Crouch Valley line - loadings and service provision

[TheWalrus]

Good evening

I travelled on a few services today between Wickford and Southminster and noticed the pateonage seems to be particularly low - is that normal for this route? I counted around 32 total SMN-WIC on a trip this afternoon - surely this is not cost effective and is losing a lot of money?

Also does it really justify a 40 minute frequency? It used to be hourly and Im guessing it was increased due to it not really needing much additional resources to do so. However most of the stations clearly don’t even justify an hourly service, with the exception of South Woodham Ferrers and Burnham-on-Crouch which seem to be the busiest stations on the line by a reasonable amount!

I wonder with the two units would it be beneficial to reduce it to an hourly service but extend to Shenfield which has a lot more connections?

Would patronage increase if more services ran through to London Liverpool Street, maybe as portion working with the Southends?

Lots of thoughts and ideas here but doesn’t seem to justify a 5-car EMU every 40 minutes for 30-40 passengers in total per trip, based on the ones I did.

 

[bramling]

Good evening

I travelled on a few services today between Wickford and Southminster and noticed the pateonage seems to be particularly low - is that normal for this route? I counted around 32 total SMN-WIC on a trip this afternoon - surely this is not cost effective and is losing a lot of money?

Also does it really justify a 40 minute frequency? It used to be hourly and Im guessing it was increased due to it not really needing much additional resources to do so. However most of the stations clearly don’t even justify an hourly service, with the exception of South Woodham Ferrers and Burnham-on-Crouch which seem to be the busiest stations on the line by a reasonable amount!

I wonder with the two units would it be beneficial to reduce it to an hourly service but extend to Shenfield which has a lot more connections?

Would patronage increase if more services ran through to London Liverpool Street, maybe as portion working with the Southends?

Lots of thoughts and ideas here but doesn’t seem to justify a 5-car EMU every 40 minutes for 30-40 passengers in total per trip, based on the ones I did.

40 passengers on a 4-car class 321, which was what used to operate the service, I wouldn’t have said is too bad for an off-peak time, that would have equated to about 10 per carriage. Clearly 5 longer cars is more lavish, but that’s one of the issues with GA’s choice to buy 5 and 10 car trains.

 

[dk1]

Losing money is not something that matters with railways. Most do that any hence the subsidy. It’s quite a cost effective route and the 40 minute frequency has been in for many years now. When hourly it ran through to Shenfield for a time. Portion working is out of the question as would extend Southend Victoria timings, risk inheriting delay, and often Southend services are 10-car anyway.

 

[Fenchurch SP]

For a while services ran through to Liverpool Street on Class 315s, stopping at all stations to Ilford. There were sometimes problems with the platform at Wickford being occupied by a Southminster bound train waiting for a delayed train to clear the single line.

 

[Magdalia]

I travelled on a few services today between Wickford and Southminster and noticed the pateonage seems to be particularly low - is that normal for this route? I counted around 32 total SMN-WIC on a trip this afternoon - surely this is not cost effective and is losing a lot of money?

It very much depends on time of day.

I have travelled on off peak trains between Ely and Kings Lynn with loadings not much different.

What matters is the loadings at peak times.

Lots of the costs are fixed, the savings from running slightly fewer trains off peak are not big in the grand scheme of things.

Would patronage increase if more services ran through to London Liverpool Street

There are trains through to/from Liverpool Street at peak times.

For a while services ran through to Liverpool Street on Class 315s, stopping at all stations to Ilford. There were sometimes problems with the platform at Wickford being occupied by a Southminster bound train waiting for a delayed train to clear the single line.

This seems to me a very good reason for using the bay platform at Wickford.

 

[Halish Railway]

Lots of thoughts and ideas here but doesn’t seem to justify a 5-car EMU every 40 minutes for 30-40 passengers in total per trip, based on the ones I did.

In the context of a service that I’m assuming mainly conveys passengers connecting onto other services at Wickford I don’t think it’s fair to look at the service in isolation when talking about financial sustainability. I think a better way of looking at it is that the service is adding 30-40 passengers joining services to London Liverpool Street and Southend at Wickford.

Yes the route will require a considerable subsidy, but I’d imagine that it’s money well spent as it gives towns and villages a reasonable rail service, when they would have otherwise have had to depend on narrow, winding and accident-prone roads to go anywhere. Certainly having most of Burnham-on-Crouch’s traffic arrive on the zigzagging B1010 would not be ideal.

 

[TheWalrus]

Losing money is not something that matters with railways. Most do that any hence the subsidy. It’s quite a cost effective route and the 40 minute frequency has been in for many years now. When hourly it ran through to Shenfield for a time. Portion working is out of the question as would extend Southend Victoria timings, risk inheriting delay, and often Southend services are 10-car anyway.

Losing money isn’t great unless the economic benefits are greater. Not sure it’s a good use of taxpayer money to pay for a 40 minute frequency on a branch line carrying 30-40 passengers?

The only way I thought portion working would work is if the tph that joins/splits at Wickford went non-stop between Shenfield and London, with the other two calling at Romford and Stratford.

Obviously the Southend line is the much busier route and you wouldn’t want to compromise it for the Southminster.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 May 2025 ==

For a while services ran through to Liverpool Street on Class 315s, stopping at all stations to Ilford. There were sometimes problems with the platform at Wickford being occupied by a Southminster bound train waiting for a delayed train to clear the single line.

Operationally the current service makes more sense in that respect.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 May 2025 ==

It very much depends on time of day.

I have travelled on off peak trains between Ely and Kings Lynn with loadings not much different.

What matters is the loadings at peak times.

Lots of the costs are fixed, the savings from running slightly fewer trains off peak are not big in the grand scheme of things.


There are trains through to/from Liverpool Street at peak times.


This seems to me a very good reason for using the bay platform at Wickford.

What are the peak time loadings like? A Saturday afternoon probably doesn’t give a good representation of the numbers.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 May 2025 ==

In the context of a service that I’m assuming mainly conveys passengers connecting onto other services at Wickford I don’t think it’s fair to look at the service in isolation when talking about financial sustainability. I think a better way of looking at it is that the service is adding 30-40 passengers joining services to London Liverpool Street and Southend at Wickford.

Yes the route will require a considerable subsidy, but I’d imagine that it’s money well spent as it gives towns and villages a reasonable rail service, when they would have otherwise have had to depend on narrow, winding and accident-prone roads to go anywhere. Certainly having most of Burnham-on-Crouch’s traffic arrive on the zigzagging B1010 would not be ideal.

I agree, it is a feeder into the other services at Wickford, strengthening those.
However the entire distance from Wickford to Southminster is only 16miles so are the operating costs really that much higher than the revenue? Or is it actually more cost effective than it looked to me yesterday?

 

[dk1]

Losing money isn’t great unless the economic benefits are greater. Not sure it’s a good use of taxpayer money to pay for a 40 minute frequency on a branch line carrying 30-40 passengers?

It doesn’t really matter when it comes to railways and there are far worse basket case routes in this country where 30-40 passengers would be seen to be a busy day with far less frequency and much higher running costs.

 

[Magdalia]

What are the peak time loadings like?

The flows data shows that most traffic is going through to/from Liverpool Street and Stratford. Much of that will be at peak time.

The busiest stations on the branch are South Woodham Ferrers and Burnham on Crouch. These have 74k and 41k journeys to/from Liverpool Street plus 19k and 12k journeys to/from Stratford. Southminster and North Fambridge have 18k and 17k to/from Liverpool Street plus 5k and 3k journeys to/from Stratford.

The biggest "on branch" flow is South Woodham Ferrers-Wickford at 9k.

Looking at the data it is not surprising that off peak the trains are quiet.

 

[Jaydubya]

The route is well worth a ride around sunrise and sunset over the river crouch. The best views can be found on the section between Burnham on Crouch and just east of South Woodham Ferrers. Some good river walks and a vineyard within walking distance of Althorne station as well. More would be made of its tourism potential if it was in other counties.

It would be interesting to compare patronage between it and the Braintree and Witham section. Probably not much in it.

 

[Brent Goose]

I’d assumed this line’s passenger services were largely a byproduct of the need to service Bradwell Power Station before it was decommissioned

 

[dk1]

I’d assumed this line’s passenger services were largely a byproduct of the need to service Bradwell Power Station before it was decommissioned

Only happened on a Thursday as I recall.

 

[Fenchurch SP]

The biggest "on branch" flow is South Woodham Ferrers-Wickford at 9k.

Looking at the data it is not surprising that off peak the trains are quiet.

Has terminating some trains at SWF ever been considered? Woodham Ferrers was included as a possible destination on the old flip board at Liverpool Street.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 May 2025 ==

I’d assumed this line’s passenger services were largely a byproduct of the need to service Bradwell Power Station before it was decommissioned

I think aggregates trains also helped the line survive Beeching.

In the evenings you get quite a few teenagers making local journeys, although I suspect not many pay the fares, especially now the conductors have gone.

 

[Harpo]

Only happened on a Thursday as I recall.

With a one day a week gap in the passenger service to run the bomb.

Southminster also used to have a sand flow to Mile End but it’s long gone.

 

[Zomboid]

Has terminating some trains at SWF ever been considered? Woodham Ferrers was included as a possible destination on the old flip board at Liverpool Street.

Would probably only serve to reduce passenger numbers and revenue without cutting costs.

 

[Magdalia]

Would probably only serve to reduce passenger numbers and revenue without cutting costs.

The passenger flows data suggests that the reduction in passenger numbers would be small, because the biggest flows are at South Woodham Ferrers and Burnham on Crouch, not Southminster.

A 1tph Wickford-South Woodham Ferrers shuttle would only need one unit and traincrew instead of 2 so would be less costly.

The flow that nobody has mentioned yet is school and college traffic: is there any of that?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 May 2025 ==

It would be interesting to compare patronage between it and the Braintree and Witham section. Probably not much in it.

For flows to/from Liverpool Street and Stratford, Braintree is almost exactly equal with South Woodham Ferrers and Burnham on Crouch added together.

What Braintree has, which the Southminster branch does not, is relatively big flows to Chelmsford (36k), Witham (30k) and Colchester (16k). Southminster branch to Chelmsford would be by bus not train.

 

[Jaydubya]

Has terminating some trains at SWF ever been considered? Woodham Ferrers was included as a possible destination on the old flip board at Liverpool Street.

When the line was electrified in 1986 passive provision was made for more easily bringing the second platform at South Woodham Ferrers back into use by putting the overhead line equipment supports on the platform rather than the old track bed. The same wasn’t done at Burnham on Crouch. At the time South Woodham Ferrers was still being built out as a small new riverside country town and so the need for additional services was a possibility.

The peak trains include a mix of London Commuters and school/college traffic for the Southend/Westcliff selective schools but London commuters are the main flow.

I’d expect numbers to have improved further since the last set of annual figures as Greater Anglia were slow to bring back the second through evening peak service from Liverpool Street, which only returned in May 24. There used to be 3 through evening trains pre COVID.

Pre covid 12 car trains operated in the peak and had long done so since the days of Class 312 stock. North Fambridge loop had been extended to allow two 12 car trains to pass at some stage. Not sure if Greater Anglia operate any 10 car trains now.

 

[Zomboid]

A 1tph Wickford-South Woodham Ferrers shuttle would only need one unit and traincrew instead of 2 so would be less costly

But would that come at the cost of no off peak service at all to Burnham and Southminster? I doubt the savings would be worth the adverse publicity of doing that.

There might be some tune you could play with (for example) an infrequent (2 hourly?) Southminster to Liverpool St service and an hourly part service up the branch from Wickford, but unless the infrastructure already supports that without modification it's probably not worth the effort.

 

[Jaydubya]

But would that come at the cost of no off peak service at all to Burnham and Southminster? I doubt the savings would be worth the adverse publicity of doing that.

There might be some tune you could play with (for example) an infrequent (2 hourly?) Southminster to Liverpool St service and an hourly part service up the branch from Wickford, but unless the infrastructure already supports that without modification it's probably not worth the effort.

The only other place where you can terminate / start a train is at North Fambridge. Years ago (1990s) there used to be a late night train that terminated at North Fambridge to provide South Woodham Ferrers customers with a later night out in London.

But tinkering with off peak services would just lead to people choosing to railhead and fewer passengers using the services that remain.

 

[Magdalia]

But would that come at the cost of no off peak service at all to Burnham and Southminster? I doubt the savings would be worth the adverse publicity of doing that.

Sorry, I was getting confused about the order of stations there. I was thinking of terminating the off peak shuttle at Burnham on Crouch not South Woodham Ferrers, so that the only station not served would be Southminster.