GNER to go!

Post by **Dave** » 16 Dec 2006 00:25

The White Rose is not actually a train, as such.

It's the name given to the route between London Kings Cross and Leeds.

The trains used on this service are the same as the trains used across the entire GNER area.

The trains that are used on the White Rose are Class 91 locomotives hauling a set of mk3/4 carriages.

For a while, this route also used Class 373 units (Which is Eurostar's distinctive unit).

I assume that the Class 91 locomotives, which are actually specifically built for East Coast Mainline running, are attached to the Franchise, and - as such - will remain with the franchise.

This means that they'd go to the company that won the franchise.

As Andel said on MSN earlier, could you possibly imagine a 91 in Virgin Silver? Somehow I think that's slightly better than GNER.

andel · Post by **andel** » 16 Dec 2006 00:59

Dave,

GNER operate Mk4's on the 91s, Mk3's on hst. No 373 sets remain with GNER now - hurrah.

Class 91s will go with the franchise, at least in the short term - Virgin will probably offer to bring in nice, new trains. Wooo.

Hula121 · Post by **Hula121** » 16 Dec 2006 04:16

Dave Worley wrote:The White Rose is not actually a train, as such.

It's the name given to the route between London Kings Cross and Leeds.

The trains used on this service are the same as the trains used across the entire GNER area.

The trains that are used on the White Rose are Class 91 locomotives hauling a set of mk3/4 carriages.

For a while, this route also used Class 373 units (Which is Eurostar's distinctive unit).

Oh. I thought the Class 373 Eurostars were still on that route.

If GNER still had the Class 373's at all, it'd be hard to imagine them in Barbie livery.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » 16 Dec 2006 09:24

Okay, lets now look at the National Passenger Survey Andel, you may be right in saying it's rubbed some people up the wrong way, but this is a minority it seems.
I'll post actual links to the statistics so i'm not accused of making them up.

http://www.passengerfocus.org.uk/your-e ... p?dsid=496

Looking at the Spring 2006 wave results.
GNER was rated as one of the top operators in the country, earning 90% satisfaction, the same as Virgin West Coast. (page 7)

Now skipping right down to page 37.
'Overall Opinion of Journey' GNER dipped between 2003 and 2004, yes, but is easily on top of the others.
'Punctuality and Reliability' (39) Midland Mainline and Virgin Cross County beats GNER during 2006, not suprising. GNER remains fairly high and was on top 2002 to 2004
'Dealing with Delays' GNER is by far better than the others.

Okay, Autumn 2006 wave results.
GNER gets 87% satisfaction, Virgin knocked off the board. (7)

Skipping down to 36 again for Overall Opinion.
GNER easily ranks top.
Punctuality and Reliability - Midland Mainline beats it but GNER still is high, beating Virgin.
And finally dealing with delays GNER is again on top.

So you may say i have my alliances wrong and GNER is crap..but there are the statistics to 'prove' they really are not.

I did Work Experience with them, i went to the HQ and they are really nice people in there..so is the vast proportion of the crew i worked with.

I'm sure some will question reliability of the results but even so, and i expect the 'your a twat' comments to start again, but if i must

I'd prefer a 'First Great North Eastern' to a 'Virgin East Coast' anyday.

andel · Post by **andel** » 16 Dec 2006 10:32

jpmaster wrote:Okay, lets now look at the National Passenger Survey

Something carried out during business hours, not something carried out late at night when people are trying to get home, but hey - lets have a little fun here....

On page 24, it states that GNER improved on their survey results from last year... now let me tell you what it didn't say:

In 2003, 2004 and 2005 GNER tried to push taxi drivers off the ranks by signing an exclusive deal with TaxiBank to work its ranks. TaxiBank set up small operating companies to do this - you may know a2bEuroTaxi in peterborough...? Yeah. Them. Anyway, this threatened to put many people out of business. Look it up here or google it.

Not just passengers being rubbed up the wrong way here...

Lets move on:

I don't see anywhere in that survey where it asks "What did you find of GNER staff attitude" - why not?

I don't see anywhere in that survey where it asks "What do you think to GNER increasing ticket prices by some 9% next year?"

I finally don't see any useful comments in there.

It may be pretty charts, but at the end of the day its a company looking down it's nose at everyone. GNER may sit well with people in first class (of whom I might be travelling with) but when it comes to their general attitude towards customers... hmmm

Lets move on, since i'm digressing:

Now skipping right down to page 37.
'Overall Opinion of Journey' GNER dipped between 2003 and 2004, yes, but is easily on top of the others.
'Punctuality and Reliability' (39) Midland Mainline and Virgin Cross County beats GNER during 2006, not suprising. GNER remains fairly high and was on top 2002 to 2004
'Dealing with Delays' GNER is by far better than the others.

Hang on a moment - don't Virgin XC cover more track and more major junctions than GNER... GNER may have had 7/7 but that aside, Virgin XC should actually have more problems than GNER for the coverage they have...

I did Work Experience with them, i went to the HQ and they are really nice people in there..so is the vast proportion of the crew i worked with.

I'm sure they're lovely. Dick Dastardly used to do a lovely sunday roast with the trimmings, too

i expect the 'your a twat' comments to start

I'm not saying that you're a "twat" (not my preferred term), I'm simply engaging you in a debate over this GNER thing. If I wanted to insult you, I'd do it to your face in a private message rather than publicly and rudely... although in my experience it doesn't take long for an idiot to show themselves up.

I'd prefer a 'First Great North Eastern' to a 'Virgin East Coast' anyday.

When did you last travel with First Great Western? Or when did you last try to get assistance at Reading Station? Or when did you last ask why there was a delay to a service only to get a rude or sourly response back?

Oh, I do apologise - let me ask another question: How many miles do you do annually on the rails, specifically on work and then on leisure.

Yours respectfully,

Griff · Post by **Griff** » 16 Dec 2006 10:49

I direct you to 'overall opinion of journey' surely those filling in the survey would take into account staff helpfulness and ticket prices wouldnt they? after all, they contribute to the overall opinion of a journey.

Decide where you are going, are you against the company? or against the staff? it seems to be you hate GNER because its staff treats you badly, not the company..the company can tell its staff how to act, nothing will make the staff listen though.

First Great Western doesnt have anything to do with GNER, so you cannot bring helpfulness of FGW staff into this. Every company has its fault..the staff on FGW wouldnt be the same staff at the ECML if First got it.
Virgin isnt exactly woo-hoo either.

Just because you may have the money to do travelling for leisure doesnt mean we all do..you dont have to. So i don't do as much as you which is exactly what you're try to say. I do enough and have done in the past...Used to every saturday up and down the country but because mum is dead and we dont get any household income..no money, no travel..
I have travelled enough and i talk to enough people who also travel to be able to have an opinion on this.

andel · Post by **andel** » 16 Dec 2006 10:57

jpmaster wrote:I direct you to 'overall opinion of journey' surely those filling in the survey would take into account staff helpfulness and ticket prices wouldnt they? after all, they contribute to the overall opinion of a journey.

Not quite. It doesn't take into account staff attitude from those travelling late at night or very early in the morning - time at which I have travelled a fair bit.

Decide where you are going, are you against the company? or against the staff? it seems to be you hate GNER because its staff treats you badly, not the company..the company can tell its staff how to act, nothing will make the staff listen though.

Both. Happier now?

First Great Western doesnt have anything to do with GNER, so you cannot bring helpfulness of FGW staff into this. Every company has its fault..the staff on FGW wouldnt be the same staff at the ECML if First got it.

If you'll read, the FGW comments were in reference to you suggesting First should get the franchise

Virgin isnt exactly woo-hoo either.

Probably not.

Just because you may have the money to do travelling for leisure doesnt mean we all do..you dont have to. So i don't do as much as you which is exactly what you're try to say. I do enough and have done in the past...Used to every saturday up and down the country but because mum is dead and we dont get any household income..no money, no travel..
I have travelled enough and i talk to enough people who also travel to be able to have an opinion on this.

My travel is actually mostly business. You see, I have a job and I actually have to go out at all hours and travel. Come the weekend, I'm normally looking forward to keeping off the rails.

Your personal circumstances didn't enter into my questions. For what its worth, I'm sorry your Mother isn't around. But please don't misread my question - my point being that I do a heck of a lot of miles and never fail to be rubbing up the wrong way.

Oh, and for the record - SWT are my preferred TOC. Simple, honest service.

I would offer you a pipe to smoke it in but I have to go get my hair cut (a short bus ride away)

Archonix · Post by **Archonix** » 16 Dec 2006 11:55

Ben_Robbins_ wrote: Archonix: I agree we would only end up how it was. But the real problem isnt just the way its managed, but the lack of line, and lack of capacity on the train. To intergrate with other transports the trains Either need to be able to hold road viecles like the channel tunnel trains, or car hire needs to be cheep and avalliable at each station. Stations need to be more common, and lines need to be more direct for people that live outside of London/Birmingham and the other highly populated areas.

As I pointed out, this is all a consequence of EU directives on the matter. It doesn't help that Alistair Darling was gearing up for another round of Beeching-style cuts to rural lines either, last I heard. If private companies ran the trains and owned the infrastructure they ran on, they'd build stations to everywhere they reckoned they could make a profit. That's how they used to do it, before nationalisation, and we had stations in practically every town and village. Hell, sometimes we had two or three, or even more, with multiple routes as companies competed for passengers and provided the best service they could possibly manage. What we have now isn't competition. It's, at best, that horrible word "coopetition", but as long as all the operators are running on the same track, without being able to adjust station placements or build new lines, there won't be any genuine competition and we'll continue to suffer for it. They're effectively a federated monopoly.

But that's what the EU wants for some reason. The government can't do anything but tender new franchises, so instead they're thinking about cutting more lines and stations. If you'll excuse the language, it's a complete f*** up. What's worse, I doubt it'd be any better it we weren't being forced to do it this way. Our various governments over the years have had a disturbing centralising tendency and seem to see the railways in the same light. The trend is for cutting small rural lines in favour of large, city-central hub stations served by buses and, if you can convince them to allow it, trams. It's stupid.

Ben_Robbins_ · Post by **Ben_Robbins_** » 16 Dec 2006 23:07

They won't be cutting any of the small rural lines around me, cause there is none left. The government would never put them back, cause labour don't know what the countryside is and the Tory’s haven’t heard of public transport.

Its important not to think that just cause one government cant run a railway, that know one else could run it. The current government runs it with money as the main deciding factor which is the same as privatization, as its capitalization (although with the obvious difference being great ignorance). And if that’s the thinking then small rural lines would never return. Not because they wouldn’t necessarily earn anything, but because there’s more money in other places.

I’m skeptical, and think that they wouldn't earn anything for a long time with the small railway stations just because of the existence of cars, and peoples and the media views of the railway, and any new ideas. Just as the millennium dome was such a flop, not really because of what it was or who ran it, but because of the media's early judgment of it. This very risky move would really need the taxpayers backing to be guaranteed not to fail.

As for the EU, I really object to them having a say.

Post by **Dave** » 16 Dec 2006 23:36

Let's be honest, we can chastise Doctor Beeching until the end (I am the worst offender) but he had no option did he really. The car and the lorry has taken the lead in transport. With the recent resurgence in train travel though, maybe we're starting to get a swing back towards the choochoos.

Archonix · Post by **Archonix** » 17 Dec 2006 00:07

Dave Worley wrote:Let's be honest, we can chastise Doctor Beeching until the end (I am the worst offender) but he had no option did he really.

Oh, he did. Centralised control is whaty did for the railways and Beeching cemented it with his cuts.. He should have shifted control back to regional organisations, putting decision-making as close to the people it affects as possible. Look at Scot Rail, they're doing well comapred to England and Wales because the government has placed control of the scottish railways in to the hands of a scottish body. Plus Darling can't get his claws in to them.

On the sad side, he keeps getting elected because his constituents thought he was doing so well with the railways, despite the fact that he had nothing to do with Scotland's network...

Post by **Dave** » 17 Dec 2006 01:14

Archonix wrote:
Dave Worley wrote:Let's be honest, we can chastise Doctor Beeching until the end (I am the worst offender) but he had no option did he really.
Oh, he did. Centralised control is whaty did for the railways and Beeching cemented it with his cuts.. He should have shifted control back to regional organisations, putting decision-making as close to the people it affects as possible. Look at Scot Rail, they're doing well comapred to England and Wales because the government has placed control of the scottish railways in to the hands of a scottish body. Plus Darling can't get his claws in to them.

On the sad side, he keeps getting elected because his constituents thought he was doing so well with the railways, despite the fact that he had nothing to do with Scotland's network...

Weren't you arguing FOR nationalisation?

Raichase · Post by **Raichase** » 17 Dec 2006 06:50

In my mind, transport should either be run by the government, or government subsidied, so that another company can make some money out of it.

It's pointless to try and compete with cheap airliners, and the common car with a private transport company, especially when you're paying through the nose for rail-fees.

The only problem with the government owning and running the services, is when they decide they should be breaking even, or even making a profit. Thats not the point of subsidised travel. I would go as far as saying it's disgusting.

Similar thing happens here in NSW, although without the privatisation. The government is trying to make a profit with public transport, and as such is removing anything and everything that doesn't make it's own back. So, expect to see only buses running during peak hours. If nobody is on a bus, save for a couple of shift workers late at night, they decide the bus doesn't make any money, and axe it. Yet, then you see those workers get cars, and the government has to pay more money to expand roads because more people get cars.

IMO, from an Aussie point of view, Britan was doing best when it was all government run. These seperate franchises is a complete load, because they are only competing with each other, not trying to provide an affordable, alternative to flying.

I can't make specific comments, being on the other side of the world, but thats what I see...

Archonix · Post by **Archonix** » 17 Dec 2006 11:05

Dave Worley wrote:
Archonix wrote:
Dave Worley wrote:Let's be honest, we can chastise Doctor Beeching until the end (I am the worst offender) but he had no option did he really.
Oh, he did. Centralised control is whaty did for the railways and Beeching cemented it with his cuts.. He should have shifted control back to regional organisations, putting decision-making as close to the people it affects as possible. Look at Scot Rail, they're doing well comapred to England and Wales because the government has placed control of the scottish railways in to the hands of a scottish body. Plus Darling can't get his claws in to them.

On the sad side, he keeps getting elected because his constituents thought he was doing so well with the railways, despite the fact that he had nothing to do with Scotland's network...
Weren't you arguing FOR nationalisation?

No. I was arguing for geniune private railways, not the kludge we have now. I was simply pointing out that we can't have that, nor can those who want nationalisaton get what they want, as long as we're beholden to the EU.

Post by **Dave** » 17 Dec 2006 12:40

Archonix wrote:
Dave Worley wrote:
Archonix wrote: Oh, he did. Centralised control is whaty did for the railways and Beeching cemented it with his cuts.. He should have shifted control back to regional organisations, putting decision-making as close to the people it affects as possible. Look at Scot Rail, they're doing well comapred to England and Wales because the government has placed control of the scottish railways in to the hands of a scottish body. Plus Darling can't get his claws in to them.

On the sad side, he keeps getting elected because his constituents thought he was doing so well with the railways, despite the fact that he had nothing to do with Scotland's network...
Weren't you arguing FOR nationalisation?
No. I was arguing for geniune private railways, not the kludge we have now. I was simply pointing out that we can't have that, nor can those who want nationalisaton get what they want, as long as we're beholden to the EU.

Ahhh anti-EU. Let's take over the country and storm out of the European Union! We could get all our meat from Iceland! (The supermarket, obviously, the country just has .. er .. geysers)

Archonix · Post by **Archonix** » 17 Dec 2006 14:07

Well that's the point, really. The EU set the rules for how our railways have to operate. We don't have a choice either way, which is why they're in this horrible half-way house that's neither private nor nationalised. We give them £15 billion so they can screw up our national instutitions, so of course I'm anti-EU.

Brianetta · Post by **Brianetta** » 17 Dec 2006 23:03

Just a personal note:

Regardless of what seat on which train my ticket might say is reserved, when travelling to Edinburgh or York I will quite happily miss my train if it's a GNER, and wait for a Virgin. Their trains are superior, hands down. Nicer seats, pleasant toilet facilities, plenty of space, an electronic seat booking system that is clear and works (when I'm reserved on a Virgin train, my name is in lights above the seat, rather than my destination being on a throw-away bit of paper), a nicer shop and a better magazine. Both can offer wireless internet. Sometimes.

Post by **orudge** » 18 Dec 2006 00:18

Well, whenever I've travelled on GNER (which isn't too often, I'll admit, but has been a few times), the trains have been clean, spacious, comfortable and altogether feel a lot more "proper" than Virgin, which feels like a plane to be honest. I certainly have had no complains the few times I've used them - I will generally catch a GNER train in preference to Virgin (if it happens to be cheaper, of course, price is the main thing with me). Just my two pence.

Brianetta · Post by **Brianetta** » 18 Dec 2006 00:34

Like a plane is good. Anyway, many times when I've meant to catch a GNER, they've laid on an HST instead of a 91. Normally, in summer, the air conditioning in a Mk3 is ineffective even if it hasn't packed in totally. And yes, this includes their newly refurbished ones.

Bombardier Voyagers are to a uniformly high standard, in my experience. Alstom Pendolinos, too, although I have only ridden those from Carlisle to Penrith.

Raichase · Post by **Raichase** » 18 Dec 2006 05:07

Brianetta wrote:when I'm reserved on a Virgin train, my name is in lights above the seat

...and that folks, is the story of how Brianetta finally got to see his name in lights.

Okay, I'm going.

Transport Tycoon Forums

GNER to go!

Who is online