No trains for charity cyclists



In article <[email protected]>,
Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
> don't often travel on the east coast. I'm old enough[1] to remember
> when trains in this country were both affordable and reasonably
> [1] I can *just* remember travelling on a steam-powered Flying Scotsman.


Were the summers always long and the football always exciting, too?

I quote from an analysis I did a couple of years ago over in Sunny
uk.railway land ([email protected]). I've seen no claims
that railways in (say) 1970 were cheaper in real terms than they were in
1932 (for which I did the analysis). If anyone has facts, bring them to
the table now.

Quote:

[...] In September 1932, the LNER were offering weekend special
holiday fares from London to Aberdeen which reduced the full fare of
124/- (6.20 pounds) to 82/9 (slightly under 4.14). (Source: posters on
the wall at Bounds Green station just before opening of the line, in
Desmond F. Croome's ``Piccadilly Line'', ISBN 1-85414-192-9, p31).

According to http://www.eh.net/ehresources/howmuch/poundq.php, that's
355.08 and 236.96 of ``spending power'' in 2001 pounds, respectively.
Price inflation: a factor of 57. However, that doesn't take into
account the fact that wage inflation has been higher than price
inflation since the war. The statutory minimum wage for agricultural
workers in Sep 1932 was 31/3 for a 51 hour week.
(http://www.wirksworth.org.uk/A04VALUE.htm). So he would need to work
for a month at minimum wage to buy a full price return to Aberdeen. The
current minimum wage is 4.20 per hour, so 204 hours at 4.20 is 856
quid. Wage inflation: a factor of 140.

[[ The same book says houses in Southgate were from 600 pounds to over
1000 at the same time. Since anything you might call a house is easily
200K now, house price inflation has been even higher ]]

So, in prices terms, London-Aberdeen full price was 355 pounds today, in
wages terms it was 856 pounds. The boast was ``A Penny A Mile'' --- 240
miles per pound, in other words. If prices have risen by a factor of
57, and wages by a factor of 140, that makes the equivalent cost today
somewhere between 24p per mile and 58p per mile. With fares at those
levels, you can have any damn seats you want. But oddly, no one is
claiming that 140 pounds for a restricted-time, restricted day
London-Birmingham return is what Virgin is aiming for.

ian
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:
>
> Mark South wrote:
>
> > This is the trains equivalent of a single "helmet saved my skull"
> > anecdote.


Quite. Guy surprises me.

> > So they appear to work for you on a small range of routes.
> > Good. But you would reject such reasoning elsewhere.


> This proves that "trains are always ****" is false, though.


Has anyone said that?
This was about experiences of taking bikes on trains.
IME there are difficulties more often than not.

This morning I travelled with the Brommie.
On disembarking (note well) I was asked if I had a reservation :-@ - as
I was leaving the station.
On my return journey, although I did not need it, the cramped two-bike
bike space was occupied - by one student with rucksac and one suit
reading the FT. The entrance was blocked by ladies luggage and a hat
box. And 10am is not really peak time.
Mark is absolutely right to ask what the 'average' experience is.
Everyone should keep a log and send it in to both the CTC and to the SRA.

This afternoon I have further journey's to make. I am not looking
forward to them. If a good service was offered I should not have to
always anticipate problems, but experience has shown it is essential to
do so.

> I have yet to have a bad experience of train travel that I can remember.


I suggest then that you are a very very lucky person.

> > Now, what's the average experience like?


Today i received my pile of SRA Cycling Consultation cards from the CTC,
and started distributing them. I would urge anyone who uses bikes and
trains to get them do the same before all bikes on trains travel is halted.

John B
 
Mark South wrote:

>>> This is the trains equivalent of a single "helmet saved my skull"
>>> anecdote. So they appear to work for you on a small range of
>>> routes. Good. But you would reject such reasoning elsewhere.


>> This proves that "trains are always ****" is false, though.


> Would a single ancedote of "helmet saved my skull" convince you that
> "helmets are a con" is false?


No, because (a) it is not possible to prove that the helmet worked in any
case, whereas it is possible to prove that my train journeys have been
convenient; and (b) your original statement implied universal crapness
rather than an overall balance of crapness.

>> I have yet to have a bad experience of train travel that I can
>> remember.


> Oh come on now! That's one of too smug to be acceptable, too naive
> to be believable, too drug-addled to be capable of remembering, or
> simply fabrication for the sake of contrariness.


What?

Actually I have just remembered I did once have a train journey that was
delayed due to a suicide on the line. Virgin laid on a replacement bus
service and Virgin empoyees with mobile phones kept everyone informed.
Other operators' passengers affected by the same problem were less lucky,
but Virgin let them on thier buses.

>>> Now, what's the average experience like?

>> Average, I expect :)

> Oh, logical discussion defeated by the use of biting wit.


No, I expect the average experience of rail travel is that it is adequate.
Not particularly exciting, but functional. My experience is probably well
above average. I actually enjoy travelling by train. I drove to work
yesterday - I would not do that every day if they doubled the salary.
Probably ;-)

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
 
JohnB wrote:

>>> This is the trains equivalent of a single "helmet saved my skull"
>>> anecdote.


> Quite. Guy surprises me.


Except it isn't, as detailed above.

>> This proves that "trains are always ****" is false, though.


> Has anyone said that?


Yes.

> This was about experiences of taking bikes on trains.
> IME there are difficulties more often than not.


So there might be, in your experience, but not in mine. I only do it once a
day, though.

> Everyone should keep a log and send it in to both the CTC and to the
> SRA.


Seems fair to me.

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Just zis Guy, you know? <[email protected]> wrote:
> No, I expect the average experience of rail travel is that it is adequate.
> Not particularly exciting, but functional. My experience is probably well
> above average. I actually enjoy travelling by train. I drove to work
> yesterday - I would not do that every day if they doubled the salary.
> Probably ;-)


Seeing this is cross-posted from u.r.c into one of my favourite stamping
grounds, I need to be careful to maintain my reputation for curmudgeonly
criticism of the railways. However, since I started cycling to work
once or twice a week last autumn, my regular pattern has been to cycle
all the way in, then go back using the International--New St run. Which
I have to use the stoppers for, because of having a non-folding bike
with me. For some reason there's never a Silverlink when you want one.

It's never let me down. There was one show which made the platforms so
crowded I didn't fancy carrying a bike down there, so I cycled home
instead. But I suspect that jad I just travelled 30mins earlier or
later I'd have been OK, and Spring Fair seizes the roads up too.
Periodically it's a bit late, but (with my uk.r hat on) I'm well aware
of the pathing issues between Coventry and New St and regard it as a
bloody miracle that anything works at all.

OK, I can be sanguine about it, because in the limit I can always ride
the whole way back, and the reason I don't is that it's just a bit too
knackering to then cook dinner straight away --- in fact, door to door,
cycling is only about ten minutes slower than doing part of it on the
train.

ian
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
> I have yet to have a bad experience of train travel that I can remember.
>


Repressed memory syndrome ;-)

Tony
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
> Let me see.
>
> - buy Virgin ticket via web with free bike reservation
> - turn up at station
> - put bike on voyager
> - go to Brum, arriving bang on time
>


Ding ding. Reality check. Virgin removed the bicycle booking option from
their website in September last year as did all the other train operators.
Bicycle reservations are still required though so if you want to go by train
you need to go to the station to buy the ticket or do it by phone.

Tony
 
Tony Raven wrote:

> Ding ding. Reality check. Virgin removed the bicycle booking option
> from their website in September last year as did all the other train
> operators. Bicycle reservations are still required though so if you
> want to go by train you need to go to the station to buy the ticket
> or do it by phone.


Ah, you are right - I couldn't work out which ticket was the right one, so I
did phone them. I hadn't noticed that I got one more option on the phone.

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
 
Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> in message <[email protected]>, TP
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> > [email protected] (Chris Brady) wrote:
> >>
> >>Yeah - and when we travelled from Chichester to Victoria the evening
> >>before we had to change at Barnham because one of the new trains had
> >>broken down. Eventually after 30 minutes delay (sans any form of
> >>announcements whatsoever) we travelled in an old ex-Connex yellow slam
> >>door train. As we went through Three Bridges we noticed that there was
> >>quite a few ex-Connex slam door trains stabled in the station and
> >>sidings. Quite why they couldn't have used those for the cycles is a
> >>moot point.

> >
> > It isn't a moot point; it is very simple. Those trains are off lease,
> > and to put then back on lease would cost a lot more than any
> > additional revenue they would generate.

>
> That is the *stupidest* excuse of all. If the trains are there, standing
> idle, and the passengers are there needing the service they can
> provide, and the management system is so baroque that they can't be
> deployed, then it's time to sack the managers.
>
> Just renationalise the lot and let's get back to a railway system which
> actually works, rather than the present crazy beurocratic morass.


Again, not as easy as it sounds, and a few more billion in the pockets
of lawyers and out of the railways. When the Tories privatised they
not only threw away the key to re-nationalisation they plugged the
keyhole, a bit like Beeching.
 
in message <[email protected]>, JohnB ('[email protected]')
wrote:

> "Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:
>>
>> Mark South wrote:
>>
>> > This is the trains equivalent of a single "helmet saved my skull"
>> > anecdote.

>
> Quite. Guy surprises me.
>
>> > So they appear to work for you on a small range of routes.
>> > Good. But you would reject such reasoning elsewhere.

>
>> This proves that "trains are always ****" is false, though.

>
> Has anyone said that?


Yes, me. On the basis of my experience of (largely Virgin) trains over
the past ten years. Or to be strictly precise, over the period ten
years ago until two years ago, when I vowed never to use one again. The
service on the old rolling stock got progressively worse as poor
maintenance led to increasing breakdowns, but that was nothing to the
consequence of the change to the new rolling stock which had less than
half the seats of the trains they replaced so were always overcrowded -
and even more unreliable than the 'old' rolling stock.

It may not be the case that all the trains are always ****. GNER
certainly seems to be better, and ScotRail run a halfway decent sleeper
service. But it is true that the system as a whole is overcomplex,
chaotic and badly run, and that Virgin are the absolute and
irredeemable pits.


--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; "If I were a Microsoft Public Relations person, I would probably
;; be sobbing on a desk right now" -- Rob Miller, editor, /.
 
Simon Brooke wrote:

> It may not be the case that all the trains are always ****. GNER
> certainly seems to be better, and ScotRail run a halfway decent
> sleeper service. But it is true that the system as a whole is
> overcomplex, chaotic and badly run, and that Virgin are the absolute
> and irredeemable pits.


And FGW are the closest to a Good Railway we have in the UK, AFAICT. But
your comment re Virgin is at odds with my experience. You can even get
decent coffee on the Voyagers.

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
 
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 07:16:30 +0100 someone who may be John Hearns
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>And where exactly is the location for wheelchair travellers on these
>trains...


In the guards van.

On modern trains the guards van is re-named flexible space and
provided with a carpet.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
 
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 19:18:21 +0100 someone who may be "Tumbleweed"
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>I thought it was funny to hear the commentator at the start, call the train
>companies '****wits' in front of a crowd of about 5,000 people.


An accurate comment. There are plenty of trains on the railways that
could accommodate the returning cycles and their riders, but the
railways are now unable to arrange such things. There are many
excuses for this inability, but they are just that.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
 
Just zis Guy, you know? <[email protected]> said:
> Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>> It may not be the case that all the trains are always ****. GNER
>> certainly seems to be better, and ScotRail run a halfway decent
>> sleeper service. But it is true that the system as a whole is
>> overcomplex, chaotic and badly run, and that Virgin are the absolute
>> and irredeemable pits.

>
> And FGW are the closest to a Good Railway we have in the UK, AFAICT. But
> your comment re Virgin is at odds with my experience. You can even get
> decent coffee on the Voyagers.


Voyagers are dreadful creations. No luggage space in the carriages, doors
that bite you if you stray too close, noisy diesel engines under the
carriage floor, an omnipresent smell of drains and the stench of burning
brake shoe every time the rattletrap monstrosity stops. Also, I'm not sure
what kind of bikes they intend to fit in the "baggage" car; a BMX might fit
easily, but my tourer took 20 minutes or so to hang up and secure.

OTOH, the Virgin staff are better than those usually found on the
Transpennine Distress or Central.

Regards,

-david
 
Just Zis Guy wrote:
> Simon Brooke wrote:
> > It may not be the case that all the trains are always ****. GNER
> > certainly seems to be better, and ScotRail run a halfway decent
> > sleeper service. But it is true that the system as a whole is
> > overcomplex, chaotic and badly run, and that Virgin are the absolute
> > and irredeemable pits.

> And FGW are the closest to a Good Railway we have in the UK, AFAICT. But
> your comment re Virgin is at odds with my experience. You can even get
> decent coffee on the Voyagers.
> --
> Guy
> --
> May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
> http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk




Yebbut, what you can't get on a Voyger is all the passengers and their
luggage going from London To Birmingham for Christmas (in my experience
anyway) :)

Bryan



--
 
On 22 Jun 2004 13:09:42 GMT someone who may be David Nutter
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>Voyagers are dreadful creations. No luggage space in the carriages,


Not quite, but not as much as there should be.

>the stench of burning
>brake shoe every time the rattletrap monstrosity stops.


Most unlikely. The main braking effort is rheostatic.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
 
vernon levy wrote:

>> >>> Travelling by train in the UK is a
>> >>> nightmare anyway - period - but with a bicycle its a total nightmare.
>> >>
>> >> ITYM travelling by train in the UK can be inconvenient, and with a
>> >> bike it may often be inconvenient.
>> >
>> >Nightmare. Such A Bloody Experience Never Again...

>>

> Could'nt disagree more. I have found the train services in Northern England
> to be superb, on time, manned by professional caring staff and tremandous
> value for money. Never had a problem getting abike on a train. Well done
> the various train operating companies who operate in my neck of the woods.


No complaints here for Valley Lines (now Arriva). Trains are regular,
mostly on time, and as long as you don't travel during commuting time,
reasonably cheap. (2 quid from Barry Island to Treforest, about 20 miles
or so, during the evening, 2.20 or so for a CDR)

I did a mini tour of Britain by train a few years
ago.

Ponty-Cardiff-Church Stretton-Llandudno-Manchester-
Blackpool-Windermere-York-Great Yarmouth-London-
Cardiff-Ponty.

Fairly expensive, but I think the total lateness of those journeys was
about 30 minutes. The only complaint I had, IIRC, was the filthiness of
the toilets in Lincoln.

--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/
Suddenly, it's Sooty
 
David Nutter wrote:

> Voyagers are dreadful creations. No luggage space in the carriages,
> doors that bite you if you stray too close, noisy diesel engines
> under the carriage floor, an omnipresent smell of drains and the
> stench of burning brake shoe every time the rattletrap monstrosity
> stops. Also, I'm not sure what kind of bikes they intend to fit in
> the "baggage" car; a BMX might fit easily, but my tourer took 20
> minutes or so to hang up and secure.


Really? Honest, I've taken the 'bent on a Voyager (without booking) - it
was trivially easy to hang and secure. I ws astonished!

> OTOH, the Virgin staff are better than those usually found on the
> Transpennine Distress or Central.


True. Mostly.

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
 
>
> The issue is that to get an old flatbed freight wagon, bolt bike racks
> on it and couple it to the end of the train would cost all of, ooooooh,
> maybe a couple of thousand nicker. But that would be an innovative
> response to customer demand, and we can't have that.


There are some suitable vehicles available for conversion to
bike-carrying carriages, compatible with many modern units, HSE
approved...... classes 142-4..... just about all they're fit for.
Remember to tighten you wheel-nuts when you get off though as they'll
probably have shaken loose.
 
JohnB <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Then, if you are lucky, the space isn't full of luggage, train rubbish
> or at peak times sardines in suits.


Speaking as one of the 'sardines in suits', if you try to take your
bike on a peak time SWT train into or out of Waterloo you deserve all
the inconvenience you get.