Kurolus Rex
Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 169
With both Hull Trains and LNER operating services to/from London-Hull, which TOC would you rather travel with? Comment your reasons why below!
Last edited:
-
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!
[Poll] - London-Hull: Hull Trains or LNER?
- Thread starter Kurolus Rex
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Scotty
Member
Maybe you should give us your opinion first... or declare any interest you have in either company?
NoMorePacers
Established Member
Meh. The HT 180s are more comfortable than the LNER 800s, but LNER has more chance of actually getting you to Hull.
Kurolus Rex
Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 169
I don't have one. Never travelled on either. Just curious to see what people's TOC of choice are between the two cities now HT have some competition.
Harpers Tate
Established Member
- Joined
- 10 May 2013
- Messages
- 1,698
Hull Trains = more comfortable, more frequent and often a bit cheaper. And they don't penalise people who buy onboard. Presently unreliable, and it remains to be seen if the replacement fleet retains the comfort. But even if they are exactly equal in this respect, the other factors still apply.
NoMorePacers
Established Member
It's the other way round. The main East Coast operator (and BR before them) have always ran a daily service to Hull and LNER still do. Hull Trains were founded to give people in Hull more frequent London services.
Kurolus Rex
Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 169
Huh, I knew BR and East Coast used to run HSTs to Hull but wasn't aware that VTEC and LNER still did prior to the introduction of the Azumas. Poll is still just as relevant though.
From my perspective LNER is more convenient for me Friday as 17:18 departure is better than HT's 15:48 or 18:50.
Monday morning HT's 06:26 is better than LNER's 07:00 even though AP tickets on the LNER service are cheaper and there is a seat selector.
Monday morning HT's 06:26 is better than LNER's 07:00 even though AP tickets on the LNER service are cheaper and there is a seat selector.
HT`s 180 is certainly comfortable if a little allergic to actually completing (or even starting) a journey but these of course are in their final months operating between Hull and Kings X. Once HT 800`s take over what is going to be the difference between HT and LNER? Have HT been forced to accept the woeful seats that DFT has inflicted on other 800`s or will HT have freedom to "do their own thing"?
Does anyone know what the situation is ?
Does anyone know what the situation is ?
Last edited:
Kurolus Rex
Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 169
I was wondering about the same thing actually, and also if catering will change at all. How is catering on HT right now compared to LNER?
LNER catering is superior. They have a chef and a kitchen for 1st class. HT's has a microwave.
lxfe_mxtterz
Member
From what I've seen on Facebook, Hull Trains seem to be keeping the existing seats on their Class 800's:
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Which is more reliable? Hull Trains are suffering terrible unreliability at the minute with the awful bags of bolts that are the Class 180s. I wouldn't trust them to run a bath as things stand. I know it's not really their fault as there isn't other stock available until the 80x arrive, but I'm not giving them a sympathy vote if the risk of a cancellation is too high.
Once the 800`s are introduced they will have exactly the same seats at LNER . Mk 4`s will be history and so will 180`s on the ECML
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
That'll be a win for Hull Trains then!
xotGD
Established Member
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2017
- Messages
- 6,078
So let me think...
A publicly owned operator, providing a public service, or a bunch of chancers trying to cherry-pick passengers.
A publicly owned operator, providing a public service, or a bunch of chancers trying to cherry-pick passengers.
You mean the private operator that identified a gap in the market that has not been filled by the specification of the DfT nor by the own initiative of the franchised operator and indeed the gap which only existed because of cuts instituted by a publicly owned service provider axing all but one train per day despite their being quite clearly plenty of demand for the service (see the unsubsidised private operator continually expanding, making money and procuring now three sets of brand new rolling stock for their service)?
AlastairFraser
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 2,130
Sad to say this is a good example of where private competition(in terms of HT' s business model) actually works (to some extent). LNER/VTEC/whoever operated the East Coast franchise at any given point didn't for some reason serve Hull or intermediate stations to London frequently enough as some people would have liked. Hull Trains filled that gap. It's irritating that HT had to use diesel 180's all the way up the ECML to Hull because of a stupid gap in electrification between the ECML and Hull,but they are getting Class 800 units now,so at least the 180 problems won't persist any longer. However, I voted LNER because they could have dealt with the 180 problem in a more timely fashion and,although I acknowledge that the problem isn't really their fault, they should have found more reliable alternatives for their passengers than just offloading them onto other TOC's. In short, they should have had a backup plan.
dk1
Veteran Member
Whichever is convenient at the time I want to travel. Operator makes no real difference to me.
voyagerdude220
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 3,277
I remember several years ago travelling on a Hull Trains Class 222 from London Kings Cross to Hull and thoroughly enjoying the journey in First Class. Admittedly I've not travelled with Hull Trains since the 180s took over.
If Hull Trains still offered the same high quality food in First Class during the week, which they did on the 222s, I'd vote for them.
Also reliability isn't great.
I approve of LNER though.
If Hull Trains still offered the same high quality food in First Class during the week, which they did on the 222s, I'd vote for them.
Also reliability isn't great.
I approve of LNER though.
Lemmy99uk
Member
- Joined
- 5 May 2015
- Messages
- 459
Where did you get the idea that either operators were publicly owned?
They are both run by private operators, although the type of contract varies.
Virgin, Nat Ex etc most likely didn`t serve Hull except for the one through service a day as their trains were too long for off peak and could be better used else where. Remember Hull Trains started off with 3 car cl 170`s (unless I am mistaken) then went to 4 car Pioneers and now 5 car 180`s, soon the be 5 car 800`s.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,266
Presumably BR InterCity? Post East Coast electrification there were only 9 HST sets retained, the rest transferred to XC, Midland and Great Western. I’d bet there was a far stronger business case for the transfer elsewhere than keeping a couple of extra sets to serve a dump on the east coast.
Technically LNER is a Limited Company, but it's owned by the Secretary of State for Transport (via a holding company).
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04659712/persons-with-significant-control
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/07141122/persons-with-significant-control
Last edited:
It would depend on many factors; give an example day and time of the journey, and I'll give you an answer!
Harpers Tate
Established Member
- Joined
- 10 May 2013
- Messages
- 1,698
That's about it, really. The Q was about going from London to Hull.
Choices are
1: travel at ~1715 (in which case LNER is an option)
2: be prepared to change trains at Doncaster and complete the trip (in duration, more than a third of the overall time) on what might very well be a 2-car pacer (although to be fair, 2c-158 or 3c-170 more likely).
3: travel at various times of the day by Hull Trains.
Choices are
1: travel at ~1715 (in which case LNER is an option)
2: be prepared to change trains at Doncaster and complete the trip (in duration, more than a third of the overall time) on what might very well be a 2-car pacer (although to be fair, 2c-158 or 3c-170 more likely).
3: travel at various times of the day by Hull Trains.
Last edited:
Yes it will have been BR Intercity that cut the majority of the service and I can very well believe that there was a stronger business case to send the HSTs elsewhere. But that doesn't change that that action created a gap in the market which in the years afterwards there has been absolutely no sign of being filled by anyone other than a private open access operator.
If the East Coast Franchise operator had increased the level of service to Hull, I can see there having been many complaints given that Hull Trains was providing a decent service and there's a lot of other places waiting for new or additional services (Bradford/Huddersfield/Lincoln/Harrogate).
- Status