Posted 8th June 2012 | 6 Comments
Virgin demands better West Coast performance
VIRGIN TRAINS has told Network Rail that it must improve performance on the West Coast Main Line, after another period of lack-lustre punctuality on the route. Talks are underway between the two parties, but now Virgin has taken the unusual step of making its grievances public.
The operator said that 'infrastructure performance of the West Coast Main Line continues to be unacceptable, and this is having a major impact on Virgin Trains' customers and those of other operators, who have seen punctuality fall well below expected levels'.
The ORR has recently told Network Rail that it must improve the performance of long distance trains, but Virgin said although the ORR's move was welcome, it did 'not deal adequately with the immediate issues'.
A company statement continued: 'We are concerned with the lack of focus on immediate improvement, as we and our customers must see short-term progress, especially as the Olympics and Paralympics will be a showcase for the industry.
'The problem has been highlighted recently as improved weather at the end of May ruined performance through heat-related delays with performance on some days being at around 60 per cent punctuality.
'We have repeatedly told the ORR and NR that we must have a reliable infrastructure if we are to continue the remarkable growth of recent years, when we have seen the number of customers double to 30 million a year. Anything short of this will affect the potential of the West Coast Main Line to continue its success.'
When asked to respond, Network Rail declined to comment directly on Virgin's statement, but repeated what it had said when the ORR had published its ruling last week: 'We welcome the ORR’s recognition that we, and the train operating companies, have already done much to improve long distance punctuality in this control period – which is currently running at a record level of 89.2 percent for the past year – and we accept the challenge to deliver an even better service.
'We are determined to do all we can to achieve that through balancing the continued growth in demand with passengers’ desire for improved reliability in terms of punctuality.'
Virgin is currently one of four shortlisted bidders for the next West Coast intercity contract, which is due to begin in December.
Reader Comments:
Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.
jack99, Oxford
To provide extra capacity south of Rugby how about reinstating the Great Central route from Rugby to Princes Risborough ( Ashendon Junction )
All that is required is a connection at Rugby , rebuild Brackley Viaduct , quadruple the GW/GC joint railway where possible , reinstate the track and electrify. Also by reinstating the Rugby - Leicester section it can connect into the Midland Main Line south of Leicester. A new railway giving additional capacity on existing disused formations at a fraction of the HS2 price.
Philip Russell, Carlisle
I always found the service on the west coast mainline to be very good in recent years, certainly better than the east coast with seemed to have frequent overhead line or weather related problems etc.It seems to be mainly major signal failures that can cause hours of trains waiting around before hand signalling is arranged or the problem fixed so maybe some fresh ideas are needed in this area
Graham, Hook
Over the last 15 years passenger numbers have been growing a lot faster than was predicted. This was partly due to the fact that when the WCML got improved more people wanted to use it.
This has lead to growth of around 5% when most predictions were/are based on about 2%. Now 5% a year doesn't sound much, but over 15 years that means that passenger double (because of compound growth) and even 2% means an extra 35% of passengers.
This means that even routes which are running at 75% full over the course of a day would then find them running at over 100% full over the course of the day with just 2% growth after 15 years.
Now the TOC try their best to spread loadings with peak & off peak & saver tickets, but there comes a point things get so bad that people will pay a lot of money to squeeze onto a train. At that point more capacity is needed.
Also if the funding is from borrowing, sometimes it is cheaper to borrow some now and then another bigger amount in 15 years time than it is to borrow a smaller total amount in the first place.
Paul, London
I can safely say stalled performance on the WCML is not due to some inert drive for HS2. The issue is the capacity increased from the WCML upgrade and resulting Virgin High Frequency Timetable has been soaked up by passenger and freight demand, whilst cable theft, and axle counter problems have hit performance
Geoff Steel, Northampton
Lee (Manchester) is right to ask the question and part of the answer I believe is due to the fact that quite a bit of the WCML was descoped from the upgrade when the costs were running out of control. In my view this is a major factor why performance now is not one would expect from a route that most passengers were led to believe had been wholly upgraded.
For example, I understand that the signalling at Watford and Bletchley PSB (power signal box) areas along with Northampton to Daventry and some areas controlled by Stafford were scaled back or cut out altogether leaving much older equipment in place and therefore more likely to be unreliable. The Bletchley area and Northampton sections are currently being renewed and due for completion in 2013/4. Also, I believe that the power upgrade has still not been completed even though it was needed for the full pendilino service high frequency service which started running some years back. In the meantime the areas at Watford and Stafford still await renewal and until this happens the risk of more delays will in my view make it increasingly difficult and challenging for NR to meet its performance targets for this route.
Regarding train speeds the line speed for non tilting trains remains at 110mph max and it is only the pendilinos and super voyagers that are allowed to travel at 125mph.
So far as Project funding is concerned it was not a case of cutting back on WCML but to save a scheme that was all ready way over the original budget and which could not deliver the original core objective to run at 140mph which of course is what the pendilinos were specifically designed.
It is logical to conclude that had this objective been delivered then the HS2 scheme might not have been necessary at all. But that's another story!!
Lee, Manchester
The cynics amongst us may view the current issues with on-time performance on the WCML as being orchestrated for the purpose of providing further justification for HS2. I would question why capacity and on-time performance are such issues now after the the whole WCML was upgraded a few years ago to increase journey speeds from 110mph to 125mph. The Trent Valley line was widened from two to four track formation and the High frequency timetable was introduced, again, all to increase capacity and improve journey time reliability. It seems to have been a lot of money invested for a short-term fix or where these schemes cut-back to save on costs with a consequent reduction in their effectiveness. I know the WCML was to have been improved to alow 140mph running as was the WCML when it was electrified. WHy do we keep cutting back on project fundingh to save money, only to find in a few years time that we have to invest far more finance than has been saved to achieve the same results?