#Railnatter
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 дек 2024
- Well, our original plans are out the window as Labour decided to publish their plans for Britain's railways. We have no choice but to go through them. And it might not take us a full episode.
Let's see if they are worth the pixels... And whether nationalisation will mean that, and if it will deliver.
Enjoyed this? Please do consider supporting #Railnatter at / garethdennis or throw loose change at me via paypal.me/gare.... Merch at garethdennis.c.... Join in the discussion at garethdennis.c....
what are you mumbling about , you don't make any sense, misleading title
should make this the strapline of the series
"Leverage private capital" yes, let's do that by getting the government to borrow the money directly and decide how it's spent
Oh no, the genius move is for the government to borrow at government borrowing rates so they can service for decades the commercial interest rates of loans taken by the private companies they outsource all their work to.
Are the DfT and NR deliberately delaying the electrification of the Leeds and Hull Line to justify more expensive battery electric trains, e.g., Hull Trains?
By the DfT delaying the funding of electrification of the Leeds to Hull line is creating a situation where open access operators are encouraged to run more expensive bi-modes, e.g , Hull Trains.
Why are the Class 360 scrapped or unused when Northern is still using obsolete diesels in West Yorkshire?
The recent Baden Wurttemberg Government report states that full electrification is 30-80 % cheaper than bi-modes and hydrogen on most route over 30 years.
Based on the report believe it would be cheaper over 30 years to electrify all the urban lines of West Yorkshire, including the line between Leeds and Halifax.
The Labour plan to nationalise the railways is a very good plan and it makes common sense to just call it BR.
Will Northern and Network Rail and thebrest of the uk network follow the "Access for All" programme pioneered by Southeastern?
The Treasury can sell bonds to take ownership of 51% of the ROSCO shares.
It's so great that over there they get a booklet with all the candidates showing their policies.
If the logic of the whole exercise is to reunite track and train - then logically it must become British Rail - reuniting the double arrow brand symbol with the body which it was created for!
I agree, this is really important. We can't go on with a situation where we're told spending on railways is increasing, the service appears to be getting worse, advance fares are through the roof or just unavailable and we can't find out where the money went because it's commercially sensitive. Most of it is almost certainly going to the ROSCOs.
Also agree about the importance of the double arrow. It's good to let regional transport authorities run and/or brand their own national rail services and do timetabling and ticketing integrated with other modes locally, but you need them to incorporate the double arrow into their branding so people know if a station or train is part of the national rail network (which will become BR). It's important for those making longer journeys with local connections to know if they have the right to a through ticket, a through itinerary, protections in the event of delays and missed connections etc.
Imagine the possibilities if GBR and National Highways became a single entity.
In all seriousness… Better integration would make it far easier to argue against projects such as the A303 Stonehenge Tunnel and M25 Wisley Interchange - and leave more money available for sensible infrastructure.
In fact they could have gone with “national” (national rail/national highways/national freight etc.) if the name GBR hadn’t already been chosen.
Labour doesn't need to stick with the Williams report. A British Transport Commission would have the aim to integrate road, rail and waterways and promote the modal shift from road to rail.
It doesn't need an Act of Parliament to create an Major Projects Group within Network Rail dedicated to the electrification of the network, to match CORE of the Indian Railways.
In addition, the Government should legislate the freehold of all land to be in the hands of the public.
Well done for staying relatively focused! haha Much appreciated.
Labour should amend the terms of reference of the ORR with the aim to integrate transport.
The Prime Minister of India has recently stated that 100% of the Indian Broad Gauge will be electrified within the next few months.
Network Rail is already nationalised, so, instead of a nugatory reorganisation an incoming Labour Government should create an Electrification Commission to match India and invite Chris Green to head up the new body.
A senior redundant senior engineer from the Indian EC can be invited to bring the recent electrification cintracting policy to the new Commission.
In addition, the infill freight electrification projects recommended by Julian Worth can be included in the list of projects.
Hmm. A perfectly crafted stermerite 5d chess document that says alot of The Good Phrases We Want To Hear but in a way that doesn't actually define any substantive change they could be held to at some point. Lots of "the adults are back in charge" but enough wiggle room to get out of doing anything to piss of the private sector.
Take modal shift for example, I too was verry pleased to hear it mentioned but on a more sober reflection it's mentioned in the vein "this could be a nice side effect that therefore justifies our document", not "yeah lads we'll crunch the numbers and set concrete targets"
100%
The National Grid is being reinforced for more electrification, so the Electrification Commission just needs to get on with the electrification of the national rail network.
The Government should legislate for the treasury to own of 51% of the shares of each ROSCO.
There is a glut of electric trains in the South. However, more urban ellectrification is required in the North to allow the cascade of high mileage EMU's from the high intensity services of the London area, i.e., Electrostars.
As you have said the West Yorkshire Combined Authority is useless progressing the light rail metro, the agreed route and commencement of the first line.
In addition, network rail has failed to accelerate the rollout of urban electrification for the West Yorkshire and Humber Regions, i.e., the line between Hull and Leeds.
Whilst you're right to be critical of the lack of investment commitment in this report, I think it is overall a step in the right direction (in terms of structure) and will also lead to more investment in the long-term.
Why do I say this? Simply because at the moment, whenever something goes wrong on the railways, be it delays, overcrowding, or cancellations, people immediately jump to blaming the private operating companies. As soon as these cease to exist, people start blaming the government instead, at which point it becomes a political issue for the government to solve, or else it starts to affect their poll ratings. As we know, the cause of (most) issues on the railways is lack of investment, so solving these issues (and thus improving their polling) will REQUIRE investment. Sadly this might not be large-scale long-term investment such as High Speed Rail (at least initially), but smaller scale 'quick win' investments.
So as you say, this report does in many ways leave a lot to be desired, however I think that in the medium-long term, it could also open the door to more ambitious investment and a reforms such as getting rid of the ROSCOs (or at least not acquiring all new trains through them), as well as a proper long term strategy ...or at least I hope so!
Hopefully! Although people do have to contend with the right wing media and the Tories saying the problems are caused by nationalisation rather than underfunding (and of course by the ROSCOs continuing to suckle at the taxpayer's teat).
And with Sir Kier agreeing with them.
So whether they'llnapply pressure in the right quarter remains to be seen.
Unfortunately I realised that due to the cancellation of HS2 Leeds and Manchester I have lost all interest really. If Labour doesn't reinstate I'm out.
Same here brother, I aint interested in tories in red, unless big changes happen like reinstating hs2 in full
Instead of forcing Northern to procure bi-modes and hydrogen trains, which are 30-80% more expensive than EMU's on most routes over 30 years, the Government should be accelerating the electrification of the urban network of the Yorkshire and Humber Region, and promoting the cascade redundant Electrostars from the South.
With regards Sunderland, that service didn’t make sense but it would make sense to replace GC from Sunderland with LNER. The other alternative is just to improve Northern services across whole of North East to better join local/regional to intercity stations like Newcastle and Darlington. Get rid of two carriage Sprinters.
It doesn't require an Act of Parliament for Network Rail to have an electrification subsidary dedicated to rail electrification alongside the major projects, to match India, i.e., CORE
The London Mayor is planning a further extension to the DLR. Will this happen before West Yorkshire gets the long awaited rapid transit system to match London, i.e., the DLR
The key test of the intentions of an incoming Labour Government, is: will the electrification of the urban network of the North be funded, to match London, e.g., the Calder Valley Line?
By all means keep some of the high mileage Electrostar running in the north to justify acceleration of electrification of the West Yorkshire and Humber Regions.
An incoming Labour Government should not reorganise Network Rail. It just needs to instruct NR to create a major projects group to electrify 100% of the mainlines by 2030to match Indian Railways i.e., CORE.
Negative points for selling railway land to private equity
There's never the money for new EMU's for the North, so cascade the high mileage Electrostars from the London area. That requires the investment in urban electrification of the provinces, e.g., West Yorkshire and Humber Region.
With the decrepit state of the general infrastructure upgraded, the electrification subsidiary can move in and install the Overhead Line Equipment like a dose of salt, e.g., between Hull and Leeds.
Why do the double decker buses in the provinces have a single door, but those in London have two. Could loading delays be less important outside London?
The railways don't need another reorganisation. Network Rail is already nationalised. What is required is more investment in the existing infrastructure including electrification, e.g., between Leeds and Hull.
It bizarre to be bringing green energy from Scotland with Green Link to the new grid intercomnector at Drax just put it on existing grid to the railways in the London area, e.g., between London and Southend.
Instead, of starting another reorganisation, an incoming Labour Government needs to create an Electrification Commission to focus on the electrification of 100% of the existing network to match India, Switzerland and the South.
The key mission must be to electrify 100% of the railway to effect the modal shift from road to rail and achieve the Governments 2050 climate change target!
On completion of the TRU will the OLR, Northern, be introducing new trains to match Crossrail, i.e., the Class 345?
Alternatively, will electrostars be cascaded from the London area, i.e., the Class 379?
It will be great for the Operator of Last Resort, Southeastern was to get a new fleet of step free trains.
Similarly,, it would be great if the high mileage Electrostars could be cascaded to the other OLR, Northern who are still using diesels on most of the urban network, e.g., the Calder Valley Line.
An incoming Labour government should direct NR major project teams to upgrade the rail infrastructure ready for electrification ready for electrification, i.e.,the obsolete and decrepit drainage, signals, vegetation and the time expired bridges originating in the nineteenth century.
regarding NPR, network rail has said in a FOI request they plan to make use of the freightline from liverpool to manchester. wonder if this is still the plan
As a condescending Londoner I'd like to see Network SouthEast revived. And Regional Railways should be called "Provincial Railways". 🙂
Honestly, sectorisation was near perfect, bar the lack of money sent it's way, and lack of devolution for city regions. Fix those two, and we have perfection.
as someone not in london, id like to see spending in london cut and the money used on the rest of the uk.
@@gwrydd Even with the lions share, money for railways is chicken feed compared to say, roads, and needs a lot more. Could also help with being more efficient (less consultants).
Instead of fighting over chicken feed, how about we just give more money to the railways overall?
@@mattevans4377are there trustworthy stats for this? When I tried it seemed that how much was spent on what was pretty well obfuscated.
@@thesenamesaretaken Generally that means they don't want you to look at it, which ironically leads people to believe the thing you don't want them finding it.
The urban railway network of the North is not fit for purpose, i.e., it lacks electrification.
The governmemt needs to electrify the urban network and cascade the high mileage Electrostars from the London area, i.e., the Class 376.
Interesting how when they (any party) wants to talk positively about Open Access they talk of Lumo and Hull, never ever do they mention Grand Central, why?
The upgrade of infrastructure is decrepit and needs to be upgraded to permit electrification. The general upgrade work should not be included in the BCR of electrification to justify the more expensive bimodes and hydrogen trains provided by the PFI ROSCO's.
Will the integration of the rolling stock and the infrastructure pioneered by Southestern be adopted by Labour nationally under the BR banner?
If you're going to acquire the RSCO assets it will have to be done at a premium to their current value which includes their future earning potential. Ergo it won't save any money. Perfectly reasonable to just phase them out by using other routes to purchase rolling stock. Lessors work quite effectively in aviation where the asset (aircraft) is pretty fungible, the market is competitive and the airlines often have a poor credit rating.
The ROSCO's are needed because the Government has a disfunctional corporate tax system to build a Sovereign Wealth Fund, to match Norway
it would be interesting to see if this gets people blaming under investment instead of the tocs?
Having failed to create a Sovereign Wealth Fund the Government should at least manage the borrowing to achieve the modal shift.
What would be the UK public reaction if the Germans Government decided to rename German Railways, Great British Railways?
Maybe the railways get the funding they need (well what hasnt already gone to road and potholes)
Or to use hydrogen like the Zeppelins for trains?
free chickens, free as in freedom?
what is this report replacing .