Open access debate - Christian Wolmar, Ian Yeowart and Jonathan Tyler

[Oscar]

Christian Wolmar, Ian Yeowart and Jonathan Tyler discuss open access:

http://www.passengertransportnetworks.co.uk/Open Access debate.pdf

The article titles (it's a PDF so I can't copy the text here):

- ECML timetable will obstruct a model service
- Open access operators provide healthy competition
- Open access plans fail to consider wider public interest
- Don't be fooled by the hype: open access train operators are nothing but trouble

I think we need to thoroughly evaluate the different options and their implications and make an make an informed choice.

 

[nuneatonmark]

We're all for Open Access operators on the West Coast. Well overdue to balance the bias against certain stations like Nuneaton from Virgin. I can't see why Alliance can't have the same impact as other operators on the East Coast such as Hull Trains and Grand Central have had in giving stations screwed by the incumbent a decent service. Also East Coast doesn't appear to have been impacted much so can't see why the same cannot happen on the West Coast.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

We're all for Open Access operators on the West Coast. Well overdue to balance the bias against certain stations like Nuneaton from Virgin. I can't see why Alliance can't have the same impact as other operators on the East Coast such as Hull Trains and Grand Central have had in giving stations screwed by the incumbent a decent service. Also East Coast doesn't appear to have been impacted much so can't see why the same cannot happen on the West Coast.

DfT told Virgin (and LM) what services to run in the VHF timetable.

 

[nuneatonmark]

When challenged, Virgin blame the government, then the government blame Virgin and so it goes on and on. Both are at fault in my opinion, Virgin COULD have run more services, the government COULD have specified a decent service level. Something will happen to derail Alliance though.

Things can change if everyone agrees, how else could LM got approval to run trains at 110mph and change the timetable?

 

[DarloRich]

We're all for Open Access operators on the West Coast. Well overdue to balance the bias against certain stations like Nuneaton from Virgin. I can't see why Alliance can't have the same impact as other operators on the East Coast such as Hull Trains and Grand Central have had in giving stations screwed by the incumbent a decent service. Also East Coast doesn't appear to have been impacted much so can't see why the same cannot happen on the West Coast.

what utter wibble. Bias? Yes Virgin hate Nuneaton! :roll:

 

[HH]

I worked on WCML bid for one of the other bidders. We looked at Nuneaton and basically there are better places to stop. You can't stop everywhere because paths are very tight; other places serve more passengers.

 

[DarloRich]

I worked on WCML bid for one of the other bidders. We looked at Nuneaton and basically there are better places to stop. You can't stop everywhere because paths are very tight; other places serve more passengers.

Exactly - the open access bidder will stop at Nuneaton as it offers a pathing opportunity. IF they could get a direct path they would whizz through as that has them in London quicker

 

[The Planner]

Things can change if everyone agrees, how else could LM got approval to run trains at 110mph and change the timetable?

What changed? They had to get 110mph or the paths via Weedon in the existing gaps wouldnt work.

 

[nuneatonmark]

'Better places to stop'? Nuneaton is a town of nearly 100000 people! We currently have the worst service to London of any comparable town of a similar distance from London (e.g. Grantham, Newark, Kettering, Chippenham, Market Harborough etc etc). Despite that disadvantage, Nuneaton's growth in use has been one of the highest on the West Coast mainline. A similar argument could be also made for Tamworth and Lichfield also overlooked by the stupid VHF timetable that shifts lots of fresh air around at high speed in off-peak periods. A great use of taxpayers money! While virtually empty Virgin trains fly through these stations, passengers have to put up with a slow overcrowded LM service in trains totally unsuited to long distances.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

A similar argument could be also made for Tamworth and Lichfield also overlooked by the stupid VHF timetable that shifts lots of fresh air around at high speed in off-peak periods. A great use of taxpayers money! While virtually empty Virgin trains fly through these stations, passengers have to put up with a slow overcrowded LM service in trains totally unsuited to long distances.

I should think the theory was that if VT made any stops in the Trent Valley it would undermine both the case for the LM hourly service and the VT headline journey times and turnround times to whatever destination was chosen.
All is supposed to come good from 2017 when extra paths via Stafford are available and more trains can run.
My beef with Nuneaton is the poor connections with XC towards Leicester, necessitating travel via Birmingham...

 

[Hellfire]

While virtually empty Virgin trains fly through these stations

I travel on Virgin a lot and I've never been on a "virtually empty" train flying through Nuneaton. Not sure how you can count the empty seats on a train padding you at 100+ mph

 

[HH]

Nuneaton has a significant political pressure group, but you can't fit a quart into a pint pot. There can only be a limited number of stops to make the timings. IIRC one of the issues is that Nuneaton, due to its location, doesn't serve any of the surrounding areas, whereas other stations are more accessible, even if they don't have as high a base population.

 

[nuneatonmark]

Nuneaton has a significant political pressure group, but you can't fit a quart into a pint pot. There can only be a limited number of stops to make the timings. IIRC one of the issues is that Nuneaton, due to its location, doesn't serve any of the surrounding areas, whereas other stations are more accessible, even if they don't have as high a base population.

The catchment area for Nuneaton includes Hinckley, Hartshill, Bedworth and south Leicestershire, a combined population of nearly 200000. That's equivalent to a decent sized city. We know, we've calculated it and we know where people come from to use the services. If/when we get GNWR services stopping at Nuneaton and the Nuckle project completed it should be quicker from Coventry to the north via Nuneaton. Stopping more services at Nuneaton not only improves the services for people from Nuneaton but massively improves connections from Coventry and the East Midlands.

Re the point about connections to XC, I completely agree. They could and should be a lot better.

 

[nottsnurse]

......but massively improves connections from Coventry and the East Midlands.....

I'm not sure the service in the East Midlands is bad enough to need a connection via Nuneaton to 'improve' things. Indeed I'd say, given the improvements that have been delivered to the MML, and will be when the electrification program is complete, it seems your's is a positively weak argument.

Make an argument for your own improved services but don't drag the East Midlands in to try and add weight to it, you'll just make yourself look desperate.

 

[pt_mad]

'Better places to stop'? Nuneaton is a town of nearly 100000 people! We currently have the worst service to London of any comparable town of a similar distance from London (e.g. Grantham, Newark, Kettering, Chippenham, Market Harborough etc etc). Despite that disadvantage, Nuneaton's growth in use has been one of the highest on the West Coast mainline. A similar argument could be also made for Tamworth and Lichfield also overlooked by the stupid VHF timetable that shifts lots of fresh air around at high speed in off-peak periods. A great use of taxpayers money! While virtually empty Virgin trains fly through these stations, passengers have to put up with a slow overcrowded LM service in trains totally unsuited to long distances.

Granted Nuneaton does deserve a more frequent off peak service than the current 1 train per hour usually formed of 4 coaches.

I think the future going forward will be a higher frequency of LM services and longer trains. From what I understand there will be an extra 8 coach train along the Trent (down) from December (1746 from Eus I think) and one on the up in the morning.

The reason there can't be more is all because of the problems on the Stoke loop with Level Crossings and Junctions near the stations, meaning 8 coach trains cannot be accommodated to stop. LM are limited in what they can do to get around this. Agreed services levels for Stone, Alsager and Kidsgrove must be maintained. This means the loop can't just be cut out all together.
Taking an 8 coach service fast between Stafford - Crewe via Madeley will mean another service has to be sent along the loop to serve those stations. Splitting a service off at Stafford will mean complicated pathing/platforming/empty stock/driver issues at Stafford. Its not something that can easily be solved and if it was it would have already been solved.

As for Virgin stopping in the Trent, I can't see much changing. To be honest I am surprised Stafford has as many stops as it does. Rugby probably only has an hourly stop because its the West Mids services rather than the North West services. Tamworth is much the same. Journey time of just over an hour to London but only 2 fast peak services on the up per day. Commuters even go there from the northern suburbs of Birmingham as its faster, but there seems little hope of a decent stopping frequency.

 

[yorksrob]

In terms of obstructing a "model service", I think that some established commentators forget that price is one of the main variables that will affect whether or when people travel. A frequent, but not quite irregular train service, such as exists on the ECML with a wide range of fares and offers, is far more value to many travelers than a timetable that looks regular and aesthetically satisfying, but all the fares are the same price and all the advances run out at the same time etc.

Open access is very good for the passenger.

 

[nuneatonmark]

Granted Nuneaton does deserve a more frequent off peak service than the current 1 train per hour usually formed of 4 coaches.

I think the future going forward will be a higher frequency of LM services and longer trains. From what I understand there will be an extra 8 coach train along the Trent (down) from December (1746 from Eus I think) and one on the up in the morning.

The reason there can't be more is all because of the problems on the Stoke loop with Level Crossings and Junctions near the stations, meaning 8 coach trains cannot be accommodated to stop. LM are limited in what they can do to get around this. Agreed services levels for Stone, Alsager and Kidsgrove must be maintained. This means the loop can't just be cut out all together.
Taking an 8 coach service fast between Stafford - Crewe via Madeley will mean another service has to be sent along the loop to serve those stations. Splitting a service off at Stafford will mean complicated pathing/platforming/empty stock/driver issues at Stafford. Its not something that can easily be solved and if it was it would have already been solved.

As for Virgin stopping in the Trent, I can't see much changing. To be honest I am surprised Stafford has as many stops as it does. Rugby probably only has an hourly stop because its the West Mids services rather than the North West services. Tamworth is much the same. Journey time of just over an hour to London but only 2 fast peak services on the up per day. Commuters even go there from the northern suburbs of Birmingham as its faster, but there seems little hope of a decent stopping frequency.

If Nuneaton and all the Trent Valley stations had an hourly 8 coach service to/from London taking approx 1hr 7mins to London from Nuneaton and avoiding the Stoke loop stations, I don't think we would have a problem with that. There have been talk of extending the Manchester to Stoke stoppers to Birmingham which makes a lot of sense. it is also fair to say that LM appear to be doing their best to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear with the full introduction of the 110 timetable and lengthening services where they can. As from December, Nuneaton will have a good half hourly fast/semi fast service in the peak from London including both LM and Virgin services.

Would still love the Alliance services though.

 

[pt_mad]

Yes I agree on the face of it any extra services would be a bonus.


But I think we have to face that half the reason the LM Trent Valley services are so busy is because they stop at ALL intermediate stations.

A fast service to London at 1pm on a Tuesday may only attract a third of the passengers from NUN that a LM stopping service via RUG and MKC would.

Same going north. An Alliance/GNWR service stopping at Tamworth, Lichfield and Warrington may only attract a few people in the middle of the day. However the LM calling at all stations to Crewe is rarely quiet.

LM do have a point as regards an Alliance service taking away some of LM's revenue/footfall. It no doubt would. Someone turning up to NUN for the next available service for London would just board an Alliance if that was the first available (ticket permitting). Likewise going north for Tamworth / Lichfield they would just board an Alliance if that was calling first.


New services would up passenger numbers for London. But in terms of NEW business going north, will enough passengers want to go Warrington and further north in the middle of the day from stations along the Trent? I'm not sure. Yes they would want Tamworth and Lichfield but this market is LMs'.



Another reason the LM services are so popular is price. Virgin or (I suspect) Alliance will not officer a price point anywhere close to what LM offer.
LM London services often fill up at Stafford, yet Stafford has at least one Virgin fast service to London per hour. But LM's price attracts people away from a fast Virgin to the LM semi-fast.

Kind of defeats the object in some ways. Stafford, a station with a frequent 125mph fills up the LM London service when originally it was probably only forseen that Stafford passengers would board the LM for intermediate Trent Valley stations.
Same with Crewe, passengers board the LM semi-fast there for London because of price, even though a fast Pendo service is available. Likewise Stoke.

 

[thenorthern]

I think the Alliance Rail services should do Tamworth and Nuneaton good, having express trains to London from Tamworth would be useful.

From a personal point of view I think the London Midland services instead of Virgin Trains to London isn't really a big issue now Project 110 is happening although connections to Manchester and much of the North West from Tamworth and Nuneaton aren't that great. What would be good though if there was an additional semi-fast train along the Trent Valley that maybe ran from Nuneaton to Stafford as its annoying only having 1 semi-fast train along there per hour.