the state of briti***rains

[Anonymous]

If you ever talk to a British person, it seems like the subject of how bad their rail system is will come up. You probably have heard about a series of awful crashes there in recent years. But what hasn't made the international news was a story I saw on the BBC website earlier this year, about a wave of petty vandalism of the British rail system lately. On a number of occasions people have been leaving metal beams on the rails (in one case causing a train to derail) or throwing rocks at passing trains. This past summer a van filled with recent migrant workers was hit by a train at an unguarded rural grade crossing. Listening to some people, and reading about it on the news, you might think Britain's rail system is falling to pieces (their complaints seem similar to American complaints about our airlines; delays, poor service, uncomfortable seats, dirty toilets).
And yet when I went to England a few years ago (just a few months before Sep. 11), I didn't see much wrong with their trains. We rode sort of a commuter train from London Paddington Station to Windsor Castle down a very busy commuter route, and it didn't seem that crowded or poorly maintained (of course this may be because we left in the morning, in the opposite direction of the rush hour); in fact I was quite impressed, as many American tourists in Europe seem to be, of how fast the train went (probably up to about 80-90 mph) and how smooth the ride was (since welded rail is not in place everywhere in the States).
Then we went on an express from London to York which traveled very fast (120 mph, I've read), which while not as fast as France's TGV, is very impressive by American standards. They had an occasional snack cart going by, and the train was clean and comfy (though I didn't get up to explore; but rather sat and watched the view and read a book I had brought). So all in all I was pretty impressed by Briti***rains, but maybe that's just because I obviously don't live there and hence don't have to deal with them everyday. I've read some horror stories similar to those of American air travel, including how some regions still use equipment built in the '60s. And truth be told, the London tube was very crowded indeed, though not completely unbearable.
So what do other board members have to say? Has anyone else ever been to Britain and have a less pleasant story to tell? Are there any British members who can add to my report? What would you say the comparison is with the American passenger rail system?

[michaelstevens]

[8D]
Thanks Andy,

I'm sure that the Strategic Rail Authority, Network Rail, Thames Trains and GNER would be grateful for your positive remarks.
British Railways do receive a lot of (I think undeserved) negative flack, in the British press -- which similar to their US colleagues, rarely if ever publicize any good news about public transportation.
As I posted on another topic; my (British) opinion is that the Acela Express is up to the British/European standards, for speed, comfort etc.

[:)][:)]

[Anonymous]

Its the same basic response: If you are around something long enough, you'll complain about it being something terrable, even if it is better than other people have. The people that complain want a perfect transportation system, yet dont want to help improve it, kind of similar to what we have with AMTRAK here in the states

[kenneo]

Rode from Garre du Nord to Waterloo this August via Chunnel. Great ride until we got to Waterloo just past the place where they had that ugly head-on. We were doing about 10 MPH and were bottoming out the suspension. I thought at first we were on the ground!! The shock of the bolster stopping by fulliy compressing the springs felt just like we had been hit by another piece of equipment like a locomotive - except verticle and not horizontal.

[TH&B]

Briti***rains are pretty awfull, I find them ugly, uncomfortable, canclations, delays and dirtyness. On tha Gatwick Express to Victoria I saw the conductor (or gaurd) the guy that checks tickets and stuff using the septic machine for the public toilets on the train at Vic station! His uniform was filthy and I didn't want him to come near me I tell you. It's discusting what they make trainmen do over there.
-Another time the ticket sales lady told me "well you can buy a ticket if you want but I don't think the train will come" what? why not? "they ran out of trains". (it was supposed to be 20min service but instead no trains, what do I do now?)
-I can go on... have you ever seen a "soccor special"? well you don't want to!
Vandilism is high and visible.
--In the 70's when I was there the trains were at least very interesting equipement even if it was dirty (and vandalism was high then too) but everything is worse now. I was on a very crowded rickity old crappy comuter train that was passed by an 125mph express, the whole coach gave and creaked by the wind impact, the clearances are so tight. All the freight marshaling yards are gone. And what is it with that new trains have to be so ugly to make me wish I was blind? Graffiti looks batter!!
IT'S BAD OVER THERE!! I was there last now 3 years ago. It's too bad because historcaly I loved Britt***rains.

Some visiter friends from Holland was over here in the USofA and had been on Amtrak and they said they couldn't see what was wrong with Amtrak, they were quite impressed actualy. They said they went from Philly to New York...... well if that then becomes thier impresion of Amtrak I guess they might be impressed. (trains in Holland are nice by the way, I think)

[jeaton]

I reread Ed Ellis' short article on BR which had quite a bit of statistical information on the scope of the system. As extensive as the system is it is not surprising that an evaluation by the occasional rider might be all over the place. With a multitude of routes and operators, the service could range from great to terrible.

A few years back Ellis wrote a column in Trains suggesting that the splitting of a rail system into separate infrastructure and operating companies would make some sense from the view of how these things differ in financial needs and structures.
While his were good, the BR may high light some of the problems with idea. It is my impression that the bad press came over some accidents and other problems related to Jarvis' performance. I don't know how they got the contract to do the work, but I suspect that they they were significantly off the mark when forecasting revenue and costs. Either that or they did not have the expertise to do the work properly.

There is a standing assumption in our country and others, that the privitization of government programs will automaticly mean the job will get done for LESS COST.
Although not stated, I think that is part of the thinking behind the present administration's proposal to spin off the Northeast corridor as a company separate from Amtrak. Amtrak management put a little under $2 Billion for the cost to bring the NE Corridor up to a state of good repair. I'd bet there is some fool out there that thinks he could get it done for less.

[kenneo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton

There is a standing assumption in our country and others, that the privitization of government programs will automaticly mean the job will get done for LESS COST.
Although not stated, I think that is part of the thinking behind the present administration's proposal to spin off the Northeast corridor as a company separate from Amtrak. Amtrak management put a little under $2 Billion for the cost to bring the NE Corridor up to a state of good repair. I'd bet there is some fool out there that thinks he could get it done for less.

[soapbox]
First, we have a culture in the US that "no taxes for me is the way to be". So, one of the first things that happens is "Let's get rid of the FAT in GOVERNMENT". Well, lookie here, something not as untouchable as Medicare, that has lasted 10 times longer than it was supposed to --- AMTRAK!!!

OF COURSE there is someone that thinks he can do it cheaper and better. Just pay minimum wage and no benefits. After all, all of Mudchickens relatives will just "have to re-hire from the union wage to $5.15. They are "so dumb" they can't figure out how to do anything else." I never thought I would suggest that these people participate in a new reality TV show -- AMTRAK For Less. Problem is that they won't learn anything from it.
end [soapbox]

[jeaton]

Eric
You stated exactly what was in the back of my mind when I wrote my note. I can just see all the manpower in the country flocking to get on these crews to get a minimum wage. After all, all you need is a bunch of guys with strong backs. "Uh, what side of this thing goes up?"

Amtrak management is well aware that their pay rate are somewhat lower than the same kinds of jobs at other companies. Obviously, I have no idea how they will be able to deal with that, but I have seen them publicly state that turnover is a problem.

And just to be clear to those members who work track, signals, power, train operations or any other RR rank and file job-I don't think any of you make more than you should.

[RudyRockvilleMD]

We visited Great Britain in 1990, 1992, 1996, 1998, 2000 and 2002. During our visits in 2000 and 2002 our experiences with its trains were negative compared to the visits in 1990 and 1992. In October 2000 we arrived in England from Ireland on the same day as a high-speed derailment occurred outside of London which killed four passengers. This accident shut down the East Coast Mainline outside of London for at least a week if not more, and it led to many slow orders due to defective tracks, last minute line closures, and reductions in schedules.

In October 2002 a mudslide between Berwick and Edinburgh closed the East Coast Main Line again; this time the mudslide kept the line closed for at least 5 if not more days, and I experienced confusion in Newcastle where the station platform staff didn't know which trains were running

Trains tended to be overcrowded. We noticed standees not only on the main line trains, but on local trains and cross-country trains during both visits. In addition some of the British residents to whom we talked also complained about overcrowded and late trains.

Based on my recent experiences with trains in Great Britain their rail system is not underrated. In fact the Amtrak Reform Council proposed a clone of the privatized railroad system in Great Britain whee separate entities operate the trains and operate the infrastructure. Yes, they move many passengers, but how well do they do it?

[Anonymous]

I have been going to Great Britain 5-6 times per year for the last 26 years so I have a little knowledge of their system. The Brits travel by train very often. Yes, there is a lot of OLD equipment on the rails, but it is disappearing rapidly. Part of the privatization of passenger service was to clean up the equipment and this cannot be done over night. Very few of the coaches with a door from each seat set remain although they were a great way to unload a commuter train quickly. The Gatwick and Heathrow express trains are new and state of the art. The Brits use their trains! For example, Reading, which is 35 miles west of Paddington station there are 329 trains a day through the station. Reading has a population of 250,000. Houston, with a population of about 2 million has TWO trains per day. What is wrong with this picture?

I have taken many train trips when I have some free time. The best was the pirates and bear trip. Left Paddington station of Paddington Bear fame (A A Milne's childrens books) and went to Penzance of pirate fame from the Gilbert and Sullivan opera. Part of the line is along the Cornwall coast which is quite scenic. The interesting part was west of Plymouth where every city had an interlocking tower that manually controlled the signals and turnouts. You could see 10-15 armstrong levers through the window. Took you back 100 years in time. No, I did not find and bears or pirates.

*** Watkins