I am amazed of the UK Railway System and how massive the network is

[Greenback]

And that's what killed the U.S. railways. Why spend a day and a half on a train from New York to Houston when you can go by air in a couple of hours.

Exactly right. Rail is very much a niche market across swathes of the US, whereas in the UK it's a realistic option for many journeys, due to population density, shorter distances, and crowded roads.

 

[MK Tom]

Forgive me for not having read 4 pages of discussion, but is the original poster aware of the Go Brightline project in Florida? It's the one state where rail looks like it could be on the brink of a serious comeback.

 

[Greenback]

I think that a passenger service between Santa Fe and Albuquerque was also reinstated at some point in the recent past? These tend to be local initiatives, though.

From a US perspective I can understand why the UK rail network looks wonderful. Perhaps experiencing the 1915 from Paddington on a Friday night, or a Pacer in the north west might change that perspective a little!

 

[glbotu]

Exactly right. Rail is very much a niche market across swathes of the US, whereas in the UK it's a realistic option for many journeys, due to population density, shorter distances, and crowded roads.

I think the more relevant issue in the US is that rail is never seen as part of the solution, except in Mega-Cities and areas known for their green credentials. California HSR has been through the works and is now finally getting built, but prior to that San Francisco to Los Angeles was car or flight only and California is one of the greenest states (despite the never-ending traffic jam that is Los Angeles). The distance between the two cities is 383 miles, less than London - Edinburgh and in the UK and much of Europe, a rail line between a metropolitan area of 13 million people and another of 4 million people is a no brainer.

No-one's realistically suggesting that people take the train from New York to Los Angeles, but for the smaller "intermediate distance" journeys, there's a case to be made for rail usage that isn't being made (with the notable exception of the North East Corridor).

Looking at the top 5 US cities by population* and their respective rail networks (I'm ignoring the Amtrak 1-2 tpd services as effectively useless at providing a service, they're basically railtours):

New York

Significant metro network (NY Subway and PATH), but realistically only served by 3 commuter railway lines (Metro-North, LIRR and NJ Transit) and one intercity mainline (NEC). While I appreciate that Metro-North, LIRR and NJ Transit have branches, that's also the same for the 12 or so lines into London. (GW, Chiltern, WC, Midland, GN, WA, GE, LTS, SE, Chatham, LBSC, SW). Especially when you consider distances.

Los Angeles

Metro Rail is about the size of Manchester Metrolink and Metro-Link (the LA commuter rail) has about 5 lines in total. There are no significant intercity services.

Chicago

Metra and the L are a decent sized commuter network and metro system. Similar to New York, relative to the size of the Metropolitan area. Chicago, being Amtrak's "hub" is probably the only place with a non-trivial amount of intercity rail outside of the North-East Corridor. The interesting thing is that there were plans to create a "Chicago Hub Network" of High Speed Rail since 1991 (the latest an SNCF proposal in 2009), which have since been shelved, because politician decided that returning money to the federal reserve was more important.

Houston

METRORail is a Tram system, otherwise, the Sunset Limited was the only rail in the Houston area. This has been suspended since Hurricane Katrina. There's a proposal for a high-speed-rail link to Dallas.

Philadelphia

SEPTA has a decent commuter railway service, a 2 line metro system and a "Trolley" system about the size of Rome's, Philadelphia is also on the NEC.

The thing is, it's not like there aren't journey opportunities there, either to other nearby major cities, or within the cities themselves. There's just a sense in the US (and you certainly get this talking to people), that public transport is what you take if you absolutely have to, not because it's ever the best option. The reason New York has an actually decent rail network is because it's basically impossible to drive into New York in the morning peak or out again in the evening. Even things like the LIRR and Metro-North have awful off-peak services, because it's expected people will just drive instead. Just look at Houston, the 4th biggest US city by population, has practically no public transport at all.

*Yes, I'm aware the metropolitan area is probably a better indicator, but it's too late now, the results come out similar..........

 

[Greenback]

I realise that I've contributed to the thread going a bit off topic, but discussions about the US system should really be in the International Transport section.

Please can we all try and keep the debate here more focused on the UK from now on? Thanks.

 

[philabos]

I think that a passenger service between Santa Fe and Albuquerque was also reinstated at some point in the recent past? These tend to be local initiatives, though.

From a US perspective I can understand why the UK rail network looks wonderful. Perhaps experiencing the 1915 from Paddington on a Friday night, or a Pacer in the north west might change that perspective a little!

As an American, have to agree with the OP.
Having crossed the pond many times, I stand in awe of the quality and frequency of the UK rail services. I assure you by comparison the 1915 from Paddington looks far better than a train that cannot even leave the station due to a failed loco just out of the yard, or in most cases just no train at all.
I have read many times of the Pacer, and a stranger might think they are ubiquitous in the UK. In my travels from London on the WCML, ECML. GWR over the years I wonder if I have actually seen one. I know for certain I have never had the experience of riding a Pacer.
A poster on another topic some time ago made the statement that Penn Station New York makes the old Birmingham New Street look positively palatial. I think that about sums up the general comparison between the UK and US passenger networks. Many reasons for that have already been stated, simple geography not least among them. Freight would be an entirely different matter in which geography also plays a major role.
Having been to the UK many times, and met people from the UK around the world, I cannot remember anyone having a nice thing to say about the railways.

 

[Morgsie]

I don't know the current status but High Speed Rail like the UK and other countries is being built in America, from what I gather currently in California. High Speed Rail is one feature of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

I am aware that some states like the OP's state of Florida were included originally but rejected later on.

 

[al78]

Having been to the UK many times, and met people from the UK around the world, I cannot remember anyone having a nice thing to say about the railways.

There is a difference in perception between using a system infrequently as a visitor, and having to use it on a near daily basis for getting too and from work. In the latter case, you experience the full spectrum of good, the bad and the ugly, whereas in the former case, you will likely experience the practical useability of the system, where time is not so important, but not experience what it is like when it goes tits up at the time you HAVE to get to an important commitment.

 

[nuneatonmark]

I think it's fair to say that both New York and London have two of the most iconic and beautiful railway stations in the world in Grand Central terminal and St Pancras. it's a shame that only the latter has the types of services fitting to it's grandeur. It's not just Americans that are truly amazed by the co-existence of the cutting edge modern and the amazing architecture that appear to effortlessly compliment each other at St Pancras.

 

[Brystar35]

I am aware of the Go Brightline project and that its going to have four stations three in South Florida Miami, ft lauderdale, West Palm Beach and one in Central Florida in Orlando. Also the good thing about this project is that its going to be privately built for the most part with a few loans from the government

But yeah we were supposed to have High Speed Rail by now but our governor at the time decided it was alot of money for Tampa to Orlando and that it was paid by the government so it was shelved but at least it went to other states like California and such.

Anyways what also amazes me of the UK Railway System is that most of the Railways lines are able to go 125 mph for the most part while here in the USA outside of the Northeast corridor we are able to go is around 90 MPH, but the rule is that 79 MPH is the normal speed to travel and the highest usually.

Also i am impressed with HS1 as it looks pretty awesome that the UK has a High Speed system and from the documentaries i saw it was a very challenging project, i am sure HS2 will be challenging project as well, but its going to be very exciting to see it happen.

Also i heard of a Tram-Train operation going to happen in Northern England which this could mean Raillines can be reinstalled in places where Rail travel is very lightly traveled.

 

[Greenback]

There is a difference in perception between using a system infrequently as a visitor, and having to use it on a near daily basis for getting too and from work. In the latter case, you experience the full spectrum of good, the bad and the ugly, whereas in the former case, you will likely experience the practical useability of the system, where time is not so important, but not experience what it is like when it goes tits up at the time you HAVE to get to an important commitment.

That's what I was getting at. Someone visiting the UK from a country which is less rail orientated (not just the US) is going to view things differently to someone who has to use the 1915 ex Paddington regularly, or who is used to being crammed into a two carriage train in Manchester during rush hour.

That doesn't make either perspective right, or more valid than the other, it just makes for an interesting comparison.

 

[physics34]

Hello everybody i had a username that was brylove7 so i came up with a new one called Brystar35 anyways nice to meet yall!!!!!!

Anyways i live in the United States in the state of Florida and we don't have alot of Railways here, the major ones here in Florida is Amtrak and Tri-Rail where i live in South Florida, while there is also Freight with CSX and Florida East Coast Railway.

I want to say that i am amazed on how massive the UK Railway system is and how very important it is and its being invested in it alot with the Modernization and Electrification of major Main Lines like the Great Western Main Line, Midland Main Line, etc.

It is amazing that someone can travel across the country so easily, lets say from London to Glasgow takes 3 to 4 hours thats amazing thats the same kind of trip from Miami to Orlando, plus i am amazed the British Trains can regularly go over 100 mph with most of the Mainlines and a bit more, while the high speed Railways we have is the Acela Express which is in the Northeast and regularly it hits 90-100 mph but it goes high speed for 15 miles only about 150 mph, and outside of the Northeast the highest is around 90-110 mph but in small segments.

It just makes me amazed on how the Government sees the Railways as very important in the UK, here in the USA poor Amtrak is being constantly attacked by the politcs here and it sucks but Amtrak tries its best to work with what they have and they do a great job.

I don't know if this was the right thread for it, but its just i find it amazing lets say i am a fan of Britain Railway history and Aerospace, and i am an American, i hope i get to travel to the UK one day and get to travel to many places in the UK like Micheal Portillo does in the Great British Railway Journeys show.

i can see why the railways are not quite the flavour of the month in the US (or flavor!).

Ive just come back from Las Vegas and San francisco, and did a return internal flights between these two cities..... on virgin america.....

...and can i say what a breeze it was... courtious, clean, friendly and quick.

There is no doubt that this form of travelling across america is highly efficient awhere as railways are expensive to maintain and slower.

For short to mid journeys you americans are in love with the motor car and i can see why as fuel is so cheap and many roads are nice to drive on.

The railways are certainly not the way forward in the US in my opinion. Local commuter lines around the cities yes but that is all.

Over here we should have a better air network for longer distance travel ie London to Glasgow.

 

[Ploughman]

Welcome! And you should have seen the rail network before Beeching. There's a great atlas here showing the extent of the rail network:

http://www.geowiki.com/New_Adlestrop_Railway_Atlas.pdf

t.

Ian

If you do look at this map, just remember that it is an unfinished project by the author and that the North of the country does actually have a rail system sadly missing off the plot.

 

[JaJaWa]

The USA, like GB, suffered decades of under-investment in railway infrastructure and, as various people have pointed out, being an exponentially bigger country it will/would take so much longer to make significant improvements, even if the will and the resources were there.

China's done it in 9 years!

 

[yorksrob]

Also i heard of a Tram-Train operation going to happen in Northern England which this could mean Raillines can be reinstalled in places where Rail travel is very lightly traveled.

I would hope so.

There's some fear that this will be used as a cheapo way to 'refurbish' existing routes, rather than opening up new areas to rail.

 

[philabos]

There is a difference in perception between using a system infrequently as a visitor, and having to use it on a near daily basis for getting too and from work. In the latter case, you experience the full spectrum of good, the bad and the ugly, whereas in the former case, you will likely experience the practical useability of the system, where time is not so important, but not experience what it is like when it goes tits up at the time you HAVE to get to an important commitment.

True enough. A few week sample every 2 years or so does not tell the tale.
That said, my UK rail experience started with the Torbay Express behind a class 50 in 1980s. Most recently on the Euston Glasgow Virgin service with which I was quite impressed. Also,the SWT service between Windsor and Waterloo, slow but reliable. I do not ever recall being on a late service, but that is the luck of the draw.
I believe UK railways OTP is around 90%. Here, the airlines and Amtrak hang around the 75% mark. That would indicate you have a far better chance on the UK system of making that important commitment.

 

[Brystar35]

I am curious about something though? I hear that London is going to have a new London Suburban metro network that will get the inner London routes to a huge umbrella company like London Overground?

I am wondering if they will get Thameslink, Southern and Southeastern to join if it will be just Routes that will be inside London or routes that go further out.

like lets say to Ashford International there will be a London Overground service there then the current Southeastern?

I am trying to say is it going to be just inner London routes or routes that are further out will be a part of the new London Overground suburban network?

 

[yorksrob]

I am curious about something though? I hear that London is going to have a new London Suburban metro network that will get the inner London routes to a huge umbrella company like London Overground?

I am wondering if they will get Thameslink, Southern and Southeastern to join if it will be just Routes that will be inside London or routes that go further out.

like lets say to Ashford International there will be a London Overground service there then the current Southeastern?

I am trying to say is it going to be just inner London routes or routes that are further out will be a part of the new London Overground suburban network?

It will be the suburban routes, which typically extend to towns such as Dartford, which are just outside London, but not longer distance services to the coast.

 

[Brystar35]

Ok so Southeastern, Southern, Southwestern and such will still continue just that those stations within Greater London will be taking over by TFL, but the rest that is outside of Greater London and beyond will still have the Franchises going on.

I like that there will be more of an umbrella of services but at the same time isn't it a bit confusing for someone that is living in Britain or an Foreigner?

 

[The Ham]

Ok so Southeastern, Southern, Southwestern and such will still continue just that those stations within Greater London will be taking over by TFL, but the rest that is outside of Greater London and beyond will still have the Franchises going on.

I like that there will be more of an umbrella of services but at the same time isn't it a bit confusing for someone that is living in Britain or an Foreigner?

It will be the minor stations and metro services within the Greater London area. Given these on some networks (such as Southwestern) almost run as separate operations to the longer distance services (different depots, rolling stock, etc.) then it is unlikely that many people will be too confused.

 

[Brystar35]

Oh phew I was worried that Southwestern, Southern, Southeastern, C2C, London Midland, Chiltern Railways all these companies were going to lose Rail service to TFL? and that these companies would disappear.

But I am glad its still being retained because I really like the Franchise idea to me it makes sense, its kind of like the Airline industry of what we have here in the United States in which there is American, Delta, United the big 3 airlines among the low cost airlines like Southwest Airlines, JetBlue, WestJet, Alaskan Airlines among the North American Companies where I am at, mind you that our airports infrastructure are managed by Government and private bodies and companies like the Port Authority, Los Angeles world airports, the Federal Aviation Administration, ICAO, IATA, etc.

So what is similar to the airlines is also on British Railway network where there are Franchises and government bodies managing the industry.

 

[Abpj17]

The UK network doesn’t feel that amazing for commuters It is much better for leisure travel and first class long journeys too.

There are a few pockets of the UK where train works for local travel too (someone mentioned under 2 miles). Luton somehow has three stations - one central, one to the south for the airport and one to the north in the suburbs. It’s about 6 miles covering all three. There is quite a bit of commuter travel from the north to the airport (workers), likewise for kids living to the north, the service is faster, cheaper, more frequent than the bus service for getting into the town centre.

physics34 - there isn’t the runway capacity of course for many more flights out of the major london airports. I assume regional airports do have more capacity.

The franchise idea doesn’t feel like it makes much sense tho! It’s not the same as the airline industry. US airlines compete for the same journeys e.g. you might get 3 or more companies flying from City A to City B. So each time your travel, you can choose a different provider. (Although there is some overlap with rail e.g. landing slots at airports acts as a constraint)

There are almost no competing routes in the UK, where there are it’s usually a choice between a very fast, more expensive train vs. a slower, cheaper train. They don’t really compete much for individual journeys. They do compete once every several years to win the franchise in the first place.

 

[sprinterguy]

The UK network doesn’t feel that amazing for commuters

Speak for yourself, it's pretty good on Birmingham's Snow Hill lines. I wouldn't say "amazing", but then again I don't subscribe to the idea that I should "arrive awesome", either.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But I am glad its still being retained because I really like the Franchise idea to me it makes sense,

It makes little sense to me. I'm not averse to the idea of a privatised railway (although I would appreciate it if it was recognised that the railways as a whole are a socially necessary service), but the convoluted hotch-potch that we've ended up is far from ideal.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It seems to me that the UK (or Britain, rather, as Northern Ireland of course still has a publicly owned public transport network!) was essentially a guinea pig for our particular mode of "liberalisation" of the railway - most other European countries have chosen a different route and for the most part have fared better. I'm pro-EU membership in principle but the enforced liberalisation of the railways is a symptom of the neo-liberal agenda that still holds sway in Brussels. Even the US, the birthplace of neoliberalism, has refrained from privatising strategic industries such as the postal service and (for all its many and varied problems) Amtrak.

 

[LexyBoy]

Exactly who operates the trains doesn't really make much difference to passengers - you can buy a ticket from any station to any other station from anyone, and it will be the same ticket, same price. Except in a very few cases, tickets allow you to travel on any operator's services so you'll simply take the first/fastest train without much regard to who runs it.

Whilst franchisees do have some freedoms in operating services, most aspects of the passenger's experience are either controlled on a railway-wide level, or down to historical aspects of the route (e.g. rolling stock, reliability of signalling etc).

London Overground is essentially an operator like any other - just branded as part of TfL's services, and managed on a concession rather than franchise basis (i.e. TfL retains operational control).

 

[al78]

The UK network doesn’t feel that amazing for commuters It is much better for leisure travel and first class long journeys too.

I agree. It is good for journeys where there is flexibility in the arrival time, or where you have allowed good padding in the journey time. It is not so good if you need to be somewhere quickly. I find traveling by train to visit family is more pleasant than when I used to drive, but local journeys can be unpleasant. For example yesterday I left UCL in London at around 5:30pm and eventually made it to Horsham around 8pm, thanks to me getting the stopping train, signaling problems near Croydon, losing more time throughout the journey, stopped outside Gatwick, probably waiting for a platform and finally, stopped outside Horsham waiting for a platform. If I'd had just continued cycling south beyond Victoria and continued until I got home I doubt I would have been much later.

 

[Mikey C]

Hello Brystar!

My impression is that whereas in the UK (and mainland Europe) we have a rail system designed for passengers first and freight second, in the US it's the other way around! In your country the freight operators own and control the track, and hence Amtrak is a poor relation on the long distance routes, often delayed by enormous freight trains.

I took the California Zephyr from Chicago to SF last summer, a really interesting journey for a holiday maker, but not a mode of transport for every day use. A once daily train restricts the usefulness, especially if your stop is in the middle of the night!

It's only on the East coast of the US where the cities are relatively close together, that it's economic to have more regular trains, and the rail network gets better passenger usage

 

[urbophile]

Merseyrail gets good reviews and is consistently near the top of the punctuality league. It is usually a pleasant experience even in the rush hours. But it does operate more or less as a self-contained metro network and the franchise arrangement is comparable to London Overground rather than any of the other franchises. When it finally gets the promised new trains it should be even better.

 

[clc]

I do love our network though. Despite being such a small country, it can take forever to cover! I heartily recommend a day in London or Glasgow; two of the greatest suburban railway systems in my humble opinion.

The elevated sections of the Cathcart Circle have nice urban/suburban views I always think.

 

[70014IronDuke]

It seems to me that the UK (or Britain, rather, as Northern Ireland of course still has a publicly owned public transport network!) was essentially a guinea pig for our particular mode of "liberalisation" of the railway - most other European countries have chosen a different route and for the most part have fared better. I'm pro-EU membership in principle but the enforced liberalisation of the railways is a symptom of the neo-liberal agenda that still holds sway in Brussels. Even the US, the birthplace of neoliberalism, has refrained from privatising strategic industries such as the postal service and (for all its many and varied problems) Amtrak.

Interesting - but your post appears to me to both confusing and flawed. (A bit unusually for 61653 HTAFC, who I very often agree with.)

First of all, my impression was that what you call "the enforced liberalisation of the railways is a symptom of the neo-liberal agenda that still holds sway in Brussels" was actually the British effect on Brussels. The powers in Brussels realised that there were awfully inefficient, vertically integrated systems in many EU countries, were costs hidden due to cross-subsidies (and some industries thus unfairly subsidised) and that the Brits had actually begun to tackle this issue, eg via unbundling the electricity and gas companies set up in the socialism-will-win era of the 1950s - 1970s.

Second, when it comes to railways, you yourself say that the rest of Europe interpreted the EU directives in a different way from the Brits. So, if a neo-liberalism still holds sway in Brussels, it doesn't matter a hoot, as the rest of Europe ignores it anyway.

Brussels did not force the system adopted - rightly or wrongly - by the British government of the time on the British public, that's for sure.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

China's done it in 9 years!

Sure, and doesn't it just prove how wonderful China is?

Just tough luck on anyone who has a house in the way of a new rail or road route - unless they have friends in high party places.

Oh, to live in a go-go country where they execute criminals according to the orders for body organs.

Yeah, China is just awesome.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The UK network doesn’t feel that amazing for commuters :

I dare say the OP realises that. But that's a large part of his point - such commuters need to stand back and try to see things afresh.