Modern Railways: LNER and compulsory reservations

[Journeyman]

They'll fly instead since it's faster and just as much hassle if they do introduce compulsory reservations.
The whole reason why people get the train from Edinburgh to London and vice versa, is for flexibility not price or speed. Because LNER can't compete with easyJet with that.

Err, no. I use both trains and planes for travel between Edinburgh and work in Kent. Sometimes I'll fly, sometimes I'll get the train, depending on when I need to travel and what the costs are. I'll always use advances on the train, so flexibility isn't an issue. And with check in and travel to/from airports, there's not much in it journey time wise.

 

[DH1Commuter]

My working day can finish any time between 1700 and 2200hrs. I am a season-ticket holder and, pre-covid, valued the fact that I have the flexibility to jump on the first train, whichever operator, was going to get me home. Compulsory reservations would limit this flexibility (particularly as you can only book 2x reservations a day, so if I missed my first I would not be able to use another).

If rail wants to kill a large part of its market, this is a good way to do so.

 

[WestRiding]

So you'll need a reservation for Wakefield Westgate to Leeds, or other similar journeys within West Yorkshire.... Hope they go bust if they push this through.

 

[Journeyman]

So you'll need a reservation for Wakefield Westgate to Leeds, or other similar journeys within West Yorkshire.... Hope they go bust if they push this through.

They've already gone bust several times!

 

[py_megapixel]

I would be entirely happy with this if machines could be installed on stations which operate as follows:

• Scan ticket (of any type) at any point on day of travel up to a few minutes before departure
• Select desired routing from a list of suitable valid ones
  • This should include those involving connections, with a checkbox to also show routings which are not the most efficient but still permitted, and should permit only reserving part of the journey, to allow breaking of the journey
• Scroll through coaches and select desired seat
  • There should be an option to only reserve part of the journey
• Machine prints a reservation ticket

 

[Master29]

On some areas of the network it would be a good idea quite frankly, especially with some of GWR's London West of England trains, during the holiday season for example.

 

[PeterC]

Why on earth would I, or the many other passengers with expensive open return tickets, want to throw away the ability to arrive at the station at the end of a busy day in London, see the previous train to the one you planned to get is still at the platform 10 minutes after it's scheduled departure, and jump on it?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Feb 2021 ==


As long as you have the seat you booked, in what way would you have a worse travel experience? That's the only thing you've paid for, not the right to have an empty train.

The underlying pricing model is back to front. The ticket which does not guarantee a seat and leaves you at risk of standing should be the cheap one.

 

[Class 170101]

The underlying pricing model is back to front. The ticket which does not guarantee a seat and leaves you at risk of standing should be the cheap one.

I would argue that the price of flexibility is the non-guarantee of a seat because you can wait for another train that might have a seat. With an Advance Purchase Ticket you have to be on that train so why not guarantee a seat with it.

 

[43096]

I would argue that the price of flexibility is the non-guarantee of a seat because you can wait for another train that might have a seat. With an Advance Purchase Ticket you have to be on that train so why not guarantee a seat with it.

Why should having a ticket to travel be a guarantee if a seat? It’s not an airline.

 

[Taunton]

And with check in and travel to/from airports, there's not much in it journey time wise.

One wonders why "travel to/from airport" is always included in a (railwayman's) assessment of comparative travel, but not of the train trip. If you are going to Kent it will notably be quicker (depending on what part of Kent) to get to either the City Airport or Gatwick than it is to Kings Cross. Same for other elements.

 

[Clip]

One wonders why "travel to/from airport" is always included in a (railwayman's) assessment of comparative travel, but not of the train trip. If you are going to Kent it will notably be quicker (depending on what part of Kent) to get to either the City Airport or Gatwick than it is to Kings Cross. Same for other elements.

Surely with Gatwaick you have to be there some time before hand to pass through any checks and the place can be busy druing normal times cant it? At least with a train, you can, in theory, get there 5 minutes before hand and get on your train - you cant do that with air travel

 

[Roast Veg]

Why should having a ticket to travel be a guarantee if a seat? It’s not an airline.

Try telling LNER that. Somebody should remind them that they're supposed to be more like a "Bus for Everyone, Everyday" than an "Airline for the Rich, Once a Year".

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why should having a ticket to travel be a guarantee if a seat? It’s not an airline.

Because travelling a long distance standing is pretty rubbish, TBH.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Feb 2021 ==

Try telling LNER that. Somebody should remind them that they're supposed to be more like a "Bus for Everyone, Everyday" than an "Airline for the Rich, Once a Year".

Compulsory reservations and fare policy are two different things.

 

[Roast Veg]

Compulsory reservations and fare policy are two different things.

If they want to increase yield while introducing compulsory reservations it must come with fare increases, surely? If anyone thinks that it's the answer to making people travel at less busy times then they are sorely mistaken.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If they want to increase yield while introducing compulsory reservations it must come with fare increases, surely?

I think their argument is that the risk of standing/being on an overcrowded train is enough of an off-putter that they will attract more business (onto trains that weren't full otherwise) even though some trains will carry rather fewer passengers than they do now.

They might well want higher fares too, but that doesn't require compulsory reservations. The two are independent. Indeed, some people may end up paying less with compulsory reservations, as you would just buy the current Advance fare for any given journey and change it if necessary, because a "walk up" fare would carry no real advantage, particularly if the DfT's view to no change fee on Advance tickets persists.

 

[Watershed]

Compulsory reservations and fare policy are two different things.

They are two sides of the same coin in reality. As soon as you have compulsory reservations it's all too easy to sneakily phase out flexible tickets.

Because travelling a long distance standing is pretty rubbish, TBH.

Indeed it is, but even more rubbish is being stuck for hours (possibly days) with no trains that have available seats. As per the situation described in post #235.

The only way that compulsory reservations won't make times of high demand even worse by reducing capacity, is if standing reservations are issued. But of course people would still complain then, probably at "being misled" because "a ticket entitles me to a seat".

There is no pleasing some people and the majority of passengers should not be beholden to an inflexible system for the benefit of an unreasonable minority.

 

[Journeyman]

One wonders why "travel to/from airport" is always included in a (railwayman's) assessment of comparative travel, but not of the train trip. If you are going to Kent it will notably be quicker (depending on what part of Kent) to get to either the City Airport or Gatwick than it is to Kings Cross. Same for other elements.

It depends how fine you want to cut it going through the airport, and I'm the sort of person who shows up the day before.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They are two sides of the same coin in reality. As soon as you have compulsory reservations it's all too easy to sneakily phase out flexible tickets.

Well, yes, because no ticket is flexible per-se in that context. But that doesn't mean you can't say cap the Advance fare on services between 1000 and 1630 and after 1900 at the level of the present Off Peak Single.

They are related, but they are not inseparably linked.

 

[Clip]

There is no pleasing some people and the majority of passengers should not be beholden to an inflexible system for the benefit of an unreasonable minority.

Is the 'unreasonable minority' you mention those who travel to/form KX to place like Newcastle and Edinburgh? Im pretty sure the long distance passengers are the Majority outside of the peaks of Peterborough and Stevenage and they are the ones that this system works for by getting them a seat for a much longer journey

 

[Journeyman]

Is the 'unreasonable minority' you mention those who travel to/form KX to place like Newcastle and Edinburgh? Im pretty sure the long distance passengers are the Majority outside of the peaks of Peterborough and Stevenage and they are the ones that this system works for by getting them a seat for a much longer journey

For all those complaining that the railway isn't an airline, for very long journeys it effectively is, and I'd love to know the percentage of Anglo-Scottish journeys done on Advance tickets. I suspect it's very high. Personally I never use anything else.

 

[Watershed]

Is the 'unreasonable minority' you mention those who travel to/form KX to place like Newcastle and Edinburgh? Im pretty sure the long distance passengers are the Majority outside of the peaks of Peterborough and Stevenage and they are the ones that this system works for by getting them a seat for a much longer journey

You imply all Newcastle/Edinburgh passengers want compulsory reservations. I am sure they, as with all passengers, would quite like a guaranteed seat.

But I don't think many of them would be in favour of compulsory reservations if they were told they face being unable to travel at busy times of year (post #235 refers), and that it would still be a free for all during disruption.

As for the minority that would still think compulsory reservations are a good idea, I am sure they would be outnumbered by the number of inconvenienced passengers making local journeys that are only served by IC services.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Feb 2021 ==

For all those complaining that the railway isn't an airline, for very long journeys it effectively is, and I'd love to know the percentage of Anglo-Scottish journeys done on Advance tickets. I suspect it's very high. Personally I never use anything else.

And that's fine and dandy if you're talking about non-stop trains like the Flying Scotsman. But as it happens, LNER services are the only option for many local journeys.

Therefore it is unreasonable to make them reservation compulsory without introducing a decent alternative for local journeys - be that additional services or unreserved coaches - in which case, why bother at all?

 

[Bletchleyite]

As for the minority that would still think compulsory reservations are a good idea, I am sure they would be outnumbered by the number of inconvenienced passengers making local journeys that are only served by IC services.

Do you reckon? I reckon the number of people making local journeys on IC services is tiny compared to the number of people making what you'd call IC journeys.

There is possibly one exception to that - Reading commuters - but that is a slightly different issue due to the large volume of them, and at least London-bound there wouldn't be much lost by just allowing them to pile on inbound (i.e. treating the "IC" as a "RE" after Reading towards London only, as DB would do it), because it's the last stop anyway, and going home the peak is more spread out anyway. Outbound last-minute standby reservations could be issued when the seats aren't taken by long-distance passengers.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Do you reckon? I reckon the number of people making local journeys on IC services is tiny compared to the number of people making what you'd call IC journeys.

There is possibly one exception to that - Reading commuters - but that is a slightly different issue, and at least London-bound there wouldn't be much lost by just allowing them to pile on inbound (i.e. treating the "IC" as a "RE" after Reading towards London only, as DB would do it), because it's the last stop anyway, and going home the peak is more spread out anyway.

Nortumberland is a good example, and generally north east of England. Leeds to Doncaster I would also class as local, you might say regional and fine but I wouldn't say compulsory reservations for regional services is any good either.

Can't disagree more with this idea. The systems that use it on the continent are a pain.

 

[Wolfie]

But if people go away for the weekend, they don't want to have to cut it short (by whatever amount) because that suits the railways - and on a Sunday afternoon / evening it's quite likely that all the trains will be just as busy anyway.

And the following weekend is likely to be similar if it's a normal weekend. If it's the easter weekend, they will be going then because going away at Easter, with more days off, is what people do.

It basically sounds like you are expecting people to inconvenience themselves in order to suit the railways - and they mostly won't want to do that, and why should they?

If it becomes too much of an inconvenience to use the railways lots more people will be questioning why the taxpayer should fund them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Feb 2021 ==

Do you reckon? I reckon the number of people making local journeys on IC services is tiny compared to the number of people making what you'd call IC journeys.

There is possibly one exception to that - Reading commuters - but that is a slightly different issue due to the large volume of them, and at least London-bound there wouldn't be much lost by just allowing them to pile on inbound (i.e. treating the "IC" as a "RE" after Reading towards London only, as DB would do it), because it's the last stop anyway, and going home the peak is more spread out anyway. Outbound last-minute standby reservations could be issued when the seats aren't taken by long-distance passengers.

In the West Midlands you are far from correct. Loads of people use "IC" services to travel between Coventry, Birmingham and Wolverhampton.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In the West Midlands you are far from correct. Loads of people use "IC" services to travel between Coventry, Birmingham and Wolverhampton.

I would still take the view that it still won't exceed the numbers who are using those trains for "proper" InterCity journeys rather than local ones, though I'd admit that the Birmingham service is likely to be the most blurred because it's not really a proper InterCity service anyway due to its short length.

Certainly on the Manchesters the number doing local journeys will be far exceeded by those travelling from MKC or Euston to Crewe/Stoke or points north.

 

[cactustwirly]

Is the 'unreasonable minority' you mention those who travel to/form KX to place like Newcastle and Edinburgh? Im pretty sure the long distance passengers are the Majority outside of the peaks of Peterborough and Stevenage and they are the ones that this system works for by getting them a seat for a much longer journey

How many people are actually traveling all way from KGX to Edinburgh?
Most people traveling to Edinburgh would fly because it's cheaper and quicker. I'd be surprised if LNER advances are cheaper than easyJet.

 

[greyman42]

Because travelling a long distance standing is pretty rubbish, TBH.

Then reserve a seat.

 

[Watershed]

Do you reckon? I reckon the number of people making local journeys on IC services is tiny compared to the number of people making what you'd call IC journeys.

I don't doubt that the number of long-distance passengers overall exceeds the number of local passengers.

But the number of inconvenienced local passengers will significantly exceed the small number of long-distance passengers who would prefer a reservation compulsory policy - in full knowledge of its significant disadvantages.

There is no realistic alternative that can provide the same levels of commuting capacity as an IC225/Azuma/Pendolino offers into Leeds/Birmingham/Manchester. Therefore the idea should be dead in the water.

 

[Journeyman]

How many people are actually traveling all way from KGX to Edinburgh?
Most people traveling to Edinburgh would fly because it's cheaper and quicker. I'd be surprised if LNER advances are cheaper than easyJet.

I do it regularly, and the price often compares pretty well. Easyjet's cheapest fares tend to be to Luton, which is useless for where I normally travel.

 

[philthetube]

Travelling an hour earlier or later if necessary is not "half" a Sunday.

They might not drive - they might go the following weekend instead if it's booked up.

And, in these days of flexible working, if you're staying at relatives then the idea of having to be back in the office on Monday morning is not necessarily still the case any more. Spend an extra day away and work remotely.

It would be a lot more than half a Friday if you wanted to travel to Penzance after work on a Friday evening.