Great British Railways can bridge the ‘track-train divide’, expert says – but clarity needed on future of freight

Great British Railways (GBR) could bridge the “track-train divide” between rolling stock and infrastructure engineers, an expert has said, enabling them to solve problems more quickly and efficiently.

Bringing together management of passenger services and rail infrastructure, the formation of GBR was confirmed on 5 November with the introduction of the Railways Bill to parliament. Headquartered in Derby, the new publicly owned company will have responsibility for coordinating the entire network.

By combining separate organisations under the same ownership, GBR could improve understanding of shared issues and lead to quicker solutions, Rail Engineer editor David Shirres told Professional Engineering. That is already happening as part of the ongoing nationalisation of train operators, he said, which recently incorporated South Western Railway, c2c and Greater Anglia.

“It’s not so much about ‘Public good, private bad’,” said Shirres, who is also a member of the IMechE Railway Division. “It’s essentially about having everything under the same ownership, so that therefore it’s much easier to align and bring together track and trains… therefore, at a working level, engineers have got a lot more exposure and ability to have contact with people who operate the infrastructure.

“The folk in rolling stock depots probably have got the opportunity to be much more aligned with the folk that are maintaining the infrastructure, and you can therefore understand each others’ problems a little better. It’s a soft cultural thing, that; being able to see things from the perspective of the whole railway, rather than just from your own little narrow niche.”

He added: “Any efficiencies you get from engineers on both sides of the track-train divide working closer together has got to be a good thing.”

Improved efficiency is one of transport secretary Heidi Alexander’s six objectives for a reformed railway, according to the policy paper, with GBR designed to help by reducing duplication and “ridding the sector of the current fragmented web of interfaces and competing interests”.

Many of the aims for the new organisation are focused on passengers, with the government saying it will “put passengers before profits”. Measures will include a strengthened passenger watchdog and a new ‘one-stop-shop’ app where passengers can check train times and book tickets, replacing 14 existing operator ticketing platforms.

The bill is also designed to give devolved governments and England’s mayors a bigger say in how the railway is run in their area, helping improve local connectivity.

Shirres said he was pleased with the ambitions of the bill and its plans for a long-term rail strategy, which brings together infrastructure and rolling stock. “The critical thing from an engineering perspective is considering rolling stock and infrastructure together – that is absolutely essential,” he said.

He said some questions remain over its scope, however, including if it covers all rolling stock in the country or just the trains owned by GBR. That is particularly important in relation to freight, he said, which the bill sets out to increase. Less than 3% of rail freight traction energy consumption comes from electricity in Britain, unlike Europe, where the majority is electrified.

“That means you’ve got slow trains and lots of diesel freight on the West Coast Main Line (WCML), which is the busiest mixed traffic railway in Europe. And if you mix super-slow freight trains with fast passenger trains, you're really destroying capacity.”

Steps to increase electric haulage could include “beefing up” the power supply on the WCML and infilling electrification where it is sorely needed, he said. This includes a short stretch of unelectrified line from the London Gateway port in Essex, he said, meaning there is no electric through route for freight trains.

“If you’re going to use electric trains on the West Coast Main Line, you’ve got to change locos, which is actually quite costly,” he said. “If the rolling stock and infrastructure strategy doesn’t address that issue, then it’s really missing something out, and it’s not looking at a case for electrification in the round.”

That is particularly important as GBR will have a statutory duty to promote freight, he added, with electrification offering the chance to increase the number of running freight trains.

Decisions on whether to electrify freight fleets will remain a commercial choice for operators, the Department for Transport told Professional Engineering. 

“We are committed to electrifying and decarbonising our railway, but we need to do this in the most cost‑effective way and focus on schemes that make the greatest difference as quickly as possible,” a spokesperson said.  

“The rolling stock and infrastructure strategy will primarily cover services operated by Great British Railways, but we will work closely with devolved governments, local authorities and industry partners to understand wider needs.”

Overall, the bill is “a step in the right direction,” Shirres said. He praised a recent speech by Alexander in which she stressed the importance of whole system engineering, and suggested that new procurement strategies could buy rolling stock for the entire railway rather than just individual operators. “I think there’s a lot of good stuff there,” he said.

Another aim of the new bill is to remove barriers and improve rail network accessibility for disabled people. Last week, an IMechE report highlighted the issues faced by people with accessibility needs, including uneven distribution of step-free stations and a lack of spacious wheelchair areas, comfortable shelters and joined-up information. En route to Inclusive Public Transport recommended measures including improved funding, better use of data and meaningful engagement with disadvantaged groups during transport design. 

IMechE recently responded to the Transport Select Committee inquiry looking at how the bill balances accountability and autonomy, and enables accessibility improvements. While generally supportive of the bill’s objectives, IMechE called for clearer incentives, greater engagement with engineers and a stronger role for the Office of Rail and Road to maximise the engineering potential under GBR.