What If? The railway without Covid-19?

[L+Y]

Inspired by a post in the predictions for 2026 thread: what would the trajectory of the railway have been in the absence of the Covid-19 pandemic?

Obviously a lot of this will be wrapped up in politics, so for the sake of argument let's assume a point of divergence in January 2020: the Johnson Government is in power with Brexit still happening. GBR or anything like it hasn't been announced, HS2 hasn't yet been curtailed and Restoring Your Railway is, in theory, just beginning.

 

[35B]

Point of order, the concept of GBR was announced under Chris Grayling - but just as little fleshed out.

 

[Topological]

Things would have slowed anyway because of Ukraine. Strikes etc would presumably have followed because of the associated cost of living impacts.

Reduced timetables would have been less palatable but still necessary.

The impact of the end of the pacers would have been more pronounced, especially in South Wales.

 

[The exile]

Things would have slowed anyway because of Ukraine. Strikes etc would presumably have followed because of the associated cost of living impacts.

However, there would have been more in the national coffers to offset them. They would have been the biggest thing to hit the economy, not COVID.

 

[deltic]

Assuming the ideas put forward under Shapp-Williams plan went ahead then we would have seen a move to TfL type operations across the network with fares and services set by GBR and delivered by private sector operators. Fares would likely have moved to single leg pricing as per LNER, zonal fares and smart/contactless cards would have been rolled out more. Given the railway would have been more financially stable then may have seen more investment as per TfL into station deep cleaning and staffing but more ticket offices would have gone. A single GBR ticketing App would have been pushed forward. Otherwise not much else would have changed.

 

[Route115?]

Hopefully most routes would be running pre-covid timetables.

However, there are underlying tensions in terms of control, etc that Williams-Shapps was designed to address that would have come to the fore without covid.

You could ponder whether the political scene would have been different without covid and the effect this could have had.

Its interesting to speculate to what extent remote working would have happened without covid. Pre covid the Friday AM peak was lighter on some outer suburban routes, but the process would have been far, far slower. (Interestingly when I visited Vienna in March 2018 the metro had a reduced service on Friday mornings.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Hopefully most routes would be running pre-covid timetables.

Except the WCML, ideally, where COVID saved us from the worst timetable I have ever known, the attempt at three-way through services off the WMT London-Birmingham service. It collapsed in flames on a daily basis.

To be honest I think the WCML timetable we have today is a lot better than what was in place even before that. It's quite well designed.

 

[3141]

SWR, Class 701s and Class 442s. First, SWR were going to introduce new and faster timetables. But consultations on the draft versions led to many reservations being expressed, so SWR were looking at approaching the DfT to vary or even drop some of their proposals. If the DfT had insisted that they proceed with what they offered to do in their winning bid for the franchise, we might have seen frequent disruptions as it all turned out to have been too ambitious.

Now, assuming that SWR could have got the 701s into service (and it's a big assumption!), they had undertaken not to exceed certain dwell times at Clapham Junction. I can't remember the exact details. An article in Modern Railways in 2018 or 2019 questioned whether these dwell times were realistic. If they turned out not to be, SWR would have been in breach of contract and the timetables wouldn't have worked.

With the 701s in service, and all class 455, 456 and 458 withdrawn, we'd have seen re-tractioned class 442s operating the services to Portsmouth. How well would they have worked? There had been problems when they were first reintroduced, with the old traction control interacting with the signalling system. But I think that had been sorted, so it seems reasonable to think that any problems with the new system would have been sorted as well.

 

[PTR 444]

The Euston to Stirling open access proposal would probably never have gotten off the ground, as Grand Central would have been using those paths for their Blackpool service.

 

[The exile]

Several more “rolling back Beeching” projects under way (mostly station reopenings) as a) the need to rein in expenditure so drastically wouldn’t have arisen and b) passenger numbers would have continued their upward trajectory.

 

[bramling]

Inspired by a post in the predictions for 2026 thread: what would the trajectory of the railway have been in the absence of the Covid-19 pandemic?

Obviously a lot of this will be wrapped up in politics, so for the sake of argument let's assume a point of divergence in January 2020: the Johnson Government is in power with Brexit still happening. GBR or anything like it hasn't been announced, HS2 hasn't yet been curtailed and Restoring Your Railway is, in theory, just beginning.

Interesting to speculate what the fleet situation on GTR would have looked like now. Presumably the 379s would have arrived on GN, however would the displaced 387s have replaced the 313s, 365s, both or neither? One presumes the 455s would still be running. Or alternatively 707s replace SN 455s (give or take with some 387s), and 365s stay along with Southeastern not ditching any of their Networkers?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Things would have slowed anyway because of Ukraine. Strikes etc would presumably have followed because of the associated cost of living impacts.

However, there would have been more in the national coffers to offset them. They would have been the biggest thing to hit the economy, not COVID.

The economy would definitely be better and thus electrification north of Wigston on the MML would have continued.

 

[TheHSRailFan]

Purely word of mouth, so probably not true.
I do believe the electrification of the Uckfield and Marshlink lines was on the table.
HS2 most likely wouldn't have had the horrendous shelving/cancellation it has now.

 

[JohnElliott]

The remodelling of East Croydon / Norwood Junction / Windmill Bridge Junction would likely have gone ahead.

 

[Clansman]

ScotRail HSTs would have had a full catering offer.

 

[Trainman40083]

It is interesting to think what might have happened, had it not been for COVID. On many lines, passenger growth seems to have been roughly 3 to 10%....so over 10 years, I would have expected capacity to bust. You look at what Cross rail has achieved in terms of passenger numbers. Already past the 2030 expectations. Imagine if Manchester had such a commuter system. I guess the down side is the revenue from the greater number of passengers may be lower, overall. Less commuters, first class passengers. More leisure travel on advance or split tickets. But . I keep hearing people say "if they reduced the fares, more people would use trains". But also "why are trains packed..why are you overselling tickets".

 

[brad465]

Interesting to speculate what the fleet situation on GTR would have looked like now. Presumably the 379s would have arrived on GN, however would the displaced 387s have replaced the 313s, 365s, both or neither? One presumes the 455s would still be running. Or alternatively 707s replace SN 455s (give or take with some 387s), and 365s stay along with Southeastern not ditching any of their Networkers?

The 707s announced for Southeastern took place just as covid lockdowns began, which means this must have been in planning for a few months before, so I doubt they'd have gone to Southern. I think 707s would have replaced the 465/2s still, as these were the most knackered and Southeastern is strapped for stabling space, but the 9x 465/9s and many of the 466s scrapped so far would have survived, which coupled with Chart Leacon reopening, would have provided a small fleet increase.

Elsewhere I think the 701 rollout will still have been heavily delayed, but not as bad as happened with covid and because many units wouldn't have been stored without testing for so long. I think the 456s would have stayed till the 701s started getting rolled out properly, as 10-car demand would have remained, however if the 701 rollout happened quicker 456s could have left when they actually did but with no capacity hit.

The 769s would have found use on the Thames Valley branches and North Downs line, although their reliability problems may have meant a more muted fleet than what was planned.

Obviously a lot of this will be wrapped up in politics, so for the sake of argument let's assume a point of divergence in January 2020: the Johnson Government is in power with Brexit still happening. GBR or anything like it hasn't been announced, HS2 hasn't yet been curtailed and Restoring Your Railway is, in theory, just beginning.

Restoring your railway was a PR gimmick and there was no real money behind it, and the two reopenings linked to it: Okehampton and Newcastle-Ashington were the low hanging fruit (existing railway of some form and/or had high political motivation). Maybe one or two more routes, such as Tavistock, would have been green-lighted, but there is no way even a quarter of what was put forward through RYR would have got approved.

 

[stevieinselby]

One factor to ponder is how far the transition towards remote working would have gone. While some offices are now seeing a move to get people back in a bit more, I suspect that without the push from Covid, the amount of remote working would be a lot lower, meaning that the drop in commuter traffic wouldn't have happened and so we wouldn't have seen the cuts to services particularly on South Eastern, Southern and South Western. While that might have kept more income to keep the coffers in better shape, it would have put more pressure on the fleet, eg unlikely that Southern would have been able to scrap the 313s and 455s without any replacements.

 

[brad465]

One factor to ponder is how far the transition towards remote working would have gone. While some offices are now seeing a move to get people back in a bit more, I suspect that without the push from Covid, the amount of remote working would be a lot lower, meaning that the drop in commuter traffic wouldn't have happened and so we wouldn't have seen the cuts to services particularly on South Eastern, Southern and South Western. While that might have kept more income to keep the coffers in better shape, it would have put more pressure on the fleet, eg unlikely that Southern would have been able to scrap the 313s and 455s without any replacements.

As bramling suggested, it's possible Great Northern would have used 379s to displace 387s to replace 313s and 455s, rather than the 387s allowing 377s to go to Southeastern, while the remaining 365s in service would have stayed longer. Southern might also have considered tagging along to a new fleet order with another operator to long term replace the 313s and 455s, such as getting more 701s, or a third rail version of the 730 (the 3-car type to replace 313s, and some 5-car types to replace 455s and allow more 10-car services).

 

[317 forever]

It is interesting to think what might have happened, had it not been for COVID. On many lines, passenger growth seems to have been roughly 3 to 10%....so over 10 years, I would have expected capacity to bust. You look at what Cross rail has achieved in terms of passenger numbers. Already past the 2030 expectations. Imagine if Manchester had such a commuter system. I guess the down side is the revenue from the greater number of passengers may be lower, overall. Less commuters, first class passengers. More leisure travel on advance or split tickets. But . I keep hearing people say "if they reduced the fares, more people would use trains". But also "why are trains packed..why are you overselling tickets".

Many members of the public seem to want lower fares and less crowded trains. Or more frequent trains without having to pay for them.

 

[slowroad]

Many members of the public seem to want lower fares and less crowded trains. Or more frequent trains without having to pay for them.

And of course the large majority of people use trains rarely - or never.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Many members of the public seem to want lower fares and less crowded trains. Or more frequent trains without having to pay for them.

This is possible if by making the service better you get significant growth. Metrolink doesn't in my understanding require an operating subsidy, but even though it has its foibles it's wildly better than the Manchester diesel commuter services, and while it started out expensive the fares aren't wildly different from the heavy rail ones these days. And in every case it's delivered this by replacing a vastly inferior heavy rail service that did require operating subsidy.

 

[brad465]

And of course the large majority of people use trains rarely - or never.

But those who don't use trains still benefit from their existence, as if everyone using a train took to the road, there would be a significant increase in traffic.

This is possible if by making the service better you get significant growth. Metrolink doesn't in my understanding require an operating subsidy, but even though it has its foibles it's wildly better than the Manchester diesel commuter services, and while it started out expensive the fares aren't wildly different from the heavy rail ones these days. And in every case it's delivered this by replacing a vastly inferior heavy rail service that did require operating subsidy.

There maybe routes with suppressed demand due to restricted capacity, where you could cut fares by say 10%, in conjunction with a 25% increase in capacity and bring in more revenue if that new capacity is filled. XC would be a prime candidate, along with local services around cities like Bristol and Manchester. Which neatly leads onto another possible what if regarding covid: if covid hadn't happened in this way, XC would likely have got more Voyagers from Avanti quicker and not binned the HSTs as fast, while the Northern and GWR fleet tenders could have been processed earlier and already be in production now (but not in service yet).

 

[Trainman40083]

But those who don't use trains still benefit from their existence, as if everyone using a train took to the road, there would be a significant increase in traffic.

There maybe routes with suppressed demand due to restricted capacity, where you could cut fares by say 10%, in conjunction with a 25% increase in capacity and bring in more revenue if that new capacity is filled. XC would be a prime candidate, along with local services around cities like Bristol and Manchester. Which neatly leads onto another possible what if regarding covid: if covid hadn't happened in this way, XC would likely have got more Voyagers from Avanti quicker and not binned the HSTs as fast, while the Northern and GWR fleet tenders could have been processed earlier and already be in production now (but not in service yet).

You talk about suppressed demand. There was a report (I think it was in connection with First Group proposal for a Sheffield to Kings Cross service)...It highlighted the market share in Sheffield to London travel. I think rail was about 8%. Car and coach had a larger share.