Grand Union Trains bought by First Group?

[BayPaul]

I think this is fantastic, especially if they get the Paignton service too. It will mean that even with GBR we'll have a bit of competition in the South West, which will help holding the government operator to account. Lumo sound excellent on the Edinburgh service, so I'm sure I'll use them.

First look like being a national intercity operator now, which IMO would have been a decent privatisation model - on rail competition would have helped with both service and price.

 

[irish_rail]

With any luck, the threat of Lumo will wake up the "nationalised" operator into stepping up and not taking passengers for granted, plus hopefully some more direct Plymouth - Bristol - London services too.

 

[anthony263]

So the previous idea of a higher passenger quality of service on the South Wales line is transformed into the Ryanair style Lumo offering.

So another three years to introduce it too? What rolling stock could that involve? It feels a bit too soon to procure new bi-mode stock, unless the combination of all FG’s various open access needs tempts Hitachi to offer a sensible deal (which by all accounts it hasn’t appear interested in recently).

Don't forget one issues was Hitachi didn't want small orders when first tried for extra carriages to lengthen the lumo 803s.

Could a combined order now perhaps tempt Hitachi. Maybe first could take the opportunity to get an extra 802 for hull trains and lumos Scotland service

 

[John R]

Don't forget one issues was Hitachi didn't want small orders when first tried for extra carriages to lengthen the lumo 803s.

Could a combined order now perhaps tempt Hitachi. Maybe first could take the opportunity to get an extra 802 for hull trains and lumos Scotland service

Indeed! That is exactly what I was getting at when talking about a combination of all FG's various open access needs tempting Hitachi.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think this is fantastic, especially if they get the Paignton service too. It will mean that even with GBR we'll have a bit of competition in the South West, which will help holding the government operator to account. Lumo sound excellent on the Edinburgh service, so I'm sure I'll use them.

I'd not call them excellent, but they aren't that bad and the price is very attractive, and unlike traditional OAOs they aren't operating unreliable old tat (yes, you, Grand Central) so tend to be a reasonably safe bet.

 

[sh24]

I Lumo'ed for the first time last week and thought it was pretty decent. Least worst standard seats on an IET, good on board service, solid pricing. Luggage is the biggest challenge...the South West in holiday season will need some careful thought.

Do think they are missing a trick in not offering a Standard Plus/Premium Economy cabin.

 

[John R]

I Lumo'ed for the first time last week and thought it was pretty decent. Least worst standard seats on an IET, good on board service, solid pricing. Luggage is the biggest challenge...the South West in holiday season will need some careful thought.

Do think they are missing a trick in not offering a Standard Plus/Premium Economy cabin.

IIRC they have to have a certain number of seats to meet the ORR requirement set out in the track access agreement (hence why luggage space is at a premium). Anything that reduces capacity further would clearly need to bear that in mind.

 

[YorkRailFan]

But it also says it now includes the Carmarthen service, previously not part of the planned FG acquisition.

Indeed, now Grand Union only has their proposed Cardiff-Edinburgh service left. Will be interesting to see what happens with that.

 

[Wolfie]

Indeed, now Grand Union only has their proposed Cardiff-Edinburgh service left. Will be interesting to see what happens with that.

Precedent would suggest that they do the leg work and then, if they get approval, sell the rights on.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I don't have a problem with any of this really. The GWML is crying out for some actually affordable fares.
Given Megabus are no longer an option now I'd imagine there's be quite a demand for cheaper fares between Cardiff and London and Bristol and London.

 

[geoffk]

This is an utter disaster and so very disappointing. So we'll have GWR/GBR class 800 IETs with no buffet and shoddy interiors or Lumo class 8XX IETs with no buffet and a pared down offering. This should be looked at again by the ORR as it's nothing like service that Grand Union had planned to offer.

This is not the age of the train for south Wales & the west.

What we need is to get the current train companies to operate reliably rather than clog up the network with yet more fast London trains which don't add any new travel opportunities. As it is, some local trains have to be overtaken at Dawlish Warren while trains from Paignton are often delayed at Newton Abbot coming north. And where are they going to get drivers and guards from, other than "poaching" them from GWR? Whatever happened to "not primarily abstractive"?

 

[dk1]

Whatever happened to "not primarily abstractive"?

Doesn’t mean anything anymore when it comes to staffing, that’s if it ever did. Plenty of revenue raiding to be had whichever way they dress it up and disguise things.

 

[brad465]

Presumably they're routing their Paignton proposal via Bristol to account for 2 things: 1, the B&H is full and 2, to try and get round the revenue abstraction issue. The problem is a fast service from London to Bath Spa and Temple Meads would be very abstractive, both because these are popular flows and they will suddenly be faster with fewer stops. I wouldn't be surprised if this is all about getting revenue from this lucrative flow, and extending to Paignton is an attempted smokescreen for this.

 

[BayPaul]

What we need is to get the current train companies to operate reliably rather than clog up the network with yet more fast London trains which don't add any new travel opportunities. As it is, some local trains have to be overtaken at Dawlish Warren while trains from Paignton are often delayed at Newton Abbot coming north. And where are they going to get drivers and guards from, other than "poaching" them from GWR? Whatever happened to "not primarily abstractive"?

The fast services from Torbay to Exeter, Bristol and Bath are new (at least in decent numbers) and would provide good local journey opportunities.

The current train companies seem incapable of operating reliably, and it is unlikely that nationalisation will solve that. What might solve it is competition from a cheaper and more reliable operator - Lumo is likely to do well in the reliability stakes with a simple operation, no legacy staffing issues and modern trains. They will either take good passenger shares, or force GBR to up their game, or both.

 

[geoffk]

Doesn’t mean anything anymore when it comes to staffing, that’s if it ever did. Plenty of revenue raiding to be had whichever way they dress it up and disguise things.

My comment was more about capacity. An aspiration here is Devon Metro (Exmouth - Paignton) all stations on a clock face headway. At present, some stations only get an hourly service during the day, while main line trains going to Paignton at odd times (both GWR and XC) mean local trains don't get a regular path. Paignton station is constrained by having only one platform for departures. Adding these Lumo trains will just make the situation worse.

 

[dk1]

My comment was more about capacity. An aspiration here is Devon Metro (Exmouth - Paignton) all stations on a clock face headway. At present, some stations only get an hourly service during the day, while main line trains going to Paignton at odd times (both GWR and XC) mean local trains don't get a regular path. Paignton station is constrained by having only one platform for departures. Adding these Lumo trains will just make the situation worse.

The Torbay branch however does get an excellent service compared to a few years ago. The hourly Exmouth-Paignton was initially boosted by the hourly branch shuttle before both ran through to Exmouth hourly. That along with the far better spread of through Paddington services has really impressed me. It’s easy to forget it wasn’t always this way.

Sunday frequency leaves a lot to be desired however.

 

[JonathanH]

The current train companies seem incapable of operating reliably, and it is unlikely that nationalisation will solve that. What might solve it is competition from a cheaper and more reliable operator - Lumo is likely to do well in the reliability stakes with a simple operation, no legacy staffing issues and modern trains.

Many of the issues with reliability stem from infrastructure problems that will affect an open access operator as much as it affects the GBR operation.

 

[John R]

Many of the issues with reliability stem from infrastructure problems that will affect an open access operator as much as it affects the GBR operation.

Not the Sunday lack of staff issue though, which seems to be the biggest problem at the moment.

 

[JonathanH]

Not the Sunday lack of staff issue though, which seems to be the biggest problem at the moment.

Well no, but that reflects that the staff employed by the open access operator effectively have worse terms of employment than those employed by GWR.

 

[coppercapped]

This is, of course, what the future of the rail network looks like unless GBR gets a grip on keeping Open Access in check. It’s entirely inevitable that private operators will look for all and every viable OA business case over profitable routes, leaving the state network with the bits that aren’t commercially desirable. Any halfway functioning system needs the revenue income from the bits which earn money to help pay for the subsidy of the bits which don’t, and if that income is susbtantially diminished by private competition there is going to be a problem. This seems pretty basic stuff to me, I’m rather surprised that GBR don’t seem to have a way through it.

This I don't understand.

It is not GBR's job to 'keeping Open Access in check'. Please check what the ORR's responsibilities are...

Many on this forum seem to look forward to the creation of GBR, but don't understand the implications. In this case the track access and other payments made by (all of) the Open Access operators will accrue to the future GBR and so boost its revenue stream. This will help to cover the costs of those parts of the network where the fare income is low and there are no other sources of income from, say, freight operations.

Well no, but that reflects that the staff employed by the open access operator effectively have worse terms of employment than those employed by GWR.

Do you know that? Or is is a supposition?

 

[A S Leib]

plus hopefully some more direct Plymouth - Bristol - London services too.

I'd be surprised if that happens with GWR between Paddington – Weston-super-Mare going to bihourly (I think) and if the remaining Cardiff – Taunton services are extended to Exeter.

 

[brad465]

I'd be surprised if that happens with GWR between Paddington – Weston-super-Mare going to bihourly (I think) and if the remaining Cardiff – Taunton services are extended to Exeter.

This already happens.

 

[Caaardiff]

What we're seeing here is the Railway catching up with the Airline industry. Airlines historically had high fares, well paid crews, better service offering. Since low cost airlines came in, it's low paid crews, basic service with add ons, but ultimately what most people want, cheap fares, which is what Lumo offers.
There's also been a shift from First Class flying to a more Premium on board offering.
Expect to see longer trains, with more capacity, and a pile them high setup. If TOC's can get the on board sales and other revenue generators like paid for reserved seats, either in Standard or Premium/First then we'll see the open access operators looking to grow further.
What will be interesting is to see how GBR respond. Take a look at BA trying to keep up with the low cost airlines. It's not gone well.

Given Megabus are no longer an option now I'd imagine there's be quite a demand for cheaper fares between Cardiff and London and Bristol and London

Megabus reductions have mostly been influenced by the introduction of Flixbus services.
If OA's can offer competitive rail fares, not only will it hurt GWR, its will also hurt National Express and Flixbus, as well as create new markets from people that opt not to pay expensive fares or travel by bus.

 

[JonathanH]

Expect to see longer trains, with more capacity, and a pile them high setup.

On what basis should we expect to see longer trains? The evidence so far is shorter ones with more seats crammed in.

If TOC's can get the on board sales and other revenue generators like paid for reserved seats, either in Standard or Premium/First then we'll see the open access operators looking to grow further.

The thing about the railway is that there are only so many paths available for open access, and any paths they gain prevent the primary railway from optimising its own service.

 

[Caaardiff]

On what basis should we expect to see longer trains? The evidence so far is shorter ones with more seats crammed in.

The thing about the railway is that there are only so many paths available for open access, and any paths they gain prevent the primary railway from optimising its own service.

Both of those points give you the answer. Lower fares attract other and create new demand. Longer trains with more seats crammed in because of reduced available paths.
Going back to the Airline comparison, two Airlines will have a set amount of overheads to cover. An Airline with a 180+ seat jet will make more money than a smaller propeller airline with 80 seats, despite having a fuel cost and less crew saving, because the Airline with the jet can offer more seats at a cheaper price to cover all the overheads.

 

[Snow1964]

On what basis should we expect to see longer trains? The evidence so far is shorter ones with more seats crammed in.

On the new proposal to Devon via Exeter, through Bristol and Bath there are lots of 2 and 3 coach trains utilising paths, even XC often runs just 4 coach trains on this section. Would expect new operator to be 5 or more carriages.

The thing about the railway is that there are only so many paths available for open access, and any paths they gain prevent the primary railway from optimising its own service.

Depends on if you define optimising as a high frequency (even if trains are short), or utilising max line capacity (and generally all principle stations to/from South West have platforms of 240-300m long. It's not like the current operator is utilising signalling capacity of train every 5-8 minutes, and operating trains with 600+ seats

 

[JonathanH]

On the new proposal to Devon via Exeter, through Bristol and Bath there are lots of 2 and 3 coach trains utilising paths, even XC often runs just 4 coach trains on this section. Would expect new operator to be 5 or more carriages.

Depends on if you define optimising as a high frequency (even if trains are short), or utilising max line capacity (and generally all principle stations to/from South West have platforms of 240-300m long. It's not like the current operator is utilising signalling capacity of train every 5-8 minutes, and operating trains with 600+ seats

Yes, but it all gets more congested as it gets closer to London and the current operator is, or could, utilise all capacity between London and Reading.

Convention says that this wouldn't be viable with the section between Bath and London, and on that stretch a 5-car train is shorter than the other services.

 

[Towers]

This I don't understand.

It is not GBR's job to 'keeping Open Access in check'. Please check what the ORR's responsibilities are...

Many on this forum seem to look forward to the creation of GBR, but don't understand the implications. In this case the track access and other payments made by (all of) the Open Access operators will accrue to the future GBR and so boost its revenue stream. This will help to cover the costs of those parts of the network where the fare income is low and there are no other sources of income from, say, freight operations.

One would assume that the track access payments total less than the fare revenue from the trains being operated, hence the venture being profitable. So it follows that the greater benefit to the ‘nationalised’ railway would in fact be to simply carry those same passengers on its own services, no?

 

[Ashley Hill]

Running under the Lumo brand,will it be DOO to Paignton?

 

[Zontar]

What's the latest with the London - Stirling service? All gone quiet on that front.