Storm Frank: impact on West Coast and Highland Mainlines

[BRX]

Seemingly Virgin east coast won't be taking anymore TP tickets was able to travel down been told it changed now and it's bus only via Carlisle.

Does this also apply to TP tickets purchased before the line was closed?

If so, I don't think that's reasonable at all.

 

[AndrewE]

It's like that everywhere. The road outside my house is like the surface of the moon.

Without being funny, can "potholes" occur on the railways as well? For anyone who doesn't know, a pothole is caused by frozen precipitation causing a hole under the surface when it melts; the hole then caves in.

Presumably a similar phenomenon can occur underneath track?

Freezing will break up a road base and solid rock too, but I think the main reason for the growth of potholes is hydraulic. Vehicle tyres dropping in produce a pressure pulse transmitted through the water which dislodges and sucks out fines, gravel and bigger stones, doing far more damage than the pounding of a dry hole.... (maybe I ought to re-phrase that.)

On the railway open free-draining ballast is the ideal, if water builds up because a drain fails then fines (mud sand or clay) get pumped up from underneath the ballast by the same hydraulic action, eventually moving bigger stone too and rapidly undermining the track. You see P-Way men digging out "wet (sleeper) beds" and putting fresh ballast in to prevent it deteriorating further.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Does this also apply to TP tickets purchased before the line was closed?

If so, I don't think that's reasonable at all.

The staff briefing hasn't been too black and white about it. It says that all passengers must travel by the routes and TOCs (and times if using Advance tickets) shown on the tickets, but that discretion should be shown to passengers who purchased their tickets prior to the incident occuring.

Also note that Virgin West Coast has withdrawn ticket acceptance for TPE tickets between Preston and Carlisle too.

 

[AndrewE]

I'd welcome the network being presented to the passenger as one "brand". Whether renationalised or not and regardless of which or how many companies were actually operating the trains.

This is effectively how London Transport operates. Lots of different private bus operators but the buses all look the same to the passenger. If something goes wrong the information all comes from TfL, not from the private operators.

Would also save us from constrant repainting and rebranding of everything

Agreed. I'm surprised that nobody has pointed out yet that all these success stories (LT operations, London buses, the "Overground" and Merseyrail too for that matter) are all concessions, in conspicuous contrast to all the franchises. The real (public sector) owner sets the service to be delivered and asks for quotes to run it. The private sector contractor doesn't have to factor in economic uncertainties at all.
I believe London buses are getting busier and better in to the bargain (the only ones in England, possibly the whole of the UK.)
ps Just realised this will probably be deleted for being off-topic.

 

[edwin_m]

It's like that everywhere. The road outside my house is like the surface of the moon.

Without being funny, can "potholes" occur on the railways as well? For anyone who doesn't know, a pothole is caused by frozen precipitation causing a hole under the surface when it melts; the hole then caves in.

Presumably a similar phenomenon can occur underneath track?

I don't think there is any real analogy with a railway, as the ballast stones are held down by gravity rather than being stuck together, and there are relatively large gaps between them. Even if the drainage is bad enough that the water freezes before running away, the only effect would be a small movement in the ballast which would settle back once it thawed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Also note that Virgin West Coast has withdrawn ticket acceptance for TPE tickets between Preston and Carlisle too.

Could TP in retaliation withdraw acceptance on their Edinburgh-Carlisle buses? I don't believe VWC are running any themselves.

This is all very silly.

 

[sheff1]

It comes down to definitions of "disruption". If there is an emergency timetable in place then, unless that timetable goes to pot, there is no disruption.

On another recent thread we were told that the cancellation of one train was not disruption. Now, apparently, the cancellation of multiple trains over many weeks is not disruption either.

Both scenarios fall within the dictionary definition of disruption, so it seems we very much have a Humpty Dumpty approach to the meaning of words here.

 

[Gadget88]

Does this also apply to TP tickets purchased before the line was closed?

If so, I don't think that's reasonable at all.

I bought mine in November so seems that way notice boards advise to get bus now.

 

[Starmill]

I suspect you won't get your compensation if travelling TP either despite the 90-120 min delay and effectively being prevented from using a perfectly good train that would have reduced your delay. Good job, guys. Good job as ever!

If you're travelling VT you'll be compensated regardless after 30 mins delay, which most people will be if travelling via KMK.

NB I'm referring to cases where passengers already had tickets.

I'm actually very surprised that TransPennine would allow their revenue to be decimated in this way. Still over two weeks to go and they're essentially saying we're not providing you with a service north of Carlisle or any compensation, get on with it.

 

[najaB]

On another recent thread we were told that the cancellation of one train was not disruption. Now, apparently, the cancellation of multiple trains over many weeks is not disruption either.

As far as I know trains are running as per the current timetable. Are you aware of trains that are scheduled to run that aren't?

 

[Bletchleyite]

As far as I know trains are running as per the current timetable. Are you aware of trains that are scheduled to run that aren't?

It's still disruption (small D) even if it is not Disruption (capital D) per the Rules. Personally, I think alternative acceptance should have remained via alternative routes for all tickets purchased before the issues occurred, temporary timetable or no.

For newly purchased tickets, by buying you have agreed to the timetable published at the time, so there is a weaker case there.

 

[najaB]

Personally, I think alternative acceptance should have remained via alternative routes for all tickets purchased before the issues occurred, temporary timetable or no.

For newly purchased tickets, by buying you have agreed to the timetable published at the time, so there is a weaker case there.

I agree with you, but I suppose they see it as difficult for the 'man on the ground' to figure out when a ticket was bought.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Personally, I think alternative acceptance should have remained via alternative routes for all tickets purchased before the issues occurred, temporary timetable or no.

For newly purchased tickets, by buying you have agreed to the timetable published at the time, so there is a weaker case there.

I'd agree that people who bought tickets before the viaduct was damaged should be able to use alternative routes. But setting restrictions based on when you bought your ticket, as opposed to which ticket you bought, just adds another layer of complexity, not to mention there's no real way of knowing from a ticket when it was bought.

In terms of Delay Repay, people who buy tickets now will not be entitled as Delay Repay is decided according to the emergency timetable. I'd agree that people who bought tickets before the closure should get it though, and I'm sure they will.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree with you, but I suppose they see it as difficult for the 'man on the ground' to figure out when a ticket was bought.

Fair point (I thought tickets contained a date of issue, but they don't, they contain a date printed). However, most people would have some evidence of an advance purchase, e.g. being able to print the itinerary.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In terms of Delay Repay, people who buy tickets now will not be entitled as Delay Repay is decided according to the emergency timetable. I'd agree that people who bought tickets before the closure should get it though, and I'm sure they will.

VT have confirmed this, I asked them. Bet I just get 45 quid and have to reapply, though

 

[The Prisoner]

Could TP in retaliation withdraw acceptance on their Edinburgh-Carlisle buses? I don't believe VWC are running any themselves.

This is all very silly.

Basically pretty much everyone has withdrawn everything and are smugly sitting back thinking they have "done their bit". VT not accepting TPE advance on their Carlisle to Glasgow trains for Glasgow customers shows why someone needs to step in, bang some heads and champion the customer. Surely VT and TPE could have sat down and agreed to share costs and run the train service via Kilmarnock under a joint banner?

I got shot down last week for daring to suggest that the constantly changing acceptances and restrictions were nothing short of pathetic to the "layman" traveling public who just don't understand the politics and want to get from A to B. Surely these critics - by their very presence on this form - advocate rail travel?

Take a look at both VT & TPAssist's twitter feed - customer after customer who is confused and angry about the duff and conflicting info they are being given. VT's website gives utterly confusing London and Glasgow-centric advice and TP's website has removed the issue from their home page completely.

Someone might come back at me with the retort that the bus/shuttle service is now (for the time being) "the norm" and so doesn't need to splashed everywhere. My view is quite simple - customers booking a TRAIN ticket expect to be conveyed by a train - and in many cases this is possible here, but the train companies have not co-operated to minimise the numbers forced off the rails.

Indeed it has taken over a week for National Rail's databases to be updated to show that you are now expected to travel on a bus for part of the journey. Even as late as yesterday some websites were still showing the direct services running (albeit with a warning symbol that the service was disrupted).

I might get the "well people are trying their hardest" response and I am quite sure they are on the ground. My issue here is with the regulatory bodies and decision makers who have put the £ before goodwill, the customer and customer retention.

 

[BRX]

Basically pretty much everyone has withdrawn everything and are smugly sitting back thinking they have "done their bit". VT not accepting TPE advance on their Carlisle to Glasgow trains for Glasgow customers shows why someone needs to step in, bang some heads and champion the customer. Surely VT and TPE could have sat down and agreed to share costs and run the train service via Kilmarnock under a joint banner?

I got shot down last week for daring to suggest that the constantly changing acceptances and restrictions were nothing short of pathetic to the "layman" traveling public who just don't understand the politics and want to get from A to B. Surely these critics - by their very presence on this form - advocate rail travel?

Take a look at both VT & TPAssist's twitter feed - customer after customer who is confused and angry about the duff and conflicting info they are being given. VT's website gives utterly confusing London and Glasgow-centric advice and TP's website has removed the issue from their home page completely.

Someone might come back at me with the retort that the bus/shuttle service is now (for the time being) "the norm" and so doesn't need to splashed everywhere. My view is quite simple - customers booking a TRAIN ticket expect to be conveyed by a train - and in many cases this is possible here, but the train companies have not co-operated to minimise the numbers forced off the rails.

Indeed it has taken over a week for National Rail's databases to be updated to show that you are now expected to travel on a bus for part of the journey. Even as late as yesterday some websites were still showing the direct services running (albeit with a warning symbol that the service was disrupted).

I might get the "well people are trying their hardest" response and I am quite sure they are on the ground. My issue here is with the regulatory bodies and decision makers who have put the £ before goodwill, the customer and customer retention.

Agree with all of this.

 

[najaB]

Surely VT and TPE could have sat down and agreed to share costs and run the train service via Kilmarnock under a joint banner?

I don't understand why they haven't done this, especially given that they both have diesel stock available. The only reason I can see is that TPE have a commitment to serve Lockerbie where VT don't. That said, I don't have the skills to 'do the maths' to see what that would do to TPE's fleet utilisation and timetable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't understand why they haven't done this, especially given that they both have diesel stock available. The only reason I can see is that TPE have a commitment to serve Lockerbie where VT don't. That said, I don't have the skills to 'do the maths' to see what that would do to TPE's fleet utilisation and timetable.

TPE don't have stock available to do anything. But they could, and should, pay VT to accept the Glasgow passengers on their services. Then they might need a minibus or two only to serve Lockerbie.

 

[najaB]

TPE don't have stock available to do anything.

Have they given up the leases on all their 185's?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Have they given up the leases on all their 185's?

You've seen the overcrowding on TPE, right? The stock is not *available*. It's in use and full of passengers.

 

[najaB]

You've seen the overcrowding on TPE, right? The stock is not *available*. It's in use and full of passengers.

I'm not saying that they should steal stock from other services: there are 185's doing Manchester to Lockerbie, could any of them be used to do Manchester - Glasgow via Dumfries?

My guess is not - as you said their fleet is stretched - but it would be nice if they had even a token service (one service each way in the morning and again in the afternoon) along with cross-acceptance with Virgin for the rest of the day.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My guess is not - as you said their fleet is stretched - but it would be nice if they had even a token service (one service each way in the morning and again in the afternoon) along with cross-acceptance with Virgin for the rest of the day.

I'd suggest that as VT were able to resource it, the token service is unnecessary, and they should simply pay VT to carry their passengers (and equally VT should charge a reasonable price to do so).

 

[merry]

Hi,

I've been lurking on this discussion, watching the situation develop with some despair and disappointment (but little real surprise).
It certainly would not encourage my colleagues to travel by rail to Scotland!
Whilst I wasn't affected by it all (my travel happens to have been very limited in the last month, and in other directions!), I do feel for those who have been.

Anyway, I have to say that the end situation is a pretty coherent set of rational and reasonable concerns about the effect on the travelling public (particularly some of the later contributions by 'The Prisoner' et al).

Given how this has been distilled, would it be worthwhile making a 'group complaint' to the ORR / DfT ? With all the comment and ideas in here, it could be quite a constructive offering rather than just a set of 'whines'.

Would anyone who's been part of the discussion be willing to write a letter which could be signed (electronically) by all those participants who have been affected by these issues, and so potentially have more weight than just one moaning enthusiast?

If not practical, fine, it's just an idea. No worries!
But if people like the idea, it makes all these discussions so much more purposeful. Kinda gives added value to the forum!

TTFN
merry

 

[Carlisle]

I'm not saying that they should steal stock from other services: there are 185's doing Manchester to Lockerbie, could any of them be used to do Manchester - Glasgow via Dumfries?

Maybe someone more knowledgeable can explain why, but as far as I know, unlike Virgin, I don't think TPE stock or crews are currently cleared on any diversionary routes in that part of the country which may have a lot to do with it

 

[najaB]

I'd suggest that as VT were able to resource it, the token service is unnecessary, and they should simply pay VT to carry their passengers (and equally VT should charge a reasonable price to do so).

I agree that it wouldn't be operationally necessary but it would (a) give VT a little more flexibility in their fleet usage; and (b) show that they're "all in it together" from the PR point of view.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I'm not saying that they should steal stock from other services: there are 185's doing Manchester to Lockerbie, could any of them be used to do Manchester - Glasgow via Dumfries?

I'm not sure that they are cleared that way, others can advise, though most of the WCML trains are 350s anyway.

I'd agree that VTWC should be accepting TPE tickets on the diverted trains, at least north of Carlisle, I genuinely don't see why not. The only issue could be, as always, capacity; AFAIK the diverted train's only a single 221.

 

[Chrism20]

Are 185s still running up and down the WCML on a regular basis other than the Friday turn? I thought apart from that they were all exclusively now 350s

Also are they cleared for the GSW and are there anymore paths considering that the SR services are being subbed for buses in order for the shuttle to run and even if there is a path it would probably be better sending a Voyager as it has greater capacity.

I agree with what everyone is saying though and there really should be more co-operation between Virgin and TPE.

 

[The Prisoner]

I'm not sure that they are cleared that way, others can advise, though most of the WCML trains are 350s anyway.

I'd agree that VTWC should be accepting TPE tickets on the diverted trains, at least north of Carlisle, I genuinely don't see why not. The only issue could be, as always, capacity; AFAIK the diverted train's only a single 221.

Traveled on Monday from Glasgow on the 1022 Carlisle shuttle and I would say it was 2/3rds empty. Utter madness.

 

[scotsman]

TPE don't have enough 185s to run a Scottish service, as they can't actually use the 350s anywhere else. In addition, few of their drivers (Freightliner) and none of their conductors sign the GSW, to the best of my knowledge.

 

[najaB]

In addition, few of their drivers (Freightliner) and none of their conductors sign the GSW, to the best of my knowledge.

Fair enough.