|
Title: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: BerkshireBugsy on March 04, 2015, 20:28:51 as my job often involves me travelling from Thatcham to London by train, I thought I would do some research into the Easter service changes
Indirectly I came across the pdf at the following https://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/-/media/PDF/contents/travel-advice/easter-2015/GW150220%20Easter%202015%20Customer%20Web%201%201.pdf (https://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/-/media/PDF/contents/travel-advice/easter-2015/GW150220%20Easter%202015%20Customer%20Web%201%201.pdf) In the early stages of the pdf it says (quote) The most significant service changes will take place between Good Friday 3 April and Easter Monday 12 April, and again on Sunday 12 April, when no trains will run between Didcot Parkway and Hayes & Harlington. I need to read this in more detail but I am guessing there is a typo here. Am I right ? Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: LiskeardRich on March 04, 2015, 21:43:18 Definitely a typo. Easter Monday is the 6th.
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: bobm on March 04, 2015, 21:50:25 Doubt it is even a cut and paste error - the last time Easter Monday was the 12th April was 2004. ;D
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: stuving on March 04, 2015, 22:11:16 In the early stages of the pdf it says (quote) The most significant service changes will take place between Good Friday 3 April and Easter Monday 12 April, and again on Sunday 12 April, when no trains will run between Didcot Parkway and Hayes & Harlington. I need to read this in more detail but I am guessing there is a typo here. Am I right ? Yes. You do need to read the rest - that quote from the "welcome" page was hacked together from the detailed content rather carelessly. We did cover this before, though on the basis of a quote that seems to have been based on this leaflet's text. In fact, apart from naming Easter Monday, that statement is pedantically correct but grossly misleading. The phenomenon referred to ("no trains will run between Didcot Parkway and Hayes & Harlington") does occur between the dates given ("3 April and 12 April") - it just doesn't occur every day. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: BerkshireBugsy on March 05, 2015, 06:54:39 Thank you all for your replies.
I guess my concern us that if the introductory text is wrong then how much else of the content could be relied upon but that has been answered Thanks Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ChrisB on March 05, 2015, 15:49:14 The pdf is in the process of being revised & uploaded.
Small shame it wasn't properly proof-read though. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Timmer on March 05, 2015, 19:14:54 Small shame it wasn't properly proof-read though. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ChrisB on March 06, 2015, 09:47:13 Small shame it wasn't properly proof-read though. I think Gubbins just got himself a job.... :P Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on March 06, 2015, 09:57:51 They need to look at the Easter poster as well. Twice it says "Sunday 6th April" when it should be "Monday 6th April". Incredible.
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ChrisB on March 06, 2015, 10:44:34 Which one? The pink or Grey one? and where?
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on March 06, 2015, 10:54:06 This one, on the website:
https://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/-/media/PDF/contents/travel-advice/easter-2015/Easter%20warm%20up%20DR%20web%20(1).pdf The error is only there once, not twice as I said earlier Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: JayMac on March 06, 2015, 16:35:12 These are basic proof reading tasks. It makes you wonder that if FGW can't get the simple things right...
My opinion of FGW is at an all time low. Somewhat clouded, probably, by personal experience, but I see a TOC that has lost its way. All the little errors are symptomatic of a general malaise. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Ollie on March 06, 2015, 17:11:42 All the little errors are symptomatic of a general malaise. Or perhaps the other view, that just maybe, people are human and make mistakes? Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: BerkshireBugsy on March 06, 2015, 17:14:14 All the little errors are symptomatic of a general malaise. Or perhaps the other view, that just maybe, people are human and make mistakes? That is a very valid point Ollie. However I know from my own experience of documentation that if I review it myself I will not see the mistakes I have made. I do agree with others when they say the proof reading process isn't what it could be in this example. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Timmer on March 06, 2015, 18:53:34 As BB points out proofing your own work isn't always an easy thing to do when it comes to spotting mistakes.
I'm always happy to lend FGW a hand in any proofing work. I'm currently fortunate enough to be one of volunteers assisting the Network Rail timetable team in producing the National Rail timetable which is rewarding in helping them produce an accurate publication. I do have a vested interest in helping them mind you... I'm one of the dwindling in number who still purchase the complete timetable book! Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Ollie on March 06, 2015, 20:55:52 I'm not sure what proof reading takes place at FGW to be honest, having done some proof reading myself, I know it can be a bit tedious - and something like a date, that for all sense and purposes looks right but has the wrong number, it could quite easily be missed.
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: thetrout on March 06, 2015, 21:41:08 I also brought to the attention of FGW. A rather interesting wording on the following page:
https://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/swindon2015 First Paragraph: Quote As a result, there will be no trains stopping at Swindon station on the Saturday and Sunday or Chippenham from Saturday to Monday meaning Bristol Temple Meads services will be diverted. We will also be able to run trains to South Wales ^ albeit on a diverted route ^ adding up to 60 (it's actually 30-75 minutes, depending on the day) minutes to usual journey times. Which to me suggests this was a draft document that was copy/pasted without amendments made. In the same document there is an abbreviation of (RRS) in several places with the full version of Rail Replacement Service listed in full before each abbreviation. Just to reiterate what Ollie said also. Proofreading is all very well and good. But it is tedious work and if you're doing this for hours on end or for days. You will become lazy or you will make the same mistakes the original author made. If you are dyslexic or dyspraxic that also doesn't help. This makes you much more susceptible to errors. I am aware of a Hotel which collapsed in Singapore in 1986 which ultimately occurred because of a proof reading error. The investigation discovered the buildings Live Load (furnishings and occupants of the building) was calculated correctly. But the Dead Load (The weight of the actual building itself) was forgotten in the calculations. This basic principle ultimately lead to an accident waiting to happen :( Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: The Tall Controller on March 06, 2015, 23:15:44 The proof-reading is done by at least 4 or 5 different people excluding ourselves and it I've seen first hand how detailed their checking is! However it can often be the simple mistakes that slip through. I'll certainly feedback anything that hasn't already been brought to our attention though.
We've got two new members of our 4 man team recently started (including myself) in the Publications department so hopefully things will imporve! ::) Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 06, 2015, 23:32:17 ... so hopefully things will imporve! ::) Indeed. :P ;) ::) ;D Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: JayMac on March 06, 2015, 23:49:29 We've got two new members of our 4 man team recently started (including myself) in the Publications department so hopefully things will imporve! ::) The 'rolling eyes' smiley and typo says a lot. Are these new people in the publications department briefed to continue with FGW taking credit for the public money being invested in the rail network in the west? Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Ollie on March 07, 2015, 00:08:57 FGW taking credit for the public money being invested in the rail network in the west? The "Greater West" page (the one that has full detail about what it's all about) says "^7.5 billion from Network Rail" - so I would say it's safe to say it's not a case of taking credit for something. FGW are the current operator on this route, and it's only right that they promote the changes that are happening on it. If they didn't they would probably just get slated for not talking about changes to the route, so quite frankly, they just can't win. People will find something to pass judgement on either way. I'm going to refrain from posting further on this one. so have a good weekend. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: JayMac on March 07, 2015, 01:16:21 Admirable defence of your paymaster Ollie, but...
My current ticket wallet: (http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt68/bignosemac/notNetworkRail_zpsf9eemytf.jpg) And a poster from one of my local stations: (http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt68/bignosemac/notNetworkRail2_zpsd8jkyelt.jpg) Where's Network Rail? It's delightful also to see the #GreaterWest hashtag being used for a purpose FGW probably didn't intend. http://www.fgwkickedmycat.com/a-catalogue-of-disasters/clueless/greater-west/ Many tweets of FGW 'Building A Greater West' advertising at that link or through searching #greaterwest'. All either missing the Network Rail logo, or having it much less prominent than 'First Great Western'. For ^7.5bn I'd want my logo and company name front and centre. In bold. 36pt. Multicoloured. I'd also like to see it made abundantly clear that this is public money. The "Greater West" page (the one that has full detail about what it's all about) says "^7.5 billion from Network Rail" Where exactly does it say that? The text at: https://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/About-Us/greater-west says: Quote Building a Greater West 176 years after Isambard Kingdom Brunel first built the Great Western Railway, rail is as important as it has ever been; to our communities, our regions and the country as a whole. The revolutionary impact of Brunel^s vision turned a corner of the UK into a vibrant, prosperous region, enabling communities to connect, trade in fresh produce, flourish and invent mass tourism. This made the West great. Today, First Great Western with Network Rail are the proud custodians of this railway and we operate, maintain and renew it through thousands of our dedicated employees. We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to take our railway to where it needs to be and to deliver the service our customers deserve. With over ^7.5 billion being spent to build a Greater West, we will take this opportunity to turn that investment in track, trains and stations, into investment in communities in the regions that we serve. While we make the improvements there will be periods of disruption from time to time, including railway closures, changes to station operations and rail replacement services. We will endeavour to minimise and avoid there where possible. By working together with Network Rail in an innovative way we will design, engineer and deliver this route modernisation programme with our passengers and stakeholders in mind. We will electrify our tracks, modernise our stations and introduce new high-speed trains equipped with modern technology and high standards of comfort to deliver the investment made by the Department for Transport. Together, First Great Western and Network Rail will build a Greater West for our passengers and the communities we serve. Look at that through the eyes of Joe Public and tell me it's clear that the investment is coming wholly from Network Rail. Then there's this FGW operated Class 43 power car as well. Now I do like a non-standard livery - makes for exciting spotting - but again, it appears to be missing any mention of Network Rail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KHfvyMDFlY Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Network SouthEast on March 07, 2015, 04:00:07 BNM: To be fair to FGW, it is wrong to say that FGW's contribution is nothing and everything from Network Rail.
FGW will be paying something towards this work because they have to pay track access charges to Network Rail, they don't get to use the rails for free. I don't think your ticket wallet is wrong either. As a passenger, your ticket revenue is making a contribution towards this upgrade work too. The Network Rail upgrade works aren't to keep the service level the same either, it will enable more services to operate. More services = more track access charges. FGW (or whoever operates the franchise in the course of time) will be paying higher leasing costs on the new trains needed to make the most of the upgraded infrastructure. By the way, I'm not necessarily saying I personally like the advertising campaign, but to suggest FGW's contribution will be nothing is a tad unfair. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: grahame on March 07, 2015, 05:26:50 Let's agree (I think) and celebrate that investments are being made for the future, and admit that railway finances are some damn complex ...
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: JayMac on March 07, 2015, 12:14:52 FGW will be paying something towards this work because they have to pay track access charges to Network Rail, they don't get to use the rails for free. Track access charges come from ticket revenue. That's passengers money not FGWs. As I've said before, railway franchising doesn't allow for TOCs to make capital investment in infrastructue. To suggest with advertising that they do is misleading. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ellendune on March 07, 2015, 17:06:05 FGW will be paying something towards this work because they have to pay track access charges to Network Rail, they don't get to use the rails for free. Track access charges come from ticket revenue. That's passengers money not FGWs. As I've said before, railway franchising doesn't allow for TOCs to make capital investment in infrastructue. To suggest with advertising that they do is misleading. A curious logic. Any business, for example a supermarket, takes money from its customers. It then becomes the company's money. It can either take it as profit, distributing it to the shareholders, or invest it. If it invests it the shareholders do not receive it, but expect a return later. Whose money is the investment then? Is FGW any different because the fares are regulated? You could say that the supermarket's prices are regulated by the market since they have competitors and if they charge too much their customers will go elsewhere. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: grahame on March 07, 2015, 19:14:17 I had understood that certain capital investments - such as the station at Warwick Parkway - were made by the train company. However, with relatively short contracts the time for payback of the investment isn't long unless there's residual value left in what's invested in, and the fact that the infrastructure is leased from Network Rail and has to be returned in the same condition it was in when taken over is also something of a discouragement. There can (I suspect "is" in the case of Warwick Parkway) be the ability to hand something back enhanced, even if it then requires a higher upkeep spend in the future.
On a similar tack. marketing investment for promotion / the purpose of generating ongoing profitable income will be front loaded in any franchise period, with later marketing being aimed more at the popularity with (in particular) the people who make the next franchise award. Some will, no doubt, be longer term too but perhaps that will be factored by the likelihood of the next bid being won. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ChrisB on March 08, 2015, 12:03:55 FGW will be paying something towards this work because they have to poay track access charges to Network Rail, they don't get to use the rails for free. Track access charges come from ticket revenue. That's passengers money not FGWs. As I've said before, railway franchising doesn't allow for TOCs to make capital investment in infrastructue. To suggest with advertising that they do is misleading. That so obviously incorrect. I give you Warwick Parkway, Aylesbury Vale Parkway, the re-built Bicester Town (shortly to be renamed Bicester Village) and Oxford Parkway. All built or being built by a franchise holder Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ellendune on March 08, 2015, 13:26:40 I give you Warwick Parkway, Aylesbury Vale Parkway, the re-built Bicester Town (shortly to be renamed Bicester Village) and Oxford Parkway. All built or being built by a franchise holder Indeed the same franchise holder (Chiltern) - the only one with a long franchise! However, wasn't East Midlands Parkway also built by the Franchise holder? Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: JayMac on March 08, 2015, 13:58:50 I'll concede that a few stations have been built by TOCs, although responsibility for building East Midlands Parkway transferred from Midland Mainline to Network Rail after East Midlands Trains took over the franchise.
Figures for Aylesbury Vale Parkway station and track/signalling improvements show that the largest investment, ^8m, came from the taxpayer, ^2m from Chiltern and ^1m from Bucks County Council. Warwick Parkway was jointly funded by Chiltern and Warks County Council. Chiltern with a very long franchise, much different in financial structure to others, have made infrastructure investment. But not wholly on their own. Evergreen 3 is being paid for initially by Network Rail, and Chiltern (or its successors) are repaying the cost with a facility charge over 30 years. Not to forget the net public subsidy that goes to Chiltern, and its portion of the Network Grant that keeps track access charges artificially low. However, the majority of rail franchises do not make or pay for large scale (not just the odd station) infrastructure investment. FGW do not and the point under discussion is that their advertising, to the layman, appears to suggest otherwise. The vast majority of infrastructure investment in the railways comes from fare revenues and the taxpayer. TOCs, unlike almost any other business, make hardly any capital investment in infrastructure from profits. The byzantine franchising system doesn't allow for it. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: grahame on March 08, 2015, 14:51:57 However, the majority of rail franchises do not make or pay for large scale (not just the odd station) infrastructure investment. FGW do not and the point under discussion is that their advertising, to the layman, appears to suggest otherwise. That was indeed, your original point, and views have been thoroughly aired. What this discussion moved on to was your contention that TOCs are not even allowed to invest, which I disagreed with and quoted an example; thank you for backing up that change, and indeed talking about other examples. Yes, the longer the franchise the more commercially attractive a large scale capital investment would be. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ellendune on March 08, 2015, 15:08:14 The vast majority of infrastructure investment in the railways comes from fare revenues and the taxpayer. TOCs, unlike almost any other business, make hardly any capital investment in infrastructure from profits. The byzantine franchising system doesn't allow for it. It all comes from those two sources! Even when TOCs put money up front they (rightly) expect a return which must come from the fare revenues. Or do you expect franchises to be run by their parent companies at a loss? They are not charities. If a government owned TOC were to invest and not get a return then it would be coming from the taxpayer. The private sector is not a magic pot of money. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ChrisB on March 08, 2015, 17:28:02 The point immediately under discussion was your assertion that "flrailway franchising does not allow for TOCs to make caputal investment in infrastructure"
That is what I'm calling you on. And you've just admitted you are incorrect Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: JayMac on March 08, 2015, 19:08:16 It was another thread where I said TOCs don't do capital investment.
I've modified that viewpoint after the examples given. Chiltern, with Evergreen 3 are an admirable exception. But then they have a long franchise. Even then though it could be someone else picking up the 'facility charge' tab in the future. Nothing changes the fact that FGW are giving an impression, through advertising, that they are contributing to the 'greatest investment since Brunel' in the Greater Western franchise area. Frankly I couldn't care less what other TOCs have done/are doing. There's no comparison with FGW hanging on the coat tails of Network Rail and looking to take credit. I'm not suggesting at all that the private sector is a 'magic pot of money' either. And there is the wider 'Wolmar' question. "What is franchising for?" Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on March 08, 2015, 21:12:30 And there is the wider 'Wolmar' question. "What is franchising for?" Wolmar knows very well the answer to his question. He contributed two chapters on franchising to a book "All Change - British Railway Privatisation" edited by Freeman and Shaw and published by McGraw-Hill in 2000. The chapters are 6 'Creating the Passenger Rail Franchises' and 7 'Selling the Passenger Railway', the latter in conjunction with Roger Ford. The man is not really a transport expert but a would-be politician whose utterances have to carefully analysed for ulterior motives. The discussion about the different possible forms of organisation of what was a monolithic organisation is too long to go into in detail on this forum. Suffice it to say that it was recognised that the railways were a loss-making business which would continue to need subsidy for the foreseeable future and franchising was a method of making payments to private operators to keep the services running while allowing the Government to minimise these payments and get the best value for money through a competition every seven to ten years. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: JayMac on March 08, 2015, 21:17:31 Or the alternate view:
https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/tucfiles/The_Great_Train_Robbery_7June2013.pdf Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ellendune on March 08, 2015, 22:07:15 So government says they want to franchise railways. They set some rules they want to work by. Companies can put in a bid to take advantage of those rules or you can choose not to play games. If they bid according to the rules we might want they will undoubtedly spend a lot of money on a bid that will loose. A bid that includes investment to make a return by improving service (perhaps a legitimate way for a bidder to make money) is not possible because politicians will not allow long franchises.
So they have a choice - not to bid; or - bid taking advantage of the rules. If none of them chose not to bid then DfT would be embarrassed by a lack of bidders. If very few bid then it would be uncompetitive and the winning bidder would probably make a killing. If DfT thought they would get few bids they would be trying to recruit bidders. So when private companies choose to bid to take advantage of the rules whose fault is it? The whole fiasco of West Coast Bidding leads me firmly into thinking that it is the lack of business skills in those that let the contracts is the problem not the bidders. Don't blame FGW for what you don't like. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: JayMac on March 08, 2015, 22:49:49 I don't like FGW taking credit for investment that is not theirs.
So who should I blame other than FGW? Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on March 10, 2015, 09:06:40 I^m a bit surprised that the serious date errors in FGW^s Easter publicity (ie the Easter Guide and the Poster) we discussed last Friday have STILL not been corrected on their website.
I run a website as I^m sure many others forum members do ^ if someone tells me about an error (and they do happen) I correct it within minutes, not days. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: TaplowGreen on March 10, 2015, 17:20:33 I^m a bit surprised that the serious date errors in FGW^s Easter publicity (ie the Easter Guide and the Poster) we discussed last Friday have STILL not been corrected on their website. I run a website as I^m sure many others forum members do ^ if someone tells me about an error (and they do happen) I correct it within minutes, not days. Maybe a few ^ of the massive, multi billion ^ investment which FGW are claiming to be contributing to could be diverted into buying a few calendars? :D Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on March 13, 2015, 15:55:09 I^m a bit surprised that the serious date errors in FGW^s Easter publicity (ie the Easter Guide and the Poster) we discussed last Friday have STILL not been corrected on their website. So a week on and these date errors have still not been corrected on the FGW website. They must have decided it doesn't matter if they refer to "Easter Monday 12th April" on the Welcome page to the Easter Guide, or "Sunday 6th April" on the pink poster. I'm amazed. Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: BerkshireBugsy on March 13, 2015, 15:57:19 I've taken the easy option and booked the week off following Easter Monday. Hopefully I got the dates right when completing the holiday request form :)
Easter is in August, isn't it? Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: lordgoata on March 13, 2015, 16:01:59 Was just talking to a colleague and she said she has booked the week off due to the trains not running, and asked if I was doing the same.
Whatever FGW are planning on running, they have really ballsed up the announcements. At this rate all the trains will be running around empty apart from a) those on here that know what's really happening, and b) those that pay no attention and will turn up as usual on Tuesday morning! Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: wabbit on March 31, 2015, 21:00:42 So is there any advance info on what the timetables from RDG to PAD will be like for next week then?
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ChrisB on March 31, 2015, 22:32:06 Check online planners? They're all there
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: bobm on March 31, 2015, 22:34:41 Is there a problem with online planners? Two apps I have say they cannot connect to the database. FGW one seems ok however.
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ChrisB on April 01, 2015, 05:19:49 "It was not possible to find your application server credentials" on the NRE app
Title: Re: Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site? Post by: ChrisB on April 01, 2015, 10:23:48 The NRE app has been updated to v8 and is now less useful & slower.
This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net |