The new way of running the rails - what would you LIKE in the new system?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

The Government has announced the end of franchising, interim emergency agreements with the train operators, and will be publishing a white paper to look ahead to a system for the medium and longer term, based on advise from the Williams report.

Two questions.
This thread is what would you like to see as basic objectives of the new system?
Another thread - what do you expect the government to have as priorities in the new system? See http://www.passenger.chat/24041

I will run these two polls for 10 days ... members are allowed during that time to come back and change their votes if their vies change based on discussions.

[Bob_Blakey]

Aside from all the above, somewhat woolly, options I am of the opinion that our government must not countenance under any circumstances a return to the nationalised British Rail scenario which would allow the calling of the much loved national rail strike.

[broadgage]

I voted for simplified fares, and for increasing revenue from first class, catering, cycles and luggage.

The carrying of heavy luggage, cycles, and surfboards could in my view be charged for, especially on busy services. Carrying such items does cost money and could reasonably be charged for IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion).
Any such charges need to be simple and easy to understand. A flat rate of say 5 pounds per oversize item, might be reasonable ? Applicable to anything within reason, that the owner can handle. Any item needing staff to assist could reasonably be charged at a much higher rate, perhaps 25 pounds.

I am not convinced that catering will ever be hugely profitable, but provision is an important part of running a railway service, and encouraging better provision, and better use of that provision would reduce the total costs.

First class accommodation is sometimes little used in the off peak, and off peak first class fares should arguably be considered.

I also voted for encouraging use of trains rather than flying or driving. If we are serious about climate change, we need to fly and drive A LOT less.

[PhilWakely]

I voted for simplified fares, and for increasing revenue from first class, catering, cycles and luggage.

The carrying of heavy luggage, cycles, and surfboards could in my view be charged for, especially on busy services. Carrying such items does cost money and could reasonably be charged for IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion).
Any such charges need to be simple and easy to understand. A flat rate of say 5 pounds per oversize item, might be reasonable ? Applicable to anything within reason, that the owner can handle. Any item needing staff to assist could reasonably be charged at a much higher rate, perhaps 25 pounds.

There is already provision for a GBP5 charge for oversized items, but it is seldom, if ever charged.

[plymothian]

I voted for simplified fares, and for increasing revenue from first class, catering, cycles and luggage.

The carrying of heavy luggage, cycles, and surfboards could in my view be charged for, especially on busy services. Carrying such items does cost money and could reasonably be charged for IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion).
Any such charges need to be simple and easy to understand. A flat rate of say 5 pounds per oversize item, might be reasonable ? Applicable to anything within reason, that the owner can handle. Any item needing staff to assist could reasonably be charged at a much higher rate, perhaps 25 pounds.

There is already provision for a GBP5 charge for oversized items, but it is seldom, if ever charged.

The AAA Supplement has been abolished, so cannot be charged any more.

[Rhydgaled]

The poll options are mainly about a new fares system - but the topic title doesn't specify that so I'd like to add:

• a joined-up decarbonisation strategy combining a rolling programme of electrification with neatly aranged rolling stock cascades to minimise the purchase of new diesel trains (inc. minimising the purchase of any bi/tri/quad-mode units fitted with diesel engines) and minimise running of diesel engines on electrified routes
• mandatory rolling stock quality standards based on the Rail Delivery Group Key Train Requirements with hard seats and limited legroom etc. restricted to short distance routes

[southwest]

• Standardisation of rolling stock across the network.
• Older diesels fitted with emission reducing technology where practical.
• Better and more realistic fares that offer a competitive advantage over driving.
• A better First Class product across all rail operators, no more rubbish hard seats, cheap & nasty fabric, little to no catering.
• Standard Class to have minimum requirements for privacy, leg room, seat comfort.
• Basic amenity's for Intercity services, a small buffet (like LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) OR Inter7City), Ability to walk through the entire train.

[broadgage]

Parts of the two previous posts read almost like a broadgage complaint about IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train).

"hard seats" (and undesirability thereof for long distance services)
"buffets being a basic amenity for inter city services"
"ability to walk through the whole train"
"better first class offering" with implied criticism of the present little or no catering. And not due to the pandemic, it was pretty rubbish before the pandemic.

[grahame]

The poll options are mainly about a new fares system - but the topic title doesn't specify that so I'd like to add:

• a joined-up decarbonisation strategy combining a rolling programme of electrification with neatly aranged rolling stock cascades to minimise the purchase of new diesel trains (inc. minimising the purchase of any bi/tri/quad-mode units fitted with diesel engines) and minimise running of diesel engines on electrified routes
• mandatory rolling stock quality standards based on the Rail Delivery Group Key Train Requirements with hard seats and limited legroom etc. restricted to short distance routes

The poll options are/were intended to look forward far more to what you (or the government in the sister poll at http://www.passenger.chat/24041 ) want to achieve in the medium to long term - outcomes rather than how those outcomes are reached.  How those goals are best reached is for further discussion, with each of the strategies adopted leading to some intermediate operational tactics to help achieve them - vital elements but there to help reach the objectives.  For example, I don't see "softer seats" being a DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) goal, but as part of "maximising income" via getting more passengers on a better-enjoyed service, and charging each of them a higher price for a more expensive product, it's a logical consideration.

[TonyK]

• Older diesels fitted with emission reducing technology where practical.

Good idea! I suggest a pantograph and electric motors.

• Basic amenity's for Intercity services, a small buffet (like LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) OR Inter7City), Ability to walk through the entire train.

As a minimum, a sufficiency of port.

[1st fan]

I voted for simplified fares, and for increasing revenue from first class, catering, cycles and luggage.

The carrying of heavy luggage, cycles, and surfboards could in my view be charged for, especially on busy services. Carrying such items does cost money and could reasonably be charged for IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion).
Any such charges need to be simple and easy to understand. A flat rate of say 5 pounds per oversize item, might be reasonable ? Applicable to anything within reason, that the owner can handle. Any item needing staff to assist could reasonably be charged at a much higher rate, perhaps 25 pounds.

There is already provision for a GBP5 charge for oversized items, but it is seldom, if ever charged.

The AAA Supplement has been abolished, so cannot be charged any more.

Good thing for GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) as they can ban Surfboards then.

[1st fan]

• Standardisation of rolling stock across the network.
• Older diesels fitted with emission reducing technology where practical.
• Better and more realistic fares that offer a competitive advantage over driving.
• A better First Class product across all rail operators, no more rubbish hard seats, cheap & nasty fabric, little to no catering.

• Standard Class to have minimum requirements for privacy, leg room, seat comfort.
• Basic amenity's for Intercity services, a small buffet (like LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) OR Inter7City), Ability to walk through the entire train.

I think there's more chance of Concorde coming out of retirement and flying from Paddington to Penzance but I live in hope. [/list]

[broadgage]

• Older diesels fitted with emission reducing technology where practical.

Good idea! I suggest a pantograph and electric motors.

• Basic amenity's for Intercity services, a small buffet (like LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) OR Inter7City), Ability to walk through the entire train.

Certainly support the pantograph and electric motors as an effective means of reducing emissions. In the cases of Voyagers and similar units, there is a lot to be said for adding a single new pantograph vehicle to the existing sets, retaining the diesel engines for use away from the wires.
Diesel engine emissions are of less importance if use is reduced by electric power for a significant part of the route.

As a minimum, a sufficiency of port.

[grahame]

• Standardisation of rolling stock across the network.
• Older diesels fitted with emission reducing technology where practical.
• Better and more realistic fares that offer a competitive advantage over driving.

• A better First Class product across all rail operators, no more rubbish hard seats, cheap & nasty fabric, little to no catering.

[/b]

• Standard Class to have minimum requirements for privacy, leg room, seat comfort.
• Basic amenity's for Intercity services, a small buffet (like LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) OR Inter7City), Ability to walk through the entire train.

I think there's more chance of Concorde coming out of retirement and flying from Paddington to Penzance but I live in hope.

And yet ... there are elements where these are of have been worked towards

For longer distance expresses, new trains are pretty much A300 derivatives these days - whether you call them Javalins, Azumas^▸ (Brand name for Class 80x trains on LNER), IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train), Paragons, Novas or Pip and Emma.  I would expect as the next generation of retirements comes - Adelantes, Castles, Voyagers, Pendelinos, and Meridians  - there to be builds to a new family, but consistent builds, bearing in mind progress made since the A300 was designed and the desire to balance up-to-date design against a single fleet.

We have seen retrofits over the years - re-engineering the Class 43 power cars away from Valenta engines, and we have also seen or are seeing refits of D76 and class 319 stock, and others may follow.

I believe there are already standards for seat pitch, etc;   part of the issue there is that some of the older, softer seats conform less to modern safety standards ... privacy (an in particular keeping one's breath to oneself) may be here sooner than we would have imagined.

[broadgage]

I am in favour of standardised designs of new trains for the reasons given, at least as regards the mechanical design, IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) and variants thereof are the future.
One might however hope for internal improvements as suggested by many people in order that they become more suited to inter city operation.

I support the PRINCIPLE of bi-mode operation since it permits of through service to branches not yet electrified, I would hope for more electrification so as to reduce diesel operation.
I also support the fitting of limited diesel power to nominally electric trains for when the wires come down (or when the conductor rail ices up, remember Lewisham)

It should in my view be a statutory requirement that ALL new trains should be able to couple to each other, and to haul or propel each other in case of breakdown etc.
If IETs and variants thereof are to become even more widespread, a close watch needs to be kept to ensure  that ALL variants can couple to and haul each other.