• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Simplification of operations is the only way forward.

Status
Not open for further replies.

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,379
Moderator note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/gwr-brighton-services-axed-from-may-timetable-change.228590

Originally there was talk of more GWR Brightons possibly three or more a day for the leisure Market.
People really need to get away from justifying all sorts of obscure services on the basis of the 'leisure market'. It is not going to pay the costs required.

The 'leisure market' was a nice by-product of the 'commuter market' and the 'business market' that paid the bills. Simplification of operations is the only way forward.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Joined
25 Jan 2021
Messages
281
Location
Bristol
Simplification of operations is the only way forward.
Some people may also define that as bureaucratic tidiness, disregarding any flexible mindset needed to adapt to changing market forces.

Is Portsmouth Harbour really a more useful destination for travellers to/from Bristol or Bath these days, compared to Brighton?
 

WesternLancer

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
15,308
People really need to get away from justifying all sorts of obscure services on the basis of the 'leisure market'. It is not going to pay the costs required.

The 'leisure market' was a nice by-product of the 'commuter market' and the 'business market' that paid the bills. Simplification of operations is the only way forward.
Well, if that is the case you may as well shut vast swathes down, as there will never be a commuter market or business market like there was, ever again. Rail commuting was overwhelmingly office or white collar work. Those people want to work from home with the ticket savings and time savings that brings. Ask anyone who works in an office how many people are going back. It's very limited. Some employers don't even want to have people back so they can sell the offices!

So that only leaves the leisure market as a possible growth area. If that depends on the work related markets that are not coming back then that is the end of it all apart from a residual service (like the sort of bus services councils subsidise - so few as to make them pointless) - you may as well plan for a residual 'socially necessary' railway.

And god help us if it is left to the DfT so plan that...it would be typical of them to set train service patterns for a type of service that no longer exists.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
Regarding the revised thread title, I think it depends what is meant by "simplification".

In some cases, it is a good thing. For example I have argued several times that the WCML IC services would be better off on a 30-min pattern (e.g. 30-min interval services to both Birmingham and Manchester). This would then allow the local services to also follow even-interval 30-minute patterns: last time I checked (in the normal timetables up to 2019) some of the local services on the Birmingham-Coventry and Stockport-Manchester axes were an irregular mess, caused by the insistence on a 20-min service from London. Also, the Euston-Birmingham semi-fasts are a bit irregular too: it always used to be an even-interval 30-min service. So an example on the London-Birmingham axis might be:

2tph IC to New St or Wolverhampton
2tph semi-fast New St via Northampton
2tph slightly slower to Northampton, calling at medium-sized local stations (e.g. Hemel Hempstead, Leighton Buzzard, etc) but missing out the smaller stops
2tph slow to MKC, all from Watford
2tph all stations stopper Coventry to New St

- all at even-interval 30 min frequency.

However, while I would argue for a simple clockface base pattern, I also believe there is room for one-off holiday specials, peak extras, and the like on top of that base pattern.

Some countries such as Germany and surrounding countries manage to achieve some interesting services. The German philosophy (at least that prevailing between 2009-14 when I visited regularly, not sure about now) was to run clockface services on busy key segments between nodes (major Hbf stations), for example Frankfurt to Munich. However beyond the key nodes, each service on each hour might progress to a different ultimate destination, providing a simple service on key busy routes, but also one, or few-a-day through services to other, more far-flung destinations. For instance the two-hourly Munich to Innsbruck IC fast progressed to a different Italian city with each service. The two-hourly Salzburg-Munich-Stuttgart-Heidelberg-Frankfurt was clockface two-hourly on that stretch, but originated from other Austrian cities in some hours.

While perhaps my opinion of this isn't entirely valid as I haven't actually lived in Germany, to an outsider this pattern seems a nice trade off between simple, easy to understand services and occasionals to less-popular destinations.

Perhaps the SWT 2004 timetable change also had it right to some extent (clockface pattern, but with extras where needed) - though it did have some flaws, for example no peak extras on the Alton line; the only peak extra on the Portsmouth Direct was at 1818, when there was also a path available at 1718; peak extra provision to the local stations between Surbiton and Woking was poor, due to a lack of paths; and the peak extra to Winchester and Southampton, at 1748, was a little on the slow side and caught up by the following 1805.
 
Last edited:

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,379
I've always thought that the XC Reading services should run through to Brighton. The original Virgin XC services should never of been pulled to Brighton
There are so many reasons why that is not the case. It certainly isn't simple (and couldn't easily be done now anyway as there is nowhere to service Voyagers overnight in the Brighton area).

Not enough Voyagers to support it.

The paths are better used on the Brighton line to give a frequent and reliable service to London.

The signalling can't reliably support it going via Guildford and the Kensington Olympic route is a dreadful crawl around West London, again with no realistic capacity.

More to the point, the journey times to Manchester are around three and half hours from Brighton to Manchester via London with a connection every twenty minutes (assuming the 3tph service is restored) and about two hours longer on what would be an infrequent service via Reading.

Besides, XC started to extend them to Southampton instead which is much more worthwhile.
 

Doctor Fegg

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2010
Messages
2,135
Location
Charlbury
People really need to get away from justifying all sorts of obscure services on the basis of the 'leisure market'. It is not going to pay the costs required.
The 'leisure market' was a nice by-product of the 'commuter market' and the 'business market' that paid the bills. Simplification of operations is the only way forward.
Maybe that's true wherever you are but it certainly isn't true universally.

Around here, commuter loadings are still a long way down from pre-Covid, but leisure and general off-peak travel appears - to my eyes at least - to be greater than it ever was. Historically a mid-morning down train would only disgorge a couple of passengers here in Charlbury; now it's often 30+. And this is almost all leisure traffic - the taxi drivers are doing very nicely out of it.

I don't see how the path back to railway prosperity is through focusing on a "commuter market" which is half what it once was. People are just not going back to the office in the numbers they previously did. Businesses are downsizing, or selling entirely, their city centre offices. Sandwich shops are closing. The world has changed. The railway needs to skate to where the puck is going, not where it was.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,379
I don't see how the path back to railway prosperity is through focusing on a "commuter market" which is half what it once was. People are just not going back to the office in the numbers they previously did. Businesses are downsizing, or selling entirely, their city centre offices. Sandwich shops are closing. The world has changed. The railway needs to skate to where the puck is going, not where it was.
I totally agree with every sentiment here.

However, the point I was responding to is the continual suggestion that 'everywhere to everywhere' services, which add significant costs to the railway operation, are needed. The justification always seems to be that this is what the 'leisure market' needs.

However, pushing up costs where the railway is only supported by relatively low volumes of passengers and consequently revenue can not be the answer. Simplified timetables and good connection opportunities can be.

Some people comment that season ticket commuters paid a low price, almost as low as off-peak fares in some cases for daily travel but the point was that it came with high volume.

Around here, commuter loadings are still a long way down from pre-Covid, but leisure and general off-peak travel appears - to my eyes at least - to be greater than it ever was. Historically a mid-morning down train would only disgorge a couple of passengers here in Charlbury; now it's often 30+. And this is all leisure traffic - the taxi drivers are doing very nicely out of it.
As an extreme example, in the context of the Cotswold Line, I could imagine someone saying that one of the mid-morning services ought to run on from Worcester to Birmingham and Manchester 'for the leisure market' with a return around 5pm. The costs associated with running such a service would be disproportionate to the extra revenue it might generate. Far better would be to use the opportunity of Worcestershire Parkway to make this sort of journey easier with sensible interchange. (Of course, I appreciate that hasn't yet come to pass because the long distance services aren't calling.)
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,736
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
However, pushing up costs where the railway is only supported by relatively low volumes of passengers and consequently revenue can not be the answer. Simplified timetables and good connection opportunities can be.

The "good" bit (or "quality connections" as I tend to say) is important here.

A quality connection is NOT:

- One with a long wait
- One which involves a long walk e.g. between stations, or where no effort has been made to plan it into nearby platforms despite the station layout allowing it (and long term, station layouts should change to improve connections)
- One which often misses
- One where a TOC staff member goes "not my problem mate, that's a different company"
- One without appropriate shelter and warmth where it takes place if a short wait is necessary
- One which is penalised through the fare system

I would very strongly support a Grossbritannientakt based on half hourly services. But we have to get the whole package right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top