coppercapped
Established Member
GTR got the 'job' on cost grounds and through the DfTs hatred of first group.
Citation needed. Assertions are not evidence.
GTR didn't get this contract based on any promises made in their bid.
GTR got the 'job' on cost grounds and through the DfTs hatred of first group.
GTR didn't get this contract based on any promises made in their bid.
Give me East Coast over Virgin anyday. There again, in my view, GNER were better than East Coast but they could not make things pay.
As for Southern/Thameslink/Gatwick Express/Govia, even they do not seem to know who they are so I won't even attempt to comment.
GTR got the 'job' on cost grounds and through the DfTs hatred of first group. GTR didn't get this contract based on any promises made in their bid.
MPs make cheap soundbites because vociferous commuters pester them and demand they 'do something'.
If they didn't make cheap soundbites, people would criticise them with other cheap soundbites: lazy, overpaid and uninterested in the plight of the rail traveller etc.
Of course, not many MPs understand the full structural complexity of the railway. But later in the day they might be dealing with a health service issue, an education issue and defence policy. It's a big ask to expect a generalist on £70k pa to know everything about everything before venturing an opinion.
Citation needed. Assertions are not evidence.
The FirstGroup bit is nonsense, but Govia did win on cost, and according to DfT, on quality as well*. I'm afraid that you won't find that information on any publicly available source however.
* Quality as defined by DfT and marked by DfT, which may not be (and probably isn't!) the same as what you (or I) would perceive as quality.
I wouldn't care if my train was a few minutes late occasionally, but when almost all Southern services you catch is a few mins late for weeks/months it is irritating.
Is that late on public timetable or late on working timetable?
As people whinge so much about the train being one minute late maybe its about time the railways started using the working timetable on all the timetables that way people could then moan about the train leaving at 20 past one hour, 23 minutes past the next hour, 22 minutes past the next hour etc etc.
It's time to cut back some of the extremities such as Southampton/Eastleigh which see regular terminations short at either Chichester, Havant or Fareham because of the delay and as such transferring the passengers onto SWT or GWR services at either Havant or Fratton.
Yes, if either SWT or FGW were to provide a more frequent service.
But it comes to something when Southern provide more trains than either of the other two between Southampton and Fareham, irrespective of the reliability.
They only have Southampton for political dogma reasons, they're not a necessity.
......
A lot of their issues are communication related
It's not nonsense, Govia were 'encouraged' to bid as first were by far the front runners and the DfT at the time didn't want them in.
meeting on monday, so we'll see what comes of it.
Well, someone doesn't know what they are talking about. "..rebuilding work at London Bridge, engineering over Christmas, a recent signal failure..." are nothing to do with the Train Company.
As for the references to "Southern", there is no franchise nor Train Company of that name any more! While I'm sure some will see use of a now defunct franchise/company name as a moot point, I would expect an MP to get it right, so it makes me wonder what else they get wrong.
Is that late on public timetable or late on working timetable?
As people whinge so much about the train being one minute late maybe its about time the railways started using the working timetable on all the timetables that way people could then moan about the train leaving at 20 past one hour, 23 minutes past the next hour, 22 minutes past the next hour etc etc.
Me, I'm a Socialist who wants to see railways renationalised. I would be happy for service levels to stay the same as they are, but without the public money being pushed into the hands of private companies.
Chaos again today, although it's Network Rails issue
Perhaps it's time to accept that giving everybody direct trains to London just isn't feasible if they also want service reliability, unless of course they want to pay for the redundancy to make it robust (extra staff, spare stock, etc) ?HarleyDavidson said:It's NOT a service if they're always running late and are constantly fouling up both SWT & GWR and/or terminating short. That's simply not acceptable, so to prevent the fouling up of other services, these get the chop, so to provide their core service area, with a better, more resilient service.
They only have Southampton for political dogma reasons, they're not a necessity.
Perhaps it's time to accept that giving everybody direct trains to London just isn't feasible if they also want service reliability, unless of course they want to pay for the redundancy to make it robust (extra staff, spare stock, etc) ?
A think tank has called for train operators Southeastern, Southern and South West Trains to be replaced in south London by the Overground run by TfL.
The turning south London orange report by the Centre for London states that not putting train services under TfL control will cause the network to struggle with progressively worse crowding and congestion."
It also claims extending the Overground would bring extra economic benefits and job growth.
The report comes as the South West Trains franchise contact is coming to end and the Department for Transport is seeking commuter views on the current service.
South West Trains, which provides services in and out of central London from stations in Kingston, Richmond, Wandsworth, Elmbridge and Epsom, has often been a point of contention with commuters who complain of late trains, delays and cancellations on a daily basis.
The franchise also has some of the most overcrowded trains in the country with certain morning services being 60 per cent over capacity.
The 7.32am and 7.02am South West services from Woking to Waterloo through Surbiton are consistently in the top 10 most overcrowded trains in the country.
The report estimates any TfL takeover would cost £10bn to £15bn over 25 years if rail franchises are phased out when they came up for renewal.
South West Trains franchise expires in 2017, Southeastern's in 2018 and Southern in 2021.
To respond to the DfT consultation email [email protected] or write to South Western Consultation Coordinator, 4/15 Great Minster House, 33 Horseferry Road, SW1P 4DR by February 9.
http://www.croydonguardian.co.uk/news/14209709.Should_TfL_run_all_south_London_train_services_/
An article about people wanting TFL to take over services:
My main concern is what stations they define. I lcertainly do not want East Croydon trains to be TFL, as I like to keep the 1st class sections.
Of course painting the trains orange isn't a magic bullet, but perhaps TfL have access to money that regular franchisees don't? Given enough money, no engineering problem is insurmountable...A-driver said:People rather foolishly think TfL taking over is the answer to all issues. It's far from it. Who ever runs the trains will encounter the same delays and issues. It will still be network rails infrastructure and TfL trains will still be subject to delays as they'll be sharing the congested over-capacity tracks with Thameslink and southern mainline (or whoever the mainline TOC is in that area) services.
I agree although tfl would not solve everything I think they would spend more money. At the end of the day GTR are just doing what they are told to do and what has been agreed by dft.Of course painting the trains orange isn't a magic bullet, but perhaps TfL have access to money that regular franchisees don't? Given enough money, no engineering problem is insurmountable...
Services which are entirely within the travelcard zones may make sense in some cases to transfer to LOROL, but this would depend on how easy it is to segregate these from services which run further afield. I also feel that coinciding the introduction of LOROL with new trains would help with re-mapping services. Again, these are organisational issues which need to be thought through before the crayonistas are let loose!
This is RailUK Forums and they have all the answers(most notably those who dont work in the industry and such and such ....)
i do agree that branches like caterham and tattenham could and should just have shuttles, which means more trains could then run up the redhill line.
yes, tattenham and caterham people would have to cross over at purley, but...........