Anyone noticed anecdotally another uptick in passenger numbers

[Snow1964]

DfT have updated their usage since covid spreadsheet

Most recent 5 days
Column G, (including Elizabeth line) 99%, 99%. 102%, 102%, 102%
Column H, (without Elizabeth line) 89%, 88%, 92%, 92%, 91%

So close to 91% without Elizabeth line, so approaching pre-pandemic levels
Unfortunately some operators are nowhere near 91% of vehicle km compare to pre-pandemic

Daily domestic transport use by mode

Daily usage of selected domestic transport by mode for Great Britain.

www.gov.uk

 

[Bald Rick]

Unfortunately some operators are nowhere near 91% of vehicle km compare to pre-pandemic

Some operators are nowhere near 91% of passenger numbers either!

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Some operators are nowhere near 91% of passenger numbers either!

Always the question of which comes first, vehicle km or passenger numbers

 

[Krokodil]

Always the question of which comes first, vehicle km or passenger numbers

Well quite. Where services have been slashed (whether long-term due to fleet reductions or day-by-day cancellations because of a lack of staff) then you're not going to recover passenger numbers. The fact that certain operators are so dreadfully unreliable won't help balance the books either. Then there's the infrastructure. Network Rail attributed delay minutes are breaking records, is "Modernising Maintenance" to blame?

 

[Snow1964]

Some operators are nowhere near 91% of passenger numbers either!

If 91% is the average, then some other operators need to be well above too.

As an example the quarterly ORR data shows GWR at about 98% (which is nearer 110% if you adjust for transfer and loss of local services to Elizabeth line). Not that GWR have increased its diesel fleet from 5 years ago by anything like +10%

 

[yorksrob]

The Establishment were happy enough to use average figures as a stick to beat the railway with, so what difference does it make if some TOC's are below now that numbers are recovering l.

 

[Snow1964]

The Establishment were happy enough to use average figures as a stick to beat the railway with, so what difference does it make if some TOC's are below now that numbers are recovering l.

The significance is inflexibility of fragmented railway, if one area has growth and another has shrunk, then BR would have moved rolling stock around the Network.
But with all the non-standard designs and different leases and DfT micro managing not possible anymore (actually leases not major problem as some operators sub-lease stock to others eg 707s went to SE on paper 2 years ago but leased back to SWR for months).

 

[The exile]

The significance is inflexibility of fragmented railway, if one area has growth and another has shrunk, then BR would have moved rolling stock around the Network.
But with all the non-standard designs and different leases and DfT micro managing not possible anymore (actually leases not major problem as some operators sub-lease stock to others eg 707s went to SE on paper 2 years ago but leased back to SWR for months).

Though of course even BR would have had problems coping with a large surplus of emus and a desperate shortage of diesels. Don’t think they ever resorted to dragging emus on a non-electrified line on a scheduled basis (I don’t mean diversions…)

 

[yorksrob]

The significance is inflexibility of fragmented railway, if one area has growth and another has shrunk, then BR would have moved rolling stock around the Network.
But with all the non-standard designs and different leases and DfT micro managing not possible anymore (actually leases not major problem as some operators sub-lease stock to others eg 707s went to SE on paper 2 years ago but leased back to SWR for months).

Though that's more to do with the structure of the railway, rather than how the statistics are used.

Don't forget, they've been using those figures to justify scrapping rolling stock without adequate replacement all over the country.

 

[Bald Rick]

Always the question of which comes first, vehicle km or passenger numbers

It’s not either or. But, in general, it’s passenger numbers first.

Then there's the infrastructure. Network Rail attributed delay minutes are breaking records

Which records are they?

is "Modernising Maintenance" to blame?

There are lots of factors for trsin delays, as you know.

If 91% is the average, then some other operators need to be well above too.

Of course. Elizabeth Line most notably.

 

[Krokodil]

Which records are they?

In 2023/24 Q3 NR-on-TOC delay minutes were 3,040,071.43 (not sure how you can have .43 of a delay minute, the ORR doesn't make it clear). That's higher than any quarter going back as far as the data is provided (2016/17). Granted, it probably doesn't beat Railtrack's meltdown, but the data doesn't show that far back.

 

[Snow1964]

There are other indicators that some things might have increased

eg Disabled railcards are at highest (in 12 years of data) per todays ORR report. But could just be more people are using the cards, not more disabled passengers

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/bduouxde/dprc-factsheet-2023-24-rail-periods-11-13.pdf

ORR have also released Passenger Assists, which also seem to be at a high at 1,376,878, but could be just more awareness, and bookings, than people needing assistance number increase.

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/covisqd4/assists-factsheet-2023-24-rail-periods-11-13.pdf

 

[Krokodil]

ORR have also released Passenger Assists, which also seem to be at a high at 1,376,878, but could be just more awareness, and bookings, than people needing assistance number increase.

In the past the only Passenger Assists which would have been counted were those booked in advance, anyone who turns up would have been handled by phone calls from station to station (or from train to station when the guard has picked someone up at an unstaffed station). With apps now available for coordinating assists between staff, more of them are registered.

 

[Bald Rick]

In 2023/24 Q3 NR-on-TOC delay minutes were 3,040,071.43 (not sure how you can have .43 of a delay minute, the ORR doesn't make it clear). That's higher than any quarter going back as far as the data is provided (2016/17). Granted, it probably doesn't beat Railtrack's meltdown, but the data doesn't show that far back.

That was half a year ago, and IIRC including a succession of major, named storms.

 

[Mag_seven]

I was at Reading tonight at about 18.00 and I would say that both the number of people on the station and on trains was way down on what it would have been on a Monday pre pandemic.

 

[Starmill]

Of course. Elizabeth Line most notably.

The post you're quoting takes the 91% from the figure that's normalised for new Elizabeth line services. Unless you're saying that they aren't normalised well?

 

[Jimini]

I was at Reading tonight at about 18.00 and I would say that both the number of people on the station and on trains was way down on what it would have been on a Monday pre pandemic.

Reading / Caversham was quiet when I passed through at 10ish — as was town when I got to Paddington and over to London Bridge. Maybe an uptick in ad hoc days off due to the footy last night? The office was half empty as well (Monday being one of two “anchor days” when most people are required to be there in person and it’s normally quite busy).

 

[Bald Rick]

The post you're quoting takes the 91% from the figure that's normalised for new Elizabeth line services. Unless you're saying that they aren't normalised well?

I’m afraid it doesn’t. Normalised for the effect of the Elizabeth Line it is 83%.

From page 2 of the ORR quarterly report:

With the Elizabeth line excluded, there were 1,390 million journeys in the latest year, which equates to 83% of the 1,680 million journeys in April 2019 to March 2020 (pre-pandemic). With the Elizabeth line included, the relative usage was 93% compared with pre-pandemic.

 

[Starmill]

I’m afraid it doesn’t. Normalised for the effect of the Elizabeth Line it is 83%.

From page 2 of the ORR quarterly report:

Gotcha. Thank you. Perhaps #151 could be caveated appropriately.

 

[ThameslinkUser]

I still think it's somewhat disingenous to exclude the Elizabeth line as it also by virtue excludes the TfL Rail services that ran on the East and West that have since been subsumed. These were not small operations and would have a meaningful impact on the passenger figures, even if you exclude the CCOS.

 

[Watershed]

I still think it's somewhat disingenous to exclude the Elizabeth line as it also by virtue excludes the TfL Rail services that ran on the East and West that have since been subsumed. These were not small operations and would have a meaningful impact on the passenger figures, even if you exclude the CCOS.

Indeed. Figures of 83% also ignore the fact that the DfT has been paying less subsidy to GWR & Greater Anglia since the Elizabeth line takeover - as the subsumed services, though busy, would still have been subsidised (probably more so on the west than the east).

 

[Meerkat]

Isn’t revenue more relevant than passenger numbers for most of these debates (though not the thread title to be fair)
if there has been a movement from peak to off peak then passenger numbers could increase quite a bit without causing crowding problems (XC excepted of course)

 

[Snow1964]

DfT has announced that latest rail crowding data (for major cities, not overcrowded short local trains) will be released 09:30 on Thursday.

Rail passenger numbers and crowding statistics in several major cities in England and Wales during 2023.
These statistics will be released on 19 September 2024 9:30am

Rail passenger numbers and crowding on weekdays in major cities in England and Wales: 2023

Rail passenger numbers and crowding on weekdays in major cities in England and Wales for 2023.

www.gov.uk

Not clear to me why they have given 1.5 days warning unless expecting lots of positive or negative comments, or aiming to announce something else to show doing something about it

 

[jon0844]

Amazon, and suggestions of other businesses pushing to axe hybrid working from the new year, is going to likely increase passenger numbers and in particular raise the usage on Mondays and Fridays.

The other consequence will be that currently when there's disruption a lot of people just decide to call their boss and say they'll work from home. As such the impact is reduced.

Once people have no choice but to travel or take a day off as annual leave, or maybe unpaid, there's going to be an impact there.

 

[Stephen42]

DfT has announced that latest rail crowding data (for major cities, not overcrowded short local trains) will be released 09:30 on Thursday.

Rail passenger numbers and crowding on weekdays in major cities in England and Wales: 2023

Rail passenger numbers and crowding on weekdays in major cities in England and Wales for 2023.

www.gov.uk

Not clear to me why they have given 1.5 days warning unless expecting lots of positive or negative comments, or aiming to announce something else to show doing something about it

It's fairly standard statistical practice to have a publication dates list for upcoming releases. Previously it was provisional for September and has now been updated to a confirmed release date. Particularly for data that will be looked at by the financial markets it's really important to communicate when it will be released as various businesses will have a team on hand to analyse it once released.

Here it's likely uploaded into the same system with the same announcements despite the lower importance. The data may have already been loaded in with a future release date or someone may have realised no date was confirmed until now.

 

[Snow1964]

Lots of new data just published
have't yet been through any of it

Rail passenger numbers and crowding on weekdays data tables RAI02

Data on rail passenger numbers, crowding and capacity, produced by the Department for Transport.

www.gov.uk

 

[Snow1964]

BBC version of data

One in five rail passengers arriving into major cities in England and Wales during the morning rush hour were forced to stand, official figures show.
The average number of commuters pouring into urban centres on a daily basis rose by 13% to 1.7 million on average between September and December 2023, compared to the same period the year before.
But train operators increased seating capacity by just 2% over that time, according to a report published by the Department for Transport (DfT).
Alex Robertson, chief executive at Transport Focus, the watchdog said: "Our research shows that getting a seat is in the top five priorities of what passengers want from the railway.

"This will need to be considered alongside other priorities for investment as demand continues to increase.”
Of the largest cities, London saw the highest number of arrivals during the period, at a daily average of 1.1 million which was a 14% increase on the same time the previous year.
It is about 10 times higher than Birmingham, the city with the next-highest number of people travelling in every day at 108,400.
But while the mornings on trains in London were busy last year, they were not as crowded as pre-Covid travel.
The figures indicate that people's travel habits have changed since the pandemic, with more passengers arriving outside the morning peak.
In autumn 2019, 55% of London-bound passengers came in between 7am and 10am. By 2023, that proportion had dropped to 45%.
However, people are continuing to return to their workplaces.
Stripping out the effect of the Elizabeth Line, which was launched in 2022, the figures show that the number of arrivals into major cities in England and Wales dropped by just 73,000, or 4%, between autumn 2019 and autumn 2023.

One in five rail passengers forced to stand in morning peak

Official figures show that while commuter numbers have been rising, seating has barely budged.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Horizon22]

BBC version of data

One in five rail passengers forced to stand in morning peak

Official figures show that while commuter numbers have been rising, seating has barely budged.

www.bbc.co.uk

Of course a significant number of morning peak passengers into London are the Elizabeth line, and that stock is overwhelmingly built for standees (about 70% of capacity) so it will be a big skew to the figures.

 

[ThameslinkUser]

I still disagree with the concept of excluding the Elizabeth line as that takes out the figures of the GWML and GEML passengers that previously used TfL Rail. That's a large number of people included in 2019 and not included in following years. Furthermore, it shows the impact of building a new railway; something that should be proudly shown.

 

[yorksrob]

Only 4% down on 2019. So much for the "new normal"