Scotland-London - Highest level for 20 years

[DynamicSpirit]

It's probably to a large extent caused by the security theatre and quality of experience at the air terminals. I get the impression that the success of budget airlines probably sowed the seeds of their own downfall. Air travel has become so competitive that operators are painted into a corner where they have nowhere to go but to compete on price.

I'm slightly suspicious that it's more a case, of noone's trying to compete on anything other than price.

At the moment, the choice for air travel seems to be ridiculously cheap no-frills prices to get a sardine-seat. Or ridiculously expensive business class prices for a luxury seat. Neither of those interests me. What I would like when I fly is to be able to pay - say - 10% more than the cheapest price, in return for getting a seat 10% bigger, perhaps a quicker boarding time (because bigger seats implies fewer passengers) and there being a very easy, well-advertised, penalty-free way change/cancel my ticket if my plans change. But so far as I've been able to tell when I've needed to book flights, none of the airlines or flight-selling websites seem interested in offering and seriously promoting anything like that. I understand lots of people will just follow the absolute cheapest fare, but I can't believe there's no market for a slightly premium service, charging slightly higher fares in return for a better passenger experience.

To get back onto the thread topic, however: Environmental concerns make it highly unlikely that I'd choose to fly London-Scotland, or on any other journey where the train gives a realistic alternative, under normal circumstances. I wonder if a similar growing environmental awareness amongst others has made some contribution to increasing the mode-share of rail?

 

[Chester1]

Three hours is certainly a commonly cited rule of thumb. It was probably true when much of the European HSR network was being developed in the 1990's but recent experience has shown the viable distance to be longer than that, hence Eurostar services to South France, Amsterdam.

Eurostar South of France services vary between once and five times a week depending on the season. The Amsterdam service will be twice daily. DB suspended its plans for a London-Frankfurt service after the credit crunch caused oil prices to collaspe meaning the train couldn't compete on price with air travel. High speed services longer than 3 hours can be financially viable but they are mostly for a niche market not for the average traveller.

 

[cle]

A lot of the random TGV journeys are once daily. But the core frequent ones on the trunk routes are more like London-Glasgow/Edinburgh, with 3 hour journey times being the sweet spot.

However, points on remote working/wifi/movies/liquids all add nuance to the apples-to-apples journey time comparison.

I took the train to Glasgow a few weeks back for the first time in ages. Packed the whole way - and plenty of people working away. I did a few work calls, emails throughout, watched some of my own stuff... and cheaper than BA (plus Flying Club miles!) - doing it again shortly.

 

[Bald Rick]

Precisely my take on it for business travel.

The problem with flying is that you can't settle to anything.

Here's what I did on a recent air trip I made from central Edinburgh to London via Gatwick:

Taxi (30 mins)
Check in (10 mins)
Security queue (20 mins)
Shuffle round duty free (5 mins)
Sit at gate (20 mins)
Stand up at gate (10 mins)
Shuffle on to plane and sit in tiny seat (15 mins)
Wait on tarmac for air traffic (15 mins)
Get out laptop and try to do a bit of work in impossible conditions (110 mins due to Gatwick holding pattern)
Shuffle off plane (5 mins)
Stand on bus and help airsick passenger (10 mins)
Wait on bus outside terminal (5 mins)
Shuffle off bus (5 mins)
Wait for bag (10 mins)
Walk to station (10 mins)
Queue for train ticket (5 mins)
Wait for train (15 mins)
Use train (30 mins)

Just under five and a half hours door to door.

Or my most recent flying experience:

Leave office in Central London.
Tube / DLR to LCY (25mins)
Check In (2 mins)
Security (3 mins)
Buy stuff that got confiscated at security (5 mins)
Walk to gate furthest from terminal building (5 mins)
Wait for boarding (20 mins - do some emails)
Boarding (10 mins)
Flight from 'push back' to 'door open' (70 mins - do some work reading)
Disembark and fight way through EDI terminal to tram (10 mins)
Buy ticket for tram and wait for next one (5 mins)
Tram trip (30 mins - do some emails)
Walk to hotel (5 mins)

Total 3h 10min door to door, of which nearly 2h was productive time.

At least 2h quicker than the door to door by train. Cheaper too.

As ever it all comes down to the precise nature of each journey, how close to the airport / station the start and finish is, and the hassle factor of airport security / airport experience which varies by individual preference.

What has happened is that with the advent of increased security checks, the time at the airport and hassle factor has tended to get worse. However on the WCML the journey time and frequency has improved considerably. Not so on the ECML.

Hence why there are now more flights between London and Edinburgh than there were in 2005, and fewer flights between London and Glasgow.

 

[gingerheid]

I think perhaps the truest measure of desirability comes from price!

And in the case of Scotland > London the train usually comes in somewhere around the middle of the range. This is probably fair. LCY is a wonderful and convenient airport and that is why flights from there will almost without exception cost more than the train fare would have. STN and LTN aren't so much, and will almost always be cheaper.

But it's all personal. The train can have advantages depending on where exactly you live and where exactly you want to go to (for me that used to be close to Stansted > close to Prestwick, so in the days of Ryanair STN > PIK there just couldn't be much competition on time, and even though that's no more the lack of KGX - GLC trains still gives flying the edge).

It can have advantages depending on what exactly you want to take with you.

It can have advantages depending on whether you like one unbroken settled time to do something or whether you like the journey broken up so it doesn't feel so long.

I like the train, but actually I generally end up flying because of cost. Unless you get caught in disruption and end up without a seat the train is (for me) without doubt a better experience.

 

[47271]

Or my most recent flying experience:

Leave office in Central London.
Tube / DLR to LCY (25mins)
Check In (2 mins)
Security (3 mins)
Buy stuff that got confiscated at security (5 mins)
Walk to gate furthest from terminal building (5 mins)
Wait for boarding (20 mins - do some emails)
Boarding (10 mins)
Flight from 'push back' to 'door open' (70 mins - do some work reading)
Disembark and fight way through EDI terminal to tram (10 mins)
Buy ticket for tram and wait for next one (5 mins)
Tram trip (30 mins - do some emails)
Walk to hotel (5 mins)

Total 3h 10min door to door, of which nearly 2h was productive time.

At least 2h quicker than the door to door by train. Cheaper too.

As ever it all comes down to the precise nature of each journey, how close to the airport / station the start and finish is, and the hassle factor of airport security / airport experience which varies by individual preference.

What has happened is that with the advent of increased security checks, the time at the airport and hassle factor has tended to get worse. However on the WCML the journey time and frequency has improved considerably. Not so on the ECML.

Hence why there are now more flights between London and Edinburgh than there were in 2005, and fewer flights between London and Glasgow.

Totally get it. If I'd quoted one of my less recent experiences via City then I'd be a lot more satisfied with the trip, not least that I can function in a funky 2+2 Embraer 190 versus the truly dismal cramming in BA do with their Airbuses now. They really are in a race to the bottom with the budget operators there. The unique selling point of being able to purchase an M&S sandwich, I think not.

Still, even when I've used City, I've felt hassled and disrupted in a way that I never do on the train. Even if it is quicker, it's unproductive for me.

And let's not forget the most time efficient way of all - the Caledonian Sleeper.

 

[Bald Rick]

And let's not forget the most time efficient way of all - the Caledonian Sleeper.

Well, again, that depends on circumstances. My sleeper experiences can be summarised as :

Hang around station after work for a couple of hours waiting for berth.
Get on sleeper.
Don't sleep
Don't sleep some more.
Perhaps 2hrs broken sleep
Wake at about 0500
Get off sleeper.
Hang around destination station waiting for it to be time to justify going into office.
Spend the next day knackered, doing a rather unproductive amount of work.

In my circumstances, it's always quicker and much more time efficient to get a late afternoon train, or evening plane, and hotel the other end. Usually cheaper too.

 

[bramling]

Well, again, that depends on circumstances. My sleeper experiences can be summarised as :

Hang around station after work for a couple of hours waiting for berth.
Get on sleeper.
Don't sleep
Don't sleep some more.
Perhaps 2hrs broken sleep
Wake at about 0500
Get off sleeper.
Hang around destination station waiting for it to be time to justify going into office.
Spend the next day knackered, doing a rather unproductive amount of work.

In my circumstances, it's always quicker and much more time efficient to get a late afternoon train, or evening plane, and hotel the other end. Usually cheaper too.

Or, sadly, drive up the previous evening and stay over in some kind of hotel. With a good run it's quite possible to do London area to lowland Scotland in not much more than 5 hours - and this will become more competitive over time if and when the A1 is dualled between Morpeth and Edinburgh.

 

[telstarbox]

Is that without a break?

 

[47271]

Well, again, that depends on circumstances. My sleeper experiences can be summarised as :

Hang around station after work for a couple of hours waiting for berth.
Get on sleeper.
Don't sleep
Don't sleep some more.
Perhaps 2hrs broken sleep
Wake at about 0500
Get off sleeper.
Hang around destination station waiting for it to be time to justify going into office.
Spend the next day knackered, doing a rather unproductive amount of work.

In my circumstances, it's always quicker and much more time efficient to get a late afternoon train, or evening plane, and hotel the other end. Usually cheaper too.

Oh yes, I forgot to say, you need to be able to sleep on it! I understand that the ultra regulars regard it as the equivalent of being in bed at home, the rest of us may feel slightly differently.

I'm also thinking more of the Highlander which involves far less waiting around at either end. But if you have reason to be late on departure - say a show or a restaurant - and you can get on with business around 8am on arrival, then the Lowlander can be quite nifty too.

 

[xotGD]

Or, sadly, drive up the previous evening and stay over in some kind of hotel. With a good run it's quite possible to do London area to lowland Scotland in not much more than 5 hours - and this will become more competitive over time if and when the A1 is dualled between Morpeth and Edinburgh.

Averaging over 80 mph and no stops. Very safe.

 

[47271]

Or, sadly, drive up the previous evening and stay over in some kind of hotel. With a good run it's quite possible to do London area to lowland Scotland in not much more than 5 hours - and this will become more competitive over time if and when the A1 is dualled between Morpeth and Edinburgh.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm talking about business trips of no more than two or three days.

Unless you need your car at the other end and/or have nothing to occupy your mind other than driving for hours on end then, sorry, no.

That said, I'll happily drive across Europe if it's the most efficient way of transporting luggage and getting about for a week or more following arrival.

 

[bramling]

Is that without a break?

Yes, but even a short break doesn't add that much to it.

With a clear run and no roadworks, a typical run up the A1 is something along the lines of

Outer London to:

Thirsk - 2½ hours.
Darlington - 3 hours.
Durham - 3 ½hours
Newcastle - 4 hours
Berwick - 5 hours
Edinburgh - 6¼ hours

Unlike both plane and train, in many cases this will be door-to-door - and guaranteed no screaming kids for the whole journey (qv the other thread!). Personally, all things being equal, I'd normally prefer train, but reality unfortunately dictates car seems to win virtually every time.

 

[bramling]

Averaging over 80 mph and no stops. Very safe.

Might touch 80 mph occasionally, but I can guarantee the average speed wouldn't be that high. Just doing some rough estimating, from where I am to Berwick is just over 300 miles, so that amounts to not much more above 60 mph average, which allowing for the handful of sections with a speed limit of less than 70 mph and the five remaining roundabouts near the London end, I'd say is about what would be expected.

 

[InOban]

Averaging over 80 mph and no stops. Very safe.

And entirely illegal

 

[Altnabreac]

Its 4 hours for the ECML. HS2 should reduce London to Glasgow/Edinburgh to a little over 3 hours and a half hours. The central and Scottish governments have both backed further works to reduce the journey times to both cities to under 3 hours. This is considered the tipping point for a modal shift based on Europe.

sub 3 hours broadly needs some 125mph speed upgrades on existing WCML north of Preston (especially for non tilting stock), one long new high speed section in Scotland and either one or two high speed sections in England.

£15Bn give or take £5Bn either way.

Jobs a good un.

 

[InOban]

If you are able to fly more cheaply than the train, that must mean that you are not seeking out Advance tickets, or that there is such oversupply on the airlines that even at short notice they are selling cut-price tickets.

I did notice in the June stats that LCY seemed to be the route whose loadings were dropping, unlike the others.

 

[gsnedders]

No they aren't - I fly budget a fair bit and I wouldn't say Ryanair's passenger demographic was "mostly relatively well off" at all.

The EDI/GLA–LON flights are mostly relatively well off—hence why they're almost all timed nicely to make a business day trip possible, and next to nothing during the day. I agree on most other routes that's not true.

If you are able to fly more cheaply than the train, that must mean that you are not seeking out Advance tickets, or that there is such oversupply on the airlines that even at short notice they are selling cut-price tickets.

Cheapest I've ever seen GLA–STN was £5; never seen an Advance that cheap from GLC–EUS! More generally, I've seen a lot of this vary based on how far in advance you're looking—at short notice, sometimes train is cheaper, sometimes plane is cheaper.

 

[InOban]

£5 plus the cost of getting to STN and from GLA.

Just checked for Friday between London and Edinburgh on Friday using Skyscanner and Loco2. The most expensive ticket on a direct train was less than the cheapest on a plane. Mind you they were all very expensive!

 

[Chester1]

The sleepers require a large subsidy to run. The highland sleeper is probably safe until the Mark Vs are too old i.e. in 40 years or so. The lowland sleeper will not be viable once journey times reduce to around 3 hours. The rolling stock could be used to replace the Cornish sleeper stock and whoever controls the Scottish Parliament in late 2020s onwards will want to spend the money elsewhere. I very much doubt it will last signficantly past the current sleeper franchise end date of March 2030.

 

[Bald Rick]

Or, sadly, drive up the previous evening and stay over in some kind of hotel. With a good run it's quite possible to do London area to lowland Scotland in not much more than 5 hours - and this will become more competitive over time if and when the A1 is dualled between Morpeth and Edinburgh.

Well, yes, but that very much depends on the exact start / finish points, and what time of day / week you are travelling. But it has been like that for at least 30-40 years: my dad used to regularly drive from Surrey to Edinburgh or Inverness for work. He had the same problem with sleepers as I do, and in the days before the low cost airlines driving was the best mix of time / price for him.

 

[Chester1]

sub 3 hours broadly needs some 125mph speed upgrades on existing WCML north of Preston (especially for non tilting stock), one long new high speed section in Scotland and either one or two high speed sections in England.

£15Bn give or take £5Bn either way.

Jobs a good un.

Cutting stops would help. There should be enough demand to run hourly Edinburgh and Glasgow services to London without any stops between them and Birmingham Interchange. Preston, Wigan and Warrington will probably have other HS2 services anyway. Perhaps your right about getting under 3 hours but it should be possible to get close on a lower budget. HS2 phase 2b should reduce journey time to 3 jours 38 minutes. Limited stops, freight passing loops and grade seperation at Wigan and Preston should help reliability and allow padding to be removed from the time table but its unlikely the UK government will do much more because of the risk of Scottish independence making it a waste of money for England. An hour off the current average journey time should be realistic for a couple of billion though. That would probably be enough encourage a modal shift although not one as big as a sub three hour journey time would.

 

[bramling]

Well, yes, but that very much depends on the exact start / finish points, and what time of day / week you are travelling. But it has been like that for at least 30-40 years: my dad used to regularly drive from Surrey to Edinburgh or Inverness for work. He had the same problem with sleepers as I do, and in the days before the low cost airlines driving was the best mix of time / price for him.

Agreed - there's still a degree of unpredictability on the A1 during the daytime, especially at commuter times. Although same can be said for the train too.

Over the last couple of decades the A1 has enjoyed quite a bit of upgrading - most of the roundabouts have gone, and virtually all of the route through Yorkshire and Durham is now motorway (another section opens soon). There is now talk of the Northumberland section going to some form of dual carriageway within he next few years. Sadly it's hard to think of many improvements on the ECML since electrification, and even then many Scottish services are still worked with HSTs. Having said all this, East Cost still seems to be able to fill its trains, so clearly the product appeals to plenty of people.

Ironically, I'm more likely to do a journey like London to York or Darlo by train. 2 to 3 hours with screaming kids is just about bearable, but the thought of having it all the way to Scotland is unpalatable.

 

[Bald Rick]

Agreed - there's still a degree of unpredictability on the A1 during the daytime, especially at commuter times. Although same can be said for the train too.

Over the last couple of decades the A1 has enjoyed quite a bit of upgrading - most of the roundabouts have gone, and virtually all of the route through Yorkshire and Durham is now motorway (another section opens soon). There is now talk of the Northumberland section going to some form of dual carriageway within he next few years. Sadly it's hard to think of many improvements on the ECML since electrification, and even then many Scottish services are still worked with HSTs. Having said all this, East Cost still seems to be able to fill its trains, so clearly the product appeals to plenty of people.

Ironically, I'm more likely to do a journey like London to York or Darlo by train. 2 to 3 hours with screaming kids is just about bearable, but the thought of having it all the way to Scotland is unpalatable.

Improvements on ECML since electrification:

Platform 0 at KX
Additional tracks / platforms Finsbury Park - Ally Pally
Reduced signalling headway via Hertford loop (to keep freight off main line)
Power upgrades Stevenage area
Hitchin flyover
Additional platforms Peterborough
GN/GE upgrade (again to keep freight off the main line)
Allington Chord
Doncaster remodelling (north and south)
North Doncaster Chord
Various level crossing closures
Leeds remodelling (ok not on the main line)
Half hourly to Leeds, and Edinburgh* all day (* except for three one hour gaps)

This has been primarily about capacity, although journey times have reduced slightly as pathing time has been removed through some of these schemes, and because the increased frequency has enabled more trains to run without stopping at smaller stations.

But, crucially, improving frequency reduces Generalised Journey Time - the perception of passengers. This is why the doubling (arguably more than doubling) of Anglo-Scots frequency on the WCML combined with journey time reductions of over an hour have been so successful in gaining traffic on that route.

 

[bramling]

Improvements on ECML since electrification:

Platform 0 at KX
Additional tracks / platforms Finsbury Park - Ally Pally
Reduced signalling headway via Hertford loop (to keep freight off main line)
Power upgrades Stevenage area
Hitchin flyover
Additional platforms Peterborough
GN/GE upgrade (again to keep freight off the main line)
Allington Chord
Doncaster remodelling (north and south)
North Doncaster Chord
Various level crossing closures
Leeds remodelling (ok not on the main line)
Half hourly to Leeds, and Edinburgh* all day (* except for three one hour gaps)

This has been primarily about capacity, although journey times have reduced slightly as pathing time has been removed through some of these schemes, and because the increased frequency has enabled more trains to run without stopping at smaller stations.

As you say, mainly about capacity. Improvements to line speed are virtually non existent. No real length improvements to the trains either, give or take the odd extra HST trailer.

I suppose the extra York / Newark services are a benefit, but I see this as just catching up with increasing demand. Nothing radical.

 

[Ianno87]

As you say, mainly about capacity. Improvements to line speed are virtually non existent. No real length improvements to the trains either, give or take the odd extra HST trailer.

I suppose the extra York / Newark services are a benefit, but I see this as just catching up with increasing demand. Nothing radical.

The problem is that the route is so busy these days that line speed improvements atand the risk of being fairly pointless - fast trains just catch up the slow trains quicker on what is basically a 2-track railway, particularly south of Doncaster.

And given so much of the line is already relatively high speed - further incremental inprovements have relatively little journey time effect. E.g. moving from 100mph to 110mph only gains you 3 seconds for every mile upgrade. This diminishes further at even higher speeds.

Anyway new trains (800s etc) are on the way, whose superior acceleration should help to address the speed mix of services south of Donny.

Ideally one would have 4 tracks most of the way to Donny with a standalone Kings Cross-Donny stopping service, so stuff going further afield doesn't have to faff around covering the intermediate flows so could run genuinely fast from Peterborough to Doncaster on everything else.

But then we've got HS2 on the horizon, which basically achieves the same thing.

 

[backontrack]

In that case, the next priority should be a proper service from one end of Scotland to the other. Edinburgh-Perth journeys are currently slower than they were 120 years ago, so a new line through Kinross is a priority. We also need as much doubling as we can get between Perth and Ladybank, Perth and Inverness, Aberdeen and Inverness, and Inverness and Wick. And Usan needs to be sorted out.

 

[backontrack]

Ideally one would have 4 tracks most of the way to Donny with a standalone Kings Cross-Donny stopping service, so stuff going further afield doesn't have to faff around covering the intermediate flows so could run genuinely fast from Peterborough to Doncaster on everything else.

But then we've got HS2 on the horizon, which basically achieves the same thing.

The Flying Scotsman already has a service shadowing it from Berwick onwards. It stops at Alnmouth, Morpeth, Newcastle, Durham, Darlington, Northallerton, York and Retford. I wonder if we'll see this approach more, especially with First providing fast services between London and Edinburgh. Virgin will want to compete.

Virgin currently have an hourly London-York-Darlington-Newcastle-Berwick-Edinburgh service. I wonder if they'll end up dropping some Berwick calls (though hopefully not York - maybe I'm biased but I would hate to see more services skip York, especially when First are going to do that ) in order to have a more streamlined service. We may be looking at something like this in the future:

1tp2h London-York-Darlington-Newcastle-Edinburgh (-Aberdeen)
1tp2h London-York-Darlington-Newcastle-Berwick-Edinburgh (-Stirling/Inverness/Aberdeen/)
1tp2h London-Peterborough-Newark-Doncaster-York-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle-Alnmouth-Edinburgh
1tp2h London-Peterborough-Doncaster-York-Northallerton-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle-Alnmouth-Berwick-Edinburgh

 

[xotGD]

The Flying Scotsman already has a service shadowing it from Berwick onwards. It stops at Alnmouth, Morpeth, Newcastle, Durham, Darlington, Northallerton, York and Retford. I wonder if we'll see this approach more, especially with First providing fast services between London and Edinburgh. Virgin will want to compete.

Virgin currently have an hourly London-York-Darlington-Newcastle-Berwick-Edinburgh service. I wonder if they'll end up dropping some Berwick calls (though hopefully not York - maybe I'm biased but I would hate to see more services skip York, especially when First are going to do that ) in order to have a more streamlined service. We may be looking at something like this in the future:

1tp2h London-York-Darlington-Newcastle-Edinburgh (-Aberdeen)
1tp2h London-York-Darlington-Newcastle-Berwick-Edinburgh (-Stirling/Inverness/Aberdeen/)
1tp2h London-Peterborough-Newark-Doncaster-York-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle-Alnmouth-Edinburgh
1tp2h London-Peterborough-Doncaster-York-Northallerton-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle-Alnmouth-Berwick-Edinburgh

An hourly non-stop to/from York, and yet only one a day non-stop from Wakefield. When it comes to fast services, West Yorkshire is being short changed. KX - Leeds is typically only 4-5 minutes quicker than KX - Darlo.

 

[Mordac]

In that case, the next priority should be a proper service from one end of Scotland to the other. Edinburgh-Perth journeys are currently slower than they were 120 years ago, so a new line through Kinross is a priority. We also need as much doubling as we can get between Perth and Ladybank, Perth and Inverness, Aberdeen and Inverness, and Inverness and Wick. And Usan needs to be sorted out.

Please tell me you're joking.