Transport in London is shit

If there was a way to open up rail franchises to proper competition I'd be interested - no one whinges about airlines being privately-owned and air travel is cheaper than it's ever been.

Is South East Trains currently in public hands? I know its got immeasurably better since they stripped Connex of the franchise.

The problem is is that privatisation has turned the railways into a political football, government meddling has increased by several orders of magnitude. We are on our 4 th regulatory regime since privatisation. Privatisation has made the railways something for which every government now must find a quick fix for rather than actually thinking long term, as they should do, the only way the railways can get better.

The problem with the railways is that they are and artificial and imperfect market and they never can be anything other than that. You need look only at the ORCATS systems of apportioning rail revenues to operators n the same route and observe how this has distorted the market. Incentives have to be manufactured, and they cost the taxpayer dear, when that money could be going into improtant infrastructure improvement.s There can only be a role for private sector firms as service delivery companies, doing a fixed job for a fixed contract. Nothing else will really work for the railways, except maybe open access operators filling in gaps that the state operator does not think will be viable.

JimD, being able to work is a necessity

Yep, or at least an income is. And if you're truly unable to find work, then the state will give you money. But you're not actually talking about not being able to work, you're talking about not being able to get a specific job which you want to get without first getting experience in a low-paid environment in a location which costs you money to get to. All I'm saying is, if you don't like that, you can get another job. But what, are you claiming there are either NO JOBS AT ALL close to where you live, or that you CAN'T POSSIBLY MOVE to a place where there are jobs nearby? If that's the case, fair enough, the state should maybe subsidise you. But I don't believe it is.

(And also, living within london and having a low salary is perfectly possible anyway, I lived in London on a retail salary (9.5-10.5k) for a good few years, and I know plenty of other people who've done the same...in fact a couple of them worked in bookshops and eventually made enough contacts that way to get jobs in publishing, so the low-paid internship isn't the only way in there either).

The murder by privatisation of the British transport network was one of the great crimes against humanity of the Thatcher years.

im talking about the theory of opening up railway networks to private sector involvement. there is a difference between whether one should private, or partially deregulate, and how one should do so.

the man who devised the scheme to privatise the railways in britain is possibly even angrier than you lot about the way in which it was done.

(this is from Understanding Systems Failures by Bignell and Fortune, which has a chapter on South Yorkshire's bus fares policy in the 1970s, and coincidentally sits on the bookcase next to my computer)

If you want to know much about the history of British Rail in the 70s and 80s, your best bet is to find a library that has a good set of back-issues of Modern Railways magazine - that's where *I* learned most of it from, at least.

In the 70s the primary BR policy was "management for decline" - the concept that rail traffic was declining continuously and would never recover, and therefore replacement and modernisation should be done on the basis that capacity could and should be decreased. Over the long term this has been shown to be completely wrong, but a large part of the network is running as redesigned during the "management for decline" period. In particular, a large number of main lines and major stations still are operated using signalling and track layouts designed during this period, and this is now causing serious capacity problems.

(off the top of my head: Kings Cross and the ECML as far as Doncaster; most of the Great Western main line, apart from Paddington and Didcot; most of the lines around Birmingham; the WCML north of Crewe; pretty much all of central Scotland; pretty much all of the South London suburban network)

It is very hard to judge privatisation. It cant be done over the ten years of privatisation as there have been at least 4 major re-organisations of the structure of the privatised railway system since privatisation. It is not a private enterprise either. Government money and interference are present at all levels of the industry (apart from, possibly, in the ROSCOs although HST2 will change that). Now, at least we are getting a structure that may work. The TOCs are now effectively service delivery companies running on the state owned infrastructure and Open Access operators are starting, in a small way, to be permitted to provide the innnovation needed to replace 80s service patterns. May be this will work. It's not so much the privatisation itself (although I am opposed to it in principle) it's the fact that it has been one long experiment to find a structure that works.

In Europe privatisations have happened in a very different way. Germany is a good contrasting example. There regional goverenments were given control of regional rail services and These were 'Franchised' (ineffect contracted) out to private operators or to the State run rail company. National services reamined in the public sector although the State owned operator was instructed to take a more commercial approach, to prepare itself for privatisation. It has done this, with mixed results; The frieght arm is now the biggest and most wide reaching railfreight business in Europe and after a number of losses it has started to win contracts to operate local rail services. It's ha s even bid, as part of consortia, for franchises in other european countries including britain. The state operato will be privatised in the next few years but as one large comapny, it may work it may not, we shall see.

It is at least acknowledged in Germany that the primary competetive pressure on rail are not from other Rail companies but from Road and Air and trying to stimulate Rail on Rail competition does not fit with the passenger mindset (freight is a different matter, there are significant open access operators in Germany).

this might be my favourite ever ilx post.

Assuming this were true, which it isn't, they wouldn't give you enough to live on.

if everybody in, say, ruislip or st albans looked for work within walking distance of their house... you'd have a lot of unemployed people.

well no they'd be employed but they'd have rubbish jobs.

unfair of you to single out these 7 people.

well there's the Acton Town-Hammersmith section and the Wembley Park-Finchley Road plus Metroland sections but not quite the same thing i know.

On underground trains, after passing a signal at danger, the brakes automatically come on, and the driver has to get out of the cab to reset them. This traditionally was not the case on overground trains, but I think it now is also necessary on a lot of overground stock.

(this also applies to all other trains running on LU lines, such as most of the trains in and out of Marylebone station; I'm not sure if it applies to LU trains running on non-LU routes, and I'm fairly sure it doesn't apply to the other services on those routes)

why is that a joke? i was just about to say the same. apart from the hellhole bit.

had a presentation today which set me thinking. theres a split in this country between buses as a service which is controlled by a public body and provided by service provision companies, simply fulfilling requirements of the contract, and a situation where buses are removed from their status as inherently political products, open to competition, with the hope that the market will improve the product- to drag buses away from the operations-heavy approach of the past - "we tell you when and where the buses run, and we make them run that way" towards a industry that responds to passenger demands and looks to increase business - ie improve patronage more actively. in fact, i think these aims are laudable, but unfortunately the majority of operators, and it would seem the bigger they are, the worse offenders they are, are stuck (quite happily) between the two - they do little more than operate buses below a desirable standard, pay seemingly little attention to customers needs/desires and communicate very poorly with them, and yet focus on profitting from other means eg acquisitions and monopolisation, cost cuttign etc rather than increasing patronage through better service provision.

these two directions diverge quite seriously, and whilst london is allowed to pursue the first model without the stringent competitive requirements imposed on othewr areas, DfT, OFT, bus operators and PTES/local authorities are going to have to do some serious thinking about the fundamental guiding philosophy behind the bus industry structural model that we need for this country.

I was under the impression that on a lot of stock the TPWS reset is outdoors, like the tripcock on LU stock.