train travel and why we still use cars

[cybertect]

The sad thing is that I really had the impression that BR were finally getting their act together in the last few years before privatisation. Certainly on the routes I used at the time, the number of late and cancelled trains tailed off enormously.

 

[Roadkill]

The sad thing is that I really had the impression that BR were finally getting their act together in the last few years before privatisation. Certainly on the routes I used at the time, the number of late and cancelled trains tailed off enormously.

It's been suggested that the railways in Britain have never been better run than they were in the years leading up to privatisation. Certainly, BR did a lot with a very small budget, and at least one former manager has argued that back then they had a far better idea of where the money was going and what they were getting for it than they do now. Which is ironic, given that one argument for privatisation was that the private sector is better at managing the money.

 

[djbombscare]

I recall something of a discussion on radio 4 about 6 months ago. Which talked about the state of the railways and offered the question should they go back to being govt owned rather than privately owned

If I remember correctly it actually pointed out that the reason they are such a pile of shite is because they are neither, and actually both at the same time. Some of it is held and run by the govt who have there way of doing things and some privatley run who effectivley rent bits of it from the govt.

Someone is going to have to educate me here Im afraid

 

[oneflewover]

Are you trying to suggest that the public should be held responsible for everything a government does? Do you feel responsible for the Iraq war? After all, that was started by a 'democratically elected' government. Or how about the various terrorism laws? ID cards? Where do you draw the line?

We all have to accept some responsibility for our goverments actions. It is our failure to to make it see the majority view. The general apathy of us allows us to be governed against our wishes.

vive la france

 

[Roadkill]

We all have to accept some responsibility for our goverments actions. It is our failure to to make it see the majority view. The general apathy of us allows us to be governed against our wishes.

vive la france

The majority opposed the Iraq war. Some of us made our opposition very clear, and they went ahead and did it anyway. Governments don't act according to the will of the people: they make a show of consultation every five years, and then do roughly what they like in the meantime.

So no, I don't accept any responsibility for rail privatisation, especially since it was rushed to get it through before an election the Major government knew it was going to lose, making it much more difficult for the incoming Labour government to halt the process.

That said, we could be more vocal about demanding a solution to the problems. In that respect, as you say, 'vive la france.'

 

[pogofish]

With regards to blaming the public:- It was for their conduct on trains and their ever increasing need for the cheapest of tickets and for for all wanting to travel at the same time, eg. commuting.

I think we must use different railways, the only thing I've ever found relaible about Leeds Station is the offer of a cheap blowjob! Its not the reserving of a seat that is the problem, rather who else is reserved on it at the same time!

Must be very tough for them, not being able to do what they were traditionally designed & run for. Never mind that being cheap & accessible is something critical to the success of any public transport system. What about commuters? How many places developed simply because of a railway line? Go look at a few maps!

 

[Roadkill]

If I remember correctly it actually pointed out that the reason they are such a pile of shite is because they are neither, and actually both at the same time. Some of it is held and run by the govt who have there way of doing things and some privatley run who effectivley rent bits of it from the govt.

Someone is going to have to educate me here Im afraid

None of it is run by the government, but the track, stations and signalling are now owned by Network Rail, which is a not-for-profit company effectively (but not technically) under government control. Nowadays Network rail employs most maintenance staff, whereas until a couple of years ago they were employed by private contractors. Network Rail is the successor to Railtrack, the private company forced into administration in 2001 (and whose shareholders have since been whining about the money they lost). The trains are owned by leasing companies, themselves all now owned by banks. The train operating companies own virtually nothing except a logo and a franchise to operate trains on certain routes.

The result of this is that we get all of the worst features of the fully privatised railway - fragmentation, inflexibility, duplication of functions, lack of co-ordination and high costs - with the age-old problem of BR; that it was too subject to political interference. It's the worst of all worlds.

Did you know the railways now receive more than three times the subsidy (in real terms) that British Rail did?

 

[djbombscare]

That would be about right. Three times the cost and a third of the service.

 

[Pingu]

i use the train quite a lot to travel to london

if i could park I would drive...


nothing wrong per say with the train service its just I could drive there and back... stay in a cheap hotel.. have something to eat for about the same price

 

[Tom A]

The bad news is I don't have a driving licence, much less the money to maintain the ownership of a car. The good news (sorta) is at 22 I still am legiable for a Young Persons Railcard.

However I am still pissed off with the pathetic excuse of a company that is Virgin Trains. Their so-called 'value' tickets are never there even if search for a month in advance, particularly if I want to get the sole direct service from Stoke-on-Trent to Brighton to see a mate there. Getting to and from London can be somewhat touch and go as well, and it was always impossible to get a ticket to and from Plymouth other than the saver return, which after discounts is a whopping £57, so I ended up resorting to National Express, fortuantely I never have to make that journey, so I end up paying the extra tenner for the benefit of being at my destination 2-3 hours earlier.

I went to Boston for a funeral - £98 return

Boston in America or Boston in Lincolnshire?

And what a load of bollox £117 return [from Bristol to London]. Which is Dia-fucking-bolical IMO.

Well I looked up the prices on nationalrail.co.uk, a saver return (without railcard) is 'only' £49, and they are always available as long as you arrive in London after a set time 9 or 10am I think, excluding weekends.

 

[djbombscare]

Well I looked up the prices on nationalrail.co.uk, a saver return (without railcard) is 'only' £49, and they are always available as long as you arrive in London after a set time 9 or 10am I think, excluding weekends.

Yeah thats the price I got when I checked. However I had to be there at 8.30 am. I didnt have a garunteed time for return AND I dont have a credit/debit card so I have to pay at the station for my ticket with cash.

That is £117 return

 

[discplayer]

Did you see the news story yesterday about the complexity of rail fares now? They said stuff that's been said above - the TOCs highlight cheap advance fares but massively increase walk up fares.

They also said on one report that as well as walk up fares increasing raipdly, the cheaper walk up fares that still exist, like the Saver, have had their hours cut back so when you may have used a Saver a few years ago (if you couldn't use the now seldom found Super Saver) you now need a full price Open ticket.

 

[christonabike]

I said:
I went to Boston for a funeral - £98 return

You said:
Boston in America or Boston in Lincolnshire?

I say:
Take a wild stab in the dark, I was travelling by train



I really like getting on a train to travel around the country, but I was absolutely freaked that I was asked for £196 for the two of us to get to Boston, (in Lincolnshire, not America )

 

[Tom A]

Sorry, it's that I heard of many cases where it's cheaper to fly to various parts of the world than it is to travel across Britian by train. Hence why I thought you might be going to Boston, MA, USA.

 

[christonabike]

No bother Tom A

I always get "Boston, what, in America?"

So I was chuckling when I even get it on a message board