Northern Rail late,crowded not up to standards

DomRavioli

Cpu2007 wrote: »

I think it might help you getting a dose of reality as well as you keep making comparisons that don't stand.

Finding an alternative way of transport? that's a typical excuse that you also get from people don't have an answer to give. If I had an alternative way of transport, I'd have used it but the options out there are restricted and it seems that these companies take advantage of these restrictions. Getting by car is cheaper but by making parking expensive a person would think twice.
A person, is therefore forced to use the train.
This doesn't make the train the best option but the less worse option and this is what my question was about


Simply because there are term and conditions, it doesn't make them right even if your bound to them. The term a condition of a service are useless if a number of situations forces you to choose only one service(eg high parking rates etc)

Is that because an alternative means of transport would actually be a solution? Are you scared that you have gotten useful advice and your "argument" has been resolved?

There's the bus, the 17 runs every 10 minutes or better, and you will likely get a seat. Its cheaper, but takes about an hour. You could always move. Or get an alternative train.

Noone is forced to use a train. You took the job, you chose to live where you do, noone forced you to do any of that. You CHOSE it, and you are CHOOSING to spit your dummy out because there is no reason or need to throw your little tantrum because a train is a couple of minutes late.

Real simple solution. GET THE EARLIER TRAIN. You won't be late, and you will usually get a seat.

flyingscotno1

Cpu2007 wrote: »

check the morning journey from Castleton to Manchester.
Minimum delays of 2-3mins at least once or twice a week
7-15 mins of delay at least 6-7 times a month,

2-3 minutes is nothing really. A train is defined as on-time if it is within 5 mins of the scheduled times.

As for standing- such is the nature of rush hour commuting!

Cpu2007

DomRavioli wrote: »

Is that because an alternative means of transport would actually be a solution? Are you scared that you have gotten useful advice and your "argument" has been resolved?

There's the bus, the 17 runs every 10 minutes or better, and you will likely get a seat. Its cheaper, but takes about an hour. You could always move. Or get an alternative train.

Noone is forced to use a train. You took the job, you chose to live where you do, noone forced you to do any of that. You CHOSE it, and you are CHOOSING to spit your dummy out because there is no reason or need to throw your little tantrum because a train is a couple of minutes late.

Real simple solution. GET THE EARLIER TRAIN. You won't be late, and you will usually get a seat.

No, because stating "use an alternative way of transport" or "don't use it if you don't like it" are childish statements that people use when they can't provide a solution but think they actually are.

If I'm scared, that wouldn't be because my argument has been resolved but because what you're classifying as advices is not an advice, nevertheless useful.

I'm aware of buses, taxis, trams, trains and everything but your failing to understand the meaning behind my argument.

I don't have an issue with the train being a couple of minutes late, the train being expensive, the train not having seats; I have an issue with all these things PUT TOGETHER which became a relevant issue in my opinion.

Buses have seats and they are cheap but they take time, which is normal for a bus and I wouldn't be complaining about their time if I was taking a bus as I know that this method of transport takes time.

The train claims to provide a service that will take me from A to B in a certain amount of time, which I am happy to pay for as is short; however if this then implies that you have to keep standing most of the time and there are the usual delays then I find that their service is not adequate.

I already take an earlier train, which takes me to work half an hour early if on time, 25-20 mins early on average and sometime 5-10 early if the train was 7-15 mins late. Now, if I was to take an earlier train than the one I'm already taking then I'd be there 45 mins early sometime. With your statements saying to take early trains so I won't get late your basically saying that every single person should get very early trains so that they don't risk being late, but by doing this people would be getting there very early(some businesses maybe don't even open very early). So how about the train company becomes more serious and punctual about their service, which means that I could take the train I'm supposed to take and be at my place of work 10mins early easily.

I don't think the concept of demand and supply is hard to understand, which is what all these issues are based on.

Humphrey10

Cpu2007 wrote: »

I don't think the concept of demand and supply is hard to understand, which is what all these issues are based on.

The trains you use aren't full - you never have to wait for the next train, supply meets demand. You pay for a journey between A and B, you don't pay for a seat - if you want a seat you can usually pay extra to reserve one or pay for 1st class, I don't know if either are possible on the train you use but if they are, it's up to you if you want to do this or not.

The trains could be delayed for many different reasons, only a few of which the train company that runs that train can influence. People ask "well, why don't they allow the train more time to get from A to B, then it wouldn't be late?", the reason why this might not be suitable in this case is because it would mean everyone's journey would take longer, and could cause less frequent trains, so could cause more problems than it solves.

Jeff_Bridges_hair

Cpu2007 wrote: »

I don't think the concept of demand and supply is hard to understand, which is what all these issues are based on.

I would say its the issue of supply and demand that you do not understand.

Yes they are over crowded. We all know this - especially at peak times. Cant be helped.

Without the actual infrastructure to supply more paths they cannot therefore buy /lease more vehicles to run on said infrastructure. And given the constraints at many stations - especially terminal stations where there is no more room really to build more platforms then the railway quickly becomes full.

I wont bore you to death with it all but only because it would go over your head.

Cpu2007

the reason why I don't have to wait for the next train is because I don't want to get the next one, I'd rather be swallowed up by a crowded train than wait for the next one. It is clear to me that the only thing I'm paying for is to be transported from A to B and not punctuality,seats are a secondary/optional service. what I simply don't understand is that why the cost of the journey for such basic service is so high.
I can afford it but when I see that I can make the same journey, around the same time, with a cost marginally higher than a train ticket (excluding the parking which is why I don't use the car) then the cost of my journey isn't any different than the cost of the journey of the train.
I know they have costs of maintenance, staff,management and others but also the number of people using or forced to use their service because of lack of less worse alternatives is high. shouldn't this make the cost of the journey cheaper?

@Jeff are you saying that if there was enough infrastructure then they would have bought/leased more trains to put on the path?and therefore it's not their fault but it's because of the infrastructure?

redux

Cpu2007 wrote: »

@Jeff are you saying that if there was enough infrastructure then they would have bought/leased more trains to put on the path?and therefore it's not their fault but it's because of the infrastructure?

That might be the case, or it might not. There will be an efficient flow rate for trains, and the line may or may not be at capacity.

For one example, Reading station is being extensively remodelled at the moment, including new platforms, track alignment, and signalling.

It might not be possible to use longer trains without extending platforms at several stations.

They may be reviewing that area, maybe not. If they did have more capacity on your line, it would cost more money, and might not all be used.