• 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!

Rail Replacement Services should replace trains as a last resort

Status
Not open for further replies.

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
But cost of provision is not equal, and in this country, how much things cost to provide will always be taken into account too.

Once you take into account the cost of running a train in the first place, the cost of running it a different route is not enough to justify a massive price hike.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,180
Once you take into account the cost of running a train in the first place, the cost of running it a different route is not enough to justify a massive price hike.

Your opinion, clearly not theirs! You already know the implications in staff training, rolling stock hire, administration etc etc because it has been itemised elsewhere in this forum. I guess the additional cost is about £50 per passenger journey actually made.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Your opinion, clearly not theirs! You already know the implications in staff training, rolling stock hire, administration etc etc because it has been itemised elsewhere in this forum. I guess the additional cost is about £50 per passenger journey actually made.

Also not XC, EMT or LNER's opinion, as other posters have pointed out.

It's Virgin that are out on a limb.
 

Dr Hoo

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2015
Messages
3,912
Location
Hope Valley
Also not XC, EMT or LNER's opinion, as other posters have pointed out.

It's Virgin that are out on a limb.
CrossCountry and EMT both have all-diesel fleets, which inevitably gives more flexibility. To be fair to Virgin they seem to be pretty good at diverting Pendolinos when alternative routes are electrified. LNER also have a more 'useful' diesel fleet in the HSTs that are already commonly used under the wires over very lengthy distances (rather more so than the Virgin Class 221s that are predominantly needed on North Wales diagrams).
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
Virgin Class 221s that are predominantly needed on North Wales diagrams

Where's all this talk of North Wales come from? On a Saturday there are five trains to Holyhead and only four on a Sunday. The bulk of the diagrams terminate at Chester and so run under the wires for almost the whole journey. For a one-off weekend make people change at Crewe for Chester like they used to, keeping the Holyheads.

LNER also have a more 'useful' diesel fleet in the HSTs that are already commonly used under the wires over very lengthy distances

They do, but they also drag 91s too, including over the Tyne Valley, the Durham Coast and Lincoln. They even used Stillington one year to avoid works at Darlington.

People prefer trains. It's not about crayoning in a piece of track, it's about being able to walk around, visit the buffet car, go to the toilet. The LNER Tyne Valley diverts are full even though it extends the journey time by over two hours.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
CrossCountry and EMT both have all-diesel fleets, which inevitably gives more flexibility. To be fair to Virgin they seem to be pretty good at diverting Pendolinos when alternative routes are electrified. LNER also have a more 'useful' diesel fleet in the HSTs that are already commonly used under the wires over very lengthy distances (rather more so than the Virgin Class 221s that are predominantly needed on North Wales diagrams).

I suspect that the costs are just not in the same league.

@Arctic Troll makes the very good point that the majority of Voyagers only go as far as Chester. It would be very do-able to substitute these with electrics and run a diesel shuttle for the last stretch. In fact, I remember GNER doing something very similar between Doncaster and Leeds when the line via Wakefield was closed.

It seems more likely that Virgin Trains have "gone off the boil" a bit and can't be bothered as much as they used to.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,124
It's Virgin that are out on a limb.
Yes, I wouldn’t be surprised if they’d cut a deal with Dft a while back saving them costs of class 57 operaton and diversionary route knowledge in order to release more train crew for enhanced frequencies and additional destinations like Blackpool.
 
Last edited:

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
Where's all this talk of North Wales come from? On a Saturday there are five trains to Holyhead and only four on a Sunday. The bulk of the diagrams terminate at Chester and so run under the wires for almost the whole journey. For a one-off weekend make people change at Crewe for Chester like they used to, keeping the Holyheads.
.

@Arctic Troll makes the very good point that the majority of Voyagers only go as far as Chester. It would be very do-able to substitute these with electrics and run a diesel shuttle for the last stretch. In fact, I remember GNER doing something very similar between Doncaster and Leeds when the line via Wakefield was closed.

It seems more likely that Virgin Trains have "gone off the boil" a bit and can't be bothered as much as they used to.

So how many units are we are about here please? Because if thats your plan then you are going to have to use a double voyager as there will be a lot of people wanting to go on the train as already discussed in this thread so with the direct service being 3 hours from Crewe to Glasgow so are we adding 2 hours to be generous here or a bit longer for the diversion? so around 5 hours from Crewe to Glasgow yeah?

So with an hours turnround at glasgow it can probably only do 2 trips from Crewe and one from Glasgow which isnt too bad.

So if you have another 2 units to do that in reverse then you are looking at 3 trips to and from Glasgow based on 4 units in double - how many do they have again?

Also,if you are still with me here, you will see that a pendo has 65 seats from what i can see more than a pair of voyagers so what are you going to do with teh other people from the pendo then? Leave them at crewe? Pop them on someone elses services? Fly them there? Bus? Taxi?

Also the double voyagers may have to be double manned - the problem with this is that you will have to ensure that the crews dont go above their hours for the day/week whatever because the most important service is that on monday and that cant be affected either - so basically if you can come up with a solution for that and the issues about using voyagers then i am sure Virgin would love to hear from you because to me its not as simple as you both claim but im all ears
 

yoyothehobo

Member
Joined
21 Aug 2015
Messages
550
Now I agree that I would rather use a train than a bus, pretty much every time and if i saw there were RRBs running I would probably change my plans.

However, I think it is important to look at diversionary routes a bit closer.

Going over the Settle and Carlisle route adds a significant amount of time and if you are going from London to Glasgow, you can avoid any closure Preston to Carlisle by going by the ECML. Vice versa works if the line is shut north of Newcastle, you can go up the WCML avoiding the Tyne Valley diversion.

If you run either side of a closure for example if the line is closed between Preston and Lancaster, surely you can shuttle people between those to stations by bus and run a good service on the two open bits of the line independent of one another. If you solely have a diversion going by the S+C you will still need a RRB to get to Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith. So why go to all the expense of keeping the route knowledge and running the drag when you still have to get RRbs to intermediate stations?
 

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,272
Location
N Yorks
Where's all this talk of North Wales come from? On a Saturday there are five trains to Holyhead and only four on a Sunday. The bulk of the diagrams terminate at Chester and so run under the wires for almost the whole journey. For a one-off weekend make people change at Crewe for Chester like they used to, keeping the Holyheads.



They do, but they also drag 91s too, including over the Tyne Valley, the Durham Coast and Lincoln. They even used Stillington one year to avoid works at Darlington.

People prefer trains. It's not about crayoning in a piece of track, it's about being able to walk around, visit the buffet car, go to the toilet. The LNER Tyne Valley diverts are full even though it extends the journey time by over two hours.
you can drag a 91/mk4 set with any old locomotive. ETH would be nice though. A pendo needs a specially adapted loco.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Yes, I wouldn’t be surprised if they’d cut a deal with Dft a while back saving them costs of class 57 operaton and diversionary route knowledge in order to release more train crew for enhanced frequencies and additional destinations like Blackpool.

Indeed. Who's to know.
 

PeterC

Established Member
Joined
29 Sep 2014
Messages
4,069
Should? - definitely.

Does the present franchising structure make the best outcome for the passenger uneconomic or impractical in many cases? Yes
 

RLBH

Member
Joined
17 May 2018
Messages
962
While I'm generally in favour of the principle that rail passengers, having chosen to travel by train, should be able to stay on a train for their full journey where possible... are we seriously suggesting that that should extend to dragging a dead Pendolino through Blackburn and Clitheroe, then over the S&C?

That's the only way I can see that you'd do that diversion, and given the lines in question and (presumably) relatively low speeds throughout - it's bonkers.

IIRC, passengers will generally take a half-hour hit on journey times to avoid a change. Going from train, to RRB, back to train is in effect two changes - so if the diversionary route takes more than an hour longer, it's a loser. Even if there's a big shed of suitable trains sitting around waiting to be needed, which there isn't. I think that's probably a sensible place to draw the line between diversions and replacement bus services.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
It's Virgin that are out on a limb.

Really? How many class 57's are there? How many trains do you want to run. I see it as illustrative that you and others are happy to spread the impact of service disruption wider than necessary so you can get some quail action in.

Also not XC, EMT or LNER's opinion, as other posters have pointed out.

all three of whom have an almost go anywhere fleet operating, predominately, away from OHLE.

They do, but they also drag 91s too, including over the Tyne Valley, the Durham Coast and Lincoln. They even used Stillington one year to avoid works at Darlington.

And does the class 91 require a special coupler to haul it? You are not comparing like with like. Perhaps a better comparison would be with 3rd rail units.

People prefer trains. It's not about crayoning in a piece of track, it's about being able to walk around, visit the buffet car, go to the toilet. The LNER Tyne Valley diverts are full even though it extends the journey time by over two hours.

Correct, People do prefer trains until such time as the diversion becomes unacceptably long. The research I have seen suggests that is about 2 hours.

Yes, I wouldn’t be surprised if they’d cut a deal with Dft a while back saving them costs of class 57 operaton and diversionary route knowledge in order to release more train crew for enhanced frequencies and additional destinations like Blackpool.

Could you point me to any evidence for this conspiracy theory?

While I'm generally in favour of the principle that rail passengers, having chosen to travel by train, should be able to stay on a train for their full journey where possible... are we seriously suggesting that that should extend to dragging a dead Pendolino through Blackburn and Clitheroe, then over the S&C?

That's the only way I can see that you'd do that diversion, and given the lines in question and (presumably) relatively low speeds throughout - it's bonkers.

Yes posters here are suggesting exactly that.
 

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,272
Location
N Yorks
While I'm generally in favour of the principle that rail passengers, having chosen to travel by train, should be able to stay on a train for their full journey where possible... are we seriously suggesting that that should extend to dragging a dead Pendolino through Blackburn and Clitheroe, then over the S&C?

That's the only way I can see that you'd do that diversion, and given the lines in question and (presumably) relatively low speeds throughout - it's bonkers.

IIRC, passengers will generally take a half-hour hit on journey times to avoid a change. Going from train, to RRB, back to train is in effect two changes - so if the diversionary route takes more than an hour longer, it's a loser. Even if there's a big shed of suitable trains sitting around waiting to be needed, which there isn't. I think that's probably a sensible place to draw the line between diversions and replacement bus services.
or pendo to Preston, cross the platform to a diesel train, on to carlisle with another cross platform change onto another pendo to Scotland. far better than dragging luggage/kids/granny out of the station to a scrum getting on buses. And actually what the customer has paid for.
 

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
or pendo to Preston, cross the platform to a diesel train, on to carlisle with another cross platform change onto another pendo to Scotland. far better than dragging luggage/kids/granny out of the station to a scrum getting on buses. And actually what the customer has paid for.

Lets be fair though because in most cases when people have booked these trains they have already been informed that there will be a rail replacement bus and it is at that point that they make the decision based on their need to get to wherever they want to go and if they didnt want a bus then i would say that they wouldnt book that service and would try and different route where possible
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Really? How many class 57's are there? How many trains do you want to run. I see it as illustrative that you and others are happy to spread the impact of service disruption wider than necessary so you can get some quail action in.



all three of whom have an almost go anywhere fleet operating, predominately, away from OHLE.



And does the class 91 require a special coupler to haul it? You are not comparing like with like. Perhaps a better comparison would be with 3rd rail units.



Correct, People do prefer trains until such time as the diversion becomes unacceptably long. The research I have seen suggests that is about 2 hours.



Could you point me to any evidence for this conspiracy theory?



Yes posters here are suggesting exactly that.

Another one peddling the old "it's only rail enthusiasts who prefer a rail diversion to a RR bus so that they can tick off a new line" line. It's really not. Passengers really prefer to continue their journey by rail.

And I've not heard anyone say that the diversionary route for North of Preston was unacceptably long. "As long, or possibly a bit longer" than the replacement bus is the phrase bustitution proponents on this thread have used to describe the S&C. In other words, not nearly long enough to make people prefer the bus.

And who was it who specified the Pendolinos to have non-standard couplers in the first place ?

The fact is that VT are capable of running blockade busters - they've done so via Banbury. They can do so on the Northern section as well.
 

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,272
Location
N Yorks
...

And who was it who specified the Pendolinos to have non-standard couplers in the first place ?

The fact is that VT are capable of running blockade busters - they've done so via Banbury. They can do so on the Northern section ...

Why on earth is anything allowed on the railway without the ability to couple to another unit or loco? How many types of coupler do we have.

Oh for the days when all southern units would couple with any other unit, a cl33 or cl73. Then someone bought the 455's with auto couplers and jumpers.

grump over.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Why on earth is anything allowed on the railway without the ability to couple to another unit or loco? How many types of coupler do we have.

Oh for the days when all southern units would couple with any other unit, a cl33 or cl73. Then someone bought the 455's with auto couplers and jumpers.

grump over.

Very true indeed.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
So how many units are we are about here please? Because if thats your plan then you are going to have to use a double voyager as there will be a lot of people wanting to go on the train as already discussed in this thread so with the direct service being 3 hours from Crewe to Glasgow so are we adding 2 hours to be generous here or a bit longer for the diversion? so around 5 hours from Crewe to Glasgow yeah?

So with an hours turnround at glasgow it can probably only do 2 trips from Crewe and one from Glasgow which isnt too bad.

So if you have another 2 units to do that in reverse then you are looking at 3 trips to and from Glasgow based on 4 units in double - how many do they have again?

Also,if you are still with me here, you will see that a pendo has 65 seats from what i can see more than a pair of voyagers so what are you going to do with teh other people from the pendo then? Leave them at crewe? Pop them on someone elses services? Fly them there? Bus? Taxi?

Also the double voyagers may have to be double manned - the problem with this is that you will have to ensure that the crews dont go above their hours for the day/week whatever because the most important service is that on monday and that cant be affected either - so basically if you can come up with a solution for that and the issues about using voyagers then i am sure Virgin would love to hear from you because to me its not as simple as you both claim but im all ears

I would suggest:

Run as many between Crewe/preston and Scotland as you can cobble together

Don't fully book all the seats with Scotland passengers. There are likely to be plenty of people wanting to go to places between Crewe and Carlisle, so they can stay on their Pendo to the limit of the blockade, relieving the Voyager.

Also, the double voyager may have to be double manned, but you're running fewer trains to begin with, so the additional staff are less likely to be needed elsewhere.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,838
or pendo to Preston, cross the platform to a diesel train, on to carlisle with another cross platform change onto another pendo to Scotland. far better than dragging luggage/kids/granny out of the station to a scrum getting on buses. And actually what the customer has paid for.
How is that different, you are just substituting the coach for a train in that example?
 

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,272
Location
N Yorks
I would suggest:

Run as many between Crewe/preston and Scotland as you can cobble together

Don't fully book all the seats with Scotland passengers. There are likely to be plenty of people wanting to go to places between Crewe and Carlisle, so they can stay on their Pendo to the limit of the blockade, relieving the Voyager.

Also, the double voyager may have to be double manned, but you're running fewer trains to begin with, so the additional staff are less likely to be needed elsewhere.
your could decide not to do catering for the preston carlisle leg....
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,180
How is that different, you are just substituting the coach for a train in that example?

75% of the passengers that normally travel won't, because of the huge extra journey time and the inconvenience of changing to the diesel train en route. Far more economical to convey the residue by bus in this instance.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,838
its a train....
So its acceptable to drag your stuff off a train and put it on another one, then do the same again for another train but not for a coach which could potentially be quicker that a diverted train? I don't think that is the premise behind "keeping people on a train"
 

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,272
Location
N Yorks
75% of the passengers that normally travel won't, because of the huge extra journey time and the inconvenience of changing to the diesel train en route. Far more economical to convey the residue by bus in this instance.
this is what the argument here is. Do people mind a bus, or do they expect a train, having paid for a train?
 

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,272
Location
N Yorks
So its acceptable to drag your stuff off a train and put it on another one, then do the same again for another train but not for a coach which could potentially be quicker that a diverted train? I don't think that is the premise behind "keeping people on a train"
yes. because its a train... And you dont get the scrum in the station forecourt getting people on the right bus.

Comedians make jokes about rail replacement buses. should give you a clue what people think.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,838
I agree with @RT4038 , if it were me and I was told I am changing train twice, the fact I'm changing train twice would make me bin it off.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
I agree with @RT4038 , if it were me and I was told I am changing train twice, the fact I'm changing train twice would make me bin it off.

Quite agree. I think the hardcore rail enthusiasts on here sometimes get a bit adrift from the real world.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top