharf lines in Leeds deemed more important to electrify than the entire GWML & southwest?

They were a fairly limited commuter extension, rather than an important main line, but no different in that respect than the third rail infill schemes on the Southern Region.

Personally, I'd find 50/60 year old trains even more comfortable than the forty year old ones !

 

[Bevan Price]

Funny thing is that everyone in the country wants brand new trains and as soon as they arrive it seems they don't like them and want trains from 40 years ago.....

Part of the problem is that whilst train performance has improved a lot, the internal design & layout have coaches has (on average) got worse - for which I suspect that DfT takes much of the blame. Although the average size of people has been slowly increasing, seat size & legroom have been gradually reduced. For example, the average width of seats (measured across the width of the seat cushion in standard class) has been reduced by over 2 inches going from Mark 2 stock to Voyagers & Pendolinos. (Measured several years ago using a tape measure.)

Also thanks to DfT, many trains remain too short, and they are still building inadequate 2 car dmus for some busy routes. Additionally, there is often inadequate space for luggage.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Personally, I'd find 50/60 year old trains even more comfortable than the forty year old ones !

I am old enough to have travelled in the 1950s on some of the remaining (LYR?) non-compartment coaches with horsehair stuffing in the Manchester area and can assure you that there was much discomfort felt in the exposed skin not protected by short trousers. I think that these were stabled at Red Bank carriage sidings.

 

[yorksrob]

I am old enough to have travelled in the 1950s on some of the remaining (LYR?) non-compartment coaches with horsehair stuffing in the Manchester area and can assure you that there was much discomfort felt in the exposed skin not protected by short trousers. I think that these were stabled at Red Bank carriage sidings.

I suspect that those carriages weren't built 50/60 years ago, but we're actually 80/90 years old, so might not be up to scratch in terms of comfort.

I can assure you that an EPB, HAP, DEMU or CIG for example, that was built 50/60 years ago had very comfortable seating indeed.

 

[snowball]

can assure you that there was much discomfort felt in the exposed skin not protected by short trousers. I think that these were stabled at Red Bank carriage sidings.

Short trousers were stabled at Red Bank?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Short trousers were stabled at Red Bank?

Consider me to be in need of a revision lesson in the correct formation of sentences...

 

[DarloRich]

is it that bad? no

Could it be better? Yes

Will it be better when the new trains arrive? Perhaps.

Can we also not have silly comparisons between what happens in London and the south east and what happens in Leeds or Manchester or Newcastle. These areas with their own unique issues and solutions.

 

[brel york]

I find my usage of the rail system in South Yorkshire to be fine , I could use the train from Sheffield to Doncaster for Work , the problems not the train , it’s getting to the station
I start at 6, 20am and can be in Doncaster on time , problem is the 4 mile journey to the station, the bus can’t get me there and neither can the tram and a taxi is roughly £8 that’s why I choose the car

 

[AndrewE]

I find my usage of the rail system in South Yorkshire to be fine , I could use the train from Sheffield to Doncaster for Work , the problems not the train , it’s getting to the station
I start at 6, 20am and can be in Doncaster on time , problem is the 4 mile journey to the station, the bus can’t get me there and neither can the tram and a taxi is roughly £8 that’s why I choose the car

You need a pushbike...

 

[brel york]

You need a pushbike...

I have one but the hills are a killer lol

 

[B&I]

is it that bad? no

Could it be better? Yes

Will it be better when the new trains arrive? Perhaps.

Can we also not have silly comparisons between what happens in London and the south east and what happens in Leeds or Manchester or Newcastle. These areas with their own unique issues and solutions.

What makes the rest of the country so different from the south east that it cannot expect an equivalent standard of rail provision, once adjustment has been made for population density?

 

[DarloRich]

What makes the rest of the country so different from the south east that it cannot expect an equivalent standard of rail provision, once adjustment has been made for population density?

really? You are unable to identify the issues?

 

[B&I]

Sorry, no. There is plenty of material available to demonstration that is not the case, though locally elected officials will tend to suggest otherwise - as arguments both for and against their agendas.

Care to provide some of this material?

 

[B&I]

really? You are unable to identify the issues?

Apart from population density, no. Do enlighten me.

 

[DarloRich]

Apart from population density, no. Do enlighten me.

really? No ideas of your own? No guesses? If not try a bit of research and self improvement.

 

[B&I]

really? No ideas of your own? No guesses? If not try a bit of research and self improvement.

Ah, It's obvious. It's the boundless superiority complex and sense of entitlement of some people who live in the south of England, and their apparent belief that those of us who arw dull enough to remain up north should simply accept how things are without question. Those are the vital factors I've missed justifying why expenditure on rail down there per head is many times what it is in the north.

I feel a proper banana now.

 

[JohnB57]

Banana? Luxury!

 

[Railwaysceptic]

Ah, It's obvious. It's the boundless superiority complex and sense of entitlement of some people who live in the south of England, and their apparent belief that those of us who arw dull enough to remain up north should simply accept how things are without question. Those are the vital factors I've missed justifying why expenditure on rail down there per head is many times what it is in the north.

I feel a proper banana now.

I live in London and I assure you most people here do not have a sense of entitlement. They do however have common sense.

The first thing many people in other parts of the country need to understand is that much of the investment in London's railways comes from local taxes and grants and only part comes from Central Government. The mooted Crossrail 2 is a good example. Northern whingers complain about Government support for this project although the Government has not committed itself to supporting it. Most of the financing will come from London.

A second point is that most people in London do not have the over developed tribal instinct - the us against them mentality - that is so prevalent elsewhere. Londoners do not think, as you so wrongly assume, that people in the North should shut up and accept low standards. We do note however that Northern politicians accepted HS2 and did not argue that the astronomical sums involved should instead be used to procure huge improvements across the whole of Northern England.

Another point which people in the north should consider is that in the Home Counties, we do not run silly two coach trains when five coaches are necessary. Down here we lengthen platforms and trains as much as possible, and still the trains are full to bursting at peak times. I suggest you compare peak hour arrivals at Waterloo with those at any Northern station.

If people in the North want heavy investment in railway infrastructure they need to do two things. First, they need to come up with schemes that will be cost-effective, practicable and of benefit to very large numbers of people. Second, they need to find a way for a major part of the financing to come from local taxes and businesses.