Services that would be better suited with other TOCs

cactustwirly · 3 Jun 2018

MarkyT said:
I'd agree with that. The other Thames Valley branches would probably better be branded as part of a Thames Valley Metro network along with Heathrow Western Access and stopping trains on routes radiating west from Reading to Basingstoke, Newbury and Oxford (Although branded as a separate local network, that collection of services, worked by 387s and some other slower units for branches, could still remain as part of a GWR franchise or might be hived off from the the longer distance services that will use 80xs).

That was the case pre 2007, the Thames Valley had its own franchise (Thames trains, later First Great Western Link)

RailUK Forums

MarkyT · 3 Jun 2018

cactustwirly said:
That was the case pre 2007, the Thames Valley had its own franchise (Thames trains, later First Great Western Link)

True that, but my version would not include the longer distance Cotswold and Bedwyn/Westbury services or fast services between Reading and Didcot, Oxford, Newbury. Fast paths on the Mains would be retained east of Slough however, and the Heathrow Express service would also be run by this operater, also using 387s which would all be based at Reading.

Berneylegs · 3 Jun 2018

I would transfer Holyhead/Bangor/Wrexham/Pembroke/Carmarthen/Swansea/Cardiff-London services to the Wales TOC

Berneylegs · 3 Jun 2018

Chiltern Railways would take over Paddington-Greenford with new platforms built for services to run up to High Wycombe.

GWR services which operate beyond Oxford calling at stations to Hereford and Banbury would transfer to Chiltern extending the Marylebone-Oxford services reversing at Oxford to continue onwards.

DavidGrain · 4 Jun 2018

Berneylegs said:
GWR services which operate beyond Oxford calling at stations to Hereford and Banbury would transfer to Chiltern extending the Marylebone-Oxford services reversing at Oxford to continue onwards.

Interesting thought. This would re-emphasise the notion about how stupid Oxford University were to oppose Oxford being on the GWR main line to Bristol back in the 19th century.

pompeyfan · 4 Jun 2018

When this topic came up last time, there was several separate calls for the Portsmouth - Cardiff services to be transferred to SWT, now it’s SWR I wonder if people still hold the same opinion.

D365 · 4 Jun 2018

700007 said:
Romford to Upminster should have been part of Crossrail - even if it isn't a direct service to the core, but a 'local link' connecting with passengers from Romford using mini 345s or the like would have made more sense than the weird LO service in an area where LO doesn't operate near.

700007 said:
Or even a 710 dedicated to the Elizabeth line - two units. It can be maintained from Ilford who are looking after the LO 710s as well.

The Class 710, to all extents and purposes, is a "mini 345".

If you're operating LO-branded units from the Ilford pool (well aside from the talk of LO retaining two 315s) surely you might as well keep the LO brand to operate the service.

Berneylegs said:
Chiltern Railways would take over Paddington-Greenford with new platforms built for services to run up to High Wycombe.

There isn't a Paddington-Greenford any more, it's been cut back to West Ealing. Who will pay for these extensive new platforms?

cactustwirly · 4 Jun 2018

D365 said:
There isn't a Paddington-Greenford any more, it's been cut back to West Ealing. Who will pay for these extensive new platforms?

There is actually, but only 2x a day!

D365 · 4 Jun 2018

cactustwirly said:
There is actually, but only 2x a day!

So Chiltern are already running a service through Greenford; all they're missing for a station stop is platforms

DavidGrain · 4 Jun 2018

D365 said:
So Chiltern are already running a service through Greenford; all they're missing for a station stop is platforms

Chiltern's service from Ruislip to Paddington is a 'parliamentary' train which is necessary to maintain route knowledge. I have on two occasions been on Chiltern trains from Birmingham to London which have taken this route into London. The first I knew about but the second came as a surprise. On another occasion I was on North Acton Central line station when a Chiltern train unexpectedly went past. (By the way North Acton is obviously an ex GWR station)

MarkyT · 4 Jun 2018

DavidGrain said:
...By the way North Acton is obviously an ex GWR station

The GWR built the Ealing & Shepherd's Bush Railway and its stations specifically to allow the Central London Railway to access their interchange at Ealing Broadway. The current platforms have only ever been used by tube rolling stock, but there were once additional platforms and presumably buildings and shelters on the main line as well, long since removed.

Journeyman · 4 Jun 2018

mugam4 said:
It needs DMUs, and GWR have a DMU depot at one end of the route. SWR only have one, in Salisbury, and at the other end GTR's is off in Selhurst, so GWR makes sense

Yeah, it's pure historical accident. It was operated by Southern DEMUs in the sixties and seventies, but then changed over to Western Region DMUs. It just so happened that it carried on being worked that way, so fell into the Thames Trains franchise. I think it would only make sense to swap TOC if the whole lot were to be electrified.

Berneylegs · 4 Jun 2018

Island Line should be a TOC Under it’s own entity incorporating the steam train from Smallbrook Junction.

MarkyT · 4 Jun 2018

Berneylegs said:
Island Line should be a TOC Under it’s own entity incorporating the steam train from Smallbrook Junction.

A lot of people on the island didn't want that, and the steam railway was not interested in taking any part in the liabilities of running scheduled public transport as opposed to heritage leisure operations. That said I'd love to see an hourly Newport battery D-train interworked with the heritage stuff over a new extension to the riverside...

Harbornite · 5 Jun 2018

Berneylegs said:
I would transfer Holyhead/Bangor/Wrexham/Pembroke/Carmarthen/Swansea/Cardiff-London services to the Wales TOC

Why.....?

DavidGrain · 5 Jun 2018

Berneylegs said:
I would transfer Holyhead/Bangor/Wrexham/Pembroke/Carmarthen/Swansea/Cardiff-London services to the Wales TOC

I don't understand the proposal. The Wales franchise already covers services from North Wales to South Wales. Or are you saying that North Wales to London and South Wales to London which are currently part of the WCML and GW Main Line franchises respectively should be separated out from the franchises which cover the main lines from London and currently have longer mileage in England than in Wales?

DavidGrain · 5 Jun 2018

pompeyfan said:
When this topic came up last time, there was several separate calls for the Portsmouth - Cardiff services to be transferred to SWT, now it’s SWR I wonder if people still hold the same opinion.

I am assuming that this is the service that I have twice travelled on between Bristol and Bath. Each time it has been a 2 car unit absolutely rammed with passengers standing.

DelW · 5 Jun 2018

Journeyman said:
Yeah, it's pure historical accident. It was operated by Southern DEMUs in the sixties and seventies, but then changed over to Western Region DMUs. It just so happened that it carried on being worked that way, so fell into the Thames Trains franchise. I think it would only make sense to swap TOC if the whole lot were to be electrified.

Of course, if we went fully with historical precedent, South Eastern ought to operate Redhill to Reading, since the original SER built the line. I think mile posts on non--shared sections are still based on mileage from London Bridge via Redhill.

(Please note I'm not seriously suggesting this for current operations.)

Clansman · 5 Jun 2018

Caledonian Sleeper was better run under ScotRail IMO rather than its own franchise.

talltim · 5 Jun 2018

Northern

bussnapperwm · 5 Jun 2018

Stratford/Leamington to Kidderminster/Worcester (inclusive) local trains should be put into Chiltern with Snow Hill terminating trains from Chiltern continuing to Stourbridge or Kidderminster (so more through Stourbridge to London services in effect)

Journeyman · 5 Jun 2018

Clansman said:
Caledonian Sleeper was better run under ScotRail IMO rather than its own franchise.

Hmm...as a former Sleeper employee, I'd dispute that, although splitting the franchise has been far more complex than anyone thought.

The biggest problem with ScotRail running the Sleepers was that they were always regarded as a marginal part of the business and they didn't get much investment or attention from management. There was no guaranteed future for the services, and the rolling stock was allowed to deteriorate into really awful condition before it got handed over to CS.

CS have achieved a lot, but had a very hard time in early days. I think the staff on the trains are fantastic, and the new rolling stock is going to be transformational. It's a very challenging operation for such a small TOC, though, and splitting it off has caused problems that probably would have been easier for the much bigger ScotRail to solve.

Caleb2010 · 6 Jun 2018

Journeyman said:
Yeah, it's pure historical accident. It was operated by Southern DEMUs in the sixties and seventies, but then changed over to Western Region DMUs. It just so happened that it carried on being worked that way, so fell into the Thames Trains franchise. I think it would only make sense to swap TOC if the whole lot were to be electrified.

It wasn't that long ago - that Redhill drivers were passed out on WR mechanical stock. The introduction of the Turbo's put an end to this though!

NorthKent1989 · 6 Jun 2018

DelW said:
Of course, if we went fully with historical precedent, South Eastern ought to operate Redhill to Reading, since the original SER built the line. I think mile posts on non--shared sections are still based on mileage from London Bridge via Redhill.

(Please note I'm not seriously suggesting this for current operations.)

A very unusual oddity a South Eastern line......,heading so far west, cutting across the SWR??

Why was it ever built by the South Eastern in the first place?

The London, Tilbury and Southend line was operated by the LMS at one time, another geographical oddity

DavidGrain · 6 Jun 2018

The London Tibury and Southend being operated by the LMS was a geographical oddity yes but if you think back to the fact that it was the Midland Railway which took over the LTSR as a way of getting into the London Docks.

12CSVT · 6 Jun 2018

All services currently run by National Rail franchises to be transferred to a resurrected British Rail :lol:

fairysdad · 6 Jun 2018

Slightly off beat; I have wondered in the past if Epsom station should be run by SWR rather than Southern - it's the quicker route into London, and has services to not just Dorking but also Guildford in the other direction. I guess there's some historical reasons why, but hey ho.

cactustwirly · 6 Jun 2018

fairysdad said:
Slightly off beat; I have wondered in the past if Epsom station should be run by SWR rather than Southern - it's the quicker route into London, and has services to not just Dorking but also Guildford in the other direction. I guess there's some historical reasons why, but hey ho.

I was thinking the same about Leatherhead, SWR operates more services than SN

jhy44 · 6 Jun 2018

mallard said:
In that case, it's more that "Trans-Pennine" doesn't accurately reflect the real operations of the franchise, rather than the franchise having "extraneous" services. Calling it "Manchester-centered express/intercity trains" would be more accurate, but a bit of a mouthful.

'Northern Express' would be a much better name IMO, as that's essentially what it is.

Likewise, I think it would be sensible to group all the old Central Citylink Services (Cardiff - Nottingham, Birmingham - Stansted, Liverpool - Norwich, Birmingham - Liverpool) as a 'Midlands Express' to mirror the Northern arrangement too.

53703 · 7 Jun 2018

Leeds to Manchester all stations via Dewsbury operated by TPE, are they running it because of the mess Northern are in?

Services that would be better suited with other TOCs

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member