Train Overcrowding

[WESSEX158]

Where in Britain are the worst places for rush hour overcrowding?

I have been to Bath Spa many times and caught a standing(/no) room only train back to Warminster in the rush hour. It happens so frequently even to the extent of refusing more passengers.:-x

Also, what are the rules on load restrictions? I was on a train from Exeter St Davids last summer - a two car class 143 with people literally squashed inside it - intending to travel to Paignton, I got of at Newton Abbot instead, but the train was actually bouncing up and down and landing with a thud! These trains are only supposed to carry 102 people and it must have been double or more that.hock:

 

[mumrar]

Where in Britain are the worst places for rush hour overcrouding.

I have been to Bath Spa many times and caught a standing(/no) room only train back to Warminster in the rush hour. It happens so frequently even to the extent of refusing more passengers.:-x

Also, what are the rules on load restrictions? I was on a train from Exeter St Davids last summer - a two car class 143 with people literally squashed inside it - intending to travel to Paignton, I got of at Newton Abbot instead, but the train was actually bouncing up and down and landing with a thud! These trains are only supposed to carry 102 people and it must have been double or more that.hock:

There are no load restrictions, people are free to get on until the train is full so long as the crew are happy to take them. I'n going to imagine that most of the routes around London and the South East, as well as around Leeds too. You're hardly suffering with a wedged two-car, even the Cross-City route can manage a fair few peak time services absolutely rammed with 6-car formations.

 

[WESSEX158]

The problem is if you have 6 cars it's hard to change that, but we only have 1/2/3 so there is room for more.

Even I not just for the passengers, the trains need the extra power or else they cause delays for other trains i.e. GWML London trains

 

[imagination]

London Underground wins if it counts.

 

[WESSEX158]

Yes, but considering it's age, it can't be helped.

 

[mumrar]

The problem is if you have 6 cars it's hard to change that, but we only have 1/2/3 so there is room for more.

But there isn't anymore carriages to add. If every TOC ran enough vehicles to ensure no-one stood at peak times, for the remaining 16 hours or so each day, you'd have hundreds, maybe ocer a thousand vehicles sat around awaiting the next peak period. Either that or you'd have trains running around off-peak at hugely unnecessarry sizes. Even when I work a packed XC turbo New St-Stansted, there's only people standing about 30% of the time, so for 70% of the journey the train length is fine.

 

[WESSEX158]

I understand that, but at least re-form the trains into 3 car. FGW shouldn't have gone back to only 2.

Besides somewhere there must be something(s) spare, mabe SWT could operate some extra services - they operate a train to Salisbury in the middle of the night that must be nearly empty.

ATW used to operate services to Waterloo aswell.

 

[Ferret]

I understand that, but at least re-form the trains into 3 car. FGW shouldn't have gone back to only 2.

Besides somewhere there must be something(s) spare, mabe SWT could operate some extra services - they operate a train to Salisbury in the middle of the night that must be nearly empty.

ATW used to operate services to Waterloo aswell.

Ok, reform to 3 cars, but then cancel trains because of a shortage of units thus having overcrowded 3 cars instead of overcrowded 2 cars?! I like your thinking!

The answer of course is to build more trains, but somebody has to pay for that - so we're stuck with it!!!

 

[WESSEX158]

But with 2 car trains the frequency is the same

 

[mumrar]

Not to mention the extra costs of maintenance, fuel usage, track access etc, and then the delays and timetable recasting required to allow reforming of trains over the short sections for which they are overcrowded so severly. In an ideal world this would happen, but similarly it's like asking the governemtn to make the M25 15 lanes on each side in both dircetions, just because it's over-crowded at peak times, it doesn't mean that's the ideal solution.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But with 2 car trains the frequency is the same

Yes, but you said to reform the 2-cars into 3-cars, so for every 3-car you get, you've lost half a 2-car unit, which can't run on it's own. So how are you going to keep the frequency if you reform the units?

The Voyagers are the perfect example of how this doesn't work, in some sections frequency was doubled and train length halved, that does exactly take much account of passenger growth does it?

 

[ainsworth74]

Besides somewhere there must be something(s) spare

What exactly? There is little or nothing spare anywhere. Pretty much every operator is crying out for extra rolling stock. There are a few units here and there kicking around that aren't in use (I think there is some 3rd rail stock perhaps), but the brutal truth is everything that can be used is being used. Stock shortage is the main reason why loco hauled services are making a comeback in some areas.

 

[WESSEX158]

I'm not saying that sock is instantly available but the sort of things open access operators pick up or as you said, loco hauled services.

I saw an HST come through the other day - no idea why.

 

[yorkie]

There is little the TOCs can do, due to the way franchising works. It really needs the DfT to specify a requirement for new stock. Cascades are the best way to achieve this, but it is difficult with our fragmented system. Electrification would help, as freed-up DMUs could go elsewhere to satisfy demand.

In fact, FGW did more than most when they introduced additional HSTs. Although I heard some people in the DfT were not too happy about that, as the HSTs belong to FirstGroup, giving them an advantage in the bidding process for the franchise renewal.

 

[jopsuk]

In the areas where the operators aren't crying out for more stock, it's not that the trains aren't overcrowded- it's that the infrastructure can't actually take any more carriages at peak hours (London area, mainly).

As noted recently by some railway blogs, it is now over 500 days since a new order was placed for passenger rolling stock. The previous record is a bit over 1000, during privatisation.

 

[Wyvern]

There are no load restrictions, people are free to get on until the train is full so long as the crew are happy to take them. I'n going to imagine that most of the routes around London and the South East, as well as around Leeds too. You're hardly suffering with a wedged two-car, even the Cross-City route can manage a fair few peak time services absolutely rammed with 6-car formations.

From experience of a train from Liverpool one Saturday, and another from Matlock after the Venetian Nights, the limit would seem to be when you cant get door interlock. :roll:i

 

[LE Greys]

I'd say the Circle Line was the worst, but the Northern Line between Moorgate and London Bridge was about the same, only made worse by the curved sides. On the national network, the commuter fasts between Waterloo and Woking are horrendous, but there's not much anybody can do about that unless they started running double-deck trains. In my own experience, Finsbury Park to Stevenage can be a nightmare, especially if they run a 4-car instead of an 8-car for whatever reason.

The record for people on a train would probably either a 12-car EPB formation out of Moorgate or a 10-car 376 formation out of Charing Cross. Still, an EPB can go from absolutely rammed to completely empty in 30 seconds (thanks to all the doors) while a 376 can take two minutes to unload.

 

[mrcheek]

In fact, FGW did more than most when they introduced additional HSTs. Although I heard some people in the DfT were not too happy about that, as the HSTs belong to FirstGroup, giving them an advantage in the bidding process for the franchise renewal.

also, FGW turned overcrowded 2 car 158s into marginally-less-overcrowded 3 car units.
And FGW also introduced loco hauled services to fill in gaps.

Odd how FGW are good at this kind of thing, yet FCC are one of the worst...

 

[Zoe]

Even when I work a packed XC turbo New St-Stansted, there's only people standing about 30% of the time, so for 70% of the journey the train length is fine.

Last year I was on an XC 170 from Birmingham New Street. It seemed very strange that a service linking the second and tenth largest cities consisted only of a 2 car DMU. I left at Nuneaton but I expect most of the people were going to Leicester.

 

[Drsatan]

The record for people on a train would probably either a 12-car EPB formation out of Moorgate

The Widened Lines from Moorgate to Farringdon were electrified at 25kv AC so an EPB could never go there. You're probably thinking of a 317 or 319.

A couple of years ago I traveled on a 221 from York to Southampton Central which was standing room only from Leeds to Birmingham NS. I agree that having to stand for an hour or more creates a very poor image of our railways to occasional travelers. Certainly if I was a non-enthusiast passenger who had to stand from Leeds to Birmingham I'd probably drive instead!

Birmingham and Leeds ought to be served by something longer than a five car DEMU, but, I can't see any of XC's trains being lengthened. Even the SRA refused to let Virgin XC order more centre cars for the Voyagers. The situation might improve a bit when Virgin West Coast gains four extra Pendolinos to allow Birmingham NS - Glasgow to be turned over to Pendolino operation, and instead of operating Manchester - Hayes (for Heathrow) services using the displaced Voyagers why not give them to XC? Only problem is Branson would probably have a tantrum

 

[tbtc]

A few points here:

1. There is a difference between "crowded" and "overcrowded". Most trains are built with a specific number of standing places, in the way a bus might have "forty seats plus twelve standing". I'd use "crowded" to describe a train with standing, and "overcrowded" to describe a train with more people standing than intended; it may look like a minor point, but I think the difference is worth making

2. There are no spare trains (beyond a handful of dregs). Anything new would be a couple of years away, minimum, by the time it is built/ tested

3. However, as I've said before, this encourages me that any ROSCO buying additional new trains would find a market for them (in the way that the Porterbrook 170s built "on spec" were soon part of the Central Trains fleet). If you build a generic unit like a 170 (or electrical equivalent- no new types of trains, please) then you have a lot of TOCs who would be interested

4. With crowded trains all day on some routes (and at peak times on many routes), throwing any resources at speculative Open Access operations. When you have two car units on the Liverpool - Nottingham (Norwich), or three car units on the Cardiff - Portsmouth, or four car units on the Cross Country routes, does anyone think that we should use five car 180s on routes like Bradford - Pontefract - London? I appreciate that in the competitive railway we have Grand Central have simply played the system, but should they be allowed to use these valuable 180s on emptier routes?

5. I'd seperate this thread into "Network South East" and "rest of the UK". In the old Network South East area there's little that can be done, since most routes are at capacity and many are twelve coaches long. However, in other areas, platforms can take longer trains and there are spare paths, so its a little easier to "solve" the problems

6. Whilst this is a lot of negativity, it should be remembered that this is partly because we have had fantastic passenger growth over the last decade (despite many routes being more frequent now). Yes, we should have planned better for this, and yes we need some national plan for how to tackle it (not just letting each TOC compete for resources, with no long term plan), but we should at least appreciate that railways are more popular now

 

[Greenback]

Good points there. Is there anything stopping ROSCO's from building extra stock on spec?

 

[Ferret]

Some excellent points raised there. Of course, LM will have 172s shortly which will release some 150s to FGW. That will hopefully make a difference to them...

 

[tbtc]

Is there anything stopping ROSCO's from building extra stock on spec?

Some say that there is, but I can't see how. If it was additional units of an existing type, I can't see how DFT would be able to say no (they could maybe claim that a brand new class needed several years of testing/ clearance etc) - if you built some more 170/ 350s then I can't see any problem (and there would be TOCs who already have 170s who would be interested in taking them, surely)

Everything built has found someone to take it on, even unreliable non-standard stock like 180s. I'm confident that if Bombardier built an additional dozen 172s (when the current production ends) they'd be snapped up

 

[Zoe]

The dft can refuse to underwrite the lease of the new stock to a TOC though. If the ROSCOs are unable to lease to any potential new stock to a TOC then they won't have any built.

 

[swt_passenger]

Here's a theory, based on passengers 'self regulating' to a certain degree.

Let's say you are running a service of 2 car trains every 15 mins into a city, during the morning peak, and for argument's sake the comfortable capacity is about 100 pax, just to make the sums easy.

One or two trains on this hypothetical service arrive (let's say at 0830 and 0845), completely wedged with about 200 passengers onboard, ie 50% standing. Some passengers are not going to put up with this, and are going to travel earlier or later than they really need to.

If you magically upgraded the service so that these two services were now 3 car, I reckon what would happen is they'd simply fill up with existing 'early or late travellers' until the same sort of density of passengers as before becomes the limiting factor. So you'd now have 300 on each train, and 200 less on the trains before and after.

Even in the real word of Southeast London, where they are lengthening platforms at the moment to allow services to be made up of 12 cars instead of 8 or 10, I suggest that there will still be particular trains on every route that will be complained about because they are too full - the real benefits will be seen by the pax prepared to travel slightly earlier or late, but there will always be some people whose personal time/space trade offs lead them onto the most packed train.

The graph of overcrowding against time will just end up with a sharper peak - it certainly won't flatten out any compared to now...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The Widened Lines from Moorgate to Farringdon were electrified at 25kv AC so an EPB could never go there. You're probably thinking of a 317 or 319.

Probably mistaken Moorgate for a completely different route, AFAICT the platforms have never been long enough for 12 car trains. Barbican couldn't even take 8 cars. Which could be why they are making all that fuss about lengthening Thameslink for 12 cars...

 

[142094]

The worst overcorwding a few years ago was found to be the Northern service in the morning peak that calls at Darlington, Durham and Chester-le-Street on route to Newcastle. Most likely still is one of the worst.

 

[Greenback]

Some say that there is, but I can't see how. If it was additional units of an existing type, I can't see how DFT would be able to say no (they could maybe claim that a brand new class needed several years of testing/ clearance etc) - if you built some more 170/ 350s then I can't see any problem (and there would be TOCs who already have 170s who would be interested in taking them, surely)

Everything built has found someone to take it on, even unreliable non-standard stock like 180s. I'm confident that if Bombardier built an additional dozen 172s (when the current production ends) they'd be snapped up

The dft can refuse to underwrite the lease of the new stock to a TOC though. If the ROSCOs are unable to lease to any potential new stock to a TOC then they won't have any built.

I suppose it would come down to whether an individual TOC thought it was worth the cost of leasing additional stock. They would have to attract sufficient additional fare payers in order to make it worthwhile. The question is, how many people are currently put off travelling by overcrowded trains, and will they be persuaded on to trains that are less crowded?

I can see why the ROSCO's don;t want to be left with expensive trains and no one to lease them, but I would like to see some entrpreneurial flair and risk!

 

[imagination]

The most overcrowded train I've ever been on was once when I had a dentist appointment on the last day of the regatta week at Henley-on-Thames (at the dentists in Henley).

For the train back I had to queue for almost 1.5 hours at Henley station and then got on a train that was jammed to overcrowded and beyond.

 

[tbtc]

I can see why the ROSCO's don;t want to be left with expensive trains and no one to lease them, but I would like to see some entrpreneurial flair and risk!

I appreciate that its a big gamble, but the fact that there is nothing "spare" at the moment, and passenger number keep rising, would convince me that it'd be worth building a few new trains, even just to test the market, I can't imagine they'd sit idle

Just make sure its "standard". You could even build them to take advantage of damaged stock, like the Scotrail/ NXEA 156s which has accidents recently

We really need someone to grab the bull by the horns and get additional trains built. It won't be the new Government. It won't be short term TOCs. It won't be PTEs.

 

[LE Greys]

The record for people on a train would probably either a 12-car EPB formation out of Moorgate

The Widened Lines from Moorgate to Farringdon were electrified at 25kv AC so an EPB could never go there. You're probably thinking of a 317 or 319.

Probably mistaken Moorgate for a completely different route, AFAICT the platforms have never been long enough for 12 car trains. Barbican couldn't even take 8 cars. Which could be why they are making all that fuss about lengthening Thameslink for 12 cars...

<Smacks forehead> Why the £$%^ did I say Moorgate when I meant Waterloo.