Catering provision - IEP / beyond 2017

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Conscious of the current Travelling Chef thread in "Across the West",   I'm starting a separate IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) catering thread here; as has been noted, the various things are getting confused.

So - what will IEP have?

http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/denies-buffet-cars-hit-buffers/story-22053525-detail/story.html?

"The future provision of catering generally is a different issue to the consultation we have currently on what to do with the handful of our trains that operate the Travelling Chef service in First Class," [a spokesman for First] said.

"The situation is that when the new rolling stock arrives in 2017, no one knows who is going to be operating the trains on the Great Western lines, so we cannot possibly say what will happen to buffet cars as it might not be us."

Indeed that's correct, but First could say what would possibly happen if they're running the trains in the area at that point.   It's probably not something they want to commit to, and I can understand that - we have the September 2015 probably extension / direct award to come for 10 months, 3 or 5 years (no-one knows which yet), and perhaps (if it is to be 10 months) a further franchise round with multiple potential operators involved.  And to make promises at this stage would be creating a hostage to fortune. 

Also naughty of my to point out that replacement of a buffet by high density seats would increase the seats capacity by 30 to 40, or (if replaced by a cycle area) allow the train to carry, say, 20 more cycles.

[broadgage]

I do not often agree with the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers), but in this case I do agree with the Union.

The present plans for the new trains do not include a buffet for the majority of passengers who will be in steerage.
Supporters of the new trains have IMO^▸ (in my opinion) muddied the waters by repeatedly stating that the new trains WILL have a buffet, but only for first class.

This I consider to be misleading, what I believe to be proposed is NOT a buffet but a KITCHEN for the preparation of hot meals for first class on selected services and presumably a first class table service for drinks and snacks at other times.

I doubt that a buffet counter service with customer facing staff is proposed. Whom would they serve ? not first class whom will get table service, and not steerage who wont be admitted.

I therefore stand by my previous remarks elsewhere on these forums, that the new trains as presently proposed "wont have buffets"
It is of course possible that the design will be altered in order to provide a buffet and/or a kitchen accessible to both classes, but I feel this to be most unlikely in practice.
"too late to alter the now proven design"
"would increase costs which are under pressure"
"would cause delays in delivery, customers are clamouring for the new trains"
"would reduce seating capacity"

I certainly do not agree that restricting catering to a trolley is a return to a golden age of rail travel.

On the new shorter trains I expect that the trolley will in practice be static as it wont be able to negotiate all the standees and their luggage etc.
On the minority of full length trains, I cant forsee the trolley passing through more than 2 or 3 coaches before running out and returning for re-supply.

[TaplowGreen]

Just wondering..................do you think that many people are really that bothered about Travelling Chef/buffet?

You can be pretty sure that were it currently making a significant profit, it would be retained......however the prices are very high and TC^‡(resolve) is very unreliable/unpredictable in its provision........I wonder whether it's only a relatively few "enthusiasts" who are losing sleep over this - certainly most people I see on trains (and I travel a lot, long distance as well as commuting) seem to manage to bring their own provisions.

I can certainly see the argument for some sort of "sandwich shop" via a trolley or something, but any more than that is perhaps an expensive luxury only appreciated by a few which is losing money and hence about to be chucked overboard?

Given the choice of more seats which are needed by all or a buffet which only a small proportion of customers will use I think I know which option most people would take?

[broadgage]

IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), on the new half length trains, a kitchen and buffet should be placed between first and steerage in order that meals may be served to first class, and lighter refreshments and drinks be served at the counter for steerage, broadly similar to a proper full buffet HST^▸ (High Speed Train).

On the full length trains, I believe that a kitchen should be provided in the first class driving vehicle as presently proposed, for table service to first class. And that a bar and buffet should be provided in the middle of the steerage section, this vehicle should have a bar servery in the middle and limited perch seating at each end, with plenty of grab rails and hand holds for those who wish to stand.
This need not entail any actual loss of capacity since many people prefer to stand if in pleasant company and enjoying a drink. They think of this as like being in the pub, where many prefer to stand.
I suspect that the bar and buffet could accommodate 28 on perch seats, and 60 or more HAPPILY standing and pretending that they are in the pub.
Call these vehicles "tavern cars perhaps"

[TaplowGreen]

........as Captain Mainwaring would say, ".........I think you're getting into the realms of fantasy" 

[broadgage]

Something like this perhaps
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAd4AcB1t1M

Or slightly more modern, what about something like the bar on a Wessex Electric train, on rush hour services these were routinely full of people standing and enjoying themselves.
Every person standing through choice, is another seat for someone else.

[TaplowGreen]

Something like this perhaps
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAd4AcB1t1M

Or slightly more modern, what about something like the bar on a Wessex Electric train, on rush hour services these were routinely full of people standing and enjoying themselves.
Every person standing through choice, is another seat for someone else.

Indeed.........1949 is the way forward....."white wine for the lady Sir?, let me light your pipe for you!"

Wasn't sure if that was real or something from the Fast Show! 

[Rhydgaled]

Just wondering..................do you think that many people are really that bothered about Travelling Chef/buffet?

You can be pretty sure that were it currently making a significant profit, it would be retained......however the prices are very high and TC^‡(resolve) is very unreliable/unpredictable in its provision........I wonder whether it's only a relatively few "enthusiasts" who are losing sleep over this - certainly most people I see on trains (and I travel a lot, long distance as well as commuting) seem to manage to bring their own provisions.

The removal of 'Traveling Chef' may or may not be a concern, since the planned replacement might be just as good if not better. We don't know what is proposed. Your argument of passengers bringing their own provisions however I think is more relevant to the drinks-and-snacks catering provided on most trains than a cooked meal service.

What really matters is modal shift. Take bus/rail interchange at a rural station with nothing but a bus shelter in terms of facilities. In fair weather, if everything ran to time and the time between one service arriving and another departing was arround 5 minutes things would be good. However, things can go a bit wrong so the timetable needs to leave 15-20mins between services. It would then only take one cold windy day and bang the users get a bad experience which could put those travellers off using the public transport option. Not relevant you might think, but I once had a bad experience involving trains and food. I was making a long journey, heading off on holiday, and hoped to find an evening meal at my destination before checking into the hotel. However, on arrival it was dark and was probably too late for the pubs to be serving food, so I ended up with just a light snack (flapjack, from the provisions we had brought with us) instead of a full evening meal. I was not at all pleased, not much fun having to go to bed hungry. Maybe I'd have got some beans on toast had I been traveling on a Traveling Chef service rather than a service with just a trolley. A look at the competition here: if we had gone by car there may have been a service station on route serving food, and judging by the standard of most of those it shouldn't be hard for rail to beat that offering (and, on a train you could save time by eating on the move).

Given the choice of more seats which are needed by all or a buffet which only a small proportion of customers will use I think I know which option most people would take?

Returning to the matter of IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.), a kitchen/buffet will be provided so that space has been taken up anyway. The question is where in the formation the kitchen/buffet should be positioned, with possibly a second question of what range of food would be offered.

I would say the kitchen/buffet should be positioned between first and standard (as on the IC125 fleet), with the full range available for purchase by any passenger from either class (with certain items complementary for First class passengers, who would also benifit from waiter/waitress service).

[TaplowGreen]

That's an interesting perspective however I'm not sure that the sort of people who are going to transfer from the train to the bus on arrival/mid journey are the same demographic who would be willing to pay ^4.50 for beans on toast?

I think the days of trains being moving restaurants as well as a means of transport are probably drawing towards a close and this is evidenced by the generally patchy provision and relatively low takeup of what's on offer.

Sure the Pullman will always appeal to a few but it's a niche market and unaffordable to most.

If people do want to eat on the move, they generally plump for a sandwich or similar (hence the explosion of Subway and supermarket sandwiches) so that would be the way forward I think for the railways, reflecting the prevailing market conditions......your late night hotel arrival scenario is reasonable however in all honesty how many people would that impact more than once a year?

[Rhydgaled]

That's an interesting perspective however I'm not sure that the sort of people who are going to transfer from the train to the bus on arrival/mid journey are the same demographic who would be willing to pay ^4.50 for beans on toast?

I think the days of trains being moving restaurants as well as a means of transport are probably drawing towards a close and this is evidenced by the generally patchy provision and relatively low takeup of what's on offer.

Sure the Pullman will always appeal to a few but it's a niche market and unaffordable to most.

If people do want to eat on the move, they generally plump for a sandwich or similar (hence the explosion of Subway and supermarket sandwiches) so that would be the way forward I think for the railways, reflecting the prevailing market conditions......your late night hotel arrival scenario is reasonable however in all honesty how many people would that impact more than once a year?

I can agree with you that ^4.50 sounds rather steep for beans on toast. I was rather supprised, however, to see that Little Chef charged ^3.99 for beans on toast (that's not what I ordered though). I also agree that the Pullman is a niche service that few would use, I for one probably will never use it. I'm very fussy and the menu will probably not feature anything I would eat. I do wonder how much of the low takeup is due to how terribly patchy the provision is, and the form that provision takes where it does exist. As I've said the competition is motorway services, rail tends to offer either next to nothing or something much fancier. Isn't there scope for a more general menu which would appeal to a wider audience? Frequency of the late night hotel arrival scenario is certainly a valid question, but could occur for a number of reasons. Any long journey could result in a late-evening arrival.

[SapperPsmith]

The key issue is that on board catering doesnt cover its costs.  In particular the cost of buying and maintaining the space provided has not been matched by the revenue.  I speak with the benefit of having managed onboard catering and been responsible for the income on my trains.  The revenue covered the cost of goods sold and the staff but never the daily maintenance of ovens and other equipment and the substantial lease costs of the vehicles.

I love travelling in a train with white table cloths and silver service but I have come to realise that I cannot expect other passengers (or the taxpayer) to subsidise this activity.

[Richard Fairhurst]

I may be howled down for this sacrilege, but I've always been surprised that British railway operators haven't installed vending machines on their trains.

They can serve the same stock as a trolley (or better, because they can be refrigerated if needs be); there's no need for on-train staff; stock control can be monitored electronically; and what passengers lose in at-seat convenience, they gain in being able to purchase items at any time. They're fairly space-effective and the servicing network already exists.

It's not a new idea - they exist in Germany, Norway, and inevitably Japan.

[TaplowGreen]

I may be howled down for this sacrilege, but I've always been surprised that British railway operators haven't installed vending machines on their trains.

They can serve the same stock as a trolley (or better, because they can be refrigerated if needs be); there's no need for on-train staff; stock control can be monitored electronically; and what passengers lose in at-seat convenience, they gain in being able to purchase items at any time. They're fairly space-effective and the servicing network already exists.

It's not a new idea - they exist in Germany, Norway, and inevitably Japan.

.......I sense a certain turning from Bob Crow's grave......no need for staff? Must be an excuse for a strike!!! 

[broadgage]

The key issue is that on board catering doesnt cover its costs.  In particular the cost of buying and maintaining the space provided has not been matched by the revenue.  I speak with the benefit of having managed onboard catering and been responsible for the income on my trains.  The revenue covered the cost of goods sold and the staff but never the daily maintenance of ovens and other equipment and the substantial lease costs of the vehicles.

I love travelling in a train with white table cloths and silver service but I have come to realise that I cannot expect other passengers (or the taxpayer) to subsidise this activity.

In my view, a reasonable on board catering offer is part of running an intercity train service, and need not make a profit.
After all, how much profit is made by the luggage racks, toilets, and wheelchair spaces ?

What is "reasonable" would of course differ according to journey time and customer numbers.
In my view a trolley service should be the absolute minimum on secondary routes, with a hot buffet being the norm, and a full silver service restaurant on selected services.
I would hope that revenue would cover wages and direct input costs, but not perhaps vehicle leasing and train crew wages other than catering staff.

[TaplowGreen]

The key issue is that on board catering doesnt cover its costs.  In particular the cost of buying and maintaining the space provided has not been matched by the revenue.  I speak with the benefit of having managed onboard catering and been responsible for the income on my trains.  The revenue covered the cost of goods sold and the staff but never the daily maintenance of ovens and other equipment and the substantial lease costs of the vehicles.

I love travelling in a train with white table cloths and silver service but I have come to realise that I cannot expect other passengers (or the taxpayer) to subsidise this activity.

In my view, a reasonable on board catering offer is part of running an intercity train service, and need not make a profit.
After all, how much profit is made by the luggage racks, toilets, and wheelchair spaces ?

What is "reasonable" would of course differ according to journey time and customer numbers.
In my view a trolley service should be the absolute minimum on secondary routes, with a hot buffet being the norm, and a full silver service restaurant on selected services.
I would hope that revenue would cover wages and direct input costs, but not perhaps vehicle leasing and train crew wages other than catering staff.

If revenue covered costs we wouldn't be having this debate.