UK Rail Passenger Numbers Discussion

[Clarence Yard]

The drop in commuting and business is largely a structural change, not really related to TOC performance troubles, although they won’t help. Long distance leisure (or increase in leisure generally) won’t cover the revenue shortfall unless prices rise dramatically, which will then push the demand backwards.

The current revenue model for the industry is bust, as the latest quarterly ORR figures show.

 

[The Ham]

I do think that is someone's job doesn't now require them to be in the office five day a week then it probably will stay that way and we can't start to try and work out the new normal.

Indeed, however over time it may be that people who don't have to be in the office full time may migrate away from car based travel for that travel towards other modes of travel.

Obviously that's not an option for everyone, but why own a car (with the significant up front costs) for it to be used for commuting for 2 or 3 days a week if rail cold be viable (and probably cheaper if that is mostly what the car is used for)?

For those who have another half, where they're both in 3 days a week, why own two cars for the one or two days a week where you both need a car?

Cars are expensive, it's just that most people only equate the costs in small packages.

The drop in commuting and business is largely a structural change, not really related to TOC performance troubles, although they won’t help. Long distance leisure (or increase in leisure generally) won’t cover the revenue shortfall unless prices rise dramatically, which will then push the demand backwards.

The current revenue model for the industry is bust, as the latest quarterly ORR figures show.

Indeed, however whilst commuting revenue is low, it has over the last year grown significantly. As such there could still be scope for this to recover further (and yes this still could be noticeable below where it was).

However for that to happen rail has to offer a reliable service.

Yes there's likely to be a need to review what is provided (and some cuts may well happen), however it needs to be remembered that rail usage is comparable to 2010 numbers and not 1980's numbers.

As such there's probably a way to create a useable rail service which results in an affordable cost to the government.

Pre Covid about half the level of support given to the railways was for enhancements. It may well be that has to reduce (although where it results in cost savings that may not be a suitable option).

Something else which also should be considered is that if rail use doesn't increase some of your other incomes (including rent from shops at stations) may also fall away.

 

[ar10642]

Indeed, however over time it may be that people who don't have to be in the office full time may migrate away from car based travel for that travel towards other modes of travel.

Obviously that's not an option for everyone, but why own a car (with the significant up front costs) for it to be used for commuting for 2 or 3 days a week if rail cold be viable (and probably cheaper if that is mostly what the car is used for)?

For those who have another half, where they're both in 3 days a week, why own two cars for the one or two days a week where you both need a car?

Cars are expensive, it's just that most people only equate the costs in small packages.



Indeed, however whilst commuting revenue is low, it has over the last year grown significantly. As such there could still be scope for this to recover further (and yes this still could be noticeable below where it was).

However for that to happen rail has to offer a reliable service.

No chance that is going to happen. Endless strikes and service cuts will see to that. The railway is in decline and everyone in charge seems happy to just let it happen.

 

[Class83]

Indeed, however over time it may be that people who don't have to be in the office full time may migrate away from car based travel for that travel towards other modes of travel.

Obviously that's not an option for everyone, but why own a car (with the significant up front costs) for it to be used for commuting for 2 or 3 days a week if rail cold be viable (and probably cheaper if that is mostly what the car is used for)?

For those who have another half, where they're both in 3 days a week, why own two cars for the one or two days a week where you both need a car?

Cars are expensive, it's just that most people only equate the costs in small packages.



Indeed, however whilst commuting revenue is low, it has over the last year grown significantly. As such there could still be scope for this to recover further (and yes this still could be noticeable below where it was).

However for that to happen rail has to offer a reliable service.

Yes there's likely to be a need to review what is provided (and some cuts may well happen), however it needs to be remembered that rail usage is comparable to 2010 numbers and not 1980's numbers.

As such there's probably a way to create a useable rail service which results in an affordable cost to the government.

Pre Covid about half the level of support given to the railways was for enhancements. It may well be that has to reduce (although where it results in cost savings that may not be a suitable option).

Something else which also should be considered is that if rail use doesn't increase some of your other incomes (including rent from shops at stations) may also fall away.

Because the justification for owning a car isn't getting to a city or large town during the day. It's getting pretty much anywhere else at the evening and weekend. If the railway isn't reliable, people sink the cost into the car, then use it even for commuting where the train or bus is more convenient. Marginal additional use of a car you own is cheap.

It's why I like the German Bahncard model, as it creates a sunk cost into rail travel, with a low (even zero) cost for additional journeys.

 

[david1212]

The drop in commuting and business is largely a structural change, not really related to TOC performance troubles, although they won’t help. Long distance leisure (or increase in leisure generally) won’t cover the revenue shortfall unless prices rise dramatically, which will then push the demand backwards.

The current revenue model for the industry is bust, as the latest quarterly ORR figures show.

My first choice for leisure travel ( my daily commute is not even partly practical by rail ) is rail.
My price cut-off for a walk-on ticket ( or at an open booking office a split-fare combination ) currently is no more than 20p/mile.
For the service reasonable connection times and at least hourly on each section so the maximum delay or wait if a rail issue, I miss a train or I simply change my plan.

Hence if ticket prices get directly hiked beyond general inflation, indirectly increased by changing ticket types and/or time restrictions or the service frequency is cut rail will loose my revenue.

XC had no revenue from me this year because of the 2 hour frequency south of Reading.

 

[kristiang85]

No chance that is going to happen. Endless strikes and service cuts will see to that. The railway is in decline and everyone in charge seems happy to just let it happen.

I've normally felt more optimistic about things, but lately I've come round to this way of thinking. An on time train on my routes seems to be a rarity and nobody seems to care, the infrastructure is creaking and services just seem to be getting ever more reduced. It does reek of a managed decline.

 

[30907]

It's shorter distance commuting and Denmark Hill has the hospitals which probably helps.

I suspected as much - but the curious thing is that it is one of only two (ex)SE route that has returned to its pre-Covid frequency (the other being via Herne Hill).

The loading data is also questionable, Ravensbourne and Beckenham Hill aren't the busiest of stations so them taking a 8-car class 700 from few seats available to even standing space limited seems unlikely to me.

Yes, I did find that odd.

IIRC these were introduced as PiXC busters and have been around for a while now, think it was back in 2016/17 they were introduced. TBH as they're timed to leave Bromley South 7 mins after the Welwyn Stopper they've got plenty of time to call!

And they have each had a further stop added, so now consistently Bellingham, Crofton Pk, Denmark Hill.

However, this is a bit niche in the context of the thread.

 

[Killingworth]

I've normally felt more optimistic about things, but lately I've come round to this way of thinking. An on time train on my routes seems to be a rarity and nobody seems to care, the infrastructure is creaking and services just seem to be getting ever more reduced. It does reek of a managed decline.

Mismanaged and totally avoidable decline!

 

[philosopher]

I've normally felt more optimistic about things, but lately I've come round to this way of thinking. An on time train on my routes seems to be a rarity and nobody seems to care, the infrastructure is creaking and services just seem to be getting ever more reduced. It does reek of a managed decline.

I am seriously thinking of getting a coach back from Birmingham to London after Christmas as the industrial action at the moment is getting to the point where the railways are unusable as a means of transport.

For me it would almost certainly be a one off as I suspect the railway network will be tolerable enough to use once these disputes are resolved at least on the routes I use. However, I can definitely see quite a few switching to coaches or on longer UK routes, air travel if rail services continue to deteriorate.

Coach travel, while it does have a down market image, is very flexible, for example it is far easier to set up a new coach route than a train route. Some coach operators could also win those over who may regard coach travel as down market by implementing luxury coach services.

 

[Kite159]

I am seriously thinking of getting a coach back from Birmingham to London after Christmas as the industrial action at the moment is getting to the point where the railways are unusable as a means of transport.

For me it would almost certainly be a one off as I suspect the railway network will be tolerable enough to use once these disputes are resolved at least on the routes I use. However, I can definitely see quite a few switching to coaches or on longer UK routes, air travel if rail services continue to deteriorate.

Coach travel, while it does have a down market image, is very flexible, for example it is far easier to set up a new coach route than a train route. Some coach operators could also win those over who may regard coach travel as down market by implementing luxury coach services.

Certainly I've noticed a lot more advertising from National Express on the radio lately.

 

[Gostav]

it would be a bad development, if public transport is only used by: people without cars, low income earners, newcomers to the UK and students who don't have a choice in travel. That's going to have a big impact on the future and any decent person is avoiding public transport which would be contributes to the stereotype that "most of the poor and criminals who use public transport" and once formed it takes many years to correct.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Coach travel, while it does have a down market image, is very flexible, for example it is far easier to set up a new coach route than a train route. Some coach operators could also win those over who may regard coach travel as down market by implementing luxury coach services.

I'm slightly surprised the domestic air services aren't being ramped up, but while luxury 2+1 coach services are a big thing in Spain I'm just not sure I can see it happening here.

 

[The Ham]

No chance that is going to happen. Endless strikes and service cuts will see to that. The railway is in decline and everyone in charge seems happy to just let it happen.

The problem with letting the railways decline is that it will cost us a lot more while that is happening than fixing it will.

However rail isn't the only area where there's a decline in service and strikes.

The one thing I would say is that passenger numbers (by quarter) have seen an upwards tend (growth in 5 of the last 6 quarters, with the one decline being small and the next quarter was higher than the quarter before).

 

[ar10642]

The problem with letting the railways decline is that it will cost us a lot more while that is happening than fixing it will.

However rail isn't the only area where there's a decline in service and strikes.

The one thing I would say is that passenger numbers (by quarter) have seen an upwards tend (growth in 5 of the last 6 quarters, with the one decline being small and the next quarter was higher than the quarter before).

Yes I'm not saying this is a good thing at all, but the combination of this cost cutting government who are quite happy to let the thing be shut down, the arrangement between the DfT and the TOCs which takes away any incentive to improve services, and low staff morale + indefinite industrial action is a toxic mix and until at least some of that has changed I can't see anything improving.

 

[driverd]

I can only report anecdotally on my experience at work, but it appears to me that commuter travel is returning, but with the introduction of flexible working, is substantially more spread. Where, previously, we might see a handful of packed trains, 1645-1800ish, we now see a better spread across 1530-1900, perhaps some of these being considered "leisure" in data are using off peak/advanced tickets (especially those moving to a later working day). Don't forget, with the now widespread use of apex tickets across the North, which are encouraged by the use of mobile booking platforms, a lot of 2 days per week commuters will be far more inclined to travel on such tickets - which I strongly suspect are logged as leisure.

 

[387star]

Yes I'm not saying this is a good thing at all, but the combination of this cost cutting government who are quite happy to let the thing be shut down, the arrangement between the DfT and the TOCs which takes away any incentive to improve services, and low staff morale + indefinite industrial action is a toxic mix and until at least some of that has changed I can't see anything improving.

Exactly the Gov don't care...
At Chichester earlier this year the platform was busy with lots of holiday makers heading to the west country. Big suitcases and the like. That service no longer exists despite it being a leisure orientated service.

 

[SE%Traveller]

It's shorter distance commuting and Denmark Hill has the hospitals which probably helps. The loading data is also questionable, Ravensbourne and Beckenham Hill aren't the busiest of stations so them taking a 8-car class 700 from few seats available to even standing space limited seems unlikely to me.

Re the data, below is from the Thameslink Website. So follow up question is how accurate is 'on train counting equipment'? at Ravensbourne you could well believe you're in the middle of Hertfordshire, Golf course and all! Bellingham onwards was where traditionally these trains were loaded to capacity.

"How does it work?
Using data collected from on-train passenger counting equipment, we predict how many people use Great Northern, Southern and Thameslink trains during the current week, based on how busy they were over the previous two weeks. The information is updated automatically each day to keep it up to date.

The indicated passenger numbers are intended as a guide and do not take into account when services are impacted due to disruption, weather or other out of the ordinary events on the day."

This and and loadings on other routes would suggest Zone 1 to 6 London commuter rail is recovering quite well, with Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday back to normal, Monday slightly off that and Friday slightly off Monday. (Anecdote, got a shock when i looked at the Saturday figures the other day and they were off the chart, then realised it was a SE strike day...)

And they have each had a further stop added, so now consistently Bellingham, Crofton Pk, Denmark Hill.

However, this is a bit niche in the context of the thread.

LOL true enough.

 

[The Ham]

I can only report anecdotally on my experience at work, but it appears to me that commuter travel is returning, but with the introduction of flexible working, is substantially more spread. Where, previously, we might see a handful of packed trains, 1645-1800ish, we now see a better spread across 1530-1900, perhaps some of these being considered "leisure" in data are using off peak/advanced tickets (especially those moving to a later working day). Don't forget, with the now widespread use of apex tickets across the North, which are encouraged by the use of mobile booking platforms, a lot of 2 days per week commuters will be far more inclined to travel on such tickets - which I strongly suspect are logged as leisure.

The rail use data graphs from this page could also be showing this:

Domestic Transport Usage by Mode

www.gov.uk

In that if you WFH 2 days a week when there's a strike you'll then go into the office in the days following (which the dip and then spike in November could be showing). It's also worth noting that the low point in that dip in November is higher than the best days in March and maybe even April (it's a close run thing).

 

[bib]

The rail use data graphs from this page could also be showing this:

Domestic Transport Usage by Mode

www.gov.uk

Interesting if you look at the spreadsheet where the graphs come from, weekday car traffic is consistently 92-94% of pre-covid, with 100% on weekends. So it seems reasonable that WFH is reducing overall road journeys by about 7% at most. Although fuel prices going up 30% may have had some effect.
National rail figures are 7-day rolling averages so you can't compare weekday/weekend figures and I haven't seen them elsewhere, but I'd assume a higher proportion of rail trips are for commuting journeys thefefore I'd expect the drop in commuting passenger numbers to be >7%. The overall numbers are bouncing around between 85-90% for the last few weeks.
The tube figures are roughtly 75-78% weekday and 90-95% at weekends.

Having a look at the National Travel Survey stats for 2019, indicates 20% of car trips were commuting, 47% surface rail trips were commuting, and 60% for tube travel.
If the 7% drop in weekday traffic was solely from a reduction in commuting, this would be a 35% reduction in commuting trips, which is higher than I'd expect across the population. But applying the 35% drop to railand tube commuting journeys would give an expected (0.35*47 = 16 drop )84% of pre-covid passenger numbers for surface rail and (.35*60 = 21% drop) 79% for tube, which isn't too far off.
For surface rail, 84% on weekdays and say 105% on weekends would give 90% overall which seems to be not too far off where we are. I'd guess the drop in commuters might be < 35% but business travel will also have dropped, possibly by more, which was about 10% of rail journeys in the 2019 survey figures so that would knock a few % off. Weekend figures might also be >105% given the various anecdotes I've read, but I've not seen any actual figures.

 

[12LDA28C]

No chance that is going to happen. Endless strikes and service cuts will see to that. The railway is in decline and everyone in charge seems happy to just let it happen.

Everyone in charge? No.

The TOCs themselves I'm sure would love to be able to pay overtime/RDW, employ enough/additional staff as necessary but the Government, via the DfT only cares about cutting costs, not spending sufficiently to ensure that the service actually runs to the timetable which is what the passengers want and expect.

If you want someone to blame, look no further than the Govt.

 

[ar10642]

Everyone in charge? No.

The TOCs themselves I'm sure would love to be able to pay overtime/RDW, employ enough/additional staff as necessary but the Government, via the DfT only cares about cutting costs, not spending sufficiently to ensure that the service actually runs to the timetable which is what the passengers want and expect.

If you want someone to blame, look no further than the Govt.

Why would they? Under the current scheme they get paid no matter what so why try harder?

 

[paul1609]

Everyone in charge? No.

The TOCs themselves I'm sure would love to be able to pay overtime/RDW, employ enough/additional staff as necessary but the Government, via the DfT only cares about cutting costs, not spending sufficiently to ensure that the service actually runs to the timetable which is what the passengers want and expect.

If you want someone to blame, look no further than the Govt.

Realistically its not cutting costs in terms of pre-covid support, its trying to claw back the 30% of revenue that's missing since the beginning of the pandemic.
That's the real problem the rail industry as existed in 2019 is just no longer viable. The government has bailed it out for 3 years and won't continuing in to the future.

 

[yorksrob]

Realistically its not cutting costs in terms of pre-covid support, its trying to claw back the 30% of revenue that's missing since the beginning of the pandemic.
That's the real problem the rail industry as existed in 2019 is just no longer viable. The government has bailed it out for 3 years and won't continuing in to the future.

No, it only likes doing that if there are no passengers !

 

[43066]

Realistically its not cutting costs in terms of pre-covid support, its trying to claw back the 30% of revenue that's missing since the beginning of the pandemic.
That's the real problem the rail industry as existed in 2019 is just no longer viable. The government has bailed it out for 3 years and won't continuing in to the future.

Clawing back revenue would be a lot easier if the railway was running in a way that enabled and encouraged people to actually use it but, as we all know, large parts of it currently aren’t. The government are the ones actively preventing that state of affairs from changing.

 

[12LDA28C]

Why would they? Under the current scheme they get paid no matter what so why try harder?

Hard to believe apparently, especially by someone like yourself, but many rail staff actually take pride in their jobs and are embarrassed at the way things are going on the railway currently.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Dec 2022 ==

Clawing back revenue would be a lot easier if the railway was running in a way that enabled and encouraged people to actually use it but, as we all know, large parts of it currently aren’t. The government are the ones actively preventing that state of affairs from changing.

Absolutely this.

 

[mrmartin]

I don't think this doom and gloom is warranted (though industrial relations are a real real problem).

At the end of the day there was always going to be a move away from office based commuting to WFH. This was already happening in London, pre pandemic. A lot of people used to WFH on Fridays. Covid just massively accelerated it.

There is no reason that the railways cannot be on a good financial position with more leisure travel vs business/commuting.

Back in the 1980s airlines really only catered to business travel. Now it's increasingly completely the opposite, with low cost carriers dominating the market with mostly leisure travel.

That's the way I see the intercity railways going. Much better yield optimisation by selling a lot more seats, even if it is at a lower cost. First class removed, etc. The low cost train operators are doing very well in various countries.

The regional railways potenitally will require more support in the medium term, passenger usage will grow though - population is increasing and the roads are not a viable contender for many big cities (and even if they are now in smaller cities, will continue to get worse and worse as traffic increases).

 

[Ken H]

Interesting if you look at the spreadsheet where the graphs come from, weekday car traffic is consistently 92-94% of pre-covid, with 100% on weekends. So it seems reasonable that WFH is reducing overall road journeys by about 7% at most. Although fuel prices going up 30% may have had some effect.
National rail figures are 7-day rolling averages so you can't compare weekday/weekend figures and I haven't seen them elsewhere, but I'd assume a higher proportion of rail trips are for commuting journeys thefefore I'd expect the drop in commuting passenger numbers to be >7%. The overall numbers are bouncing around between 85-90% for the last few weeks.
The tube figures are roughtly 75-78% weekday and 90-95% at weekends.

Having a look at the National Travel Survey stats for 2019, indicates 20% of car trips were commuting, 47% surface rail trips were commuting, and 60% for tube travel.
If the 7% drop in weekday traffic was solely from a reduction in commuting, this would be a 35% reduction in commuting trips, which is higher than I'd expect across the population. But applying the 35% drop to railand tube commuting journeys would give an expected (0.35*47 = 16 drop )84% of pre-covid passenger numbers for surface rail and (.35*60 = 21% drop) 79% for tube, which isn't too far off.
For surface rail, 84% on weekdays and say 105% on weekends would give 90% overall which seems to be not too far off where we are. I'd guess the drop in commuters might be 5% but business travel will also have dropped, possibly by more, which was about 10% of rail journeys in the 2019 survey figures so that would knock a few % off. Weekend figures might also be >105% given the various anecdotes I've read, but I've not seen any actual figures.

with the reduction of rush hour road traffic due to WFH, for those going in to work, driving might have become viable. And finding a parking space at work may well be easier. So maybe car use hasnt dropped as much, while rail has taken a hit
And maybe people are driving to nearer to work, then getting the puffer as its cheaper. So they are making shorter (and cheaper) journeys

 

[Ken H]

I don't think this doom and gloom is warranted (though industrial relations are a real real problem).

At the end of the day there was always going to be a move away from office based commuting to WFH. This was already happening in London, pre pandemic. A lot of people used to WFH on Fridays. Covid just massively accelerated it.

There is no reason that the railways cannot be on a good financial position with more leisure travel vs business/commuting.

Back in the 1980s airlines really only catered to business travel. Now it's increasingly completely the opposite, with low cost carriers dominating the market with mostly leisure travel.

That's the way I see the intercity railways going. Much better yield optimisation by selling a lot more seats, even if it is at a lower cost. First class removed, etc. The low cost train operators are doing very well in various countries.

The regional railways potenitally will require more support in the medium term, passenger usage will grow though - population is increasing and the roads are not a viable contender for many big cities (and even if they are now in smaller cities, will continue to get worse and worse as traffic increases).

The new carriers like Ryanair, Jet 2, Squeezyjet etc have it in their business model to cross sell as much as possible. Cheap headline seat prices, then add on for all sorts of stuff. Then on the plane sell drinks and snacks.
Maybe thats where some operators will go. Make the money flogging cheese butties, not tickets.

 

[12LDA28C]

Realistically its not cutting costs in terms of pre-covid support, its trying to claw back the 30% of revenue that's missing since the beginning of the pandemic.
That's the real problem the rail industry as existed in 2019 is just no longer viable. The government has bailed it out for 3 years and won't continuing in to the future.

Well the Government is going about it in completely the wrong way.

The railway was recovering quite nicely before the current strikes (caused by the Govt) and initiatives like those proposed in Scotland such as the removal of peak-time fares could have further encouraged people back to rail.

Cutting costs by not allowing TOCs to employ enough staff to run a full train service would appear to be the very definition of a false economy.

 

[The Ham]

Realistically its not cutting costs in terms of pre-covid support, its trying to claw back the 30% of revenue that's missing since the beginning of the pandemic.
That's the real problem the rail industry as existed in 2019 is just no longer viable. The government has bailed it out for 3 years and won't continuing in to the future.

The problem is that there's two schools of thought:

Let the railways earn at much at they can by running a half decent service (but with some limited cuts, where these can be shown to actually save money)

Try and cut costs until there's no level of support needed

The problem is that the current government are wedded to the latter, even though there's a risk that the more you cut the worse the financial position becomes.

It also ignores the fact that the railways (through wages) pay taxes and (through allowing people to get to where they're going and staff spending money) grows the economy (there's no need to argue if it's better at doing this than the roads, they both manage it and generally cover any support they require).

Currently quarter by quarter rail use is growing, yes it's taking longer to get back to reliably above 90% than the roads, however it is still growing and so substantial cuts at this time are likely to be short sighted and could end up costing the government more.

For every £100 extra a member of railway staff is paid about £40 (depending on rates of pay) would go directly back to the government (for some near the bottom of the income rates it could also save the government money through reductions in working benefits) in PAYE taxes, whilst most of the rest would likely be spent in the economy providing the growth that is required.

That growth would likely result in other taxes being paid to the government and yet more spending in the economy; and so on.