What three things would you fix or change about the railway?

[antharro]

Assuming unlimited money and no DfT/TOC interference, what three things would you fix or change about the railway? Could be anything you like as long as it's railway related - new benches at your local station, putting 1938ts back on the Northern Line, rebuilding the SWML so double-deck trains could be run...

My three:

1) Bring back the 442s on SWML services in their SWT configuration with the snug and buffet.
2) HSTs on all XC routes with comfortable seating and decent catering.
3) Refit the 80x fleets with a premium interior - much more comfortable seats, a proper first class, decent catering and less harsh lighting.

 

[A S Leib]

Electrification of all lines with at least 2 tph

No more trains shorter than 3 carriages (apart from a few cases such as the Stourbridge shuttle)

The creation of a ranger / rover covering the northern Home Counties (between London, the Thames Rover, Heart of England and Anglia Plus), and expanding the Thameslink Daysaver to all Thameslink routes and the Kent Rover to Hastings, Dartford, Ebbsfleet and Bromley South (if this point counts as two I'll take the last bit).

 

[Paul Jones 88]

Refit 720s to be like 379s.
Bring ticket pricing in line with those of Europe.
Direct link from Southeastern into C2C and Greater Anglia.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Nationalise the railways.

Reopen all the scenic branch lines Beeching closed.

Bring back steam.

 

[A S Leib]

Direct link from Southeastern into C2C and Greater Anglia.

A Crossrail / Thameslink from Cannon Street / Charing Cross to Fenchurch & Liverpool Street, or around Dartford or Gravesend?

 

[ComUtoR]

Pay rise.
Remove all Government subsidy.
Private branch line from my house to my depot.

 

[birchesgreen]

Much more electrification (including ending the ban on new third rail)
More regular and predictable timetables (every station should have a train every hour)
More consistent and simpler ticket prices

 

[2392]

What would I fix.-

1] Selective reopening of some lines. Better more appropriate facilities and/or new stations [building replacements for those closed or completely new ones at town/cities that didn't have one in the past. [At one time I'd said all closed lines, but not these days as some were even on paper a dead loss and purely "political",i.e I'd built a line from A to B just because you were too....].

2] A "pool" of spare/extra stock [both locos and rolling stock]. To cope with any sudden serge of passenger or replace a defective vehicle in a set. Granted thing have gone from one extreme to the other, i.e. Heaton Carriage sidings on Tyneside even o a Sunday is pretty well empty with the odd Grand Central coach of half a Sprinter unit. In the old days there were literally dozens of Mk1s that seem to just sit there fron one years end to the next. 3]As already suggested above more sensible ticketing/pricing.

3] As mentioned above better more sensible ticketing/pricing.

 

[Harpers Tate]

1: I don't care who actually runs the trains themselves or the customer interface, but as far as the entire service provision is concerned, total integration of timetables, fares, the services available at offices and machines and so on; a seamless "single product". Include bus services run effectively as an extension of the railway (much as Amtrak Thruway does in the USA). If we do retain separate TOCs (eg under a franchise) then no TOC specific fares (except advances that are train, and thereby TOC, specific by definition). No route restrictions brought about solely for TOC specific revenue attribution purposes. etc.
2: Always at least sufficient capacity to at least meet demand, including when predictable special events occur (music festivals, Christmas Markets, major Sporting events)
3: Provision across the board for "paying up" when one's ticket is found to be unsuitable before travel (examples: bought a railcard discounted ticket and discovered it was left at home/expired/etc - pay up to the same fare undiscounted; need to travel earlier/later than booked - pay up to the next available fare).

There are more - but I'm only allowed three.

 

[zwk500]

Stop opening Stations on existing lines where it blocks capacity for the main flows.

Sort out all the network's data, so that computer assistance can be used to it's full potential both for planning and operational matters.

ETCS L2 in-cab full network deployment.

 

[AM9]

1) Full integration between bus and rail services with effective workable onward travel timetabling.
2) As @zwk500 says, ETCS L2, both to upgrade safety and capacity on lines as well as contributing to smoother cascading of rolling stock when beneficial.
3) A rolling programme of electrification to include all lines with 2 tph or more and any resulting unelectrified islands. That would also include progressive conversion of metro standard 3rd rail to mainline OLE concurrent with necessary infrastructure updating.

 

[Ken H]

More grade separation
More loops or quadrification
Get the wires up

 

[swt_passenger]

As a member of the forum for so long now, I think the most important restoration of all would have to be a XC Liverpool to Brighton service. Nothing has been discussed more often…

 

[Bletchleyite]

Lots and lots of wires and EMUs.

Interiors designed for people to want to be in them. The GWR 80x is an issue but by no means the biggest one.

 

[mike57]

1. Electrification of all major routes, we can argue about where the 'cut' would be made, but I am not advocating electrifying lines such as Heart of Wales or Far North, but anything that carries regular inter regional services, intensive local services, and existing half finished projects such as GWR lines and MML should be included.

2. An improvement to passenger environments, think Mk3 comfort in modern stock. An end to 3+2 seating. On short distance Metro services longitudinal seating like class 378 is probably a better fit, everything else is 2+2. All First Class to be 1 + 2, and seats designed for comfort rather than the thinest/cheapest. Adequate luggage space on all inter regional, inter city and airport services.

3. All future passenger stock must be able to operate together, and will belong to common pool with a standard driver interface and controls, we really have gone backwards in this area, there would be 125mph EMUs (limited to 100mph on 3rd rail) for inter city routes, 100mph/90mph dual voltage EMUs for local services and 100mph/90mph DMUs for the lines that dont make the criteria for improvement 1. Three types of traction knowledge for passenger stock. And the 125mph and 100/90 stock would be capable of operating together, at the lower of the two speeds. It can be built by different manufactures, as long it conforms to common standards set and enforced, which also extends to standard components for all wearing items. Interiors may vary, Metro style longitudinal, Doors at 1/3rds, and end vestibules with doors at ends depending on usage, but everything can work with everything, and can therefore be moved around as requirements change. There would also be a defined percentage spare, probably of Doors at 1/3rds units as these could could cover any requirement so that short term strengthening could take place to cover large events etc. An end to the current situation where there are countless different types in use, all of which require different maintenance, traction knowledge etc. and cannot be quickly redeployed

Although upfront cost would be high once objective 1 & 3 have been acheived day to day running costs would probably be lower and going forwards we would have a better railway

 

[Bletchleyite]

1. Electrification of all major routes, we can argue about where the 'cut' would be made, but I am not advocating electrifying lines such as Heart of Wales or Far North, but anything that carries regular inter regional services, intensive local services, and existing half finished projects such as GWR lines and MML should be included.

My personal view is that any line with an hourly or better service should be electrified within 10 years of today. Any line with a half-hourly or better service should be prioritised. Clearly as you say not the Far North, Conwy Valley and other similar ones, but absolutely all commuter lines around Manchester and Birmingham, the MML, the GW all the way to Penzance (though batteries might be needed for Dawlish!*), all routes used by XC and possibly diversionary routes like the S&C even if they won't normally receive a frequent service, plus the whole of TPE, Windermere, Barrow and stuff like that, as well as the Highland Mainline, the route via Aberdeen/Dundee and the North Wales Coast all the way to Holyhead.

* That said there is a Scottish coastal 25kV electrified line that gets as much of a drenching...

2. An improvement to passenger environments, think Mk3 comfort in modern stock. An end to 3+2 seating. On short distance Metro services longitudinal seating like class 378 is probably a better fit, everything else is 2+2. All First Class to be 1 + 2, and seats designed for comfort rather than the thinest/cheapest. Adequate luggage space on all inter regional, inter city and airport services.

Absolutely. The Class 397 gives an idea of what it should look like (though I think I'd have slightly more airline seats).

 

[AM9]

My personal view is that any line with an hourly or better service should be electrified within 10 years of today. Any line with a half-hourly or better service should be prioritised. Clearly as you say not the Far North, Conwy Valley and other similar ones, but absolutely all commuter lines around Manchester and Birmingham, the MML, the GW all the way to Penzance (though batteries might be needed for Dawlish!*), all routes used by XC and possibly diversionary routes like the S&C even if they won't normally receive a frequent service, plus the whole of TPE, Windermere, Barrow and stuff like that, as well as the Highland Mainline, the route via Aberdeen/Dundee and the North Wales Coast all the way to Holyhead.

* That said there is a Scottish coastal 25kV electrified line that gets as much of a drenching...



Absolutely. The Class 397 gives an idea of what it should look like (though I think I'd have slightly more airline seats).

I would enhance your statement about the frequencie require to qualify for urgent electrification by replacing "service" with traffic, i.e to include non-stop services that use the line as well as encouraging freight to be electrified sooner. The drenched OLE in Scotland is east of Saltcoats (pun) - see here. (picture of class 380 surfing on its holidays!)


I also add that the 397s are the type that could be the backbone of IC and longer distance regional services as long as the rubbish ride is fixed!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would enhance your statement about the frequencie require to qualify for urgent electrification by replacing "service" with traffic, i.e to include non-stop services that use the line as well as encouraging freight to be electrified sooner.
I also add that the 397s are the type that could be the backbone of IC and longer distance regional services as long as the rubbish ride is fixed!

Yes, I did mean "any line that has a train pass in each direction at least once per hour", freight is of course included.

 

[A S Leib]

As a member of the forum for so long now, I think the most important restoration of all would have to be a XC Liverpool to Brighton service. Nothing has been discussed more often…

Liverpool - Blaenau Ffestiniog - Aberystwyth - Carmarthen (tunnel to Plymouth) - Okehampton - Exeter - Clapham Junction - East Grinstead - Brighton?

 

[HSTEd]

3-4 feet of extra vertical clearance, and a fixed lower gauging, throughout the network and a huge fleet of Regio 2N type trains for everyone.

 

[Bletchleyite]

3-4 feet of extra vertical clearance, and a fixed lower gauging, throughout the network and a huge fleet of Regio 2N type trains for everyone.

Lord, no. Double deck is horrid unless you're on a massive loading gauge such as that found in the US.

Full size ICE derivatives, yes please. Or even better the new Stadler single-deck high speed train.

 

[Trainbike46]

1. Electrify every line with at least 16 trains per direction on the busiest day
2. reopen lines or build new lines, so that every twon with >25,000 people has a station either in the town or at the town edge. Make rail connectivity a requirement of all new towns
3. Redesign the fare system to introduce:
- an "all-line season ticket", priced competitively with car ownership if you drive a lot (similar to a bahncard 100)
- A national railcard. Most existing railcards (16-25, 26-30, Armed forces, disabled etc.) would be discounted versions of the national one. Retain Family and Friends, two together and regional railcards as is. replace gold card scheme with the national railcard being a part of all season tickets at least the price of the national railcard
- simpler fares, removing very expensive headline fares that generate negative publicity
- Unified fares that remove the need for splitting
- Overall reduction of fares

 

[mike57]

3. Redesign the fare system to introduce:
- an "all-line season ticket", priced competitively with car ownership if you drive a lot (similar to a bahncard 100)
- A national railcard. Most existing railcards (16-25, 26-30, Armed forces, disabled etc.) would be discounted versions of the national one. Retain Family and Friends, two together and regional railcards as is. replace gold card scheme with the national railcard being a part of all season tickets at least the price of the national railcard
- simpler fares, removing very expensive headline fares that generate negative publicity
- Unified fares that remove the need for splitting
- Overall reduction of fares

I agree about fare structure overhaul, currently it is far too complicated. I would go further, just two fares, Anytime single, priced at around offpeak single currently, and Advance single, which is any more heavily discounted fare tied to a specific itinary. No TOC specific Anytime tickets, and if your advance ticket journey is disrupted you automatically travel on the next available service. TOCs become companies delivering the service on behalf of GBR, when you buy your ticket it is 'GBR'. I would also do away with traditional season tickets, just offer discounted 'books' of tickets for a specific journey.

As for railcards, maybe just say 'Pay £30 a year to get 30% off' as with all the different categories currently a large percentage of the population must qualify for one of the railcards.

I like the idea of an all line season, but the annual cost could be pretty eye watering, and I reckon it would be a niche market.

 

[Trainbike46]

I agree about fare structure overhaul, currently it is far too complicated. I would go further, just two fares, Anytime single, priced at around offpeak single currently, and Advance single, which is any more heavily discounted fare tied to a specific itinary. No TOC specific Anytime tickets, and if your advance ticket journey is disrupted you automatically travel on the next available service. TOCs become companies delivering the service on behalf of GBR, when you buy your ticket it is 'GBR'. I would also do away with traditional season tickets, just offer discounted 'books' of tickets for a specific journey.

As for railcards, maybe just say 'Pay £30 a year to get 30% off' as with all the different categories currently a large percentage of the population must qualify for one of the railcards.

I like the idea of an all line season, but the annual cost could be pretty eye watering, and I reckon it would be a niche market.

The german bahncard 100 is €4,144 (standard) or €7,010 (first) per year so, a uk equivalent would probably be priced similarly, and it would be a (very) niche market, but is mostly to prove that, if you can do without a car, the train will always be cheaper

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I like the idea of an all line season, but the annual cost could be pretty eye watering, and I reckon it would be a niche market.

How would you even price one of those? Would have thought they would easily be £15,000+ per annum (based on the current £818 for a standard class fortnightly All Line Rover) and even then it'd still not be valid on certain "Inter City" type peak hour morning services?

 

[Trainbike46]

How would you even price one of those? Would have thought they would easily be £15,000+ per annum (based on the current £818 for a standard class fortnightly All Line Rover) and even then it'd still not be valid on certain "Inter City" type peak hour morning services?

My answer would be to look how NS, DB etc. priced theirs, and apply a similar strategy in the uk. It should be a lot less than £15,000 a year though, probably more like £4,000ish, similar in price to the DB one, in the ideal world

 

[Mcr Warrior]

My answer would be to look how NS, DB etc. priced theirs, and apply a similar strategy in the uk. It should be a lot less than £15,000 a year though, probably more like £4,000ish, similar in price to the DB one, in the ideal world

Absolutely no chance. An annual standard season from Three Bridges into London Victoria is already priced a tad above £4000. No way would the DfT allow it to be undercut by a cheaper alternative product with All Line Rover validity. Might need a re-think on that one!

 

[Bread & cheese]

Absolutely no chance. An annual standard season from Three Bridges into London Victoria is already priced a tad above £4000. No way would the DfT allow it to be undercut by a cheaper alternative product with All Line Rover validity. Might need a re-think on that one!

How about 100 days unlimited travel for £4000, the 100 days not being consecutive, but to be taken within a year.

 

[gmaguire]

1) Bring back the Network SouthEast livery and station branding
2) Make it easier to tell how much a fare paid with an Oyster / contactless card will cost (may already be easy to find this info, I don’t know)
3) Remove First MTR from the southwestern franchise

 

[Domh245]

2) Make it easier to tell how much a fare paid with an Oyster / contactless card will cost (may already be easy to find this info, I don’t know)

Single fare finder

Find fares between any two stations in London

tfl.gov.uk