National Express Trains

[yorkshiregoth]

Currently sat on a National Express Train from London - Leeds. Although I had made the effort to book my cycle onto train, the guard seemed rather indifferent about me putting it into the guard's van. Hope they look after it

On a lighter note, had a lovely ride in from Heathrow - Kings' Cross. Hardly any traffic, wish it was like that all the time.

 

[sheddy]

Is Nat Express the old GNER operator ?
I was looking at London - York ticket prices and it looks as though NatX are offering an extra 10% for online booking

 

[yorkshiregoth]

Its the other way round. National express trains is the new company that took over the franchise from gner. And I got a discount of 66% on my ticket.

 

[CotterPin]

See they've taken over the "One" franchise as well (what a silly name for a train company that was!).

 

[ejls2]

I think that One was actually always been a part of the National Express Group, they just rebranded.

I know what you mean about "indifference" with putting bikes on those trains! They always seem to be okay in the end though. The First Capital Connect trains are much easier as you can just put the bike in any carriage.

 

[Terminator]

I just don't think you should put a bike on a "packed" train but perhaps it's just me.

 

[simoncc]

Bring back guards vans. Then you could take a bike on any train for free with no notice. Then, just as we all started hearing about the need to encourage people to cycle more and use public transport, taking a bike on the train became ever more difficult to arrange and costly, with rules so complicated that most railway staff didn't understand them. More than once I was sold a bike ticket for a train only to be told by the guard that bikes were not allowed on that particular service.

In 1992 my commuter track into Manchester switched from trains to trams. The main effects of this were that the price went up and bikes were banned! Such is progress.

 

[Maz]

National Express...there's that song again....can't get it out of my head!

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiBI3A2WcrE

 

[domd1979]

Bring back guards vans. Then you could take a bike on any train for free with no notice. Then, just as we all started hearing about the need to encourage people to cycle more and use public transport, taking a bike on the train became ever more difficult to arrange and costly, with rules so complicated that most railway staff didn't understand them. More than once I was sold a bike ticket for a train only to be told by the guard that bikes were not allowed on that particular service.

You can take a Brompton on the train for free with no notice.

I would have thought cycle parking facilities at stations are more important for encouraging cycle/public transport journeys than a guards van to hold a few bikes.

In 1992 my commuter track into Manchester switched from trains to trams. The main effects of this were that the price went up and bikes were banned! Such is progress.

The other effect was a much better service at higher frequency.

 

[domd1979]

Yep, "One" has always been Nat Ex. NEG have are rebranding all their operations (except C2C I think). There's now the ridiculous scenario in the West Midlands of Travel West Midlands buses being re-branded to "National Express West Midlands" - guaranteed to cause confusion. The new livery for their buses and trains is hideous. Whoever thought that white was a good base for public transport vehicles wants their head examining.

I think that One was actually always been a part of the National Express Group, they just rebranded.

 

[simoncc]

You can take a Brompton on the train for free with no notice.

I would have thought cycle parking facilities at stations are more important for encouraging cycle/public transport journeys than a guards van to hold a few bikes.



The other effect was a much better service at higher frequency.

Better service? I don't think so, not in the rush hours anyway. The trams are more frequent than the trains they replaced, but the vast majority of that increased frquency is in off-peak hours when the roads are clear enough to get around by car without difficulty. Many off-peak trams are virtually empty and you are still not allowed to take bikes on them. What a giant leap backwards that was in 1992. Even well before 1992 there was lots of talk about the need for integrated transport policies and the need to encourage bike use. The next thing I know my local commuter track introduces new tram rolling stock that bans bikes! There is a long running campaign to get bikes allowed on the trams, and if it succeeds cyclists will be back to the pre-1992 level of service on those tracks.

And we still are years away from the good old days on the railways when you could take a bike on virtually any train, cost free with no notice.

 

[simoncc]

I would have thought cycle parking facilities at stations are more important for encouraging cycle/public transport journeys than a guards van to hold a few bikes.

I don't agree with this either. The ability to take your bike on a train means you can cycle to the station and then cycle from the destination station to where you want to go. I did this all the time, and so did many others. Cycle parks at stations are no use to me, not that I care any more really as I've abandoned trains. The end of free, no notice bike carriage removed their main usefulness for me. The cost of tickets, the low quality of staff, unreliability and cleanliness and hygiene issues also contributed. Now if I'm going to a city I'll put the bike in the back of the car, park up for free in a suburb and cycle in.

 

[domd1979]

I wouldn't call Metrolink a "giant leap backwards" - it was, and still is, a successful operation.

If you want to take your bike on Metrolink, get a Brompton. How many light rail systems (in the world) are there that allow bikes on the tram? Space is at a premium on trams, I don't see why they should carry non-folding bikes.

Decent secure cycle parking facilities at stations will do more for cycle use than allowing non-folders onto trams.

Better service? I don't think so, not in the rush hours anyway. The trams are more frequent than the trains they replaced, but the vast majority of that increased frquency is in off-peak hours when the roads are clear enough to get around by car without difficulty. Many off-peak trams are virtually empty and you are still not allowed to take bikes on them. What a giant leap backwards that was in 1992. Even well before 1992 there was lots of talk about the need for integrated transport policies and the need to encourage bike use. The next thing I know my local commuter track introduces new tram rolling stock that bans bikes! There is a long running campaign to get bikes allowed on the trams, and if it succeeds cyclists will be back to the pre-1992 level of service on those tracks.

And we still are years away from the good old days on the railways when you could take a bike on virtually any train, cost free with no notice.

 

[domd1979]

A lot of people live a distance away from their origin station, but work close to their destination station. The major stations, such as Birmingham New Street have a massive amount of employment within 10 minutes walk of the station. Lots of people would find it useful to cycle to the at their home end, but not at their destination end.

I don't agree with this either. The ability to take your bike on a train means you can cycle to the station and then cycle from the destination station to where you want to go.

 

[Trillian]

yes, and then you get people in the same situation as me, 8 min walk to the station

30 mins bike ride from the station to my final destination.

i'm not doing that on a brompton, partly because i can't balance properly on them and because it's busy A roads that i'll only do on a full sized bike.

so, for people like me (and i don't believe that i'm an exception) having the bike on the train is needed.