Controversial railway opinions (without a firm foundation in logic..)

[JD2168]

LNER should be banned from having compulsory reservations on it’s services.

Train stations should be next to a bus station to encourage multi modal transport, not getting further away as at Worksop.

At peak hours or very busy times First Class should be removed to enable more passengers to have a seat.

 

[gg1]

TOCs should be banned from taking the name of historic railway companies.

Really screws up your Google searches if you're interested in railway history.

 

[xotGD]

If your ticket doesn't get gripped, you should be entitled to a refund.

 

[py_megapixel]

Train stations should be next to a bus station to encourage multi modal transport, not getting further away as at Worksop.

I agree with the sentiment of improving multi-modal journeys, but it's important to remember "put the bus station next to the train station" isn't on its own enough to create a multi-modal network. Without a well-thought-out timetables, a single good-quality source of information covering all modes and a fare structure that doesn't penalise you for changing, people still won't make multi-modal journeys.

 

[yorksrob]

I agree with the sentiment of improving multi-modal journeys, but it's important to remember "put the bus station next to the train station" isn't on its own enough to create a multi-modal network. Without a well-thought-out timetables, a single good-quality source of information covering all modes and a fare structure that doesn't penalise you for changing, people still won't make multi-modal journeys.

It's probably better than "stick it on the opposite side of town as far away as possible" as seems to be the case in a lot of places.

 

[Howardh]

Japanese railways are overrated in many regards - outside urban areas you're often dealing with ramshackle branch lines infrequently operated by ratty DMUs living under the threat of closure.

Seen some YouTube vids of Japanese trains on single tracks winding their way through housing. Still keep on time!

 

[riceuten]

Wasn't a station planned for Hampton and the land is still set aside for it by the developer? The issues are I think that the line really needs to be 4 tracks at this point for it to be workable and the local authority seem to think it is all nothing to do with them and Network Rail should be bringing forward the station project and funding it without any input from them.

Well, I'm not sure Huntingdonshire have the resources to spend millions subsidising Network Rail, particularly given they're not a County Council.

The money wasted on Crossrail would have been better spent on improving services in Northern England.

If I had a pound for every time I heard the latter. 55% of people in the SE of England commute using the train - 5% in the North. I think you need to concentrate where the demand is.

 

[Howardh]

If I had a pound for every time I heard the latter. 55% of people in the SE of England commute using the train - 5% in the North. I think you need to concentrate where the demand is.

Wouldn't it be more in the north though if we had the SE's miles of over and underground?

 

[fusionblue]

TFL and DFT has an allergy to south east London and, where possible, will continue to defer any rail developments that benefit this area. The DLR recent extensions and Elizabeth aim east, the Overground south. Everything in between is Southeastern-land and has been effectively frozen from any significant attention in over a decade. When everything is always "later", later will never arrive.

 

[PGAT]

There is absolutely no denying that the North of England gets disproportionately less funding than the South, and yes that needs to be addressed. But claiming that everything they do every single time is a waste of money is an act of jealousy, because, as the Elizabeth Line shows, they damn well pay off

 

[Pdf]

London Overground should take over more "metro" rail services in London.

 

[43096]

That's not a controversial opinion. Merely a factual statement.

If it’s a factual statement can you provide an authoritative source to back it up. Without that it remains an opinion.

 

[riceuten]

There is absolutely no denying that the North of England gets disproportionately less funding than the South, and yes that needs to be addressed. But claiming that everything they do every single time is a waste of money is an act of jealousy, because, as the Elizabeth Line shows, they damn well pay off

This is my view as well - and I say this as a northerner. When I read that we should "stop investing in rail in the SE of England" because of the lack of investment in the north, it just screams "chippy provincial jealousy", when in reality both are needed, it's not either/or.

 

[Krokodil]

Wouldn't it be more in the north though if we had the SE's miles of over and underground?

Quite, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. People in the SE have better infrastructure so are more likely to use public transport. So money is invested in that well-used public transport and it stays well-used. I'm not saying that the SE should be deprived of funding (that would be levelling down), I'm saying that the North should get the same per capita funding as the SE.

 

[D6130]

I'm saying that the North should get the same per capita funding as the SE.

Hear, hear!

 

[Thirteen]

There's nothing wrong with scrapping rolling stock if they're near the end of their shelf life or are deemed unsuitable. The Class 483 is a prime example of this given it was completely knackered by the time it was replaced. The 1972 stock IMO needs to replaced ASAP.

 

[ar10642]

The money wasted on Crossrail would have been better spent on improving services in Northern England.

How is it "wasted"? It's one of the busiest National Rail line on the network and it's only been open a short time. I sometimes think some of you have literally never experienced what it's like in London.

 

[PGAT]

Also I'm pretty sure it's about to or already has broken even at least

 

[ar10642]

Wouldn't it be more in the north though if we had the SE's miles of over and underground?

It's London really. Outside of that you mainly have radial services in and out of London, two of ours in Sussex are dead ends and only really any use to get into London and out again. There are few east/west services, you'll need a car for those for the most part.

 

[D6130]

How is it "wasted"? It's one of the busiest National Rail line on the network and it's only been open a short time. I sometimes think some of you have literally never experienced what it's like in London.

Also I'm pretty sure it's about to or already has broken even at least

Perhaps you are both forgetting that the topic for this thread is 'Controversial Railway Opinions without a firm foundation in logic'. Therefore, as such, @CaptainHaddock 's posts fit the bill admirably. It is you two who are being far too logical!

 

[Thirteen]

Also I'm pretty sure it's about to or already has broken even at least

I would imagine it'll be in surplus next year which would help TfL cover losses in other parts of the network but also help them with reinvestment.

 

[LYuen]

I'd be intrigued as to what route you think this should take.

Arbitrary suggestion, route Bury line to Victoria Low Level, then follow the route similar to the Picc-Vic tunnel plan but under Deansgate instead of Cross Street, then turn South to connect Oxford Street and Piccadilly.
Alternatively, from Victoria Low Level go under Ring Road to at Northern Quarter / Ancoats, Piccadilly Low Level, then go between Oxford Road and the University, then join the existing line at Deansgate and quadruple-track between Deansgate and Cornbrook.

 

[Envy123]

Huntingdon and St Neots should have an hourly LNER service, at least. Thameslink's reliability gets rather patchy so far out of London.

As it stands, my mother and I took the risk to move to Peterborough to have the nice, fast and reliable LNER.

(I like Peterborough. It's just that my mother was constantly late to work when we lived in Huntingdon, thanks to Thameslink woes, and I'm still sore about it.)

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Best post-war railway leader was Beeching.

He not only did the plan but got the money out of The Treasury (the harder job) for a whole lot of positives - InterCity fast and frequent services; Merry-go-Round; rolling Mk2 stock building; long-welded rail; power signalling; coal concentration depots. The advances went on.

He also identified the complete basket cases of unused local passenger services, where whatever usage they might have once had disappeared once buses and cars became all-year practical in the 1930s, and likewise the local wagonload freight, one wagon at a time, where anything worthwhile had long gone to lorries.

I agree with this controversial opinion.

 

[Robert Ambler]

Well, I'm not sure Huntingdonshire have the resources to spend millions subsidising Network Rail, particularly given they're not a County Council.

If I had a pound for every time I heard the latter. 55% of people in the SE of England commute using the train - 5% in the North. I think you need to concentrate where the demand is.

Hampton would be the responsibility of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority who are the local government body responsible for transport infrastructure.

Yes I agree on the North South divide issue. Spending on rail per passenger in the SE is markedly lower than the North due to the disparity in passenger numbers (and of course around 25% of the UK population live in the SE). Spending in all areas is needed but before people moan about the expenditure on Crossrail/Elizabeth line being better spent elsewhere they should remember that a fair proportion of this money was raised from local taxation. There is nothing to stop other areas doing the same.

 

[RT4038]

Spending in all areas is needed but before people moan about the expenditure on Crossrail/Elizabeth line being better spent elsewhere they should remember that a fair proportion of this money was raised from local taxation. There is nothing to stop other areas doing the same.

Is there a mechanism for an English Region to do that? I don't think so.

 

[12LDA28C]

Here's one of mine: Most if not all the stations on the Marston Vale should be closed or bypassed to permit faster, more frequent running of regional EWR etc. services.

Hardly controversial if that's the actual plan, surely? Or is the EWR plan also controversial...

If your ticket doesn't get gripped, you should be entitled to a refund.

Or entitled to use it again, if it's still within the validity period.

 

[xotGD]

How is it "wasted"? It's one of the busiest National Rail line on the network and it's only been open a short time. I sometimes think some of you have literally never experienced what it's like in London.

How many people have switched from travel by car to travel by public transport as a result of Crossrail? If minimal, which I suspect it is (since nobody in their right mind drives into central London anyway), then the money has been wasted, and could have been better spent on enabling modal shift elsewhere in the country, where people drive into city centres.

 

[urbophile]

Quite, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. People in the SE have better infrastructure so are more likely to use public transport. So money is invested in that well-used public transport and it stays well-used. I'm not saying that the SE should be deprived of funding (that would be levelling down), I'm saying that the North should get the same per capita funding as the SE.

Of course. That should go without saying. However, we're not really comparing like with like. Large cities in the north (Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle) function very much like London, on a smaller scale: a city centre where many people work, who need cost effective transport in order to commute. (Cost effective for themselves as well as for the transport authority). But the numbers are so much smaller that the economies of scale don't work as well as they do in London. Moreover, the 'north' (ie the industrial/commercial belts of NW England/Yorkshire, and Tyneside) has always been less centralised (though probably even London is becoming less so) and workers have travelled from many directions. These journeys are less easily provided for by public transport.

 

[PGAT]

How many people have switched from travel by car to travel by public transport as a result of Crossrail?

Driving specifically? Not that much. East-West traffic via road would involve either going through the congestion charge or taking a more circuitous route. However the main focus was to relieve congestion off the Central and Jubilee lines which has certainly worked, and as a side bonus, plenty more journeys have been added that would no longer have existed otherwise.

If minimal, which I suspect it is (since nobody in their right mind drives into central London anyway), then the money has been wasted, and could have been better spent on enabling modal shift elsewhere in the country, where people drive into city centres.

The Elizabeth line was NOT a waste of money. We just discussed that it is profitable. (and TfL's budget cannot just shift to another city)