|
IndustryInsider
|
 |
« Reply #345 on: August 31, 2015, 10:49:35 » |
|
So I assumed that fGW's staff numbers would reduce by some 300, 100 at each of the 3 depots. These 300 make up 5% (approx) of the TSP▸ payments. I also said that if I guessed wrongly and double that number leave fGW's books the cost reductions still only amount to about 10% of the TSP payments.
As I said, these are back-of-the-envelope calculations. They are almost certainly not accurate - but they give an order of magnitude estimation of the sums of money involved. And it seems that the IEP▸ caper is a very expensive way to buy seat-miles.
Of course although this would reduce FGW▸ 's direct staff costs, it is not necessarily a reduction in overall staff costs by that amount as Hitachi or whoever is maintaining the new units will need to employ staff to do the maintenance. It is important to look at costs in the round.
Too many organisations have outsourced work to make their headcount look good for the city only to find that that the outsourcing is costing them more than it did in house or they find that the outsourcing organisation does not do the work well enough or very commonly both. Why the city is so obsessed with headcount rather than cost I do not understand.
As well as the staff costs, there are surely two other significant costs which will no longer apply unless I misunderstand the situation. Firstly the cost of maintaining the trains - twenty seven years worth of brake pads don't come cheap. Not to mention the cost of replacement engines, transmissions, pantographs, bogies etc. etc. etc. Then there's the likely total refurbishment of the trains which would be needed at least once, possibly twice, over the twenty-seven years. Secondly, there's the cost of the maintenance depots themselves. If Old Oak Common is to close then the cost of maintaining the building will cease, and with First not needing to contribute towards the costs of the new depot they also don't have to contribute towards the cost of modifying the old depots with equipment and a layout suitable for the new trains which they would have otherwise had to have done, or at least somebody other than Hitachi would have. Both of those things would cost a lot of money over the full maintenance contract, maybe a small percentage of the overall costs, but does anyone case to estimate what they might be? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
TaplowGreen
|
|
« Reply #346 on: August 31, 2015, 10:57:39 » |
|
Seems the weather gods are on the side of FGW▸ rather than the RMT▸ . With it being rather inclement FGW aren't having to deal with hoards of day trippers to coastal areas.
..........nope, just the hordes attending the Notting Hill Carnival and Reading Festival  (for which to be fair they've laid on a couple of extra services from Paddington) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ellendune
|
|
« Reply #347 on: August 31, 2015, 12:48:10 » |
|
As well as the staff costs, there are surely two other significant costs which will no longer apply unless I misunderstand the situation.
Firstly the cost of maintaining the trains - twenty seven years worth of brake pads don't come cheap. Not to mention the cost of replacement engines, transmissions, pantographs, bogies etc. etc. etc. Then there's the likely total refurbishment of the trains which would be needed at least once, possibly twice, over the twenty-seven years.
Secondly, there's the cost of the maintenance depots themselves. If Old Oak Common is to close then the cost of maintaining the building will cease, and with First not needing to contribute towards the costs of the new depot they also don't have to contribute towards the cost of modifying the old depots with equipment and a layout suitable for the new trains which they would have otherwise had to have done, or at least somebody other than Hitachi would have.
Both of those things would cost a lot of money over the full maintenance contract, maybe a small percentage of the overall costs, but does anyone case to estimate what they might be?
Agree just a please to compare the whole costs borne by all parties not just one small part of it borne only by FGW▸ . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #348 on: August 31, 2015, 12:55:24 » |
|
Of course although this would reduce FGW▸ 's direct staff costs, it is not necessarily a reduction in overall staff costs by that amount as Hitachi or whoever is maintaining the new units will need to employ staff to do the maintenance. It is important to look at costs in the round. These costs will be already covered in the increased costs we are discussing - the payments by the TOC▸ to Hitachi/Angel Trains |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #349 on: August 31, 2015, 15:04:06 » |
|
Got there and back ok. In the end nobody bothered to check tickets!
It seems as if the guard was too busy to check tickets on a half full service which ran non stop Reading to Exeter.
Good job that the new trains will be DOO▸ to free up time for guards to check tickets...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #350 on: August 31, 2015, 15:12:29 » |
|
Aren't there barriers at both ends of that journey?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #351 on: August 31, 2015, 15:18:52 » |
|
Barriers can't prevent dumb-belling, ensure a correct Advance is being used, check tickets of those who are connecting... and so on. There really should be an on board ticket check in the time between Reading and Exeter.
And Btline, the new trains aren't going to be DOO▸ to Exeter. There will be a TM‡ on board except in extremis and even then only in the Thames Valley will they ever run Driver Only. Even that may not happen if FGW▸ concede further ground to the RMT▸ belligerents.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for the rest of the day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
- Sir Terry Pratchett.
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #352 on: August 31, 2015, 15:32:17 » |
|
Good job that the new trains will be DOO▸ to free up time for guards to check tickets... Did you not read his final line :-) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SandTEngineer
|
|
« Reply #353 on: August 31, 2015, 15:36:58 » |
|
Back to the subject in hand  My daughter travelled from Gatwick Airport via Reading to Plymouth on Saturday 29 August and..... She got a seat on every train.... The Reading to Plymouth train had a buffet open..... Her ticket was checked on the train..... The trains were on time...... Strike, what strike?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #354 on: August 31, 2015, 15:40:21 » |
|
Barriers can't prevent dumb-belling, ensure a correct Advance is being used, check tickets of those who are connecting... and so on. There really should be an on board ticket check in the time between Reading and Exeter.
Hmmm ... The ticket check is necessary everytime on route calling at stations with significant passenger flows where there aren't ticket purchase facilities. But where every station has sales (and barriers), perhaps a sometime check is all that's needed as a deterrent, perhaps with an announcement to visit the Train Manager in Coach C, or buy tickets if you still need them from the trolley. People are only going to intentionally break the rules if - on balance - it's to their advantage. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
|
|
|
|
TaplowGreen
|
|
« Reply #355 on: August 31, 2015, 15:47:03 » |
|
Barriers can't prevent dumb-belling, ensure a correct Advance is being used, check tickets of those who are connecting... and so on. There really should be an on board ticket check in the time between Reading and Exeter.
Hmmm ... The ticket check is necessary everytime on route calling at stations with significant passenger flows where there aren't ticket purchase facilities. But where every station has sales (and barriers), perhaps a sometime check is all that's needed as a deterrent, perhaps with an announcement to visit the Train Manager in Coach C, or buy tickets if you still need them from the trolley. People are only going to intentionally break the rules if - on balance - it's to their advantage. Firstly, what on Earth is dumb-belling? Secondly - had exactly the same experience Plymouth-Taplow (changing at Reading) - not a single ticket check throughout the whole journey (no barriers or staff at Taplow!) - was in 1st class Plymouth-Reading and the refreshment trolley came through several times but no ticket checks. Apologies for straying off the main topic! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
broadgage
|
|
« Reply #356 on: August 31, 2015, 15:53:58 » |
|
In this case "dumb belling" in generally understood to mean a type of ticket fraud whereby valid tickets are held for a short portion at each end of a journey, but no ticket is purchased for the longer bit in the middle.
Usually involves season tickets in which cases it is also known as the "short reason ticket fraud" but sometimes done with single tickets.
Can be detected by on board ticket checks, but not by ticket gates.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU▸ is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #357 on: August 31, 2015, 16:04:19 » |
|
Firstly I was travelling to Torquay, which is unbarriered. Plus the Paddington bridge barriers were wide open.
There really is no excuse for no ticket checks on the long and slow 90 mins to Exeter.
As far as I have read, the new Hitachi trains will have the driver operating the doors (i.e. DOO▸ ). This will free up the guard to check tickets.
There are several DOO services in Glasgow with a guard who solely checks tickets.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
plymothian
|
|
« Reply #358 on: August 31, 2015, 16:49:13 » |
|
Got there and back ok. In the end nobody bothered to check tickets!
It seems as if the guard was too busy to check tickets on a half full service which ran non stop Reading to Exeter.
Good job that the new trains will be DOO▸ to free up time for guards to check tickets...
That's because you didn't have a guard, you had a manager "guard". And although they can be trained to work a train in 2 days, ticketing seems beyond that fast-tracking capability. TEs are off on strike too, which leaves RPIs▸ and any ticket trained managers who might be about. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Please be aware that only the first 4 words of this post will be platformed on this message board.
|
|
|
|
phile
|
|
« Reply #359 on: August 31, 2015, 16:58:11 » |
|
Firstly I was travelling to Torquay, which is unbarriered. Plus the Paddington bridge barriers were wide open.
There really is no excuse for no ticket checks on the long and slow 90 mins to Exeter.
As far as I have read, the new Hitachi trains will have the driver operating the doors (i.e. DOO▸ ). This will free up the guard to check tickets.
There are several DOO services in Glasgow with a guard who solely checks tickets.
I think you would have had a Ticket Examiner in the Glasgow area rather than a guard. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
