Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 23:15 28 Mar 2024
- Bus plunges off South Africa bridge, killing 45
* Easter getaways hit by travel disruption
- Where Baltimore bridge investigation goes now
- How do I renew my UK passport and what is the 10-year rule?
- Easter travel warning as millions set to hit roads
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
28th Mar (1988)
Woman found murdered on Orpington to London train (*)

Train RunningCancelled
20:56 Worcester Foregate Street to London Paddington
22:30 Gatwick Airport to Reading
Short Run
18:03 London Paddington to Penzance
20:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
21:04 London Paddington to Plymouth
23:04 Reading to Bedwyn
23:17 Bedwyn to Reading
Delayed
21:30 Gatwick Airport to Reading
21:45 Penzance to London Paddington
23:45 London Paddington to Penzance
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 28, 2024, 23:21:47 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[104] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[103] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[78] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[56] If not HS2 to Manchester, how will traffic be carried?
[41] Return of the BRUTE?
[25] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
 
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 16
  Print  
Author Topic: First / MTR win South Western franchise 2017 - 2024, and CMA raises competition concerns (merged topic)  (Read 86978 times)
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #165 on: June 21, 2017, 15:43:21 »

As the Elizabeth Line has been. Both without toilet provision.
Logged
Surrey 455
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1229


View Profile
« Reply #166 on: June 22, 2017, 00:02:23 »

They list enhancements for passengers, including wide gangways, but the accompanying picture shows... no Unit-End Gangways (UEGs (Unit End Gangway)). Granted the illustration may be an impression of the 10-car sets, but given we have not seen an Aventra with UEGs I suspect the 5-car sets won't have them either. If you're not only having wide gangways but also promoting them as an enhanced feature then not allowing passengers to move between a pair of 5-car units in multiple leaves a 'bad taste'. If you want to run the railway in the best interests of passengers, then if you order units that are intended to run in multiple you should specify that said units must have UEGs.

The existing 455 units on SWT (South West Trains) have UEGs but they are locked out of use. I suspect the Southern versions are too.
Logged
Rhydgaled
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1500


View Profile WWW
« Reply #167 on: June 22, 2017, 12:04:26 »

I don't see why UEGs (Unit End Gangway) are important for passengers on suburban trains?  Operationally I can see the attraction, but I wouldn't have thought pax would care less. The ability to easily walk through 5 carriages to find a less congested part of the train is a big step forward (as well as the additional space the wide gangways give).
You hit the nail on the head: being able to walk through to find a less congested part of the train. I'm sure it has been said on this forum that trains out of Paddington, Waterloo etc. tend to be more-heavily loaded at the end nearest the ticket barriers which shows passengers tend to board the train at or near the first doors they come to. With the 10-car sets, passengers will be able to walk through right to the end if they board a busy carriage, a pair of 5-car units without UEGs is more likely to have a sudden drop in loadings between the 5th and 6th coaches. UEGs would allow passengers to move into that sixth coach and maybe find a seat, a big benifit in my view.

An even bigger reason for UEGs however, from a passenger's perspective, is if the trains are scheduled to divide on route. As noted above, passengers tend to board the doors they come to first; this will be particularly true if they are in a hurry making a tight connection. Thus passengers may need to walk through to the correct portion, and asking them to alight at the next station to move to the other unit is effectively asking them to change trains. This is so important that, in my opinion, franchise agreemeents should forbid advertising trains as through services where units are uncoupled on-route unless the train that divides is gangwayed throughout. Of course if the idea is to run 2x5-car sets into Waterloo in the morning peak then detach a unit in the platform at Waterloo which runs ECS (Empty Coaching Stock) to depot/sidings leaving a 5-car in the platform to work off-peak services that's not a problem, but anything that divides on route needs UEGs (or the timetable and journey planners need to show it as seperate services, so passengers expect to have to change at the point the service divides).

Operationally the only benifit of UEGs I can see for the TOC (Train Operating Company) is that a single guard can access the entire train (although the numbers of passengers on a 10-car formation probably requires multiple staff anyway).

lack of toilet provision is uncivilised
I completely agree. The Crossrail trains, for example, really ought to have toilets fitted.

They list enhancements for passengers, including wide gangways, but the accompanying picture shows... no Unit-End Gangways (UEGs). Granted the illustration may be an impression of the 10-car sets, but given we have not seen an Aventra with UEGs I suspect the 5-car sets won't have them either. If you're not only having wide gangways but also promoting them as an enhanced feature then not allowing passengers to move between a pair of 5-car units in multiple leaves a 'bad taste'. If you want to run the railway in the best interests of passengers, then if you order units that are intended to run in multiple you should specify that said units must have UEGs.

The existing 455 units on SWT (South West Trains) have UEGs but they are locked out of use. I suspect the Southern versions are too.
Locked out of use! Why!? I had no idea they didn't use the UEGs on the class 455s.
Logged

----------------------------
Don't DOO (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) it, keep the guard (but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea if the driver unlocked the doors on arrival at calling points).
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5316


View Profile
« Reply #168 on: June 22, 2017, 17:40:51 »

The existing 455 units on SWT (South West Trains) have UEGs (Unit End Gangway) but they are locked out of use. I suspect the Southern versions are too.
On Southern units the end gangways are no longer fitted - they were removed and plated over some years ago as part of cab layout changes to provide for driver aircon...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_455#/media/File:455801_London_Victoria_September_2016.jpg

Paul
« Last Edit: June 22, 2017, 17:52:34 by paul7755 » Logged
John R
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4416


View Profile
« Reply #169 on: June 22, 2017, 19:01:33 »

You hit the nail on the head: being able to walk through to find a less congested part of the train.

An even bigger reason for UEGs (Unit End Gangway) however, from a passenger's perspective, is if the trains are scheduled to divide on route.

But you've ignored my point that the new stock is much better at distributing passenger load than Class 455's are, owing to the ease of walking within a unit, the extra car, and the greater space afforded by the wide gangways. So the disbenefit of not having IUG is minor in comparison to the gains achieved, particularly when we now know that the IUG's on 455's have been locked out of use for years.

And the point about trains dividing en route is somewhat spurious.  You still have to be in the right part of the train when it divides. Whether you walk through the train or get off and back on again is six of one, half dozen of the other, particularly as IUGs tends to be narrow and not particularly easy for  those with large luggage or those with restriction of movement.
Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #170 on: June 22, 2017, 21:56:13 »

Also, ever been on a peak HST (High Speed Train) out if Paddington?

Can walk through all of that, but pax are lazy....you'll find bunching in first couple of STD coaches by those without a reservation. I don't think a UEG (Unit End Gangway) will mecessarily work the way you think it might
Logged
CyclingSid
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1918


Hockley viaduct


View Profile
« Reply #171 on: June 23, 2017, 16:50:11 »

Try a train to Ascot on race day. Only two coaches at barrier end tend to be used, its a ling way in heels.
Logged
John R
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4416


View Profile
« Reply #172 on: June 23, 2017, 17:25:06 »

Try a train to Ascot on race day. Only two coaches at barrier end tend to be used, its a ling way in heels.
Do you say that from experience?
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #173 on: June 23, 2017, 17:28:03 »

Try a train to Ascot on race day. Only two coaches at barrier end tend to be used, its a ling way in heels.
Do you say that from experience?

Is that because they're the ones with "slightly wider seats" up front by any chance?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #174 on: July 04, 2017, 12:04:17 »

I have amended the topic of this board from "South West Trains" to "South Western Services" in order to be more general and cover both the concluding Stagecoach franchise and the starting First / MTR one.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #175 on: July 11, 2017, 11:59:47 »

From a press release I've seen, not sure who issued it. Presumably the CMA?

Quote
The government market regulator has today raised concern about the award of the South Western franchise to First MTR.

In March, the franchise was awarded to the company, which is a joint venture between First Group and Hong Kong based firm MTR.

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has been investigating the award of the new franchise (which is due to start on 20 August) since May, and on the majority of the routes there were found to be no issues with competition.   

However, the regulator has now intervened as it argues that there could be a lack of competition on the route between London and Exeter, as FirstGroup also run the GWR (Great Western Railway) franchise, which is the only other route down to the south west.

This could mean that passengers using this route could end up paying higher fares and receive a worse service due to a lack of competition.

Andrea Coscelli, acting chief executive and decision-maker of the CMA, said: “This is a crucial rail route to the south west, used by around half a million passengers a year. It’s therefore vital that passengers do not suffer as a result of reduced competition.

“The CMA believes that without its intervention, FirstGroup may be able to increase fares for passengers between London and Exeter, as it will be the only rail operator running all services on this route.

“We look forward to hearing from the companies involved about how they think they can overcome this.”

Both FirstGroup and MTR have now been given the opportunity to offer proposals (known as ‘undertakings in lieu of reference’) to ensure that the concerns identified by the CMA are addressed.

If the suggestions tabled by the two companies are considered sufficient then they will avoid an in-depth phase 2 investigation.

Previously, the CMA had ruled on a similar issue with the award of the Northern franchise, and in this case, the winning operator Arriva agreed to cap fares on the route to resolve the regulator’s concerns.

It also follows the CMA clearing the award of the TPE (Trans Pennine Express) franchise to FirstGroup last year as it found that competition on the route would not be negatively affected. 

A spokesperson for FirstGroup told RTM ((and RTFM) Read The Manual!): “We have been discussing our plans for the new South Western franchise with the CMA for several months.

“Now that this update gives more clarity, we look forward to submitting our proposals on this issue which we envisage will satisfy their concerns.”

First MTR will now have five working days to propose their undertakings, and the CMA will announce its preliminary decision on whether these measures are sufficient by 25 July.

Personally, no surprise whatsoever
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 10095


View Profile
« Reply #176 on: July 11, 2017, 13:05:54 »

No surprise, but I expect the necessary assurances will be given and there will be no need for concern.
Logged

To view my GWML (Great Western Main Line) 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/
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5316


View Profile
« Reply #177 on: July 11, 2017, 13:28:38 »

No surprise, but I expect the necessary assurances will be given and there will be no need for concern.

Don't recall this being much of a problem for Virgin to Edinburgh. 

The various regulated fares will carry on within their existing rules anyway...
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #178 on: July 11, 2017, 14:27:38 »

No surprise, but I expect the necessary assurances will be given and there will be no need for concern.

Don't recall this being much of a problem for Virgin to Edinburgh. 

The various regulated fares will carry on within their existing rules anyway...

Virgin are just a 10% Stakeholder in East Coast - not a controlling interest, whereas they're 100% London to Exeter via Taunton, and 70% via Honiton.

Having said which ... London to Newcastle, to Manchester, to Cardiff, to Norwich, to Brighton all are effectively in the hands of a single provider with little or no competition, so why single out Exeter to ask the question?  Answering my own question, could it be because of the significant differential prices at present on routes from London via Salisbury to both Exeter and Bristol?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #179 on: July 11, 2017, 15:10:10 »

yup!
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 16
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page