Has the British commuter railway been left to rot in private control?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

From Tribune

The Great Virgin Train Robbery.

By Stefan Bielik

After rail privatisation, Virgin Trains were presented as an engineering triumph – but they amounted to nothing more than a sewage-scented rebranding of British Rail's managed decline.

Since Britain’s rail network was privatised in the mid-1990s, the matter of its return to state control has dogged the country’s left. British commuters have been forced to watch on as European neighbours modernised and pushed forward technologically, while their own network was left to rot in the hands of avatars for PFI and PPP like Richard Branson. ...

a long article, concluding

Some of the problems of Britain’s 19th century infrastructure are unsolvable without tearing everything down and starting again. The legacy of its train lines being built up by competing Victorian businessmen led to many oddities, such as Wigan’s two stations, or the five different answers you would receive to the question ‘what is the main station in London?’ But there are many more aspects that can and must be fixed – and it is clear from countless historical examples that this can only be done with bold, organised state planning, without profiteering.

[RichardB]

A rather blinkered view that, tailored by a clear dislike of Virgin Trains.  Reminds me of when people wrote pro-privatisation articles in the 90s, tailored by their hatred of British Rail.

Haven't we actually ended up with "bold, organised state planning, without profiteering"?  Broadly, anyway.

One thing towards the end jumped out "This isn’t just an economic concern, either – the net result of high-speed rail between important cities has a drastic effect on domestic flights and car journeys. Thanks to state ownership and thus a lesser incentive to turn direct profits, the Chinese government (just like the French before them) were able to aggressively price their tickets against airlines, and with centre-to-centre connections and no need to ‘check-in’, as well as the ability to work en-route, domestic car and plane journeys fell dramatically."

So, London - Manchester then.  Speed and frequency improvements introduced by (ahem) Virgin Trains thanks to huge investment by the Government in the now largely forgotten West Coast Modernisation Scheme of the 00s, one of the country's largest peacetime projects, have led to rail certainly trouncing air between the two cities.  And that's despite very high peak rail fares.

[broadgage]

It seems to me that a lot of the problems including the infamous sewage smells on virgin trains, and a general lack of capacity, are due to basic poor design of new trains.
I refer here NOT primarily to the wretched IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train), they are merely the latest manifestation of a general policy of shorter trains with worse facilities.

I can remember when the Waterloo to Exeter route was operated by full length loco hauled trains, with buffets and luggage vans. (and longer ago than that, they even had a restaurant) The replacement was 3 car DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), without buffets or bulk luggage space. After about 20 years of overcrowding some extra DMUs were obtained and some trains are now as long as all the old trains used to be. Still no buffet nor luggage space.

When I lived in South East London, most local train services were operated by 8 car slam door EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit). (4+4) Then came the new improved networker EMUs. A mixture of 4 car and 6 car trains instead of 8 car trains.
I almost always got a seat on the old 8 car trains, but routinely had to stand on the new shorter trains. If a single 4 car unit was used on a rush hour service, as happened regularly, then it was even worse.

And the longer distance services branded as "Kent Coast" even had buffets ! a facility not provided when downgraded to networkers.

And of course what was then virgin cross country replaced full length HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) and loco hauled trains with shorter DMUs. Too short from day one, and still too short many years later.

The ageing stock on Waterloo to Exeter services COULD have been replaced either with new locomotives and hauled stock. Or even with decent DMUs, full length, with buffet, and luggage van, and perhaps even a restaurant. Not likely though. "what downgrades can we get away with"

The old slam door EMUs used in London, COULD have been replaced with decent new units of fixed 10 car length, with selective door opening. Not likely though "what downgrades can we get away with"

Virgin cross country could have replaced the old HSTs with new trains that were a bit longer than the old ones. Not likely though. 4 car and 5 car DMUs are the modern thing.

[IndustryInsider]

Someone left the door slightly ajar again...

[eightf48544]

What about the 12 car 700s on Thameslink. Granted no luggage space or Buffet.

[IndustryInsider]

What about the 12 car 700s on Thameslink. Granted no luggage space or Buffet.

Plenty of other fixed length suburban units of a decent length on the horizon:

Sixty 10-car suburban trains about to arrive for South Western Railway.

Seventy 9-car suburban trains for Crossrail.

Twenty-eight 10-car units for Greater Anglia and c2c routes due next year.

[eightonedee]

Getting back to the main theme and away from individual preferences for rolling stock, I would echo Richard B's comments.

Notwithstanding the shortcomings that we should continue to campaign to address in a number of areas, the rail travel offering has been improved in a number of ways since my first period as a commuter in the early and mid-1980s. The volume of passengers has more than doubled since privatisation, so something must be going. The era before was far from a golden era of successful public sector management and investment under any of the governments between 1948 and 1995.

Whatever the ownership structure, there will always be room for improvement. The culture of TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) and Network Rail blaming each other for problems is not conducive to achieving a better service, but internal squabbles between different departments in a single nationalised railway are not either. Let's concentrate on suggesting improvements to the service at the passenger end of the business, not fighting the political battles of the 20th century.

[broadgage]

The most important improvement needed on  many services is train length/capacity.
Whilst preferences for individual train designs do indeed vary a lot, almost no one wants to stand on a train of inadequate length.

The new fixed formation 12 car Thameslink units are indeed an improvement as regards capacity. No good for myself as I have left London, but still a step forward over 4 car units that all too often ran as 4 car instead of 8 car or as 8 car instead of 12 car.
In view of the journey length on Thameslink, they should have had buffets IMO^▸ (in my opinion). Central London to Brighton would appear to justify such provision.

I am most concerned that the present virus induced drop in passenger numbers will be used to justify the postponement or cancellation of much needed capacity enhancements.

[smokey]

There is absolutely no reason for the toilets to smell so bad on Voyager units.
Whilst it might be that the toilets should be drained down more often, but when they are emptied the toilet should be given a measured dose of Thetford Aqua Kem Blue a strong odour destroyer.

More to the point how come the voyager fleet have been running around for the best part of 20 years without a proper refit, time that most coaches were rebuilt with smaller toilet units and additional seating.

[Celestial]

In view of the journey length on Thameslink, they should have had buffets IMO^▸ (in my opinion). Central London to Brighton would appear to justify such provision.

Four trains an hour taking just over an hour (in normal times).  As well as the SouthCentral services.  That's an awful lot of buffets to be carting around and staff to be paid to run them. 

If you're that desperate for a coffee/beer/port on the go then you can buy it before you board (even if it means you miss the train you won't have long to wait) and the coffee will still probably be warm on arrival into Brighton.

This obsession with catering even for journeys of as little as an hour is bizarre. Can you really not get on a train without having to have something to eat and drink?

[broadgage]

Trains from London Victoria to Brighton used to have buffets, and they were well patronised. That to me suggests that similar provision on Thameslink trains to Brighton would be popular with customers.

[grahame]

Far to the right or far to the left ...

"Nationalisation should be a stepping stone to a better private railway network" - http://www.passenger.chat/23266

"Has the British commuter railway been left to rot in private control?" - http://www.passenger.chat/23283

Red herring!

Neither of the suggsetions floated in the two posts above attracts me. Whatever model you use, or something in between, you're going to have trouble justifying extra capacity on the very sophisticated (and expensive) trains we have these days for just the busiest section of the peak journey, be the accountant the Chancellor of the exchequer or the financial director responsibl eto the shareholders.  Both will understand that spending £250k per annum on a carriage will not be recovered in extra fares if it's just "needed" for the 23 minutes Reading to London or the 6 Keynsham to Temple Meads - better finance model to have 95% happy and let the other 5% grumble a bit about overcrowding, but pay anyway.

But if the current lockdown has convinced lots of people to reduce their commute to 9-to-5 jobs and work from home more days per week but has people treasuring life that much more and boosing leisure trips, we may find we have hit the peak of peak communting and things start to balance out. And we may find the need for speed reducing too - after all, an extra 15 minutes on a journey each way once a week is far less of a problem that an extra 15 minutes, each way, five days per week.

Buffets ... also

[broadgage]

Part of the problem is indeed the vast cost of modern trains.
Back in the good old days, older stock was kept, perhaps beyond its "natural" life  and saw limited "rush hour only" use, or "summer Saturday" use.
The real cost of keeping the old stock available was almost zero. It could be scrapped if significant repairs were needed. The storage cost nothing in sidings already owned by the railway.

These days though the owner of an otherwise unused siding will expect substantial payment for its short term use.
And the old trains tend to suddenly become non compliant as soon as the new ones arrive.

And why are modern trains so hugely expensive ? I know that they are increasingly sophisticated, but so are private cars and aircraft. Yet aircraft and cars have got cheaper in real terms, whilst trains have got more expensive.

[JontyMort]

Virgin cross country could have replaced the old HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) with new trains that were a bit longer than the old ones. Not likely though. 4 car and 5 car DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) are the modern thing.

To be fair to Virgin, didn’t they want the Voyagers to be six-car from the off? Hence coach F.

The view of DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) seems to be that *any*empty seat at *any* stage of *any* service is a waste. And yet, slightly longer Voyagers would have had economies of scale in procurement and (especially) in service - you don’t need 1.2 drivers, TMs^‡(resolve) or catering staff to run a six-car train instead of a five-car but you do get 125% of the standard accommodation.

[Celestial]

Back in the good old days

And why are modern trains so hugely expensive ?

Ah yes, the good ol' days when people used to fall out of slam door stock on a regular basis, and people with wheelchairs had to sit in the beloved guards van and pee into a bottle as the toilet was too small if they could even get to it.

And best of all in the good ol' days, trains used to be sliced open like tin cans in an accident, and so did all the people inside them.

But at least you could get a cup of maxpax tea and a stale ham sandwich from the beloved buffet bar.

Over 13 years since the last mainline passenger crash fatality in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom).  I prefer the bad new days somehow.