Dealing with the "luggage problem" - options

[JLH4AC]

Simply put there is a price to pay for large amounts of luggage.
Either
The TOC takes a hit on seating capacity so the fares for everyone are a bit higher.
OR
The TOC charges for large amounts of luggage so the customer bringing lots of luggage pays for the priveledge.

I suspect however no TOC can put their finger on how much capacity for extra luggage is required and also how much to charge. So they will go for the easy route - restrictions with no route for those with "too much" luggage.

It is a product of our finely tuned and efficient profit driven railway. Also known as overcrowded with no chance of investment in extra capacity. Well not much anyway as HS2's woes testify.

While not as cynical as you that was my point, the TOC needs ration luggage storage as there is only so much space that can be given over to luggage as trying to cover all the possible unrestricted demand will likely result in a large range of issues.

A lot of the people who bring large cases or bring too many cases are tourists, but this does make some room for creativity. For example, a lot of people may need to check out of a hotel for 11am but not have their train until 2pm. In a lot of situations, they would already pay money to have their bag stored at the station while they head round the city for the day.

It would be great if they could also create a system of sending people's bags to their destination in advance. This would mean a passenger could drop their bag off in the morning, spend the day going about their business, catch their train, and then pick up their bag from the final destination's luggage office. It's already not cheap to store bags at a station, and I reckon tourists in particular would happily pay a bit extra to relieve them of the hassle of dealing with their bags.

LNER currently has a trial luggage courier service.

There's some Royal Mail trains soon to be going spare which would be ideal for this!

The Class 325s have reportedly reached the end of their operational lives and need major refurbishment to be put back into prolonged service.

It depends if the railway is seen as an essential service that should cater to as many people as possible, or one that should be operated for convenience at the expense of passengers.

As I said before - we should be making provisions for bikes as it enables sustainable journeys and holidays that may otherwise have to be done by car.

If it's an issue with train capacity, lengthen them. Running 5 car trains down busy mainlines is a waste of capacity.

It is not an either-or situation, railways can strike a balance between transporting as many people as possible and providing as many conveniences as possible whether they be complimentary or for an additional fee.

There should be increased provisions for bikes but charging a small supplement like Scotrail does with the Highland Explorer seems to be fairest (Giving so many provisions for bikes for free could be seen as unduly favouring bikes over other forms of sustainable transport.) and more reliable way to ensure this increased provision. While there are many trains that clearly need lengthening, it is not as simple as just lengthening the trains there are many stations that the class 80Xs operate to where they would be uncomfortably close to fowling the signals if the shorter sets were lengthened even by a single carriage.

 

[renegademaster]

I don't think the gaurds union will like having "luggage police" added to their duties. And hiring more staff will be an even tougher sell.

Station to station transportation of parcels onboard passenger trains operated by a single operator using existing staff

Are you going to bring back the dwell times they had when parcels on passenger trains where a thing, or are you going to cancel trains so you can fit a parcel train path?

 

[Snow1964]

I don't think the gaurds union will like having "luggage police" added to their duties. And hiring more staff will be an even tougher sell.

Are you going to bring back the dwell times they had when parcels on passenger trains where a thing, or are you going to cancel trains so you can fit a parcel train path?

Unless it has been actively dropped from passenger guards duties and terms and conditions (instead of generally no longer needed) from the days of Red Star parcels, it used to be part of the job.

 

[sprunt]

Have you any evidence that there is the demand for people to travel with bikes? Most people already have plans for their onward journey without a bike. But as ever, there is an anti car undercurrent to your posts - how about letting people choose?

Saying that it should be possible for people to make journeys by methods other than a car is promoting the idea of letting people choose.

 

[43066]

Have you any evidence that there is the demand for people to travel with bikes? Most people already have plans for their onward journey without a bike. But as ever, there is an anti car undercurrent to your posts - how about letting people choose?

Are you kidding? Surely anyone who hasn’t been living under a rock knows that bike use is up massively post pandemic, and correspondingly far more are now being carried by train. The issue is the stock not having enough space to safely accommodate them. Given limited capacity there is a debate over how much space should/can be given to cycles versus passenger sitting/standing space, but nobody remotely knowledgeable about the issues would be in denial of the fact that demand to carry bikes on the railway is through the roof.

I don't think the gaurds union will like having "luggage police" added to their duties.

They’re already responsible for virtually every aspect of train safety apart from driving it, so “luggage police” is very much already part of their remit. TMs on services I worked over the summer were having to turn cyclists away, so the idea of reservations for bikes seems a sensible one, at least in lieu of longer trains, which we aren’t going to get.

 

[A0]

Are you kidding? Anyone who isn’t been living under a rock knows that bike use is up massively post pandemic, and correspondingly far more are now being carried by train. The issue is the stock not having enough space to safely accommodate them. Given limited capacity there is a debate over how much space should/can be given to cycles versus passenger sitting/standing space, but nobody remotely knowledgeable about the issues would be in denial of the fact that demand to carry bikes is through the roof.

I think you missed the point - is there the demand for people to use a bike *at both ends of their journey* ? Or are they happy to cycle to the station and then get the train plus whatever at the other end? If you look at the Netherlands for example there are huge bike racks at the stations but few bikes on trains - so people cycle to the station, lock the bike up, get the train then walk, bus, tram at the other end.

 

[JLH4AC]

I don't think the gaurds union will like having "luggage police" added to their duties. And hiring more staff will be an even tougher sell.

Placing and recovering extra large luggage from the staff only storage areas is already part of the train crew's duties on InterCity services. It is also part of the guard/train manager's duty to enforce the Conditions of Travel which include policies relating to luggage.

Are you going to bring back the dwell times they had when parcels on passenger trains where a thing, or are you going to cancel trains so you can fit a parcel train path?

Ideally the amount of parcels collected and dropped off at a single stop will be caped to limit the impact on dwell times. On routes where demand is greater than this would allow, semi-dedicated (Short parcel multiple units coupled together with shorter passager multiple units.) and dedicated parcel trains could be operated during quieter times.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Placing and recovering extra large luggage from the staff only storage areas is already part of the train crew's duties on intercity services.

Almost no UK trains now have "staff only storage areas" for luggage. Indeed I can't think of a single one that does - can you? Maybe the tiny number of remaining HSTs? Do they still use the Mk4 DVT for that?

The end bit of a Pendolino is allowed for passenger access at stations with staff present - bicycles are loaded by their rider.

 

[43066]

Almost no UK trains now have "staff only storage areas" for luggage. Indeed I can't think of a single one that does - can you? Maybe the tiny number of remaining HSTs? Do they still use the Mk4 DVT for that?

The end bit of a Pendolino is allowed for passenger access at stations with staff present - bicycles are loaded by their rider.

The bit behind the non-first-class-end-cab on 222s is generally left unsecured, but can be locked to prevent people standing in there. If so it needs to be unlocked to allow people to stow and remove bikes, and this would fall to the guard to manage.

Very much the exception rather than the rule, though.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The bit behind the non-first-class-end-cab on 222s is generally left unsecured, but can be locked to prevent people standing in there. If so it needs to be unlocked to allow people to stow and remove bikes, and this would fall to the guard to manage.

Very much the exception rather than the rule, though.

Same with the end bit of a Voyager, but the staff wouldn't put the luggage in there, just open it for passengers to do so. In my experience it's normally left open, though, particularly as the "you can't have passengers in the front third of a train over 110mph" thing seems to have been slacked off somewhat with the coming of the 80x and 397s. The staff who lock it are probably ones who remember that rule.

Theoretically you can't get into the bike bit of a 390 without staff assistance, but in reality if you push the door it opens - very often does it by itself on steeply canted track.

 

[sprunt]

They’re already responsible for virtually every aspect of train safety apart from driving it, so “luggage police” is very much already part of their remit.

There's a difference between keeping an eye out to make sure the luggage on the train doesn't start overflowing into where it shouldn't be and having to check the luggage of everyone who joins the train though - I think the guards would rightfully object if there were attempts to add that to their duties.

 

[lachlan]

Saying that it should be possible for people to make journeys by methods other than a car is promoting the idea of letting people choose.

That's what I was wondering too, promoting bike use isn't necessarily anti-car...

 

[JLH4AC]

Almost no UK trains now have "staff only storage areas" for luggage. Indeed I can't think of a single one that does - can you? Maybe the tiny number of remaining HSTs? Do they still use the Mk4 DVT for that?

The end bit of a Pendolino is allowed for passenger access at stations with staff present - bicycles are loaded by their rider.

As far as I am aware the admittedly limited remaining (Though we are 2 to 6 years removed from their withdrawal so most guards currently working on the class 80Xs would have worked on the InterCity trains.) InterCity trains still make use of guard compartments to store extra large bags (Which were trains I was intending to refer to, me having mistakenly written that in all lowercase did not help that come across.) I should worded it as "Assisting passages in getting luggage into the limited access storage areas is already part of the train crew's duties on intercity services." to include the class 390s and class 222s which would have made my intent point stronger, I also should have mentioned their general passager assistance duties.

 

[JKF]

If you look at the Netherlands for example there are huge bike racks at the stations but few bikes on trains - so people cycle to the station, lock the bike up, get the train then walk, bus, tram at the other end.

It’s quite common to have a bike at the work end which stays in the racks overnight, one of the reasons why the racks are so big there. I’ve known people do the same in London, you just need a cheap and functional 1980s mountain bike that isn’t worth stealing.

 

[43066]

I think you missed the point - is there the demand for people to use a bike *at both ends of their journey* ? Or are they happy to cycle to the station and then get the train plus whatever at the other end? If you look at the Netherlands for example there are huge bike racks at the stations but few bikes on trains - so people cycle to the station, lock the bike up, get the train then walk, bus, tram at the other end.

There is a big (and growing) market for people cycling at both ends. A lot of people in cycling gear can be seen boarding trains with bikes to travel a few miles, then there are lot of cyclists who go on cycling holidays around the UK - many of whom will currently drive. A lot of keen cyclists spend thousands on their bikes and - understandably - wouldn’t want to leave them locked up in racks where they could be damaged or stolen.

The Netherlands have dedicated cycle storage areas on trains, so I’m not sure where you get the idea that you don’t see many bikes on their railway. If anything surely you would expect to see more given how much more cycling is embedded into Dutch culture.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Oct 2024 ==

There's a difference between keeping an eye out to make sure the luggage on the train doesn't start overflowing into where it shouldn't be and having to check the luggage of everyone who joins the train though - I think the guards would rightfully object if there were attempts to add that to their duties.

True. Albeit they do need to keep a general eye out eg for people taking e scooters on board, or areas where bags are stowed unsafely.

 

[miklcct]

The Netherlands have dedicated cycle storage areas on trains, so I’m not sure where you get the idea that you don’t see many bikes on their railway. If anything surely you would expect to see more given how much more cycling is embedded into their culture.

The Netherlands also ban bikes on their peak hour trains as well. They can only taken on board off-peak, and a bike ticket is required.

 

[JamesT]

The Netherlands have dedicated cycle storage areas on trains, so I’m not sure where you get the idea that you don’t see many bikes on their railway. If anything surely you would expect to see more given how much more cycling is embedded into Dutch culture.

Perhaps @A0wen was travelling during peak hours, when most bicycles are banned from Dutch railways? https://www.ns.nl/en/travel-information/bikes-on-the-train.html

You can only take your bicycle on the train during off-peak hours (Monday to Friday from 9.00 am to 4.00 pm and from 6.30 pm to 6.30 am, and all day on the weekend)
Your bicycle is not allowed during rush hour, even if the journey started before rush hour. During the months of July and August, you may take your bicycle with you on the train all day.

 

[lachlan]

Perhaps @A0wen was travelling during peak hours, when most bicycles are banned from Dutch railways? https://www.ns.nl/en/travel-information/bikes-on-the-train.html

Makes sense - I would guess keeping one cycle at either end of your journey is more feasible in the Netherlands given their impressive cycle storage facilities.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Makes sense - I would guess keeping one cycle at either end of your journey is more feasible in the Netherlands given their impressive cycle storage facilities.

Plenty in London do it too, there are huge racks at several of the termini. The hire bikes reduce the need, though.

 

[Irascible]

But who will pay for the bullets?

We can leave an invoice on what's left of them.

Passengers boarding/disbarking with excess luggage can be an inconvenience and nuisance to other passengers and cause undue delays.

This would be rather less of a delay if there was a big door into the luggage area("guard's van") that opened straight onto the platform... if they didn't get to the luggage space in time, well, train goes with it & they know to get there earlier next time. If the train is so rammed they can't get there at all, then there's likely to be some severe boarding issues already.

 

[JLH4AC]

This would be rather less of a delay if there was a big door into the luggage area("guard's van") that opened straight onto the platform... if they didn't get to the luggage space in time, well, train goes with it & they know to get there earlier next time. If the train is so rammed they can't get there at all, then there's likely to be some severe boarding issues already.

Yeah, large luggage compartments with external doors would greatly limit the impact that passengers with excess luggage would have.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Yeah, large luggage compartments with external doors would greatly limit the impact that passengers with excess luggage would have.

Even if, say, a passenger with a reservation at the opposite end of a long and packed train has to go forward or backwards along to platform to identify and extract their excess luggage after it arrives at an intermediate station?

 

[JLH4AC]

Even if, say, a passenger with a reservation at the opposite end of a long and packed train has to go forward or backwards along to platform to identify and extract their excess luggage after it arrives at an intermediate station?

As no solution can be perfect there will be cases where it is far less ideal, but that situation would still be less inconvenient than the alternative of the same passenger having to work their way through the same train to recover their luggage that had to be placed in same luggage compartment or another carriage at the opposite end of the train to them due to there not being enough luggage space in the carriage they are in.

 

[Mike Machin]

The whole point of travelling by long-distance train is being able to take luggage, it should be rail’s main USP compared with travel by air, coach or a small car. With the ridiculous eye-watering fares being charged, all long-distance trains should have the modern-day equivalent of the full brake coach found in most Inter-City trains in the past.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The whole point of travelling by long-distance train is being able to take luggage, it should be rail’s main USP compared with travel by air, coach or a small car. With the ridiculous eye-watering fares being charged, all long-distance trains should have the modern-day equivalent of the full brake coach found in most Inter-City trains in the past.

Trouble is that is then a whole coach load of passengers who cannot travel.
The problem is many intercity trains are the maximum length they can be for many stations.

 

[AHBD]

Trouble is that is then a whole coach load of passengers who cannot travel.
The problem is many intercity trains are the maximum length they can be for many stations.

But if they can't bring their luggage, then they'll be relegated to an actual motorcoach (which does have lots of underfloor luggage space) but slower, or more likely choose their their car (more energy use, more congestion, highest danger to other road users due to sheer numbers etc).

Paying for luggage/bike space at least means it us a revenue source. Apparently the French remove seats from quieter TER services to make room for luggage.

If trains could be quickly converted from Commute mode to off peak/leisure mode ( by folding/removing proper seats), then luggage could be extra revenue and keep customers who otherwise must look elsewhere on the railway... If like me, I think touring cyclists would select off peak trains anyway...

 

[43066]

The whole point of travelling by long-distance train is being able to take luggage

Not sure this really rings true. Yes, you’ll want to take sone luggage, but I’m not sure many people really expect to be able to take more luggage on the train than then they could carry in their car, for example.

With the ridiculous eye-watering fares being charged, all long-distance trains should have the modern-day equivalent of the full brake coach found in most Inter-City trains in the past.

As noted above, though, you aren’t going to get brake coaches or guards’ vans due to the rolling stock and infrastructure investment decisions that have been taken over the past few years, that we are now stuck with for the next few decades.

In that context you have to make a straight choice between luggage space and passenger space, and charging for luggage and/or restricting allowances as Lumo(?) do, is likely to be seen as more acceptable than reducing seating.

If like me, I think touring cyclists would select off peak trains anyway...

Another sensible approach, likely to become mandatory, along with cycle reservations.

 

[Peter Sarf]

But if they can't bring their luggage, then they'll be relegated to an actual motorcoach (which does have lots of underfloor luggage space) but slower, or more likely choose their their car (more energy use, more congestion, highest danger to other road users due to sheer numbers etc).

Paying for luggage/bike space at least means it us a revenue source. Apparently the French remove seats from quieter TER services to make room for luggage.

If trains could be quickly converted from Commute mode to off peak/leisure mode ( by folding/removing proper seats), then luggage could be extra revenue and keep customers who otherwise must look elsewhere on the railway... If like me, I think touring cyclists would select off peak trains anyway...

BUT. If one whole coach is turned over to luggage then that is a whole coach load of passengers, with not much luggage, who will have to travel by a less ecological mode.

It is the same old problem. Once any transport mode is running at capacity then the tendency is for it not to cater for unusual cases. Cram the seats in closer is what we have.

You either disadvantage a minority or a majority - I know in this day and age "minority" tends to infer rights over the majority.

In the end capacity will be realised if people are willing to pay for it. So if someone wants to take a large amount of luggage then they need to pay for the valuable space that someone else could have bought a ticket for and used. Of course HS2 would bring improved capacity but people (those holding the purse strings) are not willing to pay for its construction (to put it simply).

Your idea of convertible seating areas would work if we can organise those wanting to take a large amount of luggage so that they only travel off-peak. But I am not sure there is a decent stretch of peak time on longer distance services. But I would not bother wasting time and resources on convertible seating anyway. Most of the luggage will fit on seats - could have areas near vestibules with perch/folding seats like many EMUs already have. Train Operating Companies could manage the luggage with reservations (for the seat with bags on) and a charge. Then pricing luggage onto the quieter services just the way passenger fares are priced according to demand.

Back in the day we could have used older coaches with a loco on the front and run it as an overnight service (that's me wanting cheap overnight services back).

 

[Bletchleyite]

In that context you have to make a straight choice between luggage space and passenger space, and charging for luggage and/or restricting allowances as Lumo(?) do, is likely to be seen as more acceptable than reducing seating.

I don't think I'd have an issue with charging, though there are practical issues with it (as evidenced by the number of times I've travelled Standard Premium on Avanti/Weekend First on Virgin and not been charged for it, which is more than once). I do have an issue with flat restrictions, or even worse what Lumo do with their "we might, we might not" and vague size specifications.

(Not doing stuff like luggage upsells and seat selection for a fee* and the likes is one of the ways in which Lumo is a bit of a cack-handed attempt at the low cost model - but then we shouldn't be surprised, as FirstGroup have form for cack-handed half-attempts at things.)

* Yes, I know, Trainsplit. But most people won't book via Trainsplit, and will just pay for the upsell if they want it were it offered for a fee on Lumo's site, and we know FirstGroup have the software as Avanti have it.

 

[43066]

In the end capacity will be realised if people are willing to pay for it. So if someone wants to take a large amount of luggage then they need to pay for the valuable space that someone else could have bought a ticket for and used.

In practice it’s more likely that luggage will still be restricted, even if charged for, so that those who wish to travel with lots of it will need to use other means.

I can’t see people being allowed to buy tickets for luggage and thereby exclude people from seats (yes, that already happens to an extent with seats in cycle areas, but look at the issues it causes).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Oct 2024 ==

I do have an issue with flat restrictions, or even worse what Lumo do with their "we might, we might not" and vague size specifications.

Trouble is - again in the context of being stuck with short trains with a small loading gauge - there still has to be a hard limit. It’ll still be possible to fill the trains with people who don’t require large amounts of luggage.