• 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!

Avanti's serial cancellations of last trains

Status
Not open for further replies.

mmh

Established Member
Joined
13 Aug 2016
Messages
4,311
One does have to ask, however, if having a 3tph EUS-MAN service, that can't be maintained with services being cancelled at random, is better or worse than a 2tph service that is mostly reliable.
And we should be asking what the point of super-fast, limited stop services between different parts of the country is.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

A0

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,751
I always find this as a dangerous spiral. At the moment the rail service is unreliable so we drive (as the government prefer). Rail services are cut. More drive and so on. Congestion gets worse as those that never use the train have there road space taken up by those that used to. surely the government should be taking action to maximise their investment in rail? If I start driving then that does impacts someone that never uses the train.

100 people driving late at night makes pretty much no difference - the main roads and motorways are generally quiet after 7pm and very quiet after 10pm, so congestion really isn't an issue.

Rail is best as bulk transportation, so large flows ideally with trains at 80%+ capacity. Anything less is actually wasteful.
 

Agent_Squash

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2016
Messages
1,271
100 people driving late at night makes pretty much no difference - the main roads and motorways are generally quiet after 7pm and very quiet after 10pm, so congestion really isn't an issue.

Rail is best as bulk transportation, so large flows ideally with trains at 80%+ capacity. Anything less is actually wasteful.
Shouldn’t we be encouraging more people to use the railways so we can reach 80%+ capacity, rather than discouraging as Avanti do?
 

A0

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,751
Shouldn’t we be encouraging more people to use the railways so we can reach 80%+ capacity, rather than discouraging as Avanti do?

Not if that's being done by "giveaway" fares which don't cover the costs - it would be better to run fewer trains and increase their utilisation.
 

Agent_Squash

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2016
Messages
1,271
Not if that's being done by "giveaway" fares which don't cover the costs - it would be better to run fewer trains and increase their utilisation.

I’d rather subsidise give away fares to encourage increased rail travel - a loss leader if you will. Run the trains and people will come - look at the massively increased passenger numbers on Northern as services have become regular, and previously on Virgin when VHF was introduced.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
9,811
Location
Central Belt
100 people driving late at night makes pretty much no difference - the main roads and motorways are generally quiet after 7pm and very quiet after 10pm, so congestion really isn't an issue.

Rail is best as bulk transportation, so large flows ideally with trains at 80%+ capacity. Anything less is actually wasteful.
But maybe someone travelling in the evening in one direction was in at busy period in the other.

i often choose to drive because I can’t find / rely on the train to get me home in the evening / weekend.

so if they are frequently cancelling the last train that could be passengers lost say at 1000 adding to the motorway congestion. If trains should be 80% full we might as well close the network down now. Every morning at WGC at about 0800 I see lots of trains heading south around 100% full but one’s going north at 5% full. Average out the loadings we should close the line.
 

A0

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,751
I’d rather subsidise give away fares to encourage increased rail travel - a loss leader if you will. Run the trains and people will come - look at the massively increased passenger numbers on Northern as services have become regular, and previously on Virgin when VHF was introduced.

Feel free to pay more tax - that's your right, just don't count me in on paying more tax so others can gallivant around the country at my expense.
 

Class 170101

On Moderation
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
8,664
But the taxpayer shouldn't be faced with the seemingly ever escalating of running a rail network.

And paying overtime to cover things is one such example. Perhaps allowing TOCs an easier route to reducing the timetable would be a sensible way forward.
But is overtime cheaper with its inherent risk of non availability or employing new staff, though these days the staff might also be difficult to find as well.
 

Agent_Squash

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2016
Messages
1,271
Feel free to pay more tax - that's your right, just don't count me in on paying more tax so others can gallivant around the country at my expense.

But don’t we equally have social obligations to support mobility? If we cut back services in the way you’re suggesting, all we’d do is reduce social mobility, reduce economic growth and prevent the modal shift to public transport that we need.

Rail has been proven to be a catalyst for social mobility and economic growth. Good public transport is part of a strong society and economy.

I’d rather introduce tolling on the roads to support modal shift - we need to actively be discouraging road transport and push for rail.

But this is going off topic now. The fact is Avanti is failing to operate the timetable that has driven growth on the WCML for many years - absolutely ridiculous.
 

Peregrine 4903

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2019
Messages
1,518
Location
London
Feel free to pay more tax - that's your right, just don't count me in on paying more tax so others can gallivant around the country at my expense.
But if the majority would be happy to pay more tax for better public transport, your point is moot and youd just have to deal with it.
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
3,290
Location
North West
What happens when everyone available to work is already on, people in spare are allocated work within their hours and those wanting rest day working are in. What happens if that isn't sufficient?

Question for staff on here. When was the last time you were offered overtime or rest day working to sit spare so there was always additional cover available to cover for on the day sickness and disruption.
Quite apart from whether Avanti would pay staff to sit at the depot in case they are needed, there are people - potentially including some of us on this forum - who find sitting around doing nothing so futile that they prefer not to and are even willing to miss out on the pay as a result.
 

the sniper

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2007
Messages
3,498
100 people driving late at night makes pretty much no difference - the main roads and motorways are generally quiet after 7pm and very quiet after 10pm, so congestion really isn't an issue.

Rail is best as bulk transportation, so large flows ideally with trains at 80%+ capacity. Anything less is actually wasteful.

Shouldn’t we be encouraging more people to use the railways so we can reach 80%+ capacity, rather than discouraging as Avanti do?

Why are we talking as if some of these trains being cancelled aren't at 80% capacity? Some of them would be full and standing. My 100 people example, which I thought had been largely ignored, was an extreme example.

Feel free to pay more tax - that's your right, just don't count me in on paying more tax so others can gallivant around the country at my expense.

Problem is, you've come across a bit desperate in your argument with very little substance. You're just huffing and puffing.
 

A0

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,751
But don’t we equally have social obligations to support mobility? If we cut back services in the way you’re suggesting, all we’d do is reduce social mobility, reduce economic growth and prevent the modal shift to public transport that we need.

Yes, because "social mobility" relies on late at night trains which run half full.....

Better to run fewer trains at higher utilisation.

And *you* might want a modal shift to public transport - you can count me out on that aspiration as well.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

But if the majority would be happy to pay more tax for better public transport, your point is moot and youd just have to deal with it.

The "majority" will always say there should be more tax to pay for things - the reality is they usually expect that bill to be paid by somebody else. When asked to vote on tax rises which affect them, they tend to be much less enthusiastic.
 

Agent_Squash

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2016
Messages
1,271
And *you* might want a modal shift to public transport - you can count me out on that aspiration as well.
It’s a stated goal of this government to encourage modal shift. And honestly, it’s quite surprising that as member of a rail forum you don’t want to see improved rail services and modal shift as a result.

The governments last attitudes towards train services (2018) shows that 64% of the population travel by rail at least once a year: https://assets.publishing.service.g...s-towards-train-services-feb-2018-summary.pdf - while COVID may have changed commuting, leisure is still a very viable market which the railway should aim for.

The government has clearly stated its ‘ambition’ to increase usage of public transport. Cancelling late night services (which allow people to stay out later, and therefore spend more!) will have a negative social as well as economic impact. As evidenced previously in this thread, these last trains aren’t empty. It costs the tax payer more in delay repay and the money merry-go-round than it would do to pay overtime.

Europe’s rail system isn’t perfect - but I went from Pisa to Florence for 8.80EUR today, purchased at the station. The train was packed. Low fares drive up usage, meaning that the railway becomes less of a basket case.

I’m genuinely struggling to see your argument as you’re basically arguing for a managed decline.
 

judethegreat

Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
163
The "majority" will always say there should be more tax to pay for things - the reality is they usually expect that bill to be paid by somebody else. When asked to vote on tax rises which affect them, they tend to be much less enthusiastic.

I don't think 'ordinary' people need to pay more tax. Just claw it from the rich and the corporations who avoid/evade, and cease and reverse this government's general looting of public assets and finances. There is plenty of money to go around.
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
16,804
Location
UK
I’m genuinely struggling to see your argument as you’re basically arguing for a managed decline.
@A0wen seems to be advocating for the Serpell report to be enacted. Anything that doesn't meet those stringent criteria apparently warrants closure!
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,562
Location
UK
I don't think 'ordinary' people need to pay more tax. Just claw it from the rich and the corporations who avoid/evade, and cease and reverse this government's general looting of public assets and finances. There is plenty of money to go around.

How much tax has been lost from the TOCs that are now under Government control ?

All that Corporation tax going to waste
 

gazzaa2

Member
Joined
2 May 2018
Messages
837
Chaos at Euston tonight. They shut the gates due to overcrowding. Avanti services have been rammed all day before this evening's disruption after a lot of earlier cancellations. Hopefully everyone can get home okay.
 
Last edited:

A0

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,751
@A0wen seems to be advocating for the Serpell report to be enacted. Anything that doesn't meet those stringent criteria apparently warrants closure!

No - where have I advocated route closures?

That's a typically lazy slur.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Indeed. An odd view for a railway enthusiast, you’d have thought.

Enthusiast does not equal unquestioning support.

And saying that the rail network should not expect the taxpayer to simply keep opening the wallet is not unreasonable. Freight by contrast more than pays its way - fewer unremunative passenger services could enable more profitabl freight for example.
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
16,804
Location
UK
No - where have I advocated route closures?

That's a typically lazy slur.
It's hardly a slur - what other conclusion do you expect people to draw from such comments as shown below?!

rail is best as bulk transportation, so large flows ideally with trains at 80%+ capacity. Anything less is actually wasteful.
it would be better to run fewer trains

I would imagine there is barely a single line or TOC in the entire country that averages 80% utilisation of seats. So if you are serious about that suggestion of running fewer trains because they're not all 80% full... we would need to shut most of the network down.

Have you tried being a bit less of a devil's advocate? :lol:
 

A0

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,751
I don't think 'ordinary' people need to pay more tax. Just claw it from the rich and the corporations who avoid/evade, and cease and reverse this government's general looting of public assets and finances. There is plenty of money to go around.

Thank you for proving my point - you want more tax to be spent, but you want sonebody else to pay.

Try offering to increase your tax bill by 10 or 20% before advocating that sonebody else's tax bill should go up first.
 

142blue

Member
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Messages
351
Location
UK
Quite apart from whether Avanti would pay staff to sit at the depot in case they are needed, there are people - potentially including some of us on this forum - who find sitting around doing nothing so futile that they prefer not to and are even willing to miss out on the pay as a result.
Very fair point but spare turns should still be available for these instances. If you've used the back up people and the job goes belly up then who have you got to help keep a service running.

I think the current unhappiness in the industry also doesn't motivate people. I've been at home today watching the railway fall down and thinking I'm glad I'm off
 

A0

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,751
I would imagine there is barely a single line or TOC in the entire country that averages 80% utilisation of seats. So if you are serious about that suggestion of running fewer trains because they're not all 80% full... we would need to shut most of the network down.

Have you tried being a bit less of a devil's advocate? :lol:

It's fairly simple - if you're running 3 tph at an average of 50% capacity, run 2 tph and you'll get over 80% capacity.

If you're running a half hourly service late at night which is half full, run an hourly service.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Does SABRE have such a dedicated anti-road contingent...? :lol:

Even anti motorists aren't anti roads because they need something to cycle on or their bus to use. That's before they realise their local Co op needs roads so it can receive fresh supplies of organic produce and that day's Guardian.
 

judethegreat

Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
163
Thank you for proving my point - you want more tax to be spent, but you want sonebody else to pay.

Try offering to increase your tax bill by 10 or 20% before advocating that sonebody else's tax bill should go up first.
Yes. But i have very little money. The rest of my comment?
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
11,032
Location
London
Yes, because "social mobility" relies on late at night trains which run half full.....

Better to run fewer trains at higher utilisation.

And *you* might want a modal shift to public transport - you can count me out on that aspiration as well.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==



The "majority" will always say there should be more tax to pay for things - the reality is they usually expect that bill to be paid by somebody else. When asked to vote on tax rises which affect them, they tend to be much less enthusiastic.

Not sure what "late at night trains" you've been on, but they are often very full, especially on a weekend. It's often the last passenger service before it goes to the depot, so tends to be a suitable destination so the train doesn't have to travel miles to get back (and considers the location of crew depots for the last job). The last train will always be busy simply because its the "last train" - you see this effect to a slightly lesser degree for the first train as well. There's alaways a section of people that want to be somewhere earlier / later can't and are artifically forced onto the first/last service.
 

Agent_Squash

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2016
Messages
1,271
It's fairly simple - if you're running 3 tph at an average of 50% capacity, run 2 tph and you'll get over 80% capacity.

If you're running a half hourly service late at night which is half full, run an hourly service.

No you wouldn’t - you’d get 75%…

Your master plan also makes one big assumption - that everyone who would’ve travelled still would choose to go via rail. Frequency drives demand - so a reduction in frequency would likely surpress demand and make those who would’ve used a train take their car instead.

Of course we could run late night services with 153s - we’d be making full utilisation of the rolling stock then! :D
 

DelayRepay

Established Member
Joined
21 May 2011
Messages
2,929
Chaos at Euston tonight. They shut the gates due to overcrowding. Avanti services have been rammed all day before this evening's disruption after a lot of earlier cancellations. Hopefully everyone can get home okay.
There was some kind of incident between Watford and Milton Keynes leading to a line closure earlier this evening.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top