Bus Links, Value for Money and the environmental dynamic appeal challenge to get more people to use them.

Buses tend to convey a certain core audience. Privatisation saw decline of bus networks and increased costs at the point of use. Today we have Government touting its investment in buses, but the reality is a sticking plaster and whitewash to the mainstay use enhancement of daily, depending on these fragmented networks. Value for money, affordability, accessibility, reliability, cleanliness, driver attitude, company hands-on management and direction/leadership and the adequacy of integration with rail stations, access to public toilets of a civilised standard and abundance open during bus operations at very least not part-time. These things attract or repel bus usage on a regular basis or not. In Bedford, out of the 3 main operators, Stagecoach, Grant Palmer and UNO, Stagecoach are probably with the edge in professionalism across the piece. Grant Palmer tries, but like the other day, bus failed at the Bus Station (thankfully) but not a word from the driver (10.30am No. 44, Wednesday 14^th July 2021); people had to decide whether to stay or look for another bus at inconvenience to themselves. Likewise, the 28 and 21 wait only a fraction few seconds before departing at the Bus Station and better duration waiting may enable people changing buses from elsewhere around the bus station to have a chance to change, whereas miss it and 30 minutes or 1 hour wait not uncommon. 

Getting off peak buses to link with Bedford Midland and Bus Station has been a post privatisation endeavour, but only of limited response. It should be flagrantly obvious and advantageous. Take buses out and unadulterated car dependency and congestion, add buses in, politicians and car drivers think congestion is compounded, but no! It is a choice and some carrot and stick could draw more to bus usership if the price, convenience and frequency when needed is tuned to what the customer needs and demands. Alas, getting hands-on coordination, rather than aloof science study procedures by people who drive very often is the convoluted order of the day... things must change. Extending the Concessionary Bus Pass to Under 65's and making them obtainable for all who want to use them and merging bus and rail cards to enable more public transport lifestyle/environment usage should be seen as a part of the jigsaw to cut congestion, emissions and pollution. It would also fill off-peak public transport - another goal fulfilled. 

Who pays? We do if we do, we do if we don't, what then tips the balance? Whether you believe in a Climate Emergency or not and are willing to do 'whatever it takes' to optimise the reduction of car lifestyles by choice than dictate. Any Government who gets it right, achieves a great step in the right direction!

There’s a place for nostalgia in our recollection of buses as per this historic bus stationed at Northampton on a special run-about service day circa 2018, by the Historical Society which has some old buses, some of which are from the days when the Civic Corporation ran local services for local people as a staple transport. No thought of profit motive, no disproportionality to incomes of likely users. Now, things are very different and balancing out the environmental efficiency of using public transport, is a sense of ‘who would use it?’ and does it present an attractive alternative to the car/value for money?

You may wish to peruse this link article from the Guardian for a reader:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/19/uk-bus-privatisation-has-caused-poverty-and-job-losses-says-un?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

A vision for a core circular routes pattern to encompass both Bedford Midland Railway Station and Bedford Bus Station. Any takers? Join ERTA and give us your support. Enquiries via richard.erta@gmail.com

ERTA Supports Rebuilding the Harrogate-Ripon-Northallerton Rail Link for Modal Shift back to Rail.

The A61 goes more or less the same route as the former railway Harrogate-Ripon-Northallerton. Modal shift from road is badly needed at local and regional and indeed, as part of a nationwide effort to declutter congestion, cut emissions and get people and goods more efficiently moved and give more options. ERTA is playing a part. Route protection is badly needed, but the overriding need for rail choice means ploughing through 'here's the cheque, move please' is the new order in a context of Climate Emergency and the dereliction of duty to protect these strategic rail routes in the first place. Local commuting, wider travel, freeing up capacity into and changing at York for everything, freight by rail and new flows boosting existing service demand patterns should chime well. Join ERTA and help us pioneer advocacy of this rail link being restored as a modern, local, conventional rail link. It makes a tonne of sense! We badly need modal shift from road to rail and this reopening/rebuild/new build needs ploughing through for regional linkages. Please give us support, especially if you live north of Leicestershire! https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/transport/how-re-opening-harrogate-northallerton-line-could-link-10-cities-leeds-bradford-airport-1743437

Join ERTA to boost our ability to do more potentially: https://ertarail.co.uk/become-a-member/

Please join us for our event in Brighton:

Please join us for our event in Brighton:

Trying to get the Guildford-Horsham-Shoreham rail link rebuilt for modern daily rail usage to be enhanced and increased. This would have multiple on/off the rails benefits and link both strategic regional places like Reading, Heathrow, Gatwick and Brighton and all in between and offer access to Portsmouth and Southampton for freight as a relief to Reading-Didcot for everything, creating much needed capacity. Likewise relief to the Brighton Main Line and associated radial roads. Lewes-Uckfield deals with the eastern flank, but in a context of growth, we need the western flank re-railed as well - not all eggs in one-sided baskets! We need balance. Will you join us? https://ertarail.co.uk/become-a-member/ 

We welcome everyone who may be genuinely interested and supportive, but welcome especially students who may wish to explore how they could benefit the project, team, bring time, talent and gain experience e.g. campaigns, media advocacy and negotiating with both industry and elected representatives with others to help move things forward. Raising members and money is all for the good to inform a budget as well.

Join our free email loop: richard.erta@gmail.com 

All meeting enquiries to Mr David Ferguson.

How our suggestion fits into the map of ideas and benefits:

A reflection on Pip Dunn's Woodhead Article ' Woodhead 40 years on: time to let go' Rail Magazine July 14-July 27 2021, Edition: 934 pages 38-43 - A right to disagree!

I disagree with the entire article and premises of its construe. A historical knowledge or lived experience is one thing, but a mainly second-hand sourced view with the benefit of published interests in roads, cars and lorries and the magazines unadulterated support for HS2 and HS3 'whatever the cost' hardly commends as an objective commentary? See: https://www.truckanddriver.co.uk/meet-the-team/profile-pip-dunn/

To the article, in brief, I believe the following is worthy of further consideration in defence of the idea of retaining and studying with a view to rebuilding a new Sheffield - Manchester conventional rail link which serves both end-to-end markets and new markets like access to a National Park by rail, not roads!

1. Page 38 of said article - Mrs Thatcher's dislike of the railways: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/3067563.stm and 1982 was Serpell - so context is a black cloud over unions, railways and contrast unleashing and continuing the infatuation with roads and road-based transport/oil fuelled. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Roberts  and https://en.google-info.org/7504178/1/serpell-report.html for background and context.

2. How old was Pip Dunn in 1981? Or Gareth Dennis for that matter? How objective are they? https://garethdennis.medium.com/a-remarkable-achievement-the-environmental-case-for-building-hs2-fc22ff83b024 and https://etrr.springeropen.com/articles/10.1007/s12544-017-0233-0

3. P. 38 'nowhere of note' but end-to-end lines with little in between closure is misapprehended here. For example, the Borders Railway serves mainly a rural location, was seen by many rail people in professional circles as marginal and an enthusiasts dream, but carried 4 million journeys in just 3 years: https://www.railstaff.co.uk/2018/09/06/borders-railway-more-than-4-million-journeys-since-it-opened-3-years-ago/ Where else might the model be applied? What scope and pro-affirmative scoping do these rail magazines offer us, even for Woodhead?! Silence or drab nonsense without declaring other interests. Forget the environment or modal shift, choice and emissions reductions. The joining up to Carlisle as a through route would enable even more people and goods by rail and double if not triple usage... what more for Woodhead surely? See https://www.hull.ac.uk/work-with-us/research/institutes/logistics-institute/our-work/lhoft  - utilises what is, but switching from northern supply on a north-south axis to east-west makes sense, so new and more business flows but shorter haul = good for emissions reduction, efficiency and cost reduction, what plan for rail in such a framework or must we continue a diet of denial and suppression of local/conventional rail for exorbitant passenger only High Speed case making by rubbishing other cheaper options even at the £1.5 billion quoted here - a fraction of HS2 Costs: https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/high-speed-2-costs and https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16473296 By any comparable standards, take a breathe by all means at £1.5 billion for a new Woodhead, but it is a pittance to HS2 even the northern arm and HS3... but what of default interim road usage, upgrades and new builds and environmental impact? Woodhead screams from its dormant silence as so many wrong doings, that it has a role to play in a new era of rectified and rebalanced transport apparatus'.

4. What Woodhead offers:

a. Choice/choices

b. more freight by rail, not coal, but new flows and opportunities

c. reducing emissions

d. decluttering principal roads and urban interfaces

e. not everyone drives, owns a car or wants to... let the disenfranchised have a better opportunity and be enabled to choose rail and vote with their feet. People can only use what is available, so 40 years without direct rail to the West, means either don't travel or go elsewhere signals and vice versa footfall and spend to the east and sustainability issues abound.

5. P. 38 "Traffic was in slow decline" The article does not modernise to today's need, and seems an arm chair critics retro justification for then and now status quo, with no remedy but to default of passenger only costly High Speed with large swathes disenfranchised between principal locations and no cure but car dependency/congestion and synthetic demand for road upgrades or a long way round to get anywhere.

6. Page 39 Rail Magazine has stalwartly supported HS2 and HS3 but focused on denting reopening aspiration by rubbishing calls for Woodhead to be reviewed... 

7. P39 The National Park and non car accessibility: Woodhead and Dunfold are right on the door/gateway and build support infrastructure to make it a gateway to environment, freedom, right to roam and enjoy... with footfall and spend and a cleaner basis for such theatres of leisure and entertainment.

8. P. 39 Fails to appreciate end-to-end populations. South of Newcastle to North of Derby and east to Hull across to Manchester and the Cheshire-North West arc is plenty of scope as well as the Pan-Europe-Hull-Liverpool-Atlantic audiences scope factored in. Local to Global reaches and ranges and translates back to inclusion of interim areas and best managed transport design, usage and options for people and goods.

9. Page. 39: "With capacity on both Standedge and Hope Valley Lines, there were more than enough ways to take a train across the Pennines.":

a. Why then are roads being upgraded at cost and new ones called for?

b. what use is steep gradients and rock tunnels on the Hope Valley to lend to OHLE and 9'6 container traffic... if it was cost-effective, why not done by now?

10. Page 40 Standedge for all trans-Pennine rail freight in a context of axis realignment and growth means one thing... 2/3 will be by road defaultively if we do not re-build/new-build a Woodhead Railway. Failure to apprehend this, is a failure to apprehend what this rail link can bring to the 'now' situation.

11. Page 40 "However, few (if any) container trains go that way anyway" must be contrasted with this: https://www.hull.ac.uk/work-with-us/research/institutes/logistics-institute/our-work/lhoft More study work needs doing whilst at the same time protecting the route from further destruction/redevelopment blight to keep options open, see what potential 'now' and 'then' and if it serves a purpose and saves elsewhere... why not? Why should roads take all the freight tonnages?

12. Page 41: "given it [Woodhead] was 60 mph line speed for most of the way." 

a. compare and contrast with average same distance/direction/axis road speeds for people and goods.

b. a consistent 60mph enables quicker end to end timings, obstruction free and keeps things on the move = efficiency, saving and who needs 220mph anyway between Sheffield and Manchester? 

13. Page 41:

a. new bore tunnel can be done/savings on road and elsewhere

b. does not have to go into Piccadilly, restore the south Manchester orbital rails and reopen Manchester Central as an interchange with trains from east and west for interchange, connectivity and more capacity.

14. Page 42 Gareth Dennis, firm HS2/3 supporter, how objective is he when approaching perceived or actual challengers and cheaper options/more inclusive options like this? Compare £1.5 billion for an international all-inclusive passenger and freight environmentally friendly solution like Woodhead with costs of Birmingham-Leeds Northern arm of HS2 and upgrading roads with volumes to match spiralling patterns never satisfied - all costs ratcheted and this rail could be done asap... should be in the frame not for dismissal, but revitalisation on and off the tracks. Woodhead presents good value for money and versatility than High Speed trans-Pennine solutions if the truth be known?

This is my initial reflection and the model repeats... time to wake up and re-rail Britian and get things moving in a cleaner and more sustainable fashion - people AND goods!

Richard Pill

ERTA Chairman

richard.erta@gmail.com

15-07-2021

Our London-wide Pamphlet and our latest Newsletter are available as colour pdf's via requests to richard.erta@gmail.com

Our London-wide Pamphlet and our latest Newsletter are available as colour pdf's via requests to richard.erta@gmail.com

ERTA is a voluntary association of members of the public who want better public transport and choice to road and vehicle reliance, we want cutting of fossil fuels and we don't buy the Grant Shapps view that the electric vehicle revolution is a panacea. Numbers of vehicles on our roads are rising and the volume of traffic can only be dented if adequate rail-based alternatives are put in situ. Popularism suggests Light Rail (LRT) is an answer and in some dense urban locations like Central London and possibly West London could make a contribution just as Birmingham, Manchester and other large cities across the country. However, getting more freight on the rails has to be tailored - can LRT cater for such? Freight is often seen as block container loads, whereas new markets for parcels, post, pallets by rail can be done out-of-hours and use the same infrastructure. Freight Multiple Units was once something mooted but under funded to develop properly. If it is not steel wheels on steel rails, if it is rubber, it is a bus?! How many give up the car for a bus whereas would use a train?

In M25 to radial growing urbanisation areas like St Albans, Watford, Potters Bar and Stansted via Harlow, extending the Underground Network may lend itself to serve intermittent places like London Colney, Bushey and Potters for example. Hertfordshire north of M25 needs a joined up conventional rail choice able to utilise rail for more passenger and freight off roads choices. Government found £27 billion for new roads, but cannot provide funding for rejoining links of a heavy rail kind and even its Reverse Beeching Fund is a mere £500 million for the whole nation! If lands are not retained, opportunities will be lost. If ideas are not studied, cases which could be made will be lost.

Likewise in West London:

a. Could the Southern Heathrow Link be extended to link with Old Oak Common Interchange and via a new tunnel link with the Chiltern Main Line?

b. Could that West London new north-south link enable out-of-hours freight from Southampton and Portsmouth bypass busy London routes and enable more off roads?

c. If we don't get designs and crucially capacity right, we lock-in overcrowding on and off the rails.

Please have a perusal and give support where you may. We welcome feedback, local knowledge, solutions to challenges and delivery maps and pathways please.

https://ertarail.co.uk/become-a-member/

 

ERTA Minutes for June 24th 15.00 hrs Great Central Corridor Rail Projects Hosted by Mr Owen O’Neill

ERTA Minutes for June 24^th 15.00 hrs Great Central Corridor Rail Projects Hosted by Mr Owen O’Neill *@oweno.info Our meetings are open to all/all welcome. 

Present: Owen O’Neill (Host), Richard Pill (Chair), John Harrison, Roger Landells, Frank Mahon, Ray Sloan and one or two others I did not capture

(Can amend or accept my apologies).

1. Apologies for absence: Cllr Vanessa McPake of Milton Keynes Council and Adrian Carter.

2. Rugby-Lutterworth-Narborough (linkage for Leicester etc) inclusive of Magna Park:

Owen reported that Warwickshire fairly supporting but Leicester City Council seemed luke warm. Leicestershire County Council more interested, but has a sliding scale of priorities.  It was felt West Northants Council, the new Unitary Authority was still finding its feet. Government Integrated Rail Plan was something to engage with. Midlands Connect Organisation another influential outlet we need onboard. Priorities seem to be Leicester-Coventry, Midland Main Line capacity issues and then Rugby-Leicester and Northampton-Market Harborough. It was accepted that we need to declutter our roads, cut congestion and emissions.

3. Rugby – Calvert/Banbury and vice versa: Concerns were raised over the rate of development. ERTA is not a forum to debate rights and wrongs of HS2, like so many outlets, it proves a divisive matter for and against and is being built like it or not. However, interim areas and areas not served by any rail facility in ERTA’s view need consideration at very least of how a domestic rail facilitation can be done and brought closer to where people and development is. An unrailed corridor is the former Great Central spinal lineage between Calvert and Rugby and whilst HS2 assumes part of it south of Brackley and Brackley old GC Station is lost, the HS2 assumes a route east of Brackley and a domestic line could run alongside or partner in close proximity to it and deviate onto old GC alignment north of Brackley whilst HS2 veers off to the north-west towards Solihull. The new domestic line would have a new East Brackley Parkway Station adjacent to the busy A43 and with either connecting buses or an LRT system to link with Silverstone, Towcester and Northampton and/or Buckingham and Milton Keynes in some shape or form. In any case, given development, given a Milton Keynes-Aylesbury domestic link served by East-West Rail or another agent operator or combined servicing, it was felt by ERTA that Calvert should have a new domestic station along with Claydon and that amidst the clamour for new development, lands at this stage need setting aside for a twin track domestic railway to deviate off the existing lines and head northwards to East of Brackley/Station and beyond bestriding the East-West Rail Line somewhere east of the former Great Central/HS2 corridor but west of Claydon. Objections to a station as another development have to be counter-balanced with all this development and no station just fuels calls for upgraded roads and urban congestion/land use parking demand conflicts when demand equally exists for housing and employment balances with farming and ecology/quality of life issues.

a. Route Survey brief intro and report: This has been done by our volunteer Richard Cooper in part and would be put on the website over a period of time.

b. Route Protection – what and where/establishing critical pinch points: This is vital and we need all hands-on deck to both make the case, protect pro-actively the corridor and court investors/interest/Government backing in some shape or form.

c. Making a case – England’s Economic Heartlands (EEH) Report/any support/next steps: Owen kindly talked us through some slides and these are available on request via richard.erta@gmail.com

d. Getting MP’s and Tiers of Councils/Governance on board: Concerns and the rail plan we proffer needs to get Buckinghamshire Unitary Council on board and concerns and support should court Cllr Martin Tett, who has the ear of Government, to trickle down to get the balances, management and rail foundations sorted properly.

e. Developers – what role and how to harness: If funding can be found for making the case/or volunteers putting credible elements together and bring to a table/meeting potential investors’, rail makes more sustainable whatever, so in their interest (or should be) to support our rail calls.

f. Calvert – new town, land capacity for domestic rails and line alongside HS2 going north over East West Rail – how feasible is it? What can be done: Calvert was a major discussion point. What happens or not there will affect everything else. The pressure is ‘on’ and we need to see the wood from the trees as well. There’s a threat of a new prison at Grendon Underwood and someone from ERTA needs to find out and make representations that it should not impinge on the former GC link between Grendon and Calvert as this re-railed would boost links from High Wycombe to Milton Keynes as well as Calvert-Rugby via the Great Central corridor re-railed. In reverse direction, these audiences and more freight by rail, could link to the Great Western Main Line, Old Oak Common and if a through connection is provided between Chiltern Main Line and the Southern Heathrow link, access to Guildford, Portsmouth and Southampton, freeing up capacity on and off the rails and alleviation residential areas of noise like Aylesbury.

g. Getting Chiltern Railways on board/wider rail industry: We need someone from ERTA to host either a Skype or Zoom Meeting to discuss and try and coerce them to take an interest in what we are suggesting. If baying is provided at Old Oak Common (OOC), Chiltern could use it as a terminal capacity extension to overcrowded Marylebone, OOC having links to the new Elizabethan Line alias Crossrail for example for accessing the City of London as well as Heathrow. There was relief the proposed Oxbridge Expressway was cancelled, but without a rail framework, roads will become increasingly busy, fuelling demand for upgrades and more of the same without rail to dent that modal lock-in and offer objective choices. Owen talked us through ‘land value capture’ and public transport – we need to capture growth to better public transport, otherwise it is roads mainly who it defaults to. Gone is just a London centric view, we need diverse rails for a more diverse audience, reach and range economy going forward. E.g., modern technology allows more working from home and flexi hours potentially, but equally the leisure, visiting and off-peak market can counter balance peak time losses if handled and catered for appropriately, reliably and attractively.

4. EEH/NR Banbury-Daventry-Northampton Arc/rail idea and can it link/rendezvous with GC somewhere e. g. South of Woodford Halse?  Discussion was had on re-railing the Banbury-Brackley-Buckingham-Bletchley line. New build v rebuild both have costs and issues including relocation packages and demolish or new deviations. Blockages exist out of Banbury, west and south of Buckingham esp. south of A421 Bypass/ring-road and Padbury between Buckingham and Verney Junction. The idea of a new line to Northampton from Banbury and inclusive of either Towcester and/or Daventry, was a one-liner indirect reference by EEH Report, but needs more expansion of where, case, how and when. What seemed clear was the Oxbridge East-West Rail, good as it can be, is inadequate and other east-west rails are needed. In all cases who gets there first wins and Bletchley-Northampton via Milton Keynes Central has capacity issues not going away any time soon with Bedford-Bletchley extensions to MK Central and the Southern hourly from West London to MK Central vying for more paths alongside existing West Coast Main Line passenger and freight operations. In 10 years hence HS2 may bring some relief, but if we want more and want to declutter the delays, costs and protractions of the M1 and associated roads, we need more and diverse rail solutions. That is where the ERTA Rugby-Calvert-OOC-South Coast through linkage idea comes into its own including decluttering London and M25 arcs.

5. Any other business: It was flagged up that the 12-mile gap between Bicester and Winslow was a large one given development in-between coming on-stream and any new towns or growth and indeed GC corridor north thereof if un-railed; means access to rail is confined to where stations exist (Winslow/Aylesbury) and that exacerbates demand for parking/distance of traffic and costs. Claydon and Calvert could mop up and service/spread the load more. The meeting seemed nuanced to an extent on what or which way to turn.

6. Date, Time and Place of Next Meeting: August 26^th 15.00 hrs Great Central Rail Corridor Projects Hosted by Mr Owen O’Neill *@oweno.info Please send requests for inclusion to the Zoom meeting to Owen at the email provided in a timely manner. For agenda items to richard.erta@gmail.com, likewise to join our email loop. Keep an eye on this page: https://ertarail.co.uk/events/ Meeting closed circa 16.00 hrs.

Please note: ERTA welcomes offers for new willing hosts for meetings and as a result bring people together. Please encourage any interested people or organisations to email Mr Owen O’Neill to register for these specific Zoom Meetings and ideally join ERTA. Every member helps us help others. https://ertarail.co.uk/become-a-member/ and perusal of our Blogspot can also be helpful/scroll down: https://ertarailvolunteer.blogspot.com/

Old Oak Common (OOC) Design and Improvement needed.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=GWfWlla7&id=9EF35C17D6942C170065E321CFB8AC74C9012CF4&thid=OIP.GWfWlla7kVzs4SFHiTihjQHaEj&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2findustrialnews.co.uk%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2020%2f09%2fthe-station-now-arriving-old-oak-common-interchange.jpg&cdnurl=https%3a%2f%2fth.bing.com%2fth%2fid%2fR1967d69656bb915cece121478938a18d%3frik%3d9CwByXSsuM8h4w%26pid%3dImgRaw&exph=630&expw=1024&q=old+oak+common+interchange+railway+station&simid=608040143709756533&ck=AF143313CF4A423420AAC6AACDD46D40&selectedIndex=0&qpvt=old+oak+common+interchange+railway+station&FORM=IRPRST&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0

This diagram doesn't show the proposed Southern Heathrow Rail Link. I need your help to ascertain:

1. Whether it would link with OOC and go on to physically link with the Chiltern Line or not please?

2. We need that through and connective interchange duality for our spinal north-south arcing rail corridor utlising spare capacity e.g. freight/night workings away from residential areas.

3. Could we set up a meeting with Chiltern to ascertain their views and on our map of intent - attached.

3. Is there time for a coalition of interests to push for more baying capacity from north and south - remembering the Cricklewood-Heathrow arc via Dudding Hill issues.

4. What if anything can we reasonably do to interject at this stage and to whom x whosoever may entertain potentially/please make a list of suggested outlets/parties to consider.

5. Does anyone have any direct general email link to TfL? My connection is poor and would like to involve them in our future London and surrounds Zoom/other agendas please.

I would welcome your kind collaboration please.

If too late and 'no' to any of our aims there, it is a. a pity and b. missed opportunity. Interchange would be max requiring a change. A Banbury/Brackley/Aylesbury - Guildford arc, would have been useful from numerous angles surely and I invite any active people to push for it still please by whatever channels.

In short, a list of all players would be useful for me to launch an 11th hour desk-top campaign. Any offers of help, information and join our loop for liaison please via requests to richard.erta@gmail.com