Gner & gnwr

[fhs man 2]

I have been hearing about a relaunch of GNER and new making a new service called GNWR. What is all this about anyone got any imformation on it.

oh and the reason 3 answers at the same time was because i put a arrow to attract attension a little forum trick

 

[ainsworth74]

Here you go:

Clicky Clicky

 

[Drsatan]

GNWR and GNER are two proposed open access operators, both of which would be run by Alliance Rail (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_Rail_Holdings)

Here's a map of their proposed routes: http://www.projectmapping.co.uk/Reviews/gnergnwr.html

 

[Dai.]

http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/

Alliance Rail Holdings are bringing them back as a franchise (they hope) in 2013

Wow. We all replied at the same time..

On an addition to the rest of it I quite like the look of the project!

 

[ainsworth74]

Wow. We all replied at the same time..

Hyper-efficiency of RailUK at its finest!

 

[Dai.]

Hyper-efficiency of RailUK at its finest!

Collectively we've all answered his question though, I do like the idea of the GNER and GNWR routes are they getting new trains or using the old ones?

 

[WillPS]

CSRE Polaris, just as Yeowart proclaimed was to happen a few years down the way with GC.

 

[mumrar]

Collectively we've all answered his question though, I do like the idea of the GNER and GNWR routes are they getting new trains or using the old ones?

Why is it when TOCs or FOCs change or potentially change hands people expect new stock? They are proposing this for 2013, so on the strength that they may win the franchise, they'll order a big new build of trains just incase they're successful.....

 

[Jordy]

But...this is open access? I wasn't aware of them bidding for a franchise

 

[Dai.]

Why is it when TOCs or FOCs change or potentially change hands people expect new stock? They are proposing this for 2013, so on the strength that they may win the franchise, they'll order a big new build of trains just incase they're successful.....

I don't expect new stock - I just wondering, I'd like to see new designs on the rails no matter what stock its on. I'm just curious as to what the design thoughts are.

 

[fhs man 2]

thanks for the imformation
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't expect new stock - I just wondering, I'd like to see new designs on the rails no matter what stock its on. I'm just curious as to what the design thoughts are.

GNER is getting a new look of GREEN there likely to get new fleet one problem they dont go to scotland hopefully after they launch they will go to aberdeen

 

[ainsworth74]

I don't think the ORR would allow them to run services between Kings Cross and Aberdeen as it would be taking business from East Coast. I suppose if EC stop running through services to Aberdeen an application might be allowed, but still seems quite unlikely.

 

[fhs man 2]

east coast will be gone before 2013 maybe GNER could make a deal with the next company if virgin get it that would be great because most of there trains are eletric and they would find it annoying to go north of edinburgh on diesel

 

[ainsworth74]

The current operator of the East Coast franchise will probably be gone, but the new operator will still have the requirement to run trains to Aberdeen that's not going to go away, the ORR and DfT won't just remove a franchise requirement and give it to an Open Access operator.

If Virgin were to win the East Coast, they wouldn't be bringing the Pendolinos with them to operate it, it would still be the mix of HSTs and 91+mk4s.

 

[Lampshade]

east coast will be gone before 2013 maybe GNER could make a deal with the next company if virgin get it that would be great because most of there trains are eletric and they would find it annoying to go north of edinburgh on diesel

They would still take over East Coast's rolling stock.

 

[fhs man 2]

something i dont understand is why do companys take the previous company's trains i thought a train belonged to the train company

 

[ainsworth74]

Nope, the rolling stock does not belong to the TOC (apart from Freight operators and a few HST sets that First own out right). Rolling stock in fact belongs to ROSCO's who then lease the rolling stock to various TOC's. Hence when a Franchise changes hands the rolling stock does not move but stays with the Franchise. At least that's basically how it works.

 

[LE Greys]

Nope, the rolling stock does not belong to the TOC (apart from Freight operators and a few HST sets that First own out right). Rolling stock in fact belongs to ROSCO's who then lease the rolling stock to various TOC's. Hence when a Franchise changes hands the rolling stock does not move but stays with the Franchise. At least that's basically how it works.

Which is actually a serious disincentive for operators to invest in new stock except near the beginning of a franchise. It stretches out the procurement times to such an extent that the franchise holder will be gone before they see the benefit of the new stock in service, and anyway the ROSCO would want to milk the old stock for all it's worth before getting rid of it (limited supply means high prices and no storage costs - £££).

As for what Virgin would do, I'm sure they would consider a second fleet of Pendolinos straight away, giving them a unified fleet and corporate identity. However, that would mean that someone would have to install TASS along the the ECML (otherwise what is the point of a tilting train). Therefore, there is a good chance that we would see something simpler and non-tilt turning up eventually. Whatever happens, there would be an interim period, so we would see a revival of the "Challenger" HST colours, plus a general application of "Pretendolino" [sic] livery to the Electras (which might regain their old name).

Does anyone remember ATT, as planned by GNER in 2001 for their 20-year franchise in the future? That was basically a 390 with a different name and a much better interior, painted dark blue. Never saw the light of day, of course, but is was on the cards.

 

[yorkie]

something i dont understand is why do companys take the previous company's trains i thought a train belonged to the train company

You have much to learn A good place to start is Informed Sources by Roger Ford (Modern Railways), an archive of many articles is available here:

http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/square/ca14/ALYCIDON RAIL/Archive - Inf srcs topic.htm

For articles on the owners of trains, search for ROSCO on that page and click the links.

 

[YorkshireBear]

good proposals half wont happen but i can see a few getting thumbs up

 

[fhs man 2]

for some reason i prefer the old GNER logo rather than the new one wich is green

http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/

 

[jopsuk]

The chap from the Chinese manufacturer was making some vague remarks about trains arriving here for testing "soon"- but (for obvious business reasons) wasn't forthcoming who they were for- perhaps?

 

[sprinterguy]

I’ve got to say, that’s a very ambitious set of schemes from Alliance Rail. I hope they will be introduced over a rolling programme, instead of as a single major project, as an open access operation of that magnitude has a huge potential for failure right from the off. Looking at the service frequencies they propose (two hourly in some cases), they would require a lot of trains to operate the service: Clearly, buying new is their only option.

So, Alliance Rail would be putting a big investment in a fairly large fleet of new trains from a completely untested manufacturer (CRSE), to operate on a wide range of services over both of the anglo-scottish main lines which already have well established franchised operators and high traffic levels. Whilst I wish Alliance Rail every success, as they open up a lot of new journey opportunities, it seems to me an almost insurmountable task to make the operation successful. If, as is mentioned in another thread, even Virgin require subsidies from the Government in order for them to be able to pay the prohibitively high track access charges on the WCML, it beats me how a new open access entrant into the market will be able to cover it’s costs.

So I really, really hope Alliance Rail introduce their services slowly and carefully, to “test the waters” first, or else I fear that it will be a lost cause from the word go.

 

[alexjames]

Alliance Rail is, I think, the current lodgings of that chap that got fired by GCR. The latter will, I imagine, soon be suing him for the IP that they will claim is the property of their firm. The IP is likely to be the development work that GCR may have done on the routes that AR/GNER is now proposing.

I did something similar a few years ago. But I only did so because I had the dirt on my previous firm (enough to ruin it and ensure substantil custodial sentences for some of those involved). I do hope that the gentleman concerned has something similar up his sleeve. Otherwise, his legal bills will be enormous and the outlook for AR will be bleak.

 

[fhs man 2]

GNER and GNWR will not be going to scotland they dont go that far

and

GNER is not a copyrighted name anyone could of taken it

 

[sprinterguy]

Alliance is headed by Ian Yeowart isn’t it? As I understand it, a lot of the GNER/GNWR routes that are now proposed by Alliance Rail were originally proposed by GC’s parent company, Grand Union Railways, under Yeowart’s tenure.

I also recall that there were some issues with the licensing of the name “Great North Eastern Railway” when GNER started up in 1997, which limited what the TOC could do with the branding: This being due to there being a split in the Intercity East Coast management buy-out team that secured the East Coast franchise, into two factions, and I thought that Yeowart was involved with that. Or something like that.

So it’s going to be a case of deciding who holds the licensing for the GNER/GNWR concept and planned routes; Yeowart and his team, as the plans were developed during his period of leadership, or the current incumbent of Grand Union Railway.

Surprised that there hasn't been any legal rumblings from Grand Union yet to be honest.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

GNER and GNWR will not be going to scotland they dont go that far

I never claimed that they were, just that their operation is based on the two anglo-scottish main lines, which seemed to be a less cumbersome way of saying "on the ECML and WCML".

 

[Anvil1984]

I just may be a moody git but shouldn't companies be looking away from how to just add random places to London and primarily make moneythrough revenue abstraction.GNWR in particular seem to aim to take VWC money from the Carlisle/Lancaster/Preston/Crewe - Euston fareboxes.

Take acouple of the examples the Blackpool North - Euston route, I agree there is a Blackpool North - London market but why does it have to stop at Preston except to take money from WC, then Huddersfield - London would seem fair enough but starting it from Leeds surely thats just another abstraction attempt

 

[sprinterguy]

I’m in two minds about Alliance Rails’ motives. On the one hand, it can be construed from their routings for the new services that they are not only trying to provide direct trains to London from towns and cities that have long been absent of such a service; but that they are also attempting to provide better regional links between smaller towns to the major economic centres: I mean, a Carlisle to London Euston service via the Cumbrian coast is unlikely to collect many Carlisle to London passengers given the circuitous route involved, but it does provide useful additional services from the most important Cumbrian Coastal towns to Carlisle or Preston. Similarly, the Huddersfield to Leeds service provides relief from often crowded Transpennine Express services.

Converseley, some routes do seem to have been designed principally to extract revenue from the existing franchised anglo-scottish operators: For example, is there really a need for Huddersfield to London to be served from both Kings Cross AND Euston, or is the East Coast route service a thinly-veiled attempt to extract revenue from Sheffield and Retford to London? Routing an Intercity service via the single-track Penistone branch seems to be an exceedingly peculiar thing to do. There definitely seems to be a case to be made for Alliance Rails’ routes being geared around revenue extraction for existing market demand from key focal points on the East Coast and West Coast main lines.

The reintroduction of the “Great North Eastern Railway” brand name could also be seen as a crafty way to attract custom on the ECML, as I imagine a number of passengers will remember the GNER name and the good service they provided, but not be aware that this is an entirely different operation.

I do hope that Alliance succeed in providing a service that is different to the currently accepted service patterns and linking more towns to major cities, but you do have to ask what their underlying motives are for providing these services in the first place.

 

[Sapphire Blue]

I’m in two minds about Alliance Rails’ motives. On the one hand, it can be construed from their routings for the new services that they are not only trying to provide direct trains to London from towns and cities that have long been absent of such a service; but that they are also attempting to provide better regional links between smaller towns to the major economic centres: I mean, a Carlisle to London Euston service via the Cumbrian coast is unlikely to collect many Carlisle to London passengers given the circuitous route involved, but it does provide useful additional services from the most important Cumbrian Coastal towns to Carlisle or Preston. Similarly, the Huddersfield to Leeds service provides relief from often crowded Transpennine Express services.

Converseley, some routes do seem to have been designed principally to extract revenue from the existing franchised anglo-scottish operators: For example, is there really a need for Huddersfield to London to be served from both Kings Cross AND Euston, or is the East Coast route service a thinly-veiled attempt to extract revenue from Sheffield and Retford to London? Routing an Intercity service via the single-track Penistone branch seems to be an exceedingly peculiar thing to do. There definitely seems to be a case to be made for Alliance Rails’ routes being geared around revenue extraction for existing market demand from key focal points on the East Coast and West Coast main lines.

The reintroduction of the “Great North Eastern Railway” brand name could also be seen as a crafty way to attract custom on the ECML, as I imagine a number of passengers will remember the GNER name and the good service they provided, but not be aware that this is an entirely different operation.

I do hope that Alliance succeed in providing a service that is different to the currently accepted service patterns and linking more towns to major cities, but you do have to ask what their underlying motives are for providing these services in the first place.

Presumably to turn a profit.

And quite right too.

 

[Greenback]

Yes, but you can make a profit in two ways

1. By gaining new passnegers for rail - providing new and better journey opportunities

and

2. By 'stealing' existing passnegers from other train companies

I would hope that it's the former rathe rthan latter, but this is the gist of sprinterguy's concerns!