Rail-replacement buses non-existent - Bournemouth-Southampton to-day.

[pompeyfan]

SLW might not be feasible if the line is being relayed as usually the opposite line is used to deliver ballast, panels or switches.

 

[Megafuss]

I have to say, it's all very well."authorising" customers the use of taxis. But, it's £50 from Hinton Admiral to Eastleigh in a Uber.

SWR will be counting on groups of passengers travelling together. But, some will be faced with a taxi fare which is more than the train ticket they purchased, which they may not afford.

 

[philthetube]

There's bus availability, it's just very limited and not at the kind of prices First Rail Support / Arriva Rail Replacement will usually pay.

In some places, rates have become quite extreme. There have been a number of operators offering up to £1,000 for an eight hour hire recently (bus with driver), at just a few hours notice mind. Nobody is going to take SWR's rates when they can get that instead.

Is that that expensive?

assuming 8mpg for a coach, 80p a mile, also has to be paid for on route to the hire, assuming 200 miles covered that is £160, mileage, and that is an average of 20mph, it could be a lot higher but is not likely to be lower.

Drivers wages at short notice, going to be at least time and a half on a Sunday so say 10 hours at £20 + national insurance and another 200 pounds +possible additional cover for Mondays work , quite possibly a lot more, the operator has to quote an a basis bases on what he will have to pay. May well be 300/350 for the day

Management costs, paperwork etc, + incidentals tyre costs, cost of possible breakdowns accidents etc another hundred.

So a total of £610, these numbers may be higher of lower, no a long distance hire they will certainly be considerably higher, there is about £150 factored in for the short notice in this case.

A new coach or bus costs a minimum of £300.000, over a ten year life that is £82 daily assuming it is used every day, which of course it won't be so higher than that.

Is £300 a lot of profit for an operator to expect for pushing a £300.000 pit of equipment out for a day an if a small operator for the owner having his Sunday disrupted, or if a large operator a manager having to get involved, who will want paying.

 

[Llanigraham]

An opinion. In the unlikely event of it being known in advance that there would be no or ridiculously few replacement buses available, pre-privatisation BR would either have cancelled the work, restricted it to what could have been done within periods when there was no passenger service or arranged Single Line Working to keep some sort of service going. Nowadays, it seems that service is a dirty word.

Except that not many staff at Network Rail are now trained to act as Pilotmen.

 

[The Planner]

Sorry, if I'd seen that previous thread I'd've posted in there rather than starting this new one.

Question though - as a layman, it seems surprising that 35 miles of track (SOU-POO) needs to be closed all day for engineering works. How many actual work sites would have been spread out along that 35 miles, out of interest?

When works are being planned, is there any incentive for Network Rail to, say, try and focus their work in a particular area (say, Southampton one weekend, Brockenhurst the next, Poole the next) and thus minimise disruption and bus use, or is it no skin off their nose to ask for all three at once and spread out small teams in various places?

Looking at the SWML through the New Forest (where I live so, selfishly, my area of interest) there are more works planned on the next three weekends - I hope a better fist of things is made arranging alternative transport than was managed this weekend:

Sun 23 - Soton - Poole
Sat 29 - Eastleigh - Soton
Sun 30 - Soton - Brock
Sat 5 - Brock-Poole
Sun 6 - Soton-Poole

Yes, as operators also have to agree the access and they also want NR to take the least amount of opportunities. Your example above would probably end up as five Sundays otherwise which XC would have likely have said no to, especially if there are other works on their route which would disrupt them twice.

NR have to pay compensation to operators when the track is not available, so it's very much in their interest to close the railway for the least amount of time and distance possible. The exact nature and amount of work will determine what the exact strategy used is.

Distance taken can depend on the monitoring points missed in Sch4. If Southampton and Bournemouth are the monitoring points, taking smaller chunks between the two is no cheaper.

 

[Starmill]

Is that that expensive?

assuming 8mpg for a coach, 80p a mile, also has to be paid for on route to the hire, assuming 200 miles covered that is £160, mileage, and that is an average of 20mph, it could be a lot higher but is not likely to be lower.

Drivers wages at short notice, going to be at least time and a half on a Sunday so say 10 hours at £20 + national insurance and another 200 pounds +possible additional cover for Mondays work , quite possibly a lot more, the operator has to quote an a basis bases on what he will have to pay. May well be 300/350 for the day

Management costs, paperwork etc, + incidentals tyre costs, cost of possible breakdowns accidents etc another hundred.

So a total of £610, these numbers may be higher of lower, no a long distance hire they will certainly be considerably higher, there is about £150 factored in for the short notice in this case.

A new coach or bus costs a minimum of £300.000, over a ten year life that is £82 daily assuming it is used every day, which of course it won't be so higher than that.

Is £300 a lot of profit for an operator to expect for pushing a £300.000 pit of equipment out for a day an if a small operator for the owner having his Sunday disrupted, or if a large operator a manager having to get involved, who will want paying.

The margin is more than the 30% you suggest yes, especially when a 12-14 year old single deck is the vehicle provided, which would never have been worth that much from new and was under £5k to buy, (twice that in servicing mind).

I don't even know who SWR use for rail replacement, so I couldn't say what the rates for buses SWR jobs attract are, but even for something booked well in advance (I bet they've only been able to book a maximum of 8 weeks in advance) it will probably be 35 - 45% less than £1k a day!

 

[DaventryRabbit]

The nationwide shortage of bus drivers isn't SWR's fault, but as in any tight labour market - people follow the money. They absolutely could get buses if they paid enough - but like most TOCs they have a set price they'll pay, and if nobody wants the work at that price it simply won't be covered.

It's also one thing to say there won't be ticket acceptance on local buses (the operator may be unwilling to enter into an agreement), but they should make it 100% clear that they'll be reimbursing people's "service bus" fares - or taxis, where there are no service buses - where rail replacement buses fail to turn up.

In so many Industries you hear people saying "Why should I stay in this job at £xxxx when I can go down the Road to that Amazon Warehouse and earn £xxxx+!?"
Well here in the West Midlands even Amazon Staff in Coventry are being balloted on Strike action over pay ( Even though Amazon don't recognise Trade Unions)
So if the Sainted Amazon ( where apparently EVERYONE Wants to work because of their "Better" Wages) are now going to be affected by Strikes Over Pay then I suggest the Bus Industry will be in the Mire that it is for quite some time...
(Apologies if going off topic!)

 

[Megafuss]

Anybody wondering how bad the situation is, this is Ashurst New Forest for next few hours

 

[Iggy12a]

I don't even know who SWR use for rail replacement...

First Travel Solutions

 

[Craig1122]

Back in Stagecoach days SWT used to manage bus replacement in house. Am I being cynical wondering if outsourcing to another First group company has made the problem worse? Presumably FTS has to make a profit margin itself so reducing the cash available for drivers. Contracting out also means bus provision is another step removed from the end customer.

 

[Starmill]

First Travel Solutions

Ah good. I admit they have been offering more in Northern England as they've been desperate to cover Lumo between Edinburgh and Newcastle, but a part of that seems to be because Lumo keep making errors in their planning and desperately trying to put last minute contingency in place. Also a round trip between Edinburgh and Newcastle is quite a demanding job compared to Bournemouth and Hampshire locals.

 

[Essexman]

West Ham fans on their way to Southampton were advised at around 11am that replacement buses were only running hourly and they should use local service buses or taxis from Eastleigh. At half time at the match it was announced that there were no rail replacements running.

 

[fandroid]

The lines between Poole and Southampton Central are closed this weekend for engineering works.

Unfortunately the smaller stops are not being served at all by rail-replacement buses:

https://www.southwesternrailway.com...disruption-to-services-on-woe-and-south-coast



It's a bit vexing - having been 'trapped' in my village by the strikes the past two Saturdays, I was looking forward to a trip to-day - but after waiting half an hour for a bus at around 9 and trying again at around 11 (the one around 10 was showing as cancelled on Live Departure Boards), neither of which turned up, I headed home and put in for a ticket refund...

Hammer your MP about it, and use the good background info in this thread to ensure that they know what the deep- seated causes are. Otherwise they'll just resort to TOC-bashing, or even worse general railway-bashing. Perhaps request them to write to the DfT Secretary of State asking them to ensure a better local service for their constituents

 

[BenS123]

The story's appeared in the local press:

Passengers 'went nuts' while waiting for replacement bus service at station

Customers travelling from Southampton parkway and Bournemouth had to wait around forty minutes for a rail replacement coach as rail works disrupted…

www.bournemouthecho.co.uk

"along with "hundreds of other passengers", he was forced to wait forty minutes for a bus replacement service at Southampton Parkway."
"a ten-seater bus arrived, picked up a few people from the middle of the queue – not the start of the queue – and then disappeared."

 

[PTR 444]

West Ham fans on their way to Southampton were advised at around 11am that replacement buses were only running hourly and they should use local service buses or taxis from Eastleigh. At half time at the match it was announced that there were no rail replacements running.

Yesterday’s Saints match is only the second of three consecutive home games to be affected by rail disruption. The previous one (1st October) having commenced on a strike day.

I was in Southampton yesterday and decided to take the National Express back to Bournemouth. No wonder there was a queue outside the coach station as a single on NX cost £6.00, whereas the NR fare for the RRB journey was a whopping £8.55 (with railcard)! And even then there was no guarantee of a service at all, let alone a good one.

The railway needs to learn that if they keep scheduling disruption to take place on match days and other large events, they will likely lose revenue if cheaper, less disruptive options are available.

 

[The Planner]

The railway needs to learn that if they keep scheduling disruption to take place on match days and other large events, they will likely lose revenue if cheaper, less disruptive options are available.

The disruption planned normally a year before the fixtures come out you mean? Version 1 of the 2024 Engineering Access Statement goes out on Friday, hopefully Sky and the football clubs are waiting eagerly for it.....

 

[Starmill]

The disruption planned normally a year before the fixtures come out you mean? Version 1 of the 2024 Engineering Access Statement goes out on Friday, hopefully Sky and the football clubs are waiting eagerly for it.....

Are you suggesting that the TOC are going to be making bus bookings a year in advance? Forgive me but I think we both know that's not the case.

I know that people can suffer from insider syndrome so I do have some sympathy here, but in the nicest possible way you regularly post about the Access going out more than a year in advance as if it's a "gotcha", when in fact the reality is that TOCs do not get their plan done on anything like that kind of timescale.

As far as organisers go for major events, I don't know what you think that the Access will mean to them. Customers and stakeholders need to know a timetable around which to plan.

 

[Watershed]

Are you suggesting that the TOC are going to be making bus bookings a year in advance? Forgive me but I think we both know that's not the case.

I know that people can suffer from insider syndrome so I do have some sympathy here, but in the nicest possible way you regularly post about the Access going out more than a year in advance as if it's a "gotcha", when in fact the reality is that TOCs do not get their plan done on anything like that kind of timescale.

As far as organisers go for major events, I don't know what you think that the Access will mean to them. Customers and stakeholders need to know a timetable from which to plan around.

More to the point - version 1 isn't the final version, and things can often change quite significantly before the possessions are confirmed.

 

[The Planner]

Are you suggesting that the TOC are going to be making bus bookings a year in advance? Forgive me but I think we both know that's not the case.

I know that people can suffer from insider syndrome so I do have some sympathy here, but in the nicest possible way you regularly post about the Access going out more than a year in advance as if it's a "gotcha", when in fact the reality is that TOCs do not get their plan done on anything like that kind of timescale.

As far as organisers go for major events, I don't know what you think that the Access will mean to them. Customers and stakeholders need to know a timetable around which to plan.

Does it also absolve them of forward planning? Did it absolve the FA of putting last years semi finals on when they were told well in advance the WCML was shut but decided to ignore it? The confirmed period possession plan is 26 weeks out and if it is causing disruption TOC and FOCs expect to know what the timetable plan is by then.

 

[Starmill]

Does it also absolve them of forward planning? Did it absolve the FA of putting last years semi finals on when they were told well in advance the WCML was shut but decided to ignore it? The confirmed period possession plan is 26 weeks out and if it is causing disruption TOC and FOCs expect to know what the timetable plan is by then.

It merely means that forward planning is unlikely to be possible until there's a timetable on the table. Same as trying to book a bus. It's really quite a straightforward concept.

26 weeks is rather closer to the mark than your previous attempt to suggest there's almost two years of notice. However it's just as irrelevant sending a stakeholder a possession plan as it is the v1 Access. They'll reply asking what the timetable is going to be.

In reality, I think you're well aware that there's no notice of any actual timetables until 8 weeks out at best, frequently rather less than that. Please try to think about how dry technical statements about the confirmed possession plan actually sound to stakeholders. They won't have a clue what you mean.

 

[Class 170101]

The disruption planned normally a year before the fixtures come out you mean? Version 1 of the 2024 Engineering Access Statement goes out on Friday,

Have seen Version 0 for this. Far too much disruption going on where I am.

hopefully Sky and the football clubs are waiting eagerly for it.....

It merely means that forward planning is unlikely to be possible until there's a timetable on the table. Same as trying to book a bus. It's really quite a straightforward concept.

26 weeks is rather closer to the mark than your previous attempt to suggest there's almost two years of notice. However it's just as irrelevant sending a stakeholder a possession plan as it is the v1 Access. They'll reply asking what the timetable is going to be.

In reality, I think you're well aware that there's no notice of any actual timetables until 8 weeks out at best, frequently rather less than that. Please try to think about how dry technical statements about the confirmed possession plan actually sound to stakeholders. They won't have a clue what you mean.

One to two years should be enough for the Footballing authorities to implement a robust football calendar given the Dec 23 to Dec 24 Rules Version 1 is what @The Planner is referring to. Detailed timetabling should be 8 to 12 weeks out and preferably further.

 

[Starmill]

One to two years should be enough for the Footballing authorities to implement a robust football calendar given the Dec 23 to Dec 24 Rules Version 1 is what @The Planner is referring to.

In what way?

I'd absolutely love to see you coming up with a timetable for replacement buses at that stage. Bearing in mind you're unlikely to be able to make any changes.

If you were suggesting that published schedules need to be much, much further in advance for good commercial reasons, and that there's a business case to be made for a large increase in planning resources to support that, then I'd 100% agree with you. That would bring with it the benefit of being able to secure replacement transport earlier also, and better serve stakeholders. However, the industry hasn't got the resources to manage 8 weeks currently, let alone 12 or more.

The footballing authorities, as you put it, are stakeholders, but they're not usually suppliers or customers, so they're not usually bound by any means to the railway's service. A small number of exceptional cases apply, such as the Brighton & Hove Albion agreement with GTR.

 

[Class 170101]

In what way?

I'd absolutely love to see you coming up with a timetable for replacement buses at that stage. Bearing in mind you're unlikely to be able to make any changes.

Whats your point. It alerts the FA that certain routes would be closed not the detailed replacement plan. However even the FA should know that buses carry far less passengeres compared to trains.

 

[Starmill]

Whats your point. It alerts the FA that certain routes would be closed not the detailed replacement plan.

My point is that engineering access statements are entirely meaningless in the context of organising replacement transport. They're also largely meaningless to stakeholders because they're not able to interpret gobbledegook about which lines are open and which are closed. All the stakeholder will be interested in is what services can run, and nobody will be able to actually tell them that until less than two months before. A simplified version isn't published. Nor is the statement fixed at this point in time, as has already been noted. Therefore it is not meaningful.

However even the FA should know that buses carry far less passengeres compared to trains.

Even this is wrong. On some routes the bus service has far more capacity than the train would ever be able to provide. For example when the Northern services to Manchester United ran, or events at Coventry Arena.

 

[Class 170101]

My point is that engineering access statements are entirely meaningless in the context of organising replacement transport. They're also largely meaningless to stakeholders because they're not able to interpret gobbledegook about which lines are open and which are closed. All the stakeholder will be interested in is what services can run, and nobody will be able to actually tell them that until less than two months before. A simplified version isn't published. Nor is the statement fixed at this point in time, as has already been noted. Therefore it is not meaningful.

Could be made meaningful on operators websites NRES etc, but yes requires NR to stick to it.

Even this is wrong. On some routes the bus service has far more capacity than the train would ever be able to provide. For example when the Northern services to Manchester United ran, or events at Coventry Arena.

One bus has fewer seats than a train. If you put lots of buses out then of course it has more seats than one train but then you aren't comparing fairly.

 

[Watershed]

They're also largely meaningless to stakeholders because they're not able to interpret gobbledegook about which lines are open and which are closed. All the stakeholder will be interested in is what services can run, and nobody will be able to actually tell them that until less than two months before. A simplified version isn't published. Nor is the statement fixed at this point in time, as has already been noted. Therefore it is not meaningful.

Indeed, and this seems to be one of the major issues with the way the current situation is handled. Confirming weekend timetables at most 8 weeks in advance is not really acceptable, but even with that being the case - why couldn't there at least be, say, a 6-month "look ahead" calendar, or map, that highlighted which lines will even be affected by engineering works on a given weekend, with some indication of the likely effect on services?

It's all eminently doable. The industry just doesn't seem to think it's necessary.

 

[philthetube]

The margin is more than the 30% you suggest yes, especially when a 12-14 year old single deck is the vehicle provided, which would never have been worth that much from new and was under £5k to buy, (twice that in servicing mind).

I don't even know who SWR use for rail replacement, so I couldn't say what the rates for buses SWR jobs attract are, but even for something booked well in advance (I bet they've only been able to book a maximum of 8 weeks in advance) it will probably be 35 - 45% less than £1k a day!

If it were cheaper overall to run 14 year old buses everyone would do it, the lack of capital investment is compensated by the increased maintenance. If it really was a cash cow drivers would be being paid £30+ an hour as companies would be desperate for the work.

 

[RJ]

The margin is more than the 30% you suggest yes, especially when a 12-14 year old single deck is the vehicle provided, which would never have been worth that much from new and was under £5k to buy, (twice that in servicing mind).

I don't even know who SWR use for rail replacement, so I couldn't say what the rates for buses SWR jobs attract are, but even for something booked well in advance (I bet they've only been able to book a maximum of 8 weeks in advance) it will probably be 35 - 45% less than £1k a day!

A lot of duties in this part of the world are in service from around 5am to 1am plus dead runs and driver changeovers. Those jobs see 200+ miles in service. £550-£650 would barely cover fuel and wages.

If it were cheaper overall to run 14 year old buses everyone would do it, the lack of capital investment is compensated by the increased maintenance. If it really was a cash cow drivers would be being paid £30+ an hour as companies would be desperate for the work.

It’s cheaper for some. An initial investment in getting an older vehicle right plus preventative maintenance means you get a reliable bus that’s owned outright with no pressure to have it out working every day to meet financing/leasing costs. If owned outright, savings in maintenance are offset by depreciation.

There is a reason why there are a load of 15-20 year old buses alongside newer vehicles regularly appearing at the eastern end of the network with operators who cover the duties reliably week in week out.

 

[The Planner]

My point is that engineering access statements are entirely meaningless in the context of organising replacement transport. They're also largely meaningless to stakeholders because they're not able to interpret gobbledegook about which lines are open and which are closed. All the stakeholder will be interested in is what services can run, and nobody will be able to actually tell them that until less than two months before. A simplified version isn't published. Nor is the statement fixed at this point in time, as has already been noted. Therefore it is not meaningful.

And that is done within NR, mainly by the national control centre I believe. Whether its far enough in advance is clearly up for debate.

 

[Starmill]

If it were cheaper overall to run 14 year old buses everyone would do it, the lack of capital investment is compensated by the increased maintenance. If it really was a cash cow drivers would be being paid £30+ an hour as companies would be desperate for the work.

It's very common, as RJ says, to have vehicles from 2011 or earlier on rail replacement, in addition to a number of new vehicles. If you're running a small business why would you stump up for a new vehicle?

One bus has fewer seats than a train. If you put lots of buses out then of course it has more seats than one train but then you aren't comparing fairly.

It's a valid comparison because on nearly all routes the number of additional trains which it is feasible to run is either zero or only one per hour. See the recent discussions about how London Overground don't operate any additional services from White Hart Lane, or how Coventry Arena didn't have any additional services for the Games. In both cases large numbers of buses were available to be used.