Budget announcements, 18 March 2015 (merged topic)

[whole diary]

[Electric train]

Electrification of the West of Basingstoke using third rail is not an option, ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road, formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) would not except it as an "in fill scheme"   So I am guessing more re-doubling, perhaps cascaded HST^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units))'s or 180's and crank the line speed to 110 or where possible 125

[Electric train]

I guess that assumes the new trains will be running by 2019?

Yes ......................

Between Didcot and Reading as test trains, although to be fair to the project team I am guessing they will strive for a service between London and Bristol even if it is a token service

[Oberon]

Cascaded HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) and 180s plus the ability to run a semi-fast service over the route as well as the present all station stoppers would be a real improvement.

[Network SouthEast]

I am not sure if the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) have the acceleration to be a viable replacement for the class 158 and 159s currently used on the route. There are only 14 class 180s and these are spoken for (if they weren't I'd suggest they all stay in the Great Western region).

I've read elsewhere that the Waterloo to Exeter route might be a contender for taking on the class 222s from East Midlands Trains once the Midland Mainline is electrified.

[PhilWakely]

Surely, re-doubling the line/adding more passing loops must come first?  I have read the (hastely produced) East Devon local Plan and this has resurrected the idea of an 'Inter-modal freight facility' between Pinhoe and Cranbrook which talks about transferring 'a significant quantity of freight traffic from road to rail'. How this traffic is to fit into 'an anticipated 30 minute frequency Devon Metro service between Exeter and Axminster' without any improvement to the infrastructure is anybody's guess! Added to that of course should be the pathing requirements of diverted Paddington services

Also, the cynic in me wishes to point out the following wording (my highlighting) in the budget document....

1.168 Transport: The government has asked the South West Peninsula Task Force
on rail to consider improvements to the Exeter to Salisbury line as part of its work.

Conclusion..... "Sorry, insufficient benefits and no money available!"

[Super Guard]

First Group have done well by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) after handing the keys back a few years ago. Trebles all round.  

What is franchising for if it can just be ignored?

...all made possible thanks to that wonderful Labour government we had.  Haven't we got over that "outrage" yet?

I read that FG Directors could have been prosecuted for putting the company on an obvious path to financial ruin by taking the extension, so I really don't know what anyone seriously expected them to do?  No-one is shocked Osborne's figures do not match his 2010 projections 5 years later, yet many got on their soap boxes and cried foul play because FG and the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) couldn't predict the future back in 2006.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Hmm.     I'm going to go beyond a mere 'like' for the previous post, and instead enter a rousing 'Hear, Hear!', for the record.


Posted as my opinion in a personal capacity, rather than as an official statement of Coffee Shop forum policy, obviously. 

[Rhydgaled]

I guess that assumes the new trains will be running by 2019?

The first one has reached the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) already, so at least some of them will probably be running by 2019. The questions are (a.) where? and (b.) for how much of the journey will they be running their 'Gin Palace' underfloor diesel engines?

No offence (and nothing personal!), but "at least some of them will probably be running" doesn't inspire much faith! (although it probably reflects reality!)

I guess much of it is down to how much more the electrification overruns and if the overspend is met.........."in" 2019 rather than "by" 2019 may be worth a small each way bet? (......against the promise of 2017 touted by FGW^▸ (First Great Western)).

Unless the railway is closed for a major blockcade to install wires, I think I'd be supprised if there are no IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project. This will offer more capacity on routes, save money, give a consistent and safe service and meet customer requirements. Intended to replace HSTs.) at all in service in December 2017, given the bi-modes are supposed to be capable of introduction before electrification is complete. I suppose that depends on whether they can do 125mph on diesel power, and if not whether all the 125mph bits have been wired...

[JayMac]

First Group have done well by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) after handing the keys back a few years ago. Trebles all round.  

What is franchising for if it can just be ignored?

...all made possible thanks to that wonderful Labour government we had.  Haven't we got over that "outrage" yet?

I read that FG Directors could have been prosecuted for putting the company on an obvious path to financial ruin by taking the extension, so I really don't know what anyone seriously expected them to do?  No-one is shocked Osborne's figures do not match his 2010 projections 5 years later, yet many got on their soap boxes and cried foul play because FG and the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) couldn't predict the future back in 2006.

So it's Labour's fault that Greater Western hasn't been retendered? It's Labour's fault that the franchise timetable has had the goalposts moved three times since the Intercity West Coast franchise debacle. And I assume that if we're misguidingly blaming Labour then we might as well pin that WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) debacle on them as well.

(Apologies for quoting in full but only picking up on one point. On my phone and extremely difficult to edit/delete as I'd like)

[Chris from Nailsea]

I rather thought we were tending to blame the misguided functionaries at the Department for Transport, rather than the Labour Party specifically? 

[ellendune]

So it's Labour's fault that Greater Western hasn't been retendered? It's Labour's fault that the franchise timetable has had the goalposts moved three times since the Intercity West Coast franchise debacle. And I assume that if we're misguidingly blaming Labour then we might as well pin that WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) debacle on them as well.

I rather thought we were tending to blame the misguided functionaries at the Department for Transport, rather than the Labour Party specifically? 

Agreed, but also a governing class (all parties that have been in power) who think they can play at managing complex enterprises with no experience of the real world.  

[JayMac]

As for the point about legal aspects regarding acting in best interests of shareholders. Were it not for a grossly misguided bid that, by obfuscation and dazzle, blinded the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about), then First Group would not have needed to walk away early. And let's not forget, if the extension was only in the gift of the DfT then First would have done the exact same as National Express with the East Coast franchise. Walked away and let UK^▸ (United Kingdom) Plc pick up the tab. That would at least have meant we would have had a franchise competition is on GW^» (Great Western - used as an abbreviation for the area / lines under the Great Western franchise, as opposed to FGW which includes "First", the company operating them too. For tickets - about) by now. Instead we've had a government continuing to reward a parent company that threw in the towel.

[ellendune]

Were it not for a grossly misguided bid that, by obfuscation and dazzle, blinded the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about), then First Group would not have needed to walk away early.

My point entirely, but if FGW^▸ (First Great Western) had not played DfT's game they would have just have pulled out of the rail business. Because that is the way DfT set up the game. You might think you would have been glad if that had happened - but there were plenty others willing to play the game and no nationalised bidder possible.  So if that is what happened blame DfT not FGW. 

And let's not forget, if the extension was only in the gift of the DfT then First would have done the exact same as National Express with the East Coast franchise.

Asserted, not argued. 

[Network SouthEast]

So it's Labour's fault that Greater Western hasn't been retendered? It's Labour's fault that the franchise timetable has had the goalposts moved three times since the Intercity West Coast franchise debacle. And I assume that if we're misguidingly blaming Labour then we might as well pin that WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) debacle on them as well.

(Apologies for quoting in full but only picking up on one point. On my phone and extremely difficult to edit/delete as I'd like)

I suppose if Labour implemented their original policy of Renationalisation, then in 2006 there'd have been no franchise to give to anyone other than the state!

Let's be fair, governments of both colours have cocked up franchising through the years.

My personal view is that it seems to me the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) seem to run rings around whoever is in power. Too few politicians understand, or want to understand,  the finer points of public transport to keep the DfT in check.

[ellendune]

My personal view is that it seems to me the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) seem to run rings around whoever is in power. Too few politicians understand, or want to understand,  the finer points of public transport to keep the DfT in check.

And my view too.