West Coast Franchise possibilties

[SJN]

At the moment Coventry is under West Coast so if split tomorrow Coventry would be in the same position as Northampton, Bletchley etc.

 

[TheNewNo2]

It does intrigue me how different routes have different franchise designs.

The Great Western has the one TOC operating regional and intercity.
The West Coast has one TOC for regional and one for intercity, and another for suburban.
The East Coast has one TOC for regional and suburban, then another for intercity, as well as several open access operators doing intercity.
The Midland has one TOC for intercity, and then one for regional/suburban, but this does intercity as well, albeit slowly.

It would make sense to me to combine all the regional and intercity out of Euston into one TOC, and then have the Birmingham area services operated by a different TOC (Network West Midlands). I'd likely also remove LIV-BHM and WCML TransPennine services from their current franchises, perhaps giving them to ICWC or XC.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would make sense to me to combine all the regional and intercity out of Euston into one TOC, and then have the Birmingham area services operated by a different TOC (Network West Midlands). I'd likely also remove LIV-BHM and WCML TransPennine services from their current franchises, perhaps giving them to ICWC or XC.

If the Trent Valley stoppers belong in West Coast, so do those two services, especially Manchester-Scotland. You could, with electrification, even consider the idea of running Euston-Manchester-Scotland in the manner of Euston-Birmingham-Scotland opening up yet more direct journey opportunities.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If the Trent Valley stoppers belong in West Coast, so do those two services, especially Manchester-Scotland. You could, with electrification, even consider the idea of running Euston-Manchester-Scotland in the manner of Euston-Birmingham-Scotland opening up yet more direct journey opportunities.

Franchising policy after 2012 recommends more franchises, not fewer.
During the SRA's tenure, the policy was "one TOC for each route into London", which was how we got FGW and GA.
The new policy aims to avoid mega-franchises which are "to big to fail", and encourages a wider variety of bidders.
Devolution also means putting fences round franchise areas which will in the future be locally managed.
DfT also doesn't want to in hoc to any one rail TOC group.
Hence the proposed split of LM into West Midlands and Main Line franchises.
I doubt if DfT will merge the main line one with ICWC, or fold back TPE Scotland routes into ICWC.
They love the cheap services provided by LM/TPE compared to VT.
The integrationists are fighting against the tide just now.
I doubt Labour would do much different, the demand for local control is too high.
I'm not saying it's right, just what current (coalition) thinking is.

 

[JaJaWa]

First Capital Connect rises from the ashes lol

I believe future First TOCs will not be branded as 'First'.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Franchising policy after 2012 recommends more franchises, not fewer.
During the SRA's tenure, the policy was "one TOC for each route into London", which was how we got FGW and GA.
The new policy aims to avoid mega-franchises which are "to big to fail", and encourages a wider variety of bidders.
Devolution also means putting fences round franchise areas which will in the future be locally managed.
DfT also doesn't want to in hoc to any one rail TOC group.
Hence the proposed split of LM into West Midlands and Main Line franchises.
I doubt if DfT will merge the main line one with ICWC, or fold back TPE Scotland routes into ICWC.
They love the cheap services provided by LM/TPE compared to VT.
The integrationists are fighting against the tide just now.
I doubt Labour would do much different, the demand for local control is too high.
I'm not saying it's right, just what current (coalition) thinking is.

Many not this time round but post HS2 I can see the WCML operator taking over any ICWC services that don't transfer to HS2 espically if stopping services to Tring transfer to Crossrail.

 

[SaveECRewards]

Of course this is all rather dependent on who wins the election, because if Labour win we might have government-owned bodies bidding for franchises. It's funny how people know government can't be trusted with anything, then rush to suggest they be trusted with running trains.

Well DOR did prove to be rather good at it after all! They seemed to have the innovation some people think only the private sector can provide (East Coast Rewards was a good example).

Private operators can have their good points too, but the only one I'd rate above DOR was GNER. They did really well in their first 10 years, then a combination of overbidding in 2005 and Sea Containers financial difficulties saw the end of them. They were the operator that truly made travel a pleasure, with restaurants covering all three meal times, the first with WiFi, the operator that commissioned ATOS to make WebTIS when everyone else was happy with thetrainline.

I'd rate all the ECML franchises ahead of WC for me. There's just no wow factor on the west coast. Although I do suspect if NXEC had carried on much longer then WC may have overtaken.

 

[Senex]

You could, with electrification, even consider the idea of running Euston-Manchester-Scotland in the manner of Euston-Birmingham-Scotland opening up yet more direct journey opportunities.

The big objection to this in the past has been the lack of OLE out of Manchester and the very substantial time penalty caused by the slow running beyond Manchester. But with an electrified and upgraded Bolton line soon to be available, will the picture look different? Extending London-Birmingham services through to Scotland not only allowed the required extra capacity to be provided but also allowed better diagramming of Pendolinos. Might not something similar be achieved by extending one of the London-Stoke-Manchester services north, to create a pattern alternating with the Birminghams between Glasgow and Edinburgh as destinations and opening uip more direct journey opportunities as you suggest?

(In CrossCountry days it was interesting to see that the time-penalty of running Birmingham-Newcastle trains via Leeds rather than direct, of about 25 minutes, was judged acceptable -- and indeed the present XC set-up would like to run all its trains that way if it could -- whereas the diversion via Manchester of Birmingham-Glasgow trains was felt to be too much, even though it added not that much more than the via Leeds version. And surely Manchester and Leeds are pretty comparable as major intermediate traffic centres.)

 

[Class 170101]

The big objection to this in the past has been the lack of OLE out of Manchester and the very substantial time penalty caused by the slow running beyond Manchester. But with an electrified and upgraded Bolton line soon to be available, will the picture look different? Extending London-Birmingham services through to Scotland not only allowed the required extra capacity to be provided but also allowed better diagramming of Pendolinos. Might not something similar be achieved by extending one of the London-Stoke-Manchester services north, to create a pattern alternating with the Birminghams between Glasgow and Edinburgh as destinations and opening uip more direct journey opportunities as you suggest?

I like the idea that some Manchester services are extended to Scotland via Bolton. However in terms of Birmingham I would like to see a Cross Country service from there to Scotland via the WCML.

 

[nuneatonmark]

I can see the point in having a West Midlands franchise focused on Birmingham but I believe that it would not be a good idea to lump LMs remaining services with the current 'Virgin' franchise. With both Virgin and LM offering some choice in services between the West Midlands, parts of the North West, Rugby, MKC and London means the customer gets a better deal IMO. While here in Nuneaton we want to see the restoration of the 'proper' off-peak fast service to London and North West we do at least now have, for the very first time a decent peak frequency from London to Nuneaton with a combination of LM and Virgin services offering good value fares. If these were combined it would be very important to allow more access to open access operators otherwise I can see the new operator putting up fares and cherry picking just like Virgin did under the MoC rules.