May 2023 changes

[Goldfish62]

Wouldn’t counting the total seats be the best method, since it accounts for different carriage formations and total services in that day?

Even that has its issues.

For example, Cross Country now runs (mostly) double units on the very busy Reading - Birmingham corridor, but only 50% of the previous frequency.

So, same-ish capacity, but hourly instead of half hourly. That means for walk-up passengers at any particular point in time that you want to travel and leave your origin / turn up at the station randomly the average scheduled wait time is 30 min. Previously it was 15 min. That's a significant worsening of the service.

 

[Taunton]

although the trend is towards fewer longer trains.

This is unfortunate, as one of the upsides of service changes in the last generation has been the development of better frequencies. For business trips from London, even to places as far away as Manchester or Newcastle, the return at the end of the day has changed to turn-up-and-go, which in itself adds considerably to demand and usage. Bear in mind that competitor the car is infinitely turn-up-and-go. I do find myself turning up at these return departure points without even having looked at the timetable.

Of course, having provided Metro-like frequencies, the revenue team went the opposite way, with ticketing encouraging advance purchase for just one of the trains provided. The fools.

 

[Starmill]

Will there be cuts on Scotrail routes or?

ScotRail already cut back significantly in May of this year so they're relatively well protected from further losses.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Nov 2022 ==

I really hope the Lime Street to Warrington Bank Quay service is reinstated...one train per hour from St Helens Junction is seriously taking the Michael.

Sadly I think that one is consigned to history. All part of the new round of Conservative cuts.

 

[Bald Rick]

How is the percentage calculated? Is it station calls? Number of diagrams per day? Number of headcodes?
What I'm basically asking is if a service now stops short of its original destination or has less carriages than before will that show up in that statistic?

This is number of passenger services (or paths) in the timetable. Cardiff QS - Cardiff Bay counts the same as London - Inverness. If a service stops short of its destination in the 2019 timetable, or has fewer carriages, that does not bear out in the statistics. Although the converse applies, obviously, and there is much of that as we know, especially longer trains.

What is the percentage if you exclude Elizabeth Line services? Are those figures the absolute numbers of trains or the train miles (or passenger vehicle miles)?

I also suspect that there's a substantial variation by area hidden amongst those averages. Large parts of the network outside London are running on half their pre-Covid frequencies and seem to have no prospect of improvement.

Elizabeth Line is running 400 more passenger services a day than in 2019, the national effect of that is +1.7%.

Wouldn’t counting the total seats be the best method, since it accounts for different carriage formations and total services in that day?

Yes this would be the best measure of capacity, but is much more difficult to do than a service count.

 

[DelW]

Its a very interesting issue as I read a great deal about the need for higher speeds but I think that the key issue is generalised journey train where waiting times and issues with cancelled trains and missed connections are far more important than speed (waiting time is counted at about double in train time). The best approach to reducing journey time is therefore increasing frequency and reducing cancellations rather than major infrastructure schemes. That said more trains generally means lower punctuality so you do need to spend money on eliminating bottlenecks. The Swiss, as anyone who has been there knows, are very good on this.

This is one of the big issues for me. Many of the current timetables are essentially the Covid "emergency" timetables from 2020, when TOCs each chopped services from their own schedules apparently without reference to their neighbours. So for instance, where there had been (say) two connections every hour, one TOC cut the train on one side of the hour and their neighbour cut the train on the other side of the hour, so breaking both connections.

I've almost given up using the railway for anything other than simple point to point journeys on one train - any trip involving connections is simply too slow and/or unreliable, so I've switched back to taking the car. It's also reminded me how much quicker and more flexible that is for many journeys, and that it doesn't suddenly decide to go on strike after I've already booked my accommodation.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which is why these cuts would be a key opportunity to recast and introduce a proper connectional Takt. DB regional services are often 0.5tph but connections aren't painful, they all match up.

 

[Llandudno]

Which is why these cuts would be a key opportunity to recast and introduce a proper connectional Takt. DB regional services are often 0.5tph but connections aren't painful, they all match up.

But do they wait for connections?

XC don’t seem to bother waiting for other XC connections at New Street, so rather than pre Covid wait for up to 30 minutes for the next train it is now up to 60 minutes - at least there is a shiny new Wetherspoons to frequent at New Street!

 

[JonathanH]

XC don’t seem to bother waiting for other XC connections at New Street

Neither could they ever do so unless a lot fewer trains ran. It is all very well other posters suggesting Takt connections but either everything has to run to time or a lot fewer trains need to run as the infrastructure doesn't exist for anything else.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Neither could they ever do so unless a lot fewer trains ran. It is all very well other posters suggesting Takt connections but either everything has to run to time or a lot fewer trains need to run as the infrastructure doesn't exist for anything else.

We are talking about cuts are we not?

 

[JonathanH]

We are talking about cuts are we not?

Yes, we are. Those cuts though still aren't such that reliable connections will exist and be held at every station.

 

[class717]

But do they wait for connections?

XC don’t seem to bother waiting for other XC connections at New Street, so rather than pre Covid wait for up to 30 minutes for the next train it is now up to 60 minutes - at least there is a shiny new Wetherspoons to frequent at New Street!

GTR are the worst for connections at Finsbury Park

 

[43074]

Which is why these cuts would be a key opportunity to recast and introduce a proper connectional Takt. DB regional services are often 0.5tph but connections aren't painful, they all match up.

I do agree but can't see there being the appetite in the industry for such a wholesale rewrite that a proper Takt would require, it would be very hard to implement in stages which is inevitably how it would be done.

It has also taken a decade and counting to recast the ECML and there is still no implementation date in sight (it took a similar amount of time to write the Swiss timetable when that was first introduced), so I dread to think how long it would take to write a new national timetable!

 

[Watershed]

Neither could they ever do so unless a lot fewer trains ran. It is all very well other posters suggesting Takt connections but either everything has to run to time or a lot fewer trains need to run as the infrastructure doesn't exist for anything else.

This is purely a question of attitude. In a well-designed Takt timetable, delays of (say) up to 5 mins waiting for connections can be absorbed. The May TT is likely to see a further reduction in services, thus eliminating any argument that the line is "too busy".

 

[Bald Rick]

This is purely a question of attitude. In a well-designed Takt timetable, delays of (say) up to 5 mins waiting for connections can be absorbed. The May TT is likely to see a further reduction in services, thus eliminating any argument that the line is "too busy".

I wouldn’t say ‘eliminating’.

 

[Watershed]

I wouldn’t say ‘eliminating’.

Well I suppose that's a matter of interpretation. But there are other lines out there with more than the Stour Valley's 8tph, which can absorb delays better.

It's unfortunate that despite permanent frequency reductions in the Dec WCML rewrite (and even further in May), the same fundamental problems remain embedded into the timetable structure. See also Castlefield...

 

[Ex-controller]

ScotRail already cut back significantly in May of this year so they're relatively well protected from further losses.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Nov 2022 ==

ScotRail is a strange one. A lot of commuter routes around Glasgow and Edinburgh were reduced, some of which now have frankly appalling day time frequencies, yet have recently introduced 2tph between Glasgow and Dundee between 0700 and 1900 which appears to me to be a significant over provision.

And don’t get me started on the random provision of fast services on the Ayrshire and Inverclyde routes which at times are provided counter to the main passenger flow, but not in harmony with it. No wonder trains are running in service with seats empty.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I think for more pre covid services to be restored, you will have to wait for either a change in government and even then no guarantee that that will cause that, or the Rail industry's finances to recover, or for the industry to reduce its costs so there is more money to run services, but quite frankly that could take over 10 years for the industry to get into that position.

The industry seems largely only capable of removing services to deal with cost pressures rather than collect revenue from the millions of journeys that are being done for nought. Scrapping franchises will be seen as a bad move no incentive for TOCs to chase after every penny anymore with DfT just picking up the tab.

Also what is the industry doing collectively to address the bureaucracy and standards that drive much of the costs in the first place. Nothing as we have no overall leadership and with GBR parked it now looks like all we've got to look forward is more decline.

 

[philosopher]

This is purely a question of attitude. In a well-designed Takt timetable, delays of (say) up to 5 mins waiting for connections can be absorbed. The May TT is likely to see a further reduction in services, thus eliminating any argument that the line is "too busy".

Would implementing a Takt timetable would involve a rewrite of all the train timetables in the UK? If so, this would be a massive undertaking and I can’t see it being implemented soon. That said it may be a good idea to implement in the medium terms as in a few years down the line.

 

[Goldfish62]

The industry seems largely only capable of removing services to deal with cost pressures rather than collect revenue from the millions of journeys that are being done for nought. Scrapping franchises will be seen as a bad move no incentive for TOCs to chase after every penny anymore with DfT just picking up the tab.

Also what is the industry doing collectively to address the bureaucracy and standards that drive much of the costs in the first place. Nothing as we have no overall leadership and with GBR parked it now looks like all we've got to look forward is more decline.

Completely agree.

The lack of incentive to collect revenue is already showing. For example, on strike days hundreds of trains are run, but we're told not to use them (SWR for good measure extend this message to include the whole of the next day after a strike).

The TOCs simply don't care enough about getting people onto trains, let alone collecting fares from them. The system proposed under GBR will just imbed this further.

 

[Basil Jet]

Would implementing a Takt timetable would involve a rewrite of all the train timetables in the UK? If so, this would be a massive undertaking and I can’t see it being implemented soon. That said it may be a good idea to implement in the medium terms as in a few years down the line.

After the Takt timetable had been designed, various slow spots and bottlenecks would be identified that had to be improved before it could be introduced, so I would expect it to be introduced area by area after the work was completed.

Incidentally, http://www.networkrail.co.uk/long-term-planning-process/improving-connectivity.pdf used to contain a proposal to introduce a Takt timetable across Anglia, but it's been removed from the site

 

[Goldfish62]

if you mean what % of the 2019 timetable is running now (in terms of train services), and what % will be running from the December 2022 timetable change….

Now its’s around 90%

From Dec 22 it’s about 92%.

The analysis in Modern Railways comparing Q1 (April-June) 2022 to Q1 2019 puts train km at 81% inc Elizabeth line.

This of course cuts across the May TT changes, but I can't imagine it alters the train km that much.

A lot more interesting data in the article as well.

 

[Goldfish62]

I’d have thought, given the general tone of other discussions, it’s equally likely May 2023 will have less services than now.

That's a pertinent comment.

I'm just reading Railtalk in Modern Railways and in discussing the apparent 10% cut in cost that the DfT is demanding for the next financial year starting in April examples of cuts that operators are considering are quoted as including:

...withdrawing rolling stock, running shorter formations or even withdrawing branch line services in favour of bus replacement. This is not to say that any of these proposals will come to pass, but the mood music suggests the May 2023 timetable change could be a crunch moment for the railways.

 

[GN Boy]

GTR are the worst for connections at Finsbury Park

Couldn’t agree more. The Inner and Outer services are really badly timed. Quite often we are ready to depart, to then view a train on the DOO monitors pull up along side, full of passengers ready to risk life and limb to transfer trains.

 

[Kite159]

Completely agree.

The lack of incentive to collect revenue is already showing. For example, on strike days hundreds of trains are run, but we're told not to use them (SWR for good measure extend this message to include the whole of the next day after a strike).

The TOCs simply don't care enough about getting people onto trains, let alone collecting fares from them. The system proposed under GBR will just imbed this further.

Some TOCs get paid regardless if there is 10 passengers travelling or 100 passengers.

Some might have revenue protection bonuses within their contracts.

 

[Goldfish62]

Some TOCs get paid regardless if there is 10 passengers travelling or 100 passengers.

That's exactly my point.

 

[Bald Rick]

The analysis in Modern Railways comparing Q1 (April-June) 2022 to Q1 2019 puts train km at 81% inc Elizabeth line.

The same article mentions that vehicle km was 89%.

There was an uplift in services in May 22, so the proportions have subsequently increased.

 

[Class 170101]

Of course, having provided Metro-like frequencies, the revenue team went the opposite way, with ticketing encouraging advance purchase for just one of the trains provided. The fools.

This was because revenue was divided up into pots so certain flows an operator only got a relatively small share of the overall pot, as where as an advance fare on valid on that train only meant the operator got virtually 100% of the fare income.

 

[181]

Many of the current timetables are essentially the Covid "emergency" timetables from 2020, when TOCs each chopped services from their own schedules apparently without reference to their neighbours. So for instance, where there had been (say) two connections every hour, one TOC cut the train on one side of the hour and their neighbour cut the train on the other side of the hour, so breaking both connections.

It can happen within the same TOC too, e.g. the 59-minute connections at Birmingham resulting from XC's withdrawing the Newcastle-Reading and Manchester(?)-Bristol(?) trains. All the more reason why, if we're going to have fewer trains, we need timetables designed for the lower frequency rather than high-frequency timetables with trains missing.

 

[Llandudno]

It can happen within the same TOC too, e.g. the 59-minute connections at Birmingham resulting from XC's withdrawing the Newcastle-Reading and Manchester(?)-Bristol(?) trains. All the more reason why, if we're going to have fewer trains, we need timetables designed for the lower frequency rather than high-frequency timetables with trains missing.

Perhaps these dreadful connections encouraged Wetherspoons to open a pub in New Street station..!

 

[Alfie1014]

Incidentally, http://www.networkrail.co.uk/long-term-planning-process/improving-connectivity.pdf used to contain a proposal to introduce a Takt timetable across Anglia, but it's been removed from the site

That is probably because it was bonkers and didn’t stand up to any proper scrutiny!