Comment - Public bidders for next Scotrail Franchise?

380 019 wearing the Transport Scotland prescribed 'Saltair' livery calls at Paisley Gilmore Street.

This week it has been announced by Transport Scotland that a public body will be able to bid for the next Scotrail franchise, which will begin in 2025. I had not realised that it was as long ago as 2014 where I wrote a comment on the Inter City East Coast franchise, which was then under public ownership as Directly Operated Railways following the collapse of the National Express franchise. I asked at that time whether it was appropriate for a public bidder to enter the competition for the Inter City East Coast franchise- of course it didn't, and the contract was let out to a consortium of Virgin and Stagecoach. Fast forward to today and Inter City East Coast is once again in public ownership, now branded as LNER, after the failure of the Virgin/Stagecoach operation.

320 313 approaches Bellshill

I was particularly interested therefore to see the announcement this week that Transport Scotland would allow a public bidder to compete against the private sector in Scotland, something which the UK Government had previously refused to entertain. Transport Scotland have stated that 'Our consistent view over many years is that there ought to be a level playing field between the private and public sector in bidding for rail franchises.'- Almost exactly what I had suggested in my previous comment, and very similar to the model used in many parts of Europe where national operators bid (and sometimes win) against the private sector. This landmark ruling is a breath of fresh air for the UK rail industry and provides a real opportunity to challenge the current franchising system which has been so criticised in recent years. I will certainly be watching the next Scotrail bidding competition closely; whether or not a public bidder wins the franchise or not it will certainly shake up the system, and this can only be a positive step.
The full Transport Scotland statement can be read here.

Comment - Strike woes continue

Northern is one of the companies which has now joined the RMT conductors
strike. 142025 is seen near Brough with a Hull - York service in November
2016- a train currently operated with a driver and conductor.

Until I scrolled back through my archive to write this post I had not quite appreciated that it was as long ago as July 2016 the I wrote about the continuing strikes on Southern which had led to the implementation of an emergency timetable to cope with traincrew shortages. Since then the industrial dispute between the RMT, ASLEF, the train operators and ultimately the government has developed. Several other companies have joined the Southern employees in industrial action with Abellio Greater Anglia, Merseyrail, Northern and South Western Railway now all engaged in coordinated strikes through the RMT union. The reasons for the action have not changed- a threat to the safety critical position of train guards who currently operate train doors, an extension of DOO (Driver Only Operation) and a threat that the guarantee of a second member of staff on many trains may be eroded.

The latest company to be added to the ever expanding portfolio of RMT industrial action is First/MRT owned South Western Railway which took over the running of services from Waterloo from the Stagecoach South West Trains franchise in August. SWT was one of of the last operators to run all services, including inner suburban routes with a guard and many see it as unsurprising that SWR are considering changes. A new fleet of Bombadier 'Aventra' trains will enter service on the network from 2020 and SWR officials have stated that a decision has not yet been made on the method of operation of these trains. While there is no immediate threat to the role of the guard on SWR the company has failed to put in place an assurance that a second member of staff will be retained in all circumtances stating simply that any changes to current practices would be consulted in the usual way.

While the strike on SWR will bring disruption to passengers out of Waterloo this week there may finally be light at the end of the tunnel for the long suffering users of the Southern network with news that a deal has finally been accepted by ASLEF drivers bringing an end to their dispute. A generous pay deal will see Southern drivers accept an increase in DOO services with an assurance that a second member of staff, the 'On Board Supervisor' will always be provided on trains except in exceptional circumstances. Exceptional circumstances would appear to include late notice sickness - a position the RMT, representing the guards is still unhappy with and continues to dispute with Southern. It is however the drivers strike here which has been most disruptive and an end to which will be welcomed by passengers.

Another train operator involved in the current strikes is Abellio Greater
Anglia, which already runs 60% of services DOO. The operator expects to
run a full service using contingency guards.

Strikes undoubtedly have their place in the industry but the disturbance they cause must not be forgotten. Not only do passengers suffer but general morale within the workplace is stretched. Those staff who are still working, many of whom are not involved in the strike are placed under strain and an air of unease and tension can easily descend across the industry. The company which I work for has now been brought into the dispute and I am beginning to see first hand the intricacies that strikes bring to an industry from behind the scenes. The extra workload for staff, the tension from the public, the strain on relationships and the balance between obligation and duty. For example the many company managers who have no choice but to break the strike by forfilling their obligation as contingency guards while their friends and colleagues man picket lines.

My role is is not directly involved in the current strike, but how do I feel about operating the railway when my colleagues are striking? On one hand I hope that our contingency service provision runs well in the interests of our passengers and all who are working hard today to keep trains moving safely, reliably and without incident. But then there is the other side that maybe 'secretly' hopes that it will all go wrong. There could be incidents involving our contingency guards, service levels may fall below what we expect and passenger journeys may be disrupted beyond the provision set out in the emergency timetables - the impacts of the strike would be felt stronger and enhance the case which RMT guards are presenting.

One thing is certain - as I have said before, parties need to talk. As an industry we need to innovate, but we do not need to innovate purely for the sake of change. The number one priority of the rail industry must always be safety and in my view a second member of safety trained staff on board every train can only be positive in this respect. Are trains with DOO safe? Yes. Of course they are. Would they be safer with an additional member of staff who can assist passengers and is safety trained in the event of an emergency- undoubtedly. This week Londons Evening Standard newspaper totally missed the point when they their story 'On the day before rail strike over driver-only trains, RMT boss Mick Lynch travels to work... on driver-only train' featuring a picture of the RMT assistant general secretary travelling to work by train and chastising the leader for his hypocritical actions. The suggestion presumably is that it would be more acceptable for Mick Lynch to drive to work, take a helicopter or simply not travel at all rather than using the mode of transport for which his union has worked for many years to keep safe. Mick Lynch has rebuffed the comments stating that 'by holding a strike we're trying to increase safety standards on the railway. They [DOO trains] are less safe than a train with a guard'. There is no suggestion that DOO trains are not fit for use, or that it is a risk for passengers to use them. Rail remains the safest way to travel- but why not make sure it is the very safest it can be?

Now it is time to get back around the table again and find the solution to running our railway in the safest possible way with adequate staffing for the good of everyone and at a realistic cost. And let's hope that I'm not writing another of these comments in 12 months time...

All views expressed are my own and do not represent the views of my employer.

Is competition good for the South West Mainline?

Last month Alliance Rail Holdings announced their intention to begin a new 'Open Access' service between London Waterloo and Southampton to compete with the franchised operator on the South West Main Line. The SWML is one of the busiest and most congested routes on the UK and a franchise which currently pays a significant premium to the UK Government.
Alliance says that they are working with the industry to identify paths for seven off-peak journeys per day (with two peak services to follow in 2018 following work to increase capacity on the line) using class 442 'Wessex Elecric' 100mph EMU's.

37884 hauls 2411 from Three Bridges to Eastleigh on 11th November 2016 seen in the Addlestone area. The unit has come off lease with Southern/Gatwick Express, but could these fine trains return to the SWML with an 'open access' operator?

Competition has undoubtedly brought more consumer choice on the East Coast Main Line where both First Hull Trains and Grand Central operate open access services, however it has also meant that the expansion of franchised services has been subdued and detracted revenue which would otherwise be received by the government in premium payments.
Introducing more seating capacity on the SWML is certainly a good thing but whether this should be in the form of a competing operator I am not sure. Certainly I would be more than happy to see the 442's back on the Wessex patch where they belong, but I would first be interested to see what service enhancements are proposed in the two bids for the next franchise by Stagecoach and First/MTR. It is entirely possible that these bids may also have identified extra paths and stock to utilise them and this may give a better return for the taxpayer as well as giving more operational flexibility in not having another operator to deal with on the congested line into Waterloo.
There is definitely a leisure market on this route and South West Trains have increasingly tapped into it with their promotional off-peak fares. Could Alliance Rail offer a better product? We will have to wait for the ORR to give their ruling on the proposal. Alliance hope to be running their off peak services from the December 2017 timetable change- their press release can be read here.

Comment- Southern Strikes Continue

Southern's 377701 at Cow Roast (near Tring) on the West Coast Main Line on 18.02.2015 with a Milton Keynes - East Croydon service, one of the routes which Southern will cease to serve in their emergency timetable from 11th July 2016. 

There is continuing woe for Southern rail commuters as the company has announced that from Monday 11th July 341 services will be axed each weekday in an amended timetable which is designed to provide more stability during the ongoing period of 'staff sickness' which is affecting the companies ability to run its full service.

While the company continue to put out the message that the continued period of high staff shortages is due to sickness there is a growing perception that this is actually somewhat more of a 'work to rule' situation which has been imposed by conductors who are angry at Southern's proposals to change the guards role to that of an 'on-train supervisor' a move which has been the subject of several strikes by the RMT union. (You can read some background on this on Southern's website at here). While it may be true that the full level of service cannot be provided due to genuine sickness it is very much apparently that staff are not covering for this in the usual day by refusing to work overtime or rest days, leaving a shortfall.

While Southern describe the current industrial action as 'completely unnecessary' it is perhaps worth looking in a bit more detail about what is involved. The current 'conductor' role is a safety critical position which involves operating the train doors, but also has a level of responsibility for the safety of the train. Should an evacuation be required, or should the driver require assistance in protecting their train the conductor will be able to assist as they hold all necessary safety qualifications to be trackside to provide this assistance. In addition to this the conductor also supports passengers on board the train by making announcements checking and selling tickets and providing a visible presence. Southern claim that the changes will mean that the conductor becomes more visible to customers as an 'on-train supervisor' and that the only difference in their job will be that they no longer operate the doors of the train. No job losses or reduction in salaries are proposed. What is not however clear is whether the 'on-train supervisor' will maintain their safety critical position- I suspect they may not. I also suspect that while existing conductors will transfer to the new role under their existing conditions any new appointments may not receive such generous remuneration.

Operation of the train doors will pass to the driver- known as Driver Only Operation (DOO) which has been used for over 30 years on may train services in the UK and around the world. While Southern state that a second member of staff will still be present on most of their trains a key change is that the train will no longer require that second member of staff. Suddenly one can start to see why the trade unions may be concerned. Not only has the train had it's second safety critical member of staff removed, but if for any reason the on-train supervisor is unavailable the train can continue quite happily without them- this second member of staff becomes unnecessary and hurdles to remove this second member of staff from trains altogether at a later date becomes far easier.

Is it essential then that trains have a conductor or guard to operate the doors- Personally, while there is evidence to say that a large percentage of railway accidents occur around train doors, I believe that in many respects the driver is in a better position to operate them assisted by CCTV and modern safety systems. Do I therefore think that DOO is the right way to run a railway? Absolutely not. Regardless of who is working the doors I believe a second member of safety critical staff should always be available on board a train. If something were to happen to the driver there is then a second member of staff who can assist passengers in the event of an incident. Furthermore while the driver is driving their train they cannot be contacted other than by the signaler, they also can't assist passengers on board the train or provide assistance to any disabled passengers who may need help leaving or joining the train. Having a second member of staff on board who can be contacted can prove essential in times of disruption and can also act as a liaison point between the railway control centre, the driver and passengers.

Govia Thameslink Railway (the franchise which Southern sits within) appear to be between a rock and a hard place. The unions are not backing down, yet I can't believe the government doesn't want this dispute to end in the train operators favor- after all the McNulty report of 2012 [into the the future direction and viability of the railways] suggests that DOO should become the default option for train services in order to reduce costs to the industry. It should be remembered that the Department for Transport specify to a large extent new train orders, which are being specified with DOO equipment fitted as standard, and also that the current Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) franchise is not a franchise in the typical sense- it is in fact a management contract whereby the company is paid a fee to provide the train service subject to performance targets. Yes- these performance targets have not been met and there have penalties, but GTR is shielded from any drop in takings at the farebox because they do not take any revenue directly from fares.

If the case of Southern has been set up to remove the safety critical guards role from trains by stealth, and this is supported by central government, then this is a worrying precedent, and one which could affect the winners of other forthcoming franchise competitions. It it is clear that there is a drive to reduce costs within the industry, and this should not be ignored, however it must be questioned whether removing safety critical staff from trains is the best way to achieve this.

I will be very interested to see how the situation on Southern goes forward. With no end date to the temporary timetable (which, by the way, is far better than ad-hoc cancellations) it is clear that the frustrated journeys of Southern passengers will continue for some time yet. It is clear that the dispute could have been handled better by all parties but what is needed more than anything right now is a way forward for Southerns passengers and staff who have been under strain for too long by the poor performance caused by the 'staff shortages'. I only hope the situation can be resolved without compromising safety and without causing any more disruption to journeys than is necessary.

I must stress that these views are my own and do not represent the views of my employer.

Comment- Crossrail 2 is go

It will be all change at Raynes Park in the 2030's if the Crossrail 2 scheme has gone ahead. Many trains such as this one will have their origin switched from Waterloo station to new destinations north of London via a tunnel which will emerge at Wimbledon. It may also be the perfect time to replace the train fleet with the current class 455's which will be between 45 and 50 years old.  

Discussing the outcome of the 2016 UK budget is quite beyond the realms of this blog- but the fact that funding has been secured to give the go-ahead for London's next super infrastructure project cannot be ignored. Crossrail 2 will link parts of the West Anglia Main Line and Great Northern Main Line with the South West Main Line via a new tunnel under the capital from Seven Sisters/Tottenham Hale in the north through to Wimbledon in the south west. It will form the third heavy rail route through London after Crossrail [now to be known as the Elizabeth Line] and Thameslink.
The project is much needed and will provide extra capacity on the routes it serves as well as freeing up space at several busy London terminals; Kings Cross, Liverpool Street and Waterloo. By providing direct links into the heart of the city the route will also alleviate congestion on underground routes, most notably the busy Victoria Line.

The West Anglia Main Line will form the northern part of the
Crossrail 2 link

The 80 million committed to the project in the latest budget is of course a drop in the ocean when put next to the 27 billion (at today's prices) to build the complete route. This funding will allow studies to push forward to allow planning to continue on the scheme. There are of course many milestones yet to reach before any work can start on the ground. Hopefully this new funding will allow the project to press forward, and if done quickly we may not be too late to utilise the pool of skilled workers which have been working on the current crossrail scheme.

Comment: TFL Rail to take over London Suburban Services. Is this the answer?

Crowds of passengers wait to board London Overgrounds 378233 at
Kensington Olympia. New and more frequent trains have transformed the line.

It has been announced this week that following a long campaign by London Mayor Boris Johnson commuter rail services into London will be taken over by Transport for London. Starting from 2018 with SouthEastern's suburban routes, services will be re-branded as 'London Overground' and full control within the London area will pass to TfL. The change, it has been said, will 'increase capacity' and 'eventually bringing an end to cattle truck conditions' faced by commuters. By transforming services in the south east in the same way that London Overground has transformed it's existing services (increasing ridership on these six-fold) TfL believes they can increase capacity and run a truly metro-style service on these routes.
One thing is absolutely certain- the arrival of London Overground on the wider suburban network is not going to be a quick fix. Let's take a look firstly at how TfL has transformed one of it's existing routes- the West London Line from Clapham Junction to Willesden Junction. Just 10 years ago this route was something of a forgotten backwater of the capitals rail network. An outdated 3-coach Silverlink Metro train would run every 30 minutes calling at the four stations on the route, and it was rarely busy. Look back 10 or so years further and the route only had a peak time shuttle from Clapham Junction to Kensington Olympia! London Overground has undoubtedly transformed services here- today they provide modern 5 coach walk-through trains at least every 15 minutes seven days a week. Two new stations have opened on the line and all stops are fully staffed. The line has better connectivity with many trains running through to Stratford in East London, and the real result is in ridership- trains are busy, and at peak times already nearing capacity.

In July 2006 the new West London Line station at Shepphards Bush (and the Westfield Shopping Centre next door) is still under construction as Silverlink Metro's 313109 passes with a train to Clapham Junction.

TfL has successfully invested in under-utilised infrastructure and transformed a marginal route into one that is now popular, profitable and a core part of London's transport network.

Class 455's are the mainstay of commuter traffic through Wimbledon- a
service which London Overground would like to take over- but how will it
boost services from the 18 trains an hour which already run at peak times?

Let us now look at one of the routes which TfL aspire to control in the future, also passing through Clapham Junction is the busy commuter service from Wimbledon into London Waterloo- currently operated by South West Trains. Unlike the West London Line this route is already one of the busiest commuter routes into London. Eight coach trains make the journey from Wimbledon into Waterloo up to 18 times per hour, with a train almost every 3 minutes at peak times. With the current infrastructure capacity has been reached on the line- there is physically no room for more trains. At peak times trains are also already full. By the time that TfL may take over this route (2019 at the earliest) a 25% increase in capacity will have been delivered with 10 coaches running on most trains- this still will not solve the capacity crunch and crush loadings on the route. Unlike the take over of Silverlink Metro there will be no quick wins on a route such as this.
What could London Overground therefore bring to a route such as this?
Obviously if the change in management of the line were to bring more capital investment that would be a good thing. There are ways, at great expense, that capacity could still be increased on the route- it may be possible to lengthen platforms again to introduce 12 coach trains. Technology upgrades with the use of Train Management Systems (TMS), and in-cab signalling could improve the flow of trains allowing more to be squeezed onto the network. Finally new trains could be procured with more and larger doors, walk through gangways and a metro style seating layout- this however would not be a small investment- more new vehicles would be needed for this service than London Overground's entire current fleet! Of course the long term answer for this route is to build Crossrail 2- but that is another topic altogether!

Gone and not missed- class 313 121 pauses at Caledonian Road
& Barnesbury in 2006. This route now has new class 378 trains
under the London Overground brand.

Further considerations need to be taken in with TfL's proposal- unlike their current routes many of those they are proposing to operate are not simple 'enclosed' systems- from several terminals the current operators run out to many many different destinations. There are also long distance services to consider, which share tracks and infrastructure with the trains TfL will plan to run. Then there is the small issue of what happens outside of the London Boundary- Metro style trains already continue far outside of the reaches of the Mayors authority into Surrey, Kent and Sussex. What will the impact be for these outlying (but very much essential) services?
TfL certainly faces a challenge in taking on London's commuter network and those customers who think that a sudden change in management will bring about a rapid improvement in services may be saddened to find that this is not the case. Everyone in the transport industry would like to see capacity raised on these lines but there are no easy answers, and they certainly don't come cheap. Whether it is TfL or a franchised TOC which ultimately runs these services the fact remains that these are some of the busiest railways in the world and that will be a challenge for any operator to take on.

Comment: To brand or not to brand?

The Scotrail franchise has it's own identity quite distinct from Abellio who currently operate it. 380011 in 'Saltair' colours waits at
Glasgow Central on 9th July 2015

Lime green was a stark contrast to pre-90's liveries. A Central
Trains 170 approaches Ely on 4th November 2006.

Whatever your view on privatisation of Britain's railways it has without doubt been colourful. The first fruits of colour bloomed out of BR corporate blue in the late 80's with sectorisation and creation of railway businesses such as InterCity and Network SouthEast. When privatisation took hold 'en mass' the railway was awash with colours it had never seen before; Central Trains brought us lime green, Anglia; turquoise while Midland Mainline gave us a peculiar shade of teal. Liveries continued to morph with the vinyl revolution in the 2000's making once un-paintable liveries possible- the 'dynamic lines' of First Group and even at one stage a mobile Ginsters Pasty advertisement!

More recently something seems to have changed. Several large franchises have adopted somewhat more generic liveries or decided not to re-brand at all. The first area to throw a spanner into the debate was Scotland- where many of the decisions on the railways are already devolved to Holyrood. Here the Scotish government has taken the lead and specified a livery which was first applied by First Group- the 'Saltair' livery. What happened here for the first time was the removal of the rail operators image from the franchise. First Group and now Abellio (who have run ScotRail services since April 2015) have a small logo pasted onto what is otherwise a 'national' livery. There isn't even a mention of Abellio in the company name or much of their promotional material - it is very much 'ScotRail - Scotland's Railway'- and it will stay this way for the considerable future negating the cost of re-painting vehicles which has long been lamented as a wasteful by-product of the franchise system.

A large new 'Great Western Railway' plaque on the side of
57605 at Paddington 23/09/2015

The new livery de-brands franchise owner First Group from
the new and sophisticated livery. 23/09/2015

First group has now gone on to de-brand another of their franchises- the flagship Great Western route out of London Paddington to Wales and the West country. In a bold move the 'dynamic lines' of First Great Western will be replaced by a smart (if slightly dull) dark green and silver scheme harking back to the networks Brunelian routes as the Great Western Railway. It is yet to be seen if this will be another livery which will transition with a new franchisee, and while only a handful of trains have yet been repainted the re-branding of the website and station announcements from 'First Great Western' to 'Great Western Railway' has certainly been stark.

Despite now being part of GTR the colour scheme of
Southern has not changed. 455824, 19 May 2013

Another surprise has recently been thrown into the pot by what is now the largest rail franchise in the UK- Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR). This new monster franchise is the combination of former First Capital Connect (FCC) and Southern franchises within which there are four brands- Thameslink, Great Northern, Southern and Gatwick Express. While GTR has worked to remove former First Group branding from it's ex-FCC trains it has surprised some critics by taking the decision to retain the existing brands and not to re-package all operations as GTR. Those passengers on the Southern and Gatwick Express routes (already owned by Govia) are unlikely to have noticed any difference in the appearance of their rail franchise since GTR took over in July this year. In a talk to the Institute of Railway Operators CEO Charles Horton explained that the individual brands had become established and were recognised by their individual passengers. He reiterated that the large size of the franchise was not important and that smaller changes to services and facilities would instead define the success of the business. In keeping the existing route brandings best practice can be taken from each to build a better GTR.

It seems that as the franchise model matures the garish paint schemes of the not-so-distant past are becoming more subdued and also maturing. Operators are becoming more focused on service and less on having the most eye-catching paint job as their train pulls into the station. This is an attitude I would support as I have long argued that the public by and large does not care whether their train is aquamarine or pink- so long as it arrives on time and provides a safe and reliable service at a fair price. All this said it is difficult to see brand conscious operators such as the Virgin group relinquishing their red and silver scheme which is as much part of the product as the train itself.

Comment: Where next for the 'Wessex Electric'?

Back on 2nd July 2006 'Wessex' unit 2422 'Operation Overlord' is leading a 10 car SWT service to Waterloo through Hersham. 

The days of class 442's working the premium 'Gatwich Express' service is now drawing to a close with news that the first class 387, which will take over from the class, is now in testing and due for delivery before the end of the year. Of course the class was never built for this work, which it is most unsuitable for. The 24 'Wessex Electrics' spent the first 19 years of their lives working services from Waterloo to Weymouth before being replaced by the newer class 444 'desiro' units. Once retired from Gatwick Express use there will be 24 five coach Mk3 build third rail intercity EMU's up for grabs. They will be a few years shy of their 30th birthday- but what could be next for these units, once described as the most comfortable in all of South East England?

442402 passes non-stop through Clapham Junction with a
Gatwick Airport to Victoria service in August 2012.

Further use in the South East on the 3rd rail system would be the obvious option- but there is scarcely any demand for these 'intercity' spec EMU's. Just looking at the recent order books of the London commuter TOC's reveals that the 442 just isn't the type of train being ordered today. Orders instead are for high capacity people movers such as the new class 700 for Thameslink and high capacity class 387's for Southern. Could there be any chance that the 442's may revert to the one line that might still be suitable for them- their old stomping ground from Waterloo to Weymouth? This is a possibility that cannot be totally ruled out but the author feels it very unlikely. The more modern class 444's are now well settled on this route and provide a slight increase in capacity over the 442's- further more displacing the 444's back to the Portsmouth Line where they started life would create a dramatic cut in capacity over 12 car class 450 trains which work many busy commuter services on this line (despite the complaints of some Portsmouth Line commuters!). The extra units could surely be used in the South West, but interoperability issues would also be an issue. Currently most Weymouth services split or divide at Bournemouth. Throwing class 442's into the mix with the newer class 444's would need a new look at the timetable to keep the fleets seperate. The only way I could see 442's having a place back on Weymouth trains would be if the power was finally upgraded to allow 10 car operation to Weymouth- at which point splits at Bournemouth could be removed and 10 car trains could run all the way through to Poole and Weymouth. Right now this seems unlikely.

Maybe new innovative 'growth' services could utilise the 442's? The Swanage railway will shortly be re-connecting with the national network at Wareham. The line has ambitions to once again connect the south coast town of Swanage with the mainline rail network- could a number of 442's be used to connect Swanage with destinations further afield? The heritage railway has several class 33's which can haul the 442 units when off the 3rd rail with the trains continuing on electric power beyond Wareham. A London to Swanage service would surely be the icing on the cake for the town and re-establish a through service which has not regularly run since 1969! Other options avoiding London could also be explored- maybe a train from Brighton to Swanage right along the South Coast?

Could the future use of class 442's be as hauled stock? On June 26th 2008 66547 hauls 2402 and 2010 through Wandsworth Town
while working a stock transfer from Eastleigh where the units had been in store.

Looking further afield it seems the most likely new home for the 442's could be well away from the 'juice' where they have spent all their lives. The North of England is suffering from an acute shortage of DMU's and new orders are thin on the ground as eventual electrification is the preferred option to upgrade lines and replace stock. One network where the capacity crunch is being particularly felt is Transpennine. Currently services are in the hands of class 185 DMU's running largely as single 3 car sets. These are routes where a 5 coach intercity unit would be ideal- especially if it was at relatively low cost. Could this be the perfect place for the class 442's to operate as hauled stock? The 5 car Mk3 build units are at least as comfortable as the class 185's and would allow strengthening of many Transpennine services with a huge increase in capacity. Sadly it would not be class 33's hauling the 442's but most likely a modern locomotive- class 67 or 68 would seem to be most preferable. With the 30, 1999 build class 67's seeking work this could surely be the perfect coupling of spare resources to meet a capacity need. As another advantage this option would render much of the electrical traction equipment- recycled from 4REP units dating back as far as 1966- obsolete.

With the 442's becoming spare over the next year only time will tell what fate befalls them next. I cannot help but feel these units are just too good to be scrapped yet- and after all this is the rail industry- one surprise seems to be just round the corner from the last!

Comment- Rail needs a union with Unions.

Waterloo Underground station is closed during the summer industrial action of 2015 which crippled the
capital in a dispute over rostering of the 'Night Tube'.

Before I start let me just say- I am not anti-trade union. I am however dismayed at the relationship between trade unions and the rail industry. If you keep up to date with current affairs it seems that barely a week goes by without some sort of conflict; There are the well documented strikes by tube workers over rosters for the 'Night Tube', strikes in the West of England over the concerns of maintenance staff and just this week reports that London Underground's Waterloo & City Line will be brought to a halt because just three members of one union have voted for strike action.

The result of all this- the government is taking action to quash the unions and make it far more difficult for members to strike. New limits on the turnout required at strike ballots could cripple the unions and spark a prolonged conflict between the unions, the industry and the government.
Surely there is an alternative? I believe there is. The rail industry and trade unions need to work together for the good of union members. Right now it seems that the unions are prepared to stick their foot into any conflict in the interests of their members- and that foot will not budge. The primary role of the unions is of course to protect the interests of their members, and this should be supported. However this cannot be at the cost of progress, reform and improvement. The rail industry is being held back because every time a change, or improvement is proposed the trade unions oppose it. Why- because the unions have the power to hold the industry to ransom with their demands. The result stagnates the industry and forces the continuation of archaic practices in the interests of job security. It should be remembered that this is a growing industry. Jobs are being created and while some job roles will change in the course of industry developments there is the opportunity to retain staff within the industry- and in good jobs. The whole industry, trade unions included, needs to embrace the future. I am not suggesting for one moment this should be at the expense of employees, but a balanced approach needs to be taken. Unions need to take a holistic attitude. To protect their members while not showering the industry in unreasonable demands that stifle growth and ultimately prevent job creation- not to mention preventing improvements for the travelling public.

First Great Western passengers faced disruption over the
summer as strikes over future duty changes in relation to the
new Hitachi 'Super Express' trains hit services.

The unions seem intent with picking a fight with everything the industry tries to do. Recently I turned a page of a railway publication to find a full page advertisement by one trade union- it concerned the 'Northern Powerhouse' project, and slammed the amount of investment and the impact the project could have on it's members. This organisation claims to be pro-rail, however does nothing for it's own image by using statements which are, at best, 'imaginative'. One line on the page deplored Northern Rail's use of '50 year old Nuclear locomotives'. Yes, that is right 'Nuclear locomotives'! Is it really true that Northern Rail is using engines glowing with radiation, probably recovered from the depths of Chernobyl and clearly a hazard to our health? Or maybe they powered by their own internal nuclear reactors?.. Of course the line refers to the DRS class 37's being used by Northern Rail on the Cumbrian coast. Yes- these engines have hauled nuclear flask trains, and yes, some of them have celebrated their 50th birthday- but what is the point being made here? The locomotives are reliable and are providing a cost effective stop-gap solution to a rolling stock shortage. The fact that they have hauled nuclear traffic is totally irrelevant and pure scaremongering. This organisation is trying to make a point and instead heading off on a mis-informed 'anti-rail' tangent. Beneath this scaremongering headline there is a genuine message- The UK urgently needs more, fit for purpose, diesel trains. So why not say that? It may be less dramatic but who can fault the statement? This is a point that everyone can get behind; from government, TOC's, the public and the unions and their members.

Public support for the unions right now is at a low. After all these people have had their lives disrupted by strike action by employees whom they consider to be well paid and in good jobs. Surely the unions need to work on their public image. Their considerable clout could be used for the good of the railways and in campaigns the public will support- Staff at stations, a member of customer service staff on board all trains for example (and as long as they are employed and paid does it really matter if they are a guard or a 'train manager'?). We need to end the situation where every union demand can stop the country. Strikes are a tool of last resort and I don't advocate restrictions to prevent them- but the right battles need to be picked. Sometimes job roles will change. The unions should be mediators to the industry not dictators.

I return to my opening- I am not anti-trade union. I agree with much of what they stand for. However until a union can, pun intended, 'strike' a balance between protecting its members and allowing the industry to move forward I'm afraid I'll not be signing up.

What is the worst station in Europe?

Railway stations were the cathedrals of the industrial era. Rising high above platforms across the world massive station canopies constructed of steel and glass shone a light into the smokey station beneath. Many of the Victorian era stations are still masterpieces today- however concrete constructions of the 1960's and 70's have fared less well against the test of time. Birmingham New Street in the UK is famous for being dark, dingy and uninviting (a situation soon to change, at least at concourse level following a massive refurbishment) while Penn Station in New York is also often criticised for being an uninviting underground labyrinth.
Despite their floors these large stations are largely well looked after and well used. To meet my candidates for the title of 'worst large station in Europe' we have to travel south east from the UK-

Third Place-
Budapest Deli Palyaudvar, Hungary

Completed in 1969 this station must once have been an imposing sight- the only post war modern station in Budapest. Today it is, at best, dilapidated. Train, tram, metro and bus services seem poorly integrated and the station appears to have suffered from a long term lack of maintainance. The stairs from street level to the higher concourse and platforms are in a particularly bad state with decrepid shops and stalls hardly adding to the aesthetic.



Second Place-
Skopje, Macedonia

The original Skopje station was badly damaged in the devastating earthquake of 1963, resulting in a new modernist concrete structure being completed in 1969. While impressive at it's opening the station has suffered from many years of under-use and under-investment (compounded by the unrest in Yugoslavia during the 1990's). Today just a few platforms are in use and much of the station building is used as the cities bus station- and is in much better condition than the section still used for trains. The station boasts extensive graffiti inside and out, crumbling masonry and sets of escalators gathering dust which have clearly not worked for years. Some platforms do not even have tracks!
Fortunately major upgrade work began in 2014 and will see the station completely modernised - hopefully the results will be worth the wait and, together with new trains due to arrive in late 2015, could begin an upsurge in the popularity of Macedonia's railways.


First Place-
Sofia, Bulgaria

Another communist masterpiece of its time, Sofia station opened in 1974 and with its construction mostly of marble must have been an impressive sight at the time. Once again the the building in this fairly poor country has suffered from years of poor maintenance. Escalators which once moved passengers now stand dormant, beyond repair. The screens and clocks which once gave passenger information have long since stopped working, making the task of finding ones train quite challenging. While the station has a general air of dereliction the interior of the main concourse is still light and airy however the platforms are in a poor state. The addition of a burnt out car on one platform secures Sofia as my personal 'worst station in Europe'. Fortunately, like Skojpe, a major re-building program is now underway to upgrade the station to modern standards by early 2016.

No fatal passenger accidents for a record 8th year

A busy scene at Waterloo- Britain's railways are now busier and safer than ever before according to the latest RSSB report.

The Rail Safety and Standards Board has recently published figures revealing that there has now not been a fatal passenger accident on British trains for a record 8th year. This is a great achievement that the rail industry should duly be proud of- confirming rail travel as one of the very safest ways to move around the UK. The network is now busier then ever before with more and more leisure travelers and commuters choosing to take the train. The last fatal rail passenger accident was in February 2007 when a Virgin Trains Pendolino derailed at Greyrigg killing one passenger.
More however could be done to curb railway suicides which reached an all time high this year. Investment is already being made by Network Rail and train operators who work closely with organisations such as the Samaritans to try to prevent people from ending their lives on the railways.

World Heritage Status for the Forth Bridge

A Scotrail 170 approaches North Queensferry on the Forth Bridge back in 2010 before the 'endless' task of painting it finished!

67021 exits the Forth Bridge heading south into Dalmeny with
one of the loco-hauled Fife Circle trains. These are now in the
hands of Class 68 locomotives from DRS.

In early July 2015 the Forth Rail Bridge in Scotland was officially awarded 'World Heritage Status' by UN's cultural committees meeting in Bonn. The bridge, completed in 1890 was the longest cantilever bridge in the world at it's time of construction (today it is surpassed only by the Quebec bridge in Canada) spanning the Firth of Forth between Edinburgh and Dundee in Scotland.

The bridge was designed by Sir John Fowler and Benjemin Baker to a grand design (partly to reassure the public after the collapse of Thomas Booche's spindly Tay Bridge which disastrously fell into the Firth of Tay in 1879. 125 years since its completion the Forth Bridge is still carrying up to 200 trains a day and with it's heritage status, also awarded to to structures such as the Pyramids of Giza and the Great Wall of China it is set to be preserved for the future as a Scottish Landmark. 

The bridge is famous for the 'Never ending' task of painting it. A constant maintenance crew have been based on the bridge for much of it's life- however in 2011 Network Rail completed a re-pair and repaint on the bridge which will will last for the next 20 years. 

A Scotrail DMU looks somewhat insignificant against the vast Forth Bridge and the firth below.

Comment: Charter Expectations

Many within the hobby, and indeed outside, enjoy the opportunity to travel by special charter trains. They can offer the chance to travel over interesting or 'rare' track, behind steam or heritage locomotives, in traditional rolling stock, or a pleasant day out often with full dining services being offered.

The charter market has suffered some ups and downs in recent times, but always seem so to re-surge with a quality product for those who enjoy these trips. 

I can't say that I travel on a huge number of charters- usually just a handful each year, but I almost always have a good day out. One promoter which I travel with, and almost always sing the praises of is UK Railtours. They run regular trips and really know what they are doing. They offer good value days out usually with sensible itineraries and reasonable start/finish times. The company is professional and always provides great service- in short, their trains deliver exactly what they say they will. 

Last weekend I travelled on UK Railtours 'Alpine Sunbeam'- a charter mostly aimed at enthusiasts with class 73's at the helm and a handful of unusual routes. As usual, the company deliver what it said it would (With the exception of the Newhaven Marine branch which was unaccessible and out of UK Railtours control). However the trip did fall slightly short of what I would expect from an enthusiast tour with the class 73's so far from my seat that I could neither hear or see them, the locomotives being off the end of almost every platform the train stopped at, and the lack of breaks during the trip (the only break being for half an hour at 11am).

At just gone 20:00, passengers of the 'Alpine Sunbeam' finally get a chance to see and photograph the locomotives, 73136
and 73128 which have been hauling the charter all day. The tour is now over and the locos have been shut down.
There were no other opportunities during the day to see the 73's because of short platforms and very limited stops during the day.

This got me thinking- what reasonable requirements do I have, or even expect from a heritage traction tour? 

I think all tours should, wherever possible, offer the following:

- Comfortable seating

- A hot food service in all classes

- Sensible start times from main stations

- At least one break of a decent length (minimum one hour- with time to leave the station)

- A chance for passengers to stretch their legs- ideally a short break every 4-5 hours as this is quite long enough to be sitting in one place for.

In addition if the main selling point of the tour is the traction:

- There should be a good opportunity for tour participants to see and photograph the locomotives during the day.

- The locomotive should get a chance to work at both ends of the train to give both standard and 1st class passengers a chance to hear and experience it working. 

Charity Railtours 'Four Triangles' tour suffered a loco failure which resulted in a loco swap and a lot of shunting during an extended
stop at Norwich. While this was unplanned and caused delays for the rest of the day- could a loco swap be a feature which could be
scheduled into future tours offering extra traction and an opportunity to view the engines hauling the tour?

I understand that providing everything on my 'wish list' may not always be possible. By virtue of some longer trips early starts and late finishes cannot be avoided. Similarly having a locomotive work from both ends of the train requires run-round facilities to be available and the time to shunt the train.

Also of course trains need to run to their maximum length to make them viable which may often result in the train being longer than many platforms.

I had a thought about the 'Alpine Sunbeam'- how might some of these ideas hypothetically have been incorporated?

With it's sensible start and finish times, the tour could have perhaps been extended. Maybe a break in Brighton could have been added (the train traversed the Preston Park Curve/Brighton avoider in the early afternoon)? This could have given passengers a chance to get off the train and have, say, 90 minutes in Brighton. During this time the stock could, perhaps, have run into Lovers Walk Depot for a double run round. Of course this would also have given passengers a chance to see the locomotives as well- before the tour was over.

Comment- West Coast Railways operations suspended

On 2nd April West Coast Railways, the UK's largest charter train operator had its license to run trains on the national rail network suspended by Network Rail. The notice issued by NR can be read here- It has essentially been deemed that safety is not high enough on the agenda of WCR following several incidents culminating in what NR describes as 'the most serious SPAD [Signal Passed At Danger] that has taken place this year' when a steam charter with 34067 'Tangmere' overshot a signal at danger at Wooton Basset Junction. The incident in question could have had dramatic consequences bringing the train directly into the path of a high speed passenger service- it doesn't bear thinking about.

WCR's 47760 passes through Finsbury Park with a charter to the south coast in December 2014.

Of course there was no collision and nobody was injured in this incident but the fact that there was even the potential for an accident of this magnitude has to be drawn into question.

34067 'Tangmere'- the locomotive involved in the SPAD at
Wooton Bassett is seen on a WCR charter in December 2014.

Safety Systems-
The fact that the UK has one of the safest railways in the wold is no accident. In fact it is of course due to accidents that the railway today is so safe. I would highly recommend anyone who has not read it acquires a copy of 'Red for Danger: The Classic History of British Railway Disasters [L. T. C. Rolt, 1955]' for a fascinating read of how the UK's railways have learnt from the accidents of the past to become the efficient and safe system they are today. The industry can proudly claim that it has not lost a life in an accident since the Greyrigg disaster of 2007 in which one elderly passenger sadly died. In recent years heavy investment has gone into safety- it is no surprise that since the introduction of Train Protection Warning System that the number of SPAD's has dramatically reduced. This system is designed to prevent incidents just like the one WCR was involved in at Wooton Basset. Sensors in the track are able to detect the speed of a passing train and on-board systems will automatically apply the brakes and bring it to a stand if it is exceeding the permitted limit. The TPWS sensors are located adjacent to key signals protecting junctions, at locations where there are speed restrictions and entering terminal stations where trains must stop. How therefore did the WCR train cause a SPAD of such a serious nature?

Manual override-

WCR have operated scheduled passenger trains. 47851 is seen
at Nottingham in 2008 with a train for Skegness.

While the full report is not yet concluded, early indications suggest that appears in the WCR incident an action between the driver and fireman had isolated the TPWS and/or AWS (Automatic Warning System) rendering it useless. The train would no longer receive indications or brake applications from the track about it's speed or any signals it passed at danger. In normal operation critical safety systems such as these cannot be ignored. However there are situations when the TPWS and AWS can be overridden. Usually this would be as an emergency measure to move a train- any such a move would be agreed by the signaller under very strict conditions and the train would be removed from service. All systems can fail and railway systems are designed to 'fail safe'- a TPWS fault could cause a trains brakes to apply and not release. It is situations like this where on a busy railway authorisation could be granted to isolate the TPWS in order to clear the line. As far as it can be ascertained, no such instruction was received by the WCR crew. It appears they took the decision themselves to isolate the safety systems, continuing on their way without the signaller even being made aware of the situation. A grave decision which could, potentially have cost lives. The full report will make interesting reading.

What next-
I have no doubt that in such a serious lapse of safety standards as this, and given NR has had 'concerns about WCR’s performance of its Safety Obligations for some time' the right decision has been made to suspend WCR's operations.
Is this the end for WCR? I suspect, and hope not- after all WCR has a strong and profitable business. NR's suspension letter details the process for reconciliation- a list of seven steps WCR is required to take in order to re-gain it's operating licence. There will need to be some step changes to achieve this but it is clear that if WCR want to change their operations to comply with NR's requests then a solution could be reached.

WCR class 37516 (left) and 37706 (right) pose for the cameras
at the Eastleigh Works 100 open day in 2009.

Consequences-
WCR has a significant business running charter trains with both steam locomotives as well as with it's heritage fleet of diesels. Being such a dominant operator in the charter sector means this suspension notice will certainly have consequence on that market. First and foremost a significant number of trains will be cancelled, and leisure travelers inconvenienced as a direct result of the inability of WCR to run its trains. We can also expect further work to be lost by WCR with it's reputation taking a huge hit. Other operators who contract their trains to WCR will surely think twice now that the company has a significant stain on it's safety record. The travelling public too might think about whether it wants to travel with a company shamed for its lapse safety standards.
Staff will be affected too with work not forthcoming from WCR- many of their staff being on 'zero-hour' contracts such is the nature of charter work. Owners of steam locomotives also will see their hire charges disappear as their booked work is cancelled while trains are not running.
Unfortunately there is likely to be no alternative operator waiting in the wings to take on this charter work. It is often regarded as 'marginal' in the rail industry, and although profitable the larger rail companies will need to put their core businesses first. Even if another operator such as GBRf or DRS were to take on some of this work it would be a long process to get the staff and systems in place to operate such a large schedule of trains- besides neither operators currently have a safety case to operate steam traction. Only DB Schenker is now able to run steam trains on the network and their resources for further charter work are severely limited.

Conclusions-
The suspension of WCR's operating license is a significant event. Never before on the UK's railways has a company had it's nationwide ability to run trains revoked. NR does not take a decision such as this lightly and there are clearly real concerns about how WCR has gone about its business. The UK runs a very busy, and very safe railway, and WCR must fit within this. It is very clear that no company will get away with a policy of 'playing trains' and running by it's own rules.
I hope WCR resolve NR's concerns and quickly. They are a valuable part of the railway tapestry in the UK and the heritage sector contributes to many peoples enjoyment of the railways- it however cannot do so at any cost, without accountability and without due attention to safety.

WCR's core business is excursion trains with both steam and diesel traction often over scenic rail lines such as here on the
Cumbrian coast line. WCR's operations include the 'Jacobite' tourist trains in Scotland, they also ran the 'Hogwarts Express'.

The wrong blue blues?

For fans of heritages AC traction there has been cause to celebrate recently. The AC Logo Group (ACLG), owners of many heritage electrics including 86101 and 87002 have secured a main line contract for several of their locomotives. Until GBRf can secure enough class 92's for the Serco Caledonian Sleeper contract they are to hire in locos from the ACLG to work the empty stock moves for the sleeper trains in London. This will be a great source of income for the preservation group and means investment in it's locomotives- plus a re-paint into 'Caledonian Blue'. 

It is the re-paint which seems to be causing some controversy with some enthusiasts up in arms that these locomotives are being painted out of their traditional BR blue livery- after all- the are preserved. People need to keep an open mind about these developments and view them as just another stage in the locomotive's life. In the fullness of time it is very likely that these locos will return to their much loved BR blue- but for now they will wear the colours of their new operator. An operator who is paying for their use, thus securing their future as well as further progressing the restoration of other members of the ACLG fleet such as the unique class 89. 

The enthusiast community should be commending the ACLG for securing this work, which represents a fantastic opportunity for these locomotives. I for one am certainly looking forward to seeing them on the blocks at Euston with the sleeper- whichever shade of blue they happen to carry!

The AC Loco Group's 86101 and 87002 stabled between duties at Carlisle in February 2012. The two locomotives along with
86401 are to be revived to haul empty stock movements for the new Caledonian Sleeper franchise.

Comment: When does high speed rail work?

History was made this week as ground was broken on the initial section of California's long awaited high speed rail project. By 2029 line will connect Los Angels to San Francisco in just three hours in comparison to today's fastest journey by Amtrak of around 11 hours. 

Artists impression of Californian high-speed rail
(image believed to be copyright free)

High speed rail can revolutionise transport, and indeed has in many parts of Europe and Asia. However the US has been very slow to embrace the technology which was pioneered Japanese and French in the 1960's and 70's. Conditions in California are perfect for high-speed rail. The area has a high population density with several large conurbations and an ever-expanding population. Right now long distance travel is catered for almost entirely by road or by air. The roads are already congested and air travel requires getting to out of town airports and through ever more stringent security checks, not to mention the much criticised environmental credentials of short haul flights. The potential to attract passengers from these other means is a great opportunity for the Californian project and despite much debate pro-rail parties are confident that the project will pay- indeed that it will cost the area more NOT to build the project. 

Over the last decade no country has invested more in high speed rail than China. Many large cities are now connected by dedicated high speed tracks in what is now the largest network in the world. China's network continues to expand and is reaching ever further into more remote districts over huge districts and with correspondingly longer journey times. Is the length distance over which high speed rail can be viable now being stretched? 

High-speed rail has revolutionised the way people travel in China. A CRH3
train departs from Wuxi Station on the high-speed line from Shanghai to Nanjing

China is currently proposing to construct and finance an 8,000 mile high-speed linking it's own extensive system all the way to the high speed rails of Europe. While rail supporters will surely welcome this amazing investment and opportunity it has to be wondered who would actually use such a route. To cover a journey of this length by high-speed train will still take several days- a very long time compared to a long-haul flight from London to Beijing which takes just under 11 hours. It is unlikely that passengers would see the train as a viable alternative, except for the small number who are afraid of flying or are undertaking the journey for the adventure. Unless the high-speed line is to become a means of transporting freight on mass (which would require a step change in freight transportation to use streamlined high-speed freight trains) I can see a very low patronage as it embarks on its epic journey across the vast birch covered grounds of Russia.

A parcels train on the traditional Trans-Siberian route across Russia.

Realistically there is a limit to the viable distance that regular passengers will chose to take the train. Over a short journey of a couple of hours there are major benefits in traveling from city center locations, and the train is far more environmentally friendly compared with flying. For journeys longer than this the benefits begin to disappear both in terms of the time saved and the environmental credentials. 

High speed rail has been successful in Europe and could be in the
USA- The TGV reduces travel times in France.

I applaud the construction of high-speed rail in California and hope it will inspire similar projects to begin across the US- a country which has largely ignored the train since the widespread adoption of the car. However I do call into question whether some of the vast transcontinental projects can ever realistically be viable.