Overcrowding on rural/'regional' services

[Bletchleyite]

Because when you say that people don't want to sit next to each other, what I suspect most actually want is no-one between them and the aisle - 3+1 doesn't fix that

That's preferred, but it only gets really uncomfortable when you're pushed against another passenger. 3+1 does fix that, as well as providing the groups of 6 very popular with families and groups on the 3+2 units.

Look how many people go for those single seats at the end of HSTs and 195/331s...

 

[bramling]

People don't want to sit next to each other. So I'd say "no more than 50%" in a 2+2 layout if everyone is travelling alone, though in practice they're not so it's a bit more than that.

However, change that 2+2 to 3+1 and that becomes 3/4! (For 2+1 it's 2/3).

I've long failed to understand why we aren't more innovative with layouts. Even for 3+2 it's 3/5, which is one big upside of it. But there is a lot going for a 3+1 layout. It gives you the same capacity as the 2+2 layout, but allows you far more passengers before it "feels crowded" than 2+2.

I don’t know about 3+1, as in the case of facing seats this means the chance of having someone sitting directly opposite, which I suspect most people find more of an imposition than someone directly adjacent, because it will impinge on legroom.

2+3 actually works quite well, as you can have three people in a bay of six and two in a bay of four before anyone has someone opposite as well as alongside (if everyone plays ball, of course).

 

[LowLevel]

A good example for me is Skegness in the summer.

4 car 156 lash up with an East Midlands Trains format with tonnes of luggage space and loads of table seats - absolutely perfect. You're going to have a good day, even if you do have work through one door at some of the halts.

2 car 158 with no room for suitcases or pushchairs - hell on earth and I genuinely struggle to get into my car to come to work when I know it's lined up to happen to me. Stressed and angry passengers and staff, just miserable. I know it was done to cater to a market but whoever signed off on removing all the luggage space on those trains to squeeze in a few more seats committed one of the worst "railway sins" of the last 15 years.

 

[northwichcat]

People don't want to sit next to each other. So I'd say "no more than 50%" in a 2+2 layout if everyone is travelling alone, though in practice they're not so it's a bit more than that.

I'd say it depends how long people are going to be sat next to each other. If we take a Liverpool to Manchester via Chat Moss service as an example. If it's 95% seat occupancy leaving Liverpool and 60% leaving Huyton, I don't think they'll be many objections. If it's around 90% leaving Liverpool and it remains at that level all the way to Manchester then people aren't going to be happy.

However, change that 2+2 to 3+1 and that becomes 3/4! (For 2+1 it's 2/3).

I've long failed to understand why we aren't more innovative with layouts. Even for 3+2 it's 3/5, which is one big upside of it. But there is a lot going for a 3+1 layout. It gives you the same capacity as the 2+2 layout, but allows you far more passengers before it "feels crowded" than 2+2.

How would 3+1 affect the time taken for selective passengers to reach the doors at stations, if there's 100% seat occupancy on a peak train?

I think one disadvantage would be 3+1 would make it easier for passengers to not see free seats or for a family of 5 to spread themselves across 5 seats in a way which prevents the 6th being used. Or someone not wanting to use it because it feels awkward to sit there!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Aug 2022 ==

2+3 actually works quite well, as you can have three people in a bay of six and two in a bay of four before anyone has someone opposite as well as alongside (if everyone plays ball, of course).

2+3 often means the seat is right up against the window or side of the train, which can make the window seats uncomfortable for taller people.

With 2+2 you quite often have an armrest, or space where there could be an armrest.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How would 3+1 affect the time taken for selective passengers to reach the doors at stations, if there's 100% seat occupancy on a peak train?

It would take a bit longer than in 2+2 but the same as 3+2.

 

[liamf656]

Some weekends throw up a seemingly endless list of full and standing trains on EMRs regional network, especially recently where the fleet is stretched beyond its limits. The Liverpool route has struggled with other operators’ cancellations and the Skegness’ route is in peak season at the moment as well as various sporting events making the Crewe and Lincoln routes very busy

 

[northwichcat]

Some weekends throw up a seemingly endless list of full and standing trains on EMRs regional network, especially recently where the fleet is stretched beyond its limits. The Liverpool route has struggled with other operators’ cancellations and the Skegness’ route is in peak season at the moment as well as various sporting events making the Crewe and Lincoln routes very busy

The Liverpool route is quite often very busy on weekends in football season anyway. Most weekends they'll be one Premiership club playing at home in Manchester and another in Liverpool.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Liverpool route is quite often very busy on weekends in football season anyway. Most weekends they'll be one Premiership club playing at home in Manchester and another in Liverpool.

The Liverpool route has needed a proper solution since I first used it, way back in 1997, and still does (the then 0749 Liverpool to Norwich was one of the most overcrowded trains in the North). It seems generally to be about 10 years behind the capacity it needs, i.e. it needed 4 cars in 1997 and (mostly) has it now. Now it needs 6 or 8.

 

[Starmill]

There are up to 3tph (usually 2) on Saturdays May-September and have been for several years partly due to the withdrawal of the through London trains. This is still a far cry from the days before the late 80s when direct services came in from the Midlands & North. Great Yarmouth isn't what it once was sadly.

I take a lot of holidays across most of Great Britain, including as yourself to places like South Devon. I'm lucky enough to be able to have several short breaks per year (or that was the case before 2020 anyway). I'm not sure I'd ever choose Great Yarmouth though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Aug 2022 ==

The Liverpool route has needed a proper solution since I first used it, way back in 1997, and still does (the then 0749 Liverpool to Norwich was one of the most overcrowded trains in the North). It seems generally to be about 10 years behind the capacity it needs, i.e. it needed 4 cars in 1997 and (mostly) has it now. Now it needs 6 or 8.

It will also be a tough nut to crack in terms of decarbonisation. Too many people to put onto electric buses permanently but an enormous number of unelectrified and unimproved route miles.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Aug 2022 ==

A good example for me is Skegness in the summer.

4 car 156 lash up with an East Midlands Trains format with tonnes of luggage space and loads of table seats - absolutely perfect. You're going to have a good day, even if you do have work through one door at some of the halts.

2 car 158 with no room for suitcases or pushchairs - hell on earth and I genuinely struggle to get into my car to come to work when I know it's lined up to happen to me. Stressed and angry passengers and staff, just miserable. I know it was done to cater to a market but whoever signed off on removing all the luggage space on those trains to squeeze in a few more seats committed one of the worst "railway sins" of the last 15 years.

At least being able to take a 170 this year makes this less likely. But it's really not great.

 

[Trainbike46]

It will also be a tough nut to crack in terms of decarbonisation. Too many people to put onto electric buses permanently but an enormous number of unelectrified and unimproved route miles.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Aug 2022 ==

The solution would be bimodes I would say. Maybe they should order some more, and possibly longer, 755s, maintain them at Norwich crown point and move the existing 170s to other EMR services, and the 158s elsewhere. Long term though, the only solution is a rolling programme of electrification, possibly combined with swapping out diesel engines for batteries

 

[Killingworth]

The Liverpool route has needed a proper solution since I first used it, way back in 1997, and still does (the then 0749 Liverpool to Norwich was one of the most overcrowded trains in the North). It seems generally to be about 10 years behind the capacity it needs, i.e. it needed 4 cars in 1997 and (mostly) has it now. Now it needs 6 or 8.

If only it had 4 cars at the times they're really needed. However a lot of the current crush is caused by TPE's inability to run very many of their trains at all, but not being able to say when until the day.

Northern can, and do, ease the congestion between Sheffield and Manchester where they can, but can't get longer than 2 cars into Sheffield at critical times Monday-Saturday due to platform space issues. That applies to length and signalling. On Sundays 6 cars will sometimes run - although I'd have said 4 or 5 would usually be enough. Now if TPE were to hand over their paths so that Northern could run more longer trains there'd be a big improvement on the overcrowding front, albeit the journey times end to end are about 25 minutes longer.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If only it had 4 cars at the times they're really needed. However a lot of the current crush is caused by TPE's inability to run very many of their trains at all, but not being able to say when until the day.

Certainly that doesn't help either!

 

[LowLevel]

At least being able to take a 170 this year makes this less likely. But it's really not great.

Sadly they still don't eat as much luggage as a 156 and they bring their own problems in multi with all the short platforms.

There is nothing like a 156 with the parcels van bulkhead removed, a full size luggage stack, the big overhead racks, space between the seat backs and if need be, the windowless seats by the door pockets covered over for luggage room.

Currently in vogue are humongous suitcases and on a 158 you can fit maybe 9 of them in the luggage racks if you're lucky, and you can make a pile in the bike space if you sacrifice that.

On a 156 I reckon you can fit more like 40 stacked correctly.

It gets to the point where you leave people behind because you can't fit their luggage in, rather than any shortage of space.

The extra HSTs are also sorely missed in this regard, all 3 vans in the power cars and TGS as well as the saloon stacks would be used.

The solution invariably just seems to be get on with it as best you can, though.

 

[Starmill]

The solution would be bimodes I would say. Maybe they should order some more, and possibly longer, 755s, maintain them at Norwich crown point and move the existing 170s to other EMR services, and the 158s elsewhere. Long term though, the only solution is a rolling programme of electrification, possibly combined with swapping out diesel engines for batteries

The difficulty with this is that it won't be possible to get all of the CLC line, Manchester - Sheffield, and Peterborough - Ely - Norwich prioritised for electrification. So a bimode will just be a less energy efficient diesel train. Same unfortunately applies for Birmingham / Coventry - Leicester - Peterborough, Stoke-on-Trent - Derby and Oxford - Bedford.

 

[BrianW]

This all begs the question of perspectives. On most routes there will be many times of the day when trains run almost empty and few travellers note or comment on that. A few trains will be rammed full for parts of the journey and the crowded masses will shout out. That's only natural. We all know there's a big tidal flow element, particularly at commuting times. That's relatively easy (or was pre-Covid) to plan around.

Surges in leisure demand are much harder to work around, not least because they tend to be irregular, are greatly driven by specific events and by the weather.

Add to the mix all sorts of totally unpredictable railway hazards causing delays and cancellations with further knock-on delays to many other services. A planned for load can very quickly be overwhelmed by bumped and diverted passengers from other disrupted services.

Which begs a question. What levels of loading do passengers prefer? 100% being all seats taken

Under 25% some may feel anxious about other passengers near them, but most welcome the space.

Up to 50% is comfortable with all able to get a choice of single seats without sharing a 2 (or 3) with anyone else.

At 75% most will still have a selection of single seats available because many couples will be sitting together.

Over 75% gets more delicate. Do we ask that person with a bag on the seat to move it so we can sit next to them? Take their feet off the seat? Do we want to sit next to an old/young man/woman? Maybe opt to stand?

By 90% quite a few may be standing from choice.

By 100% there'll still be a few empty seats as above but new boarders will probably stand.

By 110% pressure will have forced most bags off seats, although there's always one.....

By this time 'the railway' will accept the service is crowded.

By 150%, depending on rolling stock and distribution down the train, passengers may be unable to board.

Crowding levels are liable to fluctuate greatly along long rural/regional routes. I'm thinking of Norwich - Liverpool and Manchester - Milford Haven as examples (both between 250 and 300 miles) although there are many others. CrossCountry may not strictly count as rural/regional but it certainly has the longest routes made up of overlapping traffic flows.

People will be attracted to trains that regularly run to timetable with loadings below 75%. Once short forms, cancellations and late running trains are factored in that desirability starts to evaporate. My experience on the three services above suggests that for sections overcrowding is likely to be deterring further custom.

What to do about it? Maybe lots more fresh air trundling around the rails in empty trains causing wear and tear on tracks and rolling stock with more staff to maintain both. Or splitting trains and causing more interchange disruption for through journeys. Other threads have already aired these views.

On my line just running all the scheduled trains at full planned length would be a very good way to eliminate congestion.

Excellent and helpful input, Killingworth. Thank you.

 

[urbophile]

Exactly, the spare coaches/units on BR were almost all eliminated in the period before Privatisation. It was a process that had been steadily going on since the 1960’s and by 1994 there was hardly anything left.

It had nothing to do with privatisation or private operators. The Treasury view has always been that this extra traffic should be priced off, so as to reduce the need for extra stock. Every time you renewed a fleet in BR days they were looking for savings in fleet numbers.

It has everything to do with the profit motive which was long dominant in BR (not their fault, government policy) long before privatisation. I wonder if railways in this or indeed any other country have ever been run as a public service?

 

[Scotrail314209]

The Mallaig service in Summer tends to get quite busy, one journey I had was standing room only between Fort William and Mallaig, with the return having all seats taken between Mallaig and Fort William, where the train emptied out but remained busy, but still with plenty of seats left.

 

[farwest]

Was there not talk of a 5 car for the St.Ives branch? Making two 3 car 150s out of three 2 car 150s? I thought the platforms had been lengthened for this.

 

[paul1609]

The Mallaig service in Summer tends to get quite busy, one journey I had was standing room only between Fort William and Mallaig, with the return having all seats taken between Mallaig and Fort William, where the train emptied out but remained busy, but still with plenty of seats left.

Probably doesnt help that someone seems to have been marketing it to coach operators as " the cut price Jacobean" featuring the Harry Potter Viaduct!

 

[dk1]

I take a lot of holidays across most of Great Britain, including as yourself to places like South Devon. I'm lucky enough to be able to have several short breaks per year (or that was the case before 2020 anyway). I'm not sure I'd ever choose Great Yarmouth though.

You are not alone haha.

 

[Requeststop]

I thought that Lelant and St Erth Stations had recently been expanded (lengthened) to accommodate 6 coaches?
I note that 4 coaches are normal, and Lelant is still a request stop, with an hourly service.

 

[Gostav]

They have been ordered with fixed couplings and can't just be remarshalled.

That is weird, some railway operators still like rolling stock and locomotive because they can be easy to remarshalled such as add or remove dining car, luggage car or increase or decrease the number of carriages according to changes in passenger flow, TPE Mark 5A almost circumvents all the benefits.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That is weird, some railway operators still like rolling stock and locomotive because they can be easy to remarshalled such as add or remove dining car, luggage car or increase or decrease the number of carriages according to changes in passenger flow, TPE Mark 5A almost circumvents all the benefits.

There are many things odd about the Mk5a order...but yes, that they weren't independent vehicles (with Standard coaches plus a DBFO with wheelchair space, so only two vehicle types) was one of the oddest. They have all the disadvantages of both pretty much.

 

[haggishunter]

On this very subject, ScotRail is trying to dissuade people from travelling on a direct Inverness - Edinburgh train and take either of 2 earlier Glasgow trains instead after people were getting left on the platform.

ScotRail says it pays not to take one of its trains

Customers have been asked to consider alternatives to the busy 10:51 Inverness-Edinburgh service.

www.bbc.co.uk

What I don’t understand is this busy service appears to be always 3 coaches and they say they can’t add to it, can’t they rearrange so its a longer train?

 

[david1212]

The most over capacity train I have even been on was a 2-car 158 north from Shrewsbury. This was split from a 4-car starting at Birmingham International. It was full and standing from Wolverhampton. However after Shrewsbury space for no more as even standing in the loo so some left behind. It was booked to go on west from Chester but was terminated and from RealTimeTrains went back to Wrexham. Given North Wales from Manchester etc are crowded anyway how those heading to Rhyl, Llandudno etc got there I have no idea.

If adequate capacity I would do day trip to Aberystwyth.

 

[delt1c]

No different in BR days when the Treasury required 2 new next gen DMU cars replaced 3 first gen DMUs.

This was the preparation for privatisation, make the BR service look bad due to financial restraints then when privatisation comes along the future looks good. A case of physiology on the behalf of the government of the day

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Aug 2022 ==

Do you run public transport for the public or for shareholders profit?

 

[Bald Rick]

This was the preparation for privatisation, make the BR service look bad due to financial restraints then when privatisation comes along the future looks good. A case of physiology on the behalf of the government of the day

that’s completely wrong. It was done by Provincial (later, Regional Railways) management to save various parts if the railway. The decisions were taken in 1983-88, well before privatisation was on the cards.

the reason it was done is that modernisation era DM?us we’re so comprehensively unreliable, that new units would be far more productive. Also, no need for a guards van taking up 30% of the space of one coach.

 

[Killingworth]

On this very subject, ScotRail is trying to dissuade people from travelling on a direct Inverness - Edinburgh train and take either of 2 earlier Glasgow trains instead after people were getting left on the platform.

ScotRail says it pays not to take one of its trains

Customers have been asked to consider alternatives to the busy 10:51 Inverness-Edinburgh service.

www.bbc.co.uk

What I don’t understand is this busy service appears to be always 3 coaches and they say they can’t add to it, can’t they rearrange so its a longer train?

Oh dear, didn't Scotrail introduce 5 car HSTs to cover such services? Ducks for cover!!

 

[Clarence Yard]

This was the preparation for privatisation, make the BR service look bad due to financial restraints then when privatisation comes along the future looks good. A case of physiology on the behalf of the government of the day

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Aug 2022 ==

Do you run public transport for the public or for shareholders profit?

No, as stated above it was done (and was well entrenched) well before privatisation. The Treasury always had a downer on BR for not using it’s assets fully and for having too much stock.

So every year they were after BR to make savings in their fleet and every time new stock was authorised, they wanted more out than in.

The money shutters on BR started to come down in 1990, when the economy started to go south and the Treasury tuned the taps off for all of the public sector. Orders and plans for new stock were cut back then too.

 

[Fyldeboy]

One of the issues which has been exacerbated by sectorisation /privatisation (as well as suburban electrification) has been the growing inability to use spare commuter stock at weekends elsewhere on the network.

I think traction knowledge(?) for guards/drivers is a major issue if used away from the commuter lines that they inhabit M-F