Recent Transpennine Express problems: What could be done to solve them?

[yorkguy]

Another disrupted day yesterday. Cancellations from Scarborough included 08.45, 16.44 and 17.44, meaning there was a 3 hour service gap between the 15.44 and the 18.44. Appalling service - my journey from Malton to Leeds was an hour late in each direction, after both my booked trains were cancelled.

 

[yorkguy]

Of course there is a plus side to wasting hours waiting for trains that are late or don’t arrive on the York/Scarborough service, I’ve probably only paid for about 25% of my fares thanks to delay repay.

 

[scarby]

Another disrupted day yesterday. Cancellations from Scarborough included 08.45, 16.44 and 17.44, meaning there was a 3 hour service gap between the 15.44 and the 18.44. Appalling service - my journey from Malton to Leeds was an hour late in each direction, after both my booked trains were cancelled.

What an awful mess. When you believe it couldn’t get worse it just did.

All on a line where, if a simple shuttle service was introduced, almost every train could run on time to the minute. It would only require 3 trains, and 2 for most of the day.

 

[tpjm]

All on a line where, if a simple shuttle service was introduced, almost every train could run on time to the minute. It would only require 3 trains, and 2 for most of the day.

But then come the cries of “You’re cutting Scarborough off”, “I don’t want to change trains” and “it’s a disgrace that Scarborough doesn’t have direct trains across the North” from the local politicians, customers and transport authorities.

Not disputing your point, just explaining why there would be a reluctance to do it.

What it really needs for a start is for TPE services to not have to pass through such hideous bottlenecks on the network. The Chat Moss is abysmal - you can be 10 down between Liverpool and Manchester, even after a right time start. It’s like you’re set up to fail in the first 30 mins of a 3 hour journey.

 

[nr758123]

What it really needs for a start is for TPE services to not have to pass through such hideous bottlenecks on the network. The Chat Moss is abysmal - you can be 10 down between Liverpool and Manchester, even after a right time start. It’s like you’re set up to fail in the first 30 mins of a 3 hour journey.

It would probably be quicker to list those parts of the core North Transpennine Route which aren't bottlenecks.

 

[AndrewE]

What it really needs for a start is for TPE services to not have to pass through such hideous bottlenecks on the network. The Chat Moss is abysmal - you can be 10 down between Liverpool and Manchester, even after a right time start. It’s like you’re set up to fail in the first 30 mins of a 3 hour journey.

Not sure what you are proposing: Not go via Chat Moss, or not serve Manchester, Huddersfield and Leeds? All of our northern cities are suffering from 1970s and 80s reductions in rail infrastructure capacity and all our lines need a massive capacity boost - on top of doubling the length of most trains. You can't have stoppers and InterCity trains sharing the same 2 tracks unless it is very cleverly timetabled and always works like clockwork.

 

[tpjm]

Not sure what you are proposing: Not go via Chat Moss, or not serve Manchester, Huddersfield and Leeds? All of our northern cities are suffering from 1970s and 80s reductions in rail infrastructure capacity and all our lines need a massive capacity boost - on top of doubling the length of most trains. You can't have stoppers and InterCity trains sharing the same 2 tracks unless it is very cleverly timetabled and always works like clockwork.

I’m not suggesting we should do anything other than invest in the infrastructure to relieve key bottlenecks.

 

[Revaulx]

Not sure what you are proposing: Not go via Chat Moss, or not serve Manchester, Huddersfield and Leeds? All of our northern cities are suffering from 1970s and 80s reductions in rail infrastructure capacity and all our lines need a massive capacity boost - on top of doubling the length of most trains. You can't have stoppers and InterCity trains sharing the same 2 tracks unless it is very cleverly timetabled and always works like clockwork.

The infrastructure reductions started in the mid-60s, when Manchester-Hudds-Leeds was de-quadrupled.

 

[scarby]

But then come the cries of “You’re cutting Scarborough off”, “I don’t want to change trains” and “it’s a disgrace that Scarborough doesn’t have direct trains across the North” from the local politicians, customers and transport authorities.

Not disputing your point, just explaining why there would be a reluctance to do it.

Indeed there would. However, immediate action is needed to make the Scarborough-York service reliable.

At the moment it's not fit to be described as a business. A business puts its customers first.

If I book into a reputable hotel, I don't expect on arrival to be told that my room isn't ready, or in fact my booking is cancelled altogether, for "technical reasons", that there is no breakfast or dinner, because the staff are still being trained, etc. Sure, most of us accept there can be the odd issue, but it should be the exception and if something's clearly wrong, we expect it to be addressed and solved quickly. No customers would accept serious issues on a daily basis, going on for 18 months.

Why should a train service be any different?

 

[HSTEd]

At the moment it's not fit to be described as a business. A business puts its customers first.

A business doesn't put its customers first.
A business puts its shareholders first.

 

[nr758123]

A business doesn't put its customers first.
A business puts its shareholders first.

A business that receives payment from government to provide a specified minimum level of service meets its contractual obligations. That means putting its customers first.

Except that in the railway industry it doesn't seem to work that way.

 

[HSTEd]

A business that receives payment from government to provide a specified minimum level of service meets its contractual obligations. That means putting its customers first.

It's contractual obligations don't say things about putting customers first.
The railway is paid to operate a specific service in a specific way with specific penalties for non compliance.

The management made it's choices about how it would comply, and are now enacting them.
Just because you don't like the choices doesn't mean it isn't acting like a business.

 

[ivorytoast28]

I’ve read that TPE are possibly taking over the Liverpool - Nottingham route. How are the dft considering this when their performance on existing routes is so poor ?

They do have the route knowledge and are getting extra trains and having such a long distance EMR service is pointless and causes far more delays.
Also as a passenger, TPE tend to have the cheapest advance tickets of the 3 operators currently serving the hope valley line and having the fast trains on the same operator means cancellations/delays have less affect on passengers who would be able to get on the next Cleethorpes-Airport train if the Liverpool one gets delayed around Nottingham

 

[geoffk]

Indeed there would. However, immediate action is needed to make the Scarborough-York service reliable.

At the moment it's not fit to be described as a business. A business puts its customers first.

If I book into a reputable hotel, I don't expect on arrival to be told that my room isn't ready, or in fact my booking is cancelled altogether, for "technical reasons", that there is no breakfast or dinner, because the staff are still being trained, etc. Sure, most of us accept there can be the odd issue, but it should be the exception and if something's clearly wrong, we expect it to be addressed and solved quickly. No customers would accept serious issues on a daily basis, going on for 18 months.

Why should a train service be any different?

There is supposed to be an additional Northern service, York - Scarborough, which would presumably use platform 2 at York. The delay must be down to insufficient stock and crews, not infrastructure.

 

[coppercapped]

A business doesn't put its customers first.
A business puts its shareholders first.

Rubbish.

Another meaningless sound bite.

If a business doesn't pay very great attention to its customers' needs and desires - there won't be many shareholders to put first.

On the other hand, if a business doesn't pay dividends then it will find it hard to obtain operating capital or it will be sold or split or both.

Real life is more complex than a sound bite — the use of which seems to replace an ability to think or analyse — would suggest.

 

[coppercapped]

It's contractual obligations don't say things about putting customers first.
The railway is paid to operate a specific service in a specific way with specific penalties for non compliance.

The management made it's choices about how it would comply, and are now enacting them.
Just because you don't like the choices doesn't mean it isn't acting like a business.

In the world of the railway as it is now structured the franchisee's customer is the DfT. It is the DfT which has to be kept happy, not necessarily the fare paying passengers.

 

[HSTEd]

If a business doesn't pay very great attention to its customers' needs and desires - there won't be many shareholders to put first.

What are the customers going to do?
TPE have a functional monopoly, they can do what they like.

The company still collects its money, so the shareholders couldn't give a damn about the service.

 

[BeHereNow]

TPEs planned timetable had turnrounds of 15 mins at the Airport, 10 to 13 mins at Newcastle / Scarborough / Liverpool. To have those turnrounds at both ends of a 3 hour journey and then blame the infrastructure when it doesn’t work is complete nonsense.

Of course things go wrong on the railway and delays occur, that’s because it doesn’t operate like a train set in an aircraft hangar. Inadequate contingency is the responsibility of the operator.

Dec 2019 timetable seems to have solved this problem and it will be funny to note that when PPM jumps up, the infrastructure won’t have changed at all.

Any thoughts @LittleAH?

 

[Senex]

What are the customers going to do?
TPE have a functional monopoly, they can do what they like.

The company still collects its money, so the shareholders couldn't give a damn about the service.

The various regulators are supposed to represent the interests of the customers of the once-nationalised industries. The trouble is that most of them don't seem to give a damn about the customers. And in the case of the railways, the less said about the politicians and civil servants of DfT as the franchising body, the better.

 

[AndyHudds]

The 16.45 from Leeds is becoming a massive issue, it's often leaving passengers behind and is crush loaded. What is happening with the new sets why aren't they timetabled to hit the core rush hour times through Leeds going westwards to ease the crush? Could the 185 units not be doubled up through the rush hour going westwards, if no 185 units have been transferred and new stock has arrived to bolster TPE's rolling stock why can't they be doubled up?