A product of the authorities recent record of bizarre changes of mind, perhaps.
-
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 won by Abellio
- Thread starter InTheEastMids
- Start date
- Status
A product of the authorities recent record of bizarre changes of mind, perhaps.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
atraindriver
Member
<deleted>
Last edited:
I know that DfT have consistently proved their inability to run a booze up in a brewery but, if you are correct, they have excelled themselves this time and we can pencil in a parliamentary inquiry for 18-24 months time. The 180s have been unreliable junk wherever they have been and only a certifiable lunatic (hmmm Failing Grayling, you might be right..) would lumber a new franchise with them. They should be sent for coke tins with spares (e.g. engines) used on useful stock such as the 220 classes.
Starting with the useless big turd at the top...
I have had deals with many politicians but he really is the most stubborn, arrogant and downright incompetent ever.
Qwerty133
Established Member
They have more than enough staff at Leicester 99.9% of the time they just don't know how to use them efficiently. It's laughable to suggest that there is no-one available to man that counter when there are regularly more staff than counters in the main ticket office for much of the day (often all afternoon). They could also use some of often 4 or 5 members of staff who can be found talking to each other while doing little work (simply letting anyone without a ticket through without paying) at the barrier line.
There is little surprise that any employer that is happy to offer overtime during which no significant work has to be performed (such as offering first class hosts turns on services that have no at-seat service in first meaning the staff are able to literally sit on their phone for the whole journey) and have managers who cannot efficiently rota or utilise staff end up paying out for large amounts of overtime (much of which would be totally unnecessary with somewhat competent middle management).
On the contrary, we've already had numerous electrification cancellations, the Manchester Piccadilly scheme curtailed half way through etc. It's hardly surprising we're jittery about sudden changes.
However, I sincerely hope you're proved correct in this case.
Verulamius
Member
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2014
- Messages
- 245
If 180s are transferred to the MML then this will require a change in the access rights.
Will the other operators on the line welcome a potential adverse impact to their timetabled trains (with cross contamination south of London for GTR)?
The Office of Rail Regulation will need to approve the change in access rights.
Will the other operators on the line welcome a potential adverse impact to their timetabled trains (with cross contamination south of London for GTR)?
The Office of Rail Regulation will need to approve the change in access rights.
This happened with HSTs for TfW and the new member's information has since been supported by other sources. ToC managers or DfT staff are likely to be "lurkers" than members because they are reluctant to divulge information, even anonymously. @SemaphoreSlim is more likely to work in the industry than be fantasist making up a very specific story!
An anonymous whistleblower perhaps.
Kettledrum
Member
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 790
It gets better
This is what modern railway management boils down to. Disadvantaging passengers to meet arbitrary deadlines so that the Government can save face.
But all these passengers are also voters and there are a lot of marginal seats in the East Midlands. If short forming and reliability issues hit the fan, so will a lot of political careers.
Nym
Established Member
And pray tell how would putting a different idiot in parliament in it's current state make any difference to the railway?
Rolling stock on a franchise is something I've never seen on a manifesto...
Potentially true, but possibly too late for the beleaguered government to notice.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Agreed. They should have been the best of the third generation DMUs, but in actual fact are shoddily built rubbish.
To be fair, the 180's have done their job in expanding the longer distance market at a time when there wasn't a lot of new stock coming on line. We've had around 20 years front line use out of them - which is in line with the Deltics, or the REP fleet so not bad by a long chalk - but the reality is that they're not quite up to it mechanically. The Hull ones should go to bolster the Grand Central fleet. They're not a suitable solution for the Midland main line.
Greater Anglia MK3s are somewhat PRM modded?
Perhaps they will be drafted over to replace (some of) those MK3s on the MML.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-47990807
Stagecoach are calling for an independent investigation into the bid after
Stagecoach are calling for an independent investigation into the bid after
How it currently stands: 180’s. HST’s gone by Feb 2020 at the latest.
@SemaphoreSlim is quite correct.
@SemaphoreSlim is quite correct.
Given that this information is being provided by new forum members, it would be helpful to have at least some idea of its provenance.
Well quite, especially when you consider the government stated only last month that a process had started to make their HST fleet at least semi-compliant.
Indeed. Just supposing that such a u-turn had been taken, I think it would very much be in the public interest to know the whys and wherefores of how we have gone from a sensible transition to the new trains, to a premeditated balls up which will blight passengers for two years or more.
If this decision has been taken, whoever is responsible needs to be subject to the fullest scrutiny for it.
I work within the industry and I work with the trains in question.
The information is passed on in good faith for those of you with a passing interest. Specific details and other such information cannot be disclosed (or certainly shouldn’t)on a public forum for obvious reasons.
I’ll revert to my “lurking” status
The information is passed on in good faith for those of you with a passing interest. Specific details and other such information cannot be disclosed (or certainly shouldn’t)on a public forum for obvious reasons.
I’ll revert to my “lurking” status
185
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 4,988
The more interesting question is how they're replacing 10 HST diagrams with 4x Class 180s from Hull Trains. The Grand Central ones have a long term future with Grand Central I thought - unless of course "HSTs" means just the short HSTs.
Can we expect an official announcement at some stage ?
tbtc
Veteran Member
It gets better
This is what modern railway management boils down to. Disadvantaging passengers to meet arbitrary deadlines so that the Government can save face.
I'm happy to see the back of the HSTs but I think that replacing all of them in the next nine months would be dumb and also very unlikely.
Replacing one HST with a ten coach 180, or replacing some six coach HSTs with an equivalent number of five coach 180s (to tick a box by saying that "we are starting to replace the 1970s trains with modern ones") wouldn't be unreasonable or surprising - that's what I'd put money on.
But you seem keen to be making a point about "the modern railway" (to make a political point)... but I know you're not too young to remember things like replacing proper length trains on routes like TransPennine with two coach 150s in the 1980s - I don't think that this is the fault of "the modern railway" - BR used to foist unsuitable mid-life micro-fleets on regions - there's nothing new under the sun!
I keep hearing about the marginal seats in the East Midlands and how politically sensitive it is... but cancelling MML electrification doesn't seem to have been beyond the pale for the Tories - they seem okay with hitting the East Midlands (just as much as they seem okay hitting most places!). Similarly, we've had single 153s on some East Midlands lines for as long as I can remember (and the terrible split of resources post-Central Trains, with three coach 170s trundling along the Chase line whilst two coach 158s struggled to cope with the Liverpool - Nottingham service), without the Government of the time losing all its East Midlands seats.
I appreciate that Corbyn is meant to be a bell-weather seat and that there are some other marginal seats along the MML but if the Government were so scared of East Midlands voters that they'll bend over backwards to ensure that rail passengers aren't disadvantaged then we wouldn't already be in a world of four coach 222s to London, single 153s to Crewe, no electrification north of Market Harborough etc etc.
Just my opinion though.
You are perhaps correct regarding RR's replacement of full length trains with DMU's. I may have led a sheltered life in the South as we were lucky enough to have retained proper, full length trains for much longer.
Nevertheless, to the point in question, we have now had two posters, who it appears are in the industry, who are claiming that a particularly bad decision for passengers has been taken. If this is the case, it's difficult to see how it can have been taken, other than through political expediency.
There are just a lot of things not adding up here.
1. Only 4x 5car 180 units that are known to be coming available soon.
2. Another 10x 5car 180 at GC is something happening with these? (The Angel lease for the 180s to GC lease goes to 2022)
3. The new MML timetable especially post Derby rebuild could eliminate the need for the 6 car ex GC HST sets.
4. Corby electric service start down for December 20 but could it be earlier with a limited EMU service (no Bi-modes) and no new Braybrooke supply???
With 1, 3 & 4 you could just about make things work but it would need a decent length trains and 2tph on the Corby EMUs (to soak up demand south of Kettering) and have a number of other service running in shorter formation than present.
Crystal Ball Gazing:
Subleasing a 5th 180 from GC (e.g. when the sublease to Northern ends) could help on maintenance cover for the other 4?
Are GC potentially moving away from 180s e.g. an HST +MK4 solution (or IEPs) which might make more 180s available? GC have track access agreements till 2026.
- Status