Splitting GWR franchise - not very sensible?

[387165]

Crossrail or Lizzie Line

 

[aylesbury]

The mini franchise worked before but the add on of Paddington is not a good idea ,local trains run by a localy based company is an excellent idea for Devon and Cornwall.

 

[dorsetdesiro]

With this talk of standards slipping at GWR that FirstGroup may face losing the next franchise and it carved into half, the prospect of no GWR HSTs running to Cornwall looks grim. It would be foolish of them to bring out a strong brand like GWR then gradually fail to maintain the standard that it seems they are already doing with the 800s that they are nothing like the HSTs.

If the next GW franchise is given to another operator then I hope the GWR brand will be transferred over (like ScotRail) that the new operator could improve the brand & quality of service. Then the GWR brand will survive so if the operator screws up then it will continue passing from operator to operator until one does a better job with the franchise, also protecting the GWR brand.

But with new trains getting less comfortable interiors specified so I wouldn't expect miracles unless a future Transport secretary is more compassionate towards rail users, less obsessed with cost cutting and has a keen interest in railways...

As for the next Greater Western franchise splitting into two and a new separate "Westcountry" franchise launched for Devon & Cornwall, is this happening or just a possibility?

 

[irish_rail]

With this talk of standards slipping at GWR that FirstGroup may face losing the next franchise and it carved into half, the prospect of no GWR HSTs running to Cornwall looks grim. It would be foolish of them to bring out a strong brand like GWR then gradually fail to maintain the standard that it seems they are already doing with the 800s that they are nothing like the HSTs.

If the next GW franchise is given to another operator then I hope the GWR brand will be transferred over (like ScotRail) that the new operator could improve the brand, but with new trains getting less comfortable interiors specified so I wouldn't expect miracles unless a future Transport secretary is more compassionate towards rail users, less obsessed with cost cutting and has a keen interest in railways...

As for the next Greater Western franchise splitting into two and a new separate "Westcountry" franchise launched for Devon & Cornwall, is this happening or just a possibility?

Not been confirmed yet but potentially on the cards. No one down here wants it, from passengers to staff, and from local and city councils to MPs . Sadly it seems Mr Grayling wants a split and therefore we can expect it is likely to happen despite the potential damage it will do......

 

[jimm]

I think there would be a serious row in Parliament if there was an attempt to carve up the franchise by DfT diktat.

From what I have heard, the response from user groups, local authorities and other interested parties during the recent consultation on the future of the GW franchise was overwhelmingly hostile to the idea of a split.

There are no doubt a few MPs out there who will think that some sort of micro-franchise for their patch would be a great wheeze - one of the Worcestershire MPs said something to a local paper about having a standalone operator for the Cotswold Line, so it could be like Chiltern - apparently oblivious to the fact that Chiltern effectively has its own private railway for 70 miles out of London, unlike the route between Paddington and Oxford. And the second largest city in the country at the other end of its line as a target market, as opposed to Worcester and Hereford...

 

[adrock1976]

Regarding the possible split in Devon and Cornwall, is it proposed to separate the traditional Intercity trains from the local trains?

If so, there may be a comeback of Regional Railways Wales & West (obviously minus the Wales bit). Also, how does the Devon Metro concept fit in?

 

[dorsetdesiro]

Regarding the possible split in Devon and Cornwall, is it proposed to separate the traditional Intercity trains from the local trains?

If so, there may be a comeback of Regional Railways Wales & West (obviously minus the Wales bit). Also, how does the Devon Metro concept fit in?

I think it'll be similar to the old Wessex Trains franchise though extended to include Cornwall plus the addition of intercity fleet of HSTs/800s. The HSTs/800s may get divided between the GW and new Westcountry franchises.

If the split is to happen then this will be very interesting to watch with possible outcomes:

If FirstGroup don't win either or both GW and Westcountry franchises, then both may each get different brands/TOC names or the GWR brand may be carried over on the trimmed down GW franchise by the new operator.

If FG retains the rump GW franchise then it probably will be business as usual as GWR only that they will no longer run services within Devon & Cornwall.

If FG find themselves getting the new Westcountry franchise but not GW, then it would be hard to see how possible for the GWR brand to move there as the new GW operator may use it. This could also mean the end of the GWR brand if the new GW operator does not plan using it.

If the Westcountry franchise goes to FG, and the GWR brand does not survive because of new GW operator not using it then I hope FG will use that initiative they had with GWR to recreate a "new GWR style" brand for the Westcountry franchise. After all the new Westcountry franchise operator likely will inherit the Night Riviera sleeper service.

Either way, I hope the GWR brand is retained for the rump GW franchise and a strong new GWR style brand to be introduced for the Westcountry franchise.

Only time will tell!

 

[jimm]

Regarding the possible split in Devon and Cornwall, is it proposed to separate the traditional Intercity trains from the local trains?

If so, there may be a comeback of Regional Railways Wales & West (obviously minus the Wales bit). Also, how does the Devon Metro concept fit in?

The DfT consultation document can be read in full here, complete with a map of the proposed split in services they asked for comments on https://assets.publishing.service.g...t-western-rail-franchise-consultation-web.pdf

I think it'll be similar to the old Wessex Trains franchise though extended to include Cornwall plus the addition of intercity fleet of HSTs/800s. The HSTs/800s may get divided between the GW and new Westcountry franchises.

What Intercity fleet of HSTs and 800s? By the time the current franchise is due to end - and a further extension is on the cards anyway - the only HSTs that might still be running would be the regional fleet for the South West, with the full fleet of 800s and 802s being available for the long-distance express services from early next year.

 

[dorsetdesiro]

What Intercity fleet of HSTs and 800s? By the tim the current franchise is due to end - and a further extension is on the cards anyway - the only HSTs that might still be running would be the regional fleet for the South West, with the full fleet of 800s and 802s being available for the long-distance express services from early next year.

Say if a new Westcountry franchise is created, the TOC's name is for example "Westcountry Trains", then as you say those HSTs will be run on regional services and the IETs will go long distance to Paddington, both operated by "WT".

The other IETs will be run by the rump GW operator, this is likely GWR as usual if FirstGroup retain the franchise.

"WT" to run intercity services from Paddington to Plymouth & Penzance and local services roughly where Wessex Trains previously operated also where GWR now operates in Devon & Cornwall. The rump GWR will run intercity from Paddington to Bristol, Swansea & Worcester and local services in the Bristol-Bath urban area, Thames Valley and Cotswolds.

The Night Riviera likely will be transferred to "WT" or a new Caledonian Sleeper style franchise to be created (probably not, unlike CS, the NR is just one route).

 

[irish_rail]

Say if a new Westcountry franchise is created, the TOC's name is for example "Westcountry Trains", then as you say those HSTs will be run on regional services and the IETs will go long distance to Paddington, both operated by "WT".

The other IETs will be run by the rump GW operator, this is likely GWR as usual if FirstGroup retain the franchise.

"WT" to run intercity services from Paddington to Plymouth & Penzance and local services roughly where Wessex Trains previously operated also where GWR now operates in Devon & Cornwall. The rump GWR will run intercity from Paddington to Bristol, Swansea & Worcester and local services in the Bristol-Bath urban area, Thames Valley and Cotswolds.

The Night Riviera likely will be transferred to "WT" or a new Caledonian Sleeper style franchise to be created (probably not, unlike CS, the NR is just one route).

I would imagine all the 800/802s would be taken by the main franchise with the west country franchise probably making do with whatever is not wanted elsewhere , 222s or the like. Really can't see the dft allowing valuable trains to be taken away from the "important" routes to Cardiff / Oxford / Bristol etc. The south west will be made to make do as usual.

 

[dorsetdesiro]

I would imagine all the 800/802s would be taken by the main franchise with the west country franchise probably making do with whatever is not wanted elsewhere , 222s or the like. Really can't see the dft allowing valuable trains to be taken away from the "important" routes to Cardiff / Oxford / Bristol etc. The south west will be made to make do as usual.

Oh dear, "Westcountry Trains" may have to keep the Pacers for bit longer! Haha!

 

[swt_passenger]

I would imagine all the 800/802s would be taken by the main franchise with the west country franchise probably making do with whatever is not wanted elsewhere , 222s or the like. Really can't see the dft allowing valuable trains to be taken away from the "important" routes to Cardiff / Oxford / Bristol etc. The south west will be made to make do as usual.

That’s completely illogical. If you left all the 800/802s with the main franchise they’d have too many. The fleet already includes those for the Paddington - Taunton/Exeter/Plymouth/Penzance, why would they be removed rather than shared pro-rate?

 

[adrock1976]

The DfT consultation document can be read in full here, complete with a map of the proposed split in services they asked for comments on https://assets.publishing.service.g...t-western-rail-franchise-consultation-web.pdf

A very interesting document.

Thank you very much for the link above.

 

[IanXC]

I would imagine all the 800/802s would be taken by the main franchise with the west country franchise probably making do with whatever is not wanted elsewhere , 222s or the like. Really can't see the dft allowing valuable trains to be taken away from the "important" routes to Cardiff / Oxford / Bristol etc. The south west will be made to make do as usual.

Depending on the precise split (for instance thinking about the Bedwyn services) it might actually transpire that the 800 fleet matches nicely to the rump Bristol/South Wales operation, and the 802s to the West Country operation.

 

[HowardGWR]

I can only see sense in splitting this franchise if increased competition ensued (e.g. VT vs LNW vs Chiltern). As that is not the case in this suggestion, it's not only undesirable and likely to increase management costs, but also likely to lead to less cooperation on dovetailing timetables.

 

[irish_rail]

Depending on the precise split (for instance thinking about the Bedwyn services) it might actually transpire that the 800 fleet matches nicely to the rump Bristol/South Wales operation, and the 802s to the West Country operation.

Yes but it has already been admitted that the 9 car 802s are going to be used on the precious Swansea and Oxford serivices. Clearly not enough 800s where ordered hence why 802s are planned to be robbed for these services. At very best I can see the west Country franchise being left with all of the 5 car 802s, when what is needed on pad to PZ is 9 car sets....

 

[jimm]

Yes but it has already been admitted that the 9 car 802s are going to be used on the precious Swansea and Oxford serivices. Clearly not enough 800s where ordered hence why 802s are planned to be robbed for these services. At very best I can see the west Country franchise being left with all of the 5 car 802s, when what is needed on pad to PZ is 9 car sets....

What do you mean 'admitted'? When the initial Class 802 order was made, it was stated that a set or two would be used to help out in the peaks on the Cotswold Line. No robbery or cloak and dagger stuff involved.

Then seven more nine-car 802s were ordered with the specific aim of increasing the IET fleet of 800s and 802s to a size that could cover all Oxford fast workings, due to the delay in electrification there - which meant that the planned mix of IETs and 387s on the fasts was not possible - and to cover Paddington-Bedwyn duties as well, rather than Bedwyn being served by a Turbo shuttle from Newbury. Once again, no robbery involved.

And since when has a nine-car train, seating 650 passengers, ever been needed in Cornwall on a winter's day, or for rather a lot of the rest of the year, come to that? HSTs are already capacity overkill most of the time west of Plymouth - never mind the increased capacity and frequency that the short HSTs and 158s will be delivering on West Country regional services from next January, as well as extra London-Penzance through services, which will run at two-hourly intervals, even if only a five-car set does the leg west of Plymouth.

Whereas filling a 650-seat train on duties closer to London is a rather more straightforward - and lucrative - exercise.

 

[The Ham]

Yes but it has already been admitted that the 9 car 802s are going to be used on the precious Swansea and Oxford serivices. Clearly not enough 800s where ordered hence why 802s are planned to be robbed for these services. At very best I can see the west Country franchise being left with all of the 5 car 802s, when what is needed on pad to PZ is 9 car sets....

Given that, even under the old timetable something like 16 HST's were going to be needed to run the services along the B&H there wouldn't be enough 5 coach units and so there would be a need for some 9 coach units.

Of course, if you split the franchise you would need more spare units, in that with a single franchise you could have some spare units at Exeter, London and Bristol and then use then for whatever service needed cover. Whilst with a split franchise you'd need Cornish and GWR units at Exeter and London to cover as required.

 

[irish_rail]

What do you mean 'admitted'? When the initial Class 802 order was made, it was stated that a set or two would be used to help out in the peaks on the Cotswold Line. No robbery or cloak and dagger stuff involved.

Then seven more nine-car 802s were ordered with the specific aim of increasing the IET fleet of 800s and 802s to a size that could cover all Oxford fast workings, due to the delay in electrification there - which meant that the planned mix of IETs and 387s on the fasts was not possible - and to cover Paddington-Bedwyn duties as well, rather than Bedwyn being served by a Turbo shuttle from Newbury. Once again, no robbery involved.

And since when has a nine-car train, seating 650 passengers, ever been needed in Cornwall on a winter's day, or for rather a lot of the rest of the year, come to that? HSTs are already capacity overkill most of the time west of Plymouth - never mind the increased capacity and frequency that the short HSTs and 158s will be delivering on West Country regional services from next January, as well as extra London-Penzance through services, which will run at two-hourly intervals, even if only a five-car set does the leg west of Plymouth.

Whereas filling a 650-seat train on duties closer to London is a rather more straightforward - and lucrative - exercise.

9 car sets are needed on the pad to pz route precisely because of the type of service that it is between London and plymouth, nothing to do with the Cornwall bit. Indeed there is no way Cardiff to Swansea justifies 9 car sets at any of time of day or year but that will be happening.
Unlike your cotswold line, London to Plymouth is a proper intercity route on a par with the London to Scotland routes with many of the travellers, occasional or elderly. The journey time is a long one too and there is the small matter of the pullman restaraunts on many of the trains. It is also rather wasteful to need to double man both 5 car sets on such long journeys.
Splitting and attaching 5 car sets at Plymouth is also still an unknown quantity and could potentially have a detrimental effect on journey times to Cornwall.
9 car sets make more sense on the long distance trains with pairs of 5 cars more suited to the regular commuter offering nearer to London .

 

[cactustwirly]

9 car sets are needed on the pad to pz route precisely because of the type of service that it is between London and plymouth, nothing to do with the Cornwall bit. Indeed there is no way Cardiff to Swansea justifies 9 car sets at any of time of day or year but that will be happening.
Unlike your cotswold line, London to Plymouth is a proper intercity route on a par with the London to Scotland routes with many of the travellers, occasional or elderly. The journey time is a long one too and there is the small matter of the pullman restaraunts on many of the trains. It is also rather wasteful to need to double man both 5 car sets on such long journeys.
Splitting and attaching 5 car sets at Plymouth is also still an unknown quantity and could potentially have a detrimental effect on journey times to Cornwall.
9 car sets make more sense on the long distance trains with pairs of 5 cars more suited to the regular commuter offering nearer to London .

Have you actually been on a Plymouth service in the Winter?
A 5 car 802 would offer sufficient capacity, all this about "proper intercity services" having to have 9 car 802s is complete BS. The length of the train should be optimised for the demand.

 

[yorksrob]

What do you mean 'admitted'? When the initial Class 802 order was made, it was stated that a set or two would be used to help out in the peaks on the Cotswold Line. No robbery or cloak and dagger stuff involved.

Then seven more nine-car 802s were ordered with the specific aim of increasing the IET fleet of 800s and 802s to a size that could cover all Oxford fast workings, due to the delay in electrification there - which meant that the planned mix of IETs and 387s on the fasts was not possible - and to cover Paddington-Bedwyn duties as well, rather than Bedwyn being served by a Turbo shuttle from Newbury. Once again, no robbery involved.

And since when has a nine-car train, seating 650 passengers, ever been needed in Cornwall on a winter's day, or for rather a lot of the rest of the year, come to that? HSTs are already capacity overkill most of the time west of Plymouth - never mind the increased capacity and frequency that the short HSTs and 158s will be delivering on West Country regional services from next January, as well as extra London-Penzance through services, which will run at two-hourly intervals, even if only a five-car set does the leg west of Plymouth.

Whereas filling a 650-seat train on duties closer to London is a rather more straightforward - and lucrative - exercise.

I have to say, I often find the HST's pretty busy at least as far as Truro, and that's in late September

 

[DarloRich]

The quality of discussion here is fantastically wibbly! It is clearly a consultation document floating ideas rather than a firm proposal. It is clear many posters have no idea how these things work.

It was as though the civil servant was bored with the job of producing a consultation document and came up with the idea, to pass a wet afternoon in November. A waste of everyone's time, in my view (and our money).

If only. Said Civil Servant is more likely to think he's god's gift to the railways and has come up with a genius proposition. The reason for the arguments are possibly more sensible people managing to insert them in?

I aspire to head the department of messing things up and annoying enthusiasts. It is my vocation

I think, more likely, the minster asked for ideas and ideas were given. Often those ideas are thought ( but not known) to not feasible/attractive but information must be sought to prove the view. It is also entirely possible the answer isnt yet known and these kinds of studies help shape that. It often boils down to: we all agree we want change! (we have no idea what that change looks like)

Yes, because we absolutely love wasting our time for absolutely no reason. Jesus.

I hope you realise that civil servants don't just go in to work every day and do whatever the hell they feel like. Some critical analysis on your part here would be appreciated.

you will be lucky!

That's the way that I read it.

Some people on here need to understand the way that Government (or any large organisation) works.

You come up with feasibility studies/ reports/ consultation documents/ proposals that suggest things to see if they could be done better. Often, you know that you don't want these things to happen, but you have to show that you've at least considered them.

So, you might intend to keep one GWR, but you have to placate angry people in Devon/ Cornwall who feel ignored by a huge franchise that seems to be too focussed on the Thames Valley/ Bristol axis. You have a politician who wants to be seen to respond to the "valid concerns" of their local voters. Some of that may be for A Local Franchise For Local People, some of it may be wanting to give local councillors some involvement (which they feel they don't have in a huge-franchise dominated by Paddington services), some of it may be people demanding all GWR announcements are bi-lingual (English and Cornish).

In the grand scheme of a ten year franchise, it doesn't cost a lot of money to have someone knock up a report that gives lip service to the demands for "local accountability" or "better involvement for West Country stakeholders". You examine the ideas, you dismiss the ideas, the politician can go away to explain that everything was investigated and considered, but the status quo is best. That's the way that Civil Servants operate, and their private sector equivalents.

Is the correct answer!

The mini franchise worked before but the add on of Paddington is not a good idea ,local trains run by a localy based company is an excellent idea for Devon and Cornwall.

"Hello, hello? What's going on? What's all this shouting? We'll have no trouble here! This is a local train, for local people; there's nothing for you here"

 

[Cowley]

I would suggest splitting it further - Cornish local services running to Saltash only, for passengers to cross the Tamar Bridge by foot and board Devon services on the Devon side.
Cornish Rail - a new livery of beige lower bodyside plus strawberry red around the windows and a cream roof.
Devon services the same but with the red and cream reversed in the correct way.

 

[HowardGWR]

It's one thing to put forward an idea and let people discuss it. We can do that here free of charge to anyone. Wasting civil servants' and others' time on this nonsense is costing we taxpayers needlessly. The GWR (the real one) ran its trains from London to Bristol, Fishguard, Birkenhead, Penzance and even Crewe, perfectly satisfactorily and with such efficiency that even the slightest delay would result in a 'please explain' memo; all this at the same with an intensive parcels and freight service to boot. I understand we are in a different era, but the fundamentals of railway operation have not changed.

I have not seen one fact in this discussion that would tell me why splitting up the present franchise would have any benefit for the pax (remember, the people who buy the tickets) whatsoever.

 

[jimm]

9 car sets are needed on the pad to pz route precisely because of the type of service that it is between London and plymouth, nothing to do with the Cornwall bit. Indeed there is no way Cardiff to Swansea justifies 9 car sets at any of time of day or year but that will be happening.
Unlike your cotswold line, London to Plymouth is a proper intercity route on a par with the London to Scotland routes with many of the travellers, occasional or elderly. The journey time is a long one too and there is the small matter of the pullman restaraunts on many of the trains. It is also rather wasteful to need to double man both 5 car sets on such long journeys.
Splitting and attaching 5 car sets at Plymouth is also still an unknown quantity and could potentially have a detrimental effect on journey times to Cornwall.
9 car sets make more sense on the long distance trains with pairs of 5 cars more suited to the regular commuter offering nearer to London .

Who said anything about the Cotswold Line? Though up here there will be 2x5 or nine-car sets at the busy times of the day and five-cars the rest of the time, matching the stock provided to the actual demand for travel.

In what way is that any different to operating 2x5 or nine-car on the busiest services west of Plymouth and five-cars at other times?

Until HSTs appeared, BR and GWR version 1.0 used portion working on Cornwall-London expresses for the reason that they did not want to lug around lots of empty coaches west of Plymouth. HSTs can't be split, so they had to go all way through as a big train, whether or not it made sense. All that splitting 2x5 formations at Plymouth will do is reinstate what had been the status quo for donkey's years.

As you know full well, there will be nine-car sets for the West Country, which I expect will be diagrammed for the Pullmans, in just the same way as they have to be careful to diagram an HST with a full kitchen on them now - get a set with the 'breakfast' kitchen and the chefs struggle to offer the full Pullman menu.

 

[DarloRich]

It's one thing to put forward an idea and let people discuss it. We can do that here free of charge to anyone. Wasting civil servants' and others' time on this nonsense is costing we taxpayers needlessly. The GWR (the real one) ran its trains from London to Bristol, Fishguard, Birkenhead, Penzance and even Crewe, perfectly satisfactorily and with such efficiency that even the slightest delay would result in a 'please explain' memo; all this at the same with an intensive parcels and freight service to boot. I understand we are in a different era, but the fundamentals of railway operation have not changed.

I have not seen one fact in this discussion that would tell me why splitting up the present franchise would have any benefit for the pax (remember, the people who buy the tickets) whatsoever.

Goodness me. It is clear from the document that the splitting of the franchise is one of a number of options under consideration. If you don't like the idea lodge a response. Try to avoid referring to some semi mythical, halcyon, day when the GWR was the greatest commercial undertaking the world has ever seen otherwise it just comes across as a silly rant that should give those time wasting mandarins a good laugh.

PS Perhaps you ought to offer your services to the DfT as some form of oracle as you clearly know what is best in every situation. That would save a fortune.

 

[HowardGWR]

No need, we've got you to do that. Don't take it so seriously. Do I have to put a smiley after every cynical post? (Actually Poe's Law of the internet says I do). It won't happen and it was put there just to be shot down, which is clear from the write-up they gave it in the consultation document. That was what I was aiming at.

 

[irish_rail]

Have you actually been on a Plymouth service in the Winter?
A 5 car 802 would offer sufficient capacity, all this about "proper intercity services" having to have 9 car 802s is complete BS. The length of the train should be optimised for the demand.

Of course I have I work the route and travel incredibly frequently . Other than first thing in morning and last train at night the trains are at least busy enough to make a 5 car feel overcrowded in the winter. People do live in Devon and Cornwall you know it's not just summer tourists!

 

[The Ham]

Of course I have I work the route and travel incredibly frequently . Other than first thing in morning and last train at night the trains are at least busy enough to make a 5 car feel overcrowded in the winter. People do live in Devon and Cornwall you know it's not just summer tourists!

There's something like 60% the capacity of a HST in a 5 coach 80x. That would mean that if there's a few more seats than 1 seat per row spare currently (6-7 seats per 5 rows) and there'll be about enough capacity in a 5 coach unit.

 

[irish_rail]

There's something like 60% the capacity of a HST in a 5 coach 80x. That would mean that if there's a few more seats than 1 seat per row spare currently (6-7 seats per 5 rows) and there'll be about enough capacity in a 5 coach unit.

Luckily TOCs don't plan intercity services expecting to have most seats sat on , I believe on long distance the desirable aim is about 60 percent seat occupancy. This also allows extra room for the large amount of luggage carried on this route.
A five car IET has just 2 bike spaces, an instant no no on the Plymouth route and minimal wheelchair space too. GwR are not planning on running 5 car sets on most pad plyms anyway, my argument is against the pairs of 5s that will be happening when I believe 9 car sets would make more sense.