Re: Trains in the UK
Posted: Sat 07 Jan, 2012 20.57
Oh I dunno -- I reckon paying a quid to go from Cardiff - London on a coach in 3 hours is pretty good.
I don't know whether you were being facetious Alexia but certainly the £1 seats will be sold at a loss.Oh I dunno -- I reckon paying a quid to go from Cardiff - London on a coach in 3 hours is pretty good.
Well, as it turns out, £3.50 is now the minimum charge for Cardiff-London on the Megabus. However it does illustrate the two models of fares which can be utelised:Chris wrote:I don't know whether you were being facetious Alexia but certainly the £1 seats will be sold at a loss.
That'll be the Pacers then. Agree -- not only are they life expired, they're also not DDA compliant, and so technically will be illegal in 2019.WillPS wrote:We are now in the absolutely farcical situation where old, unpleasant, substandard (if not unsafe) trains which British Rail paid for in the 70s and 80s but were sold to ROSCOs for £0.00 on account of them being considered life expired (in the mid-90s) have since been rented back to the TOCs for somewhere close to £100,000pa. The stuff the DfT tells the TOCs to do is often unprofitable - so what's the net result? The treasury is indirectly paying millions of pounds every year for stock which they paid for in the first place.
Why can't they sell them on to the new TOC? Why does it have to be at a loss? Can't there be some arrangement where these are automatically passed on or something? I'm being quite simplistic here, I realise.Alexia wrote:Because what happens when the franchise gets sold to another operator? Say FGW lose their franchise in the next round of bids (as is very likely) -- they'd be left with trains they don't need as they won't be a TOC any more, and will be forced to sell them on at a loss. Not good business sense.barcode wrote:Why don't we just buy out the rolling Stock? im sure one company in the south did and cut costs alot.17p goes on the cost of leasing the trains from the rolling stock operating companies
In the 1980s ITV Franchise Round, TVS were forced to use portakabins while Southern stalled on selling on their studios.Jovis wrote:Why can't they sell them on to the new TOC? Why does it have to be at a loss? Can't there be some arrangement where these are automatically passed on or something? I'm being quite simplistic here, I realise.
IIRC don't FGW outrightly own the extra HST sets which they got when they withdrew the 180's? In which case if FGW loose their franchise it is entirely possible that the new franchisee will have to make do with less rolling stock.At least the leasing agreement means if First lose their GW franchise tomorrow, those Class 43s and Mk3s will still be running back and for Paddington rather than being sold for scrap or off to another franchise.
One argument I *don't* buy when moaning about britain's railways is the 'age of rolling stock' arguments. Trains are not cars. They are built to have long service lives - 20 years is not old in train terms. Most of the DMUs and EMUs built in the 1980's were introduced to replace stock which was built in the 1950's which was 30+ years old at the time. Most UK rolling simply isn't that old - AFAIK the HST is the only 1970's-built train still in frontline service, and to be fair they have been so heavily refurbished in recent years that the bodyshell is pretty much the only original part left. I believe the next oldest train in regular service is the class 455 (the red things which SWT operate in London) where the oldest examples were built in 1982 and again they were also stripped down to the bodyshell during a major technical and cosmetic refurb only a few years ago.We are now in the absolutely farcical situation where old, unpleasant, substandard (if not unsafe) trains which British Rail paid for in the 70s and 80s but were sold to ROSCOs for £0.00 on account of them being considered life expired (in the mid-90s) have since been rented back to the TOCs for somewhere close to £100,000pa. The stuff the DfT tells the TOCs to do is often unprofitable - so what's the net result? The treasury is indirectly paying millions of pounds every year for stock which they paid for in the first place.
Don't First own some of HSTs out right though, and are (alegedly) using them as a bargaining chip in the GW franchise renewels?Alexia wrote:At least the leasing agreement means if First lose their GW franchise tomorrow, those Class 43s and Mk3s will still be running back and for Paddington rather than being sold for scrap or off to another franchise.
Not sure how much of a chip they will prove to be though, if Pacers will end up technically illegal through the DDA seemingly for no other reason than they have a two-step entrance, I can't see that MK3 carriages with heavy slam doors and only an external door handle which needs to be pushed practically down to 90 degrees to open will be allowed to survive as it is impossible for disabled people to open the doors.dosxuk wrote:Don't First own some of HSTs out right though, and are (alegedly) using them as a bargaining chip in the GW franchise renewels?Alexia wrote:At least the leasing agreement means if First lose their GW franchise tomorrow, those Class 43s and Mk3s will still be running back and for Paddington rather than being sold for scrap or off to another franchise.