"Eurostar bids for East Coast Main Line franchise"

[Tetchytyke]

I love the way the government announce these things with bells and whistles, as though the operator of the trains means anything. It doesn't matter what colour we paint the damn things, we know that the HSTs and the 91s will be getting replaced with the Insanely Expensive Pointless train and we know that the fare rises will be stratospheric to pay for them.

 

[Oswyntail]

When they reported the story on Look North last night, they illustrated it with a shot of.......a GBRF Cl66 trundling through York.:roll: Actually, it is just about relevant...

 

[jon0844]

"Insanely Expensive Pointless train".

From what I've read, they sound like they'll be pretty decent trains for the passenger.

 

[Tetchytyke]

That depends who you ask.

DafT Rail, the procurement specialists that brought us the West Coast franchise fiasco, think they're brilliant and cheap as chips.

Everyone else thinks they're overpriced and badly specced, with much cheaper and better options being available simply walking down to the Siemens or Bombardier showroom and buying off the shelf. The bi-mode trains are seen as a particularly stupid idea.

Christian Wolmar, hate him or hate him, is very scathing about the "dog's breakfast of a train". And clearly all the planets are lined up in a weird way because, for once, I actually agree with him.

 

[YorkshireBear]

That depends who you ask.

DafT Rail, the procurement specialists that brought us the West Coast franchise fiasco, think they're brilliant and cheap as chips.

Everyone else thinks they're overpriced and badly specced, with much cheaper and better options being available simply walking down to the Siemens or Bombardier showroom and buying off the shelf. The bi-mode trains are seen as a particularly stupid idea.

Christian Wolmar, hate him or hate him, is very scathing about the "dog's breakfast of a train". And clearly all the planets are lined up in a weird way because, for once, I actually agree with him.

I don't. Even roger ford admitted that if they were procured the same way everything else is they would be cheaper so manufacturer has nothing to do with it.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I love the way the government announce these things with bells and whistles, as though the operator of the trains means anything. It doesn't matter what colour we paint the damn things, we know that the HSTs and the 91s will be getting replaced with the Insanely Expensive Pointless train and we know that the fare rises will be stratospheric to pay for them.

I was wondering when an IEP-basher would come along.

Your name suits you well. Please stop trying to divert the topic, because it's unnecessary and has been done to death. (I do like the way you try to portray your opinion as 'everyone's' though )

 

[junglejames]

I was wondering when an IEP-basher would come along.

Your name suits you well. Please stop trying to divert the topic, because it's unnecessary and has been done to death. (I do like the way you try to portray your opinion as 'everyone's' though )

Eh? Who was it started the conversation about how good IEP was going to/ or not going to be? It certainly wasnt Arctic Troll.
He purely pointed out that whoever the operator was, would be using IEP, and, as is very very common on here, used a nickname to describe them (a bit like people using nicknames like pretendilino etc etc).

Of course, if you dont like nicknames being used, then well, youve got a fight on your hands, I'll give you that.

 

[Manchester77]

Eh? Who was it started the conversation about how good IEP was going to/ or not going to be? It certainly wasnt Arctic Troll.
He purely pointed out that whoever the operator was, would be using IEP, and, as is very very common on here, used a nickname to describe them (a bit like people using nicknames like pretendilino etc etc).

Of course, if you dont like nicknames being used, then well, youve got a fight on your hands, I'll give you that.

Thought it was arctic troll, the only other mentions of IEP have been that that's what'll replace the existing fleet.

Didn't SNCF or some French company linked to them bid for ICWC (the one that got messed up)?

 

[MidlandMainlie]

There would indeed be interesting competition issues if First or Arriva won, because of their Hull Trains/Grand Central interests respectively.

If First or Arriva win can they not merge their open access operations into the existing franchise?

 

[ainsworth74]

Okay we have other threads for discussing the merits of IEP or otherwise. I suggest we stick to the topic at hand discussing wider issues around the ICEC franchise rather than wether or not IEP is a good or bad thing.

If First or Arriva win can they not merge their open access operations into the existing franchise?

When WSMR started picking up calls for Chiltern (same owning group) Chiltern got in serious trouble. Similarly there were issues with Virgin trying to run ICWC and ICXC as one venture rather than two so I'd suggest that unless something has changed it's unlikely that the DfT would allow that.

They probably wouldn't object to some harmonised branding (see Virgin Trains before they lost ICXC) but operationally they will probably require them to remain completely operationally seperate. Besides what happens if down the line First/Arriva lose the franchise? Do you then split the OAOs back out or leave them as part of the ICEC franchise?

 

[Manchester77]

Whenever that question has been raised before I seem to remember the answer being no and people using the example of when Virgin had XC and WC they had to keep them separate. They could market them but they'd still have to remain separate legally.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Arriva or First would need to disband their open access operator if they wanted the paths for the non-OA operator, though they can of course harmonise branding. As ainsworth74 pointed out, Chiltern got a rather large fine for trying to discharge their franchise duties with the Wrexham & Shropshire trains, which was a rather large factor in the abolition of W&S.

My main point before was the same as tbtc's.

 

[yorksrob]

I wonder if we'll get our White Rose Eurostars back. I rather liked those

 

[Eagle]

They probably wouldn't object to some harmonised branding (see Virgin Trains before they lost ICXC) but operationally they will probably require them to remain completely operationally seperate. Besides what happens if down the line First/Arriva lose the franchise? Do you then split the OAOs back out or leave them as part of the ICEC franchise?

It's definitely possible. There is already an example of an open access operation which shares branding with a franchised TOC.

Namely, the ATW Premier service.

 

[woolwinder]

I wonder if we'll get our White Rose Eurostars back. I rather liked those

if they did they would have to be called grubby white rose to match their TMST cousins current condition.

Looks like a play off between the frogs and Gerry's to me (SNCF & DB)

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If First or Arriva win can they not merge their open access operations into the existing franchise?

No, they are different animals. The access contracts are different (dates, routes, charges etc).
More important, they will be competing with themselves at places like York (GC), Hull (First) and Doncaster (both).
At the very least they will have to promise to keep "Chinese walls" between the operations with no cross-subsidisation.
In a normal commercial situation, some disposals would be necessary to satisfy the competition authorities (eg sell the OA operator to a competitor).

 

[button_boxer]

It would be amusing for Virgin to bid for the ECML franchise and then notice the small print that "this includes running Pacers between Darlington and Saltburn"... that'd be one way to sully their corporate image...

If this were the case they'd probably just use separate (Stagecoach?) branding on the local services.

 

[SkinnyDave]

If this were the case they'd probably just use separate (Stagecoach?) branding on the local services.

Under these circumstances I wonder why Virgin don't bid for GW

 

[Eagle]

Would be a bit odd to have Stagecoach branding for an operator which isn't majority-owned by Stagecoach.

 

[david16]

They'll use the current fleet, replacing them with IEP.

People will automatically think Eurostar and SNCF means that if they won the East Coast contract that journeys would suddenly match the high quality speed, smoothness and comfort of those in the near continent such as Paris to Brussels or Strasbourg to Marseille. It won't.

The IEP trains will be no patch on the SNCF trains.

In any case the daily class 43 Highland Chieftain Inverness to London Kings Cross through train is safe surely even with the new IEP trains to be used on the east coast. Is it?

This very government promised/gave guarantees more than 2 years ago that even with IEP replacement that the class 43 London to Inverness train would not be cut short at Waverley from King's Cross instead of continuing through to Inverness or start from Waverley to Kings Cross instead of Inverness. Surely a 2 car 158 as the so called guaranteed connection which would suddenly force passengers to make a long trail through Waverley with loads of heavy luggage would be disgraceful

 

[richw]

Would be a bit odd to have Stagecoach branding for an operator which isn't majority-owned by Stagecoach.

I don't see this, 51/49 is hardly a massive difference in stake.

 

[Tobbes]

In any case the daily class 43 Highland Chieftain Inverness to London Kings Cross through train is safe surely even with the new IEP trains to be used on the east coast. Is it?

This very government promised/gave guarantees more than 2 years ago that even with IEP replacement that the class 43 London to Inverness train would not be cut short at Waverley from King's Cross instead of continuing through to Inverness or start from Waverley to Kings Cross instead of Inverness. Surely a 2 car 158 as the so called guaranteed connection which would suddenly force passengers to make a long trail through Waverley with loads of heavy luggage would be disgraceful

Wasn't IEP-off-the-knitting (e.g., Inverness / Aberdeen) precisely the rationale for the IEP Bi-modes? Think your Highland Cheiftan is safe.

Tobbes

 

[tbtc]

This very government promised/gave guarantees more than 2 years ago that even with IEP replacement that the class 43 London to Inverness train would not be cut short at Waverley from King's Cross instead of continuing through to Inverness or start from Waverley to Kings Cross instead of Inverness. Surely a 2 car 158 as the so called guaranteed connection which would suddenly force passengers to make a long trail through Waverley with loads of heavy luggage would be disgraceful

It's not going to get cut short - it'd be political suicide to cut a symbolic link like this (even though very few people use the through service) - this is one of the benefits if bi-mode (as Tobbes has explained).

If anything, central belt electrification may encourage an early Edinburgh - London service to start back from Stirling (with evening return, on a diagram that would otherwise terminate at Waverley when its come up from London). In fact, five coach bi-mode may encourage a similar additional service from Dundee? There are suddenly a lot more possibilities.

How many Edinburgh - Inverness services are just a two coach 158 anyway?

 

[SkinnyDave]

It's not going to get cut short - it'd be political suicide to cut a symbolic link like this (even though very few people use the through service) - this is one of the benefits if bi-mode (as Tobbes has explained).

If anything, central belt electrification may encourage an early Edinburgh - London service to start back from Stirling (with evening return, on a diagram that would otherwise terminate at Waverley when its come up from London). In fact, five coach bi-mode may encourage a similar additional service from Dundee? There are suddenly a lot more possibilities.

How many Edinburgh - Inverness services are just a two coach 158 anyway?

Virgin have discussed a Stirling to London route, It would be interesting if East Coast franchise done the same

 

[Eagle]

Wasn't Virgin's Stirling service going to be routed via Cumbernauld and Motherwell (meaning that you lost either a Glasgow or an Edinburgh service)? Or am I imagining things?

 

[TheKnightWho]

It's not going to get cut short - it'd be political suicide to cut a symbolic link like this (even though very few people use the through service) - this is one of the benefits if bi-mode (as Tobbes has explained).

If anything, central belt electrification may encourage an early Edinburgh - London service to start back from Stirling (with evening return, on a diagram that would otherwise terminate at Waverley when its come up from London). In fact, five coach bi-mode may encourage a similar additional service from Dundee? There are suddenly a lot more possibilities.

How many Edinburgh - Inverness services are just a two coach 158 anyway?

I do find it curious that the anti-IEP crowd simultaneously hate it for being bi-mode and think that services will be cut back. I have my own reservations about it (especially regarding the price), but the entire point of bi-mode is to expand service potential, is it not?

 

[tbtc]

Wasn't Virgin's Stirling service going to be routed via Cumbernauld and Motherwell (meaning that you lost either a Glasgow or an Edinburgh service)? Or am I imagining things?

Agreed - did seem a bit token (a Stirling service on the ECML can be easily tagged onto an Edinburgh - London one, but as you say a Stirling service on the WCML would be at the expense of Edinburgh/Glasgow)

I do find it curious that the anti-IEP crowd simultaneously hate it for being bi-mode and think that services will be cut back. I have my own reservations about it (especially regarding the price), but the entire point of bi-mode is to expand service potential, is it not?

Good points!

 

[Eagle]

Agreed - did seem a bit token (a Stirling service on the ECML can be easily tagged onto an Edinburgh - London one, but as you say a Stirling service on the WCML would be at the expense of Edinburgh/Glasgow)

The other option would be to reverse at Edinburgh, of course.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The other option would be to reverse at Edinburgh, of course.

Or Glasgow Central now the Carmyle line is being wired.

 

[route:oxford]

The other option would be to reverse at Edinburgh, of course.

Or Glasgow Queen Street

There was an earlier thread where it was worked out that it could be done at the moment anyway with the early morning Voyager that routes from the Glasgow depot via Falkirk Grahmston and round the suburban in Edinburgh.

There's enough time for it to get up to Dunblane ECS, reverse and travel through as a semi-fast to Edinburgh then on to New Street.