LNER traction problems

[50039]

I understand the business side of it - sure, LNER have given up the leases on the HSTs etc and can’t just use them - what surprises me is how close to the bone they have cut it - giving up the leases without evidence from Hitachi that the replacements are ready. Assuming Hitachi are late delivering the Azumas, then I would imagine there will be some form of Liquidated Damages claim pending - if rail is a business model as described, I’d be shocked if LNER had no grounds for a claim against Hitachi.
So if there is a claim, then that should cover the cost of short term hire of replacement stock. But it’s unlikely to be HSTs as far as I can see - having publicly retired them, it would be bad PR all round to be forced to get them back in use again...
More 91 services would be less visible to the public/media...

 

[HSTEd]

It was John Major not Thatcher who privatised the railway.

Not sure Major really got to have his own ism though.....

 

[Deepgreen]

This is the glory of Thatcherism.

This is the sort of thing that happens when you start running a railway using the model we use in the UK.

Exactly so! The imposition of an artificial and horribly complex contractual framework on what should be a single network entity was always doomed to frequent and prolonged failures.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Your comfort is less important than the cost of providing that comfort.

Yes. The franchise agreements (or whatever follows on) need to include penalties for short forming and cancellations at a level that incentivises the TOC and ROSCO. Of course that will make the whole operation a little bit more expensive so either through fares or taxes we need to pay that little bit more. Or we can go on as we are.

 

[DanNCL]

More cancellations today and tomorrow thanks to the Azuma shortage.