Passengers complaining about no seats available on busiest trains

[seventh-heaven]

Out of curiosity, what service type(s) would you consider appropriate to use LHCS for? About the only service type I can think of is sleeper trains, and even those might eventually just be sets of EMUs.

Diesel hauled services where you need 5 or more coaches all day long. At this point a loco hauled solution is cheaper to operate provided that it operates in push pull mode and provided that the locomotive does not cause train length restrictions that cannot be solved another way.

Whilst you could operate sleepers as multiple units I suspect that this service more than any is one where changing formations of the various portions during different seasons or for different events is worthwhile. Also given the small number of trains it may be more efficient to have a small number of spare vehicles rather than spare full units.

 

[Kali]

I used to commute from Hornsey to Old Street in the mid/late-80s. Sounds like nothing much has changed in that time (despite years of inflation-busting fare increases).

Returning all the 313s back to the GN would help reduce the number of short-formed services. Giving them a SWT 455-style refurb would help with the capacity.

I did Harringay<->FPK / Moorgate in the 90s, on the odd times I tried to go in the rush hour proper it was near impossible even then. Walking to Fins. Park isn't that far, nice walk across the park itself too. Unless it's a day like today...

 

[infobleep]

I often see people at Woking station waiting to get on a crowded train which I am getting off. The train having come from south of Guildford and myself from Guildford. The train arrives into platform 2, the usual platform for fast trains to London.

I then go over to platform 1 and board a train 3 minutes later which always has seats and is fast to London. It is one of the few fast trains to stop at platform 1 and I can only assume people are unaware. However I can only do this because the arrival time of the second train is still early enough to allow me time to make a connection at Euston. 3 minutes can make a big difference at times. All one needs to do is miss a tube train and you when 5-6 minutes down when you reach Euston and you miss your mostly half hourly fast service.

I certainly couldn't get any slowe trains because a) they have no loos and b) my commute is already 1 hour 30 minutes long and I don't fancy another 20-25 minutes on top of that in either direction. If I took both slow services it would be 35-40 minutes per journey.

The change I make at Woking though is not official as the gap is only 3 minutes so I cannot officially recommend it I guess. However it works unless major disruption occurs.

I think it is a game of give and take. Would I travel earlier if the trains were cheaper before say 7am? Yes I would. However I wouldn't be surprised if the latter stages of my journey then hit peak time and I'd be charged accordingly. And coming home I'd probably hit peak time as I finish my journey. As my journey ends in a travel card area, I wouldn't have an exact end station to start out of peak time in.

 

[Dave1987]

My point is, and this is most pertinent on my line, that the fast servies to London are at max length and cannot be extended. So if people choose to travel on these services you cannot complain that the TOC is rubbish because lot and lots of other people choose to catch the same train as you and there are no seats left. And there is no more room to run any extra services.

 

[noddingdonkey]

Why is it the passenger's fault that the railway isn't able to provide them with the standard of service which they require, and haven't done anything effective to manage those expectations if they are unrealistic?

 

[causton]

My point is, and this is most pertinent on my line, that the fast servies to London are at max length and cannot be extended. So if people choose to travel on these services you cannot complain that the TOC is rubbish because lot and lots of other people choose to catch the same train as you and there are no seats left. And there is no more room to run any extra services.

That's like going to a shop and they never have any milk! They say "sorry we only get two deliveries a week, it's your fault and you cannot complain that we are rubbish because lot [sic] and lots of other people choose to buy the same milk and there is none left"...?!?!

The simple answer the customer would give is "Well have more deliveries then!" and in both cases it's just not that simple, but still...!

 

[tbtc]

My point is, and this is most pertinent on my line, that the fast servies to London are at max length and cannot be extended. So if people choose to travel on these services you cannot complain that the TOC is rubbish because lot and lots of other people choose to catch the same train as you and there are no seats left. And there is no more room to run any extra services.

This is it.

Twelve coaches seems a natural limit to how long trains can be on normal lines (excluding HS2), due to the cost of platform lengths/ train lengths/ staffing/ signal blocks etc...

...so where do we go after that? Building new lines into the middle of big cities is going to cost stupid money and take many years. Tinkering with seating may make a marginal difference to overall capacity I guess, but what else can we do (other than price some people off)?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why is it the passenger's fault that the railway isn't able to provide them with the standard of service which they require, and haven't done anything effective to manage those expectations if they are unrealistic?

I'd suggest that the price rises that people complain about are one way of "managing expectations".

That's like going to a shop and they never have any milk! They say "sorry we only get two deliveries a week, it's your fault and you cannot complain that we are rubbish because lot [sic] and lots of other people choose to buy the same milk and there is none left"...?!?!

The simple answer the customer would give is "Well have more deliveries then!" and in both cases it's just not that simple, but still...!

A better comparison would be a huge queue of people all trying to buy milk at seven in the morning, so large that it can't all fit in the shop.

Should we build an extension to the shop so that all of this queue can be accommodated (even though the shop isn't as busy during the rest of the day)?

 

[AndyLandy]

That's like going to a shop and they never have any milk! They say "sorry we only get two deliveries a week, it's your fault and you cannot complain that we are rubbish because lot [sic] and lots of other people choose to buy the same milk and there is none left"...?!?!

The simple answer the customer would give is "Well have more deliveries then!" and in both cases it's just not that simple, but still...!

A better comparison would be a huge queue of people all trying to buy milk at seven in the morning, so large that it can't all fit in the shop.

Should we build an extension to the shop so that all of this queue can be accommodated (even though the shop isn't as busy during the rest of the day)?

You are quite right, sir. We'll add more milk deliveries and we'll extend the supermarket to accommodate more customers. I'm afraid that this will mean your pint of milk will now cost £9.99 though.

In the case of the supermarket and of the railways, pretty much anything can be overcome if you throw enough money at it. But who is going to pay for it? You could add more tracks, longer platforms, better junctions etc, but so much of these tasks are remarkably expensive. I'm sure there are far more efficient designs for station throats at London termini, but the cost associated with such an endeavour would be exorbitant!

 

[tbtc]

I'm sure there are far more efficient designs for station throats at London termini, but the cost associated with such an endeavour would be exorbitant!

Not just the cost, but also the months of disruption to such busy corridors.

That's one reason I came round to favouring HS2 - looking at the months and months of weekend blockades required for the WCML upgrade.

 

[AndyLandy]

Not just the cost, but also the months of disruption to such busy corridors.

That's one reason I came round to favouring HS2 - looking at the months and months of weekend blockades required for the WCML upgrade.

Absolutely. I had actually said something about that, but then deleted it from my post!

I came round to HS2 on pretty much exactly the same grounds. Capacity, and the impracticalities of boosting capacity on existing routes. I love all the arguments about "Do we really need to build HS2 just to save 15 minutes on a journey between Birmingham and London?" The answer of course is "No, not at all. That's nothing to do with it!" But if you're going to build a new railway, why would you do anything other than build it as a modern, high-speed link?

 

[Cheshire Rover]

Absolutely. I had actually said something about that, but then deleted it from my post!

I came round to HS2 on pretty much exactly the same grounds. Capacity, and the impracticalities of boosting capacity on existing routes. I love all the arguments about "Do we really need to build HS2 just to save 15 minutes on a journey between Birmingham and London?" The answer of course is "No, not at all. That's nothing to do with it!" But if you're going to build a new railway, why would you do anything other than build it as a modern, high-speed link?

Let us hope that the designers of HS2 also have the foresight to "future proof " the line so that in 100 years time there is no need to build another line.

 

[tbtc]

Let us hope that the designers of HS2 also have the foresight to "future proof " the line so that in 100 years time there is no need to build another line.

It should be capable of taking a 400m train every three minutes. If future growth means that this isn't sufficient then we'll have a very busy railway on our hands

 

[HSTEd]

Building new lines into city centres isn't that expensive, see HS2. Tunnels are relatively cheap if you don't need many stations, and a longer distance railway would only have one station in central london.

The trouble is finding space for stations, which is why I favour digging up london parks to build cut and cover stations and then putting the park back in afterwards.

Also London-crossing lines to reduce the platform space required in London.

 

[The Ham]

Let us hope that the designers of HS2 also have the foresight to "future proof " the line so that in 100 years time there is no need to build another line.

What does it matter if another line needs building in 100 years time? To future proof a line to the extent that it can cope with growth for 100 years would cost a lot of money.

Even if growth was 1.5% per year for 100 years that means that for every 10 passengers now there will be 44 people travelling in 100 years time. Increase that to 2.0% and it jumps up to 71 people in 100 years time.

 

[exile]

How often exactly and where exactly could you find BR fiddling with formations in the middle of the service (once we're out of the sixties at least)? Further I'd love to see how you could do this at somewhere like Kings Cross or Euston or Victoria or Waterloo in the middle of the peak. I don't see how loco hauled can claim any great flexibility advantage of units? I want to make my four -car train into an eight-car? Drive another unit onto the front. Eight to twelve? Drive another unit onto the front (and that's assuming we're working only with four car units other combinations are of course possible). It takes seconds compared with shunt moves, coupling, break tests and so on. Then of course you can run a twelve car train of three units and have it quickly split on route allowing one long train to serve several places with smaller trains of a more appropriate length for once you're out of London.

Forgive me but this is not a problem of a fixed unit length railway it's a problem of simply not having enough units.

Well, I DO remember extra coaches being shunted on to an existing formation - but then I've been using trains since the early 60s. Currently Virgin, for example, either have to run an extra 9 coach pendolino or nothing if they want to cope with a busy period. If units could be easily lent to other TOCs that might help.

 

[MKB]

Has anyone else noticed how a lot of passengers complain about the fact they cannot get a seat on the most popular trains, usually the express services. These services are usually the max length of train that can be run so impossible to add more carriages. Why not get a slightly slower train that is less crowded?

To answer the original question, as a regular passenger, where my time constraints allow, I'd much rather choose a less busy train. Perhaps the OP can tell me where I find this information on the various booking websites?

 

[Dave1987]

To answer the original question, as a regular passenger, where my time constraints allow, I'd much rather choose a less busy train. Perhaps the OP can tell me where I find this information on the various booking websites?

What TOC do you travel with regularly. I would email them and ask them which of their services is less busy at the time you travel. I know that GA were actively trying to encourage some commuters to try less busy slightly slower services to london.

 

[Nym]

To answer the original question, as a regular passenger, where my time constraints allow, I'd much rather choose a less busy train. Perhaps the OP can tell me where I find this information on the various booking websites?

You mean like this?

www.londonmidland.com/your-journey/finding-a-seat/

 

[AndyLandy]

You mean like this?

www.londonmidland.com/your-journey/finding-a-seat/

South West Trains have posters up at Basingstoke telling passengers which trains are the busiest in the mornings. The information is usually discoverable, and in the worst case, you can always try varying your journey slightly to see if it's any better.

 

[stut]

The SBB/CFF/FFS website does this well, with a little graphic, when you search, telling you how heavily loaded each train is supposed to be.

However, IME, 'heavily loaded' on a Swiss train means "you might have to sit next to somebody", rather than "you'll be wishing for the JR-employed 'men with white gloves'..."

 

[island]

Passengers can try to re-arrange their travel, but there is little reward for it. Why not shorten the peak, and make trains arriving in London say prior to 7.30am 'off peak'? More people will travel early because it's cheaper yet not so early that you're outside your office at 6am - everyone wins. Passengers travel in comfort. Unless TOC exist purely for profit. Hammering everyone who travels before 10am as 'peak' is unfair.

Newsflash: TOCs do exist purely for profit. How will they be compensated for the reduction in revenue caused by your plan?

Well, I DO remember extra coaches being shunted on to an existing formation - but then I've been using trains since the early 60s. Currently Virgin, for example, either have to run an extra 9 coach pendolino or nothing if they want to cope with a busy period. If units could be easily lent to other TOCs that might help.

They could run a Super Duper Voyager, or an 11-car Pendolino, or the Pretendolino!

 

[Ascot]

I made the idiots mistake of buying my way out of the problem with a 1ST season ticket thinking the extra cash is insurance for busy times. Oh how I was wrong!

As it's often the case you enjoy a nice drink in the lounge while watching the departure board light up in red for every driver cancellation and listening to the background of moans and groans from those outside the frosted door. Between the sea of red is a thin strip of green, that light at the end of the tunnel, translated to my train. "No problem", I thought as I began to pack my laptop away while finishing my cereal bar. I hold my breath as I prepare to battle through the concourse littered with compensation forms and the blood of a former CSA announcing the cancellations, "have a nice day" I hear from the lounge dragon as she mentally signs my death certificate.

After navigating the maze of flesh and pushchairs to the ticket barrier I gingerly make my way down to the usual platform of 3A to find there is no train there but an empty void. I start to wonder if that mystery green light on that departure board was having a dare with the arrivals board to make me join the great misery about to unfold. "Oh dear" I thought, "It's a platform change", so a quick hop skip and a jump to 5A, I make my way down the escalators. With the shopping bags just coming into view down below I clutch my self motivated insurance with a knowledge that there won't be more than 23 1ST holders on board.

From that point it all went downhill, even if it never went up the hill. I managed to find my way to the mystical haven called 1ST to find that comfort barrier blocked by a shopping trolley and her owner occupying all the known space between reality and salvation. It was a tough battle but I made my way through, still clutching my rapidly fading insurance. The light at the end of the tunnel turned dark very quickly as I was met by a Victorian angry mob wielding torches and pitch-forks being led by our good friend shopping trolley chanting "burn the 1ST class scum" and "death to capitalism". My insurance at this point had now washed completely into my back pocket leaving me to return to my former self, pressed against the luggage rack but even more out of pocket.

Throughout the journey, our good shopping trolley reminded me of my stupidity by bashing my leg between every junction and red light this side of Birmingham until that magic moment we had to part ways but not without her wheels rolling over my foot as a final f* you.

 

[MKB]

You mean like this?

www.londonmidland.com/your-journey/finding-a-seat/

That would be a start, if it covered the trains I take -- it doesn't -- and reflected anticipated demand on specific dates using sales of Advance tickets as a good starting point.

 

[Haydn1971]

You mean like this?

www.londonmidland.com/your-journey/finding-a-seat/

What a good idea ! Can we roll that out everywhere !

 

[Optimo]

Newsflash: TOCs do exist purely for profit. How will they be compensated for the reduction in revenue caused by your plan?

Newsflash: I should have used the sarcasm font.

TOCs would be compensated by me/customers actually paying to use their service, rather than avoiding them as I do now. Perhaps more people could be persuaded to use their services (rather than bus/tube/car) if we were not pumped for cash during exaggerated 'peak hours', for example.

In several years of commuting I've seen nothing to 'encourage' me to use the trains - there are alternatives that they just do not compete with with an acceptable level of service [in my case, FCC].

 

[Tom B]

Part of the problem, surely, is a general culture of people working 9-5, Monday-Friday, no? Thus causing a large number of people to travel at precisely the same time.

I am lucky enough to work shifts and therefore am either getting to work just before the "rush" starts, or setting off just as it finishes, or getting to work just before the evening rush starts. Many office workers could surely adopt different hours so as to spread the load? And probably help those with e.g. children (an 11am start, for instance, allows them to drop offspring at school before they go in). However, this does mean travelling at the weekend with the closures/suspensions/rail replacement bus "services" etc.

 

[Dave1987]

Newsflash: I should have used the sarcasm font.

TOCs would be compensated by me/customers actually paying to use their service, rather than avoiding them as I do now. Perhaps more people could be persuaded to use their services (rather than bus/tube/car) if we were not pumped for cash during exaggerated 'peak hours', for example.

In several years of commuting I've seen nothing to 'encourage' me to use the trains - there are alternatives that they just do not compete with with an acceptable level of service [in my case, FCC].

The thing is that the cost of running the railways is much higher than buses etc. But they are a lot faster than buses. Otherwise dont you think that all the commuters that use the railways would have defected to the bus. A to go by car to central london you would get stuck in massive traffic jams.

 

[jopsuk]

whilst flexible working is a nice idea, there are many, many jobs, especially office based, where live or near-live communication is big part of the job. This requires everyone to be working at the same time. Meetings, conference calls and prompt email replies are not so easy to arrange if working hours are more diffuse.

 

[The Ham]

whilst flexible working is a nice idea, there are many, many jobs, especially office based, where live or near-live communication is big part of the job. This requires everyone to be working at the same time. Meetings, conference calls and prompt email replies are not so easy to arrange if working hours are more diffuse.

True, in part. However as many large organisations have offices in different parts of the world and cope with different timed core office hours, it is possible for office hours to be diffused a little.

Most people who work in offices are likely to be able to cover each others jobs to a certain amount (otherwise holidays would be a nightmare) and the elements where there is something that only one person is dealing with (say point of contact for a client) the individual just deals with it when they are in.

Having had to deal with workers in other organisations who only work on certain days, you soon just adjust to only making contact with them when they are working. Likewise I've worked with people who have worked 4 days a week (having the same day off each week) and you notice that fairly quickly that the number of emails and phone calls that they get on their days off is less than during their working days.

Likewise if you are working outside of "normal" hours you can often get a lot more done as you have less emails and phone calls that need dealing with other than when you are working during "normal" hours.

 

[mailman]

Most people who work in offices are likely to be able to cover each others jobs to a certain amount (otherwise holidays would be a nightmare) and the elements where there is something that only one person is dealing with (say point of contact for a client) the individual just deals with it when they are in.

I think you will find that the vast majority of office workers have no say in whether they can change to different start times thanks to the ingrained Victorian era style of management many people have to suffer under (ie. if your manager cannot see you, he cannot manage you).

What you say makes sense though...allowing people to start earlier or later but the reality is its not the office workers who are the barrier to this kind of working BUT the management view and trust of their workers.

It makes sense to be able to start after rush hour, mainly because it would save commuters thousands of pounds a year in the cost of travel. On the other hand, if we all started to work outside peak hours Im willing to bet your left testicle that the TOC's would very quickly recover all that lost and loved revenue through inceasing off peak tickets to the point where there is no difference in price...as someone already said, TOC's exist to make money!

Mailman