FGW Franchise

[whole diary]

[signalandtelegraph]

How about a Management Contract?

Or Directly Operated Railways. They'll be looking for something to do once the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) franchise is re-tendered.... 

 Hopefully they can run both, small steps, small steps 

[ChrisB]

There is a whole new "politics" in the railway which is only just taking shape as such the GW^▸ (Great Western) could prove to be an interesting franchise, the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) will not want to pay the cost of electrification or the new trains so that will be wrapped up in the franchise

Disagree there - the figure involved is far too many ^million to wrap up in a 15-year franchise. Add-ons may well be the deciding factor - extra vehicles to that DfT spec and / or additional wires up the branches maybe....

[12hoursunday]

.



I would like to see Arriva (Deutsche Bahn owned) run it but under the german Deutsche Bahn name.

Your having a laugh! Arriva are, as an employee, the last lot I would want to have it! From a passengers point of view they are probably one of the worst for the standard of customer service provided. Look at Arriva Trains Wales and Cross Country to see why.

[JayMac]

But it doesn't follow that all operating divisions within a group are poor. Within DB^» (Deutsche Bahn - German State Railway - about) there's Chiltern and part ownership of the current London Overground franchise. So who's to say DB Great Western would be a bad thing?

[matt473]

But it doesn't follow that all operating divisions within a group are poor. Within DB^» (Deutsche Bahn - German State Railway - about) there's Chiltern and part ownership of the current London Overground franchise. So who's to say DB Great Western would be a bad thing?

Apparently DB in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) with passanger services has been absorbed by Arriva so potentially the once admired Chiltern services may soon adopt Arriva's way of running things. Hope this does not happen but would not be surprised as even Mr Shooter is now off to pastures new so the omens are not grat

[smokey]

i mean basically its costing the industry more because roscos purchace new trains (they are normally banks!) and then they let the units out to the toc's.... no doubt at a nice little profit!, i find it amusing that the government will dish out student loans the majority of which doesnt actually go on living and studying (im sorry if your the exception to the rule and didnt go out binge drinking every night) and charge no interest.... but something which is vital to the daily running of the country such as the railways is set up so that banks can rob even more cash off us!

BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) bought New Stock and Wrote the Cost off in 7 years, after that stock cost was from Maintenance budget, and works refits kept then going for anything up to 40 years.

Today ROSCO^» (Rolling Stock Owning Company - about)'s buy the Stock and lease them for about 10% the build cost every year.
So a NICE little earner when stock is older than 10 years,

[paul7575]

If leasing stock is such a rip off, then why did TfL^» (Transport for London - about) alter their plans?  They originally intended to buy the LO 378s outright - but following a review of the comparative costs decided that it was better to use a ROSCO^» (Rolling Stock Owning Company - about) (albeit a new one to the market, QWRail):

The overall costs of leasing or buying the fleet remain approximately the same, but
with a leasing arrangement Transport for London will not bear the cost of the depreciating
value of the fleet and the risk of a loss if selling second hand rolling stock.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/archive/7525.aspx

Paul