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

[LYRobert]

Yes, yes - but what is it that's so good about using a car? Doing the trip in a car carries the burden of having to drive it. Having to drive the thing is a real chore - it's work! Sat there, hour after hour, making sure it stays on the road, looking out for what everybody else is doing ALL THE TIME to avoid death and injury - the penalty for making a mistake. "You look tired", "Yes, I've just driven up from Weighbridge and the traffic's dereadful".

And what are "Motorists"? Does that mean car drivers? - or are "Motorists" something special - different in some way, like knowing stuff about their - and other - cars. 'Petrol heads' we used to call 'em. They are "Car drivers". I drive a car when I have to, not often (I hate it) but the bus stop is at the end of my road, and we have rail services from Banbury to everywhere.

And it's not just the car, - its all the car-track stuff: roads, lane marking, white lines, bollards, keep left, no parking, pass either side, 40, 30, and now (here at least) 20. I don't have to drive the train, or bother which track its on, or any of that - I just enjoy being in a sort of lounge which will arrive where I want to go without any further intervention from me. If you are going to compare modes then do a proper cost-benefit analysis with calibrated values for car travel as well.

 

[riceuten]

Transport in London is overrated.

Whether it be due to lack of investment from central govt, or inaction/poor management from TfL, I've always gotten a fairly poor impression when I've had to travel within London's zones and deal with TfL's ticketing. Yes, it's cheaper than what I pay in rural-nowhere, but....

The stations are dirty, the operation is designed to be patronising towards passengers (where else in the country does there need to be someone with a megaphone telling adults in excruciating detail how to board a train every day?!), the system integrates poorly with the rest of the National Rail network (and this interoperability isn't prioritised as much as it should be, it's only getting worse), it's too hot on the vast majority of lines, some of the stock is ancient, crumbling to pieces and vandalised - and I genuinely don't see much in the way of innovation nowadays. Oyster feels like it's stood still for a number of years; I still have to fill in an unintuitive, lengthy form or wait on hold for ages to get a refund. I still have to find a member of staff in person every time I renew my Railcard, or else I miss out on the discount I am entitled to. I can still "not collect a top-up quickly enough". Passenger information provisions are poor, especially during disruption ("severe delays"!)

They've delivered on some really important infrastructure projects, like Crossrail - albeit not quite on time - and I only really have minor gripes in relation to the Elizabeth Line. I also can't claim they don't transport millions of passengers every day, but c'mon - it could be so much better for a capital city.

Having lived or worked in the capital since 1983 on and off, I have to say this is not a London I recognise. Stations are no cleaner or dirtier than anywhere else in the country. I haven't seen a rail staff member with a megaphone in decades, and the integration with LUL and other operators seem pretty good. Quite a few trains have a/c nowadays - or opening windows, and most rolling stock nowadays in the capital is pretty up to date. Staffing and passenger information at stations in London is better than in the sticks, so I am not sure that the comparison bears any fruit

 

[Krokodil]

We should have child/child-free carriages on the intercity trains.

In some cases I'd sooner take the kids than their feral parents. I feel quite sorry for the poor mites sometimes.

 

[riceuten]

This model would probably drive down fares, but it would definitely make the system more complicated. The number of trains available for you to catch would be limited to the few a day that are run by your operator of choice. A heavily subsidised national operator/franchisee, however, would provide the same cost reductions to the passenger without the complications and inconvenience, and possibly with better integration with other modes.

It would drive down fares on particular line, but where there is little or no competition, it would hasten their end. One only needs to look at how well "competition" has worked on buses and coaches (and not just in the UK)

It is the true triumph of ideology over common sense

- People massively overstate how much good nationalisation would do

It really depends on how "nationalisation" is done, using what structures. You only need to look at the rest of Europe to see how "badly" nationalisation works.

 

[Ken H]

Yes, yes - but what is it that's so good about using a car? Doing the trip in a car carries the burden of having to drive it. Having to drive the thing is a real chore - it's work! Sat there, hour after hour, making sure it stays on the road, looking out for what everybody else is doing ALL THE TIME to avoid death and injury - the penalty for making a mistake. "You look tired", "Yes, I've just driven up from Weighbridge and the traffic's dereadful".

And what are "Motorists"? Does that mean car drivers? - or are "Motorists" something special - different in some way, like knowing stuff about their - and other - cars. 'Petrol heads' we used to call 'em. They are "Car drivers". I drive a car when I have to, not often (I hate it) but the bus stop is at the end of my road, and we have rail services from Banbury to everywhere.

And it's not just the car, - its all the car-track stuff: roads, lane marking, white lines, bollards, keep left, no parking, pass either side, 40, 30, and now (here at least) 20. I don't have to drive the train, or bother which track its on, or any of that - I just enjoy being in a sort of lounge which will arrive where I want to go without any further intervention from me. If you are going to compare modes then do a proper cost-benefit analysis with calibrated values for car travel as well.

But how to you do a village near Settle to Blackburn, or Manchester? 3 buses, and a dog leg via Skipton.

 

[gc4946]

For the next 25 years, central government funding for rail infrastructure enhancements should only be spent outside London and the South East.
This means high speed links connecting communities in the north and midlands fully completed, major infrastructure work eg Castlefield in Manchester progressed, and full electrification of Midland Main Line and Transpennine routes, etc.
If London and SE want extra infrastructure they should raise money locally.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Even the swathe from Belgium down to Austria (basically BE, NL, DE, CH and AT)? I've visited that area several times, though never lived there - and I get the impression, from my visits, that they do timetables (the "Taktfahrplan"), connections and integration with buses much better than we do. It's not perfect (delays and cancellations still occur, of course) - but it seems much more planned and integrated than our haphazard post-privatisation system.

I do think BR had some continental characteristics in the past (early InterCity in the 70s and early 80s, or around the late 80s, early 90s with NSE, RR and IC) but no longer.

Then there's the whole S-Bahn concept, which exists for even smallish cities. We can only dream of a Solent S-Bahn !

I think you have this back-to-front. By the mid-1970s BR had largely achieved regular interval timetables on IC routes to/from London, along with modern rolling stock on nearly all such services, and was working towards that on XC and the quasi-IC regional routes (TP North, Marches, etc). In the meantime the Europeans still had a hotch-potch of TEEs (with some still charging premium fares), domestic ICs and an unwieldy collection of D-trains. The success of BR's IC model led the Europeans to largely copy it by replacing TEEs with ECs and eventually merging (in effect) the ECs and ICs as international frontiers became less significant. Then they built up a network of complementary secondary services, often known as IRs, and by the 1990s were generally doing a better job of it helped by sensible connection policies and avoiding the balkanisation caused by privatisation, not to mention a much greater willingness to invest in improved infrastructure.

The period of BR that you praise is of course when it had properly moved on from steam but before it lost its way due to having to prepare for full privatisation. I also note that a few posters in this thread have referred to the early 2010s as having been a good spell for Britain's railways: that just happens to coincide to the time of coalition government. No use of railways as a political football!

 

[TUC]

Open Access operations should be banned. They use up track capacity with short units, are primarily abstractive regardless of what they claim, and invariably offer poor service due to the need to cut costs to be viable. The competitor is the car.

Tendering invariably leads to a poor quality product because typically tenders aren't well enough written to avoid suppliers producing cheap junk.

They have not just resuled in more towns and cities having direct connections to London, the competition they create have sriven down fares acrss all operators on their lines of route.

Unit allocation between the North and South of England should be reversed so that those of us in the North get to enjoy the luxury of half empty 12 coach trains while Londoners have to pile onto a cramped, wheezing, clapped-out 2 coach class 150 for their daily commute!

I agree. Doibg tht for t least a year would sharpen minds on investment and speed of delivery.

 

[nw1]

I think you have this back-to-front. By the mid-1970s BR had largely achieved regular interval timetables on IC routes to/from London, along with modern rolling stock on nearly all such services, and was working towards that on XC and the quasi-IC regional routes (TP North, Marches, etc). In the meantime the Europeans still had a hotch-potch of TEEs (with some still charging premium fares), domestic ICs and an unwieldy collection of D-trains. The success of BR's IC model led the Europeans to largely copy it by replacing TEEs with ECs and eventually merging (in effect) the ECs and ICs as international frontiers became less significant. Then they built up a network of complementary secondary services, often known as IRs, and by the 1990s were generally doing a better job of it helped by sensible connection policies and avoiding the balkanisation caused by privatisation, not to mention a much greater willingness to invest in improved infrastructure.

The period of BR that you praise is of course when it had properly moved on from steam but before it lost its way due to having to prepare for full privatisation. I also note that a few posters in this thread have referred to the early 2010s as having been a good spell for Britain's railways: that just happens to coincide to the time of coalition government. No use of railways as a political football!

OK, fair enough. I have to admit that all my significant travels on the continent by rail took place from 1999 onwards, with a particular focus on the 2009-15 period, though I do remember hourly even-interval IC services up and down the Rhine main line at Freiburg Hbf in 1987 (this was pre-ICE, the locos reminded me a little of 87s and the general 'feel' of the services was very 80s WCML-like).

Where do northerners get the impression we ride around only in new stock? Southeastern and Southwestern have ancient EMUs ,

What, 444s, 450s?

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

I think you have this back-to-front. By the mid-1970s BR had largely achieved regular interval timetables on IC routes to/from London, along with modern rolling stock on nearly all such services, and was working towards that on XC and the quasi-IC regional routes (TP North, Marches, etc). In the meantime the Europeans still had a hotch-potch of TEEs (with some still charging premium fares), domestic ICs and an unwieldy collection of D-trains. The success of BR's IC model led the Europeans to largely copy it by replacing TEEs with ECs and eventually merging (in effect) the ECs and ICs as international frontiers became less significant. Then they built up a network of complementary secondary services, often known as IRs, and by the 1990s were generally doing a better job of it helped by sensible connection policies and avoiding the balkanisation caused by privatisation, not to mention a much greater willingness to invest in improved infrastructure.

The period of BR that you praise is of course when it had properly moved on from steam but before it lost its way due to having to prepare for full privatisation. I also note that a few posters in this thread have referred to the early 2010s as having been a good spell for Britain's railways: that just happens to coincide to the time of coalition government. No use of railways as a political football!

SNCF still hasn't got the hang of regular interval timetables. Even the notionally hourly (half-hourly in the peak) regular interval TGV service Paris Nord - Lille Flandres has so many caveats as to the days / time period a particular service will run, that the notes in the 'European Timetable' take up half a page - more than the timetable itself. The LGV Sud Europe Atlantique timetable to Bordeaux and beyond is even more infuriating, with seemingly random trains deigning to serve the intermediate stations.

 

[Adam Williams]

Stations are no cleaner or dirtier than anywhere else in the country.

The science proves otherwise - the air on the platforms at London Underground stations is poor quality, is high in PM10 pollutants and has been proven to increase susceptibility to pneumococcal disease. TfL seem unable to be able to tackle the issue on older lines - so much so that there was a past campaign from the RMT on tube air quality.

I haven't seen a rail staff member with a megaphone in decades

This is a regular occurrence when trying to travel during peak times on the tube, where staff seem to treat passengers like idiots and feel the need to shout at them every 2 minutes to move down the platform, let others off the train first, not to fall off the platform etc. It's very surprising to me that you've not experienced this in decades if you've been commuting for years! In the rest of the country (even in other busy cities), passengers seem to manage to board trains without being hand-held throughout the entire process.

the integration with LUL and other operators seem pretty good

Day travelcards are going in the bin, cross-London tickets still can't be fulfilled to E-Ticket, contactless doesn't integrate with National Rail's discount schemes at all (Oyster integrates with some of them poorly), ticket acceptance during National Rail strike action is poor (customers can't travel on adjacent dates if they need to use the tube), no respect for the National Rail Conditions of Travel (passengers struggle to exercise their break of journey rights at TfL gatelines). I could go on for a while.

Quite a few trains have a/c nowadays

I've never had a comfortable Bakerloo, Northern, Central or Victoria line journey on a summer day in London. The 'ventilation' you get in the train is thoroughly unpleasant, hot air. The stations are a slight respite from the experience, but they're still uncomfortably warm. This will only get worse as time goes on.

most rolling stock nowadays in the capital is pretty up to date

Some of it is, but there's such a contrast between the stock used on the Elizabeth line and the Bakerloo line!

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

SNCF still hasn't got the hang of regular interval timetables. Even the notionally hourly (half-hourly in the peak) regular interval TGV service Paris Nord - Lille Flandres has so many caveats as to the days / time period a particular service will run, that the notes in the 'European Timetable' take up half a page - more than the timetable itself. The LGV Sud Europe Atlantique timetable to Bordeaux and beyond is even more infuriating, with seemingly random trains deigning to serve the intermediate stations.

TBF my post was in response to a comment about BE, NL, DE, CH, AT. France most definitely hasn't embraced Takt for longer distance services. If you want a really complicated timetable try Paris-Cherbourg in the 1990s. No two days were the same and even those trains which ran 5 or 6 days a week nearly all had intermediate timing variations. I'm sure the arch bashers would love that sort of thing!

 

[Krokodil]

They are great for local trips but, looking at it objectively, not so good on multi hour inter regional journeys with the engines roaring and doors rattling constantly. That said, they have been unphased by the hammering they are getting in their twilight years. Total failures are extremely rare.

They are certainly bomb-proof. No "computer says no" and I've never known one with an air-con fault.

The "see it, say it, sorted" thing should stop immediately (in all its forms) and never return.

This is supposed to be a controversial thread!

In Japan, the government-funded lines, they choose a maximum curve radius of 4,000m and a designed speed of 260km/h.
Through track upgrades (e.g. sound barriers) and using tilting trains, they have improved the operational speed to 320km/h. 360km/h and beyond is being tested.

Tilting trains are a make-do approach for improving old infrastructure. If you're building from scratch then you should get it right first time. The advice from SNCF was to future-proof.

Where do northerners get the impression we ride around only in new stock? Southeastern and Southwestern have ancient EMUs , underground even more so. GWR have some bus like DMUs. Southern are all 377s but we're are pretty used to the "oopsie we can only send a 4 car unit to a normally 12 car route"

How many EMUs do SWR or SE operate that are older than Northern's 150s? Or the dire 319s? I understand that the remaining 455s are on borrowed time.

London Underground units do the job needed of them - it's a high-frequency metro service where most people are happy to stand, the only issue with the older units is the lack of air-conditioning. People do not generally spend long periods of time onboard. As EMUs their economic lifespan is longer than that of DMUs anyway.

 

[eldomtom2]

Just add it to the list of conditions on the pay rise that the unions are not going to agree to and are going to be forced in by the TOCs/NR anyway.

How well do you think people will react when someone in management says "yes the railways will be less safe, but they'll be cheaper"?

 

[Krokodil]

How well do you think people will react when someone in management says "yes the railways will be less safe, but they'll be cheaper"?

Someone at NR admitted a short while ago that cuts to maintenance are already affecting reliability. He didn't mention safety but it's only a matter of time before something happens.

 

[renegademaster]

They are certainly bomb-proof. No "computer says no" and I've never known one with an air-con fault.


This is supposed to be a controversial thread!


Tilting trains are a make-do approach for improving old infrastructure. If you're building from scratch then you should get it right first time. The advice from SNCF was to future-proof.


How many EMUs do SWR or SE operate that are older than Northern's 150s? Or the dire 319s? I understand that the remaining 455s are on borrowed time.

London Underground units do the job needed of them - it's a high-frequency metro service where most people are happy to stand, the only issue with the older units is the lack of air-conditioning. People do not generally spend long periods of time onboard. As EMUs their economic lifespan is longer than that of DMUs anyway.

ORR stats reveal the oldest train fleets in Great Britain | Office of Rail and Road

ORR stats reveal the oldest train fleets in Britain. Each year ORR publishes statistics on the average age of rolling stock for each rail operator in Great Britain.

www.orr.gov.uk

According to ORR, Southwestern have a tiny bit higher average age than Northern, and Southeastern are younger by a year. GWR are pretty far down but that's mostly their Azuma fleet, their local trains are pretty dismal old DMUs.

Southwestern have the brand new 701s sitting in sidings but god knows when they will come into service

 

[Sonic1234]

How well do you think people will react when someone in management says "yes the railways will be less safe, but they'll be cheaper"

Depends on how it's phrased and communicated, if the public even hear about it. The word "safety" is always seen as a good thing (see Covid), but the public are also familiar with the concept of "health and safety gone mad" and "excessive red tape."

Has anyone ever taken the train rather than another mode of transport because of high safety standards?

 

[Topological]

Today's controversial thought: Cross Country should not provide duplicate services on main lines:

• Bristol, Southampton (since Basingstoke is probably not a destination), Manchester and York should be the extent of the network.
• Deficits in provision between York and Scotland, Bristol and the South West, and Southampton and Bournemouth should be picked up by the respective train companies.
• Voyagers should run doubled up where the reduced network length frees units.
• Cardiff to Nottingham fits the model well enough and Birmingham to Stansted Airport is OK (noting both use 170s anyway)

Note: The stock availability issue will certainly ruin all of this, but the result should be a better service with less delays getting imported from one part of the country to the other.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Certain "duplication" is important in "XC" terms - viz hourly to Plymouth south of Bristol - and of course Newcastle to Glasgow via Edinburgh (which caters for a strong Central Belt to Tyneside flow - which at one time was partly covered by the 2 hourly GNER service from Glasgow to Edinburgh and on to London KX) -

In my experience - in the past - any review of XC services , it is critical to look at actual passenger flows - though it has to be said then - there was some element of normality in flow analyses.

 

[The Ham]

How about:

The bulk of the railway infrastructure is woefully unfit for purpose in the modern era, and fixing most of it would be so disruptive and expensive that it'd be cheaper to build a replacement from scratch.

At the very least we should be looking to duplicate rows which are very busy - as an example (but would need repeating across the country) Crossrail 2.

Those weeds are already trying to take over the railway without people closing it.

My controversial suggestion is that both DfT and Treasury should be abolished, and that part of national taxation should be used to make rail travel "free" (apart from your contribution via taxation). Just think of all the potential savings - no barriers, no ticket offices or tickets, etc.

I was going to suggest that the benefit to the country may actually be more if we didn't have to buy rail tickets. As you could remove a lot of staff and infrastructure.

Add on to that the fact that people would be able to have less restrictions on their ability to earn/spend money.

Unit allocation between the North and South of England should be reversed so that those of us in the North get to enjoy the luxury of half empty 12 coach trains while Londoners have to pile onto a cramped, wheezing, clapped-out 2 coach class 150 for their daily commute!

A 12 cost 450 has seating for 792 people, half that would be 396 seats, that's 2.65 times the capacity (pretty much) of a class 150, I'm not sure that you'd manage to get that many on 2 coach class 150.

However I'm not sure that all that many 12 coach trains (perhaps other than those going contra flow) are all that empty anyway.

The issue isn't really that the South has more units, the issue is that the North hasn't been given what it should have done.

------------------------------------------------------

Another controversial opinion, TOC's should run all their services with as many coaches as possible (buying now rolling stock to do so), as the extra cost from doing so isn't all that much and the trains would likely get busier due to the extra capacity. The "as many coaches as possible" would have a clause which allowed shorter than the maximum length if the number of coaches still provided spare capacity of 100% of the number being carried (so a full 4 coach train would need to run as 8 coaches).

 

[Adrian1980uk]

The science proves otherwise - the air on the platforms at London Underground stations is poor quality, is high in PM10 pollutants and has been proven to increase susceptibility to pneumococcal disease. TfL seem unable to be able to tackle the issue on older lines - so much so that there was a past campaign from the RMT on tube air quality.


This is a regular occurrence when trying to travel during peak times on the tube, where staff seem to treat passengers like idiots and feel the need to shout at them every 2 minutes to move down the platform, let others off the train first, not to fall off the platform etc. It's very surprising to me that you've not experienced this in decades if you've been commuting for years! In the rest of the country (even in other busy cities), passengers seem to manage to board trains without being hand-held throughout the entire process.


Day travelcards are going in the bin, cross-London tickets still can't be fulfilled to E-Ticket, contactless doesn't integrate with National Rail's discount schemes at all (Oyster integrates with some of them poorly), ticket acceptance during National Rail strike action is poor (customers can't travel on adjacent dates if they need to use the tube), no respect for the National Rail Conditions of Travel (passengers struggle to exercise their break of journey rights at TfL gatelines). I could go on for a while.


I've never had a comfortable Bakerloo, Northern, Central or Victoria line journey on a summer day in London. The 'ventilation' you get in the train is thoroughly unpleasant, hot air. The stations are a slight respite from the experience, but they're still uncomfortably warm. This will only get worse as time goes on.


Some of it is, but there's such a contrast between the stock used on the Elizabeth line and the Bakerloo line!

I do love the constant announcements, on the central line at bank is fantastic, they get so excited they don't know what to Holla first, mind the gap, stand clear of the closing doors - usually after the event anyway!
There was one lady the other day standing so close to the platform edge giving her running commentary on the district line, and she didn't step back even when the train departed.

I've always wondered what their purpose in life was as all the announcements are automatic anyway and they just shout over them

 

[renegademaster]

At the very least we should be looking to duplicate rows which are very busy - as an example (but would need repeating across the country) Crossrail 2.



I was going to suggest that the benefit to the country may actually be more if we didn't have to buy rail tickets. As you could remove a lot of staff and infrastructure.

Add on to that the fact that people would be able to have less restrictions on their ability to earn/spend money.



A 12 cost 450 has seating for 792 people, half that would be 396 seats, that's 2.65 times the capacity (pretty much) of a class 150, I'm not sure that you'd manage to get that many on 2 coach class 150.

However I'm not sure that all that many 12 coach trains (perhaps other than those going contra flow) are all that empty anyway.

The issue isn't really that the South has more units, the issue is that the North hasn't been given what it should have done.

------------------------------------------------------

Another controversial opinion, TOC's should run all their services with as many coaches as possible (buying now rolling stock to do so), as the extra cost from doing so isn't all that much and the trains would likely get busier due to the extra capacity. The "as many coaches as possible" would have a clause which allowed shorter than the maximum length if the number of coaches still provided spare capacity of 100% of the number being carried (so a full 4 coach train would need to run as 8 coaches).

Making TOCs use all the stock they have would kill what little redundancy the Network has left.

 

[trebor79]

I do love the constant announcements, on the central line at bank is fantastic, they get so excited they don't know what to Holla first, mind the gap, stand clear of the closing doors - usually after the event anyway!
There was one lady the other day standing so close to the platform edge giving her running commentary on the district line, and she didn't step back even when the train departed.

I've always wondered what their purpose in life was as all the announcements are automatic anyway and they just shout over them

I get the impression it's a very boring job. The staff at Stratford just babble away constantly making jokey announcements about not getting squashed in the doors etc.
I do wonder what the purpose of them is?

 

[[.n]]

So my fun controversial opinions are:

1. The best TOC/Brand Name was "one" - I used love the announcements at Liverpool Street
2. The Waterloo to Weymouth service should ditch Winchester as a stop (as it used to)
3. They should move the eurostar terminal back to Waterloo
4. All gateway line staff should be employees of the TOCs and not random agencies who don't provide proper training

 

[Krokodil]

Has anyone ever taken the train rather than another mode of transport because of high safety standards?

People of a nervous disposition certainly avoid the railways in the aftermath of an accident. You are right though that no one gets any credit for the 999 other times when nothing went wrong.

 

[Trainguy34]

4. All gateway line staff should be employees of the TOCs and not random agencies who don't provide proper training

I agree with this, then they would have some partially in depth knowledge of helpful customer service stuff.

 

[gc4946]

Britain should have a nationwide zonal unified public transport fare system where you can easily calculate how much your journey costs

 

[xotGD]

There shouldn't be barriers at level crossings. A red light is sufficient to make traffic stop at a road junction, so nothing more is required.

Heritage railways outside of GWR territory shouldn't be operating locos with copper caps.

All coaching stock and units should be blue and grey. Locomotives in blue or large logo blue.

 

[Kite159]

Placing your feet on the seat opposite should be an automatic £100 penalty if caught, no ifs, no buts. Also, they get ejected at the next station. Same with anybody vapping on the train. Enforced by plain clothed & uniformed bylaw enforcement officers.

Also any idiots who can't be bothered pushing a bike along the platform and instead jumps onto their bike to ride to the exit regardless how busy the platform is will also get an automatic £100 penalty and bike taken away to be destroyed.

 

[Bald Rick]

Which would be?

As per the Transport Assessment Guidelines data book