-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Standing on long rail journeys to be banned under Virgin Trains plan for airline-style fare
- Thread starter duncanp
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Standing on long distance trains is a bad thing
If there is one part of rail travel we can agree on, it is that standing on commuter services is difficult to avoid or legislate against, and even the most grumpy commuter accepts standing as part of the going-to-work experience. On long-distance services, however, the acceptance level is far lower, and it is not a surprise that it is recommended that advance tickets are bought and seats are reserved for long distance trains.
The discomfort, inconvenience and potential danger from standing on long-distance trains are all valid reasons to find ways to replace "you may have to stand" with "you must reserve a seat in advance."
If all seats are reserved, then what?
Some people on this thread have created quite the straw man, picturing passengers turfed out onto wet platforms because their long-distance train is fully booked and they are forced to wait for the next train. The railways would not be allowed to introduce compulsory booking without also changing how many different elements of the systems work:
*More carriages where possible
*Alternative services (regional franchise holders or what have you)
*Non-reserved sections
The way UK railway stations are designed will also need to be looked at. How should passengers be moved from entrance to platform if the train is only for reserved tickets? In some cases this might be easy, in other cases it could create a large financial outlay into gates, platform staff and such.
Rail travel is not air travel
The UK is uncommon for having "turn up and travel" as a foundation of its railway culture. Some people on this thread feel this is under threat from compulsory booking.
I understand the concern. HOWEVER, long-distance travellers expect a certain kind of service from air travel, and find it difficult to understand why railway travel is so more "coach" than "class".
"Turn up and travel" is rarely used by people wanting to spend hundreds of pounds on the day for a journey along the entire WCML. It would not be under thread by compulsory booking, in my view. Ordinary passengers who want to travel somewhere on a whim some random rainy Thursday will still be allowed to do so.
Remember that the plural of anecdote is not data.
UK railways would need modernising
For compulsory booking to work a lot of the format of UK railways would need modernising, There perhaps need to be more of a "route" system, so passengers know they have booked a seat on Route X to Euston, confident that the train will call at particular stations along the route. It's common to compare the UK with Germany here, where the latter has its S and U and ICE, all with their particular roles and formats, something the UK does not have.
From how tickets are sold to how mapping is designed, compulsory booking would change how the UK railways work, and what would be expected by passengers, It would make the railways far more responsive to passenger needs.
I am not entirely in favour of compulsory booking, but it is not the great big evil which some posters on here think it is. Virgin is right - standing on long-distance services is not what passengers want and it's not what TOCs want to provide for customers. There are complications - such as those stations where local services are provided on long-distance TOCs - which are not barriers to modernisation, they are just quirks of the UK system which can be resolved and fixed in time.
If there is one part of rail travel we can agree on, it is that standing on commuter services is difficult to avoid or legislate against, and even the most grumpy commuter accepts standing as part of the going-to-work experience. On long-distance services, however, the acceptance level is far lower, and it is not a surprise that it is recommended that advance tickets are bought and seats are reserved for long distance trains.
The discomfort, inconvenience and potential danger from standing on long-distance trains are all valid reasons to find ways to replace "you may have to stand" with "you must reserve a seat in advance."
If all seats are reserved, then what?
Some people on this thread have created quite the straw man, picturing passengers turfed out onto wet platforms because their long-distance train is fully booked and they are forced to wait for the next train. The railways would not be allowed to introduce compulsory booking without also changing how many different elements of the systems work:
*More carriages where possible
*Alternative services (regional franchise holders or what have you)
*Non-reserved sections
The way UK railway stations are designed will also need to be looked at. How should passengers be moved from entrance to platform if the train is only for reserved tickets? In some cases this might be easy, in other cases it could create a large financial outlay into gates, platform staff and such.
Rail travel is not air travel
The UK is uncommon for having "turn up and travel" as a foundation of its railway culture. Some people on this thread feel this is under threat from compulsory booking.
I understand the concern. HOWEVER, long-distance travellers expect a certain kind of service from air travel, and find it difficult to understand why railway travel is so more "coach" than "class".
"Turn up and travel" is rarely used by people wanting to spend hundreds of pounds on the day for a journey along the entire WCML. It would not be under thread by compulsory booking, in my view. Ordinary passengers who want to travel somewhere on a whim some random rainy Thursday will still be allowed to do so.
Remember that the plural of anecdote is not data.
UK railways would need modernising
For compulsory booking to work a lot of the format of UK railways would need modernising, There perhaps need to be more of a "route" system, so passengers know they have booked a seat on Route X to Euston, confident that the train will call at particular stations along the route. It's common to compare the UK with Germany here, where the latter has its S and U and ICE, all with their particular roles and formats, something the UK does not have.
From how tickets are sold to how mapping is designed, compulsory booking would change how the UK railways work, and what would be expected by passengers, It would make the railways far more responsive to passenger needs.
I am not entirely in favour of compulsory booking, but it is not the great big evil which some posters on here think it is. Virgin is right - standing on long-distance services is not what passengers want and it's not what TOCs want to provide for customers. There are complications - such as those stations where local services are provided on long-distance TOCs - which are not barriers to modernisation, they are just quirks of the UK system which can be resolved and fixed in time.
I think within the confines of the UK system compulsory reservations won’t work, and people expect to be able to turn up and go, as they have been able to for a long time. However @PR1Berske ’s favourite project, HS2 is likely to change that due to the massive uplift in capacity it will provide, making compulsory reservations on HS2 less of an issue than they are on the classic network currently.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I was going to say that HS2 will provide the capacity and regularity he seems to seek - though he might like to note that the WCML does operate a regular interval timetable of the kind he suggests already.
But if you have to book - why bother? You don't need to know other calling points etc, just that train IC1234 is the one you booked.
Esker-pades
Established Member
Agreed. I will note that standing on long distance services is acceptable if they are used for short distance commuting (Macclesfield - Manchester etc.)
What additional dangers exist when standing on long distance services? Is it the train or the distance? If the former, then the statement is false. If the latter, then it would be silly to ban people travelling from Coventry to Birmingham from using the InterCity services because it is a short distance. Thus, standing at peak times is annoying but "reasonable".
It isn't a straw man argument if it is what would happen.
Here we go....
Uncontroversial for CrossCountry (where one would find these carriages is the discussion point for numerous threads), but not really possible for the 9/10/11 car GWR, VT, LNER etc. services are already maximum length and still get overcrowded at some points.
The second idea is quite silly. Some short distance journeys don't have the additional capacity to run the extra trains (Coventry to Birmingham, Macclesfield to Manchester, York to Newcastle etc.). Other stations don't generate that much traffic, so the regional services would be a massive waste of money.
That would require whole new spaces in already cramped locations. If such large spaces exist, they would be better used to have new platforms, longer platforms etc. so more trains could run. Such infrastructure would be required for some of your suggestions.
How so? The massive generalisations aside, it would significantly limit the flexibility of passengers who want/need he flexibility, or significantly increase the cost, or both. It also doesn't address the shorter distance travel problem, which still exists because the solutions proposed don't work.
Not entirely sure how this is relevant. Tickets would be booked by train under this system.
That is, at best, wishful thinking.
The focus should be on overall rail services in the UK. The proposal by Virgin would significantly increase overcrowding for other TOCs on the shorter distance services, and reduce flexibility for those that want it.
But your solutions either don't exist or don't work.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Is it? Cramming a load of commuters onto an IC service at one end is quite a stressor for those who at that point want to e.g. gather their luggage for a quick exit. If anything, this type of standing is more negative than a few people in each vestibule because the train was slightly "overbooked" (as is the nature of most standing on VTWC other than the likes of the first off peak train of the evening; I can't recall the last time I didn't get a seat on VTWC).
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Do they? The interior pictured looks like a low density regional express layout (which coincidentally is what it actually is).
Maybe you needed to post a picture of the Class 700 interior?
I'd rather stand than not be able to travel.
How far?
Surely however far? I'd rather stand from Aberdeen-Penzance than end up stuck at the wrong end of the country!
Much the same.
Trying to think how far I have had to stand in the past. Doncaster to London (when it was 2 - 2.5 hrs) perhaps.
F Great Eastern
Established Member
At the end of the day I doubt someone will be standing from Aberdeen to Penzance anyway, because despite popular belief, people do actually get off at intermediate stops and I've never seen a train that has every seat full from the first stop to the last stop.
I thought I'd offer some background to this, given the situation VT have created for themselves. It might go some way to explain why they've submitted this proposal, given the terrible PR their current decisions make for them.
Last Thursday night I was travelling from London to Stockport. I would have taken the 1700 or 1720 etc etc but of course, these aren't permitted with the return portion of my Off Peak Return. There was no way I was paying well over double double for an Anytime Single in one direction (that's £219.55, an outrageous sum, compared to the £89.10 I paid). There was no Advance ticket availability, a couple of weeks before.
So we all stood around waiting. The 1857 has recently had First Class added, indeed, last Thursday was the first ever day it ran with First Class in operation. The train was short formed 9 vice 11. It doesn't stop at Stockport, so it wasn't a great deal of use to me, but once it became full, most customers without the reservations were asked not to board, and moved over to the 1900 instead. I saw the 1857 drawing out with almost every seat taken, including in First Class.
I was on the 1900, and no seat reservations were available due to a lack of data. A huge row seemed to be ensuing further up the train over reserved seating so I found a seat in coach U. There was a delay of 7 minutes while the train manager tried to ask people to leave the train and go over to the 1920, rather than be forced to stand for 2 hours. The train waited for everyone who didn't have a seat to leave (including the reserved passengers of course). The 1920 departed behind us and was also full and standing so it had its coach G declassified.
VT have made a rod for their own backs here. By removing Friday PM restrictions but adding First Class even on Thursdays they've made Thursday night a nightmare. They know that they've got the 1900 running in excess of 100% capacity every Thursday and choose to do nothing. The only real solution is to sell more Advance tickets on the 1840 - remember, I couldn't get one for last week. They don't want to risk selling too many on it though in case it undermines their business revenue on that juicy £175 Anytime Single.
Looking ahead to next Thursday, there's availability on the 1840 and 1820 still at £91. So that's more for a fixed single than for a flexible return. I don't think so. The 1800 is an astonishing £148 Advance!
Last Thursday was worse than usual because the 1857 was short formed, and it was Thursday before a Bank Holiday Monday. But in general Thursday nights are probably just going to keep getting worse. And be in no doubt that the crush loading is deliberately done to try and keep the business market paying.
Last Thursday night I was travelling from London to Stockport. I would have taken the 1700 or 1720 etc etc but of course, these aren't permitted with the return portion of my Off Peak Return. There was no way I was paying well over double double for an Anytime Single in one direction (that's £219.55, an outrageous sum, compared to the £89.10 I paid). There was no Advance ticket availability, a couple of weeks before.
So we all stood around waiting. The 1857 has recently had First Class added, indeed, last Thursday was the first ever day it ran with First Class in operation. The train was short formed 9 vice 11. It doesn't stop at Stockport, so it wasn't a great deal of use to me, but once it became full, most customers without the reservations were asked not to board, and moved over to the 1900 instead. I saw the 1857 drawing out with almost every seat taken, including in First Class.
I was on the 1900, and no seat reservations were available due to a lack of data. A huge row seemed to be ensuing further up the train over reserved seating so I found a seat in coach U. There was a delay of 7 minutes while the train manager tried to ask people to leave the train and go over to the 1920, rather than be forced to stand for 2 hours. The train waited for everyone who didn't have a seat to leave (including the reserved passengers of course). The 1920 departed behind us and was also full and standing so it had its coach G declassified.
VT have made a rod for their own backs here. By removing Friday PM restrictions but adding First Class even on Thursdays they've made Thursday night a nightmare. They know that they've got the 1900 running in excess of 100% capacity every Thursday and choose to do nothing. The only real solution is to sell more Advance tickets on the 1840 - remember, I couldn't get one for last week. They don't want to risk selling too many on it though in case it undermines their business revenue on that juicy £175 Anytime Single.
Looking ahead to next Thursday, there's availability on the 1840 and 1820 still at £91. So that's more for a fixed single than for a flexible return. I don't think so. The 1800 is an astonishing £148 Advance!
Last Thursday was worse than usual because the 1857 was short formed, and it was Thursday before a Bank Holiday Monday. But in general Thursday nights are probably just going to keep getting worse. And be in no doubt that the crush loading is deliberately done to try and keep the business market paying.
Last edited:
Nothing stopping you from sitting on the floor, too.
And that's good customer service, is it? Not providing enough seats.
Or is this a boasting thing? You can stand from Yorkshire to London so we all should?
F Great Eastern
Established Member
And turning someone away from a train they want to stand on, which there is plenty of room to stand on is even worse customer service as it stops them getting home earlier, to spend time with their family and the ones they love. I'm guessing you clearly don't have a family by your viewpoint.
Alternatively they could be stuck in the station for the night as despite seeing they could get on the train and stand they are forbidden from doing so and thus may have to miss their little ones birthday celebrations.
The difference between me and you is that I think people should be able to make a choice of standing or choosing not to travel. You want to force people to not have that choice. I think people should be able to make their own minds up rather than you dictating.
You seem to think because you do not want to stand at all that nobody else should be able to choose to do so. I believe we should have a right to choose. Make a decision for yourself, don't force them onto someone else like a dictator.
Are you a yoga teacher? Because that's a stretch!
I'm looking at how long distance trains could be improved. Compulsory bookings is one option.
This nightmare scenario of families being left on platforms is hysterical nonsense. If you're a responsible parent you would have planned and booked your journey way in advance. If you're a responsible TOC you will ensure they enjoyed that journey.
If you haven't booked knowing that the service is compulsory booking, why haven't you? If you couldn't at short notice, let's explore options: an unreserved section, longer trains, extra services from different providers, the possibilities are endless.
F Great Eastern
Established Member
No, I'm someone who travels for business frequently as well as for leisure and commuting. What comes through loud and clear on this thread is there are a group of leisure users who have no idea how people who travel for business use the railways.
I'm afraid business travel isn't always planned huge amounts in advance, you don't seem to be getting this no matter how much I tell you, that turn up and go and flexibility is vital for business. You are very ignorant to the needs of business travel and this is the reality. Perhaps if you ever got a job where you had to do this you might understand, but you don't so you think you know it all when you know nothing as you have no experience of it.
Where did I say about families being left on platforms? Did you mis-read my post or are you deflecting here by being deliberately ignorant? I was talking about people like me, who would rather stand if it meant getting home earlier to spend time with my loved ones. Because honestly when I travel for work a lot, I want to get all the time I can with the people who are close to me, I don't want someone like you, forcing your choices on to me, I'd far like to make my own choice of whether I stand or not without you nannying me.
What's the point in providing extra services taking up valuable paths for a relatively small number of standing passengers. Also are you really going to run trains from Diss to Norwich for example for things like this? That would be the height of stupidity.
I agree if trains are standing throughout and each train that is packed with standees for a considerable point of it's journey we should be looking to make trains longer, but the idea that if a small number of people are standing for a small part of the journey we should add extra trains that will carry 95% fresh air is stupid. Hopefully those people who propose such idea will have to pay the full cost of providing those services., but I bet you will be the first to moan, won't you and say the people who don't even want that must pay for it.
What comes through here is the selfishness of some passengers who think because they bought a cheap advance ticket costing comparatively little they should have huge amounts of space and should not have anyone standing anyone near them. The price they are paying to what they are expecting is quite frankly a total joke and as per usual, it's the ones who pay the least who complain the most.
Anyway this thread is becoming pointless and is going round in circles, I'm done with it.
Last edited:
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I think given the limited choice of trains that near enough everyone making that journey is going to reserve on the one or two journey possibilities on offer. Most people know which day they will travel on, but not necessarily the time of travel. It's when you get onto pseudo-metro IC journeys like London to Bristol or Birmingham that it becomes a bit illogical. The WCML speedups of the 2000s probably also bring Manchester and the North West into that, but I suspect even when you get as far as Carlisle most people probably reserve.
That said, it is looking rather like I may be making a walk-up journey to Inverness tomorrow. But I am by no means typical of anything, really - and there are only about 2 journey opportunities that will work so I might actually book it before I go to bed so as to avail myself of the VT seat selector.
(By the way, as an aside there are seats on all the Sleasy flights from Luton tomorrow, it's only because you pay over the odds for a single that I think I'll be doing train both ways - the Off Peak Return[1] is also cheaper than two flights at the prices being asked, which I expect would be higher if regulation was dumped!)
[1] Which is "no trains between 0230 and 04something" with no break of journey restriction, so basically near enough an Anytime at 150 quid, curiously also seemingly pseudo-not valid on the Sleeper - it seems to get that to show as an option on the planners the ticket must have something specific in the restrictions about being *valid*. I've had this issue with Inverness tickets before - they booked it for me over the phone but none of the planners would do it and even Bletchley station couldn't.
Last edited:
What nonsense. I'll repeat a scenario I described further upthread.
I'm meeting up with a number of friends from different areas of the country at Sheffield station in a few weeks time and are walking from Sheffield to Bamford. We hope to arrive at Bamford in time to catch the 17:42 back to Sheffield to connect with trains back to our respective homes around 18:30
We don't know exactly how long our walk will take, we might be quicker but could be slower than anticipated. We will book seats on our expected trains from Sheffield but if we had compulsory reservations what would happen if we needed to travel later but there were no available seats? If we travel on a different train there's no guarantee of a seat but at least we'll get home so there is no risk. There's no way we would contemplate this day out if there was any risk that we wouldn't be able to get a different train and could be left stranded.
This is just an example. Take sporting fixtures, sometimes they over-run. Just because it's a leisure trip doesn't mean that flexibility isn't needed.
How would you cater for this type of scenario with compulsory reservations.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The way you do it is the same as you would with a flight or a coach. You book the last train you are vaguely likely to want to use, then if there's space you move earlier when you get to the station. If not, go for a pint or a meal.
F Great Eastern
Established Member
In other words your solution is to deny boarding to someone who is willing and able to stand on a service and make them wait against their wishes. In other words nannying them and not giving them a freedom of making their own choice and because you like a certain thing everyone else has to go along with it.
If I don't want to go for a pint or a meal and I want to go home and stand as I want to see my kids before they go to sleep I should be allowed to do that. If you don't like standing then you too are free to book a seat. Nobody is stopping you from doing it and nor should they, neither should they remove decisions away from others.
I have to say you're views are way out of reality with what the average business person wants from the railway. It's often said that enthusiasts and railfans have a clouded judgement of the day to day realities of your average passenger uses the service and this thread has shown that out to be very true.
Anyway, I'm out, have to catch a train in the morning to go to a last minute meeting. I may have to stand, but thanks to flexible ticketing I won't miss the meeting and can take any train I want in the evening. Maybe I'll be making it in my car next year though if the dictating nannies get their way and push all the business pax back there, but I guess they wouldn't know what it is to travel for business, hopefully one day PR1Berske will make it into a good job where they can see the light and remove the blinkers.
That's my last word on this thread.
Last edited:
If you know your train is at 1830, you would surely ensure that you get to the platform by 1820 at the very latest, no?
But you do make a point which the railway industry will need to explore. If it does turn to compulsory bookings, a lot of the current way of working will have to be modernised. If you miss your train, how would the on-station staff direct you to an alternative service home? I don't know the best answer to that. It's why this thread is so long, people are exploring what can and cannot be done with bookings while the UK has the railway culture it has.
MarlowDonkey
Member
- Joined
- 4 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 1,101
That's already possible with reservations on non-Advance tickets. How would it work with Advance tickets? These are essentially offered on a "use it or lose it" basis.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
All Advance tickets are changeable, sometimes for a fee but the move is very much away from that. You'd book on, say, the 2100, then arrive at the station at 1900, go to the ticket office or TVM (the French have TVMs specifically for "echanges billets") and change to, say, the 1930 instead if there were seats, paying any applicable fare difference.
Glad it’s your last word, you’ve been quite rude and superior
F Great Eastern
Established Member
Just for you, I'll dispatch a few more.
I'm just saying it like it is from a business passengers point of view, some people might like to lock themselves in an echo chamber of their bargain basement advance tickets for leisure, but some people actually have to use the train to do business in this country to keep a roof over their heads, provide public services and to contribute to the economy. I know that might sound boring but that's the facts and key to this is flexible ticketing. It doesn't suit everyone but it is vital to the business market.
Not everyone is a person who uses a train because they are a railfan or going for a day out every now and then, some people need to use it to do their job, go about their daily lives and put bread on the table for their family. They also need to get to/from places of work. Unfortunately it is undoubtedly true that most rail enthusiasts do not fit this profile so it's understandable that many don't understand the realities of business travel.
If the Railways lose business travel, they'd lose a heck of a lot of revenue and that means all of you guys buying bargain basement fares would not be able to do so anymore. And First Class would be dead, and all that extra revenue the TOCs get from First Class is going to have to be made up somewhere. So instead of crying foul, you should be thanking all of us business travellers for keeping your fare down, as without our companies paying top dollar in expenses on train fares, you would be paying far more. And you thank us for all of this by trying to prevent us travelling? Pfft, give me a break.
Last edited:
I aactually agree with you, one of the big attractions of trains is that they aren’t planesJust for you, I'll spare a few more then
I'm just saying it like it is from a business passengers point of view, some people might like to lock themselves in an echo chamber of their bargain basement advance tickets for leisure, but some people actually have to use the train to do business in this country to keep a roof over their heads, provide public services and to contribute to the economy. I know that might sound boring but that's the facts.
Not everyone is a person who uses a train because they are a railfan or going for a day out every now and then, some people need to use it to do their job, go about their daily lives and put bread on the table for their family. They also need to get to/from places of work. Unfortunately it is undoubtedly true that most rail enthusiasts do not fit this profile so it's understandable that many don't understand the realities of business travel.
If the Railways lose business travel, they'd lose a heck of a lot of revenue and that means all of you guys buying bargain basement fares would not be able to do so anymore. And First Class would be dead, and all that extra revenue the TOCs get from First Class is going to have to be made up somewhere. So instead of crying foul, you should be thanking all of us business travellers for keeping your fare down, as without our companies paying top dollar in expenses on train fares, you would be paying far more. And you thank us for all of this by trying to prevent us travelling? Pfft, give me a break.
Then the attraction of using rail is lost.
When I was single and lived alone, that would have been my attitude towards my own travel. I still wouldn't have wished it to be imposed on everyone. Reservations are already available for intercity rail, if sitting all the way is essential to you. Sit in the pub as long as you want to wait for your seat, but don't stop me going home to my young child, or someone else getting to their elderly parents who they have caring responsibility for.
There are aspects of the railway that need to be fixed. This isn't one of them, and the changes as suggested would be massively detrimental to the majority of passengers.
- Status