Why is the UK so bad at railways?

[PGAT]

Tbf Newhaven & Seaford, Dieppe's counterparts, don't even get a service to London at all.

They did until September 2020

 

[AdamWW]

I was in Central Europe last summer and while the trains there were comfortable and reasonably frequent, they were not exactly speedy, I doubt any of the trains ever got above 100 mph and for much of the time they seemed to be only travelling at 30 to 50 mph. This included the Railjet between Prague and Vienna which I think is regarded as one of the best train services in Europe.

This summer I visiting Spain. The frequencies of trains in Spain appear to be very poor. The appears to be only direct train a day on the route I am using, which seems not to run on Saturdays.
.

Indeed. While I see plenty of things in railways overseas that I wish we had here, there's a lot I see that I'm glad we don't.

Compared to many countries we have a reasonably dense network with frequent trains and no need to commit to a particular service in advance in case all the trains sell out. And mostly inter-available fares rather than being restricted to one operator or type of service.

We also have a very generous family railcard and child fares up to 16 (effectively 18 now apart from very casual users who can't justify a 16-18 railcard).

 

[zwk500]

They did until September 2020

1 up in the morning (a portion of an Eastbourne train, IIRC) and 1 down in the evening, wasn't it?

 

[geoffk]

Just come across this quote attributed to a the Mayor of Bogotá, no less.

“A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation.” ​

This is probably more about urban buses and trams and what makes cities work properly, which they don't really in the UK.

 

[PGAT]

1 up in the morning (a portion of an Eastbourne train, IIRC) and 1 down in the evening, wasn't it?

Correct

 

[Ken H]

1. Politicians dont like authorising projects that will go beyond the next election as the opposition may get the kudos.
2. Much spending is given the 'why not spend on schools and hospitals' type analysis.
3. Too many projects have yes man as middle management. They say crossrail was like a swan. looking serene above the water surface but the feet paddling away like mad underneath!
4. silly rows between local and central government.
5. the problem of compensating TOC's for closing lines so their services benefit, inflating project costs

 

[Bevan Price]

Just for a start:
1. Successive governments lack the ability to think beyond the next election result.
1a. We have political parties who think that only their ideas are correct, and always want to change things to comply with that party's ideas.
2. We have a Civil Service (including Treasury) that likes to meddle in things that it often does not fully understand.
3. We have a DfT and Treasury that fail to comprehend the need for long-term planning.
4. Although there are many talented railway employees, there are some (hopefully a minority) who reach management positions who think that trains exist for their convenience, not for the benefit of passengers.*** (And - if railways are like other industries, inevitably a proportion will be promoted beyond their abilities by licking the boots of senior management.)

*** For example - timetable planning - not an easy task, but, for example, a timetable is useless if people cannot get to/from work, to/from shopping trips comfortably without hassle. Looking at some historic timetables, it is hardly surprising that some lines were doomed to failure long before Marples/Beeching. Even if people had wanted to commute to/from work, some timetables made that impossible.

 

[eldomtom2]

The US is about freight rail, at which they very much do lead the world.

I'm sorry, but they definitely do not. US railroads ship a lot of freight because of geography and extremely favourable regulation. In everything else they're at the bottom of the developed world - industrial relations are some of the worst of any industry in any developed country, shippers are constantly complaining of high fees and late or cancelled shipments, capital investment is practically nonexistent, the railroad companies are explicitly opposed to electrification, their safety record is atrocious (the US has only had a single year without double-digit rail worker fatalities, but the total number of rail workers is not much higher than the UK)...

 

[MattRat]

Americanization. Specifically, the surburbia dream. Even wants to live in the suburbs with two cars, like the USA, to show off their 'great' lifestyle, even though it's a terrible way to live. Walkable cities with good public transport have far happier populations than car centric ones.

 

[bramling]

Just come across this quote attributed to a the Mayor of Bogotá, no less.

“A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation.” ​

This is probably more about urban buses and trams and what makes cities work properly, which they don't really in the UK.

Judging by the behaviour on trains in this country these days, it’s amazing *anyone* uses trains when they have other alternatives. That said, roads are no better with the way some people behave, but at least you’re largely insulated from it.

Just for a start:
1. Successive governments lack the ability to think beyond the next election result.
1a. We have political parties who think that only their ideas are correct, and always want to change things to comply with that party's ideas.
2. We have a Civil Service (including Treasury) that likes to meddle in things that it often does not fully understand.
3. We have a DfT and Treasury that fail to comprehend the need for long-term planning.
4. Although there are many talented railway employees, there are some (hopefully a minority) who reach management positions who think that trains exist for their convenience, not for the benefit of passengers.*** (And - if railways are like other industries, inevitably a proportion will be promoted beyond their abilities by licking the boots of senior management.)

Excellent post and I very much agree with the above.

It does seem that our political system is increasingly creating more problems than it solves, which is of course the opposite of how things ought to be. What we do about that I’m not sure, but for a start as a population stop electing mavericks, though of course we can only choose from what we are presented with.

 

[stuu]

Firstly our political system means there is far less consensus and more chance for plans to be torn up every time there is an election. Uncertainty costs money. Change costs money.

Secondly, they really aren't that bad. Services are (normally) as frequent as anywhere comparable. There's a huge disconnect between the reality and what is presented in the media - the media, especially the right wing tabloids have this strange doublethink where everything is simultaneously crap whilst the UK is the best country in the world.

Lastly, civil engineering projects take longer than scheduled all over the world, for a variety of reasons, but often it's just luck. Too much rain, ground conditions being much worse than expected, suppliers going bankrupt unexpectedly

 

[RPI]

Why do people still keep trotting out this myth? Pacers were used on all sort of lines, but a big number were used in the Manchester and Leeds metropolitan areas. They were certainly not explicitly to keep lighter used lines open - the threat of closure (Serpell report) had largely receded by the time they came about.

A large chunk of these were built for Devon and Cornwall but were woefully inadequate with them all being sent up to the North West, in return for knackered class 101/108 hybrids!

 

[yorksrob]

Because we have a political establishment that believes that the passenger railway should cover its costs.

 

[miklcct]

I was in Central Europe last summer and while the trains there were comfortable and reasonably frequent, they were not exactly speedy, I doubt any of the trains ever got above 100 mph and for much of the time they seemed to be only travelling at 30 to 50 mph. This included the Railjet between Prague and Vienna which I think is regarded as one of the best train services in Europe.

In my opinion low-speed trains are more useful than high-speed trains because low-speed trains can stop more frequently, i.e. they can reach more places on their own without needing connecting transport.

In Central & Eastern Europe, low-speed intercity trains call at suburban station frequently, which means I can use them both as a mean of local suburban transport, and for long-distance suburban to suburban transport.

These low-speed trains are mostly slower than driving if taken end-to-end, i.e. city centre to city centre, however their fares are very cheap as in those countries, trains are a form of heavily-subsidised public service.

I would like to see this model imported into the UK, i.e. more frequent low-speed trains calling in the suburbs with cheap fares as an incentive to remove car traffic between suburbs and city centres, and prioritise pathing to low-speed stopping trains on two-track railways.

 

[Annetts key]

well, actually, we’re not that bad. But could do better. What hampers us, in short is:

History, Geography, and Politics.

Historical limitations can be mitigated if there is willing by the relevant organisations.
Geography does impose limitations, some can now be overcome with our current engineering technology. But that costs lots of money. Money that is not likely to be made available.
But the biggest problem is political. Lack of vision, limited funding, political meddling, you name it…

The biggest problem however is the way that the media portray the railways.

There is some investment in the railways. Unfortunately I think that the way the mainland U.K. network is organised and run is currently limited progress.

BR was often slated, but did manage to carry out many improvements, many of which did improve the system. Yes, sometimes it was rationalisation, often due to there not being enough money to do anything better.

Unfortunately, with the current way that the system is, it’s rather disjointed at times. There are definitely problems that should not exist. Although there are still worthwhile projects that have and are being carried out.

The four tracking of the Filton bank undoing the rationalisation caused because BR could not afford to replace a bridge is just one example. The building and then expansion of Filton Abbey Wood station, and also the same thing with Bristol Parkway station.

There are other projects that have nothing to do with passenger trains, that make a difference to the country. Regardless of if you are for against or for the use of imported coal, the improvements to the freight railways around Bristol allowed coal imports to power two large coal power stations for many years.

And all this in one relatively small corner of the railway network.

Some projects will always overrun and go over budget. The GWML OHL project is an excellent example. I don’t know if there was proper preliminary investigation of the ground conditions (even in areas where it’s now operational, in places, there are a surprising number of unused foundations). But I do know that hitting existing burred cables was largely avoidable. It’s likely that there would have been less problems if the railways were more joined up. Railway employees often have many years of experience. But unfortunately are often the last to know about what is being planned. So the knowledge and experience that they have is ignored. Until of course it starts going wrong. Then suddenly people you have never heard of want to know what ‘the locals’ know…

 

[43096]

A large chunk of these were built for Devon and Cornwall but were woefully inadequate with them all being sent up to the North West, in return for knackered class 101/108 hybrids!

"Large chunk"? 13 of them were built for Devon and Cornwall, out of a total build of 96 142s, or 144 of all Pacers. 9% wasn't a large chunk last time I checked.

 

[yorksrob]

Historical limitations are a red herring.

We have an excellent railway system for getting people from A to B. The problems are all managerial.

 

[Bald Rick]

Historical limitations can be mitigated if there is willing by the relevant organisations.

in some cases, yes.

however the main historical issue was the complete lack of national strategy when the railways were built. Hence multiple stations in many cities, multiple lines chasing the same revenue, lines built to block others, etc etc. We still live with the effects of that now.

The problems are all managerial.

Come and join us, and show us where we’re going wrong.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Come and join us, and show us where we’re going wrong.

I think some people forget that 'management' are human too!

 

[yorksrob]

in some cases, yes.

however the main historical issue was the complete lack of national strategy when the railways were built. Hence multiple stations in many cities, multiple lines chasing the same revenue, lines built to block others, etc etc. We still live with the effects of that now.



Come and join us, and show us where we’re going wrong.

It's not you. It's primarily the Government.

We know that on the ground, the railway can have the best management in the world. But unfortunatrly the ultimate management (government) just aren't very good.

 

[Annetts key]

Historical limitations are a red herring.

We have an excellent railway system for getting people from A to B. The problems are all managerial.

I’m referring to indirect routes that exist because of how the railways developed, and which no one currently wants to fix. How long has it taken to get to where we are with the East West Rail project?

A lot of the managerial problems relate to the stupid way the railways are organised. Just go and count how many companies are involved with the railways even now. Even trying to get simple things fixed often requires a lot of effort.

 

[yorksrob]

I think some people forget that 'management' are human too!

This is true of Government of course, but that doesn't mean that they aren't doing a bad job.

 

[bramling]

It's not you. It's primarily the Government.

At times it feels like there *isn’t* any effective railway-operator-level management at the moment, instead everything being micromanaged by the state via the DFT. Quite odd really when one considers we’ve had a Conservative government for coming up to 13 years.

TFL is no better, and it’s quite odd that the government seem to despise Khan’s influence, yet could quite easily have wrenched this off him.

 

[zwk500]

This is true of Government of course, but that doesn't mean that they aren't doing a bad job.

The biggest problem is the Government are trying manage at a level they don't belong. Setting strategic direction and approving borrowing on the public purse is one thing, but micro-managing pay disputes and specifying x number of services between 06:00 and 09:59 is not helpful.

 

[Annetts key]

however the main historical issue was the complete lack of national strategy when the railways were built. Hence multiple stations in many cities, multiple lines chasing the same revenue, lines built to block others, etc etc. We still live with the effects of that now.

Absolutely. That’s the problem with all the railway companies having been private and commercial and hence competing with each other. A free market does not always produce the best outcome.

Also often even simple things like where the engineers line reference causes a change of mileage, can screw things up.

 

[zwk500]

At times it feels like there *isn’t* any effective railway-operator-level management at the moment, instead everything being micromanaged by the state via the DFT. Quite odd really when one considers we’ve had a Conservative government for coming up to 13 years.

TFL is no better, and it’s quite odd that the government seem to despise Khan’s influence, yet could quite easily have wrenched this off him.

It's only odd until you remember that these people get off on little power rushes, and want the office to work for them far more than they want to work for the office. The odd Tory is ok, but because of the way Cabinet appointments are done nowadays, you either have to be an utterly shameless yes-man or a dangerous threat to the PM to get a decent ministry.
The DfT also suffers from a managers' springboard effect, where somebody comes in and makes rapid-fire changes to prove they're capable of making changes. They then schmooze upstairs as hard as possible to land a nicer job before the effects of their changes actually come through.

 

[urbophile]

Because we were the first at it and got complacent. Plus imperialist British exceptionalism pumped into generations of school kids.

 

[The exile]

One of the issues with megaprojects like HS2 or Crossrail is that it is incredibly difficult to know in advance how much they are going to cost to build. As someone else said, if you give the worst-case figure, then you'll almost certainly come in below that, but you'll never be given the chance to build it anyway. If you give the best-cast figure, you'll almost certainly find you've missed something, or other factors cause costs to grow, and then need bailing out. The media in this country know that printing stories about projects going over budget is great material for the opponents of those plans, and therefore sells advertising space.

When Crossrail was being budgeted, two major factors, that could not have been predicted, ended up affecting the programme time, access to materials and labour, and therefore pushed the costs up - Brexit and Covid lockdowns. If contingency for either of those factors was added to the original budget, they'd have been laughed out of the enquiries, and there would be lots of people asking questions like "I assume if you don't need that money for them, then it'll just be going into the bosses pockets".

Indeed - Just look at the Germans' experience with Stuttgart 21 and (admittedly non-railway) Berlin-Brandenburg Airport - not to mention collapsing tunnels in Cologne.

 

[zwk500]

Also often even simple things like where the engineers line reference causes a change of mileage, can screw things up.

To be fair, the railway has had more than enough time to resurvey the network and sort out ELRs properly.

 

[yorksrob]

At times it feels like there *isn’t* any effective railway-operator-level management at the moment, instead everything being micromanaged by the state via the DFT. Quite odd really when one considers we’ve had a Conservative government for coming up to 13 years.

TFL is no better, and it’s quite odd that the government seem to despise Khan’s influence, yet could quite easily have wrenched this off him.

The biggest problem is the Government are trying manage at a level they don't belong. Setting strategic direction and approving borrowing on the public purse is one thing, but micro-managing pay disputes and specifying x number of services between 06:00 and 09:59 is not helpful.

This is exactly the problem.

I had 100% confidence in the management of NetworkSouthEast, for example. They ran the railway and got me where I needed to be.

I feel that the day-to-day railway is currently run by people who have nothing to do with the railway