Train companies incentive to run trains short?

[SF-02]

Over the past three weeks Southeastern have been running many, many trains short. I would estimate that 3/4 have been below normal levels. I use the train everyday so have seen the change, as I last used Southeastern daily for months over the winter and spring and the situation is now far worse. It's a completely different service recently. Today my usual train service that was 8 cars for years was 4 leaving London in rush hour. It was horrendous again. It has never been more than 6 the past 3 weeks.

I remember reading somewhere that companies pay Network Rail more if trains have more carriages. Is that nonsense?

If that is rubbish does anyone know why short forming is now so widespread on the companies trains? Depot cutbacks etc? They had their franchise renewed in March for 2 years which arouses suspicions.

 

[142094]

I remember reading somewhere that companies pay Network Rail more if trains have more carriages. Is that nonsense?

Not sure where you have heard that, but doesn't sound correct. Track access charges AFAIK apply to a a train only, not the number of carriages. In effect the TOC pays less if it can put two or more units together to form one 'train'. Often when moving ECS, especially light engines for freight, the units/locos will be coupled together and worked as one.

 

[lookingforit35]

I hadnt noticed any particular changes recently.

But it may well be that the ongoing relivery of the 465s has taken enough out of service to have a noticeable effect. I would have thought this would have been factored into normal maintenance regimes though.

 

[Southern]

Looking at Southeastern's daily performance information, they have an awfully high number of train faults. Their website is currently reporting no less than 16 short formations, which by the looks of the reports mostly concern Class 466's.

 

[ushawk]

Affecting Southern a lot as well, my 18.06 from Victoria to Seaford/Ore yesterday evening was 5 coaches short than usual (Seaford section 3 vice 4, Ore section 4 vice 8). A lot of other short formations too, not just affecting 1 particular class as well.

 

[SF-02]

Looking at Southeastern's daily performance information, they have an awfully high number of train faults. Their website is currently reporting no less than 16 short formations, which by the looks of the reports mostly concern Class 466's.

Yep that's been the norm recently. They've also cancelled quite a few trains due to train failures recently as well.

The refit seems logical for the high number of short formed trains. However it wasn't anywhere near as bad when they were refitting trains last year, and a high number were done.

 

[stanley T]

For those of you nostalgic for BR and Network South East, the Networker was pretty crap. Unreliable drive, and why a gearbox for goodness sake? I thought the drives were to be replaced?

 

[island]

There's been a wide range of SET services announced cancelled lately in my experience due to a lack of serviceable rolling stock.

I think I prefer Electrostars to Networkers.

 

[jopsuk]

I remember reading somewhere that companies pay Network Rail more if trains have more carriages. Is that nonsense?

nonsense- if they do, it'll be based on what's booked, not what actually runs- and they'll likely be fined for short-forming trains.

 

[DelayRepay]

Last time I complained, they said it was because they were adding de-icing equipment to some trains to avoid a repeat of the problems we had last winter. If this is true it's a reasonable enough excuse although they may have been better trying to schedule the short formations over the next month when more people will be on holiday, schools and colleges are closed etc.

I wonder if we are seeing more short formations since Delay Repay came in. If they only have 8 coaches available, rather than cancelling one service they run two short. Thus meaning both services ran and delay repay claims can be rejected, even if passengers were left behind on the platform.

However, back to the original point, I also had heard train companies are charged less for running shorter trains as they're using less electricity. I thought that was why they only used 4 car units on Sundays on some routes and left the other 4/6/8 cars in the depot.

 

[Drsatan]

I also had heard train companies are charged less for running shorter trains as they're using less electricity. I thought that was why they only used 4 car units on Sundays on some routes and left the other 4/6/8 cars in the depot.

I believe the main reason that shorter trains are run on Sundays is so maintenance can be carried out on more units than during the week. Although as you've said, a spokesman for SWT claimed a couple of years ago that it would be operating many of its off-peak services as four or five car trains to save electricity.

 

[Bald Rick]

Train Companies have a number of marginal costs related to train mileage, or more accurately vehicle mileage. In no particular order

Variable Leasing costs
Electricity / fuel
Variable track access costs
Train maintenance

You could argue that this is thus an incentive to run trains as short as possible. However most TOC are monitored on short formations, and have to pay fines to DfT if they do so, the fine more than offsetting the costs saved. So they only do it if they really have to.

 

[Lincoln]

Not sure where you have heard that, but doesn't sound correct. Track access charges AFAIK apply to a a train only, not the number of carriages. In effect the TOC pays less if it can put two or more units together to form one 'train'. Often when moving ECS, especially light engines for freight, the units/locos will be coupled together and worked as one.

Hi, sorry. I'm afraid the previous poster was correct in assuming charges are per carriage. Please see here for the current list of variable charges and here for a page containing all the info you could want on track access.

However I doubt these would influence an operator on how many carriages are provided as quite often they will have clauses within the franchise agreements on acceptable levels of overcrowing, and actions the operator must take to reduce it.

 

[DelayRepay]

As SF-02 has noticed though, and others have also commented, Southeastern have had a bad few wees for short formations. Does anyone know the real reason for all these faults on trains that cannot be rectified?

 

[Fincra5]

Affecting Southern a lot as well, my 18.06 from Victoria to Seaford/Ore yesterday evening was 5 coaches short than usual (Seaford section 3 vice 4, Ore section 4 vice 8). A lot of other short formations too, not just affecting 1 particular class as well.

That was due to Graffiti on a 4car unit.

 

[ukrob]

Not sure where you have heard that, but doesn't sound correct. Track access charges AFAIK apply to a a train only, not the number of carriages. In effect the TOC pays less if it can put two or more units together to form one 'train'. Often when moving ECS, especially light engines for freight, the units/locos will be coupled together and worked as one.

They were correct - else how would you calculate a combination of different types of unit in one train.