Overcrowding due to parsemonious rolling stock policy.

[SECR263]

On 1707 High Speed to Folkstone thence Ramsgate.

6 car, with passengers standing from STP. Just left International Stratford. More standing.

Why is this not a 12 so it would encourage people back to the Rly.

I enjoy train travel but I hate the fact all trains seem to be minimum length. I not a great car traveller but would rather drive in some instances than join a packed train with a possible no seat.

We have Khan trying to eliminate car travel all by himself, but where is incentive to use public transport from Gov with short formed trains. Left buttock, right buttock.

I have read all threads and understand why Dft are going for the cheap as chips option and s## the passengers, sorry customers, but how does this square up with the green agenda or the need to make the railways pay or Make Train travel enjoyable not a trial of endurance. Did not realise javelins according to on board supervisor only Los at either end. How does this work on a boozed up commuter back home on a Friday No working bogs if unit in service all day.

Just left Ebbs Int. No standing in carriage D but not sure about other cars.

As regards ticket buying I prefer a human any time. Nice tfl person sussed out I needed high speed ticket. Service indeed without asking.

Where do we go from here I wonder.

Cheers.

 

[JonathanH]

Just left Ebbs Int. No standing in carriage D but not sure about other cars.

Explains why it is only six cars then. It was only passengers for the quick hop to Ebbsfleet who were filling it up.

Problem really is that (overall) passenger demand no longer justifies 2tph on the Gravesend route, so passengers for Ebbsfleet only have 3tph, and there is a half hour gap between the 1637 and 1707.

Also won't have helped that it arrived at St Pancras late so some passengers arriving for the 1720 will have caught it instead, even though it was full.

 

[32475]

I’ve often been on Sandwich to St Pancras morning trains where the 6-car unit has been full by the time it leaves Folkestone Central so everyone getting on at Folkestone West and Ashford are standing all the way to Stratford and some as far as St Pancras.

 

[kentrailman]

The trick is to plan your journey around the few 12 coach trains !
See this recent thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/poor-performance-on-hs1.246246/

 

[bramling]

Explains why it is only six cars then. It was only passengers for the quick hop to Ebbsfleet who were filling it up.

Problem really is that (overall) passenger demand no longer justifies 2tph on the Gravesend route, so passengers for Ebbsfleet only have 3tph, and there is a half hour gap between the 1637 and 1707.

Also won't have helped that it arrived at St Pancras late so some passengers arriving for the 1720 will have caught it instead, even though it was full.

I’d say a related problem is that the Southeastern HS1 service doesn’t work optimally due to the 6-car fixed formations. Six cars is insufficient on many off-peak services, and there isn’t enough stock (or money) to run everything as 12.

I have often wondered if the 140mph trains are *really* needed. Could it be made to work with 110 mph Electrostar-type trains running in 4/8/12-car formations as necessary?

 

[gazzaa2]

It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. People stop using the trains because they don't put enough carriages on (name your TOC) and thus the people who stop using them become the excuse to keep fewer carriages = managed decline.

 

[Fyldeboy]

I can understand why OP is fustrated but the fact that trains are running at 100% (100+?) capacity means that the TOC, and therefore taxpayer, are sweating the stock to best advantage.

 

[JonathanH]

It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. People stop using the trains because they don't put enough carriages on (name your TOC) and thus the people who stop using them become the excuse to keep fewer carriages = managed decline.

I don't think that is true. For journeys to London from the South East, the railway has a relatively captive market, although passengers boarding at Ebbsfleet is perhaps symptomatic of them driving there rather than using the train from further out.

If passengers were truly put off by overcrowded trains, they would have been put off some time ago.

 

[J-2739]

I’d say a related problem is that the Southeastern HS1 service doesn’t work optimally due to the 6-car fixed formations. Six cars is insufficient on many off-peak services, and there isn’t enough stock (or money) to run everything as 12.

I have often wondered if the 140mph trains are *really* needed. Could it be made to work with 110 mph Electrostar-type trains running in 4/8/12-car formations as necessary?

What? Running Electrostars on HS1? That would be an interesting sight!

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I can understand why OP is fustrated but the fact that trains are running at 100% (100+?) capacity means that the TOC, and therefore taxpayer, are sweating the stock to best advantage.

The downside with that approach to resource deployment is that it treats the current revenue / custom as the high water mark. There is no room for growth, poor journey experience puts off newcomers and the only way is downward.

 

[philosopher]

I can understand why OP is fustrated but the fact that trains are running at 100% (100+?) capacity means that the TOC, and therefore taxpayer, are sweating the stock to best advantage.

I agree train companies should aim for high loading factors, but aiming for 100% in my view is too high. Aiming for a perhaps 80% loading across the journey would be better.

A 100% loading means passengers at intermediate stations will be completely reliant on passengers getting off the train to get a seat. If few passengers get off, they will end up standing. In addition, anyone travelling as a couple will likely end up sitting apart. Neither of these are going to encourage rail travellers back. 80% occupancy on the other hand still means the train is busy, but passengers boarding intermediate stations can still get seats and couples or small groups should be able to sit together.

However, the nature of railway travel does mean in practice, on most routes, one section of the route will be busier than others, such as on the approach to a city centre. There is probably little in practice the railway industry can do to provide even loading across the route.

 

[JonathanH]

I agree train companies should aim for high loading factors, but aiming for 100% in my view is too high. Aiming for a perhaps 80% loading across the journey would be better.

It is a bit difficult to aim for 80% loading instead of 100% with a train fleet that comes in multiples of six coaches. The only way to achieve it would be by fare restrictions.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Is there any serious suggestion that the available Highspeed fleet is not being fully deployed? (I.e. perfectly serviceable trains being kept in sidings simply to save the nationalised Southeastern/OLR/DfT money whilst passengers stand or are left behind.)

 

[bramling]

The downside with that approach to resource deployment is that it treats the current revenue / custom as the high water mark. There is no room for growth, poor journey experience puts off newcomers and the only way is downward.

Was it not the case that many TOCs used to plan for 70% off-peak seat utilisation because going above that put people off?

 

[Horizon22]

HS1 track charges are extremely high, and I wonder if that has something to do with the increased number of 6-cars on Southeastern HS?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Was it not the case that many TOCs used to plan for 70% off-peak seat utilisation because going above that put people off?

Its not something I’ve personally come across but it would not surprise me.

 

[miklcct]

I agree train companies should aim for high loading factors, but aiming for 100% in my view is too high. Aiming for a perhaps 80% loading across the journey would be better.

A 100% loading means passengers at intermediate stations will be completely reliant on passengers getting off the train to get a seat. If few passengers get off, they will end up standing. In addition, anyone travelling as a couple will likely end up sitting apart. Neither of these are going to encourage rail travellers back. 80% occupancy on the other hand still means the train is busy, but passengers boarding intermediate stations can still get seats and couples or small groups should be able to sit together.

However, the nature of railway travel does mean in practice, on most routes, one section of the route will be busier than others, such as on the approach to a city centre. There is probably little in practice the railway industry can do to provide even loading across the route.

Is the 395 designed to have standing passengers regularly when fully loaded, like the 700?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

HS1 track charges are extremely high, and I wonder if that has something to do with the increased number of 6-cars on Southeastern HS?

They've tweeted a number of times recently apologising for "a train fault resulting in this service running with 6 cars instead of 12" so it's likely a reliability issue rather than a planning issue.

 

[Brubulus]

HS1 track charges are extremely high, and I wonder if that has something to do with the increased number of 6-cars on Southeastern HS?

They're mainly per train, not per coach so that's most likely not the reason.

 

[Sly Old Fox]

They weren’t really there. Nobody travels by train anymore. Don’t believe it.

 

[zwk500]

I’d say a related problem is that the Southeastern HS1 service doesn’t work optimally due to the 6-car fixed formations. Six cars is insufficient on many off-peak services, and there isn’t enough stock (or money) to run everything as 12.

I have often wondered if the 140mph trains are *really* needed. Could it be made to work with 110 mph Electrostar-type trains running in 4/8/12-car formations as necessary?

140mph trains are needed to fit in with Eurostar paths and also to minimise the journey time due to St Pancras being slightly further out than SE's other terminals.

Regardless of whether another train would have been better, trains need KVB and TVM-430 to operate on HS1, which won't be being fitted to Electrostars.

 

[The exile]

I can understand why OP is fustrated but the fact that trains are running at 100% (100+?) capacity means that the TOC, and therefore taxpayer, are sweating the stock to best advantage.

That depends on your definition of “to best advantage”. The best advantage of a box-ticker in a back office who can now claim a bonus for “successfully” saving 10%, maybe - but not that of the traveller, or the person who depends on that traveller - or indeed the person stuck in a traffic jam which is longer than it might otherwise have been.

 

[zwk500]

That depends on your definition of “to best advantage”. The best advantage of a box-ticker in a back office who can now claim a bonus for “successfully” saving 10%, maybe - but not that of the traveller, or the person who depends on that traveller - or indeed the person stuck in a traffic jam which is longer than it might otherwise have been.

Of course the question then becomes how many additional pence is a passenger willing to tolerate on their fare to operate longer trains?
The DfT may be imposing arbitrary restrictions on TOCs but the people doing the operational work at SE are pretty good when I've worked with them. Slim comfort it may be, but it's a fair bet that SE is probably making the best of the hand it's being dealt right now.
If there are perfectly serviceable units sitting at Ashford for want of the DfT signing a cheque, then the ire should be at Whitehall and 11 Downing street (which is where the cost cutting demands originate) and on Thursday many Kent residents can signal their displeasure towards Mr Hunt.
However - is there evidence of trains being held in reserve for no reason other than finances?

 

[Blindtraveler]

I would also like to hotly debate whoever said that the Gravesend route no longer justifies two tph. I can understand why running two tph beyond the Medway towns might be a frivolous waste of money but an extra hs1 train starting at Gillingham and calling usual stations to pancreas is now I would say an essential if we are to offer travelers A good experience of the railway rather than a cattle class endurance test

Either that or we make more of an effort to alert travelers to the fact that there is one Victoria service an hour from the likes of faversham Sittingbourne and Medway that only takes a couple of minutes longer than high speed, I think it is the X Margate service from recollection

 

[JonathanH]

I would also like to hotly debate whoever said that the Gravesend route no longer justifies two tph.

That wasn't an expression of my opinion. It was a statement of how the timetable is currently set up, with only one tph on Saturdays to the Gravesend route.

Someone at Southeastern presumably feels that is the appropriate provision.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I have often wondered if the 140mph trains are *really* needed. Could it be made to work with 110 mph Electrostar-type trains running in 4/8/12-car formations as necessary?

Well they would need to be fitted with TVM in-cab signalling kit for that, which is unique to HS1.
387s have been fitted with ETCS for the Heathrow Express service, which is similar, but TVM conversion would be "against the grain".
One day HS1 will probably be converted to ETCS, but that's a distant prospect.

 

[zwk500]

Well they would need to be fitted with TVM in-cab signalling kit for that, which is unique to HS1.
387s have been fitted with ETCS for the Heathrow Express service, which is similar, but TVM conversion would be "against the grain".
One day HS1 will probably be converted to ETCS, but that's a distant prospect.

Importantly TVM signals are transmitted through coded Track Circuits whereas ETCS signals are transmitted through over GSM-R radio, so you need two very different sets of receiving equipment. It's possible to configure the ETCS DMI to show the TVM-430 indications, but you still need the extra gubbins under the train.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I would also like to hotly debate whoever said that the Gravesend route no longer justifies two tph. I can understand why running two tph beyond the Medway towns might be a frivolous waste of money but an extra hs1 train starting at Gillingham and calling usual stations to pancreas is now I would say an essential if we are to offer travelers A good experience of the railway rather than a cattle class endurance test

Either that or we make more of an effort to alert travelers to the fact that there is one Victoria service an hour from the likes of faversham Sittingbourne and Medway that only takes a couple of minutes longer than high speed, I think it is the X Margate service from recollection

I wonder if the issue is that higher fares but almost no journey time difference is killing HS1 demand on that route. On a quick check, Rochester is 37 minutes to St Pancras on the hourly HS1 service, or 40/43 minutes on the half hourly fast trains to Victoria. But fares on HS1 are typically 20-25% higher (for example, anytime day return to London is £41.70 not-via-HS1 or £50.80 with HS1). So it's a bit hard to imagine that many people from Rochester eastwards having much motivation to use HS1 unless they specifically need Stratford.

 

[bramling]

140mph trains are needed to fit in with Eurostar paths and also to minimise the journey time due to St Pancras being slightly further out than SE's other terminals.

I guess my question is how *essential* are both these factors?

If we ignore the signalling, how much of a showstopper are these issues? The time difference between 110mph and 140mph isn’t that great from a Kent passenger’s perspective - most of the time saving on HS1 is achieved through fewer stops and not having to negotiate low-speed sections of line like the London approaches, Rochester, Tonbridge, etc. All this would apply just the same to a 110mph train.

I’ve always thought the 395s are a bit extravagant for what they do, but if the 6-car formations are now contributing to overcrowding then it seems they aren’t really fit for purpose.

 

[philosopher]

I wonder if the issue is that higher fares but almost no journey time difference is killing HS1 demand on that route. On a quick check, Rochester is 37 minutes to St Pancras on the hourly HS1 service, or 40/43 minutes on the half hourly fast trains to Victoria. But fares on HS1 are typically 20-25% higher (for example, anytime day return to London is £41.70 not-via-HS1 or £50.80 with HS1). So it's a bit hard to imagine that many people from Rochester eastwards having much motivation to use HS1 unless they specifically need Stratford.

I do wonder how many pay the premium for the high speed train just because they like the experience of travelling on a very fast train on a fairly new rail line, even if the time saving is minimal? I am guessing the size of such a market is a lot bigger than just train enthusiasts.