December 2022 Timetable Changes

[JonathanH]

In terms of revenue, it would make more sense to only have one London Northwestern Railway service between London and Birmingham but have three Avanti services on the same route per hour. This would encourage passengers to use the more expensive Avanti services.

It would actually make more sense just to charge the same fare for all three operators and remove any lower priced fares. If that naturally results in fewer Chiltern and LNR services so be it.

Providing more Chiltern services running on diesel than are strictly necessary to handle the intermediate flows is complete folly until the route can be electrified.

 

[Birmingham]

Chiltern are doing well by providing exactly that.

Chiltern is considerably worse than pre-Covid with each service picking up many more stops; most journeys are around 2 hours now. Presumably they’ve been prohibited from reinstating shorter workings to High Wycombe or Banbury or such (I don’t know what they ran) so the Birminghams have to pick up some of those stops.

If travelling across London, especially a day trip, it can be desirable to take a faster Avanti service to get there sooner and for the better connections at Euston. Chiltern and LNR services do not address that. Which is why it’s frustrating that a full timetable would not be reintroduced.

 

[Watershed]

It would actually make more sense just to charge the same fare for all three operators and remove any lower priced fares.

I'm not so sure about that. The different levels of fares serve a legitimate purpose in terms of market segmentation. Indeed, many people might rely on the cheaper fare for their regular journeys or commute to be affordable. Real hardship could be caused by the removal of the fares.

Providing more Chiltern services running on diesel than are strictly necessary to handle the intermediate flows is complete folly until the route can be electrified.

Here I agree a little more. But with the notable post-Covid timetable reductions (and concomitant journey time increases) implemented by Chiltern, I'm not sure that it is viable to reduce services much more. Is it unreasonable for places like Warwick, Leamington, Banbury and Bicester to expect at the very least an hourly service to London? Really it ought to be half-hourly all day, every day.

 

[Goldfish62]

If that naturally results in fewer Chiltern and LNR services so be it.

I doubt if rail users in Banbury, Warwick or Leamington would welcome that. Banbury and Leamington are already suffering from a 50% cut in Cross Country services.

 

[Kite159]

It would actually make more sense just to charge the same fare for all three operators and remove any lower priced fares. If that naturally results in fewer Chiltern and LNR services so be it.

Providing more Chiltern services running on diesel than are strictly necessary to handle the intermediate flows is complete folly until the route can be electrified.

Which will just push those passengers who use Chiltern/LNR as a cheaper alternative to Avanti to using coaches rather than forking out for the Avanti set fares.

 

[A0]

The trouble is that’s a massive reduction in frequency and capacity until/unless that happens. And all 3tph were in the timetable before. Was that just a move to lock in the paths in the recast even though they never intended to run them from December? Disappointing!

TBF Birmingham - London still has a decent train service, whether Avanti are running 2 or 3 tph.

You want to look at where *has* lost out (again), it's Northampton.

So it's going from 3 to 2 tph to London (having already dropped from 4 to 3 tph) *and* they're getting slowed down.

Which means Northampton (popn 225,000) will have an inferior service to Rugby (popn 77,000), Kettering (popn 63,000), Nuneaton (popn 91,000)

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Presumably they’ve been prohibited from reinstating shorter workings to High Wycombe or Banbury or such (I don’t know what they ran) so the Birminghams have to pick up some of those stops.

Prohibited is not the quite word, it’s more these services in a post covid world don’t cover their costs of operation so are unsustainable financially.

 

[bramling]

It wouldn't at all, because at present they're just using Chiltern anyway.

You could split that at Banbury to make it less convenient, but then they'd just drive.

The railway needs to provide what people want, which isn't fast "crack expresses" but frequent capacity at a decent comfort level and a reasonable price. Chiltern are doing well by providing exactly that. It needs to look much more like Nederlandse Spoorwegen than SNCF.

People also like (surprise, surprise) that Chiltern offers reasonable walk-up prices, with no need to plan in advance.

This is a rather depressing outlook, if realistic. However we mustn’t get in to the trap of assuming that all leisure users are happy to have a tedious journey, they really aren’t. What people would *ideally* like is the faster Avanti service, at a price they deem reasonable. I’ve done Chiltern a few times, and my general feeling at the end has been “never again” - slow and overcrowded, and that was before the current Covid service which is worse. If I want to do something like London to Birmingham then I just want to get there as quickly as possible. If rail can’t provide that, out comes the car, it’s as simple as that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If I want to do something like London to Birmingham then I just want to get there as quickly as possible. If rail can’t provide that, out comes the car, it’s as simple as that.

I don't agree. The car is the last resort for travelling to London - it's the one type of journey where people are very unlikely to resort to it - if rail (or coach) doesn't work for them they just won't go. Day-out family and friend trippers don't necessary need the raw speed, but do want seats together ideally around a table, comfort and a reasonable price. Chiltern delivers that (as does LNR - the bays of 6 on the /2s are quite popular with groups, and the narrow seats don't matter if the person in the middle is a kid).

Similarly in 2022 a business traveller may prefer 2 hours with a table and power socket (so they can work) than 90 minutes in a cramped airline seat.

 

[LowLevel]

I don't agree. The car is the last resort for travelling to London - it's the one type of journey where people are very unlikely to resort to it - if rail (or coach) doesn't work for them they just won't go. Day-out family and friend trippers don't necessary need the raw speed, but do want seats together ideally around a table, comfort and a reasonable price. Chiltern delivers that (as does LNR - the bays of 6 on the /2s are quite popular with groups, and the narrow seats don't matter if the person in the middle is a kid).

Similarly in 2022 a business traveller may prefer 2 hours with a table and power socket (so they can work) than 90 minutes in a cramped airline seat.

My parents live in the sticks North West of Wolverhampton and having been bitten too many times by Avanti actively go out of their way to use Chiltern, even with the change of station in Birmingham. They love the loco hauled sets but find the 168s to be a perfectly acceptable train for journey at a decent price. Marylebone might not be the centre of the universe but it's not hard to get to where you want to be.

I can also testify to your second point - my Liverpool - Norwich trains are routinely very busy these days and do appear to have attracted some decent number business travellers back. They are usually horrified to find there's no plug sockets or WiFi.

 

[Bald Rick]

I don't agree. The car is the last resort for travelling to London

To London yes, as most people travelling to London (for a return trip starting outside London) are going to central London, or an airport.

From London is different. There’s whole swathes of north and west London where people live, and many will have various reasons to prefer travel to the Midlands / North by car rather than train. And many, many do, as the M1 and M40 testify every Friday afternoon and Saturday morning.

 

[bramling]

To London yes, as most people travelling to London (for a return trip starting outside London) are going to central London, or an airport.

From London is different. There’s whole swathes of north and west London where people live, and many will have various reasons to prefer travel to the Midlands / North by car rather than train. And many, many do, as the M1 and M40 testify every Friday afternoon and Saturday morning.

Even to London isn't a massive issue, plenty of people will drive to places like High Barnet, Stanmore or Cockfosters, at least until such time as Khan takes the car parks away! All these car parks are quite busy at weekends nowadays, especially if there's an event on. As you say, it's more than viable to drive to somewhere like Birmingham/West Midlands, especially if the ultimate destination isn't Birmingham city centre itself (which presumably for many it won't be).

 

[Bald Rick]

Even to London isn't a massive issue, plenty of people will drive to places like High Barnet, Stanmore or Cockfosters, at least until such time as Khan takes the car parks away! All these car parks are quite busy at weekends nowadays, especially if there's an event on.

Still quite a rare thing to do; there’s fewer than 1000 spaces in those car parks combined. Stanmore is popular for people aiming for Wembley (and the O2 at Greenwich), the other two less so. There won’t be many long distance drivers heading for them - certainly not enough to fill a Pendolino.

Going the other way is different though.

 

[cle]

Still quite a rare thing to do; there’s fewer than 1000 spaces in those car parks combined. Stanmore is popular for people aiming for Wembley (and the O2 at Greenwich), the other two less so. There won’t be many long distance drivers heading for them - certainly not enough to fill a Pendolino.

Going the other way is different though.

It's not a horrible idea though - Stanmore is 30 mins to Oxford St. You'd never do it by road in that. Cheaper too. And you could skip a few mins to Baker St or head to the city with a Met change at Wembley Park.

But I don't know that many folks from wherever away would be savvy enough to do it at scale. Likely Home Counties people with more London-centric routines already and know a few 'hacks'.

 

[A0]

Even to London isn't a massive issue, plenty of people will drive to places like High Barnet, Stanmore or Cockfosters, at least until such time as Khan takes the car parks away! All these car parks are quite busy at weekends nowadays, especially if there's an event on. As you say, it's more than viable to drive to somewhere like Birmingham/West Midlands, especially if the ultimate destination isn't Birmingham city centre itself (which presumably for many it won't be).

I think it depends where you're travelling from - when I lived in Herts, I'd often drive to Stanmore or Canons Park to get into London quickly. Cockfosters and High Barnet were actually quite slow and Stanmore & Canons Park are convenienient for the M1, A1 and A41.

Now living in Northants, if my employer is paying I'll go from Wellingborough. if I'm paying I'll drive to Harlington or Luton Airport Parkway - both convenient for the M1.

 

[Bald Rick]

But I don't know that many folks from wherever away would be savvy enough to do it at scale. Likely Home Counties people with more London-centric routines already and know a few 'hacks'.

Agree with that. Hillingdon also gets some use from those up the M40.

But compared to the people who use the train all the way into London, the proportion is very small.

 

[philosopher]

This is a rather depressing outlook, if realistic. However we mustn’t get in to the trap of assuming that all leisure users are happy to have a tedious journey, they really aren’t. What people would *ideally* like is the faster Avanti service, at a price they deem reasonable. I’ve done Chiltern a few times, and my general feeling at the end has been “never again” - slow and overcrowded, and that was before the current Covid service which is worse. If I want to do something like London to Birmingham then I just want to get there as quickly as possible. If rail can’t provide that, out comes the car, it’s as simple as that.

I use Chiltern quite a bit on the London to Birmingham route. At 1:45 or 1:50 hours, which is the time their faster weekday services take it is not too bad, given that I generally find they are more comfortable and reliable than Avanti’s services.

However if it is greater than 2 hours, which is the duration of most of their weekend services, it is starting to get quite tedious. Most of Chiltern‘s weekend services are only very marginally quicker than London Northwestern services, meaning that for most passengers there is very minimal rationale in using Chiltern‘s service on weekends, given London Northwestern is cheaper.

It is not helped by Chiltern’s current timetable seemingly being padded quite a bit, which helps reliability but not journey times.

 

[Kite159]

I use Chiltern quite a bit on the London to Birmingham route. At 1:45 or 1:50 hours, which is the time their faster weekday services take it is not too bad, given that I generally find they are more comfortable and reliable than Avanti’s services.

However if it is greater than 2 hours, which is the duration of most of their weekend services, it is starting to get quite tedious. Most of Chiltern‘s weekend services are only very marginally quicker than London Northwestern services, meaning that for most passengers there is very minimal rationale in using Chiltern‘s service on weekends, given London Northwestern is cheaper.

It is not helped by Chiltern’s current timetable seemingly being padded quite a bit, which helps reliability but not journey times.

The issue I have with Chiltern is that they run some services on the London - Birmingham route as 3 coach units (even at times as 2 coaches), which I would imagine could get busy at times.

At least with the LNR services it will be at least 4 and most of the time 8 coaches from London to Birmingham.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

The issue I have with Chiltern is that they run some services on the London - Birmingham route as 3 coach units (even at times as 2 coaches), which I would imagine could get busy at times.

At least with the LNR services it will be at least 4 and most of the time 8 coaches from London to Birmingham.

Interesting you say they get busy as opposed to overcrowded. Busy trains, eg most seats taken is what the railway should be aiming for. Look at a commercial carrier such as Ryanair they would expect maybe 90% load factor of seats.

It seems apart from certain spikes in demand 4 car DMUs would be the optimum for Chiltern to Birmingham, the 2 car DMUs probably not being enough but the loco hauled sets generally providing too much capacity - whilst it’s nice to have the seat next to you empty that means the train is only running at 50% load which in the current financial climate is unaffordable.

 

[Goldfish62]

Interesting you say they get busy as opposed to overcrowded. Busy trains, eg most seats taken is what the railway should be aiming for. Look at a commercial carrier such as Ryanair they would expect maybe 90% load factor of seats.

Except they do get overcrowded, often severely so.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Nov 2022 ==

It seems apart from certain spikes in demand 4 car DMUs would be the optimum for Chiltern to Birmingham, the 2 car DMUs probably not being enough but the loco hauled sets generally providing too much capacity - whilst it’s nice to have the seat next to you empty that means the train is only running at 50% load which in the current financial climate is unaffordable.

OK then, take a couple of coaches out.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Except they do get overcrowded, often severely so.

Which is why I asked the question as was intrigued the OP said ‘busy’ as that just implies the train is running at capacity as opposed to overcrowded.

 

[Goldfish62]

Which is why I asked the question as was intrigued the OP said ‘busy’ as that just implies the train is running at capacity as opposed to overcrowded.

Yes, I understand.

 

[Kite159]

Maybe I should have used 'cosy' rather than busy, at times along the route (ie Full & standing from Marylebone emptying out a bit along the way before gaining new passengers when it reaches Banbury for the section to Birmingham)

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

whilst it’s nice to have the seat next to you empty that means the train is only running at 50% load which in the current financial climate is unaffordable.

Where it can be avoided (for example, nothing can be done on 9 car+ LNER/Avanti/GWR services), having the seat next to you empty should not be considered a luxury outside of peak times. Having a table to yourself, yes - if that's happening all the time you probably are carting around fresh air. If four carriage trains are running on long distance routes where you'd almost always have to sit next to someone off peak, regardless of where you sit, questions should be asked about why they're four carriages.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Where it can be avoided (for example, nothing can be done on 9 car+ LNER/Avanti/GWR services), having the seat next to you empty should not be considered a luxury outside of peak times. Having a table to yourself, yes - if that's happening all the time you probably are carting around fresh air. If four carriage trains are running on long distance routes where you'd almost always have to sit next to someone off peak, regardless of where you sit, questions should be asked about why they're four carriages.

Having a seat next to you empty implies 50% load factor. We shouldn’t be running 8 car trains round just because if it’s 4 cars someone has to sit next to you. It’s neither economic nor environmentally friendly. A route where you almost always have to sit next to someone off-peak shows they are matching capacity to demand well. Having an overcrowded train with people standing off-peak however is not.

On Long Distance Intercity routes the majority offer 2+1 First Class if someone wants the luxury of nobody sat next to them this is where they should book to travel. Same as economy v business on planes.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Having a seat next to you empty implies 50% load factor.

No it doesn't. That's only the case if everyone has the seat next to them free.

 

[Peter0124]

No it doesn't. That's only the case if everyone has the seat next to them free.

Also what about if people stand at the doors? Or if it's 3+2 seating for example.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Nov 2022 ==

Having a seat next to you empty implies 50% load factor.

 

[Goldfish62]

The current discussion on this thread reminds of the numerous times I've had to patiently explain to the public / local politicians why it's neither physically possible nor economically sensible to have buses that are exactly tailored to the number of passengers at all times of day and at all locations along a route.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Having a seat next to you empty implies 50% load factor. We shouldn’t be running 8 car trains round just because if it’s 4 cars someone has to sit next to you. It’s neither economic nor environmentally friendly. A route where you almost always have to sit next to someone off-peak shows they are matching capacity to demand well. Having an overcrowded train with people standing off-peak however is not.

On Long Distance Intercity routes the majority offer 2+1 First Class if someone wants the luxury of nobody sat next to them this is where they should book to travel. Same as economy v business on planes.

This view won't attract people out of cars. For it not to feel unpleasant, each travel group needs a unit of seating to itself. Note the marketing of preserved lines at the moment! Also, if you do fill all seats there's little slack not to end up with standing - a big issue on LNR at the moment where a few more trains need to go 12-car.

I have suggested in the past that having some areas of 3+1 seating in Standard might help a bit with this.

First Class is great, but only Avanti offer a reasonable price walk-up (by way of Standard Premium) - it is only affordable via Advances on other TOCs.

 

[12LDA28C]

It would actually make more sense just to charge the same fare for all three operators and remove any lower priced fares. If that naturally results in fewer Chiltern and LNR services so be it.

Providing more Chiltern services running on diesel than are strictly necessary to handle the intermediate flows is complete folly until the route can be electrified.

What utter claptrap. The railway is currently supposed to be trying to attract people back to train travel and you want to remove low priced fares?

And don't expect to see the Chiltern route electrified any time soon. More likely to be some kind of hybrid/battery train operation.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Nov 2022 ==

Except they do get overcrowded, often severely so.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Nov 2022 ==


OK then, take a couple of coaches out.

The Chiltern loco-hauled sets run as fixed formations. Any savings achieved by 'taking a couple of coaches out' would be minimal and they would only need to be reinstated as passenger numbers grow. Also Chiltern services to Birmingham including the hauled sets can be very busy at weekends when, as is often the case, the WCML is closed either due to an incident or because of planned engineering work.