| The opportunity that GBR offers Posted by grahame at 07:32, 13th September 2026 |     |
From Andrew Stephens on LinkedIn - 3,000 words precised down to about 100 in my review
A few days ago I wrote an article about Great British Railways that was, if I am being generous to myself, sceptical.
[snip]
The infrastructure will still need maintaining. Trains will still need servicing. Drivers will still drive them, signalling will still need operating, stations will still require people, electricity will still need buying and, unless somebody in Whitehall has been keeping a particularly exciting technical breakthrough quiet, rails, bridges, tunnels, embankments and overhead lines will continue to deteriorate when exposed to weather, weight and time.
[snip]
Perhaps the real opportunity is not in who owns the railway at all. Perhaps it is in finally removing some of the extraordinary amount of friction involved in running it.
[snip]
The infrastructure will still need maintaining. Trains will still need servicing. Drivers will still drive them, signalling will still need operating, stations will still require people, electricity will still need buying and, unless somebody in Whitehall has been keeping a particularly exciting technical breakthrough quiet, rails, bridges, tunnels, embankments and overhead lines will continue to deteriorate when exposed to weather, weight and time.
[snip]
Perhaps the real opportunity is not in who owns the railway at all. Perhaps it is in finally removing some of the extraordinary amount of friction involved in running it.
I think he is right in his identification of the opportunity. The question is ... will the opportunity be taken?
| Re: The opportunity that GBR offers Posted by Witham Bobby at 11:48, 25th September 2026 | |
From Andrew Stephens on LinkedIn - 3,000 words precised down to about 100 in my review
I think he is right in his identification of the opportunity. The question is ... will the opportunity be taken?
A few days ago I wrote an article about Great British Railways that was, if I am being generous to myself, sceptical.
[snip]
The infrastructure will still need maintaining. Trains will still need servicing. Drivers will still drive them, signalling will still need operating, stations will still require people, electricity will still need buying and, unless somebody in Whitehall has been keeping a particularly exciting technical breakthrough quiet, rails, bridges, tunnels, embankments and overhead lines will continue to deteriorate when exposed to weather, weight and time.
[snip]
Perhaps the real opportunity is not in who owns the railway at all. Perhaps it is in finally removing some of the extraordinary amount of friction involved in running it.
[snip]
The infrastructure will still need maintaining. Trains will still need servicing. Drivers will still drive them, signalling will still need operating, stations will still require people, electricity will still need buying and, unless somebody in Whitehall has been keeping a particularly exciting technical breakthrough quiet, rails, bridges, tunnels, embankments and overhead lines will continue to deteriorate when exposed to weather, weight and time.
[snip]
Perhaps the real opportunity is not in who owns the railway at all. Perhaps it is in finally removing some of the extraordinary amount of friction involved in running it.
I think he is right in his identification of the opportunity. The question is ... will the opportunity be taken?
"Friction" is an extremely apt word. I wish I'd thought of describing it that way
| Re: The opportunity that GBR offers Posted by TaplowGreen at 15:58, 25th September 2026 | |
From Andrew Stephens on LinkedIn - 3,000 words precised down to about 100 in my review
I think he is right in his identification of the opportunity. The question is ... will the opportunity be taken?
A few days ago I wrote an article about Great British Railways that was, if I am being generous to myself, sceptical.
[snip]
The infrastructure will still need maintaining. Trains will still need servicing. Drivers will still drive them, signalling will still need operating, stations will still require people, electricity will still need buying and, unless somebody in Whitehall has been keeping a particularly exciting technical breakthrough quiet, rails, bridges, tunnels, embankments and overhead lines will continue to deteriorate when exposed to weather, weight and time.
[snip]
Perhaps the real opportunity is not in who owns the railway at all. Perhaps it is in finally removing some of the extraordinary amount of friction involved in running it.
[snip]
The infrastructure will still need maintaining. Trains will still need servicing. Drivers will still drive them, signalling will still need operating, stations will still require people, electricity will still need buying and, unless somebody in Whitehall has been keeping a particularly exciting technical breakthrough quiet, rails, bridges, tunnels, embankments and overhead lines will continue to deteriorate when exposed to weather, weight and time.
[snip]
Perhaps the real opportunity is not in who owns the railway at all. Perhaps it is in finally removing some of the extraordinary amount of friction involved in running it.
I think he is right in his identification of the opportunity. The question is ... will the opportunity be taken?
"Friction" is an extremely apt word. I wish I'd thought of describing it that way
Are you sure it's not a typo? In the context of the way the railways are owned/run perhaps "fiction" was intended?
| Re: The opportunity that GBR offers Posted by Electric train at 08:21, 26th September 2026 | |
From Andrew Stephens on LinkedIn - 3,000 words precised down to about 100 in my review
I think he is right in his identification of the opportunity. The question is ... will the opportunity be taken?
A few days ago I wrote an article about Great British Railways that was, if I am being generous to myself, sceptical.
[snip]
The infrastructure will still need maintaining. Trains will still need servicing. Drivers will still drive them, signalling will still need operating, stations will still require people, electricity will still need buying and, unless somebody in Whitehall has been keeping a particularly exciting technical breakthrough quiet, rails, bridges, tunnels, embankments and overhead lines will continue to deteriorate when exposed to weather, weight and time.
[snip]
Perhaps the real opportunity is not in who owns the railway at all. Perhaps it is in finally removing some of the extraordinary amount of friction involved in running it.
[snip]
The infrastructure will still need maintaining. Trains will still need servicing. Drivers will still drive them, signalling will still need operating, stations will still require people, electricity will still need buying and, unless somebody in Whitehall has been keeping a particularly exciting technical breakthrough quiet, rails, bridges, tunnels, embankments and overhead lines will continue to deteriorate when exposed to weather, weight and time.
[snip]
Perhaps the real opportunity is not in who owns the railway at all. Perhaps it is in finally removing some of the extraordinary amount of friction involved in running it.
I think he is right in his identification of the opportunity. The question is ... will the opportunity be taken?
"Friction" is an extremely apt word. I wish I'd thought of describing it that way
Are you sure it's not a typo? In the context of the way the railways are owned/run perhaps "fiction" was intended?
During the railway privatisation process in the 1990's the word "tension" was used a lot. The DfT / Treasury /Government / John Major belief was that British Rail could not get to the (eutopia) subsidy free position that politically John Major's Conservative government wanted because it lacked commercial / competitive "tension".
By breaking BR up into 100 business this would create market forces tension which in turn would generate completion thereby driving costs down and improving efficiency and because of the competition between TOCs this would lead new train operators entering the UK rail market hence more train services all competition with each other ................ (what could possibly go wrong!)
The same model was used for maintenance and renewals multiple companies all bidding for the work, cost being driven down and efficiencies and performance improved by competitive tender process, Railtrack would be according to the Government at time be in the Fotsi 100 companies.
The contracts did have wonderful clause that included "collaborative working" "required to work collaboratively with" etc
All of the above was the essence of the internal propaganda being feed to the staff within BR at the time.
What actually happened within UK rail the tension changed to friction because the eutopia of a friendly collaborative environment was ultimately trumped the companies share holder dividend and the salaries of the Chairmen and CEO's etc. So yes the railways has been running for many years with a lot of friction.
It will be interesting to see if the performance of GWR / NR GW Route improves in the months after GWR is taken into public ownership when the commercial / contractual friction has been removed
