|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Dec 15, 2008 21:07:56 GMT
May I interject please?
I would suggest that the comparison should be a fair one and should take two parameters: -
1. The journey time by classic train between a station and the London terminal.
2. The service to St Pancras with an indication of the premium fare - in broad terms, perhaps quoting the fare in today's terms via a percentage of the present Ashford or Gravesend fares as indicated by the DfT in their consultation documents.
If the new classic journey times are not slower then GoVex should not worry as they will have proved that the service is not getting worse. They should also not simply show the ChavLine stations but perhaps a few where passengers will have to change, let us say Minster which will not have a High Speed service even though GoVex bid to supply one and introduced extra train miles to do so. Those passengers will, no doubt, catch a service to Ashford and then have a quick change for North London or stay on it and go to Charing Cross as now.
It must be seen to be simple to understand, demonstrate like for like and show that they are offering a valid choice - quicker trains for higher prices. All the time that adverts are going out with false comparisons then the day of reckoning will give them a much more difficult PR exercise to undertake with a media which will have been primed with simple comparative facts.
As I have said previously, there is nothing for GoVex to be frightened of, they do not have to hide behind false claims. If the journey time and cost equation works for the passenger then they will sell it.
Don't forget that a comparative time could be: -
.............2008........2009..... Rochester. 36mins (LB) 41mins (SP) Chatham....39mins (LB) 43mins (SP) Gillingham 44mins (LB) 47mins (SP)
but that would not be right either as it uses the actual 19.32 from Cannon Street (from London Bridge - which is London) - plus still compares a classic service with a High Speed service with premium fares.
Perhaps a little research into what the DfT specify in their SLC2 translated into a direct comparison would be of use as one would not wish to fall into the same trap as GoVex have.
A extra day or two before replying to GoVex will not go amiss. It would give a chance to come up with a real comparison that really will be honest and show the time/cost equation.
Yours sincerley O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Dec 15, 2008 21:49:25 GMT
...a quick look at an initial guess for Ashford area journey times: -
_________________Classic___________|Javelin ..............2008....2009....+/- .|..HS1.. Ashford..... 57mins .74mins +17mins| 37mins Canterbury.. 84mins 101mins +17mins| 62mins Dover....... 88mins 110mins +22mins| 74mins Folkestone C 76mins .98mins +22mins| 63mins Maidstone E. 48mins .55mins +.7mins| N/A
The Charing Cross trains will stop at extra stations and for Maidstone there is no fast service to Cannon Street during the day. If the Charing Cross to Dover services are looped or held at Ashford for the ChavLine train to overtake then journey times will be even longer.
Govex really do have to come clean quickly or they face a really bad press next Christmas when the following January the fares go up just after the service introduction and their income budget requires RPI+3%.
OVS
|
|
|
Post by Richard Trevithick on Dec 16, 2008 0:28:58 GMT
Are any of the living frequenting this message board able to undertake their own walking time tests from St Pancras to the City and existing London terminii? Also adding whether they rush around or just dawdle everywhere would also help provide additional reliability for the figures. If a few people of each type (fast and slow!) were able to partake, that would be fantaastic for really balancing out the figures.
I agree that leaving it several days before replying would allow much valuable information to be collected and thrown back at Govia.
Seasons Greetings,
Richard
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Dec 16, 2008 22:35:14 GMT
Here is my starter for 10 - for everyone to hack about. The 2008 times are from the present timetable and the 2009 times are by taking the 2008 service and simply adding 2 minutes for each additional stop as shown by the DfT. I believe that this shows a genuine comparison for off-peak journeys where the lower off-peak price may offer a reasonable price if the reduced journey to the passenger's final destination is the best choice. On the other hand it also shows a potential worsening of the classic service compared to now and thus no real connectivity for those who still wish to travel from Ashford and stations east to London Bridge (for Southern services) or Waterloo (for South West Trains) or because their final destination is close by. For Chatham Line passengers the whole story is quite bad as there is little time advantage over the present journey time to London, the fares are much higher in comparison and the classic fast trains will be slowed up. Not very inspiring for Medway and stations east is it. Off Peak Service | Classic | | Javelin | | | 2008 | 2009 |
[/td][td]2009[/td]+/-[td]Premium[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Ashford[/td][td]57[/td][td]74 +17mins[/td][td] 37 -20mins [/td][td]+£3.90[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Canterbury West[/td][td]84[/td][td]101 +17mins[/td][td]62 -22mins[/td][td]+£3.90[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Chatham[/td][td]42[/td][td]46 + 4mins[/td][td]43 + 1min[/td][td]+£2.95[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Deal[/td][td]110[/td][td]129 +19mins[/td][td]--[/td][td][/td][/tr] [tr][td]Dover Priory[/td][td]88[/td][td]110 +22mins[/td][td]74 -14mins[/td][td]+£3.90[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Ebbsfleet[/td][td] --[/td][td]--[/td][td]17[/td][td]New station[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Faversham[/td][td]67[/td][td]73 + 6mins[/td][td]66 + 1min[/td][td]+£2.95[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Folkestone Ctl.[/td][td]76[/td][td]98 +22mins[/td][td]63 -13mins[/td][td]+£3.90[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Hastings[/td][td]89[/td][td]91 + 2mins[/td][td]--[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Herne Bay[/td][td]83[/td][td]89 + 6mins[/td][td]72 -11mins[/td][td]+£2.95[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Maidstone East[/td][td]48[/td][td]55 +.7mins[/td][td]--[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Margate[/td][td]97[/td][td]103 + 6mins[/td][td]98 + 1min[/td][td]+£3.90[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Minster[/td][td]104[/td][td]121 +17mins[/td][td]--[/td][/td][/tr] [tr][td]Ramsgate[/td][td]102[/td][td]108 + 6mins[/td][td]84 -18mins[/td][td]+£3.90[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Sandling[/td][td]84[/td][td]101 +17mins[/td][td]--[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Sevenoaks[/td][td]27[/td][td]27[/td][td]--[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Sittingbourne[/td][td]59[/td][td]65 + 6mins[/td][td]61 + 2mins[/td][td]+£2.95[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Staplehurst[/td][td]52[/td][td]60 + 8mins[/td][td]--[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Tonbridge[/td][td]34[/td][td]36 + 2mins[/td][td]--[/td][/tr] [tr][td]Tunbridge Wells[/td][td]47[/td][td]47[/td][td]--[/td][/tr] [/table] Times are for direct services in both 2008 and 2009 Javelin services compared to fastest classic services in 2008 The shown premium fare is an indicative addition to the present fare for a single journey at 2008 prices - so double it for a return. Peak hour times are a completely different issue and should not be treated this way. Commuters have chosen jobs to which they have easy access and migration to other terminals will take 1 or 2 years to fully show. It is this traffic that most argument surrounds and it would be better if the DfT and Govex would simply accept the fact and supply the best service for those people. This may end up, initially, with an "all day" frequency to North London but a gradual migration if that emerges. The 395 units can cover the classic services until (and if) the market changes or they could simply concentrate on those destinations already suggested by the SRA as giving the highest Net Present Value in my earlier posting. Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by paulbgillingham on Dec 17, 2008 23:25:34 GMT
I'd say the 50 minutes Gillingham-Victoria includes quite a lot of padding. When the 375s were new I regularly noticed a 8-10 minute coffee break at Bromley South. I still have one on the laughably named 'fast' 0825 Gillingham-Victoria which takes as long as a slow (and therefore the slow is actually going faster, just stopping more), but this used to be regular on a range of services. In the reverse direction the 'dwell time' was at Chatham. I used to seriously consider whether it would be quicker to walk home from Chatham rather than go through to Gillingham, but Chatham Hill is quite steep.
I assume drivers have been told to save electricity or otherwise not embarrass the management by regular dwell times, by driving slower.
|
|
|
Post by vinnieMPKTPES on Dec 19, 2008 22:49:08 GMT
Why so much negative talk about the hs1.look on the positive side.Its going to be another train service up to London.Ok some people wont use it, but some will,it can only be a good thing.Ok it might be a minute slower here or a minute faster there,is your life really that centered around time.I think some times we should step back and look at the bigger picture.
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Dec 20, 2008 20:17:17 GMT
Dear vinnieMPKTPES
Thank you for your input.
If you read the postings made earlier I think that you would understand that most irritation comes from a service that is inconvenient to most commuters is being forced on regular passengers when it isn't the most convenient.
There is a difference between commuters and off-peak passengers. Now one doesn't wish to be patronising but when the SRA recognised that passengers actually live at places which currently have good services to specific terminals then having a service that not only adds up to £1,400 a year to your cost of actually working then it is bound to be unpopular. Please take note - 80% of passengers arriving at Cannon Street WALK to their final destination. 70% of passengers arriving at Charing Cross and Victoria WALK to their final destination. Of existing passengers arriving at St Pancras - 25% WALK to their final destinations, the rest already queue to get into the tube station to board already overcrowded trains. It has very little to do with a minute here and a minute there but up to £1,400 extra costs - when the current service to existing terminals are being reduced by about 1,500 seats each peak hour. If some CTRL services from Ashford ran to Cannon Street and Victoria then some passengers would pay the additional costs because it would deposit them near their office - much quicker than now. Clearly you do not understand this.
Off peak is a different issue and some passengers may well be persuaded to pay at least £7.80 extra if it saves them time. The problem is that all alternatives to paying the premium payment will be slowed up in an effort by the DfT and GoVex to force not only the next RPI+3% increase but in return give a much worse service. This is simply bad faith by the Government and GoVex to provide an equitable service to now in return for the fare paid now. In personal cost/benefit terms it is a worse product. Having said that - for those people going north of London - it will provide a much faster connection so maybe worth the extra cost - but the DfT admit, in their consultation documents that this traffic is currently a massive 3% of passengers.
I'm sorry, my friend, but if you cannot understand that - then perhaps you should give some effort to describe where the value really is for ChavLine services and how you understand the 1,500 passengers per hour will get to their objectively chosen London terminal.
No - a minute here and a minute there isn't a big issue but an extra £1,000pa will be for a Medway passenger, particularly when the odd minute is simply to a London terminal. From North London 70 - 80% of passengers will then have about 25 minutes extra to get to their final destination (if they can actually get onto the tube platform quickly - which is unlikely). Ashford line passengers will have their time reduction to North London negated and those from Medway and stations east will actually have slower journeys at higher cost.
Seriously, my friend, most readers of this message board actually would be interested in your applied logic to the issue.
Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by Vinnie on Dec 28, 2008 16:32:49 GMT
Dear Friend,
Sorry i haven't replied I've been busy.
I don't have any figures to hand, only yours.You, I, and every man and his dog,knows that the best destination for HS1 is Charing cross, Cannon st, or both.It's not going to happen. I know you are concerned about seats, but the Government have this year, admitted 250,000 immigrants, probably 500,000 when you include illegals, and student over stayers etc. etc. The general consensus is that the population will be 70,00000 in the not to distant future practical all of whom want to live and travel in the southeast. I don't want to sound patronizing,but isn't worrying about 1500 seats a bit like the Captain of the Titanic wondering if the water in the pool is warm enough. what i do clearly understand, is that this time next year. HS1 will start. It will go to St. Pancreas It will cost extra to use it.
Understandingly Yours, Vinnie
|
|
|
Post by Vinnie on Dec 28, 2008 19:25:14 GMT
PS. When you call the North Kent line, the chavline,I would imagine the people in that area would find your words derogatory,offensive and maybe in these times illegal.
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Dec 29, 2008 23:19:46 GMT
Dear Vinnie Please examine the Wikipedia entry below: - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_ChavsThere is, of course a more derogatary explanation which, as the article says, may have come from Romany which is close to the hearts of many people in Kent. It suggests that this may be more etymologically correct: - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChavIf you feel that the term is derogatory,offensive or illegal then I would humbly suggest that you contact Wikipedia - or the Tap'n'Tin pub in Chatham. (...but seriously, the rail industry has made a major mistake - and this may well mean that Cannon St and Victoria services will become unusable from Medway in December 2009. You are obviously in favour of asking Medway passengers who have already been asked to pay the highest increase for any train company in Britain to simply pay more, extend there journey times by travelling via a London terminal that they do not want - and in most cases pay extra underground fares.) Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by barrygillingham on Dec 30, 2008 9:19:18 GMT
Methinks dear old Vinnie is a wind up merchant. I wouldn't want him to stop airing his views - but perhaps we can treat him like Grandpa Simpson and don't take him too seriously.
Barry Gillingam
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Dec 30, 2008 13:20:15 GMT
Dear Barry
I don't take any offence from Vinnie and try to treat all opinions which differ from my own with the respect that perhaps was sadly lacking in his posting.
The moment that he quoted 7,000,000 (commas corrected) as the UK population then I felt that he might be misguided. He also quoted 250,000 immigrants as being a potential problem for seating availability - but of course it isn't. If it was then we should be quite pleased as there is currently a net emigration from this country.
I am sure that Vinnie is a great person who simply fails to gather facts before presenting his case. I wish him and all other members of this message board a Very Happy New Year.
Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by Vinnie on Dec 30, 2008 21:57:53 GMT
Dear Mr Bullied, Sorry my mistake i meant 70 million.I think you will find i said 250,000 to 500,000 extra immigrants i think you lost 250,000 there somewhere. I've read the 70 million figures in newspapers and also on the BBC news web page, they say the population will rise to 65million by 2016, 71million by 2031 and 77million by 2051. Feel free to have a look.The BBC news economics editor Evan Davis said the figures were a wake up call. The first few lines of wikipedia describe chav as a derogatory term. stereotypically young aggressive white males of working class backgrounds often fighting and engaging in petty crime.
Julie Burchill of The Times said in her article the use of the word is a form of social racism and that the use of the term revels more about the chav hater than those of the supposed victims. A similar article was published in the Guardian in 2007. I don't care for political correctness, but in my opinion,you could irritate people by calling it the chavline.
I don't want people who use southeastern to pay more,i think rail travel should be heavily subsidized,make rail travel £1 each way and get the money from somewhere else.The government have just miraculously found billions. The public seem quite happy for transport staff to work a 24hrs day on shift work,why not make everyone do it?You would have the space on trains spread out over a 24hr period,just a thought.
Sorry if I've upset anyone.
vinnie.
|
|
|
Post by Richard Trevithick on Dec 31, 2008 10:18:34 GMT
Chavs are typically young and aggressive white males often fighting and engaging in petty crime, but I'd question the "working class" part of the stereotype. Often they are nothing but dole spongers and drug addicts, the type of scum that think the world owes them a living. The picture on Wiki with the fake Burbury is perfect( ly typical)! Chavs are proud of being regarded as scum. When I've borrowed a body for the day, I've seen some in the Rochester area talking loudly about themselves "being a chav". Which makes one think they have zero self respect, and hence, no respect for others, which is a large part of the problem. They view being a chav in a similar manner as the ASBOs they think of as being medals of honour. As for "social racism", what utter tosh! Racism is a word that's bandied about waaaay too much these days. If somebody looks at you funny, they are racist. If somebody in a shop accidentally short changes you, they are racist. If the Police do a random stop and search, they too are apparently rascist. The good news is, with mindless idiots using it as an everyday word, it'll lose the mighty power it commands, and in a few years when losers start bleating the word, people will just say "whatever". It's not as powerful as it used to be a few years ago. The TRUE meaning for racism relates to abuse of somebody with a different skin colour. This has, over the years, been twisted to being about somebody from a different country (where the correct word for this type of abuse is "xenophobia", NOT racism). Now the word has been twisted even further to meaning anybody with a different hair colour or even dress sense. I know standards of education have been falling in this country for years, but surely the time has come to educate people on the correct use of the meaning of (especially certain) words, and not just let them use them in a context that they think is correct "this week". As for irritating people on the chavline, with respect Vinnie, you are the only person so far who has complained about it. Normal people (i.e. those who do have a job and don't resort to violence, crime and drugs) generally tend to distance themselves from the lower degenerate levels of society and accept that life is such now that they have to share the streets and Railways with this kind of trash of society. For years, the Greenwich line has been affectionately referred to as the "scumline", but when in body form I've never heard anyone complain about this reference, and neither have any of the staff who attend my seances. I think £1 each way for rail travel is a little unrealistic, the subsidy needed for that would be mind-blowing. Whilst I totally disagree with bailing out the banks (it should have been done on a loan basis with a nominal rate of interest rather than " you've made a huge mistake but please accept this money on behalf of your customers and the taxpayer who you've been ripping off for years with dodgy charges"), we must remember that this huge pot of gold the government dug up was a 1-off payment, and not an ongoing concern. What SHOULD be done is to renationalise the Railway network. This would instantly save £300+ million across the country each year in the form of shares dividends for worthless shareholders not being paid out. A few tens of millions would also be saved on overpaid fat-cat executives salaries. Didn't the boss of Govia earn over £400,000 last year? For what?! Think of the many good purposes in which that money could have otherwise been used. Once all of these areas of waste have been cut back, there will be much more money in the pot to spend on the areas that need attention. The Railway will instantly become more cost effective and viable, which will slowly lead to more passenger growth. As the revenue increases, this money could be reinvested into more rolling stock. Unfortunately, this will never happen until we have a government that has the backbone to make such a bold more (and not renege on the very policy it was voted in with, like the current incompetent shower we have at the moment). Very good comment about the 24 hour transport system. It does amaze me how a number of whingers expect the railway to run 24/7 365 days a year but they still demand to have all of their Bank Holidays (including 25/12 & 26/12) off work whilst everyone else is expected to work their backsides off to pander to their selfish needs. The trains already run 20+ hours each day, so as you say, instead of b*tching about overcrowding on the 07:14 to Cannon Street, why not travel an hour or two earlier or later to guarantee a seat? Even if the train companies doubled their rolling stock, there are only so many services that will physically be able to pass through London Bridge at 8am. Overcrowding on peak services is one area in which very little blame can be laid upon the TOCs - the root cause is too many mindless sheep all want to get on the same train each day! Best wishes to everyone on here for a Very Happy New Year. Kind regards, Richard T
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Dec 31, 2008 10:38:09 GMT
Dear Vinnie
Freedom of Speech is something that we should all enjoy.
I find that doing some research, as you have done with the Evan Davies quote is the way that I work. Sometimes the result goes against what you would wish. My immigration/emigration note was from the Office of National Statistics and, in fact, went completely against what I thought was a fact. Net emigration in 2007 was 277,000, why I have no idea but there are hints that it might be due to returning Eastern Europeans adding to the normal flow of retiring Brits.
You may not have taken on board the use of "alternative" titles for elements of rail in the Kent and Medway area. GoVex (go and vex passengers) is derived from a mix of Govia and Connex, ChavLine is derived from GoVex's new service name of Javelin - Chav and Jav being close matches in phonetic terms. I tend to think of those in the DfT as being Chavs for their undesired interferrence in many of Kent's commuter services going to the wrong terminal. (Off peak is a different issue for long distance travel north of London.)
I like your own use of St Pancreas. It did pass my own mind as being associated with Gall(bladder) and the simple gall being an "abnormal growth" (CTRL?) but I stuck to North London as being descriptive of where the station is located - compared to the more central old Southern termini (why not a few Ashford - Cannon St services via the CTRL to improve the lot of Tonbridge and Sevenoaks commuters - if the SLC2 is correct there are going to be less trains using Cannon St from next December?).
The final disagreement that we might have is that I do not see any advantage in heavily subsidised rail services but do agree with you that a change is required. What I would suggest is that all commuting by public transport fares should be set against your income tax as a benefit - whereas commuting by private transport should be excluded. This might encourage a modal shift that would free up some road space. It might also kick start an increase in rail infrastructure provision that would service the natural flows to largest workplace provision.
Sir, I extend the bones of my right hand (the flesh has long gone).
Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|