'Passengers are revolting' says head of Passenger Focus

[pendolino]

Well, not quite. Anyway:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/...ing-rail-network-could-spark-passenger-revolt

Anthony Smith, Passenger Focus chief executive, said rail users should be consulted. "We need to ensure that the costs don't pile up," he said.

"Passengers need to be asked about the balance of the cost of doing this weather-proofing of the railways, against the bill that will increasingly fall on rail users. Someone needs to ask what passengers want on this, not just government and industry."

...

Smith added: "Would you rather have two or three days of disruption or would you rather pay 10% more for your ticket to ensure it does not happen again? Heating the third rail is going to cost a fortune."

A consensus on that is unlikely I imagine. But I think it's the right question to ask, and passengers should certainly have a say.

In a report on the transport industry's response to this month's snow, David Quarmby, chairman of the RAC Foundation, said much of the network had coped "admirably" but there were lessons to be learned. Those included urging government-backed Network Rail to investigate replacing or adapting the third rail system in Kent, Surrey and Sussex.

Acknowledging that his recommendations could be expensive, he said: "I do believe that when the numbers are done that there will be a case for reconfiguring the third rail network."

By which he seems to mean swapping 3rd rail for OLE @ £800k/mile. The chair of a motoring organisation making recommendations for the railway: should we be worried about this?

Interesting article anyway.

 

[wintonian]

"I do believe that when the numbers are done that there will be a case for reconfiguring the third rail network."

By which he seems to mean swapping 3rd rail for OLE @ £800k/mile. The chair of a motoring organisation making recommendations for the railway: should we be worried about this?

Or that’s the new word for rationalisation.

 

[Old Timer]

Of course the RAC believe that the Railways should be available to carry people who cannot use their cars due to the severe weather.

They are only there as a backup, but should run the full service and operate punctually, so that RAC members are not incovenienced on those days when they cannot use their cars.

Simples !

 

[tbtc]

Of course the RAC believe that the Railways should be available to carry people who cannot use their cars due to the severe weather.

They are only there as a backup, but should run the full service and operate punctually, so that RAC members are not incovenienced on those days when they cannot use their cars.

Simples !

Agreed; furthermore the railways should have thousands of spare coaches and engines sitting round all year to cope with those times when motorists/ volcanoes/ snow etc mean people might need to slum it on public transport

The only danger with running railways only for about two weeks a year is that Northern would still find time to strike on some of them

 

[CarterUSM]

The only danger with running railways only for about two weeks a year is that Northern would still find time to strike on some of them

Miiiiiaaaaaaow!!!

 

[ainsworth74]

The only danger with running railways only for about two weeks a year is that Northern would still find time to strike on some of them

Step away from the thread and put the handbag down

 

[wintonian]

Agreed; furthermore the railways should have thousands of spare coaches and engines sitting round all year to cope with those times when motorists/ volcanoes/ snow etc mean people might need to slum it on public transport

If the railways are being run solely as a contingency plan in the event that the road network is unusable and they want to pay for these extra coaches etc. then they can put up the price of petrol and leave rail fares alone!

 

[MCR247]

Passengers are revolting

I agree! I mean the smell.....

 

[gareth taylor]

If the railways are being run solely as a contingency plan in the event that the road network is unusable and they want to pay for these extra coaches etc. then they can put up the price of petrol and leave rail fares alone!

I second that.

 

[Mojo]

"The head of Passenger Focus is revolting," says passengers.

Makes a good point that there is a level of dissatisfaction, and that many are unhappy, but who can come up with a practical solution? It's no use simply saying that the alternatives are worse, but we should be focussing on why rail is better!

 

[me123]

I always thought this forum was a lot better than the tabloid newspapers. Sadly, the title of this thread has proven otherwise.

 

[monkey]

I agree! I mean the smell.....

..darn! beat me to it! really though some passengers really need to invest in some deodrant...

 

[Clip]

I always thought this forum was a lot better than the tabloid newspapers. Sadly, the title of this thread has proven otherwise.

True but when you have the head of a Road using ability giving the industry **** when even the UK highways agency failed massively it makes you wonder doesn't it?

 

[Failed Unit]

Bad timing in some content. Some passengers are already facing a 10% increase in ticket prices for a worse service. But at least in 5 years time the will get more coaches. That is of course if they are still using the service in 5 years time! At least BR did there mega increases justified by improvements once the improvements happened as anyone using the ECML will remember after electrification. BR said your increase is above other lines because you have the new trains.