HS2 going to have 3+2 seating?!

[Camden]

Standing will not be allowed but by 10 years time it should be possible to reserve a seat a few minutes before departure

Says who/where? Is this an official policy?

If so it's going to be news to those travelling on HS2 trains which are forecast to be overcrowded (ie Liverpool trains). That would mean not simply uncomfortable journeys but actually turning people away! I think their inward investment/tourism folks would have something to say about that.

 

[gsnedders]

Says who/where? Is this an official policy?

If so it's going to be news to those travelling on HS2 trains which are forecast to be overcrowded (ie Liverpool trains). That would mean not simply uncomfortable journeys but actually turning people away! I think their inward investment/tourism folks would have something to say about that.

I presume the simple way to prohibit it is is having compulsory reservation, as many high-speed lines on the continent do.

 

[All Line Rover]

I can't see 100% reservation working on the London - Brum bit as that strikes me as being very much a high frequency commuter shuttle for London workers and precious little else, so a walk-on service (in the evenings especially) is more or less obligatory.

I would not expect season tickets to be made available on HS2 to/from London (certainly not at current pricing levels, where the weekly cost of an annual long distance season ticket - e.g. Manchester to London - is less than the cost of a single peak return ticket). This is not unheard of. Eurostar does not offer season tickets. Commute from Ashford to Lille (a 40 minute journey) in First and you must pay around £120,000 per year, compared to around £15,000 per year for Coventry to London (the first class season ticket is of course unregulated, but it is constrained by the price of the regulated standard class season ticket).

Existing season ticket prices are constrained by long standing political imperatives. The southern portion of HS2 will form an entirely new route that runs in parallel with existing routes. There will be no existing user base that needs 'protecting'. If seats can be filled at peak times with passengers paying, say, £300 return for Birmingham to London (which wouldn't surprise me in 2026/27), everyone should pay close to that price. The only reason why season tickets should be offered at a modest discount compared to the daily fare is if the calculation is made that this will encourage repeat travel and generate more revenue overall.

If the cost of commuting from Birmingham to London on HS2 is, say, £1000 a week, I would not expect HS2 to suddenly turn into a new London commuter route. There is no political imperative to subsidise rich London commuters on a new multi-billion pound taxpayer-funded rail line.

 

[MarkyT]

3+2 seating seems to be the standard for Shinkansen, with 2+2 for 'green' class and some trains with 2+1 premium seats.

I'd be happy with 3+2 if the seat width was maintained. Leg room could be increased a bit and you'd still have more capacity than 2+2. According to Wikipedia, Shinkansen loading gauge is 3.4m (compared to 3.15m for UIC), so a twin-track rail formation would need to be half a metre wider overall.

Full size Shinkansen trains such as the E5 series have a 3+2 seating arrangement in standard just like the 0 series in York NRM, but Mini Shinkansen such as the E6 have 2+2. These are the Japanese 'classic compatibles', with a narrower body and platform cutaway to suit the smaller loading gauge of some former narrow gauge routes at the extremities of the high speed network converted to standard gauge. Here is an image of a captive E5 coupled behind a classic compatible E6. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...成試運転.JPG#/media/File:E6系S12編成+E5系S11編成試運転.JPG

 

[Clip]

Unfortunately I can't provide it as I read it on the paid iPad app, and my subscription (as it is just done via the appstore) does not give access to the website which is behind a paywall.

Screenshot it is the easiest way to get around a paywall.

 

[azz7008]

Screenshot it is the easiest way to get around a paywall.

As long as The Times doesn't catch up with you...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Seems the BBC already did
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I presume the simple way to prohibit it is is having compulsory reservation, as many high-speed lines on the continent do.

There's a sort of split - Germanic high speed is more like UK operations without compulsory reservations, whereas Romance countries very much go for it.

It has big negatives, but I also see strengths of it with modern technology. I think the way Advances have now become the default for many people has tended the UK towards a point where, by way of Roger Ford-ian boiling frogs, there wouldn't be an excessive amount of opposition to it, particularly if the classic network remained true walk-up.

 

[HSTEd]

Existing season ticket prices are constrained by long standing political imperatives. The southern portion of HS2 will form an entirely new route that runs in parallel with existing routes. There will be no existing user base that needs 'protecting'. If seats can be filled at peak times with passengers paying, say, £300 return for Birmingham to London (which wouldn't surprise me in 2026/27), everyone should pay close to that price. The only reason why season tickets should be offered at a modest discount compared to the daily fare is if the calculation is made that this will encourage repeat travel and generate more revenue overall.

Thanks to a variety of efficiencies it would be cheaper for the state (which is the ultimate guarantor of the entire rail industry anyway) to provide a seat to a season ticket holder from Birmingham international to London on HS2 than on the Classic line system. Forcing them to use the classic line would have the effect of increasing net subsidies.
Therefore there is no reason to withhold season tickets from HS2 traffic, certainly not until the line is rammed full at peak times.
The capacity of the line is so enormous that £300 tickets would not be able to fill it.

In the two hours to 10AM something like 40 trains, each up to 400m long with 1000+ passengers will be arriving at OOC/Euston. [And a 400m double deck could plausibly have 1100 Standard and 250 First class seats]
If train operations start at 6AM you could have 80 trains arriving if you start trains short at Birmingham and Birmingham International to use the early morning southbound core slots.
You really think there are 80,000 plus people willing to pay £300 per day, every day? Plus standees ofcourse.

If the cost of commuting from Birmingham to London on HS2 is, say, £1000 a week, I would not expect HS2 to suddenly turn into a new London commuter route. There is no political imperative to subsidise rich London commuters on a new multi-billion pound taxpayer-funded rail line.

There is the political imperative that it be seen to be a success.
Which means it has to be running full.

And I don't get what is so horrific about standing on trains? Rail accidents are so insanely rare that it makes little difference - especially as passengers are not in any way restrained anyway.
And you aren't subsidising them if your line isn't full - because the marginal cost of longer trains when all the infrastructure is already in place is very very low indeed.

 

[deltic]

Says who/where? Is this an official policy?

If so it's going to be news to those travelling on HS2 trains which are forecast to be overcrowded (ie Liverpool trains). That would mean not simply uncomfortable journeys but actually turning people away! I think their inward investment/tourism folks would have something to say about that.

HS2 aspirations for passenger experience is not consistent with allowing standing.

I have not seen any data suggesting there will be overcrowding on any HS2 service - with two trains an hour to Liverpool there should be no reason why the route will be overcrowded

 

[All Line Rover]

There is the political imperative that it be seen to be a success.
Which means it has to be running full.

The political imperative is that ticket revenue covers a substantial cost of the construction of the line. Offering heavily discounted season tickets when there is a strong amount of business traffic would be short-sighted, particularly as business traffic grows over time (it would be far more difficult to substantially increase the cost of season tickets after they have been introduced, than to introduce them at an appropriate price to begin with). I will be interested to see the pricing structure that is adopted and agree that we may see cheaper peak time walk-up fares than we have at present due to the enormous capacity that the line will create, but I'm not sure why you think that the line must be running at capacity from day one.

 

[Ironside]

In Italy the two rail companies have four classes each.

Italo: smart 2+2, smart xl 2+1, prima2+1, club 2+1. Most seats are in the 2+1 configuration.

http://www.seat61.com/italo.htm#.VqdLwWtYCSO

Trenitalia: Standard 2+2, Premium 2+2, business 2+1, executive 1+1(only 8seats). most seats in 2+2 formation.

http://www.seat61.com/frecciarossa.htm#Frecciarossa_1000

I don't mind if we have one of these configurations on HS2 as long as the allocation of wider spaced seating is proportional to demand.

 

[Camden]

HS2 aspirations for passenger experience is not consistent with allowing standing.

That's very different from your definitive statement that "Standing will not be allowed". I think there are many aspects of "HS2 aspirations" which are not consistent with the reality of their offer (but that's another matter).

I have not seen any data suggesting there will be overcrowding on any HS2 service - with two trains an hour to Liverpool there should be no reason why the route will be overcrowded

From HS2 docs:

Demand increases for Liverpool, Runcorn and Crewe, with the latter benefiting in particular from the greater frequency of services and the faster journey time. Stafford sees a reduction in demand, partly as some passengers around the north of the Stafford station catchment area switch to the improved services at Crewe, and partly as passengers are put off by crowding on this service

The load factor on the slow service is again high at 80%, suggesting a high degree of overcrowding and indicating the need to increase train capacity.

with "Average weekday 2043 southbound load factors on HS2 trains" in some scenarios 83% (which being an average must make for some massively overcrowded services especially given the "conservative" view of passenger numbers anyway).

Guess you're not as much an HS2 guru as you thought.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's very different from your definitive statement that "Standing will not be allowed". I think there are many aspects of "HS2 aspirations" which are not consistent with the reality of their offer (but that's another matter).

Such as 3+2 seating. I wonder, though, if that was the Times's doing, and they extrapolated "we want Chinese style trains" to mean "we want to cram the seating in like Chinese trains do, despite the fact that clearly works for them because Chinese people are on average shorter and thinner than English people".

 

[Camden]

"Executive" 1 + 1 seating is a waste of train. An indulgence of the over privileged, and would be taken to be every indication that HS2 is not something that benefits people in Britain, but something that is for the enjoyment of the elite. Who not only cannot bear to be around real people, but who also feel the need to over-indulge in an extravagance of everything.

It would be disgraceful for taxation to be spent on providing them with this opulence, while ordinary workers struggle to afford their travelcards.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would be disgraceful for taxation to be spent on providing them with this opulence

If the price is right, it will do quite the opposite, and subsidise Standard fares from their payments for said opulence.

 

[NSEFAN]

The political imperative is that ticket revenue covers a substantial cost of the construction of the line.

That isn't necessarily true. If a lot additional economic activity is facilitated by the new line and the capacity it brings, the tax revenue generated will potentially be far greater than the fares contribution. I expect that it's very difficult to predict how much tax revenue will be collected, but on a large-scale infrastructure investment like HS2 it is an important consideration nonetheless.

 

[The Ham]

"Executive" 1 + 1 seating is a waste of train. An indulgence of the over privileged, and would be taken to be every indication that HS2 is not something that benefits people in Britain, but something that is for the enjoyment of the elite. Who not only cannot bear to be around real people, but who also feel the need to over-indulge in an extravagance of everything.

It would be disgraceful for taxation to be spent on providing them with this opulence, while ordinary workers struggle to afford their travelcards.

It depends on how it is priced vs how much space it takes up. Lets say that to provide each 1+1 seat takes up 4 times as much space as a 3+2 seat but it costs 4 times the cost but has an occupancy of 20% vs 80% then you have a point.

However, lets say that to provide each 1+1 seat takes up 3 times as much space as a 3+2 seat but it costs 10 times the cost but has an occupancy of 30% vs 75% then the 1+1 seating would bring a higher income for any given set area than other classes. If that is the case then there could be a good reason to provide such luxury, in that it could provide a bigger income than cramming in more seats, until such time as you start to get noticeable numbers of people standing.

If the numbers were low (say 8 seats) then the extra setting that could be provided by providing it as a lower class could be fairly small (say 16 extra seats on a train capable of holding 1000 people), which again, unless you are looking at over the course of a year wouldn't make a lot of difference.

 

[HSTEd]

The political imperative is that ticket revenue covers a substantial cost of the construction of the line. Offering heavily discounted season tickets when there is a strong amount of business traffic would be short-sighted, particularly as business traffic grows over time (it would be far more difficult to substantially increase the cost of season tickets after they have been introduced, than to introduce them at an appropriate price to begin with). I will be interested to see the pricing structure that is adopted and agree that we may see cheaper peak time walk-up fares than we have at present due to the enormous capacity that the line will create, but I'm not sure why you think that the line must be running at capacity from day one.

The epiphet of 'white elephant' takes months to gain and decades to lose.
In the interests of seeing increased new line development in Britain this route must be an explosive success - and it must shatter the projections and become the most heavily travelled line in the country.
Ideally it must take the title of busiest high speed line from the Tokaido Shinkansen.

Business travel is never going to saturate HS2 - the capacity is far too large for that, and it is also imperative that the fare structure not be significantly different to that of classic lines. If it is then we create yet another avenue for the enemies of high speed rail to attack it.
Compulsory reservations turns it into an airline - and you won't beat an airline at its own game. This is a railway and should be operated as such.

Its the super Metropolitan.

 

[Camden]

It depends on how it is priced vs how much space it takes up.

No it really does not. What it depends on is whether it is considered elitist and something utterly unnecessary for the over privileged. Which having a massive train with just two seats abreast would be.

While I don't doubt, if this is being looked at, it would be the airline model of superstar in First, business people in Business and everyone else in Economy. But trains are not planes.

What is not being considered is the public acceptability of something that already is derided as an elitist project. In a country where First Class is already decried by some as elitist. To take that up a level, and the state provide luxury travel to the 1%?? You have to be joking if you think there wouldn't be utter outrage.

1 + 1 would be a true "Let them eat cake" moment from HS2. And actually I wouldn't travel in it if it were offered to me free, not simply because I think it would be a disgusting indulgence of over-consumers paid for by taxation, but also because I think people would be so repulsed you could be marking yourself out by using it. Especially if a train/adjoining train happened to be overcrowded.

Economics of whether it would be profitable or not is irrelevant. Income is irrelevant. Although it is perhaps also concerning if HS2 are having to go to such lengths to try and make their services tot up.

 

[deltic]

That's very different from your definitive statement that "Standing will not be allowed". I think there are many aspects of "HS2 aspirations" which are not consistent with the reality of their offer (but that's another matter).

From HS2 docs:




with "Average weekday 2043 southbound load factors on HS2 trains" in some scenarios 83% (which being an average must make for some massively overcrowded services especially given the "conservative" view of passenger numbers anyway).

Guess you're not as much an HS2 guru as you thought.

The quote you take is from an optioneering report which has been superseded - it was not the service pattern assumed in the business case published in 2013. Since then Phase 2A strategic case published last year suggests further changes. The level of crowding you quote relates to a train on departing from Stafford and not Liverpool.

I would never claim to a HS2 guru

 

[Camden]

The quote you take is from an optioneering report which has been superseded - it was not the service pattern assumed in the business case published in 2013. Since then Phase 2A strategic case published last year suggests further changes. The level of crowding you quote relates to a train on departing from Stafford and not Liverpool.

I would never claim to a HS2 guru

By all means, feel free to give the link to the report you claim has superseded the above, however in fact the updated service pattern is not materially different, with one fast and one slow via Stafford. The only change was a train not stopping at Birmingham Interchange. The crowding issue southbound at Stafford (and logically northbound up to it) therefore remains.

Where the overcrowding arises along the route is of no relevance, all that matters is that the train is overcrowded and uncomfortable. And on departure from Euston, it will affect everyone equally.

Also, the only current available solution to this is to either continue removing stops, further harming connectivity, or join the train at Crewe with another portion increasing the journey time and adding potential for delays, which HS2 cannot absorb. Bargain (basement).

 

[MarkyT]

1 + 1 would be a true "Let them eat cake" moment from HS2. And actually I wouldn't travel in it if it were offered to me free, not simply because I think it would be a disgusting indulgence of over-consumers paid for by taxation

Whether or not any 'super-elite' class gets provided or not is surely a commercial decision for the operator, rather like first class on airlines where similarly the vast majority of accommodation is and always will be 'lumpen-proletariat', just as it will be on HS2 trains. A very small number of super luxurious 'nirvana' seats (with appropriate levels of service and catering etc) could provide a very high income proportionately for the floorspace occupied, assuming there's a market for it and they could effectively provide a cross subsidy for the cheaper seats. We're in a world with enormous disparity of income and wealth so it is not a moral issue whether there is some provision for luxury travel on these trains or not particularly. It could be argued that if a tiny number of obscenely rich people are (perhaps in our eyes foolishly) prepared to pay extortionate amounts for such luxury and exclusivity, then we should allow them to do so to help to pay off the public's investment in the infrastructure project.

 

[Camden]

It could be argued

No it couldn't. Not successfully. Two words: Utter outrage. This is one for those who understand how real people think.

We're in a world with enormous disparity of income and wealth so it is not a moral issue whether there is some provision for luxury travel on these trains or not particularly

Huh?? You think this is the 80s? Actually, in today's world, it is a massive moral issue. The enormous disparity is in fact something which gets a lot of people very exercised. To this end, a HS2 pampering the super-elite could be the very iconic thing which loses the conservatives the next election. Despite Jeremy Corbyn.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No it couldn't. Not successfully. Two words: Utter outrage. This is one for those who understand how real people think.

Poor people who have a problem with rich people as a concept are no different from rich people who have a problem with poor people as a concept. Both are prejudiced and need to look deeper at the person behind the bank balance.

 

[gsnedders]

There's a sort of split - Germanic high speed is more like UK operations without compulsory reservations, whereas Romance countries very much go for it.

It has big negatives, but I also see strengths of it with modern technology. I think the way Advances have now become the default for many people has tended the UK towards a point where, by way of Roger Ford-ian boiling frogs, there wouldn't be an excessive amount of opposition to it, particularly if the classic network remained true walk-up.

It's already the case in some places that you can still get (near) walk-up tickets with a reservation—albeit with a two minute diversion via the customer services desk. Heck, it shouldn't be too technically complex to make it possible to do from one's smartphone, so you can get your last minute reservation on the way to the station.

 

[Camden]

Poor people who have a problem with rich people as a concept are no different from rich people who have a problem with poor people as a concept. Both are prejudiced and need to look deeper at the person behind the bank balance.

Well that's your view, but it changes nothing. I won't waste my time with strawman arguments. I've stated it how it is.

1 + 1 seating is offensive to my own eyes. And as I'm far from left wing I take that as a barometer that tells me most people would be utterly appalled too, and some (on the left) would be totally outraged.

On top of this, there are those who will gleefully exploit anything they can get their hands on to go after "the elite" further, who have no inclination to look beyond someone's bank balance and see the warm loving person behind it (who just happens to need half a train all to themselves).

It's a stinker of an idea.

 

[The Ham]

No it really does not. What it depends on is whether it is considered elitist and something utterly unnecessary for the over privileged. Which having a massive train with just two seats abreast would be.

While I don't doubt, if this is being looked at, it would be the airline model of superstar in First, business people in Business and everyone else in Economy. But trains are not planes.

What is not being considered is the public acceptability of something that already is derided as an elitist project. In a country where First Class is already decried by some as elitist. To take that up a level, and the state provide luxury travel to the 1%?? You have to be joking if you think there wouldn't be utter outrage.

1 + 1 would be a true "Let them eat cake" moment from HS2. And actually I wouldn't travel in it if it were offered to me free, not simply because I think it would be a disgusting indulgence of over-consumers paid for by taxation, but also because I think people would be so repulsed you could be marking yourself out by using it. Especially if a train/adjoining train happened to be overcrowded.

Economics of whether it would be profitable or not is irrelevant. Income is irrelevant. Although it is perhaps also concerning if HS2 are having to go to such lengths to try and make their services tot up.

Right so there would be outrage if there was provision for something for which there was enough of a market to justify it and was priced in such a way that it effectively subsidised everyone else using the service?

Yes there would be comments like "look how the other half live" but most people would take one look at the price and think "a fool and their money are easily parted".

I am far from wealthy by UK standards (although in world standards, as are everyone who is lucky enough to be born in the UK, I would be considered fairly wealthy) and would like to see the gap between rich and poor reducing rather than increasing.

However I can see that there are people with more money than sense and if they are willing to provide extra employment by being waited on hand and foot whilst traveling on a train and paying for the privilege to do so. Then why should people who want to live the socialist fantasy where everyone is equal (when in reality that would require them to reduce their standard of living quite dramatically just to even get close to being the worldwide average) have any more or less say on what is provided on a train.

 

[Ironside]

Whether or not any 'super-elite' class gets provided or not is surely a commercial decision for the operator, rather like first class on airlines where similarly the vast majority of accommodation is and always will be 'lumpen-proletariat', just as it will be on HS2 trains. A very small number of super luxurious 'nirvana' seats (with appropriate levels of service and catering etc) could provide a very high income proportionately for the floorspace occupied, assuming there's a market for it and they could effectively provide a cross subsidy for the cheaper seats. We're in a world with enormous disparity of income and wealth so it is not a moral issue whether there is some provision for luxury travel on these trains or not particularly. It could be argued that if a tiny number of obscenely rich people are (perhaps in our eyes foolishly) prepared to pay extortionate amounts for such luxury and exclusivity, then we should allow them to do so to help to pay off the public's investment in the infrastructure project.

This seems quite practicle, and already works in Italy. When i was there loading in executive/club was over 50% and the fare was over four times the basic fare. Advance tickets were even cheaper for economy but there was no discount for executive/club tickets although the ticket was flexible.

In Germany on the ICE I have seen family rooms in the standard class. They are enclosed areas prioritised for families: ie others can sit the there but have to give there seat up if a family with children arrive. They seem to work quite well as it keeps them together and keeps the noise down in the rest of the carriage.

 

[Camden]

Definitely not the views of the majority on here.

 

[NSEFAN]

Definitely not the views of the majority on here.

Why is the seating arrangement even being made into a political issue? If it turns out that it's popular then it will have done it job. If nobody uses 1+1 seating then it'll be removed in favour of another configuration.

And anyway, why does the majority view necessarily need to be taken into account? We live in a democracy, but that's not the same as rule by popularism. I'd argue that the seating layout is a business decision to be made by the railway, not by the man on the street who may have an axe to grind.