How do you think ordinary fare paying passengers think of their service?

At the end of the day though, there is still a choice.

Have said this before but some don't seem to understand.

If the £5k is to much to pay, drive.
Driving would cost more? Well that's the scales for ya.
There's nothing stopping you changing jobs, but that's too much hassle too.

So people accept the train (and paying £5k) because it's the least hassle option.

WombatDeath said:

For my part, it's not so much about the money as such, more that I'm paying large amounts of money to undergo a necessary but grimly unpleasant experience. It's basically the same feeling that I have towards going to the dentist, except that I trust my dentist to achieve the expected outcome.

Click to expand...

And what's the number 1 point of a railway?
To move you from A to B.
While it may seem like there's cancellations all the time, I'd challenge someone to take a random month and see how many times they arrive at their destination within 10 mins of the scheduled arrival time.
Because if it's less than half, why are you bothering with the railway anyway?

whhistle said:

At the end of the day though, there is still a choice.

Have said this before but some don't seem to understand.

If the £5k is to much to pay, drive.
Driving would cost more? Well that's the scales for ya.
There's nothing stopping you changing jobs, but that's too much hassle too.

So people accept the train (and paying £5k) because it's the least hassle option.




And what's the number 1 point of a railway?
To move you from A to B.
While it may seem like there's cancellations all the time, I'd challenge someone to take a random month and see how many times they arrive at their destination within 10 mins of the scheduled arrival time.
Because if it's less than half, why are you bothering with the railway anyway?

Click to expand...

Of course, not everyone can drive, or afford to run a car, so the train becomes the primary mode of medium - long distance transport (a fact lost on some on here).

whhistle said:

At the end of the day though, there is still a choice.

Have said this before but some don't seem to understand.

If the £5k is to much to pay, drive.
Driving would cost more? Well that's the scales for ya.
There's nothing stopping you changing jobs, but that's too much hassle too.

So people accept the train (and paying £5k) because it's the least hassle option.

Click to expand...

No it's not a choice.

I don't drive, mainly because I was completely useless at it when learning (and incredibly nervous) and I'd be a danger on the roads so I eventually gave up with that option.

I can't change jobs (unless I change career) as my field is quite specific, and outside of London it is hard to find jobs in it.

So yes the 5k train is the less hassle option, but that doesn't mean you have to be happy with it, which is what this thread was asking. If I was paying 5k and got a comfortable and reliable service that meant my 2-3hrs a day commuting was a pleasurable part of the day, I wouldn't complain at all. But it is not, so we have a right to have a negative view of the service.

it would also be OK if it was comparable with season tickets in other western European countries, but per mile these are generally far less to what we pay here, and also as a percentage of salary.

whhistle said:

At the end of the day though, there is still a choice.

Have said this before but some don't seem to understand.

If the £5k is to much to pay, drive.
Driving would cost more? Well that's the scales for ya.
There's nothing stopping you changing jobs, but that's too much hassle too.

So people accept the train (and paying £5k) because it's the least hassle option.

Click to expand...

I assume you work for the railway or get subsidised travel in some way. Or are otherwise well paid. And are older. So got on the housing ladder before it all went so difficult for the kids (so Gen X or earlier).

It is hardly a choice. Most commuters do it because they simply have to. Whether they are seven figure partners at professional services firms, their secretaries or in retail. Or all points in between. They get a train every day because there is no alternative. The bus takes forever, if there's even a service. Driving is a complete and utter logjam, not only in London, and cycling isn't feasible. They can't afford a house in, say, London (other cities are available) so have to buy further out. And can't afford to buy there unless they work in London/other place. So they simply have to commute.

I barely use the railway these days, or indeed any form of transport on a regular basis, and my commute is just over 10 minutes on foot each way. I don't drive (last time I was learning it was causing high levels of stress to the point I'd rather be work) so when I do go for a trip on the railway it's certainly unusual these days and I generally have more of a 'norm' perspective.

So with that in mind, my most regular route is Hereford to Birmingham, or at least part of it. After all I'll often break up the journey or only do parts of the route for various reasons. It has to be said I'm generally happy with what I get from WMR, I mean I'd like a later train from Birmingham but I do understand why it doesn't exist. Service provision is pretty good these days, and major farces on the route don't seem to occur half as much as they once did.

Quite, in general when I use the route overcrowding isn't half as bad as it was in the past. Yes there are a lot of busy trains, the 14:50 Birmingham New Street to Hereford being a very prime example, as is the 16:39 return, but overall I'm pretty happy with the service we get.

I'm less happy at how much the fares keep going up, but when you look at the distance covered on a return trip (just over 110 miles) it could be far worse. Hopefully the 196s will be decent when they arrive, I'll be keen to see what they're like on a decent length run. I'll possibly be using them on a trip to Heathrow in January.

The majority of the time I can get a seat easily enough, the service is good (just needs a couple of tweaks in places but then nothing's perfect) and fares are, all things considered, reasonable. So yeah, overall as a norm passenger I'm very satisfied with the railway. Or at least WMR...

As a semi regular, commuter and leisure user with SouthEastern, I find generally the service that's advertised and expected is normally what I receive!
That however isn't my measure of satisfaction but it could be for someone else.
I'd be happier if my long distance stopper didn't stop so often at so many smaller stations, I'd be much happier if the peak fare structure wasn't so punitive to peak travellers when it is over 3 times more that a super off peak fare.
I'd prefer that during peak hours the number of carriages could be increased for example.
I can also go from satisfied to pissed off because change of trains means moving from a comfy 375 to a dirty, grafittied and very tired 465!
Infact I was one of those 50k that filled out a questionnaire, and I was handed it on journey between Gravesend to London Bridge, unsurprisingly on an unconductored, unticket barriered part of the network whilst riding in a class 465, do you think I was impressed?

All in all, some routes, some rolling stock and certain stations will either provide very positive or very negative results and in some cases the survey if carried out in cherry picked areas could yield very different results to the actual truth or the reality that everyday users experience.

yorksrob said:

Of course, not everyone can drive, or afford to run a car, so the train becomes the primary mode of medium - long distance transport (a fact lost on some on here).

Click to expand...

But there is an option not to work in a place that requries the train.
Nothing stopping those people moving closer or looking for a new job. It's the fact taking the train is the least hassle. If that means accepting it'll be rubbish sometimes... that's a fact of taking trains in this country. When has it every been to a standard everyone likes?

kristiang85 said:

No it's not a choice.

Click to expand...

Sorry but, it really is.

It's fairly hard to understand but as stated above:
YOU are choosing to work far away (you could give up your job and start elsewhere)
YOU are choosing to take the train (you could take a taxi, learn to drive again, get a bunch of buses)
YOU could move closer. It's drastic, yes but it's still a choice you could make.

Seriously, when you realise it is a choice (and I have freely said it's perhaps the one with least hassle), you'll be amazed at what other things you seemingly do automatically but realise that you could change to make your life better.

Are you saying you are forced to use the train? Because I highly doubt anyone is forcing you to do anything - it may seem like it, but you're not a slave.

whhistle said:

But there is an option not to work in a place that requries the train.
Nothing stopping those people moving closer or looking for a new job. It's the fact taking the train is the least hassle. If that means accepting it'll be rubbish sometimes... that's a fact of taking trains in this country. When has it every been to a standard everyone likes?




Sorry but, it really is.

It's fairly hard to understand but as stated above:
YOU are choosing to work far away (you could give up your job and start elsewhere)
YOU are choosing to take the train (you could take a taxi, learn to drive again, get a bunch of buses)
YOU could move closer. It's drastic, yes but it's still a choice you could make.

Seriously, when you realise it is a choice (and I have freely said it's perhaps the one with least hassle), you'll be amazed at what other things you seemingly do automatically but realise that you could change to make your life better.

Are you saying you are forced to use the train? Because I highly doubt anyone is forcing you to do anything - it may seem like it, but you're not a slave.

Click to expand...

The terms of this argument are false, insofar as presenting commuting as a binary between choice and obligation is not particularly helpful. There are degrees of freedom and degrees of obligation. There are legal obligations and ethical obligations; legal freedoms and practical freedoms.

Either way though, the fact or non-fact of being obliged to commute shouldn't particularly affect whether or not someone feels able to be critical of the service.

whhistle said:

But there is an option not to work in a place that requries the train.
Nothing stopping those people moving closer or looking for a new job. It's the fact taking the train is the least hassle. If that means accepting it'll be rubbish sometimes... that's a fact of taking trains in this country. When has it every been to a standard everyone likes?




Sorry but, it really is.

It's fairly hard to understand but as stated above:
YOU are choosing to work far away (you could give up your job and start elsewhere)
YOU are choosing to take the train (you could take a taxi, learn to drive again, get a bunch of buses)
YOU could move closer. It's drastic, yes but it's still a choice you could make.

Seriously, when you realise it is a choice (and I have freely said it's perhaps the one with least hassle), you'll be amazed at what other things you seemingly do automatically but realise that you could change to make your life better.

Are you saying you are forced to use the train? Because I highly doubt anyone is forcing you to do anything - it may seem like it, but you're not a slave.

Click to expand...

As others have mentioned, ther reality is that people are often quite restricted in where they live/work.

yorksrob said:

As others have mentioned, ther reality is that people are often quite restricted in where they live/work.

Click to expand...

Made worse over the past couple of decades with the centralisation of jobs in the big cities and the smaller cities & towns being left to rot with nothing but low quality employment, charity shops, etc. The well known "brain drain" away from rural areas has now extended to what used to be prosperous and busy towns and small cities.

whhistle said:

It's fairly hard to understand but as stated above:
YOU are choosing to work far away (you could give up your job and start elsewhere)
YOU are choosing to take the train (you could take a taxi, learn to drive again, get a bunch of buses)
YOU could move closer. It's drastic, yes but it's still a choice you could make.

Click to expand...

Basically you're saying I should either use the railway and put up with it and never be critical of its failings, or make my life a lot more miserable? That is not a choice in my book.

As I said, I work in a fairly unique sector that is mainly only present in London. I really enjoy it, so I could go for another job but have 40 hours a week I am not enjoying.

I could get a taxi and have no money left for anything else (insane suggestion), learn to drive - as I said, after a year of learning I was nowhere near road ready- I was too nervous and would just end up killing people. Not an option. And buses would take 3hrs each way, so again no time for anything else in life beyond work.

Moving closer would mean moving away from my relationship, which again is a big part of my life.

That is just me. I'm sure 1000s of others are in the same position.

So for you to say that is simply a "choice" is utterly ridiculous, with all due respect.

I agree there, I didn't like learning to drive either and a lot of people don't. There's also the cost of it to consider, being able to find an instructor who has availability in your free time (I actually struggled with just that issue!) or even one you get on well with, not to mention the environmental factors too. I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd rather not add to the congestion on the roads!

underbank said:

Made worse over the past couple of decades with the centralisation of jobs in the big cities and the smaller cities & towns being left to rot with nothing but low quality employment, charity shops, etc. The well known "brain drain" away from rural areas has now extended to what used to be prosperous and busy towns and small cities.

Click to expand...

Indeed. The idea of all of Leeds' office workers moving next door to the office block, for example, is impossible.

Sorry of this bucks the trend but....

Here in the Far North (of Inverness) I suggest the majority of my fellow commuters on the local lines into Inverness consider the Scotrail service very adequate (a choice of 3 trains in and a choice of 2 home again around the peak.
Trains are clean, pretty much on time, cheap to use (with a range of fare options from Carnets to Season tickets to railcards usable) and plenty of space and seats.

We (on here) know that the 158s are getting long in the tooth - but they seem to provide a service that works and turns up.

Train services are mediocre and over priced, this is caused by the pathetic useless franchising system specified by the DfT, it is why we have useless companies with no record of delivery winning yet more franchise competitions.

The West Coast Mainline has mainly been operated well by Virgin and adequately by London Midland before the Abellio farce. There should in my opinion be more choice for customers, the TOCs then have more incentive to actually deliver the service people are paying for. Not the drivel we are currently forced to endure.

mikey9 said:

We (on here) know that the 158s are getting long in the tooth - but they seem to provide a service that works and turns up.

Click to expand...

I think after the HST the Class 158 was probably the best thing BR built from a passenger perspective. A very good (and reliable) unit. Just not enough of them.

GrimShady said:

Not on the ECML they dont.

Click to expand...

Well that was not made clear in your post

al78 said:

At least one of my journeys can't be cheap as chips. Years ago I could book advance tickets and get from Horsham to Manchester for less than £40 return. Now, no matter how much searching I do, the advance tickets cost over £40 one way, making it over £80 return, more than double the cost of the petrol if I were to drive.

Click to expand...

Yeah its £80 for the return but thats a 500 mile round trip so what do you think that price should be?

underbank said:

No, however far in advance you book or whatever discount cards you buy, lots of journeys aren't "cheap as chips", especially if you're not going into the mainline terminii.

All the longer-distance journeys I've wanted to do this year have been extortionately priced, even when trying to book months in advance. Journeys such as Carnforth to Durham, Oxford, Cambridge, and Warwick. For myself and my son with railcard, every return journey would have been well over a hundred pounds, so far more expensive than the petrol used.

Click to expand...

Again - you are looking at quite long journeys and you have been a member here for some time now so you would surely know about trainsplit? and how split ticketing works?

For 13th September I found the following - coming back the 15th

Durham - £44.74
Oxford £76.35
Cambridge £78.40
Warwick £54.00

They are quite some savings from 'well over a hundred pounds'.

Its generally always going to be hard to beat the car on price as people focus on just the petrol costs but to claim you cant get cheap tickets is just plain false

I too think that the 158 is an excellent unit. I think the only drawback with them, is when operating with crush loads, it can be difficult for train crew to get to and from their cabs. It's a pity they couldn't have been designed with separate crew doors. Think on the 159s when the driver keys in, the vestibule behind the driving cab goes out of use for passengers.

StaffsWCML said:

Train services are mediocre and over priced (etc., etc.)

Click to expand...

If your travel was in a vehicle which appeared at your doorstep the second you opened your front door, carried you in five star luxury, with meals cooked by the highest rated Michelin chef and wines selected by the world's best sommelier, flying over all possible delays, with (ahem) "personal services" provided during the journey by the most beautiful woman (or man) in the world dressed in whatever way is most guaranteed to turn you on, arriving at the front door of your destination within 30 minutes regardless of the distance, and never failed to provide perfect service, you'd post here complaining about the shade of the woman's lipstick.

You are so relentlessly negative that you make Mr Happy at my last depot (so named because he was always unbelievably miserable) look like the most positive creature in the world.

Bletchleyite said:

I think after the HST the Class 158 was probably the best thing BR built from a passenger perspective. A very good (and reliable) unit. Just not enough of them.

Click to expand...

Phase 1 CIG would have to be a good contender.

In terms of the 158's, excellent successful units. Shame there aren't more centre carriages though !

kristiang85 said:

No it's not a choice.

I don't drive, mainly because I was completely useless at it when learning (and incredibly nervous) and I'd be a danger on the roads so I eventually gave up with that option.

I can't change jobs (unless I change career) as my field is quite specific, and outside of London it is hard to find jobs in it.

Click to expand...

In addition it may not be possible/practical to drive because there is no parking near the workplace. I don't use a train for commuting and chose my address to be a (long but doable) cycling distance from work, but I, like you, have a specific field of work and can't change jobs easily. I have applied elsewhere for jobs aligned with my skills/experience several times but always get turned down. It is amazing how many think you can just change jobs like that as if you don't have a partner/children who are settled in the local area and moving would be difficult/impractical/highly undesirable, or you will turn up to an interview with no competition or you will automatically be the best candidate and get the job.

There is always someone insular who thinks everyone's life is like theirs, and cannot put him/herself in another's shoes, so comes up with over-simplistic unhelpful suggestions that are simple, elegant, and wrong.