"Train firms seek longer contracts" (BBC News 30/10/09)

[whole diary]

[moonrakerz]

As some of you will have gathered I'm not really left wing, but on this I say bring back British Rail (oh and CEGB and a few others)

Yes - wouldn't it be great to have the GPO^‡(resolve) running our telephone system again ? Wait for months to get a line, then have a choice of one colour for your 'phone - great, wasn't it !   

[paul7575]

I think that ALL suburban London routes should become LO, with full Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) validity.

Assume full Oyster validity in the London fare zones starts in Jan as planned - ie LO isn't a prerequisite for Oyster pre pay. 

The problem with handing ALL suburban routes to LO, is that the suburban routes don't match to the political area, just looking at the local stoppers in SWT^▸ (South West Trains)'s area, they run well outside 'London', eg Dorking, Shepperton, Guildford, Woking, Windsor. Then there are semi fasts that run as far as places like Alton, Basingstoke or Reading. Do you transfer all these to LO as well?  IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) LO will work great on discrete routes of its own, such as the NLL, WLL, DC^▸ (Direct Current) lines, and even the rebuilt part of the ELL. But where LO runs on the mainlines in amongst other TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company), such as on the Sydenham corridor, where it will be subject to the same route perturbations as SN and FCC^▸ (First Capital Connect), it'll look just like another TOC, but with short trains.

I don't think LO is the panacea you think it is...

Paul

[ChrisB]

I think BtLine was referring to lines such as Shepperton, Chessington South, etc - inner-suburban if you like.

[Btline]

I was indeed talking about lines such as Shepperton. Ok, it does enters Surrey, but I think any stopping services that start in London should be LO, even if they project a few miles out of London/across the M25 (whichever border you use). I would also consider making Xrail part of LO.

Semi fasts would remain with current operators obviously!

[ChrisB]

I thought XRail was to be LO?.....

I can't support those 'suburban' services that serve main-line stations outside the M25, sorry. The Mayor's interests don't go that far.....

[Btline]

I thought XRail was to be LO?.....

I can't support those 'suburban' services that serve main-line stations outside the M25, sorry. The Mayor's interests don't go that far.....

The Shepperton and Woking stoppers only go a few miles out of London.

[devon_metro]

Quite simple,what is the point?

[ChrisB]

Which point!? - longer contracts or LO takling over surburban services?

[devon_metro]

Latter

[ChrisB]

Don' t be too expressive, eh?

[Btline]

So the whole of London has consistency. e.g. signage and branding would then be the same at all Tube, Rail, Tram and DLR^▸ (Docklands Light Railway) stations in London.

[paul7575]

The point is that it isn't the branding that makes the service reliable, if the trains are running in and out of Waterloo, Victoria, London Bridge etc in amongst the rest of the outer suburban or middle distance services that remain with the normal TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company), you get into the problems of more than one TOC per terminal which they've been trying to get rid of for the last few years. You'd need joint control, you'd definitely have common signalling as now.

AFAICS^▸ (As Far As I Can See) It really isn't possible for a proposed 'LO inner suburban service' to have its own dedicated routes into, and platforms in, any of the 'SR^‡(resolve)' terminii, so the advantages that you see with the dedicated routes such as the NLL and WLL isn't likely to happen.

I have never seen any suggestion that Crossrail will be part of LO. Again, with it running all the way to Reading, it gets well outside the London mayor's area of responsibility. I think it may well be a TfL^» (Transport for London - about) sponsored TOC, but it will have to be a fully integrated mainline TOC, as far as I can see.

Paul

[ChrisB]

AFAICS^▸ (As Far As I Can See) It really isn't possible for a proposed 'LO inner suburban service' to have its own dedicated routes into, and platforms in, any of the 'SR^‡(resolve)' terminii, so the advantages that you see with the dedicated routes such as the NLL and WLL isn't likely to happen.

The plans definitely exist at TfL^» (Transport for London - about) as it was in Ken's masterplan, for sure. He mentioned this at meetings more than once. Whether Boris will pick it up, he hasn't yet said. I don't think Ken was worried about sharing stations, but he had the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)'s ear, that's for sure.

I have never seen any suggestion that Crossrail will be part of LO. Again, with it running all the way to Reading

Says who? It currently will go only to Maidenhead. Let's not start stating theory as fact again, please.

it gets well outside the London mayor's area of responsibility.

Not at Maidenhead, it doesn't :-)

I think it may well be a TfL sponsored TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company), but it will have to be a fully integrated mainline TOC, as far as I can see.

I wouldn't disagree with that - but can you see any difference between LO and LOROL^▸ (London Overground Railway Operations Ltd)?

Paul

[paul7575]

AFAICS^▸ (As Far As I Can See) It really isn't possible for a proposed 'LO inner suburban service' to have its own dedicated routes into, and platforms in, any of the 'SR^‡(resolve)' terminii, so the advantages that you see with the dedicated routes such as the NLL and WLL isn't likely to happen.

The plans definitely exist at TfL^» (Transport for London - about) as it was in Ken's masterplan, for sure. He mentioned this at meetings more than once. Whether Boris will pick it up, he hasn't yet said. I don't think Ken was worried about sharing stations, but he had the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)'s ear, that's for sure.

Like in many subject areas, as I see it Ken Livingstone announced that he hoped to take over all the inner suburban routes rather prematurely, just like many other completely unfunded transport plans. I think it was one of TfL's proposals for the new SN franchise as well.  Unfortunately for Ken, the DfT didn't seem to agree, although they gave TfL a fairly detailed remit for certain TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) services that run mostly within the GLA boundaries. http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/passenger/franchises/sectflrailfranchise/guidancetfldftrailfranchise.pdf
However the document says nothing about TfL actually expanding LO at all, and the original proposal seems to have gone very quiet again. For example the latest Mayoral master plan doesn't mention TfL taking direct control of any more services.

I'm still far from convinced it would be easy to run all inner suburban services separately.  Maybe experienced railwaymen had the same advise for the DfT?
Now as an alternative method if SWT^▸ (South West Trains), for example, were to relivery all their inner suburban routes as LO, and man the stations like LOROL^▸ (London Overground Railway Operations Ltd) do the LO ones, what would be the difference as far as the public are concerned?
Actually transferring all the routes to a separate LO franchise would surely just create duplication - how would you share out all the different fleets, depots and staff for instance?  Again, new stock was needed for the NLL, ELL at the same time as the reorganisation, but the same wouldn't be true for Southeastern by any means.

I take your point about Crossrail to Reading btw...
 
Paul

[IndustryInsider]

I take your point about Crossrail to Reading btw...

So do I. But I've still got my hat at the ready if it doesn't get extended to Reading.