What level does HEx need to fall to before political pressure calls for its demise?

[Mikey C]

HEx wouldn't be discontinued without improved Liz Line services, as it provides an extra 4 trains an hour between T2&3 and T5 for Liz Line users.

I'm not sure how many Liz trains terminate at Paddington, and what the recent extra match ordered were for, but running an extra 2 an hour to T5 as a replacement for the 4 an hour HEx would reduce the number of trains into Heathrow, but give the majority of passengers a better service, with 8 evenly spread Liz services to Heathrow, 4 to T4 and 4 to T5.

 

[Djgr]

Is it?

It's a combination of commercial and regulatory outcomes. Yes, under the current system, but I would expect the new GBR system to be one that still gives the private sector players confidence they operate in a predictable rule-based environment. I find the suggestion the government can simply go in and dictate things troubling. We don't live in communist China or Trump America.

HEx may make a commercial decision not to renew their Track Access contract. Or (I'll describe the process in terms of the current system) DfT (via GWR) could apply to operate additional system, then Network Rail would have to demonstrate there's not enough capacity to satisfy all track access applicants then declare the GWML Congested. Then a process is triggered that might involve Capacity Charges and Decision Criteria.

If DfT really wants those paths it can trigger such a process. Does it even want to? Is Treasury convinced it should finance running 2tph additional LDHS services?

Of course this all ignores the point that those HEx paths only exist because there are those Main Line path that make Slough stops that create those paths east of Airport Junction. Without consulting the timetable I don't remember the particulars - it might be that 2tph of the 4tph HEx paths are in those 'Slough bonus' paths, but the other 2tph occupy paths that do exist to at least Reading.

But the existing regulatory regime is only there as the result of a political decision!!

 

[Clarence Yard]

I don’t think HAL are too worried about that. Their TAA is not a standard one and dates back to their original agreement with BR (in reality, the Government).

If they have any serious beef, they usually just ring up No 10, so the DfT are definitely not going to rock the boat!

 

[Starmill]

Realistically there isn't any pressure as the title puts it to do something different with Heathrow Express. It's also not clear where it would really come from.

 

[NCT]

But the existing regulatory regime is only there as the result of a political decision!!

Any regulatory change should be properly thought out and consider a whole range of events and contexts. Freight is going to remain Open Access, the government would get into legal hot waters if it were to ban passenger Open Access completely, there is likely to be a growing number of devolved administration-run services accessing the GBR network. GBR will have to manage the relationship between its 'own' trains and third party trains as a rule not an exception. Unless you advocate us becoming a banana republic, then having a predictable, transparent and fair regulatory framework is essential for GBR's reputational sustainability.

You shouldn't just change the rules in reaction to a specific issue, or try to manipulate an outcome outside of the rules.

 

[Djgr]

Any regulatory change should be properly thought out and consider a whole range of events and contexts. Freight is going to remain Open Access, the government would get into legal hot waters if it were to ban passenger Open Access completely, there is likely to be a growing number of devolved administration-run services accessing the GBR network. GBR will have to manage the relationship between its 'own' trains and third party trains as a rule not an exception. Unless you advocate us becoming a banana republic, then having a predictable, transparent and fair regulatory framework is essential for GBR's reputational sustainability.

You shouldn't just change the rules in reaction to a specific issue, or try to manipulate an outcome outside of the rules.

Whilst I don't have a particular issue with what you say, the point I was trying to make (which is pretty self evident) is that the structure of the railways in the UK (certainly in the last 80 years) has resulted from political decisions being made. That is why nationalisation came about post war and privatisation in the Thatcher/Major years. There is nothing god-given about it which means that radical change cannot be imposed upon it.

 

[NCT]

Whilst I don't have a particular issue with what you say, the point I was trying to make (which is pretty self evident) is that the structure of the railways in the UK (certainly in the last 80 years) has resulted from political decisions being made. That is why nationalisation came about post war and privatisation in the Thatcher/Major years. There is nothing god-given about it which means that radical change cannot be imposed upon it.

You seem to struggle with the distinction between the specific and the general.

What is the problem that you've identified? Is that a specific issue, or is there a more general manifestation of it that it warrants a systematic intervention? What mechanisms do you propose? It it a rule-based mechanism or do you propose giving politicians more executive power on a case-by-case basis?

 

[Djgr]

Realistically there isn't any pressure as the title puts it to do something different with Heathrow Express. It's also not clear where it would really come from.

I don't think that is what the title says at all.

It is clearly not talking about now but rather if there would come a time in the future (say if and when HEx has lost another 1/3rd of its passengers) when people might question its use of scarce infrastructure resources into Paddington.

 

[NCT]

I don't think that is what the title says at all.

It is clearly not talking about now but rather if there would come a time in the future (say if and when HEx has lost another 1/3rd of its passengers) when people might question its use of scarce infrastructure resources into Paddington.

As far as the infrastructure operator and the regulatory framework is concerned, track access charge is track access charge.

Whether HAL considers there to be a case to pay that charge is entirely down to HAL.

 

[Djgr]

You seem to struggle with the distinction between the specific and the general.

What is the problem that you've identified? Is that a specific issue, or is there a more general manifestation of it that it warrants a systematic intervention? What mechanisms do you propose? It it a rule-based mechanism or do you propose giving politicians more executive power on a case-by-case basis?

The identified problem is:

a) HEx passengers have fallen by 1/3rd. This is different to every other TOC.
b) HEx makes extensive use of scarce infrastructure, which could potentially be more productively utilised.
c) The operating agreement of HEx differs from other TOCs.

These three points make it a specific issue, which, if considered a problem, cannot be solved by existing business-as-usual mechanisms but requires a political intervention.

 

[Snow1964]

Currently Heathrow Express has track access for 4 paths per hour until June 2028, a 4 year extension from mid 2024.

Of course the situation at the time of the recent renewal (which was probably negotiated late 2023 / early 2024) when air travel had just bounced back from covid inactivity, will be different in 4 years time.

By late 2027 / early 2028 Old Oak Common surface platforms will be close to opening, and Elizabeth line extension of Paddington terminators will be pending. Going to be much harder to justify utilising 60+ paths each way daily, if many trains only carrying token numbers per coach. (Some trains will be busy, eg around 8am when many International flights just landed), but others will run almost empty.

Another factor might be rolling stock, not sure how long the trains are leased for, and by 2028 they might need another refresh if service is to continue. Will the costs be covered?

 

[NCT]

The identified problem is:

a) HEx passengers have fallen by 1/3rd. This is different to every other TOC.
b) HEx makes extensive use of scarce infrastructure, which could potentially be more productively utilised.
c) The operating agreement of HEx differs from other TOCs.

These three points make it a specific issue, which, if considered a problem, cannot be solved by existing business-as-usual mechanisms but requires a political intervention.

You may personally consider those things a problem, but does the industry as a whole do so?

What's your model of intervention, is it a rule-based model that covers generalities?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Saturday at 23:17 ==

Currently Heathrow Express has track access for 4 paths per hour until June 2028, a 4 year extension from mid 2024.

Of course the situation at the time of the recent renewal (which was probably negotiated late 2023 / early 2024) when air travel had just bounced back from covid inactivity, will different in 4 years time.

By late 2027 / early 2028 Old Oak Common surface platforms will be close to opening, and Elizabeth line extension of Paddington terminators will be pending. Going to be much harder to justify utilising 60+ paths each way daily, if many trains only carrying token numbers per coach. (Some trains will be busy, eg around 8am when many International flights just landed), but others will run almost empty.

If anything, if HAL is on the ball, they would market Heathrow Express as the premium HS2/GWML - Heathrow connecting train, and may even work with DfT to launch a through ticket / add-on.

 

[Djgr]

You may personally consider those things a problem, but does the industry as a whole do so?

What's your model of intervention, is it a rule-based model that covers generalities?

I don't think it's necessarily the industry's call.

Not everything can be rule based.

 

[Starmill]

I don't think that is what the title says at all.

It is clearly not talking about now but rather if there would come a time in the future (say if and when HEx has lost another 1/3rd of its passengers) when people might question its use of scarce infrastructure resources into Paddington.

Indeed, that's exactly what I mean! The title asks where it could come from. Nowhere apparent is the answer.

 

[NCT]

I don't think it's necessarily the industry's call.

Not everything can be rule based.

This is a dangerous attitude for a liberal democracy.

 

[Class 170101]

Personally I think if HAL want the 3rd Runway they should be required to pay for Southern AND Western Links out of Heathrow with no costs expensed back to the Taxpayer.

At that point Crossrail services from Heathrow Terminal 5 should be extended to Reading.
Heathrow Express services should be extended 2tph to Southampton / Bouremouth and 2tph to Portsmouth.

I don't believe there can be extra services from Crossrail to Heathrow on the relief lines as that screws up freight and secondly unless and until Euston is sorted out Old Oak Common will need as many Crossrail trains to start there as possible for Central London due to people being 'dumped' off HS2 there.