TfW found to be worst TOC in the UK

[tomuk]

All of it. The platform is one thing, the actual nuts, bolts, seats, toilets and pretty much everything else you can think off is dft led.

The only thing that isn't is the PIS and paint.

The 197s are a version of the earlier 195s. They are a CAF design to the then current TSIs/NR standards with input from Northern (Arriva) on the detail design eg interiors. The 197s are similar a CAF design, modified to Keolis Amey's requirements as agreed with the Welsh Government during the franchise process. Nothing to do with the DFT. The only input DFT has had was over the level of service tph provided on the English legs of the franchise to Manchester, Birmingham, Cheltenham and Bristol.

 

[wobman]

The 197s are a version of the earlier 195s. They are a CAF design to the then current TSIs/NR standards with input from Northern (Arriva) on the detail design eg interiors. The 197s are similar a CAF design, modified to Keolis Amey's requirements as agreed with the Welsh Government during the franchise process. Nothing to do with the DFT. The only input DFT has had was over the level of service tph provided on the English legs of the franchise to Manchester, Birmingham, Cheltenham and Bristol.

Can I ask how you know this information about the DFT having no input ? Thanks

 

[yorkie]

YouGov aren't a trustworthy source but TfW are a very poor train company, and their attitude towards passengers absolutely stinks.

 

[squizzler]

An opinion poll has found that, in its sample, TfW had the lowest overall customer satisfaction.

Not that it is the "worst toc in the UK".

I agree. I also take issue with the thread title: “TfW found to be worst TOC in the UK”. (my bold). Makes it sound like a matter of fact.

 

[Sean Emmett]

The only input DFT has had was over the level of service tph provided on the English legs of the franchise to Manchester, Birmingham, Cheltenham and Bristol.

Bristol? No TfW trains through Severn Tunnel at present.

There has been talk of a Swansea - Bristol service, ideal for 319s (even the converted 769s), but no wires down Filton Bank to Temple Meads.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

All of it. The platform is one thing, the actual nuts, bolts, seats, toilets and pretty much everything else you can think off is dft led.
The only thing that isn't is the PIS and paint.

I still don't understand what the issue is.
Are you saying WG would have gone for different suppliers/trains if they hadn't been constrained by DfT?
The only point mentioned is being forced to have predominantly 2-car units. Would WG have gone for anything different?
There's not a lot of choice for UK-spec DMUs.
DfT (in the shape of its earlier TOC requirements and franchise deals) produced several UK-approved DMU/EMU/hybrid trains.
Any variation on those specs would cost (WG) money.
I can well believe that WG found it could not afford anything very different to the DfT specs.
The underlying regulations for complying with TSIs (were EU but now UK) would also apply.
WG got round the obligation to let the franchise to the private sector (having done just that initially).

 

[TravelDream]

YouGov aren't a trustworthy source but TfW are a very poor train company, and their attitude towards passengers absolutely stinks.

I agree. I also take issue with the thread title: “TfW found to be worst TOC in the UK”. (my bold). Makes it sound like a matter of fact.

The poll didn't find TFW to be the worst TOC. It asked people to rate their local rail services and people in the Yougov Wales region gave train services in their local area the lowest score. Those people could just as easily have been talking about GWR, Avanti or Crosscountry.
The Yougov regions are rather large so no area could relate to just one TOC.

I'm not sure how TFW's attitude to passengers stinks. Staff are generally friendly, no penalty fare zones or dodgy practices in that area like certain other operators. The problems are mainly the service reductions and issues with services in the last year or two.

The only point mentioned is being forced to have predominantly 2-car units. Would WG have gone for anything different?

I wonder about this. 2 carriage trains are required on the Cambrian line, and likely would be used on the Conwy Valley line and for services in Pembrokeshire so the need was definitely there.
There's also a lot of flexibility with the platform to run in different formations dependent on demand.

TFW were never going to go for totally new design due to the huge cost and the risk of introducing a new platform.

 

[wobman]

I still don't understand what the issue is.
Are you saying WG would have gone for different suppliers/trains if they hadn't been constrained by DfT?
The only point mentioned is being forced to have predominantly 2-car units. Would WG have gone for anything different?
There's not a lot of choice for UK-spec DMUs.
DfT (in the shape of its earlier TOC requirements and franchise deals) produced several UK-approved DMU/EMU/hybrid trains.
Any variation on those specs would cost (WG) money.
I can well believe that WG found it could not afford anything very different to the DfT specs.
The underlying regulations for complying with TSIs (were EU but now UK) would also apply.
WG got round the obligation to let the franchise to the private sector (having done just that initially).

The point we are trying to get across is that the majority of the 197s order are 2 car sets, but they should be 3 cars minimum as they are fitted with ASDO and SDO. But the dft specified that the order must be the majority of the units being 2 car units for flexibility but tfw needs more trains that are longer.
This comes from multiple sources inside tfw at numerous levels of management.

 

[Anonymous10]

The poll didn't find TFW to be the worst TOC. It asked people to rate their local rail services and people in the Yougov Wales region gave train services in their local area the lowest score. Those people could just as easily have been talking about GWR, Avanti or Crosscountry.
The Yougov regions are rather large so no area could relate to just one TOC.

I'm not sure how TFW's attitude to passengers stinks. Staff are generally friendly, no penalty fare zones or dodgy practices in that area like certain other operators. The problems are mainly the service reductions and issues with services in the last year or two.



I wonder about this. 2 carriage trains are required on the Cambrian line, and likely would be used on the Conwy Valley line and for services in Pembrokeshire so the need was definitely there.
There's also a lot of flexibility with the platform to run in different formations dependent on demand.

TFW were never going to go for totally new design due to the huge cost and the risk of introducing a new platform.

i know that the pembroke dock branch can handle 5 car trains on most stations and smallest can take a 3 the Milford branch is again 3 car minimum

 

[Parallel]

It is frustrating when you're waiting for a delayed TfW train or your train's been cancelled and the reason usually given at the station is 'a problem currently investigation' when it's actually because there's a shortage of crew or "resource availability" as TfW label it. I understand the Unions requested TfW not use 'a shortage of train crew' but TfW surely need to come up with something better because "resource availability" cannot be 'a problem currently under investigation' if the cause of the problem is known!

 

[Caaardiff]

The point we are trying to get across is that the majority of the 197s order are 2 car sets, but they should be 3 cars minimum as they are fitted with ASDO and SDO. But the dft specified that the order must be the majority of the units being 2 car units for flexibility but tfw needs more trains that are longer.
This comes from multiple sources inside tfw at numerous levels of management.

You do know that 2+2 = 4?
Which is exactly why the were bought with gangways, for portion working. It means the busier routes can be 4 or 5 car and further down the line the units can be split and go separate ways on quieter parts (West wales / cambrian etc)
It also works for tfw on other lines that don't need more than 2 car as single (Blaenau, HOWL etc)

 

[wobman]

You do know that 2+2 = 4?
Which is exactly why the were bought with gangways, for portion working. It means the busier routes can be 4 or 5 car and further down the line the units can be split and go separate ways on quieter parts (West wales / cambrian etc)
It also works for tfw on other lines that don't need more than 2 car as single (Blaenau, HOWL etc)

Yes and 2+3 =5 then 3+3 = 6, wouldn't it be better for future proof and strengthening services to have the majority of the order being 3 car units not 2 car units ?.
The Cambrian fleet of 21 are all 2 car ertms units, as the 197s have SDO they could be 3 car sets with these cambria units going onto to a very busy city Birmingham.

 

[Caaardiff]

Yes and 2+3 =5 then 3+3 = 6, wouldn't it be better for future proof and strengthening services to have the majority of the order being 3 car units not 2 car units ?.
The Cambrian fleet of 21 are all 2 car ertms units, as the 197s have SDO they could be 3 car sets with these cambria units going onto to a very busy city Birmingham.

The idea behind the whole Franchise plan is that frequencies will ultimately be increased on many routes. So where a 3-4 car now is sufficient, this will likely mean services increased capacity will be 4-5 car, as well as extra services along those routes.
There's 26 3 car units on order, with majority of Swansea - Manchester services being 5 car (Either 197 or Mk4) which is a big increase from the current 2 or 3 car 175s. North Wales will see increase in frequency and most will likely be 4 or 5 car.

I do agree with Cambrian issues though. Although the plan is for a more set hourly Aberystwyth - Shrewsbury, the Pwllheli line could do with having a 3 car. I know there's currently restrictions on using anything more than 2 car and I don't believe it's down to doors. I believe it's down to infrastructure, but that should really be looked into.

 

[TravelDream]

I do agree with Cambrian issues though. Although the plan is for a more set hourly Aberystwyth - Shrewsbury, the Pwllheli line could do with having a 3 car. I know there's currently restrictions on using anything more than 2 car and I don't believe it's down to doors. I believe it's down to infrastructure, but that should really be looked into.

Cambrian to Aberystwyth is going hourly all day by 2024. That's a significant increase on the single train each two hours from just a few years ago.

 

[coradiafan2000]

I can't say it surprises me to be honest. Delays certainly aren't uncommon- my most recent journey was delayed by 15 minutes due to what was described as "a problem currently under investigation", which is the most vague excuse for a delay I've ever heard.

I don't think they are the worst TOC though. I'd personally give that reward to CrossCountry, simply because I can't think of a single thing they've done to improve the service they provide, nor do they seem to have any plans for the future. Them getting Avanti's Voyagers and the Meridians is only speculation so far.

 

[Bikeman78]

Passenger numbers are understandably below pre-Covid numbers, services have been thinned out, so why is there so much overcrowding (given that there's scope to lengthen trains, given that other services aren't being operated)?

There's not many trains missing now compared with December 2019. Llandudno trains are cut back to Chester. Some of the extra Aberystwyth trains haven't come back, Pembroke trains are cut back to Carmarthen and Cardiff to Swansea stoppers aren't running. That saves about five units. 30 Pacers have gone, a few 769s and 153s have replaced them.

 

[Eccles1983]

Incorrect.

I still don't understand what the issue is.
Are you saying WG would have gone for different suppliers/trains if they hadn't been constrained by DfT?
The only point mentioned is being forced to have predominantly 2-car units. Would WG have gone for anything different?
There's not a lot of choice for UK-spec DMUs.
DfT (in the shape of its earlier TOC requirements and franchise deals) produced several UK-approved DMU/EMU/hybrid trains.
Any variation on those specs would cost (WG) money.
I can well believe that WG found it could not afford anything very different to the DfT specs.
The underlying regulations for complying with TSIs (were EU but now UK) would also apply.
WG got round the obligation to let the franchise to the private sector (having done just that initially).

The make up of the train such as seating, toilets and various other elements are dft dictated.

Basically everything in the train. Various items have been flagged for change and the stock answer is "it is as the spec order"

And that spec order came from the dft.

The actual caf units are really good from a drivers view point. The customer package could be better, and changes are not possible due to the dft's hand.

 

[Bluejays]

I think they've been poor since taking over. They haven't helped themselves either in terms of optics.

Stupid things, like plastering the pacers in 'these trains are terminating soon ' banners, then running them for another 2 years. Or plastering trains and stations with posters about how good things will be in 5 years time.

For me,a lot of what they have done comes across as having lots of big plans, but not really giving a toss about the crap service being provided at present. I think that's the view shared by a lot of travellers. It's probably a slightly unfair viewpoint, but one caused in a large way by their stupid advertising.

Was also a lot of talk when they first took over that arriva had stitched them up a bit. Maintenance not done, depot fuel tanks left empty etc. Not sure how much truth there was to it. But they did seem to have a rocky start in terms of reliability, and have been chasing their tails since

 

[mmh]

There's not many trains missing now compared with December 2019. Llandudno trains are cut back to Chester. Some of the extra Aberystwyth trains haven't come back, Pembroke trains are cut back to Carmarthen and Cardiff to Swansea stoppers aren't running. That saves about five units. 30 Pacers have gone, a few 769s and 153s have replaced them.

Hilarious apologism for anyone who's wanted to travel east along North Wales over the past two years at "rush hour." It's an example of why people feel TFW treat passengers with absolute contempt. They're annoying, getting in the way of running a train set.

Staff on the ground, as ever, are fantastic. They know as well. It's the management who our ire should be aimed at.

 

[Caaardiff]

There was a long term plan in the new Franchise. There was a half assed short term plan with the 769's and 230's which backfired and played a huge contribution as to why things aren't great at the moment. New management came in thinking they could ride the waves until the shiny new trains came and had no foresight or contingency.
If Covid hadn't have hit TfW would have been in an even worse mess. Covid has given them an excuse to reduce services, which has been a blessing as they wouldn't have had the units to cover the service otherwise.
What should have happened is Chester - Liverpool should have been postponed and a short term concentration on maximising the fleet usage on current routes, a sped up PRM modification and refresh program, which seems to have taken forever to complete, especially the 158's that seem to have gone in separately for PRM mods and now refresh all done at Arriva Crewe. And better usage of the 170's on other routes rather than just their current ones. Money would have had to be spent on the latter to get them cleared, but the money that's been wasted on 230's and 769s would negate that.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The point we are trying to get across is that the majority of the 197s order are 2 car sets, but they should be 3 cars minimum as they are fitted with ASDO and SDO. But the dft specified that the order must be the majority of the units being 2 car units for flexibility but tfw needs more trains that are longer.
This comes from multiple sources inside tfw at numerous levels of management.

I take your point, but "TfW management wanting longer sets" isn't the same as WG being able to afford them.
You could say the same of the Northern 195 order, compounded in their case by the failure to wire some routes which were intended for EMUs.
I'd have taken 195 clones without the gangway connections - that would have saved some cash.
The 175 fleet manages perfectly well without gangways.

 

[deltic]

YouGov aren't a trustworthy source but TfW are a very poor train company, and their attitude towards passengers absolutely stinks.

YouGov are a trustworthy source - they publish full details of their surveys and as @TravelDream points out the survey is not about TOCs. Given many (majority?) of those surveyed wont have used a train over the last year its really about perception and expectations rather than reality.

 

[wobman]

I take your point, but "TfW management wanting longer sets" isn't the same as WG being able to afford them.
You could say the same of the Northern 195 order, compounded in their case by the failure to wire some routes which were intended for EMUs.
I'd have taken 195 clones without the gangway connections - that would have saved some cash.
The 175 fleet manages perfectly well without gangways.

Gangway connections are far better for regional type trains, the 197s are replacements for the sprinter fleets which work well with Gangway connections.

 

[tomuk]

This comes from multiple sources inside tfw at numerous levels of management.

You've changed your story again. You originally said your manager told you, now it is numerous levels of management. Did James Price personally tell you that DfT interfered? Messroom gossip can be just as bad if not worse than platform end wibble.

 

[tbtc]

The Liverpool services are the symbolic one for me.

It was much more of a priority to secure a route to a big city beyond the franchise boundaries than to focus resources on the "core" Welsh (or Borders) routes - that's the way that they see things - taking a share of the Liverpool - Chester market matters higher than using the DMUs on existing routes

Once things look better and the franchise has more stock then, sure, expand to places like Liverpool, but to focus on running a new service to Lime Street whilst trying to keep long standing passengers happy with promises of improvements "soon"

What'll happen if the 197s don't work straight out of the box but the 175s get snapped up by someone else? (oh, wait, I know the answer to this, it'll be "blame Arriva")

Just because Arriva's gone doesn't mean the effects of that franchise are still felt. 15 years of no investment and growth isn't going to be undone in three

Arriva's tenure ended over three years ago (which means that it must be about four years since the tender bits were being designed) - yet we are still in the world of "jam tomorrow" - it'll all be better in just another three years - if things carry on like this then in 2024 I'm sure we'll be hearing that it'll all be better by 2027, and that all problems are still the fault of Arriva!

The dft should shoulder a lot of the blame, they wrote up a non growth 15yr franchise

That was awarded in August 2003 - there's been a lot of water under the bridge since then (yet people are still blaming a decision from over eighteen years ago)

Tfw have some great ambitions for the franchise and they have brought in lots of external staff into senior roles

The current TFW plan for Wales is the most ambitious since the railways were first constructed

Great ambitions, sure, but they can't deliver - and it's worse to over-promise and then frustrate people than to suggest a fairly modest "no growth" franchise and over-perform (given that Arriva did more than the initial requirements)

Things seem worse now than they did in 2018 - despite the new franchise being drafted before Pacer replacement was required, yet they seem to have been caught cold by the fact that it'd take a wee while for new trains to be built with very little contingency

But you can't just magic up new trains, staff and infrastructure overnight

Nobody expected them to

But over three years later, what's improved?

Have little doubt that if the UK Government had been solely in charge of Wales' railway and had the new franchise we'd be stuck with the 2-3 carriage Class 175s running on the Marches for the foreseeable, diesel Sprinter trains running on the Valley Lines twice per hour at most, no Ebbw Vale line, certainly no Valleys electrification, in fact no new trains in Wales at all

...like Arriva's winning Northern franchise bid (with the UK Government solely in charge) saw just the same trains with no capacity increases and no additional stock?

(the one with new 195s and 331s, electrification meaning a number of four coach EMUs coming to the franchise to replace the Pacers/153s - cascaded three coach 170s etc... that pesky UK Government, eh?)

...or the TransPennine franchise (with the UK Government solely in charge) saw the 397s, 802s and loco hauled rakes?

It's a lot more complicated than that in reality. TfW lost 30 Pacer units but gained 9 769s and 12 170's. In terms of comparable units the 769's being 4 car are a replacement for 18 Pacers, along with the 12 170's should mean that capacity should've been increase with many of the 170's being 3 car.

30 Pacers have gone, a few 769s and 153s have replaced them.

They knew that the Pacers would be going - the railway knew about the 31 December 2019 deadline for ages - so Cardiff Bay should have had plans to fill the gap left by removing a large chunk of the local Welsh fleet

Yet over three years after the TfW franchise started we are still waiting for new trains - people seem to blame Arriva for a lot of things that aren't Arriva's fault

I think they've been poor since taking over. They haven't helped themselves either in terms of optics.

Stupid things, like plastering the pacers in 'these trains are terminating soon ' banners, then running them for another 2 years. Or plastering trains and stations with posters about how good things will be in 5 years time.

For me,a lot of what they have done comes across as having lots of big plans, but not really giving a toss about the crap service being provided at present

Agreed - they talked a great game about this transformational franchise... but that was over three years ago... the "terminating soon" stunt might have been a good boast in the final few months of their operation but after a year of seeing them it looks a bit of a hollow boast

I like some of the plans (some seem a bit pointless, going through the costs and complications of bringing in 170s to replace 175s feels a bit more like "being seen to replace the entire Arriva fleet" rather than "sensible long term planning"), but they've gone about it the wrong way - there was a lot of boasting in 2018 and then... some things have gone backwards whilst others haven't improved much- they are going to be testing the patience of passengers if numbers pick up closer to pre-Covid levels

 

[Anonymous10]

The Liverpool services are the symbolic one for me.

It was much more of a priority to secure a route to a big city beyond the franchise boundaries than to focus resources on the "core" Welsh (or Borders) routes - that's the way that they see things - taking a share of the Liverpool - Chester market matters higher than using the DMUs on existing routes

Once things look better and the franchise has more stock then, sure, expand to places like Liverpool, but to focus on running a new service to Lime Street whilst trying to keep long standing passengers happy with promises of improvements "soon"

What'll happen if the 197s don't work straight out of the box but the 175s get snapped up by someone else? (oh, wait, I know the answer to this, it'll be "blame Arriva")



Arriva's tenure ended over three years ago (which means that it must be about four years since the tender bits were being designed) - yet we are still in the world of "jam tomorrow" - it'll all be better in just another three years - if things carry on like this then in 2024 I'm sure we'll be hearing that it'll all be better by 2027, and that all problems are still the fault of Arriva!



That was awarded in August 2003 - there's been a lot of water under the bridge since then (yet people are still blaming a decision from over eighteen years ago)





Great ambitions, sure, but they can't deliver - and it's worse to over-promise and then frustrate people than to suggest a fairly modest "no growth" franchise and over-perform (given that Arriva did more than the initial requirements)

Things seem worse now than they did in 2018 - despite the new franchise being drafted before Pacer replacement was required, yet they seem to have been caught cold by the fact that it'd take a wee while for new trains to be built with very little contingency



Nobody expected them to

But over three years later, what's improved?



...like Arriva's winning Northern franchise bid (with the UK Government solely in charge) saw just the same trains with no capacity increases and no additional stock?

(the one with new 195s and 331s, electrification meaning a number of four coach EMUs coming to the franchise to replace the Pacers/153s - cascaded three coach 170s etc... that pesky UK Government, eh?)

...or the TransPennine franchise (with the UK Government solely in charge) saw the 397s, 802s and loco hauled rakes?





They knew that the Pacers would be going - the railway knew about the 31 December 2019 deadline for ages - so Cardiff Bay should have had plans to fill the gap left by removing a large chunk of the local Welsh fleet

Yet over three years after the TfW franchise started we are still waiting for new trains - people seem to blame Arriva for a lot of things that aren't Arriva's fault



Agreed - they talked a great game about this transformational franchise... but that was over three years ago... the "terminating soon" stunt might have been a good boast in the final few months of their operation but after a year of seeing them it looks a bit of a hollow boast

I like some of the plans (some seem a bit pointless, going through the costs and complications of bringing in 170s to replace 175s feels a bit more like "being seen to replace the entire Arriva fleet" rather than "sensible long term planning"), but they've gone about it the wrong way - there was a lot of boasting in 2018 and then... some things have gone backwards whilst others haven't improved much- they are going to be testing the patience of passengers if numbers pick up closer to pre-Covid levels

the class 170s were brought in to cover maesteg to Cheltenham and the ebw vale service partly replacing 175s to help 150s replace the pacers and partly to directly replace the pacers. long term they were supposed to work the west wales branches that rarely see a 175 and are usually worked by either class 150, 153 or 158 dmu's

 

[Bikeman78]

They knew that the Pacers would be going - the railway knew about the 31 December 2019 deadline for ages - so Cardiff Bay should have had plans to fill the gap left by removing a large chunk of the local Welsh fleet

Yet over three years after the TfW franchise started we are still waiting for new trains - people seem to blame Arriva for a lot of things that aren't Arriva's fault

Agreed but the planning for the replacement of 30 units needed to start long before October 2018. By then it was too late. That's not me blaming Arriva. Why should it care about a deadline 15 months after the end of the franchise?

 

[wobman]

You've changed your story again. You originally said your manager told you, now it is numerous levels of management. Did James Price personally tell you that DfT interfered? Messroom gossip can be just as bad if not worse than platform end wibble.

My manager told me and also another manger from a different dept clarified that recently, why did James Price tell you anything different??
I can assure you that managers don't have their breaks or wibble in traincrew messrooms as you seem think.

 

[wobman]

I don't think some people realise the tfw franchise is the Wales and borders franchise and its responsibilities run into many parts of England as a result.

The Chester to Liverpool services are subsidised partly by Merseytravel and it brings in valuable revenue from busy stations such a Liverpool Lime Street. This route will eventually be Cardiff to Liverpool Lime Street with direct service connection at Chester joining from Llandudno. Liverpool is a valuable market for N Wales and its always been an aspersion to runnthis service.

 

[Llandudno]

I don't think some people realise the tfw franchise is the Wales and borders franchise and its responsibilities run into many parts of England as a result.

The Chester to Liverpool services are subsidised partly by Merseytravel and it brings in valuable revenue from busy stations such a Liverpool Lime Street. This route will eventually be Cardiff to Liverpool Lime Street with direct service connection at Chester joining from Llandudno. Liverpool is a valuable market for N Wales and its always been an aspersion to runnthis service.

Yes and the Liverpool to Chester service is operated by only one unit now that the frequency has been cut to at best, one train every 2 hours (due to covid!) and the last trains at night have been culled as well, despite the leisure market bouncing back better than commuter services.