What would a "pro-growth" rail agenda look like?

[Sad Sprinter]

Interested to know what a government policy would look like, to get as many people using the railway as possible. And more so, would it even be possible or desirable?

 

[Irascible]

Rather than pro-rail in isolation, pro-integrated-public-transport. Optimistically it'd involve regional ( for various levels of region ) govenrment - unfortuinately knowing us, that'd just add layers of raguments...

 

[Tetchytyke]

There’s no one size fits all.

For local journeys it can’t be rail in isolation. So co-ordinated ticketing, co-ordinated timetabling, easy connections between modes. Something that we see to an extent in PTE areas (with some PTEs better than others) and something that is distinctly lacking elsewhere.

As for long-distance travel, cost is the big thing, closely followed by capacity. Only a masochist would voluntarily travel by XC, and EMR is heading that way.

But it’s the easiest thing in the world to charge 2p a ticket, it’s harder to make it sustainable. That requires structural change, and I don’t think either of the two main parties have any interest in making the required structural changes.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I agree rail can't be seen in isolation. I'm guessing to make the biggest impact you'd have to go down the route of undoing bus deregulation to enable greater connectivity with rail timetables?

 

[bluenoxid]

A pro-rail agenda might also see more behaviour influencing measures in terms of movement charges via road such as road user charging and workplace parking levy’s

 

[yorksrob]

Probably the easiest pro-rail initiative that could be introduced would be a National railcard available for all.

We already have an infrastructure for dealing with railcards and its just a matter of filling in the gaps.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Probably the easiest pro-rail initiative that could be introduced would be a National railcard available for all.

We already have an infrastructure for dealing with railcards and its just a matter of filling in the gaps.

I do wonder if rail-loyalty card things could entice people into the office more "make 4 peak hour trips a week every month to win a free weekend round trip" or something

 

[Trainbike46]

I agree with others here that improving connections between modes, for example by timing buses depending on trains, would help. In some cases integrated ticketing would certainly help too, for example by offering combined coach-rail tickets for routes where rail does not exist the whole way.

If the government was aiming for growth, increasing capacity on routes where it is constrained would be key. This means that XC should get the ex-avanti 221s when they are released, and EMR should look at acquiring slightly more 810s. LNER should keep the IC22s as well.

The next most important things would be tackling unreliability at the source, and then looking to restore pre-covid frequencies where this hasn't happened yet.

Finally, there would be a long-term investment plan, looking to tackle bottlenecks, increase reliability and expand electrification. HS2 would be built in full, without government-imposed delays that increase overall cost.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree rail can't be seen in isolation. I'm guessing to make the biggest impact you'd have to go down the route of undoing bus deregulation to enable greater connectivity with rail timetables?

That looks like it'll happen anyway, assuming Greater Manchester is successful, and buses are de-facto regulated in more rural areas anyway as commercial operation is not viable.

 

[snookertam]

Co-ordinated ticketing and a combination of co-ordinated scheduling and consistent timetabling where feasible. Make it simple and easy for people, and they will use it.

 

[Trainbike46]

Another thing that should be considered is whether it would be possible (for a reasonable price) to extend all LNER and GWR 9-car 80x to 10-cars, to increase capacity without increasing staffing costs. Bonus points if it could add level boarding for wheelchair users and a shop for the GWR ones, though those points aren't essential

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Could "parry people movers" type stock provide a way to reopen small rural lines? Or are they not economical

 

[Dr Day]

Growth in what? % of total miles travelled travelling by public transport per £ subsidy? Something bus-based I would expect to deliver more growth per pound than anything rail based.

 

[43066]

Another thing that should be considered is whether it would be possible (for a reasonable price) to extend all LNER and GWR 9-car 80x to 10-cars, to increase capacity without increasing staffing costs. Bonus points if it could add level boarding for wheelchair users and a shop for the GWR ones, though those points aren't essential

That’s a very sensible suggestion, and the sort of thing that can only feasibly be done during the limited window while the production line remains open.

However it would need a willingness of the DfT to take a long term view, and be prepared to invest for the future, so there’s zero chance of it happening!

 

[JonathanH]

The most important thing it to get more people using the railway, not the same people using the railway more.

 

[Trainbike46]

The most important thing it to get more people using the railway, not the same people using the railway more.

Is it? In what way?

 

[JonathanH]

Is it? In what way?

A green growth agenda would not encourage people to make extra journeys, but would encourage people to make use of public transport instead of other means.

 

[Trainbike46]

A green growth agenda would not encourage people to make extra journeys, but would encourage people to make use of public transport instead of other means.

Fair point, but in a hypothetical example of someone who sometimes drives (or even flies) and sometimes uses public transport, getting them to move more of their journeys onto public transport would be a sustainability win, while also being a case of a current rail user using the railway more.

I fully agree it is key to get more people using the railway though

 

[43066]

The most important thing it to get more people using the railway, not the same people using the railway more.

A green growth agenda would not encourage people to make extra journeys, but would encourage people to make use of public transport instead of other means.

I think both are important. The same people using it more might improve the revenue position further than new customers if they tip back into using season tickets.

 

[cle]

All sounds very Swiss so far!

Agreed on ticketing, timetables etc - with buses and light rail and other things. There should be one source of truth, and a ))) tap/bank card mechanism (with alts for those without) - which melds the likes of NR, all buses and grabbing Metrolink, for example - without penalties and indeed, with incentives such as free transfers. People might use Deansgate station more for transfers, to give one Manc-centric example.

Other last mile things if we feel responsible enough to have e-scooters, bikes etc to increase catchment of a station. I know half of them get nicked or thrown in canals.

Trains should have displays with the connections (other trains' platforms and buses) - at each coming station.

Could we ever go mode-agnostic on pricing (by distance/time) ?

Cut bus routes to feed heavier transit hubs, no duplication.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Trains should have displays with the connections (other trains' platforms and buses) - at each coming station.

Some newer (And refurbished) trains do have this, I've seen it on 195s, 150s, and probably some more I wasn't paying attention to.
However, not (yet) busses.

 

[8H]

There’s no one size fits all.

For local journeys it can’t be rail in isolation. So co-ordinated ticketing, co-ordinated timetabling, easy connections between modes. Something that we see to an extent in PTE areas (with some PTEs better than others) and something that is distinctly lacking elsewhere.

As for long-distance travel, cost is the big thing, closely followed by capacity. Only a masochist would voluntarily travel by XC, and EMR is heading that way.

But it’s the easiest thing in the world to charge 2p a ticket, it’s harder to make it sustainable. That requires structural change, and I don’t think either of the two main parties have any interest in making the required structural changes.

Agree with this good little summary and would add the importance of railfreight in respect of network capacity increases and of more rolling stock in actual passenger capacity. Maybe some more route miles added too, possibly Very Light Rail to plug obvious missing links. Sadly concur too that the UK government experience in respect of structural change and necessary spending on infrastructure improvements requiring a long term view mean we are probably going nowhere fast UK business as usual.

 

[RT4038]

That looks like it'll happen anyway, assuming Greater Manchester is successful, and buses are de-facto regulated in more rural areas anyway as commercial operation is not viable.

Has this (increasing) de-facto bus regulation in rural areas generally provided co-ordination with rail timetables? No. Has it provided any fares co-ordination or integration? No. Is anything remotely on the cards? No.

 

[Trainbike46]

Anyone who thinks train fares aren't too expensive don't know the reality - the amount of people that would travel by train all the time but don't often because of the price is ridiculous, and that's just from personal experience.

I fully believe if all off-peak train fares were halved and time restrictions removed, with advance and anytime fares removed (both would be redundant with off peak tickets becoming anytime and advance fares having no advantage with cheaper open tickets), after a couple of weeks of promoting the cheaper fares, passenger figures would more than double and the railways would be making more money than they do now.

I love this idea, but the obvious question is: how are we going to fit all those extra passengers on the trains? particularly if there's no price incentive to shift passengers to less busy times

 

[yorksrob]

I do wonder if rail-loyalty card things could entice people into the office more "make 4 peak hour trips a week every month to win a free weekend round trip" or something

"Rail miles" or some such could certainly work, although you're limiting the additional travel that a passenger will get and giving it away for free. With a railcard you're enticing the traveller to pay for ever more leisure travel, albeit at a discount.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 May 2023 ==

Growth in what? % of total miles travelled travelling by public transport per £ subsidy? Something bus-based I would expect to deliver more growth per pound than anything rail based.

To be fair, they're already doing that with the £2 flat fare.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 May 2023 ==

The most important thing it to get more people using the railway, not the same people using the railway more.

A green growth agenda would not encourage people to make extra journeys, but would encourage people to make use of public transport instead of other means.

A "green growth" agenda requires growth, which can be anybody getting out and about more, contributing to the economy, not just motorists substituting their road journeys with rail ones.

 

[deltic]

Need to improve the reliability of the service first in many locations; then you slash fares to build up ridership and as trains fill up again you increase fares to manage growth. The proportion of people who interchange from bus to train even in the best run systems is fairly small and it would take years to introduce a co-ordinated service. Simpler multi-modal ticketing would help. Just extending Oyster to the national rail network in Greater London increased patronage without doing anything else.

As we move to smart ticketing having differential pricing by direction could also grow counter peak traffic on commuter routes. Eg a cheap fare into Southend in the morning peak which is lower than the fare in the opposite direction.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Has this (increasing) de-facto bus regulation in rural areas generally provided co-ordination with rail timetables? No.

Depends. Where there’s an obvious railhead for bus services to connect into then yes it has, examples include the connections at Garsdale and Kirkby Stephen. Could be better, and can’t always work, but there has been an effort.

 

[PTR 444]

Other last mile things if we feel responsible enough to have e-scooters, bikes etc to increase catchment of a station. I know half of them get nicked or thrown in canals.

This would require the ban on e-scooters to be lifted, but I could see this being a game changer as it would help alleviate the “last mile problem” encountered among many public transport users.

Trains should have displays with the connections (other trains' platforms and buses) - at each coming station.

Agreed. It would also be good for PIS systems to display an infographic or map showing station layouts and walking times to each platform for ease of changing trains.

Cut bus routes to feed heavier transit hubs, no duplication.

While there are some cases where this might be sensible, bus routes should still be planned with passenger demand in mind. For example, if a railway station is on a bus route between a village and town where the majority of passengers want to go, it would be much better to run all the way to the town to avoid inconveniencing passengers.

 

[Thirteen]

I think Pro public transport is a better outlook than purely pro rail. The major cities like Manchester, Liverpool etc want a TfL style system for their local services and if that would be a huge selling points to voters.

 

[eldomtom2]

The key thing is fares. Ask people why they don't use the train and the number one reason is always fares, far above anything else.