Transport Tycoon Forums

Okay, following up on that, It appears (via BBC news) the new franchise is to be called London North Eatern Railway.

So maybe they are going to do something in Apple Green (bleh) or Garter Blue (better). All that seems to exist at the moment is this logo on Wikipedia (damn that was fast) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_No ... g_company)

http://www.lnerailway.co.uk/

The current plan is to nationalise it until 2020, where they hand it out to tender back into privatisation. So they might not even bother to do a proper livery to save costs, and just remove the Virgin Trains logo, and replace it with the LNER one, keeping the current coloring scheme of the livery.

Interesting that you guys managed to nationalize the TOCs while the trees are still in power.

Get the roses in and perhaps it'll be permanent ?

Arch9enius wrote:If we find out Chris Grayling or one of his chums owns Hornby, we can assume he's done it so they can make ££££s selling a bunch of class 43s / 91s etc. with new stripes on 'em....

I find the odds of that very, very unlikely somehow...

Arch9enius wrote:Well the LNER was the least rich of the big four apparently... Maybe something to do with a lack of population in the areas it served?

Ah yes, the East Coast Mainline serves those tiny places like Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh Whilst they're not exactly the biggest cities in the world, they ain't exactly the smallest. Especially when the Leeds/West Yorks urban area for example serves 1.7 million people - The Midland Mainline serves smaller population centres, and EMT are doing fairly okay.

YNM wrote:Interesting that you guys managed to nationalize the TOCs while the trees are still in power.

The East Coast ran as a nationalised railway from 2009 to 2015, which includes 5 years of Tory Government (2010-2015), where they were happy to let the nationalised railway continue. The East Coast had to be nationalised here, VTEC couldn't hit their financial obligations, which probably upset the DfT somewhat, and was causing both Stagecoach and Virgin to take losses on the service.

YNM wrote:Get the roses in and perhaps it'll be permanent ?

No thanks, give me a semi-privatised railway (which is basically what we have) any day. NR can continue to own the tracks for me too, because we all saw what happened when we tried to privatise those.


The funniest thing I find about this whole East Coast farce is the amount of money that VTEC must have spent on marketing material for the "Azumas", and now they will never operate one in passenger service. I hope that the new franchise will drop the stupid name however.

Pilot wrote:

YNM wrote:Get the roses in and perhaps it'll be permanent ?

No thanks, give me a semi-privatised railway (which is basically what we have) any day. NR can continue to own the tracks for me too, because we all saw what happened when we tried to privatise those.

Well, it is expensive to run an old relic in more than tip-top shape.

No, it’s nothing to do with expense, it’s everything to do with safety culture of such companies run by charlatan money grabbing executives cutting corners at every turn.

I don’t want another Hatfield, Potters Bar, etc etc.

Dave wrote:I don’t want another Hatfield, Potters Bar, etc etc.

Do a whole network ATO then, like in Japan.

EDIT : ... Yeah except for those you mentioned. Forgot those are flagship permanent way issues.

And ATO would help how exactly?

Gwyd wrote:

Code: Select all

Thinks about potter's bar for a single second

And ATO would help how exactly?

That's where "running an old relic is expensive" comes in. Especially one that's been neglected for decades.

YNM wrote:

Dave wrote:I don’t want another Hatfield, Potters Bar, etc etc.

Do a whole network ATO then, like in Japan.

Japan isn't all ATO, and secondly ATO is not all that reliable in the first place here.

Hatfield and Potters Bar occurred due to extremely poor maintenance procedures and cost-cutting by a private infrastructure operator. Both could have been prevented, Potters Bar was so very nearly prevented and equally only a couple minutes away from being far far worse.
In the aftermath of the Hatfield crash, it was an absolute shock to find that there were hundreds more similar instances waiting to happen all over the country.

ATO has absolutely no bearing on this whole thing.

Geo Ghost wrote: Hatfield and Potters Bar occurred due to extremely poor maintenance procedures and cost-cutting by a private infrastructure operator. Both could have been prevented, Potters Bar was so very nearly prevented and equally only a couple minutes away from being far far worse.
In the aftermath of the Hatfield crash, it was an absolute shock to find that there were hundreds more similar instances waiting to happen all over the country.

Was the Grayrigg crash caused by the same reasons of poor maintenance?

It seems TransPennine Express, Northern, Greater Anglia & South Western Railway are also struggling to keep up their payments - The Guardian.
Are there more rescue renationalisations coming up perhaps?

SWR & TPE are both operated by FirstGroup - so they might not like having two potentially mucking up franchises.

Geo Ghost wrote:Hatfield and Potters Bar occurred due to extremely poor maintenance procedures and cost-cutting by a private infrastructure operator.
...

ATO has absolutely no bearing on this whole thing.

Yeah, indeed. Most crashes are thanks to SPAD or level crossings or alike.

But perhaps while doing it they'd get a hold of how bad the tracks are XD

YNM wrote:

Geo Ghost wrote:Hatfield and Potters Bar occurred due to extremely poor maintenance procedures and cost-cutting by a private infrastructure operator.
...

ATO has absolutely no bearing on this whole thing.

Yeah, indeed. Most crashes are thanks to SPAD or level crossings or alike.

ATO still doesn't get rid of SPAD's. An ATO train can still have a SPAD (although I'd like to know if the train gets med-screened instead..)

Most crashes aren't 'thanks to SPADs' anyway. There is a varying degree of causes. Whilst some are due to a SPAD, there's still a great many that aren't.
Ones with fatalities (excluding level crossings) for example in recent decades:
Croydon Tramlink (overspeed derailment) Grarigg (points), Potters Bar (points), Great Heck (vehicle + oncoming train collision), Hatfield (rail defect), and so fourth. That's just to name a select few and there are of course plenty of incidents where there were just injuries.
Ladbroke Grove in 1999 was the last incident with loss of life caused by a SPAD, plus Southall 2 years earlier. Of course both were preventable with Ladbroke Grove having better signal sighting for that particular signal plus TPWS/ATP being implemented, and likewise with Southall again with not only TPWS/ATP being implemented but also the train in question not running as it was with the AWS isolated on-board.

Level crossings do unfortunately not account for a quite a high number of incidents, but that's almost always outside railway control.
The main reason we don't see any major incidents these days is because of a much stronger and more robust safety culture.

Geo Ghost wrote:The main reason we don't see any major incidents these days is because of a much stronger and more robust safety culture.

True that ! I'm following NR's weekly update videos, where everything is interesting XD

Aye true!
I watch a lot of the RED videos myself. Great for information and thinking, especially with their safety/incident reconstructions.

Sadly the older ones aren't fully accessible yet for us which is a bit annoying. One day hopefully!

Redirect Left wrote: With the failure rate of this route, is it due to the Department for Transport giving inflated or overly optimistic figures in the invitation to tender, or is it genuinely the TOCs promising way too much?

I believe passenger numbers have just started falling for the first time in decades. I would expect more failures to come, as most bids are based on increasing passenger demand

Chris wrote:

Redirect Left wrote: With the failure rate of this route, is it due to the Department for Transport giving inflated or overly optimistic figures in the invitation to tender, or is it genuinely the TOCs promising way too much?

I believe passenger numbers have just started falling for the first time in decades. I would expect more failures to come, as most bids are based on increasing passenger demand

The constant strikes some TOCs are facing are probably not helping either, and I'm pretty sure the DfT and TOCs would have known what to expect if they went ahead and tried to cut down on conductors hours, getting rid of them entirely, or repurposing their job.

Chris wrote:I believe passenger numbers have just started falling for the first time in decades.

Interesting... Is it really because travel overall is falling ?

Please excuse me whilst I recover from laughing..

Major cancellations across GTR services on first day of new timetable.

All I can say is "Called it!"

Yep. Not only has this peeved off the majority of rail users, it's proven hard for even the TOCs to implement without error. I wonder if they'll get it solved during the week, or if this is something that'll keep going...

Today, my journey home from York took an extra 30 minutes. Do you know how much I paid for the old timetable £10.10. Do you know how much I paid today for the new improved timetable that is actually very inconvenient? £10.55.
Yup. I am paying more, and getting a lot less convenience. oh how i wish i was joking