Search results

As much as I'd like to see Oswestry served by a regular rail service, and although I know that there are a handful of branches of a similar length still in use, I have some doubt whether if several million to reopen the Oswestry to Gobowen branch is money well spent.

In terms of cost, given that the cost of running the railways is underwritten quite substantially by the tax payer, I am reasonably most tax payers would wish their money spent wisely on the most effective way to move traffic by rail. If the railways don't continually modernise they become (or...

The purpose of the national rail network is to move passengers and freight. It isn't to be a glorified museum. That's what heritage railways are for. Where semaphores have been replaced by colour lights it has often been in conjunction with the elimination of several manual signal boxes with...

It may have occasionally been used as a lay by siding but I doubt the Shrewsbury to Chester line was that congested that this needed to happen often. The main purpose of the remaining branch infrastructure post 1966 and also when simplified post 1987 was directly associated with freight...

As mentioned by Gloster, the branch wasn't listed for closure. I am not so sure that was an error though. I seem to recall reading (possibly on another thread here) that footfall at Oswestry was comparable to, if not higher than Gobowen (which is in effect, Oswestry Parkway) today. I've not seen...

I think there's a significant risk that having regions and sectors creates significant problems. If the regions operate the sector in their area there is quite a significant risk of them operating them quite differently to one another. This would be not such an issue for the UK equivalent of...

Before I get shot down on this, it is a genuine question that I don't know the answer to. Would the reopening of this route assist with capacity on the Hope Valley route? Are there and significant freight flows that could effectively by-pass the Hope Valley by using this route instead...

That isn't correct is it? We did not have a structure at all like DB, SNCF etc and probably haven't at any time since sectorisation and prior to Organising for Quality. All four EU operators have kept rail and operations under the same roof (although there was a period where this wasn't quite...

Manutd1999 suggested a structure not dissimilar to the one I suggested. Moreover, as I suggested in an earlier post, it is the kind of structure that a number of EU railways have adopted to some extent. If we look at SNCF, DB, Renfe and Trenitalia, their operating divisions are divided by...

That sounds like a structure that would give rise to significant tensions between the 'brand' e.g Intercity or NSE , which would need some kind of overall management,especially to coordinate its regional sub-sectors, and the regions. The priorities of the brand (or call it sector) managers may...

Personally I'd favour traffic type, probably for similar reasons to sectorisation in the 1980s. It provides a market focus. Even if nationalised rail will still need to operate in a highly competitive environment so will need to still perform in a business like manner. Freight and open access...

I'm surprised now one has blown the dust of Virgin's 2002 proposals for some high speed cut offs for the ECML. However this wouldn't do anything for capacity at the southern end of the line. Virgin also proposed to reopen the Leamside Line. That would probably scupper more recent ambitions to...

How were we defining 'profitable' here? Revenue net of operating costs (access charges, leasing costs, staff, fuel/electricity, staff ages); or The above, plus the additional cost of premiums built into franchise agreements. The premiums the various failed franchisees offered suggest that all...

This is very much a What If within a What If type scenario. If the ex-Cambrian and GWR secondary lines in Shropshire and North Wales hadn't been transferred from WR to LMR and lines like Whitchurch to Welshpool and Ruabon to Barmouth hadn't closed (although this would probably rely on an...

The best BR could have hoped for by the early 2000s was some modest route realignments to permit higher speeds with non-tilt rolling stock, as per the IC250 proposed. In the 1980 I dont think anyone was envisaging the southern end of the WCML being full. So even an incremental approach to...

Personally I dont think HS2 could have been planned or built in the 1980s. The political environment was definitely not pro-rail enough at the time. BR has to jump through plenty of hoops to justify the investment that it did get, ECML electrification for example. A number of people have...

Not really no. What I envisage is essentially an evolutionary of the post-sectorisation and post Organising for Quality structure albeit with separate operating (Intercity) and infrastructure companies owned by a a GBR holding company. The regional companies would be operating/tendering...

The very simplest way would be for it to become a wholly owned subsidiary company of a GBR holding company in much the same was as SNCF Ŕeseau and DB Netz are wholly owned subsidiaries of and SNCF and DB respectively. This would make a lot of sense if open access operators are to remain and...

Would this have been the case in BR days post sectorisation and particularly post OfQ? Given that Intercity, Railfreight, Regional Railways and NSE were in effect semi-autonomous companies, were drivers and train crew able to turn up and sign for Inercity on a Monday then drive a freight train...

Yes I am proposing a Sectoriation 2.0. I think BR's final structure was basically a good one. Had it survived, then the next logical step would have been to give local or regional government greater oversight or input into Regional Railways and NSE as already happened in the PTE areas. I know I...