"The North Of England Is Getting A Rough Deal" discussion

[LNW-GW Joint]

All stock was new build at one time. I've seen a 25 year lease profile and the rates do NOT fall over time. It's just like a mortgage - the amount of capital repaid goes up and the interest element goes down. Over the S54 life the payment stays as is. At the end of that time the ROSCO will charge what the market will bear. That is not usually a 'drastic' fall.

All the leases for Northern stock expire in 2016 with the current franchise.
I agree with you that lease costs negotiated in 2006 probably do not change much, but 10 years on, the market is different.
The ROSCOS have to find homes for 86 class 319s and many other BR EMUs being cascaded by new projects, so lease costs will fall - some trains may be un-leasable (eg Pacers, hopefully).
The high upgrade costs may also put TOCs off leasing cascaded trains in favour of new at some point, even at Northern.
Roger Ford's recent rule of thumb was that lease rates for refurbished stock was 2 times the current lease cost, and new stock was 4 times.
The first test of all this will be at Scotrail, where all its leases expire next year except for the 380s which have a Section 54 agreement.
They also want a mix of old and new EMUs, of "higher quality".

 

[muddythefish]

Northern hit by a double whammy according to Railfuture

http://www.railfuture.org.uk/article1507-Northern-double-whammy

"It could be argued that the subsidy quoted by the Department for Transport for passengers on Northern Rail services is helping to pay for infrastructure development such as Reading station, recently opened by the Queen .

Last week the DfT issued new subsidy figures, after criticism by rail campaigners that the subsidy figures used in the DfT Stakeholder Consultation for the TransPennine Express Rail Franchise and the Northern Rail Franchise assumed the same costs for a Pacer as a Pendolino.

The new figures themselves are not very different, showing a subsidy per passenger mile for Northern Rail of 51.5 pence for 2013-14. This is made up of 25.8 pence subsidy direct to Northern, and 25.7 pence Network Grant paid to Network Rail.

The difference is in the way the figures are calculated. The new figures for the Network Grant subsidy are apportioned by fixed track access charges. Fixed track access charges are calculated on the basis of timetabled vehicle miles, but do not depend on the type of vehicle (only variable track access charges do that). However the type of vehicle is reflected in the calculation, because 70% of the costs which make up fixed track access charges are made up of renewals and maintenance costs which are disaggregated to 307 route sections - so fixed track access costs will be reasonably representative of real costs as the renewals and maintenance costs will depend on the type of traffic and hence vehicles using those route sections.

So far so good - but over 80% of the cost paid for by the network grant (£4Bn) is interest on NR's debt (£1.5Bn) and depreciation (£1.8Bn), aggregated at a national (England and Wales) level. These charges are the result of past investment in enhancements and major projects, most of which have been in the London area or on inter-city lines, which should have made those lines more operationally cost-effective and so reduced fixed track access charges.

Using operational costs as a basis for apportioning finance charges is fundamentally unsound. Northern are hit by a double whammy of paying for investment in the south, and then paying more because that investment has made the south more cost-effective. The only fair way would be to apportion those finance costs to the route sections where the investment was made, then to the train operators by vehicle mileage over each route section.

The nearest Northern Rail services to Reading are at Derby, 137 miles away."

 

[HH]

Northern hit by a double whammy according to Railfuture

Looks like they have it right.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

All the leases for Northern stock expire in 2016 with the current franchise.
I agree with you that lease costs negotiated in 2006 probably do not change much, but 10 years on, the market is different.
The ROSCOS have to find homes for 86 class 319s and many other BR EMUs being cascaded by new projects, so lease costs will fall - some trains may be un-leasable (eg Pacers, hopefully).
The high upgrade costs may also put TOCs off leasing cascaded trains in favour of new at some point, even at Northern.
Roger Ford's recent rule of thumb was that lease rates for refurbished stock was 2 times the current lease cost, and new stock was 4 times.
The first test of all this will be at Scotrail, where all its leases expire next year except for the 380s which have a Section 54 agreement.
They also want a mix of old and new EMUs, of "higher quality".

So new stock will be twice the price of refurbished 319s according to Roger Ford. Depends somewhat on the refurbishment and what the specification is for the new stock, but I think that if Rail North are going to support the purchase of new trains there could be surprisingly little difference.

As for ScotRail, the problem is that as new EMUs come in, the DMUs they replace might need to be cascaded to other services to cope with increased demand. I see a similar issue on Northern, which is why Pacers may not disappear...

 

[HSTEd]

Network Rail has debts so enormous that they weren't all spent on the South East - despite what many people would like to believe.

 

[Deerfold]

Network Rail has debts so enormous that they weren't all spent on the South East - despite what many people would like to believe.

But that's not the claim here...

These charges are the result of past investment in enhancements and major projects, most of which have been in the London area or on inter-city lines, which should have made those lines more operationally cost-effective and so reduced fixed track access charges.

 

[Class377/5]

But that's not the claim here...

Don't forget projects like Crossrail's £16bn are spilt down so its not as big as you'd think (around 2/3rd is money from TfL and external sources). Projects like the WCML will be included in that claim of course with the London bit only getting the work done now, so intercity being added into London in that assestment may affect thing to make a point suit a viewpoint. Of course Thameslink (which is spread out to large area of benefits) is cost £6bn which is massive compared to the Northern Hub cost.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

And I am not against better tains for the North.

I cannot let this opportunity afforded pass without comment....

Tain, which you describe has a very nice footbridge and has celebrated its 150th anniversary this year of its opening by the Inverness and Ross-shire Railway. I agree that more stations such as Tain should receive betterment.

 

[Abpj17]

Northern has 93% of trains running on time (and highlight major events, theft and vandalism as reasons for delay) http://www.northernrail.org/norther...formance_figures/1505_performance_figures.pdf

Over the same period, Thameslink ran at 86.4% which was its second highest in 12 months (highlighting train faults as reasons for delay and persons getting hit)
http://www.firstcapitalconnect.co.uk/static/performance/08/20/14:11:24:38/CI.PER.1505.pdf
Which one needs the investment?

 

[pemma]

Northern has 93% of trains running on time (and highlight major events, theft and vandalism as reasons for delay) http://www.northernrail.org/norther...formance_figures/1505_performance_figures.pdf

Over the same period, Thameslink ran at 86.4% which was its second highest in 12 months (highlighting train faults as reasons for delay and persons getting hit)
http://www.firstcapitalconnect.co.uk/static/performance/08/20/14:11:24:38/CI.PER.1505.pdf
Which one needs the investment?

Don't trust statistics too much. Punctuality is based on arrival times at the final stations and doesn't in any way suggest 93% of Northern passengers arrive at their destination within 5 minutes of the scheduled arrival time. I think Thameslink suffers from the problem Central used to suffer from in that a long stopping service is more likely to perform badly than a shorter one.

If you try to read too much in to what you say you could come to the conclusion that sending 319s to Northern will bring down their performance.

 

[Class377/5]

Northern has 93% of trains running on time (and highlight major events, theft and vandalism as reasons for delay) http://www.northernrail.org/norther...formance_figures/1505_performance_figures.pdf

Over the same period, Thameslink ran at 86.4% which was its second highest in 12 months (highlighting train faults as reasons for delay and persons getting hit)
http://www.firstcapitalconnect.co.uk/static/performance/08/20/14:11:24:38/CI.PER.1505.pdf
Which one needs the investment?

The bigger question is what is the % of delays the TOC vs Network Rail caused. With some TOCs the latter cause most of the issues.

 

[AM9]

Don't trust statistics too much. Punctuality is based on arrival times at the final stations and doesn't in any way suggest 93% of Northern passengers arrive at their destination within 5 minutes of the scheduled arrival time. I think Thameslink suffers from the problem Central used to suffer from in that a long stopping service is more likely to perform badly than a shorter one.

If you try to read too much in to what you say you could come to the conclusion that sending 319s to Northern will bring down their performance.

Although the 319s are credited with causing delays, it's often when they fail to make the DC-AC changeover at City Thameslink, thta's why the stretch between there and Farringdon is dual powered. That allows the train to be turned and sent back into 'DC land' rather than blocking the lines until it can be pushed out to Kentish Town.
The failure mode shouldn't be an issue when they are AC only up North.

 

[Class377/5]

Although the 319s are credited with causing delays, it's often when they fail to make the DC-AC changeover at City Thameslink, thta's why the stretch between there and Farringdon is dual powered. That allows the train to be turned and sent back into 'DC land' rather than blocking the lines until it can be pushed out to Kentish Town.
The failure mode shouldn't be an issue when they are AC only up North.

Failure to change over is a fairly rare occurrence for a 319.

 

[pemma]

Although the 319s are credited with causing delays, it's often when they fail to make the DC-AC changeover at City Thameslink, thta's why the stretch between there and Farringdon is dual powered. That allows the train to be turned and sent back into 'DC land' rather than blocking the lines until it can be pushed out to Kentish Town.
The failure mode shouldn't be an issue when they are AC only up North.

They will be running on a different type of OHEs though so how well they run on the older style of OHEs may not reflect how well they do on the new ones. The 350/4s have performed badly on Manchester Airport-Scotland despite the LM 350s being the most reliable EMUs around.

 

[W230]

Although the 319s are credited with causing delays, it's often when they fail to make the DC-AC changeover at City Thameslink, thta's why the stretch between there and Farringdon is dual powered. That allows the train to be turned and sent back into 'DC land' rather than blocking the lines until it can be pushed out to Kentish Town.

As stated by 377/5, this is fairly uncommon. More common is traction motor problems getting up the ramp between Blackfriars and City. Unfortunately the trains are so back to back in the core that it's usually already become impossible to use the Bi-di track to solve it.

I'd suggest the most common faults at the moment leading to cancellations on 319s are door faults. We've had so many of them recently...

 

[Darren R]

Northern has 93% of trains running on time (and highlight major events, theft and vandalism as reasons for delay) http://www.northernrail.org/norther...formance_figures/1505_performance_figures.pdf

Over the same period, Thameslink ran at 86.4% which was its second highest in 12 months (highlighting train faults as reasons for delay and persons getting hit)
http://www.firstcapitalconnect.co.uk/static/performance/08/20/14:11:24:38/CI.PER.1505.pdf
Which one needs the investment?

So because Thameslink is rubbish it is deserving of more investment? That's certainly one way of looking at it! You don't work for the DfT do you?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'd suggest the most common faults at the moment leading to cancellations on 319s are door faults. We've had so many of them recently...

How long have door faults on the Class 319 units been such a problem ?

 

[W230]

We've had many a cancellation throughout the spring/summer because of it.

Doors coming off runners, knackered seals, jammed buttons (rare admittedly). The train is only cancelled though if you can't get interlock or it's the end set of doors though. We had some the other day where the fitter spent three hours changing two sets of doors round so the train could get back in service (the affected doors would not have allowed it back into service) but obviously this then leads to one set being locked out of use.

The rumbles among some drivers is that the fitters don't care as they've got no jobs come the closing of Cauldwell, the units are going oop north eventually and FCC don't care as the franchise is ending. All pretty cynical views in my opinion and none that I share. I think they do a good job repairing the 319s and think they are generally seen as a pretty reliable unit but they're old and worked very hard with some out 24/7. The word on the street is also that there are loads of logged faults that there just isn't time to sort at the moment. This is more believable...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

We've had many a cancellation throughout the spring/summer because of it.

Doors coming off runners, knackered seals, jammed buttons (rare admittedly). The train is only cancelled though if you can't get interlock or it's the end set of doors though. We had some the other day where the fitter spent three hours changing two sets of doors round so the train could get back in service (the affected doors would not have allowed it back into service) but obviously this then leads to one set being locked out of use.

The rumbles among some drivers is that the fitters don't care as they've got no jobs come the closing of Cauldwell, the units are going oop north eventually and FCC don't care as the franchise is ending. All pretty cynical views in my opinion and none that I share. I think they do a good job repairing the 319s and think they are generally seen as a pretty reliable unit but they're old and worked very hard with some out 24/7. The word on the street is also that there are loads of logged faults that there just isn't time to sort at the moment. This is more believable...

That indeed is a most damning summation from someone in the current unit area of operation.

 

[AM9]

That indeed is a most damning summation from someone in the current unit area of operation.

From a passenger point of view, (somewhere between occasional and regular) I can only say that failures have rarely impacted my journeys. At the depot, the failures may add up as the trains are running a very intensive service, but per journey, the incidence may be within acceptable levels.
It seems that most of the failures mentioned here are things that would be cleared by the next overhaul. So when they are redeployed in the north (and elsewhere), their life should be slightly easier once fixed and maintained by teams who have a longer employment horizon.

 

[SWT444PORTS]

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news...rnment-backtracks-plans-dump-northern-7672808

Just found this on the internet.....not getting rid of the pacers anytime soon then!

 

[Deerfold]

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news...rnment-backtracks-plans-dump-northern-7672808

Just found this on the internet.....not getting rid of the pacers anytime soon then!

As per the article it's really not clear.

 

[W230]

At the depot, the failures may add up as the trains are running a very intensive service, but per journey, the incidence may be within acceptable levels.

I would imagine so - I look at it from the driver point of view and I've not had to cancel one (though have had two that have needed fitters to them for knackered door seals). But as you say, TL is a very intensive service and so in the grand scheme of things the cancellations shouldn't really impact on the service as a whole much. I still think they're a reliable unit (certainly seem more reliable than 377s although I understand these have a lower failure rate?).

My biggest gripe is the numbers we have on half power due to traction motor faults. But when I last saw the list posted somewhere there were only 6/7 units which out of 86 (?) probably isn't that bad - I just keep getting those same units!

 

[AM9]

I would imagine so - I look at it from the driver point of view and I've not had to cancel one (though have had two that have needed fitters to them for knackered door seals). But as you say, TL is a very intensive service and so in the grand scheme of things the cancellations shouldn't really impact on the service as a whole much. I still think they're a reliable unit (certainly seem more reliable than 377s although I understand these have a lower failure rate?).

My biggest gripe is the numbers we have on half power due to traction motor faults. But when I last saw the list posted somewhere there were only 6/7 units which out of 86 (?) probably isn't that bad - I just keep getting those same units!

Does that mean that the normal scheduled overhaul would return them to full working order?
I expect that the easier life they will get with Northern will result in fewer of the sort of arisings discussed above and will be less likely to impact on service reliability.

 

[DarloRich]

Northern Echo are starting a campaign for better rail travel i nthe north:

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/11443583.Northern_Echo_launches_campaign_calling_for_major_investment_in_North_East_rail/?ref=mr#comments

 

[Darren R]

Northern Echo are starting a campaign for better rail travel i nthe north:

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/11443583.Northern_Echo_launches_campaign_calling_for_major_investment_in_North_East_rail/?ref=mr#comments

Wow - some press officer somewhere (one of the rail unions? Labour HQ?) has been busy. Scroll down the page in the Northern Echo linked to above, and you will find a linked story: "Government U-Turn on pledge to scrap hated 'cattle truck' Pacer trains."

The self same "story" also appears in the Newcastle Chronicle: "Government backtracks on plans to dump Northern Rail 'Pacer' trains," and the Bradford Telegraph & Argus: "Bradford rail passengers 'livid' as Ministers dump pledge to scrap hated 'Pacer' trains." (The latter even has its own thread here.) Given I only know about those articles just from this Forum, I think it safe to assume it appears many times over in local newspapers across the country, should I bother to check.

Since there appears to be a co-ordinated campaign going on, who is grinding this particular axe?

 

[WatcherZero]

Yes it appears first in the Mirror then in many local newspapers, story originated from a RMT press release condemning the Northern/TPE consultation just as it was closing.

 

[Bantamzen]

Wow - some press officer somewhere (one of the rail unions? Labour HQ?) has been busy. Scroll down the page in the Northern Echo linked to above, and you will find a linked story: "Government U-Turn on pledge to scrap hated 'cattle truck' Pacer trains."

The self same "story" also appears in the Newcastle Chronicle: "Government backtracks on plans to dump Northern Rail 'Pacer' trains," and the Bradford Telegraph & Argus: "Bradford rail passengers 'livid' as Ministers dump pledge to scrap hated 'Pacer' trains." (The latter even has its own thread here.) Given I only know about those articles just from this Forum, I think it safe to assume it appears many times over in local newspapers across the country, should I bother to check.

Since there appears to be a co-ordinated campaign going on, who is grinding this particular axe?

Maybe the passengers using Pacer operated services?

And just a thought here, these days many newspapers simply copy articles from others & also many regional newspapers are owned by the same media groups, so replication of a story isn't as surprising as you might think.