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

[Moonshot]

We're all chuffed for you, we really are. And on the few occasions I've had to cross Manchester I've used Metrolink & it's been OK. But the North does not around Manchester revolve. Having an extensive light rail system in a few centres doesn't mean that all is suddenly well up here. There's a vast amount of improvements needed before we can start to slap ourselves on the backs. And indeed some similar projects have been turned down by the DfT, such as the Leeds tram proposal which has now been downgraded to a trolley bus scheme, and even that is still being argued about.

But it's not just about getting into the centres & main rail hubs, it's how we get about the rest of the region & onto other transport networks. For example, how many airports up here have anything like a half decent service? Away from Manchester, I can only think of Newcastle (reasonable service), Liverpool (gets you to a bus service to take you to reasonably short drive to the airport) & Teeside (let's not go there). If the North is to really attract business in, it needs to be connected into Europe & beyond. And as for the time being at least it seems that HS2 won't offer anything like that without changing at London, so maybe out airports need better connections. I know there are plans to improve the connections at Manchester (including Metrolink), but what about better links to Liverpool & Newcastle, as well as new links to Leeds/Bradford, Robin Hood? I don't know how good the connections are to Robin Hood, but to LBA they are a joke (from Leeds 3 buses per hour, from Bradford 2, all of which regularly suffer big delays in traffic).

And then there are all those lines around the North routinely packed yet operated often by 1, 2, 3 or if you are lucky 4 car services. Many lines themselves need speed upgrades, and sometimes doubling up as they can't offer any additional paths (not that the stock exists yet), and many stations can't cope with anything more than 4 car services (although again the stock doesn't exist yet). Even with the planned upgrades in & around the Northern Hub there are shortfalls. The Ordsall Cord once approved with relieve a severe pressure point to the South of Piccadilly, but doesn't really solve the problem of pathing services through Manchester. It's still a pinch point, as it is to the east of Leeds, or the north of Sheffield to mention a couple. The North TP electrification project will bring some good improvements, but what happens if there is a blockade? Where will the EMUs be routed to, or where will replacement DMUs come from to run non-electric routes (assuming of course there are any paths available)? The list goes on & on.

So although Manchester has seen lots of improvements, there is so much more to do up here. Of course all this comes at a huge cost, but they are needed to try to restart the economy up here. Maybe, just maybe a rethink is needed on HS2. Although in principle I'm in favour of a high speed network, I'm not if it's at the cost of other potential improvements within the region (capacity release as a result of HS2 notwithstanding). How many projects could be kick-started with even a fraction of the HS2 budget, and the risk of simply sending yet more talent to the capital & eventually losing them altogether?

I m very inclined to agree with you on that one.....the benefit of spreading that amount of state capital across the entire northern region cant be underestimated. Considering just how good our links in the North with London are already, I m not sure we need to do much more in that respect.

 

[northwichcat]

Ok ...how often do you go to meetings of the MCRUA itself though...ie with fellow members.? is is a good place to get your opinions voiced? How good are MCRUA in getting a good deal for your part of the North?

They have one meeting per year so there aren't many meetings to attend, people like the chairman and community rail officer attend meetings on behalf of MCRUA. It's much more common to see members on the trains. I think most of the conductors who work the line know the chairman.

MCRUA certainly work hard to try and address the issues major bodies miss. For instance, in 2007 Network Rail used LENNON data when making recommendations in a RUS. Many responses indicated they didn't think the LENNON data was accurate but MCRUA provided actual passenger counts of the busiest trains which proved the LENNON data wasn't accurate and both Passenger Focus and GMPTE (as they were at the time) included the MCRUA counts in their responses.

Also in 2007 Network Rail proposed running an additional Northwich-Altrincham shuttle but Northern weren't happy with the idea as they felt it would reduce the number of tickets sold to Manchester CTLZ and Manchester STNs and increase the number of "Metrolink City Route: Altrincham" tickets sold. MCRUA proposed potential solutions to get around the problem but GMPTE didn't like the idea of tickets that allowed to you to do Knutsford to Manchester via either Sale or Stockport, so the proposal never went ahead.

 

[Starmill]

And yet again you post a load of pointless waffle......so lets make it easy for you.

And yet again you have no answer to any of the totally relevant points I've made (in fact I can't even be that sure you are reading my posts) because you're ideologically driven and will not accept the reality of the situation if it breaks your nonsense assumptions that just because it's Metrolink and it has no operating subsidy, it's perfect.

Can somebody else who is a bit more objective please add their opinion as to how well integrated they think Metrolink really is?

In the meantime, and just for our Southern forumites who may not be aware, we have here in Manchester a brilliant way of getting people around the area by public transport. Its called Metrolink and has 92 stops dotted about the conurbation. Its very simple to use, and is a result of 20 years investement, and indeed is still being heavily invested in. It require no operating subsidy.

So from where I sit in my own area, we are not getting a rough deal at all, and in fact other areas of the UK are investing in light rail as well.

Which is utter nonsense.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

can we have some hard facts of how many passengers have had to find a hotel for the night because a delayed rail service from Bolton to Manchester was delayed? Do a full year of say 2013.....would be grateful for that ..

Yes, and we must national rail passengers include Bolton, Rochdale, Wigan, Moston, Mills Hill, Castleton, Farnworth, Kearsley..... oh, wait - it's actually going to be quite a lot isn't it?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How did the above answer my question? All I asked was how many passengers had to book a hotel etc....all I need is a number so I can get an idea just how many are affected this way ....

You will never know how many people are affected, because the majority are rational and will understand the risk of using a Metrolink connection is very high - so won't use the tram and won't get stranded! Duh!

 

[Moonshot]

They have one meeting per year so there aren't many meetings to attend, people like the chairman and community rail officer attend. It's much more common to see members on the trains. I think most of the conductors who work the line know the chairman.

MCRUA certainly work hard to try and address the issues major bodies miss. For instance, in 2007 Network Rail used LENNON data when making recommendations in a RUS. Many responses indicated they didn't think the LENNON data was accurate but MCRUA provided actual passenger counts of the busiest trains which proved the LENNON data wasn't accurate and both Passenger Focus and GMPTE (as they were at the time) included the MCRUA counts in their responses.

Also in 2007 Network Rail proposed running an additional Northwich-Altrincham shuttle but Northern weren't happy with the idea as they felt it would reduce the number of tickets sold to Manchester CTLZ and Manchester STNs and increase the number of "Metrolink City Route: Altrincham" tickets sold. MCRUA proposed potential solutions to get around the problem but GMPTE didn't like the idea of tickets that allowed to you to do Knutsford to Manchester via either Sale or Stockport, so the proposal never went ahead.

One meeting a year ? That seems poor.....what did you discuss at that meeting? Do you think you should be having more so as to get some of these issues you highlight actioned a bit quicker? Also I was under the impression that DFT specified services to be run, so what was different in 2007 ? Certainly a Northwich/Altrincham shuttle sounds ideal, more revenue for Northern inbetween Nothwich and Altrincham and also an enhanced opportunity for the fare paying public to connect with Metrolink at Altricncham.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Originally Posted by Moonshot View Post
In the meantime, and just for our Southern forumites who may not be aware, we have here in Manchester a brilliant way of getting people around the area by public transport. Its called Metrolink and has 92 stops dotted about the conurbation. Its very simple to use, and is a result of 20 years investement, and indeed is still being heavily invested in. It require no operating subsidy.

So from where I sit in my own area, we are not getting a rough deal at all, and in fact other areas of the UK are investing in light rail as well.


Which is utter nonsense

Whats utter nonsense?

 

[northwichcat]

what did you discuss at that meeting?

The minutes on the website give a clue: http://www.mcrua.org.uk/notice-board/annual-general-meeting-minutes-and-constitution/

Also I was under the impression that DFT specified services to be run, so what was different in 2007 ?

Have you not heard of the Route Utilisation Strategies published by Network Rail? They have recommended changes which have been implemented in the Northern franchise such as Northern providing an additional all-stops Piccadilly-Airport service every hour, an additional Manchester-Preston service every hour, Northern serving Stoke at off-peak times and serving Nottingham - none of which were part of the original franchise spec.

However, they've also proposed changes which were recommended to be taken forward but haven't happened such as a Northwich-Altrincham shuttle and a LM stopping service between Preston and Birmingham.

Anyway the plan is now for Greenbank-Manchester to be half-hourly post-Ordsall Chord which won't have the ticketing objections and will be better for passengers.

 

[Moonshot]

The minutes on the website give a clue: http://www.mcrua.org.uk/notice-board/annual-general-meeting-minutes-and-constitution/




Have you not heard of the Route Utilisation Strategies published by Network Rail? They have recommended changes which have been implemented in the Northern franchise such as Northern providing an additional all-stops Piccadilly-Airport service every hour, an additional Manchester-Preston service every hour, Northern serving Stoke at off-peak times and serving Nottingham - none of which were part of the original franchise spec.

However, they've also proposed changes which were recommended to be taken forward but haven't happened such as a Northwich-Altrincham shuttle and a LM stopping service between Preston and Birmingham.

Anyway the plan is now for Greenbank-Manchester to be half-hourly post-Ordsall Chord which won't have the ticketing objections and will be better for passengers.

There you go then !! What more could you want ...every 30 mins into Manchester. Result.

 

[Clip]

Wow, let's face it, nothing new has come of this thread apart from a claim and thena counterclaim which others have put down as false.

Yes the north doesn't get the same investment as the south but the north doesn't have the same high density issues as the south.

And yes the north west is favoured above the north east due to the same issues.

Its not worth the server costs to go round in circles this much is it?

 

[northwichcat]

Wow, let's face it, nothing new has come of this thread apart from a claim and thena counterclaim which others have put down as false.

Yes the north doesn't get the same investment as the south but the north doesn't have the same high density issues as the south.

And yes the north west is favoured above the north east due to the same issues.

Its not worth the server costs to go round in circles this much is it?

I imagine tbtc started this thread to stop the focus being taken away from other threads e.g. one about new 700s for Thameslink turning in to a discussion about 319s for the North.

I think this sums up the thread in video form: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxig2AF1-gw

 

[Clip]

I imagine tbtc started this thread to stop the focus being taken away from other threads e.g. one about new 700s for Thameslink turning in to a discussion about 319s for the North.

I think this sums up the thread in video form: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxig2AF1-gw

It is what it is and what I've said that you quoted is pretty truthful.

Yes you may not like a cascaded fleet of trains but surely its better than nothing or the vast investment on a new fleet solely for the north west(which its all you've really banged on about) not being able to justify its cost.

You need to remember that tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of commuters in the SE still have to stand for their journeys no matter how long their train is. Its the same the world over at peak times into big cities.

We have neither the space to get any new lines down south above ground so the costs build up with having to tunnel. The same can be said for Leeds to manc /pool but with the latter it would take a century to pay for it. Here it will take just centuries if that.


I don't mean to bang on about it but if the north east had the infrastructure of the north west then growth there would be on the same grand scale.

Its not. So stop your bloody moaning. All of you.

 

[northwichcat]

You need to remember that tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of commuters in the SE still have to stand for their journeys no matter how long their train is. Its the same the world over at peak times into big cities.

You need to remember that tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of commuters in the SE still have to stand for their journeys no matter how long their train is. Its the same the world over at peak times into big cities.

We have neither the space to get any new lines down south above ground so the costs build up with having to tunnel. The same can be said for Leeds to manc /pool but with the latter it would take a century to pay for it. Here it will take just centuries if that.

One thing to note about overcrowding in the North is it's not limited to peak time services used by commuters or the services just before or after peak services.

With you mentioning it being the same across the world, comparing Chester to Manchester to Pisa to Florence would seem a fair comparison, the sizes are similar and both Chester and Pisa get a high number of International visitors considering their size.

Chester-Manchester gets 2 trains per hour - quite often a 2 car train providing a very slow service and a 3 car train providing a quicker service. Pisa to Florence gets 3 trains per hour - one very slow, one quicker and one express. As well as the extra services another key difference is the Italians provide long electric trains, not little 2 car Pacers and Sprinters (which make the 3 car 175 providing the quicker service look like a luxury option.)

 

[Peter Lanky]

And just to throw a spanner in the works here, I wonder how many people end up on trains in a southerly direction for the sole purpose of going to one of two airports, when (with only a few exceptions) their journey was not necessary because they could have taken an equal if not better flight from Manchester, or to a lesser extent Birmingham, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Newcastle.

 

[northwichcat]

And just to throw a spanner in the works here, I wonder how many people end up on trains in a southerly direction for the sole purpose of going to one of two airports, when (with only a few exceptions) their journey was not necessary because they could have taken an equal if not better flight from Manchester, or to a lesser extent Birmingham, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Newcastle.

I don't know. People seem to be happy to travel to Liverpool Airport even if Manchester Airport's closer if they can make a significant saving on a flight.

I wonder if people who used to use Prestwick or Edinburgh airports for indirect flights now use Manchester for a direct flight give the changes to rail services.

 

[AM9]

And this is opposed to travellers in the South East who get apoplectic if the wrong seat configuration turns up on the Portsmouth line, or the doors on their Gatwick trains are in slightly the wrong place, for example.

I agree that such postings are similarly pathetic. Whether trains have end doors or 1/3,2/3 doors, whether they have 2+2 or 3+2 seating, whether the windows line up with second class seats etc. are indicative of somebody who doesn't have any problems at all, apart from too much time on their hands.
Those who do have genuine issues, such as serious overcrowding, unreliability, high ticket costs etc. are however spread across the whole network, no region has a monopoly of grief. Being one of 1500 people in a 12 coach EMU is no better for the individual than being one of 150 (approx.) in a pacer or 100 in a 152. (Insert correct numbers for equivalent discomfort where passengers refuse to squeeze on).
In past times I have travelled over 25 miles regularly on 305s and 308s as one of 26 in a 12 seat non corridor compartment, (the seats were luxury, I had to stand!). I knew some who experienced up to 30 in the same space. We were much more interested in getting to work or home than agonising whether the moquette was more outdated than on trains in other regions. Even the Gresley bogies sway and bang over jointed track was not worth mentioning, - and toilets, despite being grubby BR MKI style were just rarely available.

 

[GatwickDepress]

I'm convinced that at least one poster in this thread is Alan Partridge.

 

[WatcherZero]

It's interesting how it's portrayed in the media this month we have an article from Wolmar based on the PTEG research I posted earlier saying regional rail is hard done by as it's effectively subsidising LSE infrastructure and investment. Meanwhile an article from Tony Miles I think it was saying the north was slowing and had reached peak rail usage (based on LSE growing by 8% in 2012 while regional grew by only 2% and so we shouldn't invest in regional but put all investment in LSE . Ignoring the fact the country outside London was still in recession. if he had bothered to look at the latest data he would have seen regional rising by 2.7% while LSE was now only growing by 7.3% so under his logic of only looking at the changes in percentage growth and not looking deeper London must have reached peak growth so we. Should invest it all in regional!

 

[Clip]

In that case you did a very bad job, given you were just making reference to commuters having to stand and saying it's the same all over the world. If that's the only issue you think the North has then there's a hell of a lot you don't know.

Oh yes that must be it. Well done you for cottoning on to it. I must know nowt.

Even though others have countered what you have tried to prove, with facts you're still on this tip that you know it all eh lad?

Get your head back in that platform 5 book as the real world isn't for you.

 

[tbtc]

This thread still amuses me because anyone who didn't know about england would assume that the north of england is only about manchester and leeds.

Perhaps I should start a thread entitled 'Is the North East of the North getting a rough deal'?

Would be good and interesting to see certain posters views given that its quite obvious that there's shed loads of money being spent in the north west and getting cascaded trains and even the metrolink is on its second fleet of trams isn't it?

The north east still has rattling old trains on it and the metro is still using stock that's nearly 40 years old and I'm sure they would be happy for electrification schemes and some cascaded 319's.

Well Newcastle is getting a lot of investment as well with a £8.6m station redevelopment, new IEP trains and likely a half-hourly electric service to/from Liverpool. So if you want to focus only on the main cities in the North then the North East is doing just as well as the North West

In infrastructure terms, Newcastle is seeing no electrification within seventy five miles planned any time soon, no light rail upgrades in the past decade, no additional local trains (although I think they got one extra 142 as part of the cascade of DMUs a couple of years ago?.

Manchester has recently seen/is seeing electrification of the main unelectrified corridors (to Leeds/York, to Bolton/Preston/Blackpool, to Wigan, to Liverpool) plus dozens of extra electric trains to run on them, dozens of new trams, many tram extensions, new infrastructure like the Ordsall Chord, other infrastructure upgrades in the "commuter zone" (like at Todmorden or loops in the Hope Valley)...

...yet the complaints on this forum are always from those in/around Manchester

???

I've been trying to make the point you shouldn't be comparing Manchester to Newcastle if you're trying to compare the North East to the North West. Carlisle-Newcastle services go through both regions but yet no-one seems to bring up how well they serve Cumbria.

Well you seemed to dismiss the prospect of a 4 car EMU between Newcastle and Liverpool every 30 minutes and potential DMU cascades strengthen services in the North East as nothing compared to the Manchester area earlier, so I didn't think you'd think the potential CLC line improvements would be seen as significant

ainsworth74 and clip were suggesting that Manchester does reasonably well when compared to somewhere like Newcastle.

There's a simple reason why I didn't treat the doubling of service from Newcastle to Manchester as a reason why Newcastle is doing so much better than Manchester is because there's also a doubling of the service from Manchester back to Newcastle - i.e. it hardly proves that the grass is greener on Tyneside when Manchester is getting the same enhanced service to Newcastle!

Maybe from your perspective you don't consider the doubling of the service from Manchester to Newcastle (plus the increase in Huddersfield/Leeds services to six per hour, plus the increase in York services to four per hour) to be any benefit to Manchester itself, and only a benefit to Newcastle (and York/ Leeds/ Huddersfield? Maybe we should also mention the new non-stop fast service from Manchester to Liverpool each hour, or does that only benefit Geordies?

Since the half hourly Manchester - Newcastle service applies to both cities, I thought it'd be more appropriate to discuss differences between the two cities, if we are talking about a comparison.

For example:

• Newcastle - no new stations anywhere near, no electrification anywhere near, no major infrastructure improvements, no changes to local train services, no new light rail vehicles since their 1970s fleet was built, no light rail extension in the past decade (and none planned)

• Manchester - new stations (Buckshaw Parkway), lots of electrification, other infrastructure improvements (Ordsall Chord, Todmorden Chord), lots of light rail extensions, complete replacement of the initial fleet of trams after only around twenty years, the youngest trains in the country (350/4s, augmented by the 350/3s before they are needed by London Midland)

...yet we keep see complaints about how hard done by Manchester is? Because not every line will be electrified?

I hope you miss your train by 3 minutes and have to pay for a new ticket

Charming

Let's say you live near Failsworth. You look and the first tram on a Saturday morning is 0629

If we can only debate by using the extreme example of someone boarding a tram before half past six on a Saturday morning to do a Failsworth - London journey then we're going to go round and round in circles.

Yes, but light rail isn't the answer to everything, particularly if we are to have a robust inter urban/regional as well as intra urban public transport. This goes for the whole country outside the South East as well as just the North.

I don't think that anyone's suggesting that light rail is the answer to everything?

Just that there are lines where a frequent ubsubsidised tram seems to work pretty well, compared to heavy rail.

No need to phrase the debate in such black/white terms. For example, replacing Northern Rail services at Rotherham Central with an extension of Sheffield Supertram has some merits. Replacing the whole Doncaster - Rotherham - Sheffield line with light rail would be a silly idea though.

And then there are all those lines around the North routinely packed yet operated often by 1, 2, 3 or if you are lucky 4 car services

Four coach trains may be in the minority, but they are a lot more common in northern England than one coach trains (mainly confined to routes like Cleethorpes - Grimsby - Barton on Humber).

Maybe, just maybe a rethink is needed on HS2. Although in principle I'm in favour of a high speed network, I'm not if it's at the cost of other potential improvements within the region (capacity release as a result of HS2 notwithstanding). How many projects could be kick-started with even a fraction of the HS2 budget, and the risk of simply sending yet more talent to the capital & eventually losing them altogether?

HS2 isn't "at the expense" of any other transport projects - it's separate to the large increase in infrastructure improvements we are seeing in CP5.

Yes the north doesn't get the same investment as the south but the north doesn't have the same high density issues as the south.

And yes the north west is favoured above the north east due to the same issues?

Agreed - just a shame that those around Manchester can't see that their city isn't the victim and does better than many other places.

To move on from John Cleese in the "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch, maybe a better comparison would be the "Class" one with Corbett/ Barker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_sketch) - whilst Manchester isn't the tall bloke, it certainly isn't the small bloke either, and plenty of people would "look up" to the riches that Manchester has (and will get in future years).

I imagine tbtc started this thread to stop the focus being taken away from other threads e.g. one about new 700s for Thameslink turning in to a discussion about 319s for the North

I did.

We were getting far too many threads diverted into "how hard done by t'north is" - e.g. when I opened the thread about National Express getting an extension on the London Tilbury Southend/ C2C/ Essex Thamesside franchise (choose the name depending on how old you are!), I just *knew* that it wouldn't be long before there was a post about "why does this southern franchise get new trains, whilst poor old Northerners are lumbered with London's cast offs"... and duly there was. Hopefully we can keep all of this stuff on here.

With you mentioning it being the same across the world, comparing Chester to Manchester to Pisa to Florence would seem a fair comparison

More selective quoting?

It's interesting how it's portrayed in the media this month we have an article from Wolmar based on the PTEG research I posted earlier saying regional rail is hard done by as it's effectively subsidising LSE infrastructure and investment

I read that more like "the north is getting slightly more of a subsidy than it needs, as the track access fees on quieter lines with lighter trains should be lower than track access charges on busier lines with heavier trains"...

...not that "rural routes outside London are subsidising routes around London" though?

I could not agree more. The constant bashing of such services on Northern based on their subsidy figure is getting wearing. They are at least as well used as comparable services elsewhere and all the subsidy figures will tell you is that a train without many people on it isn't going to be profitable. It does not offer a jot of evidence in these cases that any of these services aren't worth running

The funny thing is that there are some people who queue up to complain about Northern on a regular basis (clapped out trains, Nodding Donkeys etc), but the moment someone suggests light rail as an alternative they are very quick to defend just how good Northern area and people should stop "bashing" them.

I think a lot of services need a step change in frequency and length of operating day as the key. I can think of a few places in the North where fares aren't competitive, particularly without such niceties as Network Cards and group save offers.

Despite the huge increases in passenger numbers we've seen in the past couple of decades, there are still a number of routes that don't come anywhere near to washing their faces - if they aren't carrying reasonable passenger numbers at a time of record passenger volumes nationally then maybe we should accept that it isn't working (rather than more fare cuts in already subsidised services)?

 

[Grumpy]

Reference keeps being made in this thread to a half hourly Newcastle-Liverpool service.
Is there any real need for this? Newcastle-Leeds is 2 trains/hour (C/Country and TPE hourly services) and the TPE service gives an hourly service to points west of Leeds. If that doesn't suit you can change at Leeds.
Surely the money could be better spent on something else. Or saved even.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Reference keeps being made in this thread to a half hourly Newcastle-Liverpool service.
Is there any real need for this? Newcastle-Leeds is 2 trains/hour (C/Country and TPE hourly services) and the TPE service gives an hourly service to points west of Leeds. If that doesn't suit you can change at Leeds.
Surely the money could be better spent on something else. Or saved even.

Once North TPE is electrified it there would be wires all the way from Liverpool to Newcastle as the ECML is already done. Since they would be acquiring a reasonable number of electric trains it makes sense to run as many electrics on this service as the infrastructure improvements allow. Any other services using the same paths would have to be run with diesel trains, which could be better used cascaded to other routes where there is no immediate possibility of using electrics instead. Besides, providing better links between the cities of the North isn't a bad thing.

 

[WatcherZero]

I read that more like "the north is getting slightly more of a subsidy than it needs, as the track access fees on quieter lines with lighter trains should be lower than track access charges on busier lines with heavier trains"...

...not that "rural routes outside London are subsidising routes around London" though?

Essentially the research suggests that the financing and renewals costs (and to a lesser extent investment elsewhere too) of LSE network are being mis attributed to Regional making it appear more expensive than it really is while LSE appears cheaper than it really is, if it was properly accounted by government for actual usage in reality rather than the high level national train km apportionment then rather than appearing to recieve 58% of government subsidy in accounts of the industry it is in reality only recieving around 28% on the ground.

Thats ultimately the difference between regional rail requiring subsidy of £2.3bn on annual revenue of £1244.2m and regional rail requiring subsidy of £1.8bn on revenue of £1244.2m. I.e. a net loss* of £1.05bn to a net loss* of £550m.

Meanwhile LSE would go from a subsidy of £0.8bn on revenue of £4.177bn to a subsidy of £1.8bn on revenue of £4.177bn. A net profit* of £3.3bn to a net profit* of £2.3bn

So ultimately Regional is only making half the losses the government assumes while LSE is a third less profitable than it thinks.

*Government revenue balance excluding Toc operating costs and Toc profit.

 

[Peter Lanky]

Can I please remind anyone who hasn't sussed it yet that not everyone in the NW lives in Manchester. For most, there is a journey into Manchester to be made before even starting on the main journey (on a pacer of course).

There are some towns that don't even have a railway at all such as Leigh, even though it once had 3 stations. No amount of fancy developments is going to change this.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There are some towns that don't even have a railway at all such as Leigh, even though it once had 3 stations. No amount of fancy developments is going to change this.

Well said. Leigh is being overlooked on the TfGM transport planning map as being not worthy enough for either heavy rail or light rail, but given the "booby prize" of a Guided Busway.

Even Hag Fold can boast of having a railway station..

 

[Moonshot]

Well said. Leigh is being overlooked on the TfGM transport planning map as being not worthy enough for either heavy rail or light rail, but given the "booby prize" of a Guided Busway.

Even Hag Fold can boast of having a railway station..

doesnt a bus do exactly what a train or tram does? Gets people from A to B?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

doesnt a bus do exactly what a train or tram does? Gets people from A to B?

One could have said the same about Sedan Chairs. There is a marked difference between certain modes of transport.

 

[Moonshot]

One could have said the same about Sedan Chairs. There is a marked difference between certain modes of transport.

Which of course can be seen in the provision of high quality bus services covering the Lancashire to Manchester market

 

[yorksrob]

I don't think that anyone's suggesting that light rail is the answer to everything?

Just that there are lines where a frequent ubsubsidised tram seems to work pretty well, compared to heavy rail.

No need to phrase the debate in such black/white terms. For example, replacing Northern Rail services at Rotherham Central with an extension of Sheffield Supertram has some merits. Replacing the whole Doncaster - Rotherham - Sheffield line with light rail would be a silly idea though.

I'm afraid I don't trust these people who seem to have wonderful ideas for expanding tram networks, yet as soon as it comes to expanding the rail network in places such as Matlock - Chinley, York - Beverly and Okehampton to Tavistock, suddenly can't countenance anything. It makes them seem more like tram fans.

HS2 isn't "at the expense" of any other transport projects - it's separate to the large increase in infrastructure improvements we are seeing in CP5.

I simply don't trust this happy interpretation. I'm sure that as soonb as someone in the political sphere makes a political point of linking expenditure on HS2 with rail in general, the two figures will be lumped together with the bread and butter railway being forced to cut as a consequence.

The funny thing is that there are some people who queue up to complain about Northern on a regular basis (clapped out trains, Nodding Donkeys etc), but the moment someone suggests light rail as an alternative they are very quick to defend just how good Northern area and people should stop "bashing" them.

Might have something to do with a tram being little more than a toiletless pacer which takes you on a long detour through the streets.

Despite the huge increases in passenger numbers we've seen in the past couple of decades, there are still a number of routes that don't come anywhere near to washing their faces - if they aren't carrying reasonable passenger numbers at a time of record passenger volumes nationally then maybe we should accept that it isn't working (rather than more fare cuts in already subsidised services)?

Washing their face in the narrowest sense of farebox revenue alone as Beeching would have it, or in the sense of the value they provide to the local community.

What do you consider reasonable passenger numbers. Settle Jnc - Carnforth is often cited as a case for closure, yet I was on it this Sunday and the train was very well loaded.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's interesting how it's portrayed in the media this month we have an article from Wolmar based on the PTEG research I posted earlier saying regional rail is hard done by as it's effectively subsidising LSE infrastructure and investment. Meanwhile an article from Tony Miles I think it was saying the north was slowing and had reached peak rail usage (based on LSE growing by 8% in 2012 while regional grew by only 2% and so we shouldn't invest in regional but put all investment in LSE . Ignoring the fact the country outside London was still in recession. if he had bothered to look at the latest data he would have seen regional rising by 2.7% while LSE was now only growing by 7.3% so under his logic of only looking at the changes in percentage growth and not looking deeper London must have reached peak growth so we. Should invest it all in regional!

Much as I always suspected.

 

[Moonshot]

I'm afraid I don't trust these people who seem to have wonderful ideas for expanding tram networks, yet as soon as it comes to expanding the rail network in places such as Matlock - Chinley, York - Beverly and Okehampton to Tavistock, suddenly can't countenance anything. It makes them seem more like tram fans.




I simply don't trust this happy interpretation. I'm sure that as soonb as someone in the political sphere makes a political point of linking expenditure on HS2 with rail in general, the two figures will be lumped together with the bread and butter railway being forced to cut as a consequence.



Might have something to do with a tram being little more than a toiletless pacer which takes you on a long detour through the streets.



Washing their face in the narrowest sense of farebox revenue alone as Beeching would have it, or in the sense of the value they provide to the local community.

What do you consider reasonable passenger numbers. Settle Jnc - Carnforth is often cited as a case for closure, yet I was on it this Sunday and the train was very well loaded.

But of course the tram network in various Northern cities carries a hell of a lot of passengers everyday who might not ordinarily use public transport. Passenger Focus made the exact point only the other week, and even provided a photograph of a half empty carpark which there office in manchester overlooks.

 

[Starmill]

doesnt a bus do exactly what a train or tram does? Gets people from A to B?

Now I really know you don't have a clue about how Public Transport works!

 

[Moonshot]

Now I really know you don't have a clue about how Public Transport works!

Oh really ? Please enlighten me on what the objectives of a bus , train or tram is when they are going about their daily business ?

 

[Starmill]

If we can only debate by using the extreme example of someone boarding a tram before half past six on a Saturday morning to do a Failsworth - London journey then we're going to go round and round in circles.

We're not. I gave a specific example to counter Moonshot's accusation of it being 'waffle'. Switch in any National Rail destination the country over - and any Metrolink stop and I guarantee you the principle holds.

Light Rail is not the answer to everything - my point is that there are a lot of things that could be done to make it the answer to more things, but if they cannot or will not be done, frankly conversion of the lines should never have taken place. I'm so glad I live near a local national rail station on a line that is safe from Metrolink conversion!