Goodbye East Midlands Trains. Hello Emr

[Andy C]

58 minutes ago, spilldig said:

Agreed.

 

They seem to use inflation as something they have to keep up with pricewise, like they have no choice. They should be aiming to set an example by keeping behind inflation, or dare I say it, not put prices up. That would be something.

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.

[Top Cats Hat]

1 hour ago, spilldig said:

They should be aiming to set an example by keeping behind inflation, or dare I say it, not put prices up. That would be something.

That certainly would, given that they are privately owned companies answerable to their shareholders.

[Andy C]

What the DfT say we will benefit from... (taken from http://maps.dft.gov.uk/east-midlands-rail-franchise/)

 

Abellio has successfully bid to operate the East Midlands franchise from August 2019 until 2027. They will be at the forefront of the government's commitment to deliver a cleaner, greener rail network, as well as delivering faster journey times over long-distances.

 

Other benefits include:

• new or modern, refurbished trains by the end of 2022
• a reduction in the notice period for booking Passenger Assistance at stations
• smart ticketing extended and new smart ticket vending machine kiosks at 52 stations
• compensation for delays of more than 15 minutes
• 6 existing stations converted to become zero carbon
• trialling of hydrogen fuel cell trains

CHANGES BY ROUTE:

 

Sheffield - Derby - London

 

Benefits include:

 

> from May 2020, modern diesel trains will begin to replace ageing HSTs. Timetable changes will enable faster journey times from December 2020

 

> earlier and later train service each day to East Midlands Parkway enabling better airport connectivity
earlier and later trains to and from London, with a more regular evening service between London and Sheffield

 

> brand-new 125mph trains will be introduced into service from April 2022 with:

• more reliable service
• improved comfort
• passenger information system
• free on-board Wi-Fi
• at-seat power sockets
• USB points
• air conditioning
• tables at all seats
• increased luggage space
• on-board cycle storage

Norwich - Nottingham - Liverpool

Benefits include:

 

> early in the new franchise the Liverpool - Nottingham section will transfer to another operator, which will enable the two halves of the service to better meet the needs of customers

 

> refurbished, modern trains with:

• more reliable service
• improved comfort
• passenger information system displays
• free on-board Wi-Fi
• at-seat power sockets
• USB points
• air conditioning
• tables at all seats
• increased luggage space
• limited services will continue to operate via Stamford and Loughborough

[Andy C]

 

And an introductory video from Abellio.. 

 

[spilldig]

15 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

That certainly would, given that they are privately owned companies answerable to their shareholders.

It would, but everyone rounding up prices to keep up with inflation causes, yes you guessed it, more inflation.

[bluecanary]

15 hours ago, Andy C said:

What the DfT say we will benefit from... (taken from http://maps.dft.gov.uk/east-midlands-rail-franchise/)

 

Norwich - Nottingham - Liverpool

Benefits include:

 

> early in the new franchise the Liverpool - Nottingham section will transfer to another operator, which will enable the two halves of the service to better meet the needs of customers

 

 

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. 

[Andy C]

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]

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]

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]

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.