Goodbye East Midlands Trains. Hello Emr

[Andy C 86]

45 minutes ago, bluecanary said:

Sorry if I'm being dense here, but exactly how will transferring the Nottingham - Liverpool part of the line to another operator help to "better meet the needs of customers".? Surely fragmenting a previously coherent service will have the opposite effect?

 

I have elderly parents and the ability to get on a train in Norwich and travel directly to Sheffield with no changes, albeit it slowly, enables them to see their grandchildren regularly. The requirement to change trains in the middle of the journey is not something that is going to benefit them in any way that I can see. 

The principal is the Nottingham-Liverpool section is incredibly busy linking the cities of Nottingham, Sheffield, Manchester and Liverpool whilst Nottingham-Norwich is much quieter. The current 2 car sprinters are adequate on most trips at the Norwich end, however the Liverpool end ideally could do with a much bigger, possibly Intercity style train without the faff of coupling and uncoupling at Nottingham. Some of the route at the Norwich end is basically a rural branch line with anything heavier than a Sprinter unit being subject to quite low speed restrictions.

 

There is also an obsession with avoiding delays around Manchester or Peterborough being imported cross country, however I don't get that given that East Midlands Trains actually ran the service quite reliably.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Andy C

[RollingJ 2,040]

41 minutes ago, bluecanary said:

Sorry if I'm being dense here, but exactly how will transferring the Nottingham - Liverpool part of the line to another operator help to "better meet the needs of customers".? Surely fragmenting a previously coherent service will have the opposite effect?

 

I have elderly parents and the ability to get on a train in Norwich and travel directly to Sheffield with no changes, albeit it slowly, enables them to see their grandchildren regularly. The requirement to change trains in the middle of the journey is not something that is going to benefit them in any way that I can see. 

Me neither, @bluecanary, but you forget that the DfT - or any other Govt. live in a universe divorced from reality

 

Understand your comment @Andy C, but it can be done.

[BigAl1 143]

19 hours ago, Andy C said:

The regulated fares are set by the government with increases based on inflation. Not sure if it is still the case but train operators used to have to give the government the difference if the increase was above inflation.

 

The current principle is they move a bigger proportion of the cost of rail infrastructure from taxpayer to passenger - fares up and franchise premium payment up (or subsidy down depending on the operation).

 

There are deals such as off peak fares and advance booking deals that are within the operators gift, they are generally designed to sell otherwise empty seats.

Indeed, As I recall the Train companies had some flexibility as long as the overall basket of  the regulated fares  increased by the rate set by government which is based on the inflation rate and the government can vary if they want to RPI+1% and so on or though unlikely to RPI-1%

 

the train companies are free to set the Unregulated fares as they see fit

 

One of the cleaver ways the train companies can get round the regulations is to restrict the times you can use the saver ticket to force people to buy other tickets

 

The theory of splitting the Norwich Liverpool services is based on the principal that punctuality is like to be better with the service split into two as trains at the liverpool to Nottingham end of the line will not be affected by problems at the norwichto Nottingham  end and the fact that only a small proportion of  customers actually travel on the trains through Nottingham and of course these will certainly not benefit ( I suspect that having decided to split the trains then giving them to different Train Companies was just simple logic)

 

you know train companies keep promising more comfortable trains but then when they get round to it go for the cheapest seating hoping people will forget the promise

[Andy C 86]

3 hours ago, amnicoll said:

Indeed, As I recall the Train companies had some flexibility as long as the overall basket of  the regulated fares  increased by the rate set by government which is based on the inflation rate and the government can vary if they want to RPI+1% and so on or though unlikely to RPI-1%

 

the train companies are free to set the Unregulated fares as they see fit

 

One of the cleaver ways the train companies can get round the regulations is to restrict the times you can use the saver ticket to force people to buy other tickets

 

The theory of splitting the Norwich Liverpool services is based on the principal that punctuality is like to be better with the service split into two as trains at the liverpool to Nottingham end of the line will not be affected by problems at the norwichto Nottingham  end and the fact that only a small proportion of  customers actually travel on the trains through Nottingham and of course these will certainly not benefit ( I suspect that having decided to split the trains then giving them to different Train Companies was just simple logic)

 

you know train companies keep promising more comfortable trains but then when they get round to it go for the cheapest seating hoping people will forget the promise

Depends which trains you are talking about. Some of the new train projects such as the I.E.T. were procured and specified by the Department for Transport.

[BigAl1 143]

yes the IETs were procured by the DafT but did not the train companies specify the interior design and layout

[euroe7 10]

There has already been talk about increasing black cab taxi permits on the station. Adding more pressure to already a congested situation but just follow the money, been told it's £618.00 for 12 months starting September. Concerned station users should contact train station management, and make their views clear.

 

[1978 14]

On 21/08/2019 at 09:36, Andy C said:

There is also an obsession with avoiding delays around Manchester or Peterborough being imported cross country, however I don't get that given that East Midlands Trains actually ran the service quite reliably.

There is a very serious desire to avoid importing delays from Manchester across the country. Peterborough isn't as serious, but is still an issue.

 

About 18 months ago this hourly service was being held responsible for 25% of all East Midlands delays. That was quite a staggering statistic when you consider all the trains between St Pancras and Sheffield and Nottingham and the other regional services.

 

Cutting those delays might be a priority if I were trying to run the railway, so cutting off the worst bit wouldn't dismay me too much. Without resolving congestion between Warrington and Stockport there's very little that can be done to improve things. In another 3 or 4  years the redoubling at Dore may make a little difference but it's in the west that the biggest gains can made and they'll cost billions and probably take decades!.

[Localman 10]

First experience of EMR leaves me unimpressed.

 

Simply unable to book a journey on the website. It kept telling me to go back and try again because there were 'website issues'. 

 

Having done so several times, I gave up and drove to Leeds and back instead.

[RollingJ 2,040]

52 minutes ago, Localman said:

First experience of EMR leaves me unimpressed.

 

Simply unable to book a journey on the website. It kept telling me to go back and try again because there were 'website issues'. 

 

Having done so several times, I gave up and drove to Leeds and back instead.

Very strange - I have booked three journeys since the change - one on the first day of operation to Brighton via London, one in the reverse direction, and a day return to Leicester, all with no problem.

[darylslinn 10]

The overcrowding between Liverpool and Nottingham is beyond a joke.... two car units sometimes bolstered to four cars on this route are totally inadequate.
Surely some cascaded IC125 sets down to six coaches would work on this route.... not only uplifting the acceleration speed from stops but the increased seating capacity would make sense.
It's criminal that the IC225 (Class 91's) are being withdrawn and scrapped and are in better condition than a lot of the rolling stock currently available (even though they are electric stock).

 

Edited August 28, 2019 by darylslinn

[Martin C 82]

1 hour ago, darylslinn said:

The overcrowding between Liverpool and Nottingham is beyond a joke.... two car units sometimes bolstered to four cars on this route are totally inadequate.
 

 

4 cars generally more than adequate in my experience.  2 cars very much less so.

[Annie Bynnol 612]

9 hours ago, Martin C said:

4 cars generally more than adequate in my experience.  2 cars very much less so.

The Government are more than happy to suppress demand on the route between Sheffield and Manchester through overcrowding.

This greatly harms the economy of Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

 

The "4 cars" that run once an hour (Nottingham-Liverpool)are of the Class 158 type which are old slow and soon to be replaced.

 

The current  3 car 185 TPE type trains have a lower seating capacity than a 2 car 158.

A 6 car 185 is too long for Dore and other stations and needs two Guards.

 

Other trains will become available like the HST 125, The Meridians from MML and even locomotive hauled ones.

 

Every plan announced over the last thirty years has been stopped/delayed  by the Government and they have left us with slower line speeds, two sections of single track, semaphore signalling, short trains and seriously overcrowding on weekdays and weekends.