Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,933
I think I have swapped Platforms 1 and 4 over compared to the above.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
East Midlands Franchise 2019-
- Thread starter Domh245
- Start date
- Status
I think I have swapped Platforms 1 and 4 over compared to the above.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Dore & Totley
Member
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 52
Last two trips since August in weekend first Rail Gourmet haven't showed. Got a refund for the difference. I stock up at Chesterfield just in case.
NoOnesFool
Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 602
It is a buffet bar service on London trains at weekends, there is no at seat service. You will need to go to the buffet bar (Coach C/L on 5/10 Coach Meridians) for refreshments.
Last edited:
Dore & Totley
Member
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 52
We couldn't the buffet was shut and no trolley due to there being no Rail Gourmet staff on both journeys South and North. That's 4 journeys. Looking at Twitter it wasn't just our train there were lots of complaints about lack of refreshments. I assume EMT can claim back the money they refunded me from Rail Gourmet.
Qwerty133
Established Member
Rail Gourmet have been badly unreliable for many years on EMT. I can only assume that EMT make more in compensation payments for their poor reliability than they could be bringing the catering in house or reallocating it to a more reliable contractor.
NoOnesFool
Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 602
I think to call the RG service badly unreliable is unfair. There are many reasons why a train might be uncovered, for example if I was passing a train that was delayed, I could miss the next train I'm working, thus throwing the whole circuit out of shape; it's not that it's anyone's fault, it's simply unfortunate circumstances. If a Host is ill, then they can't return to work for 48 hours, because of food safety regulations, where as non-catering staff can return as soon as they feel better. Protocol like that can affect coverage, but it's in place for a good reason - to protect you the passenger from being made ill.
cactustwirly
Established Member
But it happens a lot less frequently on TOCs who employ their catering staff directly...
I think the point about EMT is that they have a very good offer when they decide to offer it. Should they be running a Friday evening express service without their food offer ? I don't think so.
Perhaps they've given up. In which case, the only thing they have to offer is a comfortable seat, and that will ne gone when the HST's dissappear.
The whole railway seems to be giving up this year.
Perhaps they've given up. In which case, the only thing they have to offer is a comfortable seat, and that will ne gone when the HST's dissappear.
The whole railway seems to be giving up this year.
Last edited:
Mikey C
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 6,845
Having not been on one for a while, I was surprised yesterday at how worn the seat cushions seemed to be, with the rear of the cushion gone a bit saggy, a you could feel the front bar against your legs. A shame as the interior is still nice, excellent legroom and of course a nice view from the large windows.
Jorge Da Silva
Established Member
Is Liverpool to Norwich definitely getting cut at Nottingham?
Kneedown
Established Member
Not definitely.
Killingworth
Established Member
In one word, no. BUT seems 99% certain. The franchise tender includes Liverpool- Norwich until December 2021 by which time the Hope Valley Capacity Scheme should (hollow laughter) be complete. At that point a third fast service between Sheffield and Manchester is due to begin, ultimate start and finish points to be decided.
Once that is confirmed remapping can be confirmed. The franchise tender says Liverpool - Nottingham will go to either Northern or TPE, but reserves the possibility that it could stay with East Midlands, either Liverpool - Norwich (unlikely but possible until the HVCS is finished), or possibly truncated Sheffield - Norwich (slightly more likely).
The extra Sheffield - Manchester service is likely to go to either Northern or TPE. Sheffield - Manchester may end up with 2 TPE and 2 Northern services per hour, one stopping all stations, 3 with limited stops to fit pathing restrictions, ultimate starting and finishing points to be decided.
The current Liverpool - Norwich is unsustainable without major infrastructure improvements to add resilience to the national network. That can't happen within a decade, at least.
NoOnesFool
Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 602
If Northern got it, then it wouldn't surprise me if it was joined on to an existing service,i.e. the Chester service. For TPE, the South Transpennine route is something of the Cinderella of their network, a 2nd route along the Hope Valley would just be an inconveniene.
Surely if TPE got the 3rd fast and took over Liverpool - Notts, they'd be running 3tph over the 'core' Hope Valley section, at which point it would even up the North/South TPE balance and make it a bit less 'Cinderella-y'. That might make good use of the remaining 185s too rather than ship them all off to Wales or wherever.
If EMR lose Nottingham to Liverpool wouldn’t it make more sense for the remaining bit to Norwich to go to Greater Anglia? Seems to me that the remaining bit is more for the benefit of East Anglian connections than for the people of the East Midlands, marrying franchises up better with the local government that are interested in them. And GA will have bi modes to use on the ECML bit....
The remaining EMR would then be a better split between two service groups which I personally think should be separated - mainline service out as an attractive profitable franchise and a local network around Leicester/Derby/Nottingham/Lincoln ripe for devolution to a regional body.
The remaining EMR would then be a better split between two service groups which I personally think should be separated - mainline service out as an attractive profitable franchise and a local network around Leicester/Derby/Nottingham/Lincoln ripe for devolution to a regional body.
WillPS
Established Member
I'm not sure Grantham - Peterborough is a long enough section of the route to justify bi-modes.
NoOnesFool
Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 602
I agree but I can't see it happening...
Creating financial basket case local franchises does nothing for them. Grouping IC and local services in areas like Anglia and the East Mids that still make an overall profit seems sensible.
What's the point in spending millions on route learning for several hundred miles for Anglia crews when EMT already have crews in Norwich and Nottingham?
Your plan would also, combined with the loss of the Liverpool work, serve to all bit rubber stamp large scale traincrew redundancies on the EMR side for no particular reason than paper shuffling.
The service also becomes effectively the Grantham to Peterborough service in the brave new Azuma world on the East Coast.
You basically wish to incur significant cost for the sake of a sticker on the side of the train.
Kneedown
Established Member
Is the correct answer. You win the internet for the day!
I don’t think hiding unprofitable services does much for public services. It is unfair for passengers to cross subsidise each other (rather than taxpayers in general paying) and hides waste and difficult decisions.
Local services should be funded for what they are worth and controlled by local government (though it does require devolved transport budgets). The Norwich services are far more relevant to E Anglia councils than East Midland ones.
Surely it is more sensible to TUPE Norwich crew into the GA pool than for EMT to have an isolated crew depot?
Previous comments have suggested there would be plenty of work for Nottingham crews.
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,933
I don't believe any of the options suggested are the right options in respect of the train crew and would still want it to join the XC network.
The biggest weakness for the Norwich to Liverpool route is currently no Train Crew depot west of Nottingham. This means ECS moves between Nottingham and Liverpool at 04:00 in the morning or Taxi moves to Crewe. This is wasteful and I would have thought it would be better to have a train crew depot there to enable both Liverpool to Norwich and Derby to Crewe services to start there rthare than the formeer moves.
Otherwise I would favour it being handed over to Cross Country or another franchise with depots in Liverpool / Manchester or Crewe area, Sheffield or Nottingham / Leicester and Norwich EMT moving to the new franchise completely.
The biggest weakness for the Norwich to Liverpool route is currently no Train Crew depot west of Nottingham. This means ECS moves between Nottingham and Liverpool at 04:00 in the morning or Taxi moves to Crewe. This is wasteful and I would have thought it would be better to have a train crew depot there to enable both Liverpool to Norwich and Derby to Crewe services to start there rthare than the formeer moves.
Otherwise I would favour it being handed over to Cross Country or another franchise with depots in Liverpool / Manchester or Crewe area, Sheffield or Nottingham / Leicester and Norwich EMT moving to the new franchise completely.
The ECS move to/from Liverpool in each direction is an efficient way of retaining route knowledge over various diversionary routes that it’s not practical to cover with passenger services (because they’d miss intermediate stations). It’s not much in the grand scheme of things, and presumably cheaper than establishing a depot out there, otherwise I’m sure that they would establish a depot out there. It’s not going to be cheap to pass the work to another TOC’s depot who sign neither the routes nor the traction, nor would it be efficient to cover any of the work from Nottingham without the benefit of local work to make diagrams more productive.
I don’t understand the obsession with trying to change the world just to make everything fit into nice tidy boxes on a map.
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,933
I have always felt there are some weaknesses in the franchise map where some services don't fit well operationally where they serve. This route is one. Derby to Crewe another.
There are other routes that are served by one operator that would actually sit better with another or perhaps are shared.
There are other routes that are served by one operator that would actually sit better with another or perhaps are shared.
I don't know why, really.
Liverpool - Norwich maybe doesn't fit particularly well with any single current TOC, but no other TOC has a traincrew depot that could efficiently resource the early starts/late finishes from Nottingham, and the only real inefficiency is that single ECS move which isn't really so inefficient because it's used for route knowledge retention for what must be approaching half of its mileage anyway.
Derby - Crewe has to be served from one end or the other, and the other end just makes no sense at all really!
Kneedown
Established Member
I really don't hold with the idea of absorbing local services into the local authorities. They will still end up being subsidised, but through peoples Council Taxes.
Far better to place local services inside a profitable franchise. That way a proportion of the profit could help subsidise the local services, rather than go straight to the shareholders back pocket. I'm sure most passengers would be in favour of that!
As regards what service should move to what franchise, i'll repeat myself yet again. It really doesn't make a blind bit of difference what colour a train is painted (or vinyled!) and what depot the traincrew happen to come from, just as long as there is a service. The Norwich portion of the route is no better a fit with Anglia than it is with EMT. To do this and staff it with Norwich crews would mean no departures from Nottingham back to Norwich until after 09.00. Unless of course you want to induce a wasteful ECS movement from Norwich.
Far better to place local services inside a profitable franchise. That way a proportion of the profit could help subsidise the local services, rather than go straight to the shareholders back pocket. I'm sure most passengers would be in favour of that!
As regards what service should move to what franchise, i'll repeat myself yet again. It really doesn't make a blind bit of difference what colour a train is painted (or vinyled!) and what depot the traincrew happen to come from, just as long as there is a service. The Norwich portion of the route is no better a fit with Anglia than it is with EMT. To do this and staff it with Norwich crews would mean no departures from Nottingham back to Norwich until after 09.00. Unless of course you want to induce a wasteful ECS movement from Norwich.
Why on earth is it "unfair" for passenger routes to cross subsidise eachother ? That is the basic business case of the passenger railway from its inception. Main lines provide subsidy to secondary routes while secondary routes provide passengers from further afield to the main line.
I've nothing against more subsidy and local control for local Government, but that doesn't alter the fundamental structure of the railway of secondary routes feeding main lines. To try and deny this leads to stupid decisions.
I think it is good to have a mix of local and long distance services as it allows some flexibility for extra leisure demand at the weekends on local routes by borrowing the long distance stock.
In the case of the East Midlands that means using the London trains to increase capacity for weekend races at Uttoxeter, summer weekend specials to Skegness and winter specials to Lincoln Christmas market.
This would probably be deemed "too difficult" if this was across two different franchises.
In the case of the East Midlands that means using the London trains to increase capacity for weekend races at Uttoxeter, summer weekend specials to Skegness and winter specials to Lincoln Christmas market.
This would probably be deemed "too difficult" if this was across two different franchises.
It's developed on this franchise as an innovative response to the rolling stock crisis caused by the DfT arbitrarily slicing up Central Trains.
Going back decades many extra services of a summer weekend to places like Skegness were provided by utilising the West Midlands commuter fleet which to a lesser degree than you see in London but still helpfully had surplus units stood down at quieter times but still required. BR used old DMUs in long rakes followed by 150s which Central followed.
Now many EM local journeys are leisure oriented and just as much stock is needed on normal weekends as in the week. Consequently you can only run longer trains by robbing other busy services (currently Matlock line trains, very busy themselves in the summer, and some Liverpool trains run with fewer carriages than they need to service the Skegness demand).
The end result of the split was that Cross Country and EMT have little scope to service demand peaks because their fleet is fully utitlised, while off peak WMR have a load of trains parked up at Tyseley and other locations.
The London fleet on EMT does have some slack in it and they've been quite proactive in using it to support the local service where possible including paying out to train ex Central crews on 222 and HST traction.
As you correctly point out a loss making local EM concession would never have the capacity to provide the required service to places like Skegness and other special events because there's never any spare trains and they wouldn't be able to afford a float of them to sit unused for 6 months of the year.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,272
I don’t think you understand how it works. If you add loss-making routes on to profitable routes then all that happens is the premium payment to DfT is lowered to reflect subsidy for the loss-making element. It certainly won’t come out of company profits (such as there are any on the railway!), and nor should it.
Kneedown
Established Member
I didn't say what does happen, I said what I believe should happen and yes, a portion of the money made from profits should go to keep essential lifeline services up to speed. Maybe with a little investment they may become profitable rather than just being ignored and left to fester.
- Status