Re: Northern 323s

On 10 Sep, 21:52, darkprince66 <darkprince17031...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sep 10, 1:20 pm, Steve Broadbent <st...@stevebroadbent.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <9889f94f-3cb6-40fe-b9d5-c6f5befdd...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> >  trackmi...@googlemail.com wrote:
> > > Well, I assume you deliberately decided to ignore the fact that what 
I
> > > said agrees with your points above - I was just clarifying that the
> > > usual "why doesn't TOC X get more trains?" or "what are
the plans of
> > > TOC Y to manage increasing demand?" are only asked because people
> > > still haven't realised that decisions are taken by (or with) the DfT
> > > and that rolling stock plans for a franchise are agreed with the DfT
> > > when a bid is accepted as the winning bid - hence why the rolling
> > > stock "plan" for a franchise is usually announced at the start
of the
> > > franchise during the big fanfare of its launch etc.
> > > I accept that as long as there are short franchises the DfT HAS to
> > > underwrite leases or the banks that own the ROSCOS just won't put up
> > > the money for buying new trains. ("controlling hand" was used
as a
> > > statement of fact, not with any critical element).
>
> > > However I note that the preliminary report following the investigatio
n
> > > into the ROSCOs does basically say that the DfT is holding back the
> > > industry and by demanding 7 year type leases rather than 20 year
> > > leases it is preventing TOCs from making more autonomous decisions
> > > about purchasing new trains etc.
>
> > > Having had some off the record breifings from within the DfT now I
> > > think some of the views you have expressed about either DfT thinking
> > > or even the civil servants at the DfT are no longer fully accurate -
> > > and certainly there is a "strong" view at the DfT that Labour
will
> > > lose the next election and so any thinking about long term strategy i
s
> > > getting less relevant to the current band of ministers because it
> > > won't be their problem for much longer.
>
> > > I also got a confession (supported by other contacts who have had the
> > > same admission) that the DfT "HLOS Rolling Stock Strategy" was
so
> > > muddled when it was announced that it really was down to Roger Ford t
o
> > > unravel it via a very long series of clarification questions. Very
> > > senior people in the DfT have confirmed that they are now using
> > > Roger's tables as the definitive reference source within the
> > > department... make of that what you will.
> > > (and two things that Roger's work has already uncovered is that some
> > > new vehicles that were specifically announced as "Not part of the
130
0
> > > new vehicles", confirmed in written answers from the DfT to Roger
now
> > > are part of the 1300 vehicles and also the original announcement of
> > > "1300 additional vehicles" isn't 1300 NEW vehicles and the DfT
has
> > > included several moves of XX vehicles from one TOC to another as
> > > "additional vehicles".)
>
> > > But, basically yes, the DfT will always have to underwrite leases if
> > > it remains the "operator of last resort" - should a franchise
fail -
> > > and also to ensure that ROSCOs pay for new trains and that we don't
> > > see stock of maybe less than 10 years in service dumped in sidings
> > > because a new franchisee has decided not to use them.
>
> > > Tony
>
> > This, and your earlier post are, of course, spot on, Tony, as we would
> > expect!
>
> > Ever since the "1300 additional" were announced, and it was an
almost
> > off the cuff announcement which they are now having to stick with, I am
> > sure that at the time it was not the intention this would become policy
> > with each unit counted, many took it to mean 1300 brand new carriages.
>
> > Your earlier post could well be stuck on office walls as a reminder of
> > the actuality
>
> > To go back to the original post, when Northern's 51 (??) Class 323
> > carriages are transferred to Brum, that will be "51 extra vehicles for
> > West Midlands", and 51 off the 1300.
>
> > When, IF, Northern's orders the 75 new emu carriages, that will be
> > "Northern invests £100m in new stock...." .(which of course is
untrue
,
> > before anyone steps in)
>
> > Now, supposing Northern does get the four 180s it is supposed to be
> > getting, which are needed to meet the December 2008 timetable
> > obligations in the Manchester area, that too is 20 extra vehicles for
> > Northern, and 20 off the 1300, or is it?? And when they go away again
> > after a year, is that 20 back onto the 1300....
>
> > (Northern needs 20 to cater for the changes brought on by the new wcml
> > t/t.)
>
> > S- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Northern is having 180's? When did that happen???! And where are they
> going to use them?
>
>  I was under the impression that they were all taken/in the process of
> being taken by ECML operators, except for the 2 that VT is using to
> replace WB64. Mindue, there are several stories on how the split of
> the fleet is being done...
>
> Funny how no-one wanted them 12 months ago...
>
> Rich

Good to see I'm not the only one that's really confused!
[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]