East Midlands Franchise 2019-

[Domh245]

I was reading an article in The Times about the difficulties currently facing TOCs and the danger of collapse in certain ones, but I was also intrigued to see this little snippet buried in the body of the text:

"Train companies are pulling out of franchise competitions. FirstGroup and Italy’s Trenitalia confirmed this weekend they have withdrawn their joint bid from the contest to land the East Midlands franchise, leaving just two bidders."

Interesting to see this because there has been nothing from FirstGroup or Trenitalia so far, but equally I had been under the impression that there were 4 bidders at the last time of counting, Stagecoach, Arriva, Abellio, and First/Trenitalia - so have the Times forgotten about Abellio, or has someone else walked away without anyone noticing.

We must also surely not be far off the ITT being issued?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I could imagine First/Trenitalia pulling out of EM to concentrate on West Coast Partnership now the WCP ITT is out.
Ultimately this must be the big one.
Stagecoach might take the same decision on EM for the same reason, and of course has its own problems with VTEC and its fallout.
Arriva and Abellio are not involved in WCP.
The DfT clearly has to balance the franchising timetable so as to keep the bidders interested.
The WCP ITT was something like 5 months late, so maybe the DfT will keep everyone waiting a while yet for the EM version.

PS Actually Abellio is not on the East Midlands short list of three.
So losing First/Trenitalia brings it down to two: Arriva and Stagecoach.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/east-midlands-rail-franchise-3-firms-make-the-shortlist

 

[cactustwirly]

That's a shame, as I was hoping First would get the EM franchise.
I'm hoping it stays out of the hands of Stagecoach & Arriva.

 

[Masboroughlad]

The franchise system is seeming pretty shambolic across the board. Unless there are some better plans, I would increase the amount of competition from OA operators.

I'd go back also to the very first round, when we saw really ambitious bids including innovative services added on to the core map.

I really can't see how things will all play out in the long run. British Rail by Arriva?! Lol.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Arriva for me! They do seem to be genuinely improving Northern, new fleet etc.

It would be nice if the XC and EM franchise had the same owner, a bit like when Virgin had XC and the London routes. Maybe some integration would be good?

Stagecoach have done the absolute bare minimum they can get away with. It's scandalous that the DfT didn't mandate more in the franchise extension awards, but I strongly suspect that Stagecoach played haedball anyway, didn't they try that with South West, and it backfired?

The fleet is in a mess, local timetables need massive updates, especially in Lincolnshire and Staffordshire. (EMT could have improved the Lincoln to Peterborough service by now).

My local station still only gets a couple of trains a day, meaning I drive to Grantham or Bingham normally.

Central Trains may as well still be here, because it only seems like the paint changed, I really have no idea how this franchise ended up being so badly neglected.

 

[Robertj21a]

That's a shame, as I was hoping First would get the EM franchise.
I'm hoping it stays out of the hands of Stagecoach & Arriva.

Please, not First Group (assuming they survive much longer) !

Nothing wrong with Stagecoach, a very professional organisation.

 

[3141]

I could imagine First/Trenitalia pulling out of EM to concentrate on West Coast Partnership now the WCP ITT is out.
Ultimately this must be the big one.
Stagecoach might take the same decision on EM for the same reason, and of course has its own problems with VTEC and its fallout.
Arriva and Abellio are not involved in WCP.
The DfT clearly has to balance the franchising timetable so as to keep the bidders interested.
The WCP ITT was something like 5 months late, so maybe the DfT will keep everyone waiting a while yet for the EM version.

You're right, of course, that the West Coast partnership is "the big one", but I think companies that run TOCs will be thinking about the need to bid for other franchises as they come along. If they put all their eggs in one basket, and don't win, they could end up with nothing.

First can afford to withdraw from East Midlands, as they've got Transpennine and South Western, and they'll be thinking about the future prospects on the East Coast. Stagecoach might want to focus on the WCP, but their future on the East Coast is uncertain, so they probably feel they must bid for what's available, or risk ending up with just Sheffield Supertram.

 

[cactustwirly]

Please, not First Group (assuming they survive much longer) !

Nothing wrong with Stagecoach, a very professional organisation.

Have you actually traveled with EMT?
Stagecoach have done a poor job, that's why I want them to lose it!

Maybe I've got rose tinted spectacles on, but I was hoping First would use their experience with GWR to improve the EM Intercity services.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Please, not First Group (assuming they survive much longer) !

Nothing wrong with Stagecoach, a very professional organisation.

Well it won’t be will it! Haven’t you read the OP

 

[DanTrain]

Wouldn't Arriva present competition issues at the Northern end? If XC and Northern are already with Arriva, adding EMT would mean places such as Chesterfield would have 3 Arriva TOCs, and going from Chesterfield - Sheffield would have a choice 3 TOCs, all Arriva. Shame about First and Abellio, would have much prefered either of those myself.

 

[SPADTrap]

I don't imagine it's very palatable news for the media to cover, how's that bias?

 

[Domh245]

Wouldn't Arriva present competition issues at the Northern end? If XC and Northern are already with Arriva, adding EMT would mean places such as Chesterfield would have 3 Arriva TOCs, and going from Chesterfield - Sheffield would have a choice 3 TOCs, all Arriva. Shame about First and Abellio, would have much prefered either of those myself.

No, generally speaking there isn't any concern about owning groups being in charge of competing TOCs, for example GWR and SWR. Also, I've not seen it confirmed anywhere who is left in the bidding process, Abellio may well still be in it.

 

[SPADTrap]

No, generally speaking there isn't any concern about owning groups being in charge of competing TOCs, for example GWR and SWR. Also, I've not seen it confirmed anywhere who is left in the bidding process, Abellio may well still be in it.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/east-midlands-rail-franchise-3-firms-make-the-shortlist

Or is there something more recent regarding Abellio?

 

[Kettledrum]

Have you actually traveled with EMT?
Stagecoach have done a poor job, that's why I want them to lose it!

Maybe I've got rose tinted spectacles on, but I was hoping First would use their experience with GWR to improve the EM Intercity services.

Perhaps a bit harsh.

I'm not sure they have done a particularly bad job with EMT - they've just not done much that stands out as being particularly innovative or good, but my experience is they've kept the existing trains running.

I can think lots of aspects of individual aspects of poor customer service and experience that they could have changed though:

- At St Pancras, waiting for the 19.15 train, and EMT don't let you start boarding until 19.10 and it's at the far end of the platform. Regularly occurs and is very annoying
- At East Midlands Parkway when the trains for London leave at xx25 and xx33. What about all the minutes in between?
- On the Crewe to Derby route when a single coach unit is full to the rafters and really needs to be doubled up
- The train times to London are so slow that passengers drive out of their way to use another line. Derby passengers to London sometimes find it quicker going via Tamworth, Sheffield passengers drive to catch a train from Doncaster, Nottingham passengers drive to Grantham and use the ECML.

Would any other operator really do much better?

 

[Domh245]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/east-midlands-rail-franchise-3-firms-make-the-shortlist

Or is there something more recent regarding Abellio?

Yup, in February https://www.gov.uk/government/speec...-west-coast-and-east-midlands-rail-franchises

"The next operator will be required to deliver many of these improvements so I am today setting out the next step of the competition that will award this new contract.

Abellio, Arriva, Stagecoach (the current incumbent) and a joint venture between First and Trenitalia have all been shortlisted to run the East Midlands franchise that will deliver these improved services."

It was somewhat buried amongst all the news about the East Coast being terminated early, and the VTWC direct award

 

[DanTrain]

Perhaps a bit harsh.

I'm not sure they have done a particularly bad job with EMT - they've just not done much that stands out as being particularly innovative or good, but my experience is they've kept the existing trains running.

I can think lots of aspects of individual aspects of poor customer service and experience that they could have changed though:

- At St Pancras, waiting for the 19.15 train, and EMT don't let you start boarding until 19.10 and it's at the far end of the platform. Regularly occurs and is very annoying
- At East Midlands Parkway when the trains for London leave at xx25 and xx33. What about all the minutes in between?
- On the Crewe to Derby route when a single coach unit is full to the rafters and really needs to be doubled up
- The train times to London are so slow that passengers drive out of their way to use another line. Derby passengers to London sometimes find it quicker going via Tamworth, Sheffield passengers drive to catch a train from Doncaster, Nottingham passengers drive to Grantham and use the ECML.

Would any other operator really do much better?

An interesting question. Your first point about late boarding at St Pancras is incredibly irritating, especially given the tiny concourse area, and seems like something that wouldn't be that hard to solve. The 3rd and 4th aren't really their fault, they're short on stock and have next to no control over line speed to London. As for the 2nd, that may just be a nesecairy compromise, I don't know, but there can't be that many passengers who turn up at EMP without checking train times - there is only an infrequent bus from the airport and nearly everyone else will have driven for a specific train I imagine.

Personally, I agree with an earlier point about First and GWR, they are in many ways quite similar franchises with the mix of intercity and local services, and I agree that lessons learnt at FGW and GWR could be useful at EMT.

 

[Senex]

Perhaps a bit harsh.

I'm not sure they have done a particularly bad job with EMT - they've just not done much that stands out as being particularly innovative or good, but my experience is they've kept the existing trains running.

I can think lots of aspects of individual aspects of poor customer service and experience that they could have changed though:

- At St Pancras, waiting for the 19.15 train, and EMT don't let you start boarding until 19.10 and it's at the far end of the platform. Regularly occurs and is very annoying
- At East Midlands Parkway when the trains for London leave at xx25 and xx33. What about all the minutes in between?
- On the Crewe to Derby route when a single coach unit is full to the rafters and really needs to be doubled up
- The train times to London are so slow that passengers drive out of their way to use another line. Derby passengers to London sometimes find it quicker going via Tamworth, Sheffield passengers drive to catch a train from Doncaster, Nottingham passengers drive to Grantham and use the ECML.

Would any other operator really do much better?

The St Pancras question definitely needs some sort of solution. Even for an off-peak departure the waiting-area is totally inadequate, with far too much conflict between arriving and departing passengers and with far too little seating. I also dislike the way the escalators are used, so that when you arrive from the Tube/KGX direction and are perhaps in a hurry for a train you have the longest (and not too well marked) walk, but I guess the problem there is that theresimply aren't enough escalators and there's no room for more. The Midland part of the station really is not very attractive at all, and it's not helped by EMT boarding practices.

As to speed, the fast trains on the Midland line have been pretty impressive for a number of years now, given how difficult a route it is, but a journey on a stopper really can feel never-ending. And now, of course, we see the DfT-inflicted substantial deceleration coming, all for the sake of the Thameslink passengers.

But how far can we blame EMT, and how far would any other operator be better? The game seems to be to put in a wildly-overoptimistic bid at franchising time in the sure knowledge that DfT will simply go for what seems best for the public purse, get the franchise, then find out fairly quickly that things aren't going to work as expected, and then just let things slip and stagger on till the end of the franchise. And in the case of the East Midlands at the present time, there are all the infrastructure/rolling-stock uncertainties just to spice things up a bit.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Those saying the rolling stock "isn't their fault" - why is it then, that Scotrail have just been able to find 5 Class 153s, I read on this very forum? OK, so EMT have found 4, but the other 5 could have been available too, surely it's just a commercial matter of how much people are prepared to pay? That's assuming that EMT even asked about the cost.

Again, these bi/tri mode trains, (769 is it?), Great Western seem to have just ordered a large batch. What stopped EMT from doing this?

OK, so you're "robbing Peter to pay Paul", but EMT did have options to obtain additional trains and chose not to, other than what is absolutely the bare minimum (actually not even that many), to run the daily service.

Those 5 153s going to Scotrail allegedly, could have literally transformed Lincolnshire and Crewe lines in one swoop by simply providing the capacity that has always been needed since Day 1 of the franchise.

 

[hooverboy]

Those saying the rolling stock "isn't their fault" - why is it then, that Scotrail have just been able to find 5 Class 153s, I read on this very forum? OK, so EMT have found 4, but the other 5 could have been available too, surely it's just a commercial matter of how much people are prepared to pay? That's assuming that EMT even asked about the cost.

Again, these bi/tri mode trains, (769 is it?), Great Western seem to have just ordered a large batch. What stopped EMT from doing this?

OK, so you're "robbing Peter to pay Paul", but EMT did have options to obtain additional trains and chose not to, other than what is absolutely the bare minimum (actually not even that many), to run the daily service.

Those 5 153s going to Scotrail allegedly, could have literally transformed Lincolnshire and Crewe lines in one swoop by simply providing the capacity that has always been needed since Day 1 of the franchise.

the fact that they are coming to the end of the franchise period puts a brake on investment.What is the point of buying/leasing multiple million pounds worth of equipment if you know you need to sell/re-lease/re-livery/refurbish bits of kit in 18 months?
ideally as a franchise owner you would like to have some degree of certainty about what bits of kit you will need/use over the whole duration of a contract.makes planning much easier.

FWIW I think there should be less franchises-i think about half the amount we have now.10 metro/regional and 2 or 3 national semi fast/express of longer duration(10-15 years ideally)
Then rolling stock can then be purchased/bought/let in tiers(ie tier 1=new-10 years),tier 2(10-20 years) tier 3(20-30 years), with applicable leasing/purchase charges.
tier x(30+ years or mass surplus) could easily be sold to open access to get "easy-train" for £10 a go from london to glasgow on the day.I don't have a particular problem with it being a class 47/class 90 with 15 mk2/3's behind it as long as it's cheap and gets there.

I would take that over a brand spanking new azuma with rock-hard seats and wi'fi any day.

 

[Kettledrum]

So losing First/Trenitalia brings it down to two: Arriva and Stagecoach.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/east-midlands-rail-franchise-3-firms-make-the-shortlist

I'm really worried about Arriva. Passengers in Sheffield, Chesterfield, Derby, Leicester and Nottingham have been able to see first hand how Arriva have run a major intercity service - namely X Country trains. It's very bad. Many who have a choice (such as Derby to Sheffield) have chosen EMT over XC due to chronic overcrowding.

If Arriva were to run EMT in the same way that they run XC, we could see HSTs parked in the sidings whilst services are run by 4 car Merideans - with no doubled up trains at all. 2 x 5 car Merideans would be a thing of the past.

It sounds completely unrealistic, and I can hear cries of "surely that would never happen here", but it has happened on XC.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Arriva are making a better fist of Northern, including ordering new trains and refurbishing everything else.
However it's all down to the commitments made in the bid, so a lot depends on the franchise ITT.
Arriva XC has never had the luxury of acquiring new trains as the DfT has not sanctioned any increase in capacity (since the 4 HSTs came back).
Like EM it is right on the end of its franchise period.
Hopefully both franchises will get a good deal from the DfT this time - but they are short of cash with VTEC not going to deliver its expected premiums.

 

[hooverboy]

So losing First/Trenitalia brings it down to two: Arriva and Stagecoach.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/east-midlands-rail-franchise-3-firms-make-the-shortlist

I'm really worried about Arriva. Passengers in Sheffield, Chesterfield, Derby, Leicester and Nottingham have been able to see first hand how Arriva have run a major intercity service - namely X Country trains. It's very bad. Many who have a choice (such as Derby to Sheffield) have chosen EMT over XC due to chronic overcrowding.

If Arriva were to run EMT in the same way that they run XC, we could see HSTs parked in the sidings whilst services are run by 4 car Merideans - with no doubled up trains at all. 2 x 5 car Merideans would be a thing of the past.

It sounds completely unrealistic, and I can hear cries of "surely that would never happen here", but it has happened on XC.

which re-inforces my point about "easy-train" running a high capacity,no frills outfit.Would people prefer a horribly overcrowded 4 car 22x with no guarantee of a seat,that can do derby-sheffied in 30 minutes for £12,or a 47 hauled set of 10+mk2's(or even redundant HST with 10* standard mk3) with basic but functional,seat 99% of the time, takes 45 mins but only costs £5?

might not be a viable all-day service, but could quite easily make inroads into peak time loadings.

 

[DanTrain]

Again, these bi/tri mode trains, (769 is it?), Great Western seem to have just ordered a large batch. What stopped EMT from doing this?

What would be the point in EMT having bi/tri mode 769s? They’d only be able to switch on the juice through Manchester and on Grantham - Peterborough. Much better having 156s and 158s in my opinion than underpowered bi-modes.

 

[LeeLivery]

Please, not First Group (assuming they survive much longer) !

Nothing wrong with Stagecoach, a very professional organisation.

Would've agreed with SWT, but not with EMT. I've used the route since Midland Mainline days and now I travel with them between London and Nottingham regularly - it's really nothing impressive. Both of the journies I've taken in the past week had no trolley service and a closed buffet - in the middle of the day. Tickets not checked; something that never used to happen. The interior of the trains have seen better days and often the reservations aren't working or been scrapped.

Perhaps a bit harsh.

I'm not sure they have done a particularly bad job with EMT - they've just not done much that stands out as being particularly innovative or good, but my experience is they've kept the existing trains running.

- At St Pancras, waiting for the 19.15 train, and EMT don't let you start boarding until 19.10 and it's at the far end of the platform. Regularly occurs and is very annoying

They definitely aren't the worst, as you say, they've kept the trains running. As for the St Pancras issue, it's flipping annoying. As are the ticket barriers at St Pancras in general. All it does is cause crowding.

 

[Domh245]

What would be the point in EMT having bi/tri mode 769s? They’d only be able to switch on the juice through Manchester and on Grantham - Peterborough. Much better having 156s and 158s in my opinion than underpowered bi-modes.

Same can be asked of ATW. The point is that they're a self powered unit that can be used post 2020, which for TOCs with a stock shortage is the important part. The fact that they're a bi-mode is just an extra.

 

[DanTrain]

Same can be asked of ATW. The point is that they're a self powered unit that can be used post 2020, which for TOCs with a stock shortage is the important part. The fact that they're a bi-mode is just an extra.

True, and whilst I see in practice the logic in this, it still remains entirely illogical to run bi-modes on diesel only lines. I mean even the West Highland Line has more electric than most EMT routes, and I don’t see the clamour to replace the 156s up there.

Anyway, surely Greater Anglia replacing their entire fleet should solve this problem soon, some nicely refurbed 156s (in the style of Northern’s new 150s) would do the East Midlands nicely.

 

[tbtc]

I'm not sure they have done a particularly bad job with EMT - they've just not done much that stands out as being particularly innovative or good, but my experience is they've kept the existing trains running

Well, there's been an improved service to Matlock (clock face hourly, rather than the irregular service under BR/ Central Trains), with through services to Nottingham (rather than terminating at Derby)...

...double the frequency from Nottingham to Newark (allowing Lincoln services to be speeded up and providing through services from Derby to Newark)...

...four extra 156s which have allowed the capacity from Nottingham - Sheffield - Manchester - Liverpool to be doubled...

...a fifth London service per hour, with the opening of the Corby branch (which has allowed speeding up of services from London to Leicester/ Derby/ Nottingham)...

...four relatively young 222s acquired from Hull Trains...

...double the frequency from Sheffield to Leicester/ London...

...put InterCity trains on ex-Provincial services to deal with busy periods (222s to Liverpool on Grand National days, HSTs to Skegness on summer weekends, HSTs to Lincoln for the December Markets)...

...five HSTs have recently arrived from Grand Central...

...so not too bad. Especially bearing in mind how bad a hand they were dealt with the demise of Central Trains (e.g. five coach 170s on Nottingham - Liverpool services moved to LM to shuttle around on shortish routes like the Chase, whilst Nottingham - Liverpool got two coach 158s instead - people forget how far we've come).

They've ignored the extremities of the network (and the HSTs could do with an upgrade - unless you like the 1970s feel they have!), but then the Lincolnshire stuff is never going to generate much return without heavy subsidy, and there's no PTE or WAG-equivalent to throw cash at that. Crewe to Stoke seems underserved, but the hourly London Midland (LNW) service saw a huge increase in capacity there. Generally though, the ex-Provincial parts of the franchise fared no better/worse than most of the ex-Provincial parts of GWR/ W&B/ Northern etc over a comparable period - some rejigging of timetables, a little extra stock but no brand new trainset to play with.

Generally when franchises see massive improvements its because of one of
a. the franchise is profitable so it's worth investing in
b. there's a strong local government representation willing to throw large sums of money at it
c. things have got so bad that Something Must Be Done (Northern's Pacers, LTS's Misery Line, Merseyrail's 1970s fleet)

...none of those is the case with EMT - it's a franchise bang in the middle of the country and bang in the middle of the spreadsheet - not lucrative enough to warrant massive private investment, no so subsidy-dependent to require generous public sector funds. That'll be the same for whoever wins it - I don't think it'll be enough of a political "hot potato" to get much attention - it's not "London" enough to get London amounts of money thrown at it and it's not far enough away to generate the kind of "local pride" that you'd get in a franchise serving the west country/ wales/ north/ scotland.

I guess one reason they'll score badly is that they focused too much on the everyday clock face railway at the heart of the TOC and didn't have lots of quaint "Yarmouth to Barmouth" routes like Central Trains provided - so Skegness gets a more robust service to Nottingham under EMT but the ability to get a through service to Crewe isn't there any more - which I know some enthusiasts like.

 

[hooverboy]

What would be the point in EMT having bi/tri mode 769s? They’d only be able to switch on the juice through Manchester and on Grantham - Peterborough. Much better having 156s and 158s in my opinion than underpowered bi-modes.

if battery storage gets to a point where it has sufficient range to cover the likes of lincolnshire rural route, then the purpose of bi-mode like 769 is down to reliability/mean time between failure.

in general electric trains have a much better miles per failure rate than diesels.
i guess that's why I'd like to see a concept/hybrid of the rolls royce gas turbine car engine powering a dmu via alternator.
turbines have much less to go wrong still.it's basically just one single rotating part,instead of several hundred.as long as you keep them operating at a steady RPM.
Problem is gas being what it is.

 

[DanTrain]

if battery storage gets to a point where it has sufficient range to cover the likes of lincolnshire rural route, then the purpose of bi-mode like 769 is down to reliability/mean time between failure.

in general electric trains have a much better miles per failure rate than diesels.

In which case, (and forgive my ignorance here!) why aren't Northern's 195s bi-mode?

 

[pemma]

In which case, (and forgive my ignorance here!) why aren't Northern's 195s bi-mode?

It's because DMUs are much cheaper than bi-modes. It was reported Arriva were the middle bid for the Northern franchise - Govia lost out because their quality scoring was low while Abellio lost out because their cost scoring was high. While people point to the Cumbria routes and say they'd be ideal for bi-modes, it's worth remembering a number of Connect services won't be able to make any real use of overheads.