|
Post by Vinnie on Jan 1, 2009 21:10:55 GMT
Dear Richard, I did try to post this reply before but it seems to have disappeared. I know the £1 a trip sounds extreme,but when you consider that the southeast generates the majority of the wealth when only being the minority of the population,perhaps it's time for the rest of the UK to help. A halfpenny or one pence in the pound tax to everyone who live outside the southeast would help enormously to subsidize rail travel to the people that contribute enormously to the rest of the nation.I'm sure if the brains of this country put their minds to it they could come up with numerous answers,unfortunately it's not good on the votes count.
happy new year to you all.
Vinnine. aka Grandpa Simpson.
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Jan 2, 2009 13:58:50 GMT
Dear Vinnie
It can't work I'm afraid...
Not only does the South East produce the highest income towards the UK but in rail fares terms also has the highest cost per kilometre commuter fares in the UK (and probably Europe - possibly the world).
In the 1970s, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Joel Barnett invented a temporary solution to UK regional finances as a run up to devolution. This tries to equate public spending in the different countries by virtue of population rather than by actual need. It is this formula that gives the Scottish, Welsh and Ulster assemblies rather more to spend than it does the various English counties - England not having its own parliament yet.
It carries no weight in law but has been accepted by sequential governments of both two parties who have occupied that position. If a UK-wide per-capita average was a notional 100% then identifiable per-capita expenditure on services in England would be 97% and the Scottish amount 117%. Wales would be 111% and Northern Ireland 127%. For each person across each country for 2006/7 this worked out as: - England £7,121 Scotland £8,623 Wales £8,139 Northern Ireland £9,385
This isn't fair to South East commuters who see less investment in their required rail services compared to other areas of the UK and this is further aggrivated by the present government line of making the commuter pay a higher proportion of actual railway costs which are again distorted by the higher investment made to lines providing higher speed access to the capital for those originating in the regions and continental Europe.
The alternative answer is to remove the Barnett formular from transport allocations or apply rail subidies as a proportion of regional railway use.
None of this is fair to South East commuters Vinnie and getting the best of a bad job is why a fairly large number of people (not just those on this message board) are promoting the case for reassessing the need to try and reverse forcing some unwilling commuters to travel by an unwanted terminal in North London and to concentrate on giving a better all round service to all commuters whether they come from Thanet, Medway or the Weald.
This comes back to the best use of the CTRL in which I believe the DfT have got their calculations seriously wrong. Ashford in 37mins is no better than Bedford in 48mins using East Midlands Trains - which do not need to have the complicated electrical and signalling of the 395s (which again pushed up costs for Kent commuters). The odd few minutes is of little value compared to using the CTRL capacity for a greater number of high speed international services that will reduce the number of short haul flights to Belgium, France, Germany, Holland and Switzerland, distances that would be competitive. This may then require more paths through the Channel Tunnel (above the current 4 per hour each way) but it can be considered as greater national assets for France and the UK than HGV shuttles which can easily be accommodated on ferries.
It is complicated - but commuter fares are too high and should be reduced to a common cost per kilometre with other cities around the UK.
Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by Robbie Craig on Jan 5, 2009 0:26:00 GMT
I read that the Scottish executive is running an experiment where the cost to vehicles using ferry services to some Western Isles is based on a 'road cost' equivalent rather than the real cost.
It struck me, perhaps rail fares for commuters into London should be calculated in the same way. It would lower costs hugely.
Thiat would mean that when they freeze car tax for political reasons or when the oil price shoots up, it would freeze rail fares?
|
|
|
Post by Richard Trevithick on Jan 5, 2009 13:29:00 GMT
I read that the Scottish executive is running an experiment where the cost to vehicles using ferry services to some Western Isles is based on a 'road cost' equivalent rather than the real cost. It struck me, perhaps rail fares for commuters into London should be calculated in the same way. It would lower costs hugely. Thiat would mean that when they freeze car tax for political reasons or when the oil price shoots up, it would freeze rail fares? Hi, I don't see how comparing trains to roads and ferries is going to lower the cost of travel on Rail. If you follow this link to my recent post, you'll see that road and rail have virtually the same running costs per mile. At best, you'd only save a few quid per week on your season ticket. If the price of oil shoots up, then the cost of public transport will have to go up as well as trains run on diesel or electricity (which comes from fossil fuel power stations). I don't see how the cost of car tax would come into the equation! Another flaw in your theory is, with all these cuts in ticket prices that you are expecting, who will pay for the shortfall in required revenue, and where exactly will this money come from? Kind regards, Richard T
|
|
|
Post by Robbie Craig on Jan 5, 2009 19:51:00 GMT
You will no doubt be aware that fuel used by large companies, like buses and trains, is hedged against the kind of rises we have recently seen affecting the motorist. the rises blamed on it by transportation companies are a bit bogus.
on who will pay - the tax payer. the subsidy will be for a social good because air will be cleaner, roads will not need widened and hospitals will save money by not treating the victims of road accidents or ppm10 from diesel engines. Scarce resources like fuel will be used more efficiently and Co2 emissions will fall.
The problem with comparing the cost of trains and cars at the moment is that the cost of motoring is hidden to some extent by the way we pay for the car and we so not pay the full social cost of our choice to clog up the M25 and damage the health of those who live near it. Most people only compare the price of petrol and not budget for the embodied cost and environmental burden the car represents.
Sorry not a right whinger view point.
|
|
|
Post by trainplanner on Jan 10, 2009 14:03:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jumpedup on Jan 10, 2009 17:25:49 GMT
It was an interesting article. It seems that they've had a timetable leaked to them. Any of our dead engineers or any cops from the 70s have a source for one?
I wasn't completely convinced by the Evening Standard's time comparisons. What we really need are (at least) comparisons. One of peak and one for off peak. No trains run from Faversham in 68 minutes in peak (almost no trains run in that time at all) but apparently the HS1 services will not have such a time addition in peak.
Off peak, I suspect journey times will be similar and allow more choice of services - but at what price?!?
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Jan 10, 2009 21:36:34 GMT
Try going to: - www.southeastern2009.co.uk/index.php/cms/pages/homeentering your station in "Future Services to London" and a bit of information will be returned. The text says journey times - but there aren't - and you should take a pinch of salt with frequency as it includes stopping services as well as faster trains. Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by mallard on Jan 22, 2009 20:07:59 GMT
Folkestone to London in 49 minutes Tuesday, January 20, 2009, 16:39 A KEY figure in Folkestone's regeneration has branded revised, 50-minute commuting times "fantastic". Southeastern, which will be running the new high-speed link to London from December 2009, has revised its estimated journey times to 52 minutes from Folkestone Central to St Pancras International and 49 minutes from Folkestone West. This is compared to the current duration of journeys, 101 and 99 minutes respectively. Speaking for the Creative Foundation, Peter Betley said: "Improved journey times of this kind will, I think, make Folkestone the most attractive coastal destination in the southeast." Southeastern had originally estimated the journey would take 63 minutes from Folkestone but recent testing and other research has led them to predict the further time savings Mr Betley said: "This makes journey times comparable to those from London to Brighton, a place that has always enjoyed success because it's so close in time to the capital. "This will be a significant boost to Folkestone because it effectively halves commuting time, which can only help the town's efforts at regeneration. "Even people coming from unconnected stations like Sandling, who will change at Ashford, will have significantly reduced journeys. "It's fantastic." A spokesman for Southeastern reminded commuters that times were estimations. He said: "This is a huge step forward and gives thousands of our passengers a whole new range of choices about where they live, how they travel to work and how they link up with rail connections to other parts of the country and the Continent. We're proud to be at the forefront of this most exciting adventure, yet remain determined to provide passengers on all our trains with a level of service that is consistently high. "We believe that many communities in Kent with access to our new high-speed services will enjoy unprecedented opportunities for growth and regeneration, and some £10 billion of mixed use development is expected to be created along the HS1 rail route. "With Folkestone set to be less than an hour away from London by high-speed train, it is ideally placed to reap similar benefits in the years ahead." www.thisiskent.co.uk/news/Folkestone-London-49-minutes/article-629260-detail/article.html
|
|
|
Post by stumpyuk on Jan 22, 2009 20:43:55 GMT
That is good if true, and would put Dover at 60 minutes which would be nice. The comparison with brighton is interesting... do they pay a 30% premium? no, thought not!
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Jan 22, 2009 21:54:44 GMT
Dear Stumpy
Let us assume that GoVex will allow North London to Ashford in 34 minutes (without an Ebbsfleet stop during the peaks), 3 minutes to drop the pans then detach the rear unit and finally 12 minutes to Folkestone West - 49 minutes, Folkestone Ctl in 52 minutes and Dover Priory in 64 minutes.
Add to that the 25 minutes from the City of London and that will give a time of 89 minutes.
If the same train ran direct from Cannon Street then Ashford would take 50 minutes, Folkestone West 65 minutes, Folkestone Ctl 68 minutes and Dover Priory in 80 minutes.
The value of a Cannon St service is that passengers would not have the fight to get on a Northern Line tube to reach the faster train - it would be a seamless journey that gives added value. Now GoVex could try a stunt such as - if you don't have a gap in your season ticket validity then we will not charge you more to go via North London. This has been the case with passengers presently travelling on FCC to Moorgate from the Bedford Line. The Moorgate link will close to allow 12car trains through Thameslink. Frankly, if I were still alive, I'd seriously consider driving to another station that had direct trains to my chosen station - so for the people of Dover a quick drive to Faversham in 28 minutes. The good people of Medway will not thank you but you will save money on rail fares and not have the Underground to cope with - and people from Canterbury can reach Faversham in 12 minutes (according to Autoroute and keeping to the speed limits).
Of course if you are travelling to a destination in Camden or are going on one of the routes north of London then St Pancras is for you, no argument. If you are going to anywhere using Southern or South West Trains then your journey will take longer and in some cases involve additional changes.
One day the rail industry will learn that most passengers do not like changing trains or using the underground.
Yours sincerely O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by stumpyuk on Jan 22, 2009 22:36:55 GMT
Not disagreeing - i would like fast services direct to london bridge and cannon st, i would like to run fast from ashford and not have 10 minutes added to add/divide trains (which during peak always means dover is on the slower/waiting part). I have had to struggle against all this for years and years and all i have seen is deterioration. reducing the journey to st. p MAY make me think about it but the 30% is still a major hurdle. I recently applied for a new job which tuned out to be in farringdon - a totally useless commute currently, job in docklands - forget it - have to go to waterloo and then back through london bridge on the jubilee wasting my time as direct services from dover dont/wont/cant stop at london bridge (we still have the dwell time opposite platform 6 though!!!). want cannon st? change at folkestone and wait 10 minutes and then get a train that calls all to 7oaks before laughably running fast to london. ive tried this one and you get to cannon st. at the same time as if you stay on the charing + and get the tube back to the city - again utterly frustrating and useless. i hope the trainplanners read this - or better still try dover to aldgate for a week!
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on Jan 23, 2009 9:20:51 GMT
Stumpy my friend,
If you go back to the vote for the favoured London stations it gives a preference of London Bridge and Cannon Street as the most favoured solution. One also hears through the ether that GoVex seem to have examined the likelyhood of attracting use to the City via Stratford and Liverpool St and have concluded that the interchange at Stratford isn't that good (even using the DLR) and the walk from Liverpool St is too far to most workplaces (hence very overcrowded Central Line trains).
To some extent this is a tortose and hare issue as a great deal of play is made about how quickly the new trains will reach St Pancras but this is some way away from the major workplace centres. I have, for some time, been saying that a far better solution for GoVex and the DfT would be to operate two or three services via the CTRL to London Bridge and Cannon Street. By all means promote the ChavLine service to North London to try and promote longer journeys by rail but use the Southfleet Jn to Fawkham Jn link to provide peak hour services to the City of London. There are currently four trains from Cannon Street to Ashford and it would not be unreasonable to reduce these to three departing at 17.15, 17.45 and 18.15. This will encourage longer distance commuting (rather than short distances from the Weald) and give GoVex access to a higher seat charge and relief to trains serving Tonbridge and Sevenoaks. There are five morning arrivals at present and this can be reduced to three arriving about 08.00, 08.30 and 09.00.
I am almost sure that somebody will claim that there are no spare paths for such services but the December 2009 timetable will have less trains serving Cannon Street than at any time since (at least) my heyday when it had 14 more services per hour - albiet with four tracks from Borough Market Jn and eight platforms. Mind you it also handled the light engine movements for the six steam trains per hour that served the main line destinations at that time.
Yours sincerley O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
Post by spamcan on Jan 23, 2009 16:52:48 GMT
Always very interested to read Stumpy's views as I am a Dover resident myself, although sadly have little occasion to use the trains. The current train service from Dover to London is, as all are well aware, chronically slow. Dovorians are placing a lot of confidence in the benefits that the high speed trains will bring and I hope that we are not going to be too disappointed. The extension of the service from Folkestone to Dover had to be fought for long and hard and we later found out that the then LibDem council in Folkestone (Shepway) had opposed services extending beyond Folkestone in a submission to the SRA. If it is of any interest, a group of us from Castle Forum in Dover were treated to a tour of the Hitachi high speed train maintenance depot in Ashford on wednesday and I have put some photos on my fotopic site below: shipsintheportofdover.fotopic.net/
|
|
|
Post by trainplanner on Mar 27, 2009 16:02:43 GMT
Interesting how Govex have concluded a similar thing to the views expressed very early on about the interchange at stratford and the overcrowding on the central line, making this change of journey even more unattractive to those working in the city than the proposed interchange at St Pancras.
If the propsed journey times for the run from folkstone (and therefore dover) are correct then this will bring degrees of regeneration to two important kent coast towns. This is to be applauded (as it was an orginal aim, and i hope the local authority successfully manages to keep ticket prices down to encourage migration and to enable more workers to commute to london for work. I only hope people can get jobs in the north london area as transferrign back accross london on the tube will be a major discouragement for many people.
Spamcan, welcome to the message board and thankyou for the link to the pictures it is good to see the purpose built facility will keep the units to a high standard. A question though, were you allowed to see inside the trains and if so what were your views on the seating arrangements??
Has anybody else heard any further news on stopping patterns and timetable development or when the final journey times will be published??
Regards
TP
|
|