How bad is TfL Rail?

[py_megapixel]

... but I overall as a ToC TfL Rail are pretty incompetent, almost as bad as northern but that's for another thread.

I actually think this is quite an interesting point, and I think it merits discussion as I know in the past that I have had a tendency to subconciously think "shiny new 9 car trains = good service"

However, I spend a lot of time on Northern trains, and in my opinion they're pretty bad. I won't bore you all with yet another detailed explanation of the reasons why, but what it boils down to is outdated rolling stock poorly cared for, and poor reliability.

In any case I decided to create a new thread so as not to clog up the original one, which is about an unconnected topic.

 

[pdeaves]

My subjective view is that TfL Rail gets you there but that's it. No 'extras' like on board toilets or friendly helpful staff. (I know stations have booking offices, etc.; I'm talking more an onboard presence).

 

[357]

I find it more of a PR company. Whilst I am pretty sure the passenger experience is improved since the NXEA/AGA era, there are other issues when you scratch the surface. They spend lots of money on things like sweets to give out during Rail Replacement, when I believe that money would be better spent getting the buses to run on time and be more reliable.

I also feel they rather work against AGA rather than with them. I remember times that there was no TfL service, but AGA was running - TfL publicity and posters didn't even mention that AGA was open and running from Liverpool Street, Stratford, Romford and Shenfield.

Then there are the incidents where the public facing message could be better during disruption such as the attached photo.

 

[Ianno87]

My subjective view is that TfL Rail gets you there but that's it. No 'extras' like on board toilets or friendly helpful staff. (I know stations have booking offices, etc.; I'm talking more an onboard presence).

Would you expect those frills on, say, the Central Line?

TfL Rail's job is to shift people. No more, no less.

 

[matt_world2004]

Better than the Heathrow connect that went before it . That didn't provide a service for months on end due to filling in for the Heathrow express

 

[pdeaves]

Would you expect those frills on, say, the Central Line?

TfL Rail's job is to shift people. No more, no less.

Well, that's where there will be perennial debates. The service that became TfL Rail was run by main line TOCs with the expectation that goes with main line TOCs. TfL Rail (and London Overground) is a main line TOC trying to be an inner city Underground line. I think it needs to be managed slightly differently recognising that. As I say, though, much debate can be had.

 

[Goldfish62]

We need to remember that TfL Rail is a temporary entity. Had Crossrail opened it would have disappeared by now, never to return. It only exists to provide already-existing services pending Crossrail.

 

[357]

Not quite - it's exactly the same company running it but using a different brand name. They already started rebranding to the purple uniforms and signs.

 

[EssexGonzo]

TFL rail is - and will be when the Liz Line is finally, eventually, OMG one day opened - a glorified tube line that ends at/beyond the fringes of London like many other tube lines. It just so happens that the trains are national rail sized running partly on what was national rail tracks. Toilets are available at most stations along the way if one is caught short. And if you do need to hop off for a tinkle, another will be along shortly. Passenger capacity and service logistical convenience was prioritised over what would be sparsely used (for smoking) toilets that would need VERY regular emptying and cleaning.

No-one seems to whinge about Liverpool St to Chesham on the Met line - conceptually, that's a similar service.

The locals (on the East side anyway) love the new trains compared to what went before. They know there are no toilets. It seems to be enthusiasts that raise this all the time. There isn't really much debate to be had on the topic - and what little there is, is entirely philosophical.

 

[matt_world2004]

TFL rail is - and will be when the Liz Line is finally, eventually, OMG one day opened - a glorified tube line that ends at/beyond the fringes of London like many other tube lines. It just so happens that the trains are national rail sized running partly on what was national rail tracks. Toilets are available at most stations along the way if one is caught short. And if you do need to hop off for a tinkle, another will be along shortly. Passenger capacity and service logistical convenience was prioritised over what would be sparsely used (for smoking) toilets that would need VERY regular emptying and cleaning.

No-one seems to whinge about Liverpool St to Chesham on the Met line - conceptually, that's a similar service.

The locals (on the East side anyway) love the new trains compared to what went before. They know there are no toilets. It seems to be enthusiasts that raise this all the time. There isn't really much debate to be had on the topic - and what little there is, is entirely philosophical.

Same in the west the Aircon is a godsend compared to what went before. Hanwell and Acton main lines Sunday service is a huge improvement. And the frequency increases to those stations in the peak is also a huge improvement.

 

[Bald Rick]

To paraphrase Basil Fawlty - what exactly do you expect from a metro rail operator?

 

[Ianno87]

Well, that's where there will be perennial debates. The service that became TfL Rail was run by main line TOCs with the expectation that goes with main line TOCs. TfL Rail (and London Overground) is a main line TOC trying to be an inner city Underground line. I think it needs to be managed slightly differently recognising that. As I say, though, much debate can be had.

I don't recall Class 315s between Liverpool Street and Shenfield ever having toilets or on-train staff? There is no such 'expectation'.

 

[yorkie]

We need to remember that TfL Rail is a temporary entity. Had Crossrail opened it would have disappeared by now, never to return. It only exists to provide already-existing services pending Crossrail.

Are you sure? Doesn't it just get renamed CrossRail? The TOC code is already XR, in anticipation of this.

I don't recall Class 315s between Liverpool Street and Shenfield ever having toilets or on-train staff? There is no such 'expectation'.

Not on that particular route, but facilities have worsened on the route out of Paddington, and possibly some services on the West Anglia route have been downgraded. If they provide good facilities at all stations, then arguably that would make up for it, but I've no idea if that's the case or not.

 

[Wolfie]

To paraphrase Basil Fawlty - what exactly do you expect from a metro rail operator?

I do wonder how many of those expressing criticism of TfLrail live in London and actually use the service. Frankly if out of town enthusiasts don't like it but the users do who cares (l was seriously tempted to be blunter). It's the same rubbish you hear about the seating (and yes, absence of toilets) on London Overground.

 

[357]

Are you sure? Doesn't it just get renamed CrossRail? The TOC code is already XR, in anticipation of this.

Not on that particular route, but facilities have worsened on the route out of Paddington, and possibly some services on the West Anglia route have been downgraded.

Yes. The non-agency staff are employed by MTR Elizabeth Line (previously known as MTR Crossrail).

 

[cactustwirly]

TFL rail is - and will be when the Liz Line is finally, eventually, OMG one day opened - a glorified tube line that ends at/beyond the fringes of London like many other tube lines. It just so happens that the trains are national rail sized running partly on what was national rail tracks. Toilets are available at most stations along the way if one is caught short. And if you do need to hop off for a tinkle, another will be along shortly. Passenger capacity and service logistical convenience was prioritised over what would be sparsely used (for smoking) toilets that would need VERY regular emptying and cleaning.

No-one seems to whinge about Liverpool St to Chesham on the Met line - conceptually, that's a similar service.

The locals (on the East side anyway) love the new trains compared to what went before. They know there are no toilets. It seems to be enthusiasts that raise this all the time. There isn't really much debate to be had on the topic - and what little there is, is entirely philosophical.

You can't do that in the evenings or Sunday afternoons as the toilets are locked when the stations are unstaffed.
The train service is only every half an hour so you'd be waiting 25 minutes for the next train after a trip to the toilet.

 

[EssexGonzo]

You can't do that in the evenings or Sunday afternoons as the toilets are locked when the stations are unstaffed.
The train service is only every half an hour so you'd be waiting 25 minutes for the next train after a trip to the toilet.

Going back to post no.1 and the reason for this thread.....that does not make the TOC incompetent. It just makes the user expectation wholly unrealistic. You can't do that at all on most tube lines - and that's what this is!!

 

[357]

However on TfL Rail the toilets are always open if there are trains running, as the stations are always staffed if there are trains running.

 

[cactustwirly]

Would you expect those frills on, say, the Central Line?

TfL Rail's job is to shift people. No more, no less.

It's not the Central line, people aren't traveling end to end, and it goes significantly further out of London.
TfL Rail fares are the same as Thameslink and SWR outer suburban services, but have none of the facilities.

The trains are quite bad, not all comfortable.

L

However on TfL Rail the toilets are always open if there are trains running, as the stations are always staffed if there are trains running.

This is not the case, a lot of the stations are unstaffed in the evenings and on Sundays

 

[EssexGonzo]

It's not the Central line, people aren't traveling end to end, and it goes significantly further out of London.
TfL Rail fares are the same as Thameslink and SWR outer suburban services, but have none of the facilities.

The trains are quite bad, not all comfortable.

And because people aren't travelling end-to-end, toilets are less of an issue. You're arguing with yourself now. On top of 357's very valid observations that stations are always staffed.

And in part, it IS the Central Line. One objective was to take 30% of passengers out of the core Central Line.

 

[matt_world2004]

It's not the Central line, people aren't traveling end to end, and it goes significantly further out of London.
TfL Rail fares are the same as Thameslink and SWR outer suburban services, but have none of the facilities.

The trains are quite bad, not all comfortable.

L



This is not the case, a lot of the stations are unstaffed in the evenings and on Sundays

I would file a complaint then as the stations have to be staffed from first to last train. I have got off the 3:30am train from Paddington at Hayes and there has been staff there.

Toilets wernt open before 06:00am during the pandemic however they were open during night tube . At Ealing Broadway.

 

[Ianno87]

It's not the Central line, people aren't traveling end to end, and it goes significantly further out of London.
TfL Rail fares are the same as Thameslink and SWR outer suburban services, but have none of the facilities.

The trains are quite bad, not all comfortable.

The vast majority of Crossrail use will be for short journeys. I reckon (using the GWML as an example, given Shenfield services don't have toilets))

-Virtually no passengers from Reading will be on past Ealing Broadway (and if you want a toilet from Reading heading for Central London, non-stop GWR services are available)
-From Twyford/Maidenhead etc the longest 'typical' journeys will be to Stratford/Canary Wharf and no further (fair enough a reasonable distance without toilet, but this will be generally home-to-work type journeys with toilet access before you leave)
-Slough/Heathrow inwards are journey times more akin to a tube line anyway in terms of journey time and will be the dominant %-age of journeys by a country mile

 

[si404]

No-one seems to whinge about Liverpool St to Chesham on the Met line - conceptually, that's a similar service.

And one that takes longer than Liverpool St - Reading will (even with fast trains).

The whingeing in Z9 is far more likely to be about the main line TOC running like a main line TOC with short trains and high prices (out to Aylesbury).

Doesn't it just get renamed CrossRail?

No, because it's not been called "CrossRail" with a capital 'R' this century (or near enough)!

And then there was the "last minute" (OK, there were some signs that needed changing) brand change a good 2 years before it was meant to open (see also the Fleet becoming the Jubilee) to "Elizabeth Line". Now sure, there's a lot of brand bigotry and people who irrationally dare not speak its name and continue to refer to the finished line and the services on it as "Crossrail", which sometimes come across as a bit petty, but is typically fine. But clearly in this instance, as we're talking about specific branding, "Elizabeth Line" is the only correct answer and has been for 4 years now!

It's not the Central line, people aren't traveling end to end

Who travels end-to-end on the Central line?

 

[Goldfish62]

Not quite - it's exactly the same company running it but using a different brand name. They already started rebranding to the purple uniforms and signs.

You're confusing the brand and the operator. The company running it is MTR Crossrail. TfL Rail is just a brand that will disappear. What I'm trying to explain is that TfL Rail is just a temporary entity running existing services. It has nothing fundamentally new to offer and was primarily only meant to cover the legacy services that TfL inherited while Crossrail was being built.

 

[Carlisle]

The service that became TfL Rail was run by main line TOCs with the expectation that goes with main line TOCs.

A mainline TOC is only a 1990s creation to achieve privatisation.. Passenger railways have almost from the outset provided a mix of inner & outer suburban and longer distance routes utilising differing service arrangements tailored appropriately to match

 

[yorkie]

...Now sure, there's a lot of brand bigotry and people who irrationally dare not speak its name and continue to refer to the finished line and the services on it as "Crossrail", which sometimes come across as a bit petty, but is typically fine. But clearly in this instance, as we're talking about specific branding, "Elizabeth Line" is the only correct answer and has been for 4 years now!...

Isn't Elizabeth Line the name of the line and Crossrail going to be the name of the TOC?

 

[JonathanH]

The company running it is MTR Crossrail.

To be pendantic that entity doesn't exist. There are now two companies registered but I think the second one is the one which runs the trains.
MTR Elizabeth Line Limited https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11866994
MTR Corporation (Crossrail) Limited https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08754715

 

[si404]

Isn't Elizabeth Line the name of the line and Crossrail going to be the name of the TOC?

I get your point now. But no.

The "Elizabeth Line" brand is over everything. It would have made more sense if the Elizabeth line (lowercase l like all the other lines) was the line name in a Crossrail mode, run by "Crossrail" TOC (then again, would Network Rail, GWR or Greater Anglia use the line name to refer to services as the standard is the TOC name?)

AFAICS, there will be zero public reference to "Crossrail" other than a couple of legacy references in company names.

 

[cactustwirly]

I would file a complaint then as the stations have to be staffed from first to last train. I have got off the 3:30am train from Paddington at Hayes and there has been staff there.

Toilets wernt open before 06:00am during the pandemic however they were open during night tube . At Ealing Broadway.

That's definitely not the case with Twyford, Maidenhead and Slough

 

[si404]

That's definitely not the case with Twyford, Maidenhead and Slough

They are operated by GWR.