Potential slashing of rail services in 2021

[Coolzac]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...TH-commuters-not-use-trains-indefinitely.html

'Rail firms plan to slash services in timetable in the new year to cut costs amid predictions that a fifth of rail users won't return' in an article from the Daily Mail.

This isn't great for fans of rail travel, but understandable given the circumstances. I hope that most cuts are temporary, with the majority of services cut reinstated later next year. The only thing I would be ok with is a slight reduction of commuter timetables, given that I think commuting into work will never fully recover to what it was.

What does everyone think? Do you think there will be further major cuts to services next year, or that any changes will be slight? Will these services come back anytime soon?

 

[Simon11]

It makes sense, as long as there is still a frequent timetable offering a good services for passengers and all rolling stock is kept operational, with the thinking of keeping sets as long as possible for social distancing.

 

[Ted633]

I'd agree with you on commuter services, when 'normality' does return I can see commuting levels not returning. However, at least initially, I can see leisure travel going through the roof.

 

[duncanp]

I think there will be some rationlisation of services in December, especially on commuter routes where timetables are heavily geared towards peak times on Mondays - Fridays.

I don't think you will see major cuts to more long distance services, although you might see something like Avanti West Coast only running two trains per hour instead of three between London and Manchester/Birmingham.

What happens in next year's summer timetable will depend on the extent of the economic recovery (if indeed there is one at all), which will in turn depend on whether the extent to which life is getting back to normal.

 

[Ianno87]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...TH-commuters-not-use-trains-indefinitely.html

'Rail firms plan to slash services in timetable in the new year to cut costs amid predictions that a fifth of rail users won't return' in an article from the Daily Mail.

This isn't great for fans of rail travel, but understandable given the circumstances. I hope that most cuts are temporary, with the majority of services cut reinstated later next year. The only thing I would be ok with is a slight reduction of commuter timetables, given that I think commuting into work will never fully recover to what it was.

What does everyone think? Do you think there will be further major cuts to services next year, or that any changes will be slight? Will these services come back anytime soon?

As a reminder, "a fifth of users not returning" takes 2019 demand back to where it was in about 2012. And trains were hardly quiet then either....

 

[theageofthetra]

Personally I think this is also in preparation for mass testing and possibly vaccination and the effect it will have on traincrew availability.

 

[eastwestdivide]

For 'slashing' read 'adjusting supply to demand' ?

 

[Llandudno]

If services are reduced slightly, let’s hope that ALL the advertised services run, there should be no excuse for ‘lack of resource availability’ I am looking at you TfW !! and Northern, of course!

 

[Bletchleyite]

In many ways 1/5 reduction strikes me as the sort of reduction which will give the railway chance to get the capacity to actually match the demand rather than the severe overcrowding which pervaded many parts of the network up to March, as well as perhaps getting rid of some of the more decrepit rolling stock.

So no bad thing, really, provided they aren't just switching to cars and are rather not travelling at all because of e.g. home-working.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The railway will find it difficult to reduce costs on a short-term basis.
Thinning out services and parking trains doesn't reduce costs when the stock leases and train crews still have to be paid long term.
Pure train movement costs are tiny in comparison with the fleet/crew costs.
The TOCs could stop replacement or enhancement plans, but many new trains are on order which can't be terminated.
It's amusing that the DfT is asking the TOCs to reduce costs, when it's the DfT which sets the service specification in the first place!

 

[Coolzac]

In many ways 1/5 reduction strikes me as the sort of reduction which will give the railway chance to get the capacity to actually match the demand rather than the severe overcrowding which pervaded many parts of the network up to March, as well as perhaps getting rid of some of the more decrepit rolling stock.

So no bad thing, really, provided they aren't just switching to cars and are rather not travelling at all because of e.g. home-working.

I think this is a very good point. It's easy to forget that before the lockdown parts of the network were struggling with demand and cancelling services (some people may think 'twas ever thus!') . Therefore this might be a good opportunity to reduce a few services and run things more effectively.

This may be wishful thinking, however!

 

[The Planner]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...TH-commuters-not-use-trains-indefinitely.html

'Rail firms plan to slash services in timetable in the new year to cut costs amid predictions that a fifth of rail users won't return' in an article from the Daily Mail.

This isn't great for fans of rail travel, but understandable given the circumstances. I hope that most cuts are temporary, with the majority of services cut reinstated later next year. The only thing I would be ok with is a slight reduction of commuter timetables, given that I think commuting into work will never fully recover to what it was.

What does everyone think? Do you think there will be further major cuts to services next year, or that any changes will be slight? Will these services come back anytime soon?

Should read "DfT tell Rail firms to slash services" really.

I don't think you will see major cuts to more long distance services, although you might see something like Avanti West Coast only running two trains per hour instead of three between London and Manchester/Birmingham.

Already happening from a couple of weeks time. May 21 is as stable as Donald Trump at the minute.

 

[theageofthetra]

I think this is a very good point. It's easy to forget that before the lockdown parts of the network were struggling with demand and cancelling services (some people may think 'twas ever thus!') . Therefore this might be a good opportunity to reduce a few services and run things more effectively.

This may be wishful thinking, however!

Don't also forget the effect of tourism from abroad on rail traffic in some areas. That demand is almost non existent at present.

 

[RT4038]

In many ways 1/5 reduction strikes me as the sort of reduction which will give the railway chance to get the capacity to actually match the demand rather than the severe overcrowding which pervaded many parts of the network up to March, as well as perhaps getting rid of some of the more decrepit rolling stock.

So no bad thing, really, provided they aren't just switching to cars and are rather not travelling at all because of e.g. home-working.

Let's not be too complacent. The Treasury is going to be looking at bringing its rail costs back into line with levels pre-Covid.

 

[ExRes]

The quote appears to be from that most reliable of sources, the Daily Mail, perhaps a second report is required before believing this one?

 

[bramling]

Let's not be too complacent. The Treasury is going to be looking at bringing its rail costs back into line with levels pre-Covid.

But at the same time there is bound to be a steady restoration of usage. In the meantime it will be difficult to justify too much retrenchment due to social distancing. Sadiq Khan already got vilified for that, even if that wasn't really what happened in reality.

The industry is unlikely to be able to run a 100% timetable for some time anyway due to the recruitment / training issues this year, which will have left backlogs pretty much across the board.

A trimming of some high peak services is highly likely, indeed is essentially what we're seeing now and continuing in the December timetable, however there's the real risk that if staff numbers and rolling stock quantities are pared down to match then the industry could get well and truly caught out if and when ridership restores.

 

[edwin_m]

But at the same time there is bound to be a steady restoration of usage. In the meantime it will be difficult to justify too much retrenchment due to social distancing. Sadiq Khan already got vilified for that, even if that wasn't really what happened in reality.

The industry is unlikely to be able to run a 100% timetable for some time anyway due to the recruitment / training issues this year, which will have left backlogs pretty much across the board.

A trimming of some high peak services is highly likely, indeed is essentially what we're seeing now and continuing in the December timetable, however there's the real risk that if staff numbers and rolling stock quantities are pared down to match then the industry could get well and truly caught out if and when ridership restores.

I would also expect a trimming of peak-time commuter services, with those recruitment issues making it easier to do so. This would free up London commuter rolling stock as most peak services there are already maximum length. There may be scope to re-deploy it, for example some Southern Electrostars joining similar ones at Southeastern with some Networkers withdrawn. Whatever was released could be mothballed, or if the buildback is over a couple of years there ought to be time to order new stock to cope with it.

Outside the London commuter belt the service provision is much less peaky anyway, and any units released might be better used to lengthen other services, but any significant cutback is likely to reduce service frequency for some people.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would also expect a trimming of peak-time commuter services, with those recruitment issues making it easier to do so. This would free up London commuter rolling stock as most peak services there are already maximum length. There may be scope to re-deploy it, for example some Southern Electrostars joining similar ones at Southeastern with some Networkers withdrawn. Whatever was released could be mothballed, or if the buildback is over a couple of years there ought to be time to order new stock to cope with it.

Other than the ones converted to 769s, it should be possible, I reckon, to get rid of all the ex-BR stock in the South East, and possibly the Junipers too.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Could we please (although I imagine I'm going to be shot down) finally have a national timetable, drawn up nationally, with slightly reduced frequencies in Metro areas (especially where I am in SE London) to be Taktfahrplan style?

If we finally got NR to sort this out using set criteria, whereby they actually stuck decent performance allowances and turnarounds in, and then the TOCs had to resource and roster it all, we might even get good connections in some places.

If we're looking at places like SE London, we could drop to 8tph using 10 car trains solely to Cannon Street from where I live with the Victoria stuff going from, say, Sidcup.

 

[swissrailpassion]

Passenger demand reduced by 20% would mean the tantalising possibility of a seat on busy trains!

 

[Horizon22]

In many ways 1/5 reduction strikes me as the sort of reduction which will give the railway chance to get the capacity to actually match the demand rather than the severe overcrowding which pervaded many parts of the network up to March, as well as perhaps getting rid of some of the more decrepit rolling stock.

So no bad thing, really, provided they aren't just switching to cars and are rather not travelling at all because of e.g. home-working.

Definitely. I think most people reading the report would understand given a lot of them realise they aren't travelling. There's only so many peak trains because they are utilised but otherwise TOCs would love to bin them; they are inefficient and expensive and cause congestion.

 

[yorksrob]

The problem we have is that "matching services to demand" doesn't mirror "slashing services to reduce costs". We need to make sure that they don't start slashing costs and inadvertantly destroying services that are needed.

 

[Horizon22]

The problem we have is that "matching services to demand" doesn't mirror "slashing services to reduce costs". We need to make sure that they don't start slashing costs and inadvertantly destroying services that are needed.

TOCs have been collecting quite a lot of accurate ticket & loading data (although some better than others no doubt) to move towards smarter solutions and balance the plans accordingly. But with the situation so fluid and passenger demand rather varied, it will be hard to know what the "new normal" patterns are, and indeed, whether they remain in the long-term.

 

[cactustwirly]

I would also expect a trimming of peak-time commuter services, with those recruitment issues making it easier to do so. This would free up London commuter rolling stock as most peak services there are already maximum length. There may be scope to re-deploy it, for example some Southern Electrostars joining similar ones at Southeastern with some Networkers withdrawn. Whatever was released could be mothballed, or if the buildback is over a couple of years there ought to be time to order new stock to cope with it.

Outside the London commuter belt the service provision is much less peaky anyway, and any units released might be better used to lengthen other services, but any significant cutback is likely to reduce service frequency for some people.

I doubt that, most of the peak services use stock which receives maintenance during the day. So cutting them won't actually make many units redundant if any.

 

[brad465]

Other than the ones converted to 769s, it should be possible, I reckon, to get rid of all the ex-BR stock in the South East, and possibly the Junipers too.

Unless you are thinking of ordering at least some new rolling stock that's not already been ordered, I doubt the Networker side of withdrawing all SE ex-BR stock can be fulfilled; there are 190 units (147x 465 and 43x 466) with 674 carriages, plus 180 carriages with the 36 376s making up the metro fleet.

The 455s and 456s already have their replacements in order and some in testing, so their withdrawal shouldn't be a problem, but the only metro stock Southeastern will have that isn't ex-BR are the 376s and soon to include 707s, which totals 66 units with 330 carriages, nowhere near the existing levels or a fleet number 20% smaller than the current size. Kent & South-east London have also seen large areas of housing development that will ultimately mean that even with reduced commuter numbers, public transport will still be a big thing that means other cascades won't be enough without new stock on top.

 

[The Ham]

As a reminder, "a fifth of users not returning" takes 2019 demand back to where it was in about 2012. And trains were hardly quiet then either....

You beat me to highlighting that stat.

Whilst there's been improvements since 2012, I would imagine them back would make little difference.

However it's also worth highlighting that to get to a 20% fall in passenger numbers you'd need something like 60% of the communing passengers (who make up 2/3'rds of passengers) to be working an average of 50% of the time.

Given that 50% of London & SE jobs can WFH (probably higher for rail commuters) that might be possible, however given that it's closer to 33% for some areas in the North that's going to have a smaller impact on those areas.

Also you've got to remember that someone WFH 2 days a week (which is likely to be what quite a significant number of people would do) is 40% of their time, as such you'd need at least 1 person WFH 3 days a week to cover for each one.

Now whilst there'll be those who WFH 4 or 5 days a week normally, it's likely that they would be more prone to having to go in additionally (going in additionally once a month would add an extra 5% to the working in the office time, so a job which is 80% at home, 4 days WFH, may fairly quickly become 75% at home).

I wouldn't be surprised if we saw an average of 10-15% fall but with London seeing figures fall by around 20% whilst much of the rest of the country falling by around 5% (although there's still going to be variations within that).

Anyway, a 20% fall when a train is 80% full would still be 64% full, so unless it's a train which is 6 coaches which could be reduced to 4 coaches (changes from 64% to 85% full) or a 10 coach train which could be reduced to 8 coaches (changes from 64% to 80% full) then I suspect that shortening trains wouldn't be that helpful.

Even the suggestion of going from 3tph to 2tph would be a 33% fall, so overcrowding would be more than it currently is (3 trains at 70% would, with a 20% fall and a reduction to 2 trains, become 84% full).

However around a lot of the London peak hour services are over 110% full, and so a 30% fall would still leave them at 77% full, however a train at 120% full would still be 84% full and we could still some trains at over 100% full.

 

[peteb]

Those "slashing" services should consider connections across the network if the UK is to avoid the fate of rural France where many lines still have TER trains, frequency perhaps only 2 per day, but when branches meet mainline there are often woefully long connections, so pushing people onto buses to rail heads thence TGV......like the UK intercity philosophy in the 70s.

 

[swissrailpassion]

The press love words like 'slashing'. Yesterday they were all over the amazing ability of two people to move at 100mph over 500 metres. Astonishingly several thousand others were moving at 125 - 250 mph at the same instant without much comment.

 

[Purple Orange]

Could a 20% reduction be better achieved through a greater variation between peak and off-peak services? A station that normally sees 4 tph doesn’t need 4 tph all day.

On the flip side how does this slashing of services work for metros, where turn-up-and-go is their main selling point?

 

[Ianno87]

Could a 20% reduction be better achieved through a greater variation between peak and off-peak services? A station that normally sees 4 tph doesn’t need 4 tph all day.

On the flip side how does this slashing of services work for metros, where turn-up-and-go is their main selling point?

It will depend *what* demand returns. Leisure travel would be best supported by keeping up all-day frequencies, for example.