Wishlist for Upcoming Franchise Competitions

[miami]

ATW, 2tph Crewe to Shrewsbury stopping at Nantwich + Whitchurch, 1tph stopping at the other stations on the route, including Sundays (where there's a 3 hour gap in the middle of the day for stopping trains)

 

[MK Tom]

For LM


319s to be kept purely for the Abbey Line

That would be the ultimate microfleet.

Can't we fix whatever prevents 350s being used?

 

[Bletchleyite]

ATW, 2tph Crewe to Shrewsbury stopping at Nantwich + Whitchurch, 1tph stopping at the other stations on the route, including Sundays (where there's a 3 hour gap in the middle of the day for stopping trains)

More generally - where line capacity allows, move to pure clockface timetabling with an aim long-term for the entire network (with the exception of *really* rural lines like the Far North - but certainly anything justifying hourly or better, probably also anything justifying two-hourly) to be fully clockface within 10 years or so.

Just having to remember one or two numbers really does drive demand (getting a timetable out is a real barrier to use when the car keys are next to it in the drawer).

FWIW, Merseyrail has been using the concept well for over 30 years now. The Northern and Wirral lines are near perfect clockface - there are almost no trains that deviate (used to be none whatsoever, they've got a bit lazy under Abellio). And that makes things really, really easy for passengers, if operationally a little more challenging.

Even the Sunday service is the same as the weekday service just with half the trains lopped out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That would be the ultimate microfleet.

Can't we fix whatever prevents 350s being used?

That would probably make more sense. That or operate it as a microfranchise going back to the tram idea, a bit like Stourbridge, though as you have the OHLE actual trams would probably make more sense.

 

[dosxuk]

That would probably make more sense. That or operate it as a microfranchise going back to the tram idea, a bit like Stourbridge, though as you have the OHLE actual trams would probably make more sense.

There's some 25kV compatible tram-trains sat in Sheffield that'll be doing nothing for the foreseeable...

 

[infobleep]

Are further improvements likely in the winning bid for the South West franchise or are a lot of the changes already happening or agreed to happen? They are already introducing new rolling stock, 707 and got the second hand 456s, not to mention refurbishing the 458s. Then there is the work at Waterloo station to bring in extra platforms.

 

[swt_passenger]

Are further improvements likelt in the winning bid for the South West franchise or are a lot of the changes already happening or agreed to happen? They are already introducing new rolling stock, 707 and got the second hand 456s, not to mention refurbishing the 458s. Then there is the work at Waterloo station to bring in extra platforms.

There were heavy hints about replacing the 455s, as discussed many times, although it is not actually an explicit statement. The stated requirement is to improve (reduce) dwell times at Clapham Junction in the peaks.

But as I pointed out earlier, extensions to electrification and similar is not in the normal remit of franchise bids.

 

[ComUtoR]

For Southeastern:
1. Ldn Victoria - Orpington additionally calls at Clapham High Street

Why not Wandsworth Road as well ? It seems odd to stop at one but not the other. Also, the Sectional Appendix shows a 4 car limit. So you would limit train length along the whole route. We did run them once but it was very short term.

5. Consider introducing an hourly direct Kent to Gatwick service

Which route and stations ?

6. Stone Crossing, Greenhithe and down to Sevenoaks in the travelcard zones

Sevenoaks is coming I believe but Stone and Greenhithe I couldn't support. Dartford is a natural termination point for services so serves as a good zone boundary. It's also, in part, due to Local buses using Oyster but not the train.

I would like to see more SE services going via the Beckenham Spur as I think that side could be served by Charing Cross better and it may save some cross London transfers.

Pipe dreams :

Via Linford Street and into Waterloo.

New Station on Stewarts Lane for when Battersea opens. Maybe a Vic popper or services going Via Stewarts Lane and then down the Atlantics for maybe Clapham, Wandsworth, Denmark Hill, Bromley South etc.

GoVia not to get it.

 

[infobleep]

For LM

3-4 TPH Euston - Tring

Taking over MKC - Croydon from Southern

Gaining 360s ( from AGA and HEC ) as well as 350/4 from TPE

319s to be kept purely for the Abbey Line

A refurb of the 350/1 (most importantly) and then the 350/2 ( not as important)

Just a wishiist

More trains for them to cancel during disruption.

Personally if like to see it agreed that they won't run shorter services at weekend a due to tolling rock contracts and costs. I understand lack of rolling stock; maintenance or faults but those should be the sole reason for shorter trains.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

More generally - where line capacity allows, move to pure clockface timetabling with an aim long-term for the entire network (with the exception of *really* rural lines like the Far North - but certainly anything justifying hourly or better, probably also anything justifying two-hourly) to be fully clockface within 10 years or so.

Just having to remember one or two numbers really does drive demand (getting a timetable out is a real barrier to use when the car keys are next to it in the drawer).

FWIW, Merseyrail has been using the concept well for over 30 years now. The Northern and Wirral lines are near perfect clockface - there are almost no trains that deviate (used to be none whatsoever, they've got a bit lazy under Abellio). And that makes things really, really easy for passengers, if operationally a little more challenging.

Even the Sunday service is the same as the weekday service just with half the trains lopped out.

If we did a clockface timetabling then less trains would run in the peaks or useful station cslls that are only allowed to happen outside of the high peak, would be scraped.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There were heavy hints about replacing the 455s, as discussed many times, although it is not actually an explicit statement. The stated requirement is to improve (reduce) dwell times at Clapham Junction in the peaks.

But as I pointed out earlier, extensions to electrification and similar is not in the normal remit of franchise bids.

With so many passenagers, how does one improve the dwell times? They can't run any more trains as they just isn't the space. The doors aren't exactly slower to open. At least not the 455s.

Some do seem to close almost straightaway after opening so maybe the open button is a bit sensitive. Not sure if that's the 455 or 456s

Are there still quite a few 8 car trains slowing things down? Would 10 car trains speed up boarding times?

I can't imagine the Southern issue is helping with speeds as I imagine more passengers use the Dorking route or other routes.. That wouldn't change in the new franchise, if the Southern issues continue. Even if the dispute is resolved, they may still not have enough staff so people might still use the South West franchise services.

 

[Class 170101]

Lack of capacity between Wigston and Kettering mean it is more than likely that the 6th path will run to Corby, any Manchester service would probably start in Leicester, but a direct Leicester - Derby - Manchester service would be good.

Is there supposed to be four tracking proposed between Syston and Wigston via Leicester? Secondly surely the dualling of Kettering to Corby would release capacity between Kettering and Leicester by diverting trains?

Why? The Northern service by 2020 will be much faster, more sensible to extend the Sheffield semi-fast service to Leeds, a better policy would be providing faster services to Nottingham.

Possibly but the DfT won't allow this given they refused MML access already north of Sheffield to extend the Sheffield fast service as it was percieved as an ORCRATS raid on an ECML flow.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Outside of the things required by the DfT, an hourly BHM to Gloucester via Worcester would make sense. That might require the LO 172s if they're not accounted for already. I can't imagine anyone else wants them alone as a micro fleet other than Chiltern? You could also cover the Coventry to Leamington/Nuneaton shuttles, and enhance train lengths on the dark side with any that are left over.

I think I suggested XC for that as an extension of their Leicester / Nottingham to Birmingham services, perhaps the 12 Class 170s that Greater Anglia won't need once their new fleet arrives would be suitable for that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But as I alluded to earlier, that destroys any Northbound connectivity from Northampton to anywhere that's not Birmingham. Take getting from here to Leicester. It's a very easy journey on the M1, but if I want to do it by rail, I have the choice of changing at Rugby to change a miles later at Nuneaton--one change being enough to turn a significant amount of people away, never mind two--or go all the way to Birmingham to then double back on myself to get to Leicester. This is true of pretty much any connection to the rest of the East Midlands and the North East.

Arguably this a failing of WCML service provision rather than an LM problem. Perhaps it would be better to extend an existing Northampton terminator to Leicester directly or via Coventry. I still believe there is demand for a second fast service from London via the Weedon to Trent Valley stations.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why? They're slower, older, much less reliable and have a worse passenger environment than either of the current two EMUs used in Birmingham... Given that there are 10 350/4 and 17 323s fairly freely available to the WM franchise, it's not like there aren't better options available! Won't the Cl.360s and Cl.333s be available soon too? The only place 319s should be going is to the scrap men.

Class 319s are actually only around 5 years older than Class 323s. 1987 to 1992. Class 319s for London to Northampton slower services with Class 323s from Northern should be operating with their LM counterparts around Birmingham suburbs.

 

[davetheguard]

For SWT or GW

A daily service of trains between Exeter Central & St. David's to/from Okehampton that enables people to travel to work, have weekends away, evenings out, and go shopping.

The County Council have been funding Summer Sunday trains for years; it's time the line had a proper service and rejoined the national network.

 

[Mordac]

Arguably this a failing of WCML service provision rather than an LM problem. Perhaps it would be better to extend an existing Northampton terminator to Leicester directly or via Coventry. I still believe there is demand for a second fast service from London via the Weedon to Trent Valley stations.

But isn't LM the franchise supposed to provide short and middle distance services in the WCML? I'm certainly not expecting any Virgin trains to detour via Northampton...

And extending Northampton services to Leicester would require running them with DMUs, which makes it a non-starter.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

If we did a clockface timetabling then less trains would run in the peaks or useful station cslls that are only allowed to happen outside of the high peak, would be scraped.

Indeed, however some lines could do with one just to start with - the likes of Lancaster-Barrow, Penzance-Plymouth and the North Wales Coast serve reasonable populations and have busy services, yet are an awkward mish-mash of stopping patterns (especially the latter) and service frequencies that don't particularly aid user-friendliness. Much better to have punters know that if they turn up every hour at xx45 they'll have a train all shacks to Preston, and if they turn up at xx22 they'll have a train all shacks to Barrow than a service that requires a blanket 'please consult the timetable, but be careful as trains x and y don't actually call there...'.

 

[43074]

Is there supposed to be four tracking proposed between Syston and Wigston via Leicester? Secondly surely the dualling of Kettering to Corby would release capacity between Kettering and Leicester by diverting trains?

Much of the freight between the Southern MML and the Coalville and Hinckley lines has no real choice other than to go via Market Harborough. Hence the dualling of Kettering to Corby might help divert some trains but it doesn't solve the key constraint to the timetable, which is the two track Kettering to Kilby Bridge (South of Wigston, Leicester) section. The Leicester Area remodelling primarily provides extra capacity between East and West rather than North and South, because you still have the bottleneck between Wigston and Kettering.

 

[Class 170101]

But isn't LM the franchise supposed to provide short and middle distance services in the WCML? I'm certainly not expecting any Virgin trains to detour via Northampton...

And extending Northampton services to Leicester would require running them with DMUs, which makes it a non-starter.

Perhaps Virgin stopping at Rugby would help?

Why would DMUs be needed? Bi-modes?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Much of the freight between the Southern MML and the Coalville and Hinckley lines has no real choice other than to go via Market Harborough. Hence the dualling of Kettering to Corby might help divert some trains but it doesn't solve the key constraint to the timetable, which is the two track Kettering to Kilby Bridge (South of Wigston, Leicester) section. The Leicester Area remodelling primarily provides extra capacity between East and West rather than North and South, because you still have the bottleneck between Wigston and Kettering.

I certainly see your point about traffic for the Coalville lines I would expect Hinckley traffic to run via Corby and Leicester if it eases capacity on the MML without affecting the Cross Country route however I accept not all traffic could go this way.

Is there any scope in the geography therefore to construct either short four track sections or passing loops between Kettering and Leicester.

 

[Mordac]

Perhaps Virgin stopping at Rugby would help?

Why would DMUs be needed? Bi-modes?

Virgin stopping at Rugby would definitely help with connections to the North West and Scotland. I don't think they'd like slowing their services down for it though, at least pre HS2. The problem is it wouldn't do anything for connections to the East Midlands and the North East.

I didn't consider bi-modes because I doubt LM will acquire any. Most of their DMU operations don't spend that much time under the wires IIRC. I might be wrong on this, please correct me if so, but I don't think it would be worth the extra cost of going with bi-modes compares with straight DMUs. Doing that service would also require a reversal at Nuneaton.

 

[Class 170101]

Virgin stopping at Rugby would definitely help with connections to the North West and Scotland. I don't think they'd like slowing their services down for it though, at least pre HS2. The problem is it wouldn't do anything for connections to the East Midlands and the North East.

Unless the Coventry to Leicester service in the past did this I don't see how this helps Northampton. As for the North East surely thats always needed a change either London or Birmingham New Street / Tamworth

I didn't consider bi-modes because I doubt LM will acquire any. Most of their DMU operations don't spend that much time under the wires IIRC. I might be wrong on this, please correct me if so, but I don't think it would be worth the extra cost of going with bi-modes compares with straight DMUs. Doing that service would also require a reversal at Nuneaton.

Unless the previous Coventry to Leicester service didn't call at Nuneaton surely that needed a reversal anyway at Nuneaton Station and if it didn't call there surely that weakens links between Coventry and the Trent Valley / North West?

Some DMUs do spend quite a bit under wires particularly for Shrewsbury to New Street (from Wolverhampton) and Rugeley to New Street (from Walsall).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed, however some lines could do with one just to start with - the likes of Lancaster-Barrow, Penzance-Plymouth and the North Wales Coast serve reasonable populations and have busy services, yet are an awkward mish-mash of stopping patterns (especially the latter) and service frequencies that don't particularly aid user-friendliness. Much better to have punters know that if they turn up every hour at xx45 they'll have a train all shacks to Preston, and if they turn up at xx22 they'll have a train all shacks to Barrow than a service that requires a blanket 'please consult the timetable, but be careful as trains x and y don't actually call there...'.

Yes, I can see that there will be South East peak services where it isn't viable due to line capacity - though where it is allowed by line capacity (even if peak extras are added on top of the base pattern) it is preferable.

I absolutely agree about regional type services like North Wales and Barrow - indeed, the Barrow timetable is a mess for absolutely no reason I can discern given that the rump of the WCML services in that area that they would connect with/be pathed in between *do* operate to a pure Takt.

I would suggest with Barrow new dedicated bi-modes should be used (or D-319s if that's all that is affordable), which would operate a core hourly service Preston-all stations-Barrow, with selected trains carrying on past Barrow along the coast in the same "minutes" slots within the selected hour[1], and with one train every 2 hours (pure clockface) running through to Manchester Airport, with the Windermere train running through using the same concept in opposite hours. (Or if demand is sufficient, both running through joining/splitting at Lancaster). I can see no good reason not to stop all trains at all stations on the Cumbrian Coast - missing the odd one saves very little time and just makes for a confusing timetable.

North Wales would I think have sufficient capacity to do something similar - more complex, but on the Swiss rural S-Bahn model, with numbered lines operating on a pure hourly clockface timetable with consistent calling patterns.

And Merseyrail need to get the Southport and Chester lines back "im Takt" (Ormskirk, Kirkby, West Kirby and New Brighton are still 100% perfect clockface) - they were for years, it's just Abellio that's stuffed it up!

[1] That still has a memorability benefit - "it's 44 minutes past 9, 11, 2 and 5" is easier to remember than 4 separate times. I'd like to see the same approach on lines like the Conwy Valley, Far North etc too.

 

[Kite159]

For the Hampshire villages between Salisbury & Basingstoke to get an hourly service on Sundays (like the rest of the week and the Dorset villages). Also gives a clock face timetable for Andover departures

Will probably grow passenger numbers on Sundays

 

[the sniper]

319s to be kept purely for the Abbey Line

That would be the ultimate microfleet.

Can't we fix whatever prevents 350s being used?

Bit of a faff, but you could stick a 323 on it post-2019 when/if WM take all the Northern 323s. There should be more than enough 323s then to spare one or two for the Abbey line. A 350 would be good operationally, but perhaps a bit of a waste. If they do get the 360s they could stick one of them on there, as you don't need the gangway of a 350.

Adding a 5-car subfleet would be quite useful - it would allow lengths of 4, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 12-car to be formed, which would mean lengths could be tailored more to demand. There are quite a lot of LM services where 8 is insufficient, and 12 excessive, and similarly a lot of off-peak services where 4 isn't quite enough but 5 would be adequate.

I see what you're saying but in reality I can see it being a real pain planning/operation wise. It's much easier to stick to standard formations. There are many stations that only accommodate 20mx4 or 20mx8. Plus I don't think trying to match supply to demand on the level of an additional carriage here and there really helps that much, as I don't think it's easy to asses demand that accurately.

Uniformity and standardisation, while not overly interesting from an enthusiasts point of view, makes the whole operation much easier to manage and run reliably and efficiently.

ATW, 2tph Crewe to Shrewsbury stopping at Nantwich + Whitchurch, 1tph stopping at the other stations on the route, including Sundays (where there's a 3 hour gap in the middle of the day for stopping trains)

I've said it before on here but given that everywhere south of Whitchurch is in Shropshire, with one of the constituents of 'West Midlands Rail' being Shropshire, I had imagined an hourly Shrewsbury to Crewe stopper being a part of the WM franchise. What with the stopper running entirely in England and there being a LM/WM depot at each end, it makes perfect sense to me. Wasn't in the WM ITT though and the whole ATW border change thing seems to have died away, so I can't see it happening.

Class 319s are actually only around 5 years older than Class 323s. 1987 to 1992. Class 319s for London to Northampton slower services with Class 323s from Northern should be operating with their LM counterparts around Birmingham suburbs.

Indeed, they're still older though. Plus the 319s are part of the BR Mk3 'family', so are conceptually much older than the 323s too.

I don't really get why people are so keen to see 319s on the south WCML stoppers when there are 360s available in just a couple of years. The 319s have been woefully unreliable and the public find them to be completely inferior comfort wise to newer stock like the 350s that they're used to.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Plus I don't think trying to match supply to demand on the level of an additional carriage here and there really helps that much, as I don't think it's easy to asses demand that accurately.

Suggest you take a quick look at Chiltern, who seem to have become masters of this by using short DMUs that seem very rarely to run on their own.

 

[The Ham]

For the Hampshire villages between Salisbury & Basingstoke to get an hourly service on Sundays (like the rest of the week and the Dorset villages). Also gives a clock face timetable for Andover departures

Will probably grow passenger numbers on Sundays

I think more services in general on Sundays would be good.

A 2 or 3 coach DMU running a stopping service between Salisbury (maybe Yeovil on an every other hour frequency) and Woking (giving two places to connect to other services) could be fairly well used and would mean that there wasn't a need to slow down the longer distance services.

Once electrification reaches Salisbury then it could swap to bring an EMU.

Train services to Farnborough on a Sunday, at times are 1/4 of that during the week and Fleet is 1/3. As such the extra service would reduce the Sunday reduction in service impact.

By having the service run to Woking it allows connections into London as well as those down to Portsmouth without increasing paths used into Waterloo and minimising the extra resources needed to run the services.

 

[yorksrob]

SWT - Six carriages minimum between Waterloo, all the way to Exeter throughout the day.

SE - Fast trains on the SE mainline between the Kent Coast and Charing Cross. Also an earlier first train between Ashford and Hastings and a later corresponding last train back.

EMT - stop faffing with bi-modes and retain HST's until full electrification.

 

[SF-02]

For Southeastern:

Networker refurbishment to improve an interior which is tired. 2x2 seats for more standing space. To not decrease seats all peak time Metro routes to Vic need to be 8 cars, and most/all to Cannon St and Charing Cross being 12 car. SDO would be needed so fit it or get extra stock that has it.

Any related infrastructure work to achieve that needs to be done.

Station staffing from first to last train on any station above 500k users. Staff barriers not just 20% max of stations.

Fare parity with the rest of London, not paying twice as much for exactly the same zonal trips. And lose the £1.50 charge for changing to the tube that much of London does not pay.

Make sure the TOC and NR are obliged to work with authorities on housing plans. TfL do this and offer detailed guidance with planning apps - rarely have Southeastern. Alongside this look for NR sites/car parks etc that can be used for housing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Ah, and later trains on Friday and Saturday nights up to Dartford at least. Maybe some work will preclude this after 2018 but it should a mid term goal. Again, the area further slipping behind TfL managed areas over a decade will hurt the SE London and NW Kent economy

 

[nuneatonmark]

Wish list for new WCML franchise
No1 priority - restore the hourly fast service (plus extra peak calls) at Nuneaton. It should never have been taken away
No 2 priority - extra capacity for Trent Valley which could be achieved in a number of ways 1. Scrapping the existing LM fast service and replacing it 2 services which split off Birmingham services at Northampton or keep the existing direct Weedon service and supplement it by a 'splitter' off a Northampton service.

Wish list for new XC, extend Hereford/Worcester services to Nuneaton or Leicester plus more carraiges

For West Midlands franchise, at least 2 trains per hour on Nuneaton to Coventry line

 

[Suraggu]

For the Hampshire villages between Salisbury & Basingstoke to get an hourly service on Sundays (like the rest of the week and the Dorset villages). Also gives a clock face timetable for Andover departures

Will probably grow passenger numbers on Sundays

What this line needs to really increase services is a half hourly service on a Sunday from 1000 -1900. Yes there are a couple of extras in the day but to really increase passenger numbers and create growth have like on Monday-Sat A Salisbury -Basingstoke stopping service calling at Grateley, Andover, Whitchurch and Overton.

 

[Kite159]

What this line needs to really increase services is a half hourly service on a Sunday from 1000 -1900. Yes there are a couple of extras in the day but to really increase passenger numbers and create growth have like on Monday-Sat A Salisbury -Basingstoke stopping service calling at Grateley, Andover, Whitchurch and Overton.

As long as it gives a good connection at Basingstoke onto a fast service towards Waterloo.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No 2 priority - extra capacity for Trent Valley which could be achieved in a number of ways 1. Scrapping the existing LM fast service and replacing it 2 services which split off Birmingham services at Northampton or keep the existing direct Weedon service and supplement it by a 'splitter' off a Northampton service.

I'd propose the latter rather than slowing down the existing service. Also all trains 8-car - a doubled service frequency will increase demand further.

 

[Adsy125]

Far fetched I know but, extend the XC Manchester-Bournemouth services to Poole using 8 car 802s( or dual voltage 801s).Then take on some of the VTEC mark 4s and convert them to operate between Class 43s from GWR and VTEC and use these to run all services from Plymouth to the North. This should be able to release enough voyagers to alleviate capacity issues for other services and to run increased frequencies on other services e.g. 1tph SOU to NCL ☺

 

[The Ham]

As long as it gives a good connection at Basingstoke onto a fast service towards Waterloo.

Which is why I think that it would be better continuing to Working as it would then give you connections with trains between Waterloo and Portsmouth and the Woking stoppers. As well as adding potentially significant numbers of extra passengers from the stations between Basingstoke and Woking.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Far fetched I know but, extend the XC Manchester-Bournemouth services to Poole using 8 car 802s( or dual voltage 801s).Then take on some of the VTEC mark 4s and convert them to operate between Class 43s from GWR and VTEC and use these to run all services from Plymouth to the North. This should be able to release enough voyagers to alleviate capacity issues for other services and to run increased frequencies on other services e.g. 1tph SOU to NCL ☺

Just by releasing (IIRC) 7 units from the south coast to Manchester services you could see quite a lot of extra capacity on other services.

If we assume that they are all 5 coach units, then those 7 units could swap with services run by 4 coach units (7 services improved). They then pair up with 7 other 4 coach units and swap duties with 5 coach units (I.e. services run by 5 coach units now have a pair of 4 coach units and those previously run by 4 coach units now run by 5 coach units), that's a further 14 services improved.

That's a total of 28 services which see an improvement (the 7 with the new 802's, the 7 which get the 5 coach units replace the existing 4 coach units and the 14 which benefit from doubling up and swapping around). Given that XC only have about 60 units capable of 125mph running that's about 1/2 of all XC services seeing an improvement.

Yes, half those that see an improvement would only be an increase from 200 seats to 250 seats. However the other half would see an increase from 250 to 400 (or in the case of the 802's more likely close to 550 seats).

Personally, once you are into the realms of having spare 220's to run in pairs then I would start to consider creating 3 coach, standard class only units, for use as crowd busters through the core with all other units being a standard 5 coaches in length.

That would give you 19 x 3 coach units with circa 150 seats and 39 x 5 coach units with 250 seats.

 

[Clip]

Personally, once you are into the realms of having spare 220's to run in pairs then I would start to consider creating 3 coach, standard class only units, for use as crowd busters through the core with all other units being a standard 5 coaches in length.

That would give you 19 x 3 coach units with circa 150 seats and 39 x 4 coach units with 250 seats.

Sorry, have I read that right, you want to reduce train lengths and amount of seats on a train to use as crowd busters? Surely the very idea of 'crowd busting' would be to use longer trains with more seats. Or have I not had enough tea this morning to understand this idea of fewer seats and train lengths as a means of improving capacity