Controversial railway opinions (without a firm foundation in logic..)

[urbophile]

I agree.

Note also the transport enthusiasts constantly lobbying for bus stations to be located next to bus stations even where 90% plus of bus passengers want to get to town centres rather than the railway station.

(I assume the second 'bus stations' should read 'rail stations'.) I'm sure there are plenty of situations where both are, or could easily be, feasible. Buses running into a town centre and then continuing to connect with trains. Obviously it would need better planning than we have had hitherto. But at least, when the railway station is some distance from the town centre, there should be a shuttle bus which is free to use, or integrated tickets with another bus service.

Why should this be something that only 'transport enthusiasts' want? If people can't get seamless travel they will just use their cars, and those without cars suffer.

 

[riceuten]

What railway people call "revenue abstraction" is in the real world called "competition" and it's a good thing.

Ha, "competition" soons become a nice little cosy cartel - you only need to look at buses to see that. You end up with the "competition" cherry picking profitable routes and the state having to provide or subsidise loss making services.

 

[Falcon1200]

Avanti's ridiculous First Class fares are a great idea because it means those fortunate enough to have First Class staff free passes have no problem finding a seat.

 

[riceuten]

(I assume the second 'bus stations' should read 'rail stations'.) I'm sure there are plenty of situations where both are, or could easily be, feasible. Buses running into a town centre and then continuing to connect with trains. Obviously it would need better planning than we have had hitherto. But at least, when the railway station is some distance from the town centre, there should be a shuttle bus which is free to use, or integrated tickets with another bus service.

Why should this be something that only 'transport enthusiasts' want? If people can't get seamless travel they will just use their cars, and those without cars suffer.

I suspect the OP doesn't like "bus enthusiasts".

I for one am very glad we now have an integrated bus and train interchange in Stevenage, whereas previously it was quite a walk to the bus station. It has not been without controversy, as the new bus station, although much closer to the station is 112 yards further from the centre, and we have had multiple representations that it's "too far" for the elderly and disabled to go shopping now (it isn't), although much more convenient for commuters, the people who, er, pay full fares to use the services.

 

[renegademaster]

Ha, "competition" soons become a nice little cosy cartel - you only need to look at buses to see that. You end up with the "competition" cherry picking profitable routes and the state having to provide or subsidise loss making services.

Most of Western Europe now does this openly and it seems to work pretty OK

 

[riceuten]

Most of Western Europe now does this openly and it seems to work pretty OK

Really ? Because all I see in Germany are private companies operating a franchise for the county/laender. The few examples of "competition" there have crashed and burned

 

[renegademaster]

Really ? Because all I see in Germany are private companies operating a franchise for the county/laender. The few examples of "competition" there have crashed and burned

Flixtrain competes with ICE doesn't it?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What railway people call "revenue abstraction" is in the real world called "competition" and it's a good thing.

The competitor is the car and air, and all land based public transport operators should collaborate to try to unseat its majority transport role rather than spatting among themselves over single figure percentages of the market.

Flixtrain competes with ICE doesn't it?

Hardly. A couple of trains per day on a tiny number of routes.

 

[chris_in_salop]

My controversial opinion is that there are lots of internet edgelords posting on this forum.

Meanwhile in the real world, great swathes of the population don't use a train from one year to the next, and the public perceives rail travel to be slow, unreliable and horribly expensive.

 

[Iskra]

Best post-war railway leader was Beeching.

He not only did the plan but got the money out of The Treasury (the harder job) for a whole lot of positives - InterCity fast and frequent services; Merry-go-Round; rolling Mk2 stock building; long-welded rail; power signalling; coal concentration depots. The advances went on.

He also identified the complete basket cases of unused local passenger services, where whatever usage they might have once had disappeared once buses and cars became all-year practical in the 1930s, and likewise the local wagonload freight, one wagon at a time, where anything worthwhile had long gone to lorries.

The father of Freightliner too.

What railway people call "revenue abstraction" is in the real world called "competition" and it's a good thing.

Agree.

- - - - - - -

Privatisation didn't go far enough to be successful. Too much government interference or 'regulation' left us with a series of half baked compromises that satisfied nobody.

 

[Ediswan]

I for one am very glad we now have an integrated bus and train interchange in Stevenage, whereas previously it was quite a walk to the bus station. It has not been without controversy, as the new bus station, although much closer to the station is 112 yards further from the centre, and we have had multiple representations that it's "too far" for the elderly and disabled to go shopping now (it isn't), although much more convenient for commuters, the people who, er, pay full fares to use the services.

Disagree. I occasionaly use the bus to catch a train from Stevenage. The bus used to stop directly opposite the rail station. Now it skips that stop, so there is an extra distance to walk back from the bus station. On the return journey there is a bus stop outside the rail station, so the location of the bus station is irrelevant.

 

[Iskra]

Ha, "competition" soons become a nice little cosy cartel - you only need to look at buses to see that. You end up with the "competition" cherry picking profitable routes and the state having to provide or subsidise loss making services.

That's better than subsidising all of the services

 

[riceuten]

Disagree. I occasionaly use the bus to catch a train from Stevenage. The bus used to stop directly opposite the rail station. Now it skips that stop, so there is an extra distance to walk back from the bus station. On the return journey there is a bus stop outside the rail station, so the location of the bus station is irrelevant.

It's about 50 yards further from the old stop and there's now a zebra crossing which didn't exist previously. Works for me.

 

[Topological]

The competitor is the car and air, and all land based public transport operators should collaborate to try to unseat its majority transport role rather than spatting among themselves over single figure percentages of the market.



Hardly. A couple of trains per day on a tiny number of routes.

Indeed.

The problem with competition can be neatly summarised in the Bertrand Paradox. For those who do not know it, the idea is simple. Two firms offer the same product. By any measure that is an uncompetitive market, but two firms are all that is needed for the paradox to apply. Suppose each product costs 0 (you can subtract the true cost from all prices to obtain the same effect) then there is only one equilibrium, all prices will be 0. If train company A charges £10 then company B only needs to charge £9.99 to steal all the passengers. Keep that process going and the market quickly unravels to both charging 0.

The Bertrand Paradox is great for consumers because it says that for any set of homogenous goods the price will always be marginal cost, the perfectly competitive price.

However, who then invests? Where does the new stock come from? If the rival buys new stock what does a train company do? So many questions which actually better suit there being market power for train companies.

As Bletchleyite identifies here the real competitor is not the same product (train from X to Y), but in fact the private car and the flight. So rather than squandering all potential warchest funds to expand the rail share, it is better that we see a single train company able to take on the alternatives.

The lessons from competition theory go further to note that often it is only the larger firms that truly understand their power to set prices and attract customers to the market (rail). Small companies simply do not have that power (e.g. a market stall cannot set prices to bring customers to a market, Tesco can bring customers to a Tesco supermarket).

 

[brad465]

Networkers are the best trains on the rail network simply because they're the best sounding stock, almost every other EMU produces boring/bland sounds.

 

[renegademaster]

Networkers are the best trains on the rail network simply because they're the best sounding stock, almost every other EMU produces boring/bland sounds.

What about the "LENR AZUMA SERVICE" that they seem to think is worth announcing seperately ?

 

[sp503]

On a related controversial point - the decision to delete popular stops because there are too many "wet" passengers on Fri/Sat nights (Wokingham being one example from some time ago) is damned stupid because it inconveniences all passengers going to that stop.. not just those misbehaving!



Ooh, very, very controversial. Probably the most controversial opinion so far on this thread, in fact.

I'll offer something equally controversial but very different... having stock parked up in sidings during quiet times of the day/week/year, ready to be deployed at peak times (commuter peak, Friday evenings, Saturday daytimes, summer) is the right way to run a railway.

Would you kindly enlighten me on the Wokingham case? What used to happen and what did they do?

 

[L+Y]

To be really controversial...

- DCO/DOO is broadly a good thing.
- Ticket office closures are broadly a good thing.
- Though the Government is far from blameless, on the whole the unions have done more damage to the Railway in the past couple of years than the Government.

 

[matt_world2004]

The railway likes to claim that safety is its number one priority , but often pushes safety to the limit of what is legally permissable ,

It views following health and safety law as a target , rather than what it should be a baseline standard.

 

[riceuten]

The father of Freightliner too.


Agree.

- - - - - - -

Privatisation didn't go far enough to be successful. Too much government interference or 'regulation' left us with a series of half baked compromises that satisfied nobody.

If we had followed this to it’s conclusion we would have had a few high profit lines left and nothing else

 

[PGAT]

The railway likes to claim that safety is its number one priority , but often pushes safety to the limit of what is legally permissable ,

Case in point: the extremely narrow platforms at Thanet Parkway

 

[TheSmiths82]

I will probably get banned for this, but I rather like the Hitachi 800 class. Been on quite a few recently operated by TPE and I find them quite comfortable apart from the slightly hard seats.

 

[riceuten]

Flixtrain competes with ICE doesn't it?

A handful of old style (slow) IC trains that have operated sporadically does not mean ‘competition’

I will probably get banned for this, but I rather like the Hitachi 800 class. Been on quite a few recently operated by TPE and I find them quite comfortable apart from the slightly hard seats.

I like the Azumas a lot

Case in point: the extremely narrow platforms at Thanet Parkway

Ha, there are plenty of stations where up to a third of the platform is hatched off in yellow, and staff demand you stand inside the line, even when there is no train due.

 

[dakta]

Given equal conditions, trains stop more effectively when the driver has been classroom trained in pure physics

 

[devon_belle]

I love HSTs, but I'm glad they're being retired. IETs are good trains from a passenger perspective, only in need of some minor adjustments to make them excellent.

 

[LittleRedTrain]

My controversial opinion:
Seat reservations should be abolished, or charged at a level that discourages people from booking them speculatively or for short hops (e.g. £5-£10 a leg) and limited to maybe 1/4 of the train's seating capacity.

They seem to cause increased dwell times, arguments between passengers and conflicts in passenger flow as those walking down a platform/carriage to find their booked carriage/seats have to try and pass others coming the other way!

Boarding would be so much smoother if passengers knew they could just jump onto any coach and into the first free seats they see, clearing the aisle.

My local station is served by XC (lots of reservations) and Chiltern (no reservations) and even allowing for the differing door positions of a Voyager vs 168, the Chiltern trains are much quicker and easier for everyone to get boarded and sat down!

Because reservations are free, even for the shortest journeys, people also often book reservations they don't need. This leads to people being unsure if they can grab a seat that looks like a 'no-show', plus blocks the seat from being reserved for a longer distance journey where it might be worthwhile.

The only thing I would do is allow free seat reservation for any holders of Senior/Disabled railcards, or any booking that includes both an adult and child ticket (to give families a chance of sitting together).

 

[Iskra]

If we had followed this to it’s conclusion we would have had a few high profit lines left and nothing else

Not necessarily, many loss making lines were constructed and run by the privatised railway for decades, presumably propped-up by internal cross-subsidy and seen as positive for the feeder traffic they provided.

 

[Class 170101]

Not sure if this is controversial, Lumo is widely regarded as a big success

Don't expect to use them during engineering works on the ECML

 

[renegademaster]

My controversial opinion:
Seat reservations should be abolished, or charged at a level that discourages people from booking them speculatively or for short hops (e.g. £5-£10 a leg) and limited to maybe 1/4 of the train's seating capacity.

They seem to cause increased dwell times, arguments between passengers and conflicts in passenger flow as those walking down a platform/carriage to find their booked carriage/seats have to try and pass others coming the other way!

Boarding would be so much smoother if passengers knew they could just jump onto any coach and into the first free seats they see, clearing the aisle.

My local station is served by XC (lots of reservations) and Chiltern (no reservations) and even allowing for the differing door positions of a Voyager vs 168, the Chiltern trains are much quicker and easier for everyone to get boarded and sat down!

Because reservations are free, even for the shortest journeys, people also often book reservations they don't need. This leads to people being unsure if they can grab a seat that looks like a 'no-show', plus blocks the seat from being reserved for a longer distance journey where it might be worthwhile.

The only thing I would do is allow free seat reservation for any holders of Senior/Disabled railcards, or any booking that includes both an adult and child ticket (to give families a chance of sitting together).

I don't think this would be *too* controversial, other than with TOCs who want an add on to sell and people who get annoyed at sitting in the aisle seats

A handful of old style (slow) IC trains that have operated sporadically does not mean ‘competition’


I like the Azumas a lot


Ha, there are plenty of stations where up to a third of the platform is hatched off in yellow, and staff demand you stand inside the line, even when there is no train due.

Is it not just that probably their isn't just a huge amount of lines that can turn a profit? If their is empty slots , a market the state operator has seemed to missed , or not running enough capacity on , and somebody wants to pay to fill that niche , why stop them?
With the small size of flix , I doubt DB is loosing that much money from them , and the German government will fill the gap regardless.

 

[Taunton]

The father of Freightliner too.


Agree.

- - - -

Yes, missed that one, and many others. Corporate Image and British Rail name?

He even encouraged Ian Allan and editor G Freeman Allen to change the name of Trains Illustrated to Modern Railways.

A significant number of the changes were done by Beeching writing a one-paragraph pointer of what could be better, and Gerry Fiennes scheming it up into a project and choosing a team to do it. Fiennes wrote that he used to think up the detail of the ideas whilst in the bath at home. In return Beeching moved him ever upwards from his BRB HQ senior position to be a mainstream regional General Manager; I think he saw Fiennes as a possible successor, but the practical out-spokenness had not gone down well with the civil servants, who feared someone who had competence of their own and seized their chance to get rid of him.