Why do so many people moan about the uk rail network?

[northernrail2009]

After just getting back from the best day ive ever had on the uk rail network today i am thinking to myself why do so many people moan about it?

I have travelled on 5 TOC with no problems at all and no delays at all and on 1 TOC the train run early(guess which TOC that was!!!)

Yes sometimes there are problems but hey there are worse pubic services out there.

Today the sun was out and all staff were great and all had a smile.

All staff do a great job from the drivers to the ticket office staff and the staff who clean up after us(we all seem to forget the staff who clean up all sorts of stuff after us)

By the way i dont work for any TOC.

 

[asylumxl]

Cos people remember bad journeys over good ones. They tend to focus on the bad without the good, meaning it loses all perspective.

Overall the british rail system has brilliant reliability and punctuality, but people like to forget that.

 

[Proud Salopian]

I've increasingly grown to like the national network - it is certainly improving (though there is still of course much room for improvement!) and I rarely am delayed or such. But then I use the network almost entirely for leisure, and mostly during off-peak hours/days. I'm sure a commuter in the SE will have a completely different impression of the railways! But they should only go for a rail journey on a weekend out into the countryside (the proper countryside - beyond SE England :P ) to see what train travel is all about. Watching the scenery - especially mountainous and coastal - pass by is great. Again, very much a leisure orientated view of the railways!

 

[87015]

Or because four of my last five trips have at some stage degenerated into a total farce and/or had a delay repay form sent in? This centred on a railway that has just had nigh on £10bn spent on it and is "finished", unless its a bank holiday when it will be closed.

 

[mathmo]

I get annoyed at the way about 50% of my trains are a few minutes late. Even if they leave on time they still seem to get to the destination 2-5 minutes late, which I don't understand. It means I often don't have confidence in making tight connections.

 

[jon0844]

A train running early is NOT good! Leaving 30 seconds before departure time is one thing, but I've seen trains leaving a few minutes early and that's not on - especially if the next one is 30 or 60 minutes away!

Besides that, I can't say I've got much to moan about either. The number of incidents that have caused me major grief getting home can probably be counted on one hand - and that's over 6 years of regular commuting and a fair bit of weekend travel. Weekends are often a nightmare, but rather than put up with engineering work, I'll either stay at home, use another line or use alternative transport (i.e. car).

 

[Dennis]

I get annoyed at the way about 50% of my trains are a few minutes late.

They are not officially late though

from http://www.iii.co.uk/articles/articledisplay.jsp?section=Planning&article_id=2154466, bit out of date but the principles remain true...

Statistics show that improvements to UK rail services are coming through slowly. Network Rail says punctuality was measured at 82.8% in 2004, which was 2.3% up on 2003. But just how meaningful are these figures? You need to be a Stephenson’s Rocket scientist to understand them. It’s all based around the MAA of PPM or Moving Annual Average of Public Performance Measure. Trains that complete their journey as planned are measured for punctuality at their final destination by automated systems. These compare performance with the ‘Plan of the Day’ held in the computer system. But the so-called plan does not always reflect the timetable passengers are relying on and can be adjusted to accommodate engineering works or flooding, for example.

So while passengers might think the train is late, according to Network Rail it’s not. Similarly, passengers might believe that a train is late if it does not arrive exactly on time. However, a train is still defined as ‘on time’ if it arrives within five minutes of the planned arrival time for London or regional journeys, and it can be 10 minutes behind schedule but still not ‘late’ on long-distance trips. This may not sound like a long wait to Network Rail, but for the rest of us, it means a lot of missed connections.

 

[The Planner]

The lateness is measured at the terminal station, not intermediates. If an Aberdeen - Penzance for example was 20 late at New St but got to Penzance 9 late, its on time, barking mad I know, but its the way it works.

 

[daccer]

Because we are British and having a good moan is in our blood. We are also very short sighted when it comes to apportioning blame and also we tend to have self-interest at heart rather than taking a more wide-angled view on things.

Most of the problems on todays railways were created from 1960 -1990 when rationalisation and value for money (i.e cheap) were the bywords. Railways were seen as an expensive anomaly that would eventually be swept away by the car and the lorry. Suddenly in the last decade or so we have seen a sea change in attitude to the need for a rail network but old habits do die hard and it is so ingraned in us to knock the system that we struggle to change our own personal attitudes. Culturally we have traditionally not seen the railway network as an asset but as more of an embarressment. Other countries such as France and Japan view their networks very differently.

I undertook an ALR last year after being abroad for ten years and I couldnt believe the advancements being made. Sure there are problems but it is a big network and we live on a small island. However i was lucky that the ALR allowed me to take an overall view. A regular user really only cares about his services and if they are late or he is forced to ride in overcrowded Pacers every day he doesnt care about the amazing development of HS1 and St Pancras.

I believe that this Control Period is crucial in establishing the network for good in the hearts of the UK population. The massive investments being made will change the network for the better irrevocably and will also set a standard for rail development which the public will expect to be continued. As in France were the building of one HS line leads other towns and cities to demand their own so here in the UK rail improvements in one area will inevitably lead to demands from others. And so a virtuous cycle of development will begin and our long held gripes and moans may finally fall away. Heres hoping!

 

[tbtc]

I've no problem with a five/ ten minute "window" to asess punctualty - surely we're not expecting every service to arrive at the precise second it's timetabled for? And that's why we have minimum connection times, especially at larger stations.

We didn't have all the bean counters in BR days, but I'm sure the stats wouldn't have been perfect then either - sadly some people are going to complain about anything. For example, there was a story a few months ago about the cancellation rate of "Northern" train - it was half what it used to be and a hugh improvement. But the papers were full of ignorant members of the public and rentaquote MPs "outraged" at how many there were (the figure sounded high until you realised that, for the number of trains scheduled to run, and over a year, it was under 1%).

How many car journeys arrive at their destination to the precise second they are planned to? Could you drive 100 miles and arrive "on time" 99% of the time?

 

[j0hn0]

I think anyone using the WCML in the last ten years will have a different viewpoint to most. Constant failures of infrastructure even after so called "upgrades" push you to the point of despair.

Add to that the frequent strikes of London Midland drivers then you have a big sh!t sandwich that everyone has to eat.

and the dirty stinking 321's

Yes the desiros and pendo's are new, but they needed to be and are far from perfect. Connections are patchy at best and for me to get a train from Rugby to Glasgow (one that was direct before VHF) the best option according to National rail Enquiries is to get a non-stop to Euston and then return on the 1 stop (Preston) service.

Is that a connection? Rugby to Leeds is another stupidly convoluted faff. Waiting 30 - 45 minutes at Bham or Tamworth is not a connection.

 

[jon0844]

I've no problem with a five/ ten minute "window" to asess punctualty - surely we're not expecting every service to arrive at the precise second it's timetabled for?

Actually, with the recovery time put it every service timetable I pretty much WOULD expect the train to be spot on. In fact, by rights, the trains should be coming in to their final destination EARLY if they're actually on time (and many do - like a lot of my morning trains to King's Cross even in rush hour)! Measuring at the final destination is also somewhat unfair for people along the way that can find a train being as much as 30 minutes late (definitely going to miss a connection there, and possibly a meeting etc) but recover lost time on the last leg and come in on time. Some of the NXEC schedules give a ridiculous recovery time for services from Scotland. May as well not measure them at all - just say they're fine even if they're a day late!

Now, I accept that some countries have more infrequent services and won't be hit by the delay(s) of earlier trains - and then take hours to get back to normal - but we factor in huge catch-up times. To then exceed these by another 10 minutes and still be considered on time is wrong.

I think what we need is to gradually work to reducing this time, and reducing the recovery time. Not overnight, obviously, but we should be aiming towards late meaning a few minutes overall. I could imagine this being over 5, 10 or even 15 years - but a target to work to. Of course, to impose such a target would force the Government to invest a lot more money. More railway capacity in the form of new tracks, signalling to allow closer running services and more rolling stock. TOCs could also be made to adjust their timetables if it's shown that a certain number of services are always arrivng early (although I guess the TOCs will then force drivers to go slower!).

Some is happening now, but my God it's a slow process.

 

[tbtc]

Actually, with the recovery time put it every service timetable I pretty much WOULD expect the train to be spot on. In fact, by rights, the trains should be coming in to their final destination EARLY if they're actually on time (and many do - like a lot of my morning trains to King's Cross even in rush hour)!

Some of the NXEC schedules give a ridiculous recovery time for services from Scotland. May as well not measure them at all - just say they're fine even if they're a day late!

I remember pre-Hatfield that two thirds of GNER trains were "early" at their final destinations (but 10% were "late"), which I guess shows the "slack" they have/ had

Talking of recovery time, I remember one of the railways magazines that picked up on the fact that the last Virgin train of the day from (I think) Southampton to Bournemouth (or maybe Bournemouth to Weymouth - it was going back a few years) left *before* the last SWT service of the night, but was scheduled to arrive *after* it. However, there were no loops or scope to pass between the two stations - the recovery time was so slack that in theory it was "overtaken" - must be confusing for passengers!

Measuring at the final destination is also somewhat unfair for people along the way that can find a train being as much as 30 minutes late

True, but that'd mean even more bean counters to work out how "late" a train was at various stops along the way. I appreciate it's daft that I could get a refund on a late running Sheffield - Leeds train which terminated there, but not get one if it terminated at Edinburgh.

I think what we need is to gradually work to reducing this time, and reducing the recovery time. Not overnight, obviously, but we should be aiming towards late meaning a few minutes overall. I could imagine this being over 5, 10 or even 15 years - but a target to work to

That's a good idea, and one that could/ would work over time. If you could make incremental improvements, getting it down to nine minutes, then eight minutes etc, then there's scope.

 

[jon0844]

The position of every train is recorded, showing the time it arrived and departed from every station and other points along the way. It would be quite easy to measure how late, or how often a train was late, at any given station along the route.

If you're late at nn stations on a trip, the train was late. Or you work out an average.

Here's a service picked out from this morning from King's Cross. Sorry for the poor formatting - no easy way to fix it. However, you can (eventually) see how the service goes from 6 minutes late to on time. I wonder if it will turn up at the destination on time!

Headcode: 1S16 UID: Y49052 10/05/2009 1230 London Kings Cross [KGX] to Inverness [INV] 
This Train is operated by National Express East Coast.

Location	FD	Scheduled Arrival	Scheduled Departure	Expected Arrival	Expected Departure	Pl	Lateness	DR
London Kings Cross [KGX]	 	 	0930	 	0930	 	On time	 
KNGXBEL	 	Pass	0932	Pass	0932	 	On time	 
Finsbury Park [FPK]	 	Pass	0934	Pass	0934	 	On time	 
Alexandra Palace [AAP]	 	Pass	0936	Pass	0936	 	On time	 
Potters Bar [PBR]	 	Pass	0941	Pass	0941	 	On time	 
Welwyn Garden City [WGC]	 	Pass	0945	Pass	0944	 	On time	 
WLMRGRN	 	Pass	0946	Pass	0946	 	On time	 
Stevenage [SVG]	 	Pass	0948	Pass	0947	 	-1	 
Hitchin [HIT]	 	Pass	0950	Pass	0950	 	On time	 
Sandy [SDY]	 	Pass	0956	Pass	0957	 	On time	 
Huntingdon [HUN]	 	Pass	1003	Pass	1005	 	1	 
HOLME	 	Pass	1008	Pass	1012	 	3	 
Peterborough [PBO]	 	1014	1014	1019	1022	5	8	 
TALNGTN	 	Pass	1022	Pass	1029	 	6	 
SOKEJN	 	Pass	1032	Pass	1036	 	3	 
Grantham [GRA]	 	Pass	1035	Pass	1039	 	3	 
CLPLLP	 	Pass	1040	Pass	No log	 	 	 
Newark North Gate [NNG]	 	Pass	1043	Pass	1047	 	4	 
NWRKFC	 	Pass	1043	Pass	No log	 	 	 
Retford [RET]	 	Pass	1052	Pass	1057	 	4	 
DONCLCJ	 	Pass	1101	Pass	1104	 	2	 
Doncaster [DON]	 	1108	1108	1108	1110	4	2	 
SHFTHLJ	 	Pass	1113	Pass	1114	 	On time	 
TEMPLHJ	 	Pass	1118	Pass	1119	 	1	 
HAMBLNJ	 	Pass	1120	Pass	1122	 	1	 
COLTONJ	 	Pass	1124	Pass	1126	 	1	 
York [YRK]	 	1129	1130	1130	1132	5	2	 
SKELTON	 	Pass	1134	Pass	1134	 	On time	 
TOLERTN	 	Pass	1139	Pass	1139	 	On time	 
Thirsk [THI]	 	Pass	1145	Pass	1145	 	On time	 
Northallerton [NTR]	 	Pass	1149	Pass	1149	 	On time	 
Darlington [DAR]	 	1158	1158	1201	1203	4	5	 
FYHLSJN	 	Pass	1208	Pass	1212	 	3	 
TURSDLJ	 	Pass	1210	Pass	1213	 	 	 
Durham [DHM]	 	Pass	1214	Pass	1218	 	 	 
BRTLYJN	 	Pass	1222	Pass	1223	 	 	 
KEBGSJN	 	Pass	1225	Pass	1226	 	 	 
Newcastle [NCL]	 	1228	1231	1230	1231	2	 	 
HTONSJN	 	Pass	1235	Pass	1234	 	 	 
Morpeth [MPT]	 	Pass	1245	Pass	1243	 	 	 
Alnmouth [ALM]	 	Pass	1256	Pass	1254	 	 	 
BELFORD	 	Pass	1305	Pass	1303	 	 	 
Berwick-upon-Tweed [BWK]	 	Pass	1314	Pass	1312	 	 	 
REST403	 	Pass	1316	Pass	1314	 	 	 
RESTON	 	Pass	1321	Pass	1319	 	 	 
GTHS	 	Pass	1325	Pass	1323	 	 	 
OXWLCO	 	Pass	1331	Pass	1329	 	 	 
Dunbar [DUN]	 	Pass	1332	Pass	1330	 	 	 
Drem [DRM]	 	Pass	1339	Pass	1337	 	 	 
Prestonpans [PST]	 	Pass	1347	Pass	1342	 	 	 
MNKTNHJ	 	Pass	1353	Pass	1344	 	 	 
PORTOBL	 	Pass	1356	Pass	1345	 	 	 
CRGNTYJ	 	Pass	1357	Pass	1347	 	 	 
ABHLJN	 	Pass	1359	Pass	1348	 	 	 
Edinburgh [EDB]	 	1402	 	1402

 

[The Planner]

Some recovery time will always be in the trains, it has to be. For starters you have engineering recovery time, this is there to account for any TSRs or problems with the infrastructure. If there is nothing wrong, then it should be early by that amount. That will never be removed from schedules.

As for needing more bean counters to calculate the delay along the way, you dont need any. TRUST will do it all, it calculates how late a train is at every monitoring point along its journey. Any loss of 3 minutes or more (2 on some routes) has to be accounted for and allocated a reason.

TOCs have contractural journey times that have to keep to set by the DfT, they dont just pad out their schedules because they want to, in fact they cant.

 

[90019]

Here's a service picked out from this morning from King's Cross. Sorry for the poor formatting - no easy way to fix it. However, you can (eventually) see how the service goes from 6 minutes late to on time. I wonder if it will turn up at the destination on time!

I've had a go at making it a little clearer:

Location	FD	Scheduled Arrival	Scheduled Departure	Expected Arrival	Expected Departure	Pl	Lateness
London Kings Cross 	 	0930	 	0930	 	On time	 
KNGXBEL	 		Pass	0932	Pass	0932	 	On time	 
Finsbury Park [FPK] 	Pass	0934	Pass	0934	 	On time	 
Alexandra Palace 	Pass	0936	Pass	0936	 	On time	 
Potters Bar [PBR] 	Pass	0941	Pass	0941	 	On time	 
Welwyn Garden City 	Pass	0945	Pass	0944	 	On time	 
WLMRGRN	 		Pass	0946	Pass	0946	 	On time	 
Stevenage [SVG]	 	Pass	0948	Pass	0947	 	-1	 
Hitchin [HIT]	 	Pass	0950	Pass	0950	 	On time	 
Sandy [SDY]	 	Pass	0956	Pass	0957	 	On time	 
Huntingdon[HUN]	 	Pass	1003	Pass	1005	 	1	 
HOLME	 		Pass	1008	Pass	1012	 	3	 
Peterborough	 	1014	1014	1019	1022	5	8	 
TALNGTN	 		Pass	1022	Pass	1029	 	6	 
SOKEJN	 		Pass	1032	Pass	1036	 	3	 
Grantham [GRA]	 	Pass	1035	Pass	1039	 	3	 
CLPLLP	 		Pass	1040	Pass	No log	 	 	 
Newark North Gate 	Pass	1043	Pass	1047	 	4	 
NWRKFC	 		Pass	1043	Pass	No log	 	 	 
Retford [RET]	 	Pass	1052	Pass	1057	 	4	 
DONCLCJ	 		Pass	1101	Pass	1104	 	2	 
Doncaster [DON]	 	1108	1108	1108	1110	4	2	 
SHFTHLJ	 		Pass	1113	Pass	1114	 	On time	 
TEMPLHJ	 		Pass	1118	Pass	1119	 	1	 
HAMBLNJ	 		Pass	1120	Pass	1122	 	1	 
COLTONJ	 		Pass	1124	Pass	1126	 	1	 
York [YRK]	 	1129	1130	1130	1132	5	2	 
SKELTON	 		Pass	1134	Pass	1134	 	On time	 
TOLERTN	 		Pass	1139	Pass	1139	 	On time	 
Thirsk [THI]	 	Pass	1145	Pass	1145	 	On time	 
Northallerton [NTR]	Pass	1149	Pass	1149	 	On time	 
Darlington	 	1158	1158	1201	1203	4	5	 
FYHLSJN	 		Pass	1208	Pass	1212	 	3	 
TURSDLJ	 		Pass	1210	Pass	1213	 	 	 
Durham [DHM]	 	Pass	1214	Pass	1218	 	 	 
BRTLYJN	 		Pass	1222	Pass	1223	 	 	 
KEBGSJN	 		Pass	1225	Pass	1226	 	 	 
Newcastle [NCL]	 	1228	1231	1230	1231	2	 	 
HTONSJN	 		Pass	1235	Pass	1234	 	 	 
Morpeth [MPT]	 	Pass	1245	Pass	1243	 	 	 
Alnmouth [ALM]	 	Pass	1256	Pass	1254	 	 	 
BELFORD	 		Pass	1305	Pass	1303	 	 	 
Berwick-upon-Tweed 	Pass	1314	Pass	1312	 	 	 
REST403	 		Pass	1316	Pass	1314	 	 	 
RESTON	 		Pass	1321	Pass	1319	 	 	 
GTHS	 		Pass	1325	Pass	1323	 	 	 
OXWLCO	 		Pass	1331	Pass	1329	 	 	 
Dunbar [DUN]	 	Pass	1332	Pass	1330	 	 	 
Drem [DRM]	 	Pass	1339	Pass	1337	 	 	 
Prestonpans [PST]	Pass	1347	Pass	1342	 	 	 
MNKTNHJ	 		Pass	1353	Pass	1344	 	 	 
PORTOBL	 		Pass	1356	Pass	1345	 	 	 
CRGNTYJ	 		Pass	1357	Pass	1347	 	 	 
ABHLJN	 		Pass	1359	Pass	1348	 	 	 
Edinburgh [EDB]	 	1402	 	1402

 

[me123]

Moaning about the rail network?

Trains are an easy target. Everyone moans about them, and everyone loves to moan about them. When you look at the performance figures, you'll find that trains are reliable. Remarkably reliable, in fact, in comparison to airlines and buses. I'd go as far as to say that I can always rely on trains to get me where I want to go. Of course I'd build in extra time if, for example, I was sitting an exam, but I'd do that when I was driving as well. Then there's the rolling stock. It's either too old or just bad. People moan about the stock being old and, when they get new stock, people moan that it's not comfortable enough, that the underfloor engines are too loud etc... And there's the constant obsession with door positioning; if it's not at the ends of the carriages, it's unsuitable for "intercity" runs. :roll:

Let's look at First Scotrail, which has been getting a lot of undue criticism from the media recently up here. People moan about the 170s being unsuitable for Inverness and Aberdeen runs. My experience is that they are perfectly suitable trains for these journeys; and I feel that if the doors were on the ends of the carriages they'd be widely accepted. Unreliable? They're one of the best in the country, and they're constantly improving. Considering they have to negotiate the shambles that is Glasgow Central, run trains along single track lines in the Highlands and run through Partick, I think 92% on time is a fantastic achievement, and work is being done to improve this. The rural lines often come under fire for being too slow; I saw one passenger's suggestion that FSR should not repaint the trains and spend the money upgrading the WHL to the same standard as the ECML.

I think the last one says it all really. People have unrealistic expectations. 170s, 175s and 185s all serve routes very well IMO and there is no need for HSTs or Pendolinos on the routes that they operate. The WHL is always going to be a slow rural rail line aimed mainly at tourists, like it or not. And there's no way that trains will ever be 100% reliable. Let's face it, cars aren't.

Another fantastic thing is tabloid journalism. If the train companies do a good job, they don't care. That won't sell papers. If the train companies do one thing wrong, they can jump on the bandwagon, write exaggerated editorials and slander the name of the company. Of course, this isn't just true for rail, it's true for everything in this country.

But it's important to realise that there are issues. For example, there's chronic overcrowding on some routes (Liverpool-Norwich and Thameslink come to mind). The thing is that a lot of issues are being resolved, but they will take time to do so. You can't just conjure up carriages and new track; it takes time, work and money.

So, I do think some of the news is fair. But to expect most issues to be resolved instantly is ludicrous. Most of it is omitting the fantastic service that's seen by many TOCs on a daily basis. They get a lot of unfair criticism, and I think it's time that people realised how good the railways are.

 

[tbtc]

And there's the constant obsession with door positioning; if it's not at the ends of the carriages, it's unsuitable for "intercity" runs. :roll:

Totally agree! I'm sure a 170 with doors at both ends would be preferred by some serial complainers, but it'd take longer at stations. What do they want?

People have unrealistic expectations. 170s, 175s and 185s all serve routes very well IMO and there is no need for HSTs or Pendolinos on the routes that they operate

Agreed again - some people seem to think that if it's not an eight(+) coach long train, it's not a proper train. There's some routes that deserve or demand that capacity, but for a lot of routes the traction you mention is fine. There's no point in having 125mph stock on a route like Norwich - Liverpool where the line speeds don't justify it - especially as units with slower top speeds can accelerate better.

 

[EM2]

Totally agree! I'm sure a 170 with doors at both ends would be preferred by some serial complainers, but it'd take longer at stations. What do they want?

I don't understand why doors at the end are any better/worse than doors in the middle? Surely two doors are two doors?

 

[stut]

It's not just length with the like of 170s, though, it's comfort. Those things are ridiculously cramped - anything more than a half hour run (unless you're at a dead time and can stretch out at table) and it's ridiculously uncomfortable. They're far from the only train where this is case, too. Being crammed in like sardines in airline-style seats, with backs you can't see over, low down, and misaligned with windows, is an unpleasant experience. And yet, it seems to be increasingly the norm.

That, and the daft cost of flexible tickets. Sorry, but I can't plan every aspect of my days, particularly for work. I expect to pay a little more for flexibility, but most journeys I do (to Newcastle, Leeds, etc) have ludicrous prices. Sorry, but no, that's not acceptable - you're basically saying you have to book way in advance unless you're on an expense account. It makes the TOCs look like a bunch of cheap spivs.

Then, reliability. Yes, I do expect trains to be on time to within a minute or so, except in case of something genuinely out of the railway's control. If I look at a 10- or 15-minute connection, I start thinking 'hmm, can I make it', which means I leave longer. Oh great, now I have 45 minutes in Peterborough station bar, watching grown men cry into their pints. The joy, the joy.

Actually, that's not finally. The last part is the the whole ethos that comes with privately-run companies of the type that are running a huge chunk of our railways: that it's all about the money. There's no sense that it's a service to the country any more. So, unless you're travelling to/from London, on a premium route, on an expensive ticket... Well, you don't really count, do you? You can go and change several times to get where you're going on your cheaper tickets, thankyou. We need to speed things up to the capital, to draw in those expense-claiming air passengers who won't even blink at the silly walk-up fares.

And you know, despite all of that, I still go out of my way to travel on them. Must be something in it, eh? It's probably more that I think of cars as a blight than anything else...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't understand why doors at the end are any better/worse than doors in the middle? Surely two doors are two doors?

Comfort, really. Doors at the end mean you have a vestibule separate from the carriage - you get less noise, fewer draughts when the train stops, and somewhere to put luggage (a novel concept on many of the newer trains!) and have toilets where they might not stink up the whole carriage.

 

[90019]

It's not just length with the like of 170s, though, it's comfort. Those things are ridiculously cramped - anything more than a half hour run (unless you're at a dead time and can stretch out at table) and it's ridiculously uncomfortable.

Having done Aviemore-Edinburgh not that long ago on a 170, I'm going to have to disagree with you.
It was a very good trip, the seats were comfy, with plenty of room (I wasn't at a table that time) despite there being quite a lot of people on it at times, the windows were nice and large, giving good views, the engine noise wasn't obtrusive, the doors were well placed, giving a large space next to one set of doors with a few seats, a disabled toilet, plenty of space for me and my friend's bikes and a load of other people's luggage as well. The toilet i used was also nice and clean. I can't comment on the smell, but there were no complaints from my friend when he had to go and use it.

 

[stut]

Having done Aviemore-Edinburgh not that long ago on a 170, I'm going to have to disagree with you.
It was a very good trip, the seats were comfy, with plenty of room (I wasn't at a table that time) despite there being quite a lot of people on it at times, the windows were nice and large, giving good views, the engine noise wasn't obtrusive, the doors were well placed, giving a large space next to one set of doors with a few seats, a disabled toilet, plenty of space for me and my friend's bikes and a load of other people's luggage as well. The toilet i used was also nice and clean. I can't comment on the smell, but there were no complaints from my friend when he had to go and use it.

I'm willing to believe there are decent layouts in 170s out there - however, most of my trips have been on Central/AXC 170s, where, at 6'1" (tall, but hardly hugely so), I can't even fit in the airline seats without my knees having to stick out into the aisle.

Even when I do lever myself in, at an odd angle, the curved-in headrest manages to sit right on my shoulders, meaning I have to sit forward.

I'm glad they're appropriate for some journeys - Stansted to Birmingham, though, is certainly not one of them.

The smell comment is more about the smell emanating from the toilets, rather than being in them. As someone who travels on an FCC 365 every morning, I've sadly become used to the stench the covers the entire carriage.

('Luckily', though, it looks like we're about to get some cast-off 321s on this route, so maybe I can trade smell for cramped, low-down seats, and barely visible windows!)

 

[90019]

The smell comment is more about the smell emanating from the toilets, rather than being in them.

There were no comments from my friend about the smells at all, I wasn't meaning just in the toilet

 

[delt1c]

The Problem with todays system is

Privatisation:cry:
​

Whilst things seem to improving, we dont (and cant see) have an integrated system. Since privatisation ticketing has become a loty more complicated, due to each company having its own "specials" which is fine till you want to make a journey using 2 or 3 operators, or you are making a journey which is served by more than 1 company.
What was the reason for privatisation?
If it was to save money , then it has failed as the private companies are making a profit, therfore if it had stayed nationalised that profit could have been put back into the treasury not the fat cats pockets.
Improve efficiency, dont think that one has worked, look at hull trains, a dedicated service which has to have a spare unit meaning 20% of the fleet lying idle, not very efficient. Under a nationalised operation spare stock would be available for which ever service it was suitable and was needed.
Things were far from fine under BR but they could have been improved, instead past goverments sold the family silver

 

[me123]

Having done Aviemore-Edinburgh not that long ago on a 170, I'm going to have to disagree with you.
It was a very good trip, the seats were comfy, with plenty of room (I wasn't at a table that time) despite there being quite a lot of people on it at times, the windows were nice and large, giving good views, the engine noise wasn't obtrusive, the doors were well placed, giving a large space next to one set of doors with a few seats, a disabled toilet, plenty of space for me and my friend's bikes and a load of other people's luggage as well. The toilet i used was also nice and clean. I can't comment on the smell, but there were no complaints from my friend when he had to go and use it.

That's my experiences. I can't fault the Turbostars in any of the way that people do on a regular basis. Are they Intercity trains? No. But they're good for what they do, and what they do is run between the Scottish cities very well indeed. I particularly like the versatility of the units; they can be put to good use on Bathgate runs then can do a trip to Inverness with no problems. Again, though, it's a Scotrail thing. Haymarket TMD does a great job keeping the units up to scratch, and whilst I've never been on a non-Scotrail Turbostar, I've heard that they're not the same standard.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The Problem with todays system is

Privatisation:cry:
​

Interesting. The government obviously let go of the system because it wasn't financially feasible, and passed it off to independent companies. Why? Well, do you think that they could have increased fares as much as TOCs do? They'd never have got away with it. I don't think you're argument is as simple as it is; the Private companies only make money because they can invest it in the first place and charge higher prices than the government run equivalent can.

There's always a lot of people who say that Privatisation yielded nothing that BR wouldn't have done. I don't really believe this; I don't think BR could have given everything we have today. I'm actually for franchising, but I think it's been implemented badly. The best example of this in my opinion is NXEC and the stupid conditions they've signed up to.

 

[daccer]

The main historical problem with our railways is I believe the need to be all things to all people. This tends to mean that the network is always a compromise trying to fulfil many roles and obviously not always succeeding.

A good example is the WCML. To upgrade it for Inter City services only would be a piece if cake. However they needed to incorporate local stoppers and freight travelling at different speeds. This is obviously an issue and it is no surprise that the WCML falls down so often when it is recognised as the busiest mixed traffic line in Europe. Any problem and the pack of cards tumbles.

We all want a good service but to most people what constitutes this service varies. Clean spacious trains with plenty of capacity are most peoples wish. However we dont want to pay for expensive carriages that sit in sidings for most of the day. Sure TOC's could do better but service and price always battle. To those of us on expense accounts losing the restaurant on a TOC may be an issue. For the majority it is of no consequence. The TOC has to try and please as many of its passengers as it can without breaking the bank doing so.

It is important to note that the TOC's have largely fixed costs. Therefore they have to build customer revenue to make more money. It is not in their interest to lower the service and lose clients. It is a fine line they run with margins at 3-5% or so. If the service deteriorates too far they lose clientelle.
Therefore they have to do what is necessary. Approval rates are generally high and seem to be improving. The PPM is on an upward curve and is due to reach 93% by 2014.

Statistics may lie but to me all the factors point to rail improving its
standing amongst the public at large. Five years of heavy investment are coming in CP4. IEP and HS2 will follow for sure as will elecrification. As sure as rail's decline from 1960 was an accepted fact so now is rail expansion. The network will be developed going forward and we can moan about the problems but we should never forget were we are coming from. It wont happen overnight but it will happen.

 

[merlodlliw]

Of course people will always have a moan, thats human nature.

As for the railways, in the 1960s on the North Wales coast we had trains
with ten or more carriages that moved hundreds of thousands on a summer Saturday, today with a larger population we have two coach 158 DMUs
overcrowded/filthy and a total disgrace.

ATW to increase its poor performance have increased its journey times
in effect slowing them down, I personally think any one getting on a 158 two coach DMU
from Rhyl etc to Shrewsbury have every right to moan, or suddenly a two
coach 150 appears Holyhead to Birmingham.

ATW in Wales are in it for profit as a private Company, without it would
appear any social care for its passengers,

Thats how I see it as a regular commuter, all we want are extra carriages
not extra trains in North Wales.

And now this crazy idea of 158s to London, if there is spare capacity,lets
have the trains in in Wales.

 

[Geezertronic]

The majority of my rail travel recently has been Birmingham to London on VirginTrains and I have to say it has been a pleasure. Only delayed into Euston once due to a broken down train (one of the sleepers I believe?) and it was certainly cheaper and more relaxing than the car.

I have also done some travelling using London Midland services around the Midlands - locals via Birmingham New Street from Lea Hall, Duddeston and Bournville. All a pleasure and again more relaxing than the train.

Yes sometimes the local services were a bit pricey (VirginTrains are cheaper than the car), but better than sitting in traffic

 

[delt1c]

Whilst investment is needed in rolling stock, there are many areas crying out for investment in restoring 4 track sections which were reduced to 2 in the 70's and 80's. Its no good increasing the number of trains if the track is not there for them. Look at the Lea valley line, crying out for 4 track sections , but little or no chance of it happening, the result is 2 hertford all stations an hour, 2 cambridge semi fasts, 4 Stansteas Expresses and a Stratford - Stanstead semi, all sharing 2 tracks. On paper it works but in practice if a Stanstead is delayed , everything else is usually held to let it through, and if a hertford gets delayed on route (or any other service) it can cause havic as between Hackney downs and Broxbourne there are no loops.
Another thing that is happening more regularly is stock stabled in stations through the day, not a problem if the stock is limited to certain platforms, but lately at liverpool St NX have been stabling 8 coach trains in platforms then when your train is shown in the indicator it is at the end of the platform meaning a dash (often not shown until less than 5 mins before departure) to the far end of the platform.
As for money if the goverment was able to find funds to bail out the banks , surely they must have had the funds for the railways. private funding is not all that it seems.

 

[FusionRail]

Whenever I go on a train somewhere, atleast one service is late/cancelled/diverted.