gabrielhj07
Established Member
Of course, I had forgotten about that.
Going by this definition:
I imagine LNER would skew the results.
-
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!
UK Rail Passenger Numbers Discussion
- Thread starter Snow1964
- Start date
- Status
Going by this definition:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Thameslink when they use upstairs!
Waterloo will have the most on train staff of any station. There‘s two on every train, and there’s a lot, lot more trains than upstairs at St P.
If you look at post #355, and read the posting @Kite159 quoted, I initially excluded them. Somehow I subsequently edited and deleted. So I’ll have to give you that based on what’s written on the thread now
.I think that shows it’s bedtime for me.
But it has far more trains. In terms of staff per train, St Pancras upstairs (when there aren’t GTR diversions) will have:
SE HS; min one OBS per train;
Eurostar; hosts plus always 2 TM(s)?
EMR: one guard per 360;
guard (sometimes 2)+ host + trolley person per meridian.
So by my reckoning, rather betters the big shack south of the river?
Aha - I now see where you’re going with this. I realise I initially said Is there another London terminal with a higher staff count on the trains arriving and departing?
But that I clearly meant staff per train rather than total number of on train staff based on numbers or trains arriving.
Right back at ya!
Enough for now. I will reply to your post on the other thread “on the morrow”…
Last edited:
Peterthegreat
Established Member
Unless things have changed (due to HS1) Eurostar only requires 2 TMs to go through the Channel Tunnel.If you look at post #355, and read the posting @Kite159 quoted, I initially excluded them. Somehow I subsequently edited and deleted. So I’ll have to give you that based on what’s written on the thread now
I think that shows it’s bedtime for me.
But it has far more trains. In terms of staff per train, St Pancras upstairs (when there aren’t GTR diversions) will have:
SE HS; min one OBS per train;
Eurostar; hosts plus always 2 TM(s)?
EMR: one guard per 360;
guard (sometimes 2)+ host + trolley person per meridian.
So by my reckoning, rather betters the big shack south of the river?
Aha - I now see where you’re going with this. I realise I initially said Is there another London terminal with a higher staff count on the trains arriving and departing?
But that I clearly meant staff per train rather than total number of on train staff based on numbers or trains arriving.
Right back at ya!
Enough for now. I will reply to your post on the other thread “on the morrow”…
Apologies if this has already been answered up-thread: effectively where are passenger numbers at nowadays when compared to previous years? I recognise it's difficult to do a direct comparison, but approximately...
2000 levels? 2005 levels? 2010 levels? 2015 levels?
And how is the variance across the country on those?
2000 levels? 2005 levels? 2010 levels? 2015 levels?
And how is the variance across the country on those?
gabrielhj07
Established Member
I have read on this forum that overall post-covid passenger numbers have been around 2011 numbers, but I don't know how accurate that is.
The current quarterly data is summarised below (the one thing to note is the last 12 months is comparable to 2009):
dk1
Veteran Member
If the last few days have been anything to go by then we have too many passengers. Suppose many are trying to avoid leaving it too late. Been a nightmare.
Christmas is always busy, with strikes limitations the days you can travel is always going to compress the passenger numbers so that it is busier than it otherwise would be and strikes associated with other travel options (for example baggage handlers) are going to make that worse still.
However, it's likely that each of those would only be of limited impact if we were still fairly low in terms of passenger numbers and so whilst it may well be that we are a little behind pre Covid levels such overcrowding is still fairly positive.
Let's hope that the up to the last quarter's growth (which has been a high enough rate not to really worry about the normal practice of only comparing the same quarters) continues for at least the next few quarters.
It's likely that rate of growth can't continue for much longer (especially with strikes ongoing) as otherwise passenger numbers would soon exceed pre Covid levels, so probably any future growth beyond the next quarter or two will probably start to compare back to the same quarter in the previous year to be sure that there's growth.
Of course, they'll come ac point where things like the reduced timetables of XC, TPE and Avanti will start to become a noticeable limiting factor. Which will only be a good thing, as with more and more people upset that the railways aren't offering a good enough service then it'll be yet more pressure for the government to fix the dispute with the railways.
If there's enough overcrowding and revenue gets closer to pre Covid levels (the last data I saw was non season tickets was down by 30.1% and with season tickets down by 70.6% in the quarter July to September compared to the 2019 levels, so still a long way to go still - although still up massively compared to January to March where it was down by 38.1% and 76%, both >5 percentage points higher) then it's going to get increasingly hard for politicians to hide behind "but the railways are massively down on use" or "it's costing us billions more than normal to fund the railways" or whatever other spin they are putting on it (and if they do and that's not what the data is showing then it's up to us to highlight what's actually happening).
railfan99
Established Member
As a visitor from Australia between 24 September and 9 October 2022 (after which we went to Europe to continue on Eurail Global passes), I was very impressed with the patronage, especially on long distance trains and in London, Manchester and Preston.
The 0910 hours up Penzance on Wednesday 28 September 2022: 22+ on at St Erth, 5+ at Hayle, 17 on at Camborne and 3 off, 9 on at Redruth, 33 on and 4 off at Truro, 22 on at St Austell, 20+ on at Par, 4+ on at Bodmin Parkway, 15+ on at Liskeard. So that's at least 147 intermediate passengers joining prior to historic Plymouth: I did not do a passenger count of originating patrons from Penzance.
At least 50 more joined at Exeter St Davids, 30+ were on at Tiverton Parkway and 14 at Taunton where I alighted.
So with those who joined at Penzance, an unknown figure, easily more than 300 were using this offpeak most enjoyable train through wonderful country.
dk1
Veteran Member
The West Country route through Cornwall is ever popular. It’s a shame Avanti has brought standards down on the WCML following the booming years of Virgin Trains but I’m sure it’ll pull itself up over the next year or so.
Jozhua
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 1,891
I share the sentiment that running a service people can trust is vitally important for them building a life around using rail, wether to commute to work, or travel to social events.
Anecdotally heard a number of people commuting from Matlock to Nottingham have purchased a car to drive in after journey times almost doubled with the badly timed change at Derby. A few direct weekday peak services, but the damage may have been done...
The worry with service cuts is the axe will fall network-wide, irrespective of performance levels and relative level of service.
In terms of Network Rail budgets, these only look to decline, but will take years to manifest in the quality of trackwork and reduced infrastructure improvement projects.
Now, I may be huffing pure copium, but my hope is much of this can be undone as quickly as it has been messed up... A lot of the industrial disputes, supply chain pressures, etc are all related to the ongoing energy crisis, food shortages and Brexit disruption. However, over time as we adapt to these changes and these conditions improve, it should trickle over into the railway.
But at a time of recession, you want to make sure the railway is at minimum running a reliable service and helping to keep the economy ticking over. Lots of people will be looking to reduce the number of cars they have, or delay buying one at all, so access to public transport is going to be more necessary than ever. But it seems this is not happening.
Anecdotally heard a number of people commuting from Matlock to Nottingham have purchased a car to drive in after journey times almost doubled with the badly timed change at Derby. A few direct weekday peak services, but the damage may have been done...
The worry with service cuts is the axe will fall network-wide, irrespective of performance levels and relative level of service.
In terms of Network Rail budgets, these only look to decline, but will take years to manifest in the quality of trackwork and reduced infrastructure improvement projects.
Now, I may be huffing pure copium, but my hope is much of this can be undone as quickly as it has been messed up... A lot of the industrial disputes, supply chain pressures, etc are all related to the ongoing energy crisis, food shortages and Brexit disruption. However, over time as we adapt to these changes and these conditions improve, it should trickle over into the railway.
But at a time of recession, you want to make sure the railway is at minimum running a reliable service and helping to keep the economy ticking over. Lots of people will be looking to reduce the number of cars they have, or delay buying one at all, so access to public transport is going to be more necessary than ever. But it seems this is not happening.
Indeed, someone just starting a new job which requires travel (i.e. a young person withouta car, no longer a local job, the car is needed by another in the household, the car had been sold to keep the household afloat, or whatever the reason someone may not have access to a car on day 1 of a job) can more easily afford public transport costs than buying a car due to the significant up front costs (even just the insurance and VED is almost certainly going to cost over £300 and for many figures of over £900 may not be uncommon).
What is better for the government, paying someone benefits or getting taxes paid to them (and the economy being larger from that person's spending generating more taxes)?
It's why there should be a business case for cuts, as if cutting rail services results in a lower tax take, it may actually be more costly not to run trains than it is have them and pay them to run.
Especially given that there's likely to be a cost from the extra road congestion (either through needing more capacity or from direct delay costs).
Also does anyone really trust the current government to continue support for any buses brought in as a cheaper than rail beyond the first year?
Last edited:
I agree with your hope, however unfortunately, it's very difficult to bring rolling stock back into use when its already been scrapped.
The ORR figures in a rail travel usage pdf released show figures of 80% for rail passenger journeys and 77% of revenue for passengers for the period July to September 2022
The reference periods are July 2019 to September 2019 as the 100% benchmark
In headline figures for summer usage the railway has lost a quarter of its passenger revenue compared to three years ago of pre-covid.
i attach the pdf from the ORR website, worth a study, several pages and several "bullet points" to take aboard, one, leisure travel has recovered more strongly than commuting, LNER is the TOC with the healthy figures (105%)
The reference periods are July 2019 to September 2019 as the 100% benchmark
In headline figures for summer usage the railway has lost a quarter of its passenger revenue compared to three years ago of pre-covid.
i attach the pdf from the ORR website, worth a study, several pages and several "bullet points" to take aboard, one, leisure travel has recovered more strongly than commuting, LNER is the TOC with the healthy figures (105%)
Last edited:
modernrail
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
My girlfriend and I have swapped 3 train journeys for 3 coach journeys this Christmas. Her coach journey from Liverpool to Birmingham on Christmas Eve was apparently very pleasant other than the last minute deluge from passengers from Lime Street who had been done over by our rail industry.
It’s no good blaming one party or another. Collectively, all parties with a stake in the future of the system, other than passengers, are making the service completely unusable, which is pretty shocking in a country that not only invented the damm thing but also claims to be in some way or other modern and forward thinking.
As we are run by donkeys maybe we at least have them pulling a few carriages. Although I suspect we may find most turn out to have less donkey power than a long retired if not dead Blackpool equivalent.
Killingworth
Established Member
Many of us will have gone through management training where the importance of Task, Individual and Team were emphasised. I recall one such session where the sayings of successful football managers were cited. One remained seared in my memory and I found it very helpful to bear in mind. "In a winning team responsibility is shared equally". In his case that went beyond the players on and off the pitch, went through the coaching staff, the gatekeepers, the stewards, the toilet cleaners, the board, spectators, the local and national press correspondents - everyone. It seemed to work for many years. I see a successful manager employing similar style today, but I digress.
If this railway is to achieve all it should there needs to be a concerted effort for all to pull together as much as possible rather than so much pulling apart.
We can all point at so many things that are wrong. We need calm attention to many details to get things more right. The many overlapping industrial disputes would be a good start but the changed business patterns need early appraisal of many choke points on the tracks, platforms and stations. Prioritising these is vital if we are to see the reliable and frequent services we need for future leisure dominated growth.
I could name a few but that needs a new thread - a northern city centre would be at the top of my list!
Last edited:
modernrail
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
The unions have handed the DfT the perfect smokescreen to do what they do best, demonstrate gross incompetency in running anything related to transport other than perhaps funding a few bits of new road and funding the Highways Agency.
The lack of a functioning GBR together with the premature move to full DfT operating risk over TOCs due to Covid was always going to lead to a massive risk of DfT cack handed oversight. The one thing that would have helped defend against that would have been strong rebound of passenger numbers.
What the Unions have ensured is that rail has stopped functioning to such an extent that numbers will be down on what they could be on a massive scale.
The DfT will use that to slash and burn in a way only they know how, with zero intelligence or care for the UK. It will be classic civil service spreadsheet nonsense.
That is why there are lots of people on here genuinely worried we are hitting a tipping point.
None of it needs to happen. We just need a sensible push for post-pandemic growth and an intelligent rebalancing around certain changes.
The Tories, the DfT and companies like First will be to blame, but the Unions have allowed themselves and their members to become pawns in a zero sum game, and stuffed passengers and sold them down the river in the process.
The lack of a functioning GBR together with the premature move to full DfT operating risk over TOCs due to Covid was always going to lead to a massive risk of DfT cack handed oversight. The one thing that would have helped defend against that would have been strong rebound of passenger numbers.
What the Unions have ensured is that rail has stopped functioning to such an extent that numbers will be down on what they could be on a massive scale.
The DfT will use that to slash and burn in a way only they know how, with zero intelligence or care for the UK. It will be classic civil service spreadsheet nonsense.
That is why there are lots of people on here genuinely worried we are hitting a tipping point.
None of it needs to happen. We just need a sensible push for post-pandemic growth and an intelligent rebalancing around certain changes.
The Tories, the DfT and companies like First will be to blame, but the Unions have allowed themselves and their members to become pawns in a zero sum game, and stuffed passengers and sold them down the river in the process.
Killingworth
Established Member
Hear, hear!
Please define what you mean by passenger numbers being down on a massive scale, by comparing them to past years?
Are we talking lower than the lowest point in the early 90's (<0.7bn passengers using the railways)?
Are we talking about that sort of level (circa 0.8bn passengers)
What about by the year 2000, when things had started to recover and things are on the up (circa 1bn)?
What about by the year 2010 when there has been a decade of growth and things were looking good (if very overcrowded at about 1.2bn)?
What about by the year 2014 (about 1.4bn)?
Clearly we're not at the pre Covid levels (1.8bn), however given we were at very very low levels during Covid how close do we have to get (whilst there's still ongoing growth) before significant cuts can be parked to see how things pan out (not no cuts, there could be some cuts, however these should be considered and measured and not just a knee jurk reaction)?
Which leads to the question, is there still growth (i.e. people continuing to use the Railways more) or has it started to be only measurable reliability when comparing the quarter from last year?
If you've read any of my posts you'll know I know the answer to where we are at. However, like any good business, targets should be SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound).
Therefore to deliver cuts:
At what level of use should we be looking at and the cuts likely to be needed at any given level? (Specific and Measurable)
Do these result in a net benefit to government costs/income? (Achievable and Relevant)
How frequently should this be reviewed? (Bearing in mind that there were still limits in place last Christmas, with many office parties cancelled, so should we review before the railways have had a full year of recovery before making long term changes?)
My answers would be a review 15 months after final restrictions to see where we are at, whilst discussions could be ongoing up to that point, nothing which significantly limits the reintroduction of services should be done before then unless rail use hasn't shown clear quarter on quarter growth or looks like it's going to stay below 2005 use levels by the end of the review period.
As such if passenger numbers are below 2005 levels (and likely to stay their at the end of April 2023) we could start to look at which lines we could closr now. If that's not the case we could start to investigate the less used lines and start a report into at what level of use they would need to be at to justify their ongoing use (the reverse of a reopening business case - so would look at wider costs/benefits, as it's no good saving the government 100 when it costs the government 110 in lost taxes and higher benefits costs).
Where there's obvious savings (such as pausing introduction of new fleets, limiting enhancement spending, making reductions in maintenance due to comparable reductions in use, replacing staff at a 1:<1 ratio where this doesn't impact on viability of current services, etc.) then by all means make those cost savings.
However, for example, if we're 75% of the way through putting wires up on a line, finish doing that as that'll save money in the medium term and most of the upfront costs have been spent. Likewise carry on introducing bimodal trains (Avanti being a good example) where there's a clear benefit in fuel cost savings in the short to medium term.
modernrail
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
The point is pretty simple.
A lot, lot less people are using the railway at the moment because on many lines there is absolutely no certainty that an advertised service will turn up, even on non-strike days.
The DfT will use that lower baseline to slash and burn. They will NOT be intelligent enough to model out what the numbers might be if the system was running properly at the moment. Their pain point will be getting HM Treasury off their backs and they will quite happily use the gift the unions have given them to go further than they would otherwise have been able to defend.
What we really needed over the last year was a nice clear picture of the real post-pandemic travel patterns so that local politicians could go into bat properly against the Tories, the DfT and HM Treasury. What we have is the opposite.
Anothe thing affecting the attractiveness of the railway is staffing. If you cant attract/retain enough staff to run a decent railway yiu are in trouble. The bus industry is in trouble because of lowish wages, and the fact there are many 9-5 jobs to attract staff. Warehousing for example. So retaining enough lower paid rail staff could become problematic
How many are now resistant to shifts and weekend work. Missing seeing your loved ones, missing kids parties, school dos etc. Or a night on the pub watching footy. Its a problem that will hit many services as people want their weekends off but expect their services to be there.
How many are now resistant to shifts and weekend work. Missing seeing your loved ones, missing kids parties, school dos etc. Or a night on the pub watching footy. Its a problem that will hit many services as people want their weekends off but expect their services to be there.
Jozhua
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 1,891
Completely agree with both of your points.
Rail strikes or not, people will still be expected to go to their jobs and people who can't rely on the trains will eventually find another way. I absolutely sympathise that there are RMT members who do not get paid much and could do with a better payrise than the one on offer.
Of course, it inadvertently works as a fantastic smokescreen for the government to make cuts to an industry it perceives as a drain rather than a driver of growth.
I genuinely think with a return to 2019 levels of service, we would already be back to 90% ridership on most routes. Some operators such as EMR and LNER would be operating at 110-120% pre Covid ridership.
Rail strikes or not, people will still be expected to go to their jobs and people who can't rely on the trains will eventually find another way. I absolutely sympathise that there are RMT members who do not get paid much and could do with a better payrise than the one on offer.
Of course, it inadvertently works as a fantastic smokescreen for the government to make cuts to an industry it perceives as a drain rather than a driver of growth.
I genuinely think with a return to 2019 levels of service, we would already be back to 90% ridership on most routes. Some operators such as EMR and LNER would be operating at 110-120% pre Covid ridership.
Kite159
Veteran Member
.
And the bump to the passenger figures from the Lizzy line in central London (the passengers it took from LU) all be with little revenue boost
And that's even takes the 'bump' the railways got from people travelling to Edinburgh/London to pass the coffin of the Queen.
And the bump to the passenger figures from the Lizzy line in central London (the passengers it took from LU) all be with little revenue boost
Define a lot lot less.
For example are we at 90's, 2005, 2010, 2015 in passenger numbers?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Those TOC's which have a decent level of service are generally seeing their passenger numbers be near to 2019 numbers.
However, even without reaching 2019 levels numbers are still fairly decent in terms of historical numbers.
For example both 1958 and 2006 both saw circa 1bn passenger journeys. Whilst 1901, 1936, 1946, and 2008 and the last 12 months ago saw about 1.2bn passenger numbers. Likewise 1909, 2010 and if the current quarter was repeated 3 more times have about 1.4bn passenger numbers.
If we take the previous 12 months (1.2bn, 12 months to September 2022), over the last 150 years 95 of those years have seen smaller passengers numbers, of the remaining 55 there were 12 were war years and there's no data available.
Yes it would be great to get to 2019 figures sooner rather than later, however over the last 150 years there were only 4 years which saw higher rail use (and all on a network which was much bigger), so is it really very much an outlier. Likewise the preceding 5 years to 2019 were only comparable to 5 further years.
These other years are all interwar (1920's) or prior to WWI, so again on a far larger network.
Other than years in the last 15 years, there's only 1 post WWII year where passenger numbers exceed the numbers from the last 12 months.
Also it's worth highlighting that we've not had 12 months of data since the last restrictions due to Covid (there were a lot of Christmas parties in 2021 which for cancelled).
Last edited:
modernrail
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
The elephant in the room from the beginning of this recovery is the need for the DfT to accept there is plenty of custom but the non-leisure market just became a lot more price sensitive. It won’t be ransomed by laughable fares any more.
So we currently have the nonsense of peak trains running around half empty whilst off-peak trains can be rammed.
Fill those trains (the custom is there on a lot of lines, it just needs to be priced differently) and you have some revenue back.
I suspect the peak non-leisure fare payers are also well down because of disruption and strikes. I have personally mothballed for months now any meetings away from home unless it is absolutely critical I am there in person. As a small business owner why on earth would I pay hundreds of pounds to expose myself to the WCML, TPE or Northern at the moment. Even if not on my tab, why on earth would I risk a massive disruption to my day and the unprofessionalism of being very very late or not turning up at all when the person I am meeting has set aside the time.
In London I have switched to the bus or bike a lot of the time from Herne Hill into town because Thameslink is so unreliable and SE services now have massive gaps in the timetable.
Tomorrow I am on National Express.
So in total I would estimate I have not taken around 15 long distance and probably 40 or more short distance trips that I otherwise would without over the top pricing and unreliability due to current issues.
Jozhua
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 1,891
Really good point - my company is encouraging people to book in advance and we always avoid 1st class when travelling for business.
I have heard a lot about empty peak time trains, with off peak services being rammed. The UK railways are not as bad as some for their focus on the '9-5 commuter', but certainly it was still an important demographic to them.
People are still travelling, but price sensitivity is higher, like you say and the trips have changed. What needs to happen is that Government, Industry and Unions figure out how they are going to make the railway more flexible and passenger driven. Maybe in the medium/long term we see the commuters come back in even bigger numbers than before, maybe we don't. Now more than ever we need to put evidence and long term strategy at the heart of everything we do
I do think the leisure boost has been due to the following reasons:
- People with more flexible working spend less time travelling during the week, freeing time and money to do more discretionary travel on the weekends. (This seems very positive from a social point of view.)
- We realise the value of seeing friends/family and visiting new places after the covid lockdowns.
- Long term trends towards rail for leisure - especially as these trips tend to be longer distance and even if it isn't quite as fast, people value not having the stress of driving, especially if it is their downtime.
absolutelymilk
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,601
Looks like passenger numbers are still steadily rising even despite the recent disruption
Twitter post
Nicholas Lewis
Established Member
What we need to see is teh equivalent revenue chart which we know is running 15-20% below this chart and thats what really matters here when DfT are faced with reduced funding to support operating deficits although we should all be grateful that a significant deficit is still be funded compared to 2019.
absolutelymilk
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,601
Not sure where you're getting 15-20% from. Passenger usage in the last quarter was 81% of pre-covid levels, compared to 71% for revenue (when adjusted for inflation)
- Status