|
|
Post by Craig on Nov 7, 2008 13:26:33 GMT 1
For the benefit of those not already aware, several operators are currently bidding to operate improved services from our region to the capital.
National Express East Coast, as part of its contract commitment, is required to improve services on the East Coast Main Line by 2010, but now they want to introduce a further improved timetable by 2009. Currently the plans are for one Leeds-London train each hour to be extended to Bradford Forster Square via Shipley.
In addition NXEC have plans for a brand new service between Harrogate and King's Cross, calling at Pannal, Horsforth, Leeds, Garforth and Doncaster en route. This would run every 2 hours, and would be introduced alongside the 2-hourly Lincoln service which is part of their contract commitment. The Harrogate and Lincoln services would run hourly combined between Newark and King's Cross. These services are planned to be operated by Class 180 units.
First Hull Trains, using the moniker of First Harrogate Trains, have also applied to run a Harrogate-London service, running 4 times a day each way and calling at Starbeck, Knaresborough, Cattal, Hammerton, Poppleton, York and Doncaster. The plan potentially includes using Cattal as a Park and Ride station and providing a dedicated feeder bus to and from Wetherby. First plan to use Class 180 or possibly Class 222 units.
Grand Northern have been planning Yorkshire to London services for a while now. Their latest submitted plan is for a 6-times daily each way (4-times daily at weekends) service between Bradford Interchange and King's Cross via Halifax, Brighouse, Wakefield Kirkgate, Pontefract Monkhill and Doncaster. They too are looking at utilising Class 180s should their plans be approved.
I certainly hope that at least one of these plans gets the green light, and personally I would guess that NXEC will be successful as their plans are based upon their franchise commitments anyway and so have to at least partially be granted. The other 2 proposals would of course duplicate NXs services both at Bradford and Harrogate but would provide competition as well as new links from the intermediate towns en route. Of course one other big problem is that everyone seems to want to use the same DMUs, not to mention that there is also Platinum Trains applying to use Class 180s on a London to Scotland express service!
With the timetable changes next month, as well as the relatively recent introduction of all-day half-hourly trains between Leeds and London, together with these future plans, train services in the region are most definitely getting a much needed investment and improvement.
|
|
|
|
Post by nick on Nov 7, 2008 18:41:55 GMT 1
Supposing First Hull Trains win, who would operate the service between Cattal and Wetherby. Me thinks Harrogate & District, but then again could be Transdev York or even First Leeds/York.
|
|
|
|
Post by glennh2 on Nov 8, 2008 1:03:17 GMT 1
Unfortunately this may be a foregone conclusion as NXEC pays the government a premium to run its trains and has a franchise commitment to deliver an expanded timetable by 2010
|
|
|
|
Post by Craig on Nov 8, 2008 12:37:38 GMT 1
If NXEC are given permission to expand as they wish, which will no doubt be the case because of the franchise commitment, it won't necessarily preclude the other operators from also being granted access rights. Remember it's not a bidding war between 3 companies vying for only 1 prize, they are all applying for separate routes. The only limitations are unit and pathing availability.
As for the possible Wetherby service, it's clearly far too early to speculate, but as the train operating company is owned by First, it would be a safe bet that First might also be involved in the bus operation.
|
|
|
|
Post by glennh2 on Nov 8, 2008 23:59:01 GMT 1
The other two have to pass the "not primarily abstractive" test- as far as I know NXEC don't
|
|
6u3zr
Forum Member
Posts: 48
|
Post by 6u3zr on Nov 12, 2008 21:46:07 GMT 1
As Craig suggests in his initial post, this is all in proposal stage.
At the moment every man and his dog are demanding 180's - on that basis the stock anticipated for any expansion may not neccesarily be available.
With no big new builds in the pipeline - other than those which will displace the remainder of Virgin's Voyagers (already promised to EMT) - where is the stock?
The only spare stuff liable to pop up in the next couple of years are 142's and a few Scotrail 170/4's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Craig on Nov 12, 2008 22:08:49 GMT 1
The only spare stuff liable to pop up in the next couple of years are 142's and a few Scotrail 170/4's. ...and nobody wants to be bouncing on a 142 all the way down to London! |
|
|
|
Post by jackh on Nov 12, 2008 23:09:04 GMT 1
As Craig suggests in his initial post, this is all in proposal stage. At the moment every man and his dog are demanding 180's - on that basis the stock anticipated for any expansion may not neccesarily be available. With no big new builds in the pipeline - other than those which will displace the remainder of Virgin's Voyagers (already promised to EMT) - where is the stock? The only spare stuff liable to pop up in the next couple of years are 142's and a few Scotrail 170/4's. Yes it does seem intesting on what rolling stock would be used on any of these proposed London routes. I have heard that Arriva Trains Wales were to get some 180s for their North Wales-Borders-Cardiff route to replace 158s on the service. However, the 222 Meridian trains at Hull Trains are supposed to join the ones already at East Midland Trains. Whilst Hull Trains would use the 180s they already have instead. Do they still have the 170 units which they had when they first started operating? Unless, on the other hand, one of the operators trying to get access rights get the units new on approval of their planned routes from the SRA. |
|
|
|
Post by northrob on Nov 13, 2008 12:09:11 GMT 1
The 170 units that Hull Trains had went to First Scotrail to work on the Edinburgh - Inverness route when the 222s were delivered.
If I remember correctly NXECs franchise committment was to run an extra train from London every hour. This was originally supposed to be a 2-hourly Lincoln service and a extra train to York every 2 hours, the York service using Class 90s and Mark 3 rolling stock. The revision for a service to Harrogate via Leeds & Garforth appears to be combination of a reaction to First Harrogate Trains proposals and the fact it would be easier for Network Rail to find a 125 mph path on the ECML rather that a 110 mph path (The Class 90s top speed).
As regards the rolling stock there are quite simply not enough 180s to around! At the moment there are 3 still working with First Great Western, 4 with First Hull Trains and 3 with Northern (for Manchester Victoria - Backpool North services from December). Even with the FGW ones due to come off lease when they receive an HST set off NXEC once their refurbishment program has completed, that leaves 7 units available and that's before Arriva Trains Wales get theirs (apparently they will be using a Class 57 and Mark 2s on a Holyhead - Cardiff service from December and I don't know if this replaces the 180s mentioned). NXEC plans alone require as many as 9.
|
|
|
|
Post by guyarab on Nov 13, 2008 23:23:52 GMT 1
The other two have to pass the "not primarily abstractive" test- as far as I know NXEC don't As my knowledge of things trains is lacking, please be kind enough to explain the above |
|
|
|
Post by humberside on Nov 14, 2008 17:26:50 GMT 1
Not primarily abstractive means not taking too much revenue from NXEC. New open access operators must show how they will generate new demand instead
|
|
|
|
Post by glennh2 on Nov 14, 2008 17:38:01 GMT 1
Believe Northern and TPE have asked for the abstraction test to protect them as well
|
|
|
|
Post by guyarab on Nov 16, 2008 22:14:05 GMT 1
Thanks Humberside, I think I follow that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Craig on Nov 17, 2008 22:39:23 GMT 1
Not primarily abstractive means not taking too much revenue from NXEC. New open access operators must show how they will generate new demand instead And herein lies the biggest flaw of privatising the railways "to encourage competition"... |
|
|
|
Post by glennh2 on Nov 17, 2008 23:34:15 GMT 1
That would have been the case were it not for the fact that companies like NXEC pay the government substantial money to run their services and companies like Grand Union (as open access operators) don't
another flaw in the system.
|
|
|
|
Post by Craig on Nov 19, 2008 21:30:30 GMT 1
I understand that it's because NXEC pay to run that part of the railway and hence they don't want anyone else on their turf, but that's my point. Privatisation should have been about competition but never was, it was just about selling off the railway piece by small piece. I know a few open access operators have been able to start up and indeed have been successful, but the system largely discourages or more accurately prohibits competition.
It's an obvious comparison I know, but you wouldn't have a bus industry where the operator pays the PTE/government huge sums of money for the rights to operate a service, in exchange for huge subsidies and exclusivity, indeed such a scheme would be seen as ridiculous and no doubt would be challenged by many people.
|
|
mjn
Forum Member
Posts: 109
|
Post by mjn on Nov 20, 2008 13:29:08 GMT 1
Doesn't TfL employ a system for buses along those lines? The competition is present in the franchise bidding process. You can't have competition on the railways in the sense of setting up a 'leech' operator that sticks its trains on 2 mins in front of someone else's at the best times and charging 2p less a trip or whatever, space is much very limited on the railways compared to roads and needs to be managed much more stringently than on roads.
|
|
|
|
Post by channex265 on Nov 27, 2008 20:15:52 GMT 1
all sound's Interesting, I would love to see an NXEC liveried class 180  |
|
|
|
Post by topman on Dec 9, 2008 20:35:53 GMT 1
Well, the ECML could do with some new trains. The rolling stock on some of NXEC's is dire....
|
|
kendall17
Forum Member
Justice for the 96!
Posts: 4,515
|
Post by kendall17 on Dec 10, 2008 14:38:33 GMT 1
Whilst on about the London Services, i find it very poor that NXEC still haven't managed to repaint all of their units especially when NXEC will be celebrating their first birthday soon .
|
|
|
|
Post by jackh on Dec 10, 2008 16:29:04 GMT 1
Whilst on about the London Services, i find it very poor that NXEC still haven't managed to repaint all of their units especially when NXEC will be celebrating their first birthday soon . Give them time. The repaint process takes time to complete as the rolling stock has to be available to be taken out of service to get repainted. Cross Country, London Midland and East Midlands Trains still have units still running in their predecessor's liveries. |
|
|
|
Post by glennh2 on Dec 24, 2008 0:38:59 GMT 1
Network Rail is now saying that NXEC can only run to Bradford every hour if 1) Northern get new rolling stock and 2) Apperley Bridge and Kirkstall Forge new stations don't open due to capacity and timetabling issues.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Craig on Jan 29, 2009 22:33:15 GMT 1
GRAND UNION GIVEN PERMISSION TO RUN NEW YORKSHIRE TO LONDON SERVICE Grand Union have been granted paths by the Office of Rail Regulation to run 3 return trains per day between Bradford Interchange and London King's Cross, calling at Halifax, Brighouse, Wakefield Kirkgate, Pontefract Monkhill and Doncaster. The service is hoped to be started this December. See: www.grandunionrail.comand Metro's comment: www.wymetro.com/News/090129-1.htm |
|
|
|
Post by cph43 on Jan 30, 2009 0:00:45 GMT 1
Great news, maybe Monkhill and Kirkgate stations may get a spruce up, in time for this service.
|
|
6u3zr
Forum Member
Posts: 48
|
Post by 6u3zr on Jan 30, 2009 21:43:05 GMT 1
OK.
And the stock is...?
And the market is...?
Grand Central - despite pompous announcements to the contrary - are struggling to make their Sunderland service pay.
They do fairly well on peak days but can't win their prime market from NXEC, probably due to appalling reliability at the start and a therefore tarnished reputation.
Bradford is a convenient start point but frankly is'nt a sustainable source of economic full journey revenue. Halifax? It's been a long time since the last Halifax-London direct service but if it was a viable market a more credible operator would have tried by now. Wakefield Kirkgate? Possibly. Big leisure/casual market revenue tempered by a 6 space junkie-infested car park. Monkhill? Big enough car park on a Saturday - who knows.
I understand that there are still disputes to resolve about platforming at Peterborough. I'd use this service if it offered a Peterborough stop because I work there once a month, and Peterborough is a significant nodal interchange. It appears, however, that this service will be RA Doncaster - Kings Cross (despite what the website may have you believe.)
I see this as a misguided move and, with my most cynical head on, a "we have the paths - how much would you pay us for them?" ploy by the former Fraser-Eagle (also once a client of mine).
Will I live to eat my words?
Well let's make a date. If, on January 30th 2010 GCT are operating PROFITABLY between Bradford Interchange and Kings Cross I shall, on the stroke of 14.00, bare my hairy white arse in Centenary Square.
|
|
