Marston Vale line suspension over - FULL services start running 19/02/24

[zwk500]

That's not true - as you can see on any industrial park when a new company sets up and offers more than the existing companies on there.

People are mobile, they will change job if they can secure more money.

If your statement were true, then every company would be paying minimum wage for everything - and that's not the case.

Companies pay wages to compete in the job market. But like car insurance premiums, you have to leave for somebody else (or threaten to) before they'll give you a pay increase.

Other than partner/employee-owned firms like John Lewis, I've never heard of a major corporation say 'We've been increasing profits for 3 years so we'll raise the salary of all our current employees to match it'. They'll pay their dividends out though.

We are talking about an era when operators would not throw the towel in at the first opportunity and run buses.

So the 1950s? What would the 1980s BR do on a line like this? 1960s/70s BR would have probably just closed the to passengers completely.

 

[A0wen]

Companies pay wages to compete in the job market. But like car insurance premiums, you have to leave for somebody else (or threaten to) before they'll give you a pay increase.

Other than partner/employee-owned firms like John Lewis, I've never heard of a major corporation say 'We've been increasing profits for 3 years so we'll raise the salary of all our current employees to match it'. They'll pay their dividends out though.

Having worked in a number of large companies, you will often see pay increases in years when the results are good. Unlike JL, those companies didn't see the need to virtue signal about it.

 

[43066]

And SNCF's CEO is demanding 100 billion Euros from the French state - something tells me he won't get that either.

Over how long a period?

Aided and abetted by some pretty incompetent unions though.

Aided and abetted how? The unions tried to enter pay negotiations and were stonewalled.

I have no issue with employees having an organisation which is focussed on improving the lot of its members and looking to improve the conditions in which their members work. But most (if not all) the UK unions and most definitely the rail unions have a political agenda against a government they don't agree with politically.

It’s pretty clear that you a. Don’t understand unions and b. Dislike them.

The unions are composed of their members, almost none of whom are remotely aligned with a “political agenda against the government” (at least no more so than many 2019 Tory voters such as myself are!), and neither are they bringing down capitalism. That’s just a trope trotted out by people of a certain political persuasion who dislike unions…

The problem with arguing no change "at the expense of their members" is that basically is blocking any change or improvement - so you had the nonsenses that some diesel trains had to have 2 men in the cab because that's what a steam loco had or the debate about whether the driver or the guard presses the button to close the doors.

But it isn’t blocking any change or improvement. Unions have previously agreed to the removal of second men, and have previously agreed to DOO and all manner of changes. The key thing is ensuring that changes are negotiated rather than imposed.

The unions also don't help their cause by defending the indefensible - not a rail example, but in a previous life I worked for a retailer which had unionised warehouses - this is a direct quote from one of the Ops Managers at one of those sites "most of the guys who join the union don't care about the union's political campaigns. They only join the union to get them out of the **** when they do something stupid".

Oh dear, by “defending the indefensible” do you mean ensuring that employees are given a fair hearing and due process is followed?! I take it you are superhuman and above ever making a mistake at work, or finding yourself on the wrong end of a vexatious accusation.

And retail is an industry known for treating its employees absolutely appallingly. The attitude of this ops manager sounds par for the course...If anyone needs a union it’s people scratching out a living working in warehouses...

Having worked in a number of large companies, you will often see pay increases in years when the results are good. Unlike JL, those companies didn't see the need to virtue signal about it.

Having also worked for a number of large companies, many will pay the absolute minimum they can get away with.

 

[zwk500]

Having worked in a number of large companies, you will often see pay increases in years when the results are good. Unlike JL, those companies didn't see the need to virtue signal about it.

Well I hope you're right as after my year out abroad I've decided to come back and join a private sector consultancy rather than a TOC or NR.

 

[Bogallan]

So the 1950s? What would the 1980s BR do on a line like this? 1960s/70s BR would have probably just closed the to passengers completely.

No, in the 70s, 80s and 90s until privatisation the railway would most certainly have kept the line open and there would be a desire across the network, to keep trains moving, by SLW, Pilotman working to/from an obstruction etc. There was an inherent desire to keep traffic moving. Case in point, around 2019, there was a points failure at Wembley on the up slow in the morning peak. The points had detection in reverse, but this led to the Willesden Relief lines where the Driver was not passed on - I was, however. I made an announcement if there were a competent Driver on board that was passed over the Willesden Relief could they make themselves known. A Virgin Driver whom I knew, came forward and said he would conduct the LNR driver over the Willesden Relief line, the LNR driver readily agreeing too, that was a good idea to get the train moving, My downfall came when I contacted our Control, told them what was about to happen and they told me under no circumstance was I to move the train with the Virgin Conductor. Result:- we waited 65 mins for a MOM to arrive and clip and scotch the points in the “normal” position. Progress, I think not.

 

[zwk500]

No, in the 70s, 80s and 90s until privatisation the railway would most certainly have kept the line open and there would be flexibility, across the network to keep trains moving, by SLW, Pilotman working to from/obstruction etc.

But the line's not obstructed! The problem is there's no suitable stock available for the line.

There was an inherent desire to keep traffic moving. Case in point, around 2019, there was a points failure at Wembley on the up slow in the morning peak. The points had detection in reverse, but this led to the Willesden Relief lines where the Driver was not passed on - I was, however. I made an announcement if there were a competent Driver on board that was passed over the Willesden Relief could they make themselves known. A Virgin Driver whom I knew, came forward and said he would conduct the LNR driver over the Willesden Relief line, the LNR driver readily agreeing too, that was a good idea to get the train moving, My downfall came when I contacted our Control, told them what was about to happen and they told me under no circumstance was I to move the train with the Virgin Conductor. Result:- we waited 65 mins for a MOM to arrive and clip and scotch the points in the “normal” position. Progress, I think not.

That's a very specific (and frustrating) example that's not relevant to this thread though. The issue here isn't cross-company working or anything like that.

The issue is that there's no suitable stock or that efforts to locate suitable stock haven't been successful so far. Given how NR and the TOCs responded to the IET grounding, is it fair to say that the issue preventing other stock that are nearly but not wholly suitable from operating on this line are a result of jobsworths or can't-be-bothered-ness, or that there might be a genuine concern which today's safety regime does not permit?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The issue with the MV line is it is relatively lightly used - upgrading the infrastructure just to support longer units won't make a sensible business case whilst humans walk on this earth. And it has too many stations for the length of the line - having 10 intermediate stops on a 16 mile line. That's the kind of station spacing you find on an inner suburban line into London, not a rural backwater line.

Or you find them on Merseyrail or the Manchester suburban DMU services or the Snow Hill lines, which (if you built a bit more housing) would serve a similar situation but for one massive flaw - it doesn't serve MKC.

As you say though the plan is for EWR to sort that out (other than going to MKC).

 

[Bogallan]

But the line's not obstructed! The problem is there's no suitable stock available for the line.

Yes, you are correct. I was making a general point that these days we shut all lines down and run buses, whereas in former times, perhaps we would have run a train service using SLW and Pilotman working. The default position these days is "run buses" (or nothing at all).

 

[RailWonderer]

Are you speaking as somebody who works in the industry or simply as an armchair expert ?

Many of those who work or have worked in the industry (and full disclosure, I haven't) usually come on here pointing out the practicalities or realities of what needs to be done, only to see those points dismissed as "insignificant" by people who don't know any better.

In my line of work - many people could argue "oh, it's very simple, just do 'x'" - once again, usually from a point of ignorance and not understanding what issues, processes and controls, virtually all of which exist for a very good reason and can't just be circumvented for convenience.

I just said I am not in the industry. I know there are many industry people with knowledge on here, which rightly point out the reality and the difficulties with doing a certain infrastructure upgrade or moving rolling stock around.

With funding and political will no matter the realities, something always gets done if the people at the top want something done, but the forum tends to rule things out too quickly.

 

[DarloRich]

Perhaps because the members of such websites generally (though not all) don't actually understand all the issues ? And therefore what they view as a simple, almost binary problem, genuinely isn't - but they don't understand or refuse to understand that ? See the many posts on putting 379s on GN to cascade 387s, take your pick of the suggested re-openings or even the timetable changes.

If these posters are all so clever, why aren't they working in the rail industry ?....... Answers on a postcard.

I know exactly what the issues are.

I also, unlike many here, actually use ( or now used) the line on a daily basis which gives me a different stance to many posters. We have had a shockingly bad train service for years and basically no service for 4 years. That isn't good enough and I am sick of it.

Since Vivarail went bust I want to know that LNWR have explored every option to deliver us the promised service including asking the DfT hard questions. I want them to explain in detail why waiting until 2024 to deliver a full service is ABSOLUTLY the only option open to them. I don't just want to hear DDA and see a shrug.

There are class 153's parked up that could have been used to offer a train service. Admittedly that would have been a less than perfect service but it would only have been for a short time until better units became available. Speaking hypothetically: Some kind of derogation could have been arranged with DfT and those redundant 153's could have been at Bletchley days/weeks after Vivarail went pop to allow for staff training facilitating a service before autumn 2023/2024 followed by a handover to 150 operation and full DDA compliance within a tightly defined period OR at that point the service goes over to bus operation until such time as the 150's become available.

Instead: Bus. (For at least a year)

IMO DDA seems a useful excuse to do nothing. I accept it may be an insurmountable problem but I just don't believe anyone has really tried to look for a solution.

As an aside it is odd that we cant use 153's to offer a service on the line in the short term because DDA but we can run 230's/150's into a platform with no lift and very poor accessibility!

The issue with the MV line is it is relatively lightly used - upgrading the infrastructure just to support longer units won't make a sensible business case whilst humans walk on this earth. And it has too many stations for the length of the line - having 10 intermediate stops on a 16 mile line. That's the kind of station spacing you find on an inner suburban line into London, not a rural backwater line.

I don't ask for the line to be upgraded. It would be bonkers to do so. I ask for a train service on the line and I ask for it sooner than 2024.

I KNOW it is a rural line that is lightly used (which will be even more lightly used after all this nonsense) and is a massive PITA for all concerned to actually run a service but waiting until 2024 for a full service wouldn't be good enough elsewhere in the country so why is it good enough here? It is like everyone has given up and just don't care enough to try. I shouldn't let it annoy me. I should just shrug and drive to work and never bother with the train again and allow the line to die. It is what everyone seems to want!

As you say though the plan is for EWR to sort that out

My closing down the MV service. Not a solution for us poor saps who use/want to use the line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My closing down the MV service. Not a solution for us poor saps who use/want to use the line.

While the 5-station proposal does involve closing your local station it doesn't involve closing the local service entirely. Indeed, the 5-station proposal involves doubling the local service at the remaining stations from 1 to 2tph. OK, not very helpful if you use Fenny, Bow Brickhill, Aspley Guise or Kempston Hardwick, but the remaining stations get a considerable service upgrade, with the service going from 1 to 4tph at Woburn Sands and Ridgmont. That will no doubt cause significant increases in usage.

(Ridgmont may appear to be in the middle of a field but is well-located for commuters to/from a major and growing warehouse development including Amazon, and Woburn Sands is continuing to grow from a small village to a major suburb of MK; the next major development will basically join it onto MK properly).

 

[DarloRich]

While the 5-station proposal does involve closing your local station

that is the only station i care about. Closing it is unacceptable to me. I cant be convinced otherwise.

 

[Bletchleyite]

that is the only station i care about. Closing it is unacceptable to me. I cant be convinced otherwise.

I think we might differ there, even though I don't agree with EWR on which of the 5 stations should be retained. There was plenty of discussion of that on the EWR threads.

 

[zwk500]

that is the only station i care about. Closing it is unacceptable to me. I cant be convinced otherwise.

There will always be some woh lose out in any project. the 5-station proposal is better for the majority of the passengers between Oxford and Bedford (and eventually Cambridge).

 

[DarloRich]

I think we might differ there, even though I don't agree with EWR on which of the 5 stations should be retained. There was plenty of discussion of that on the EWR threads.

I am being very slightly factious. The issue for me is the current nonsense and the period since covid will be used as the tool to close the line.

 

[43066]

IMO DDA seems a useful excuse to do nothing. I accept it may be an insurmountable problem but I just don't believe anyone has really tried to look for a solution.

What solution really presents itself that isn’t going to involve breaching the applicable legislation, or spending money that isn’t available?

I KNOW it is a rural line that is lightly used (which will be even more lightly used after all this nonsense) and is a massive PITA for all concerned to actually run a service but waiting until 2024 for a full service wouldn't be good enough elsewhere in the country so why is it good enough here?

In that case I expect the government (as cheerled by many on here) would much rather close it altogether. Fingers crossed that doesn’t happen…

 

[zwk500]

I am being very slightly factious. The issue for me is the current nonsense and the period since covid will be used as the tool to close the line.

In that case I expect the government (as cheerled by many on here) would much rather close it altogether. Fingers crossed that doesn’t happen…

It won't close. the debate for EWR is about which form it takes.

 

[DarloRich]

There will always be some woh lose out in any project. the 5-station proposal is better for the majority of the passengers between Oxford and Bedford (and eventually Cambridge).

Indeed. I would prefer that it was someone else.

EDIT: you are trying to use logic to defeat an emotional argument. It wont work. I am interested only in my own view on this even if logic suggests your position is right with regard to he bigger picture. However, for once I am focusing on the needs of the one and not the many! It is quite refreshing actually not even trying to see all sides .

In that case I expect the government (as cheerled by many on here) would much rather close it altogether. Fingers crossed that doesn’t happen…

Which is my main fear.

What solution really presents itself that isn’t going to involve breaching the applicable legislation, or spending money that isn’t available?

use 153's via a derogation. It seems prima facie as the obvious option. I am honest enough to admit it is not that simple but there seems, looking from the outside in, to have been a lack of willingness to try

It won't close. the debate for EWR is about which form it takes.

Sorry: The service I and others rely on will be closed and the line handed over to E-W. I suspect that once that happens the only stations remaining open will be Ridgemont and Woburn Sands.

 

[A0wen]

I know exactly what the issues are.

I also, unlike many here, actually use ( or now used) the line on a daily basis which gives me a different stance to many posters. We have had a shockingly bad train service for years and basically no service for 4 years. That isn't good enough and I am sick of it.

Since Vivarail went bust I want to know that LNWR have explored every option to deliver us the promised service including asking the DfT hard questions. I want them to explain in detail why waiting until 2024 to deliver a full service is ABSOLUTLY the only option open to them. I don't just want to hear DDA and see a shrug.

There are class 153's parked up that could have been used to offer a train service. Admittedly that would have been a less than perfect service but it would only have been for a short time until better units became available. Speaking hypothetically: Some kind of derogation could have been arranged with DfT and those redundant 153's could have been at Bletchley days/weeks after Vivarail went pop to allow for staff training facilitating a service before autumn 2023/2024 followed by a handover to 150 operation and full DDA compliance within a tightly defined period OR at that point the service goes over to bus operation until such time as the 150's become available.

Instead: Bus. (For at least a year)

All well and good - but it's a marginal, rural branch line with penny number usage.

In the scheme of things for 99.99% of rail users it's an utter irrelevance. So you can jump up and down, stamp your feet, get emotional and whatever else you like - you won't get the answers which satisfy you, because no rail operator or government will ever spend money on this in the way you want them to. That's the beauty of a public service - be it transport, health, education or anything else - you and your opinions as an individual don't actually matter and never have.

that is the only station i care about. Closing it is unacceptable to me. I cant be convinced otherwise.

And see above - the reality is a station which is less than a mile from the starting point is inherently inefficient - the fact the line has 10 intermediate stops over a 15 mile distance is simply ridiculous. And it kills any prospect of a vaguely sensible journey time. Compare with the Sudbury branch - 11 miles, 2 intermediate stops, journey time from Sudbury - Marks Tey, 19 minutes. Or the Borderlands line between Bidston and Wrexham - almost double the length of the Marston Vale with a similar number of stations - end to end journey time of under an hour on a line double the length of the MV and the MV was taking about 45 mins.

Sorry: The service I and others rely on will be closed and the line handed over to E-W. I suspect that once that happens the only stations remaining open will be Ridgemont and Woburn Sands.

I'd add Stewartby to that list as well.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sorry: The service I and others rely on will be closed and the line handed over to E-W. I suspect that once that happens the only stations remaining open will be Ridgemont and Woburn Sands.

That is not one of the proposals, and indeed that would be quite negative because major housing developments are planned around e.g. Stewartby.

The two proposals can be found here in considerable detail: https://eastwestrail.co.uk/the-project/bletchley-to-bedford

The 5-station one looks to be the most likely in my book, which leaves Woburn Sands, Ridgmont, Stewartby, Lidlington and Bedford St John's opened, with a few of them relocated slightly. I don't wholly agree with that as I said (I'd close Bedford St John's and keep one other, possibly Bow Brickhill due to the huge warehouse developments going up around it), but I think the principle is sound.

 

[43066]

It won't close. the debate for EWR is about which form it takes.

If it wasn’t for EWR, the Marston Vale would surely be at risk, as a lightly used link between two non-descript dormitory towns, both of which have excellent links to London.

The only other thing that might save it (other than inertia and the bad optics of closing railways) is that there’s a fair bit of housing development in the area, and potential for a lot more.

 

[Bogallan]

If it wasn’t for EWR, the Marston Vale would surely be at risk, as a lightly used link between two non-descript dormitory towns, both of which have excellent links to London.

The only other thing that might save it is that there’s a fair bit of housing development in the area, and potential for a lot more.

I do not consider so. Too much use as a freight route. Remember, 7 years ago the line was to be electrified.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If it wasn’t for EWR, the Marston Vale would surely be at risk, as a lightly used link between two non-descript dormitory towns, both of which have excellent links to London.

The only other thing that might save it is that there’s a fair bit of housing development in the area, and potential for a lot more.

I think there's a chance it may have closed, yes, indeed Beeching wanted to close it but United Counties refused to provide adequate bus replacement (which if it had been provided would no doubt have long gone now). However it does have massive potential as a "Milton Keynes Merseyrail" with developments around each station as MK grows - but that would need it connecting to MKC properly which would be costly, Bletchley isn't a destination (save for the footy), it's an origin.

Think how Bristol (a city that's the size MK will be in maybe 20-30 years) is now starting to realise the potential of the Severn Beach line, when 20 years ago many thought that'd likely close.

I do not consider so. Too much use as a freight route. Remember, 7 years ago the line was to be electrified.

It could still do with it. St Albans must surely have been saved by it, because it's so much simpler to operate if you can just get anything spare out of Kings Heath or Bletchley to shove on it.

 

[DarloRich]

In the scheme of things for 99.99% of rail users it's an utter irrelevance. So you can jump up and down, stamp your feet, get emotional and whatever else you like - you won't get the answers which satisfy you, because no rail operator or government will ever spend money on this in the way you want them to. That's the beauty of a public service - be it transport, health, education or anything else - you and your opinions as an individual don't actually matter and never have.

I am not asking them to spend any money on anything other than the train ( not bus) service they are contracted to deliver and to spend the absolute minimum in doing so and deliver a service before autumn 2024/2024. I am not asking for anything beyond that. i am nit subscribing to any of the silliness about extending platforms or moving signals! If you gave me a free pot of money for one job on the line I would put a bloody lift on P6 at Bletchley!

Whilst my opinions have (rightly) no impact on wider/national rail policy they can have an impact on local policy/choices through pester power. Things to improve journeys for passengers have been changed on the line in the past via that mechanism. Same goes for health, education or anything else. Local PITA power should not be discredited.

EDIT: I note you don't seem to want to enter into any discussion about the hypothetical I suggest. I suspect you feel it is not a practical option but I further suspect you don't know for certain that it is not.

All well and good - but it's a marginal, rural branch line with penny number usage.

Not helped by the nonsense of the last few years!

I'd add Stewartby to that list as well.

Maybe. It could be served by a bus straight to the college though

That is not one of the proposals, and indeed that would be quite negative because major housing developments are planned around

I know what the proposals are. You may be more trusting than me. I see this as an opportunity for machinations.

The only other thing that might save it is that there’s a fair bit of housing development in the area, and potential for a lot more.

That is the big unknown for the medium term. There as plans for some many houses along the Vale.

It could still do with it.

Conjecture: An electrified line would not be facing the stock issues we face with a diesel line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Conjecture: An electrified line would not be facing the stock issues we face with a diesel line.

And during WCML closures you could bustitute the local stations (sorry!) and run as many 8 car shuttles as you can physically signal to get people to the MML.

Diesel islands are nuts, even more so diesel islands that can only be operated using one class of DMU which are all nearly 40 years old and likely not to have more than 10 years left in service if that.

 

[43066]

I do not consider so. Too much use as a freight route. Remember, 7 years ago the line was to be electrified.

Is that still the case these days?

 

[DarloRich]

Is that still the case these days?

• Several times per week empty stone train from Bletchley to Peak Forest ( The loaded train comes over night via Crewe & WCML)
• A car train from Toton to Doland's Moor and back perhaps twice a week ( it runs at stpuid o'clock).
• Sporadic workings by DCR from Burton/Chaddesden to Willesden/Acton ( upto twice a week - one this evening)
• Empty stock trains from Kettering to Northampton
• New units from Bombardier to various points in London.
• A Saturday working from various London points to Tunstead/Barrow Hill by Freightliner ( that doesn't always run)
• OTM often run to and from Bletchley

Not a great deal but paths on the main line need to be found to run them via another route.

 

[Bogallan]

Is that still the case these days?

Not as much as it used to have, but there a regular car flows to the continent and ROG transfer traffic.

 

[43066]

• Several times per week empty stone train from Bletchley to Peak Forest ( The loaded train comes over night via Crewe & WCML)
• A car train from Toton to Doland's Moor and back perhaps twice a week ( it runs at stpuid o'clock).
• Sporadic workings by DCR from Burton/Chaddesden to Willesden/Acton ( upto twice a week - one this evening)
• Empty stock trains from Kettering to Northampto
• New units from Bombardier to various points in London.
• A Saturday working from various London points to Tunstead/Barrow Hill by Freightliner ( that doesn't always run)
• OTM often run to and from Bletchley

Not a great deal but paths on the main line need to be found to run them via another route.

Thanks. Good to hear it’s still a factor.

 

[Bogallan]

Looking at the line as a whole, the service should be able to run like clockwork. We were promised 7 day a week running, however COVID soon pit paid to that and it does not appear to be coming back any time soon. The stations are very well kept, even now, with no rail passengers they are fully maintained and graffiti, litter removed etc 3 times a week by a roving cleaner. CCTV has been installed at all stations this year I believe, whilst almost all stations have an active friends user group which is very pleasing. There is long line announcing with the latest digital displays. Ticket Vending Machines and card readers installed t a cost of about £60,000 per station, so the outlook is promising - if only we were able to secure the trains.