EMR Overcrowding

[dk1]

I don't think so, just you can reserve any reservable seat up to close to departure from the origin. If none left and not in a hurry you may well want to reserve a slightly later one instead as you know it'll be full.

Ahh right so probably all gone. Think I’d just cram in & get on my way not that I ever do reserved seating anyway.

 

[43096]

I don’t think you could say Anglia and SWR underordered

Anglia hasn’t put it all into service though, and SWR hasn’t put any into service. Which rather makes total amount ordered an irrelevance to what passengers can use for any journeys this month

Given where revenue is on the railway post pandemic there’s a strong case to say Greater Anglia and SWR have over ordered their Aventra fleets.

 

[RailWonderer]

The 170s are far better for Norwich Liverpool, wider 1/3 2/3 doors rather than end doors, although a 158 has more capacity and you would need a 5 or 6 car 170 to increase seating. Instead of moving to an LNER model as has been said before it would be better to just run longer trains and introduce guard operated SDO.

 

[Bikeman78]

Great Western have the right idea for this sort of thing.

Electrify local and main line so that spare local stock can be used to crowd bust for busy events/days. Imagine if a spare one of those long Thameslink units could have been run up to Nottingham to get people moved.

South Eastern still runs Networkers to Ramsgate in the summer. As you say, sending 360s/700s to Nottingham, thus freeing up DMUs for other routes would be handy.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

The 170s are far better for Norwich Liverpool, wider 1/3 2/3 doors rather than end doors, although a 158 has more capacity and you would need a 5 or 6 car 170 to increase seating. Instead of moving to an LNER model as has been said before it would be better to just run longer trains and introduce guard operated SDO.

Thank you - 5-car 170's would provide something like 320 or slightly more seats and with their door layout they'd be so useful for the busy Manchester corridor and 158's for routes not running through Manchester!

 

[Killingworth]

The 170s are far better for Norwich Liverpool, wider 1/3 2/3 doors rather than end doors, although a 158 has more capacity and you would need a 5 or 6 car 170 to increase seating. Instead of moving to an LNER model as has been said before it would be better to just run longer trains and introduce guard operated SDO.

An issue that possibly needs a separate thread is, 'how do passengers get distributed more evenly down trains?' Lack of corridor connections between units like 170, 185, 195 etc is often cited but it's not at all uncommon to see one coach of a 3 coach train rammed and at the opposite end there's seating going spare.

Many stand nearest the entry point on the platform and then board the coach that stops nearest. Only a minority will move to the next coach once aboard, let alone walk to the far end of a long train. In days of old I'd do that at York and get a compartment to myself at the front of the train. Tried that about 4 years ago on LNER - ended sitting in the last vestibule until Darlington!

Reserved seats should help, in theory. My observations on XC, TPE and LNER suggest a very high proportion of reserved seats are never taken up - but that's yet another story.

 

[Bikeman78]

An issue that possibly needs a separate thread is, 'how do passengers get distributed more evenly down trains?' Lack of corridor connections between units like 170, 185, 195 etc is often cited but it's not at all uncommon to see one coach of a 3 coach train rammed and at the opposite end there's seating going spare.

This seems to apply to any train, even the walk through S stock on the underground. Recently I was in the rear coach of a circle line train which had five people in it. The sixth coach was lightly loaded. On the straight sections I could see that the fifth coach was packed with standing passengers. People couldn't be bothered to walk a few metres to a vacant seat in the sixth coach.

 

[STINT47]

This seems to apply to any train, even the walk through S stock on the underground. Recently I was in the rear coach of a circle line train which had five people in it. The sixth coach was lightly loaded. On the straight sections I could see that the fifth coach was packed with standing passengers. People couldn't be bothered to walk a few metres to a vacant seat in the sixth coach.

In fairness when using LUL services if people are only going a short distance they tend to get on at the closest door. I do this as although it might be busier I'm not fussed for a short trip. Also the trains can sometimes be so full that moving to the other end is all but impossible without alienating half of your fellow passengers.

When making a longer journey I will try to walk to the quieter coaches as long as I'm not rushing to make the train. Although having said this the overcrowding at St Pancras was so bad this weekend it wouldn't have made a difference what time or place you bordered at. EMR should have used some of Aventis Voyagers to move the crowds.

 

[Wolfie]

In fairness when using LUL services if people are only going a short distance they tend to get on at the closest door. I do this as although it might be busier I'm not fussed for a short trip. Also the trains can sometimes be so full that moving to the other end is all but impossible without alienating half of your fellow passengers.

When making a longer journey I will try to walk to the quieter coaches as long as I'm not rushing to make the train. Although having said this the overcrowding at St Pancras was so bad this weekend it wouldn't have made a difference what time or place you bordered at. EMR should have used some of Aventis Voyagers to move the crowds.

Re your last sentence: how? They are not the same as the 222s and EMR drivers/train managers are not trained on them. Are they even route-cleared?

 

[AndyMike]

It’s fair to say EMR TMs who were unfortunate enough to have been working over the bank holiday weekend have had an extremely unpleasant time of it. There has been unbelievable overcrowding on the intercity routes and clearly also on the local side. They’ve also had the inevitable bank holiday alcohol fuelled dreadful behaviour to contend with. Even early Saturday morning departures from London to Sheffield had fights breaking out and damage to trains from drunk football fans.

The arrangements for dealing with the hoards of Avanti passengers descending on the network were clearly sub optimal, especially the lack of effective crowd control at St Pancras. It doesn’t help that general behavioural standards seem to have plummeted even further over Covid (from a low starting point), to the point where many people now behave as if they’re literally feral, with absolutely no respect or even a single thought for anybody but themselves. It’s depressing to witness to be honest!

The point about a lack of effective crowd control at St Pancras is well-made, given how - in my view - it’s one of the worst stations of all when it comes to this. There’s simply insufficient space on the EMR concourse at busy times, and the crowding at the ticket gates can get deeply unpleasant. Another example of how badly the station’s redevelopment was planned.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 May 2022 ==

The problem was that it then meant all the people without reservations got to the train first, grabbed all the seats, and then the people with reservations got to board and all of them had to argue that someone was in their seat. It also has knock on consequences to those with connecting journeys who needed to be on the train, but we're unable to board because it was already full (on the train I caught they ended boarding about 5 minutes before departure time because it was full).

The better way of doing it would be to batch the reserved passengers, and then fill up with open tickets once the majority of those who had to catch a specific train were aboard.

The question must be asked: why is St Pancras particularly bad in this respect?

 

[Killingworth]

The point about a lack of effective crowd control at St Pancras is well-made, given how - in my view - it’s one of the worst stations of all when it comes to this. There’s simply insufficient space on the EMR concourse at busy times, and the crowding at the ticket gates can get deeply unpleasant. Another example of how badly the station’s redevelopment was planned.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 May 2022 ==


The question must be asked: why is St Pancras particularly bad in this respect?

Because the arrival of HS1 with the champagne bar and retail development gave new life to the old station. All the excitement was about travel to Europe. Sadly it pushed MML passengers up and out of the concourse and was inadequately future proofed for significant increases in domestic traffic.

When I first saw the plans I wondered why we MML users were being put in a temporary tacked on shed and thought surely there was more to come. There wasn't and won't be until HS2 comes to Euston, although it's unclear if that will be much help.

 

[43066]

The point about a lack of effective crowd control at St Pancras is well-made, given how - in my view - it’s one of the worst stations of all when it comes to this. There’s simply insufficient space on the EMR concourse at busy times, and the crowding at the ticket gates can get deeply unpleasant. Another example of how badly the station’s redevelopment was planned.

Presumably because at the time of the St. Pancras redevelopment it was expected that the international side would expand exponentially, with DB etc. introducing many more direct services from Germany and the near continent. Unfortunately that clearly hasn’t happened, and probably never will given journey times v. flying, with the result that the international platforms are massively under utilised and arguably something of a white elephant.

 

[STINT47]

Presumably because at the time of the St. Pancras redevelopment it was expected that the international side would expand exponentially, with DB etc. introducing many more direct services from Germany and the near continent. Unfortunately that clearly hasn’t happened, and probably never will given journey times v. flying, with the result that the international platforms are massively under utilised and arguably something of a white elephant.

I've always thought that Eurostar has one to many platforms whilst the MMLhas one to few.

Perhaps platform five can be converted to domestic use. You could infill at the concourse so people could walk across to it you then have barriers to stop people entering platform six or the original train shed.

Although the current situation is regrettable it's worth remembering that when the current design was developed MML only had two trains an hour and low passenger numbers. Four platforms and a small concourse would have seemed like plenty. Could the design team of anticipated the growth In passenger numbers? Yes but not planning for growth is hardly unique to this railway project.

In the short term a proper queuing system needs to be introduced, although installing this in such a small space will not be easy. Some clever railwaymen need to think outside of the box.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Presumably because at the time of the St. Pancras redevelopment it was expected that the international side would expand exponentially, with DB etc. introducing many more direct services from Germany and the near continent.

Except, of course, had that traffic taken off exponentially, some of that traffic would have been derived from MML passengers feeding into Euro services - ie there would have been increased demand on the MML. (Are there, in fact, any statistics as to how many MML and Thameslink passengers change for European services?)

Unfortunately that clearly hasn’t happened, and probably never will given journey times v. flying, with the result that the international platforms are massively under utilised and arguably something of a white elephant.

In that case, at what point is there a case for diverting some MML trains, eg the Sheffields, back into the far west platform under the original train shed, as I have read in here provision was originally made? (Sorry, I don't know the new platform numbers).

 

[Snow1964]

I've always thought that Eurostar has one to many platforms whilst the MMLhas one to few.

Perhaps platform five can be converted to domestic use. You could infill at the concourse so people could walk across to it you then have barriers to stop people entering platform six or the original train shed.

Although the current situation is regrettable it's worth remembering that when the current design was developed MML only had two trains an hour and low passenger numbers. Four platforms and a small concourse would have seemed like plenty. Could the design team of anticipated the growth In passenger numbers? Yes but not planning for growth is hardly unique to this railway project.

In the short term a proper queuing system needs to be introduced, although installing this in such a small space will not be easy. Some clever railwaymen need to think outside of the box.

Actually platform 5 could probably be made into 2 platforms if a crossover from a through line at outer end was built part way along (like Clapham Junction platform 2) would need an outer end platform extension to get 2 full length trains in, but looks like it would work looking at Google earth satellite view, as there is quite a long wide empty space between approaches to platform 5 and 6

I accept a platform a long walk isn’t ideal, but having the 6th one available for occasional use during times of disruption would make significant difference.

Really it shouldn’t be that difficult to unbolt the security fence from the floor, move it to between platform 5 and 6. So station has 5-6 Midland platforms and 5 International ones.

I think it would also be possible to squeeze a short platform in, on stilts to effectively make a platform zero, although it might need to share part of the headshunt of the goods yard as an approach. Although this would cost lot more so is likely to be non starter

 

[Dr Hoo]

Surely the existing four platforms (which can accommodate a 10-car longer distance service or a 12-car EMU) is ample for the maximum number of East Midland services that can be operated on the MML as a whole alongside Thameslink and freight.

 

[Starmill]

Surely the existing four platforms (which can accommodate a 10-car longer distance service or a 12-car EMU) is ample for the maximum number of East Midland services that can be operated on the MML as a whole alongside Thameslink and freight.

It certainly works on paper yes, but judging from the issues that have been raised upthread and also my own experiences of the station, it seems to me that circulating space is actually where the problems are? That is to say there's insufficient space outside of the gateline for multiple trains worth of passengers to wait, and certainly there's not a large amount of seating around there is there. In addition if more than one intercity train is boarding or arriving simultaneously there's not enough room for people to go through the ticket gates and along the platforms.

The question of whether there's physical room for more circulating space by moving retail units, or the gateline or other things around is unclear to me. I'm not sure there is a lot of scope for improvement in the current area?

It's a shame that there aren't lifts that run directly between the EMR concourse and the Thameslink concourse. But I can't see how there would be space to add them.

 

[AndyMike]

Presumably because at the time of the St. Pancras redevelopment it was expected that the international side would expand exponentially, with DB etc. introducing many more direct services from Germany and the near continent. Unfortunately that clearly hasn’t happened, and probably never will given journey times v. flying, with the result that the international platforms are massively under utilised and arguably something of a white elephant.

And this despite the fact that the terminal itself is far too small to cope with even existing passenger numbers at busy times, so thank goodness they didn’t skyrocket.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 May 2022 ==

I've always thought that Eurostar has one to many platforms whilst the MMLhas one to few.

Perhaps platform five can be converted to domestic use. You could infill at the concourse so people could walk across to it you then have barriers to stop people entering platform six or the original train shed.

Although the current situation is regrettable it's worth remembering that when the current design was developed MML only had two trains an hour and low passenger numbers. Four platforms and a small concourse would have seemed like plenty. Could the design team of anticipated the growth In passenger numbers? Yes but not planning for growth is hardly unique to this railway project.

In the short term a proper queuing system needs to be introduced, although installing this in such a small space will not be easy. Some clever railwaymen need to think outside of the box.

It also won’t be easy because there needs to be provision for people to sit down, and I’m not sure how you achieve that with a queuing system.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 May 2022 ==

It certainly works on paper yes, but judging from the issues that have been raised upthread and also my own experiences of the station, it seems to me that circulating space is actually where the problems are? That is to say there's insufficient space outside of the gateline for multiple trains worth of passengers to wait, and certainly there's not a large amount of seating around there is there. In addition if more than one intercity train is boarding or arriving simultaneously there's not enough room for people to go through the ticket gates and along the platforms.

The question of whether there's physical room for more circulating space by moving retail units, or the gateline or other things around is unclear to me. I'm not sure there is a lot of scope for improvement in the current area?

It's a shame that there aren't lifts that run directly between the EMR concourse and the Thameslink concourse. But I can't see how there would be space to add them.

Yes, I think this is a fair summation. There’s generally not long between the gates opening and the departure time, so getting on a busy train without a seat reservation can involve rather a desperate rush if you’re to find an unreserved place. It’s a rather stark contrast to, say, Paddington, where I’ve never felt there are similar issues. Possibly this is also a consequence of train capacity.

 

[BJames]

And this despite the fact that the terminal itself is far too small to cope with even existing passenger numbers at busy times, so thank goodness they didn’t skyrocket.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 May 2022 ==


It also won’t be easy because there needs to be provision for people to sit down, and I’m not sure how you achieve that with a queuing system.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 May 2022 ==


Yes, I think this is a fair summation. There’s generally not long between the gates opening and the departure time, so getting on a busy train without a seat reservation can involve rather a desperate rush if you’re to find an unreserved place. It’s a rather stark contrast to, say, Paddington, where I’ve never felt there are similar issues. Possibly this is also a consequence of train capacity.

Sometimes the xx:02/xx:05 or xx:32/xx:35 Sheffield and Nottingham services have their platforms boarded at the exact same time, leading to an even greater rush (and confusion) from passengers - this happened last time I was there and it's very frustrating.

 

[43066]

Except, of course, had that traffic taken off exponentially, some of that traffic would have been derived from MML passengers feeding into Euro services - ie there would have been increased demand on the MML. (Are there, in fact, any statistics as to how many MML and Thameslink passengers change for European services?)

Yes that’s true and the fact the international traffic hasn’t lived to expectations only exposes that all the more. It probably seemed like a sensible idea at the time but were people from the East Midlands really ever going to use international services from London when they could just jump onto an easyjet flight from Luton which will cost half as much and probably take a third of the time?

I’m sure there must be statistics somewhere, agreed it would be interesting to know. My gut instinct would be “very few”.

In that case, at what point is there a case for diverting some MML trains, eg the Sheffields, back into the far west platform under the original train shed, as I have read in here provision was originally made? (Sorry, I don't know the new platform numbers).

There’s a bi-di spur linking the MML with CTRL, so would likely need some quite substantial remodelling of the approach to make it workable. Also the international platforms are segregated for border control reasons so awkward to access, albeit they seemed to get around this at Ashford International when Eurostars stopped there.

I have no idea at what point that would be considered. Logically it will happen eventually if we see further sustained growth in MML passenger numbers and Eurostar continues to plateau.

 

[Jozhua]

Recently on my business trip to London, the train was full + standing both ways. 5 car 222 down (peak hour 7am train) and 5 car 180 back (peak hour 5:30pm train). The 5 car came all the way from Lincoln before picking up at Nottingham!

Perhaps time the diagrams so the longer units are doing the peak pickups from London. That said, the EMR fleet doesn't have a huge amount of flexibility in this regard.

Perhaps this belongs in speculative, but:
-Use 222 cab cars as 2/3 car units for 'long distance' regional, then utilise middle cars to lengthen trains? I would like to see some 222 crowdbusters stay on the MML, even with the new Hitachi fleet.

Reserved seats should help, in theory. My observations on XC, TPE and LNER suggest a very high proportion of reserved seats are never taken up - but that's yet another story.

In this case, reserved seats decrease train capacity. I've walked past many seats on XC marked as being reserved from a couple of stops after, just to find they never get occupied.

Trains aren't aeroplanes, making stops mid journey fundamentally changes the dynamics. Plus, you have a mixture of people booking in advance, as well as directly before departure, even on long distance routes.

In my opinion, reserved seats are a perk you should pay for. Certainly shouldn't have them be mandatory on certain advance fares. All this does is fill up the train with "reservations" which aren't used 50% of the time. I do it all the time - find a more convenient seat and just sit in that, the majority of the time I don't use my reserved seat, even if I have one.

In terms of spreading people throughout the train:
-Often on TPE Manchester to Cleethorpes, my reserved seat ends up being in the part of the train nearest the entrance at Piccadilly, so actively worsens the spread of passengers throughout the train.
-This is where some legwork has to be done by announcements and guards to encourage people to move to the other units. Frequent travellers eventually learn this anyway.
-Station boards can help point people towards quieter parts of the train.
-Stations need to adapt their flows in the longer term to better spread passengers along a train.

 

[QSK19]

I would like to see some 222 crowdbusters stay on the MML, even with the new Hitachi fleet.

I think this the basis of why, according to discussion on here and WNXX, the 180s could be staying longer. Either that or the 33 810s on order are insufficient and the 180s would bring the fleet up to a sufficient number instead of being crowd busters. Either way, 222s probably wouldn’t be retained unless they could be extended on a “peppercorn” lease (ie if the ROSCO thought there was no prospect of them finding another home and hence would scrap them).

 

[43055]

Recently on my business trip to London, the train was full + standing both ways. 5 car 222 down (peak hour 7am train) and 5 car 180 back (peak hour 5:30pm train). The 5 car came all the way from Lincoln before picking up at Nottingham!

Perhaps time the diagrams so the longer units are doing the peak pickups from London. That said, the EMR fleet doesn't have a huge amount of flexibility in this regard.

You may be in luck as there are paths for both Lincoln starts to have attachments at Nottingham at the timetable change meaning both will be 10 car from Nottingham. The 0749 from Nottingham looks like it remains a 10 car set all day working the 1002 to Sheffield, 1237 return, 1602 to Sheffield, 1837 return, 2105 Nottingham (that's if the platform numbers on RTT is correct).

 

[Jozhua]

I think this the basis of why, according to discussion on here and WNXX, the 180s could be staying longer. Either that or the 33 810s on order are insufficient and the 180s would bring the fleet up to a sufficient number instead of being crowd busters. Either way, 222s probably wouldn’t be retained unless they could be extended on a “peppercorn” lease (ie if the ROSCO thought there was no prospect of them finding another home and hence would scrap them).

That makes sense - at the moment scrapping perfectly good DMUs would be sacrilege, considering the severity of the shortage of them!

I think the likely home for them is XC, until HS2 arrives - then that'll be around the right time for scrapping.

You may be in luck as there are paths for both Lincoln starts to have attachments at Nottingham at the timetable change meaning both will be 10 car from Nottingham. The 0749 from Nottingham looks like it remains a 10 car set all day working the 1002 to Sheffield, 1237 return, 1602 to Sheffield, 1837 return, 2105 Nottingham (that's if the platform numbers on RTT is correct).

That makes a lot of sense - I definitely see the value in those Lincoln services, they give some pretty rural areas a direct service to London also, without compromising on express MML operations.

 

[paul1609]

Yes that’s true and the fact the international traffic hasn’t lived to expectations only exposes that all the more. It probably seemed like a sensible idea at the time but were people from the East Midlands really ever going to use international services from London when they could just jump onto an easyjet flight from Luton which will cost half as much and probably take a third of the time?

I’m sure there must be statistics somewhere, agreed it would be interesting to know. My gut instinct would be “very few”.



There’s a bi-di spur linking the MML with CTRL, so would likely need some quite substantial remodelling of the approach to make it workable. Also the international platforms are segregated for border control reasons so awkward to access, albeit they seemed to get around this at Ashford International when Eurostars stopped there.

I have no idea at what point that would be considered. Logically it will happen eventually if we see further sustained growth in MML passenger numbers and Eurostar continues to plateau.

At Ashford International platforms 3 and 4 are reserved for Eurostar passenger use only. They are a different height and clearance to accommodate UIC stock they can only be used by domestic stock in an emergency.
When class 395s used the International platforms at Stratford International during the Olympics the platforms were temporarily rebuilt with Plyboard to the UK specification.
The domestic high speed platforms deal with far more passengers per hour in the Peak with 12 coach trains arriving at the 3 platforms and with a smaller concourse.
The obvious solution is to extend some Thameslink services to Corby, (its 3 miles further than Peterborough) and free up the corbys service platform space upstairs.

 

[BJames]

I was on 20:05 STP-NOT tonight. I was in First Class but it was incredibly busy in standard, wasn't expecting it - gates were shut for boarding 8 minutes before the train departed as it had reached capacity - not sure I've had this happen before at St Pancras when there isn't even any disruption - but I think it was probably the right call as all the seats were taken, vestibules and aisles full and standing from what I could see.

This was the 4-car 180 (180110?) - TM said that it was usually 5 cars and apologised a few times for the travelling conditions - I asked later on and he said that 5 cars was usually just about manageable for this service but 4 cars has been proving unworkable recently. Is this carriage being repaired and if so when is it being reinstated?

Also - both 20:02 to Sheffield and 20:05 Nottingham had platforms displayed at exactly the same time at St Pancras - caused a huge (and unnecessary) surge forward - surely they could have waited a couple of minutes to display the Nottingham departure?

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

I was on 20:05 STP-NOT tonight. I was in First Class but it was incredibly busy in standard, wasn't expecting it - gates were shut for boarding 8 minutes before the train departed as it had reached capacity - not sure I've had this happen before at St Pancras when there isn't even any disruption - but I think it was probably the right call as all the seats were taken, vestibules and aisles full and standing from what I could see.

This was the 4-car 180 (180110?) - TM said that it was usually 5 cars and apologised a few times for the travelling conditions - I asked later on and he said that 5 cars was usually just about manageable for this service but 4 cars has been proving unworkable recently. Is this carriage being repaired and if so when is it being reinstated?

Also - both 20:02 to Sheffield and 20:05 Nottingham had platforms displayed at exactly the same time at St Pancras - caused a huge (and unnecessary) surge forward - surely they could have waited a couple of minutes to display the Nottingham departure?

I believe the 5th '180' carriage has been scrapped because of corrosion.

 

[liamf656]

This was the 4-car 180 (180110?) - TM said that it was usually 5 cars and apologised a few times for the travelling conditions - I asked later on and he said that 5 cars was usually just about manageable for this service but 4 cars has been proving unworkable recently. Is this carriage being repaired and if so when is it being reinstated?

It’s having corrosion repairs done at Doncaster currently, although as far as I know there’s no timeframe for when it’ll return

 

[43055]

I was on 20:05 STP-NOT tonight. I was in First Class but it was incredibly busy in standard, wasn't expecting it - gates were shut for boarding 8 minutes before the train departed as it had reached capacity - not sure I've had this happen before at St Pancras when there isn't even any disruption - but I think it was probably the right call as all the seats were taken, vestibules and aisles full and standing from what I could see.

This was the 4-car 180 (180110?) - TM said that it was usually 5 cars and apologised a few times for the travelling conditions - I asked later on and he said that 5 cars was usually just about manageable for this service but 4 cars has been proving unworkable recently. Is this carriage being repaired and if so when is it being reinstated?

Also - both 20:02 to Sheffield and 20:05 Nottingham had platforms displayed at exactly the same time at St Pancras - caused a huge (and unnecessary) surge forward - surely they could have waited a couple of minutes to display the Nottingham departure?

180110 seems to be out most days. Maybe with the missing coach it has become the most reliable of the EMR 180's!

 

[Jozhua]

There are always a few 222s and a 180 stabled at Derby - guessing for routine maintenance, but usually no-one out on them when I go past!

The new Hitachi fleet can't come soon enough!

London bound travel seems to have bounced back, at least for long distance business and leisure. I guess while regular commuters are WFH 1/2 days per week, lots of people who came on business once every week or two, or come for a city break, are going pretty much on their regular schedules.