Mersey & Gtr Manchester calls for Arriva to lose Northern franchise

Discussion in 'UK Railway Discussion' started by LeeLivery, 29 May 2019.

  1. option

    option Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    1 Aug 2017
    If you mean the CLC lines, then they are within the Liverpool/Manchester metro area anyway.

    Or do you mean some services would cross the boundary & so not have an obvious operator?
    WMTrains services go beyond the TfWM/Centro area, & that works.
     
  2. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    39,757
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Oh, you're suggesting a single operator for both? I can't see the two Mayors finding that acceptable; they will want their own piece of the pie.
     
  3. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    39,757
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    "wmtrains" is a traditional franchised operation with two brands, though - a bit more like Northern though not quite as big.

    Talking of Northern, with TPE removed perhaps the RRNW/RRNE split should come back. We didn't have the War of the Roses for nothing!
     
  4. JohnB57

    JohnB57 Member

    Messages:
    675
    Joined:
    26 Jun 2008
    Location:
    Holmfirth, West Yorkshire
    It has a railway station?
     
  5. Gareth

    Gareth Member

    Messages:
    642
    Joined:
    10 Mar 2011
    Location:
    Liverpool
    I'd prefer a large West Coast franchise with Virgin, WMT, North West half of Northern and the TPE North West Routes.

    North West would have its own identity like WMT, with input from the local authorities in the area.
     
  6. option

    option Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    1 Aug 2017
    I meant the actual West Midlands Railway part, that brand & set of services go beyond the TfWM borders
    Or Merseyrail that make it outside of Liverpool, to Chester.


    They could have a big say in a bigger pie...
     
  7. Andyh82

    Andyh82 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,403
    Joined:
    19 May 2014
    The Northern franchise is too big

    Most of the other TOCs have a clear focus

    London TOCs mainly focus on travel in and out of London

    West Midlands Trains has Birmingham as it’s main focus

    East Midlands Trains has Nottingham/Derby as it’s main focus, TfW mainly has South Wales, GWR regional has Bristol

    Northern has Leeds, Sheffield, Manchester, Liverpool and Newcastle all competiting to be their major focus, they have to deal with 5 PTEs, umpteen city mayors, rural, urban, you name it.

    Northern is like if they merged SWR, Southern and South Eastern into one operator, far too big to deal with.

    They should split it down the middle again, with the detached North East services separated out as a third part, either on its own, or if LNER gained local services with Great Northern, they could gain North East locals as well.
     
  8. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    39,757
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Much as I have relatively little time for FirstGroup, the fully integrated "everything out of that London terminus and everything related to it" approach used on GWR does appear to really work quite well, to the extent that anything FirstGroup does works. That said, GWR doesn't have anything like the city networks you have in the North West.

    I do wonder if TfGM/Merseytravel should take on the more self-contained lines themselves - for instance, the Hadfields and Marples could be operated as Metrolink even if they were 25kV EMUs or DMUs, and similarly Liverpool-Wigan-Preston, Ormskirk-Preston and a Kirkby-Wigan shuttle as Merseyrail, and perhaps the two ends of the CLC similarly. Then that leaves the rest a bit more like what GWR has - a combination of InterCity and connecting regional and regional expresses.
     
  9. muz379

    muz379 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,720
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2014
    Not sure there is the capacity at Leeds ,Man Vic or Preston for attaching and dividing trains in the fashion expected . Especially at Vic with through platform space already at a premium one slight delay to one portion of the train could have a huge knock on effect .
    I do think that the "Northern Connect" branded Leeds to Chester should be run via Dewsbury calling limited stops , then have the stopper that already does the Leeds-Southport . Replacing the lost via Halifax train with a Rochdale to Bradford Interchange all stops making use of the east facing bay at Rochdale at peak times it could be extended into and out of Leeds .

    To be fair it is the location with 4 west facing bays in the Manchester area to turn back for routes that way , the other places being Oxford road , Stalybridge and Stockport so is ideal for turning services back without messing about shunting at Piccadilly , and there is a train crew depot there for TPE so I dont think we will be seeing any going back on the number of services to the airport .Of course out of the airports you just mentioned Manchester is also the one with the biggest list of destinations and thus passenger numbers , it is the only one with two runways and multiple terminals so it should be obvious why out of all the airports in the region it is the main airport destination .


    Im not sure this would make a whole heap of difference , even if you deal with a body like transport for the North all councils have representatives in that body so there will still be competing interests .
     
  10. option

    option Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    1 Aug 2017
    That's not how things are going, & nor should they. That was the old, & partly current, system, & it simply doesn't work.
    The combined authorities are growing in number, & powers.
    Which council would take on Metrolink, or Merseyrail, or Metro?

    An entire 'Northern' operation is not localised enough to get investment from local transport bodies, nor is it big enough to do an NSE (930 stations, control over infrastructure, more geographically dense network, more similarity between services, likely profitable)
     
  11. 158756

    158756 Member

    Messages:
    723
    Joined:
    12 Aug 2014
    Reducing from 5 to 4tph wouldn't help, and they can't be at even intervals anyway because of all the branches and stopping patterns. 5tph to 2tph with the same number of carriages in total would instantly solve overcrowding because demand would collapse.

    You can't just add extra trains to the Dewsbury route without reducing the TPE service, and going that way doesn't necessarily make that much sense - however you route it the fastest way from Leeds to Manchester will always be TPE, and you lose the passengers from Bradford and Halifax.

    Why a Rochdale to Bradford stopper? Missing out the two biggest destinations on the route. At the western end especially it would be pointless.
     
  12. Glenn1969

    Glenn1969 Member

    Messages:
    473
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2019
    Will the planned Transpennine quadrupling Huddersfield to Thornhill Junction allow Northern to introduce extra services? I know Brighouse area passengers would like a faster service to Leeds and the Northern TSR includes a new Calder Valley Liverpool service.
     
  13. Andrew32

    Andrew32 Member

    Messages:
    492
    Joined:
    18 Jul 2013
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/northern-rail-operator-faces-end-of-the-line-cqggh9vsd


    Northern rail operator faces end of the line
     
    Last edited by a moderator: 2 Jun 2019
  14. Djgr

    Djgr Member

    Messages:
    57
    Joined:
    30 Jul 2018
    Interesting to read in today's press about government plans to take Northern's franchise away.

    Clearly not everyone is as positive about the TOC as the contributors to this thread.
     
  15. Glenn1969

    Glenn1969 Member

    Messages:
    473
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2019
    I haven't seen or heard anything saying that and can't find anything online even on Google search
     
  16. Djgr

    Djgr Member

    Messages:
    57
    Joined:
    30 Jul 2018
    There's a thread on here- starts "End of the line for Northern"!
     
  17. Glenn1969

    Glenn1969 Member

    Messages:
    473
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2019
    I don't see it happening and the DfT responded to the Metro mayors' letter categorically denying there was any prospect of the franchise being revoked. That may well be because the DfT has no interest in the North when push comes to shove
     
  18. northernchris

    northernchris Member

    Messages:
    763
    Joined:
    24 Jul 2011
    Not really surprising given Arriva have tried to renegotiate the terms and not all of the factors are within their control. However, Northern is a complex franchise and I'm not convinced renationalising will see any improvements
     
  19. quantinghome

    quantinghome Member

    Messages:
    684
    Joined:
    1 Jun 2013
    Replacement with a concession let by transport for the north would be a sensible solution, with city region transport authorities given a signficant role.
     
  20. Meerkat

    Meerkat Member

    Messages:
    823
    Joined:
    14 Jul 2018
    Surely it would need splitting up before devolution?

    Still convinced TfN is a divide and conquer by the DfT/Treasury - force northern authorities into a structure almost certain to set them at each other’s throats.
     
  21. Andyh82

    Andyh82 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,403
    Joined:
    19 May 2014
    Is there any more to this than the story a few days ago that the Liverpool and Manchester mayors wanted this to happen?
     
  22. Andyh82

    Andyh82 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,403
    Joined:
    19 May 2014
    If it was nationalised what realistically could happen in the short or even medium term? All the issues people have with Northern would still exist.
     
  23. squizzler

    squizzler Member

    Messages:
    800
    Joined:
    4 Jan 2017
    It seems churlish not to allow them at least the honour of introducing their new rolling stock, as with VTEC and its Azumas (although the latter was a DfT project at least.)
     
  24. yorkie

    yorkie Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    42,195
    Joined:
    6 Jun 2005
    Location:
    Yorkshire
  25. 158756

    158756 Member

    Messages:
    723
    Joined:
    12 Aug 2014
    The new trains are late and contributing to the problems. That is Arriva's fault - they should have managed the contract better and had an alternative ready to go if they knew there was a risk of late delivery.
     
  26. ainsworth74

    ainsworth74 Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    19,943
    Joined:
    16 Nov 2009
    Location:
    Redcar
    How could they have managed the contract better and what alternative do should they have utilised?
     
  27. 158756

    158756 Member

    Messages:
    723
    Joined:
    12 Aug 2014
    CAF should have been better incentivised for prompt delivery, and the trains should have arrived ready to use, not with design errors preventing them entering service. I don't know any obviously available alternatives - Arriva are the ones taking hundreds of millions of pounds for presiding over this mess, they should have found one, poached some stock from elsewhere, funded the 319 conversion, something. If they bring no additional expertise to the table there's no reason not to nationalise it.
     
  28. Glenn1969

    Glenn1969 Member

    Messages:
    473
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2019
    Yes but isn't some of the reason for the late introduction of the trains down to NR's bungling of the NW electrification? Arriva and CAF can't be blamed for that. As a Northerner I think nationalisation would take us back decades due to Governments being unwilling to invest in the North
     
  29. Bertie the bus

    Bertie the bus Established Member

    Messages:
    1,179
    Joined:
    15 Aug 2014
    Absolutely not, no. There is going to have to be a bit of a rejigging of 3 and 4 car 331 diagrams due to the Airedale platform lengthenings happening later than planned but Network Rail are in no way responsible for these units not yet being in service.
     
  30. DarloRich

    DarloRich Veteran Member

    Messages:
    21,398
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2010
    Location:
    Work - Fenny Stratford(MK) Home - Darlington
    It is almost as if posters here think contracts are a new idea! I bet the contract has all kinds of damages for late delivery built in. You can enforce them all you like. It wont get your train delivered any sooner which is the big issue here!
     

Share This Page