If you could choose one open access service what would it be ?

[Aictos]

How about reopening the former Sleeper routes plus operate the former Motorail routes in the summer.

Just a idea or two,

 

[yorkie]

yes how does this train cross glasgow, because you can't get to motherwell from glasgow queen street. i think

I can't see a problem going via Springburn and Coatbridge.

He's allowed 30 minutes for 16 miles, and I'm sure an average speed of 30-35mph is more than enough time allowing for the various junctions and pathing allowances.

 

[TDK]

if you could choose an open access service, what would it be, from where and where would it go. ideas welcome.

Airport Express linking all the London Airports and a couple mainline ststions wherepossible using any type practical train and funded by both the major airlines and local businesses

 

[Ivo]

I've posted this one already elsewhere, but hey...

LondonCOASTAL

Brighton
Haywards Heath
Three Bridges
Gatwick Airport
Redhill
East Croydon
Clapham Junction
Kensington Olympia
Ealing Broadway
Hayes & Harlington
Slough
Maidenhead
Reading

They could also run several other services, but obviously that's a bit much for this stage. One I would say, assuming a path through the East London Line can be found, would be this:

Brighton
Haywards Heath
Three Bridges
Gatwick Airport
Redhill
East Croydon
Canada Water
Whitechapel
Stratford
Romford
Shenfield
Wickford
Southend Airport
Southend Victoria

...and then a Crossrail extension, just for good measure, between Reading (already planned) and Southend Victoria (only really mentioned in local media)

 

[scrapy]

Bury (Bolton St)
Heywood

or

Rochdale

Manchester Victoria
Ashburys
Romiley
Hathersage
Chesterfield
Derby
Loughbrough
Leicester
Bedford
Luton Airport Parkway
St Albans
London St Pancras

 

[Death]

For me, it'd have to be:

InterCity West Coast
Guarenteed satisfaction with the true feeling of Fright Freedom...And none of that plastic crap, of course! ​

• London Euston
• Watford Jct
• Milton Keynes Central
• Birmingham New St
• Wolverhampton
• Stafford
• Stoke on trent
• Macclesfield
• Manchester Piccadilly
• Preston
• Carlisle
• Lockerbie
• Carstairs
• Glasgow Central
• Stirling
• Dunblane
• Perth
• Dalwhinnie
• Aviemore
• Inverness

* - Standard journey time EUS --> INV: 45 minutes for stopping services, 15 minutes for fast ones.
No such thing as delays in my book, as there aren't many obstructions that could win in a head-on collision with a 370/1 pulling over 450mph...

Incidentally, I still can't quite understand the full set of rules that was bought in with privatisation...So I'm completely mystified as to how or why one company (I'm mainly thinking of VT, but Last First are another culprit) can possibly have the right to prevent other companies from operating competing services on the same lines?

After all: If I opened a sandwich bar on my local high street and a Subway franchise opened up opposite, I wouldn't have any lawful right to object to the presence of a Subway there...So how on Earth can VT "legally" enforce a rule that prevents, say, Chiltern and W&S from operating along the WCML? :roll:

Still, I suppose the "West Coast OA problem" would be fairly easy to solve in a way...Just give me a Chainsaw or a solid alloy baseball bat, and point me in the direction of a certain Mr. Branston! I doubt he'd be nearly as proprietary over the WCML after I'd had a word with 'im... hock:

 

[Geezertronic]

• London Euston
• Watford Jct
• Milton Keynes Central
• Birmingham New St
• Wolverhampton
• Stafford
• Stoke on trent
• Macclesfield
• Manchester Piccadilly
• Preston
• Carlisle
• Lockerbie
• Carstairs
• Glasgow Central
• Stirling
• Dunblane
• Perth
• Dalwhinnie
• Aviemore
• Inverness

Isn't this what used to happen (up to Glasgow) before the Trent Valley Lines reopened?

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Incidentally, I still can't quite understand the full set of rules that was bought in with privatisation...So I'm completely mystified as to how or why one company (I'm mainly thinking of VT, but Last First are another culprit) can possibly have the right to prevent other companies from operating competing services on the same lines?

After all: If I opened a sandwich bar on my local high street and a Subway franchise opened up opposite, I wouldn't have any lawful right to object to the presence of a Subway there...So how on Earth can VT "legally" enforce a rule that prevents, say, Chiltern and W&S from operating along the WCML? :roll:

Still, I suppose the "West Coast OA problem" would be fairly easy to solve in a way...Just give me a Chainsaw or a solid alloy baseball bat, and point me in the direction of a certain Mr. Branston! I doubt he'd be nearly as proprietary over the WCML after I'd had a word with 'im... hock:

The franchised network is effectively a partnership between a private train operator and the tax payer (under the guise of first OPRAF, then the SRA and now DfT).

In the case of some franchises, subsidy is required to operate the network as the revenue throught the fare box is insufficient to make it worth while to run. In these cases, at the time of the franchise bidding, the bidder that offers to run the specified services at the lowest cost to the tax payer will generally win (I know this is an oversimplistic statement and that other factors are considered, but for the purposes of this thread if does the job).

In the case of other franchises (mainly the inter city ones), they generate sufficient revenue through the fare box to provide a surplus over the cost of running the franchise. In such cases, the winner of the franchise will generally be the bidder that offers to pay the largest premium to the tax payer.

Now, both of these models depend almost entirely on stability. To provide this stability, The Railways Act incorporated certain provisions called "moderation of competition", which protected the franchised operator against potential instability brought about by competition. These are different for each franchise and in most, on a case by case basis, potential open access operators can apply to the Office of Rail Regulation to run open access services.

In applying, they must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the ORR that the proposed new services generate NEW REVENUE to the railway AND ARE NOT PRINCIPALLY ABSTRACTIVE (this means they don't divert money away from the existing franchised operator). This is why in the case of existing open access operators such as Hull Trains, GC and WSMR, they are allowed to stop at some places but not others.

In the case of the West Coast franchise, Virgin's reward for investment in Pendolino (and other things) was rewarded by total protection from competition on the WCML until mid 2012. Without this protection, Virgin would have been unable to make a satisfactory business case for the investment.

The reality is that the system is not perfect, and would be improved by longer franchises being the reward for investment, but it does (in general) protect the tax payer from instability caused by ever failing franchises that may result from unregulated competition.

 

[poshbakerloo]

Lincoln Trains...

I would use some 166s from FGW after that line gets electrified!

Manchester Piccadilly-Stockport-Sheffield-Worksop-Lincoln Central

I would make getting to Lincoln and places the far side of Sheffield much easier and fast! And help a load of students that are pretty much stranded most the time!

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Lincoln Trains...

I would use some 166s from FGW after that line gets electrified!

Manchester Piccadilly-Stockport-Sheffield-Worksop-Lincoln Central

I would make getting to Lincoln and places the far side of Sheffield much easier and fast! And help a load of students that are pretty much stranded most the time!

I might be wrong, but I think 166s are too wide to operate the services you suggest. For some reason, somebody thought it was a good idea to build these DMUs wider to take advantage of the generous gauge that exists on the Great Western network.

I have a feeling therefore that 166s will always be destined to work in the west country.

 

[poshbakerloo]

I might be wrong, but I think 166s are too wide to operate the services you suggest. For some reason, somebody thought it was a good idea to build these DMUs wider to take advantage of the generous gauge that exists on the Great Western network.

I have a feeling therefore that 166s will always be destined to work in the west country.

DAMN! well maybe I'll rob some 158s and run 2 units together...

 

[jopsuk]

I might be wrong, but I think 166s are too wide to operate the services you suggest. For some reason, somebody thought it was a good idea to build these DMUs wider to take advantage of the generous gauge that exists on the Great Western network.

I have a feeling therefore that 166s will always be destined to work in the west country.

They were built wide to stop them being used elsewhere- NSE made that desicion. They didn't want Regional Railways nabbing them.

 

[djw1981]

What happened to Glasgow Trains, anyway? Has the idea been rejected?

They were planning a 20098 launch, then Virgin VHF and ECML re timetabling came along and paths were an issue.

Then the recession came and WMSR had issues so I suspect they may be reassessing their numbers. Also shortage of stock in UK currently unless they went Loco.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
From Glasgow Qs - Motherwell, Queen St - Cowlairs Sth-Sighthill West - Springburn, Gartcosh, Gartcosh Jn, Gartsherrie Sth Jctn, pass Coatbridge Freightliner, Copatbridge Central, Mossend Yard and into Motherwell Stn on p1 or P2.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

For me, it'd have to be:

InterCity West Coast
Guarenteed satisfaction with the true feeling of Fright Freedom...And none of that plastic crap, of course! ​

• London Euston
• Watford Jct
• Milton Keynes Central
• Birmingham New St
• Wolverhampton
• Stafford
• Stoke on trent
• Macclesfield
• Manchester Piccadilly
• Preston
• Carlisle
• Lockerbie
• Carstairs
• Glasgow Central
• Stirling
• Dunblane
• Perth
• Dalwhinnie
• Aviemore
• Inverness

* - Standard journey time EUS --> INV: 45 minutes for stopping services, 15 minutes for fast ones.
No such thing as delays in my book, as there aren't many obstructions that could win in a head-on collision with a 370/1 pulling over 450mph...

Incidentally, I still can't quite understand the full set of rules that was bought in with privatisation...So I'm completely mystified as to how or why one company (I'm mainly thinking of VT, but Last First are another culprit) can possibly have the right to prevent other companies from operating competing services on the same lines?

After all: If I opened a sandwich bar on my local high street and a Subway franchise opened up opposite, I wouldn't have any lawful right to object to the presence of a Subway there...So how on Earth can VT "legally" enforce a rule that prevents, say, Chiltern and W&S from operating along the WCML? :roll:

Still, I suppose the "West Coast OA problem" would be fairly easy to solve in a way...Just give me a Chainsaw or a solid alloy baseball bat, and point me in the direction of a certain Mr. Branston! I doubt he'd be nearly as proprietary over the WCML after I'd had a word with 'im... hock:

If you ran the Death shopoping Centre which onl;y has sandwich shops, and I want to open my McBurger shop in it, I can have my lawyer say that I will spend lots of money on adverts and attract people to your shopping centre (because my McBurgers are popular / the food of the masses) because you want me there to attract people to your place and you think I am successful and have a good media image, my lawyer will say that I will only 'invest' if you promise not to have any other Burger bars in the shopping centre. I am ok with coffee shops, or with a chinese and even a pizza shop, but none can sell burgers.

In your despiration to get be and some variety into your shopping centre you agree to this. I then move in and start changing my offers, bumping up prices for my megaburger, and charging people to sit down and eat it at the tables etc. Some people have to stand and my McLoo starts to not be cleaned enough.....

 

[thehstman]

Plymouth - Paignton Local Service (FIRST GREAT WESTERN)
Gloucester - Paignton Local Service (FIRST GREAT WESTERN)
Bristol T. Meads - Paignton HST (National Express)
Cardiff Central - Gloucester via Bristol Parkway (FIRST GREAT WESTERN)
Cardiff Central to Taunton/Portsmouth Harbour via Lydney and Gloucester (FGW)
London Paddington - Plymouth/Paignton Via Gloucester and Bristol Parkway (FGW)

 

[Voyager 2093]

paddington via greenford, high wycombe and banbury or
paddington via reading, oxford

You and me both I would love that service too in a 168/1 Clubman and maybe extend it to Birmingham.

 

[Sir_Clagalot]

Newcastle to Edinburgh All Stations (except Manors), with Berwick upon Tweed rebuilt to have both fast and slow lines with platforms. Trains to run hourly from say 0600 to 2300 in both directions, journey time of 2 hours. Could probably get away with using 110mph stock, preferably electric as the whole journey is wired.

 

[142094]

Newcastle to Edinburgh All Stations (except Manors)

Including Cramlington, Chathill etc? There isn't the demand as it is for the Chathill stoppers, so I wouldn't see much demand for Edinburgh.

 

[Sir_Clagalot]

Im not thinking of the end to end journeys, but more the bits inbetween, such as Chathill to Berwick and Dunbar to Drem etc. If you run a train, at the right times and at the right price, then people will use it!

 

[jopsuk]

ideally for that Dunbar would get a northbound loop/platform? Anywhere intermediate between Berwick and Dunbar that could truly justify a new station too? Dunbar could certainly benefit from a better commuter service.

 

[Drimnagh Road]

It would have to be a Holyhead-Crewe / Manchester / Birmingham direct service and bring back trains to the people of North Wales that go where they want to go...England and not south Wales. NWR - North Wales Railways.

 

[jopsuk]

How about reopening the former Sleeper routes plus operate the former Motorail routes in the summer.

Just a idea or two,

Hmm. Been putting half a thought into this, without consideration of some of the practicalities or the costs. But anyway:
bid to take the current sleeper routes under the wing of the operation
Standardise the sleeper rakes.
Loco (fleet of diesel and electric locos)
All coaches to be fitted with powered doors, SDO system to be used.
Mrk 3 Seated Sleeper coach (end) with small bar/coffee bar at loco end (with no corridor connection at that end)
Mrk 3 Seated Sleeper coach
4 x Std Class Mrk 3 Sleepers
2 x 1st Class Mrk 3 Sleepers
Mrk 3 Lounge car
Mrk 3 DVT/luggage van/Guards Van

Great Western services to get less intermediate stops, but with an added spell in a siding somewhere (because no-one wants to be getting off in Plymouth at half four in the morning, surely?)
More services to be run in summer
Advertising to make much of ability to take a lot more luggage than budget airlines- summer services to Newquay to have bookable surfboard space set aside in DVT
Motorail to be provided by running separate car trains (as is not uncommon in other countries)
Scottish sleeper services to be run as separate trains rather than splitting
Possibility of a "short" rake for services such as Fort William- one seated sleeper, two standard class, a first and the lounge (plus loco and DVT)- still longer than current formation that heads up the WHL
Much wider range of services.

Must be possible to make sleepers profitable, surely?

Longer term- try to resurrect "Nightstar" concept, but with less ridiculously heavy rolling stock. Would ideally need full UK integration into Schengen (one of the things that helped kill North of London Eurostar and Nightstar services before they even started).

 

[43167]

ive been having thoughts on things like for sometime.

1. Summer saturday services to the coast from both ECML & WCML.
Kings Cross-Scarborough
Kings Cross-Cleethorpes
Euston-Blackpool

These dont need to be new operators. The Cleethorpes is a dodgy one, I admit, dont know enough about the place, but East Coast could run a Scarborough in the summer, by using the HST that normally does the 1040 Kings Cross-Newcastle, it could even run in that path and the line between York & Scarborough isnt exactly bursting to capacity.

The Euston-Blackpool is something that was withdrawn and probably shouldnt have been. Virgin could operate it again, and given a choice of the Loco-hauled set or 221's, id go with the loco-hauled set with loads of room for luggage in the DVT. Ok, it would mean an engine change at Preston and seems pointless for 19miles, but its happened in the past when the daliy Euston-Blackpool was hauled instead of HST.

2. All shacks Doncaster/York-Newcastle:
idea to provide the towns of Thirsk & Chester-le-Street an improved service.

3. The return of an overnight cross-country service from Scotland to the Southwest.
Co-operated between FGW & FSR.


Like the idea of a stopping service north of Newcastle. Someone said no demand, but we dont know that until someone runs it for a trial period.

 

[142094]

ideally for that Dunbar would get a northbound loop/platform? Anywhere intermediate between Berwick and Dunbar that could truly justify a new station too? Dunbar could certainly benefit from a better commuter service.

Think there is already talk of this new station between Berwick and Dunbar at Reston and East Linton:

http://www.rages.org.uk/

Also an article in today's Newcastle Journal about the possible reopening of Belford station in Northumberland, which is served by the Chathill train as a means of allowing the unit to run off the mainline to allow other trains to pass then return south again. Supposedly could cost as little as £1.5m.

 

[sonic2009]

It would have to be a Holyhead-Crewe / Manchester / Birmingham direct service and bring back trains to the people of North Wales that go where they want to go...England and not south Wales. NWR - North Wales Railways.

you already get that

holyhead to birmingham international
holyhead to crewe
holyhead to manchester one service

 

[poshbakerloo]

Ooh I just thought of Buxton-Macclesfield...

Currently Northern Rail runs the Buxton Line, but what I would do is to reopen the Macclesfield, Bollington and Marple Line from Middlewood on the Buxton Line, down to Macclesfield. This would allow trains to travel from Buxton-Macclesfield direct, something which would help quite a lot of people in both towns as travelling between the to places means a long drive through the hills...

It would also give Bollington its rail service back, its a small town of about 12,000...and has nothing!

Maybe some 156s, 153s, or even some 158s although I don't think they would be available...

 

[gingerheid]

Glasgow - Carlisle - Settle - Leeds - Nottingham - Corby
Manchester - Sheffield - St P
Cambridge - Newmarket - Soham - Ely
Largs - Stevenson - Irvine - Ayr
Dalmellington - Ayr - Kilmarnock - Mauchline - Catrine

Or... how much reality are we allowed to throw out the window?

Heathrow - North London Line - Stansted (it's almost possible with a few missing chords; it would just take years!)
Gatwick - Heathrow (big missing link)
Wisbech - March - Ely - Cambridge - Linton - Haverhill (lots of missing links!)