• 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!

TPE Scotland/Bolton/Manchester. How to stop commuters boarding?

Status
Not open for further replies.

muz379

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2014
Messages
2,206
Precisely. These people are getting on the TPE trains because there isn’t capacity for them on the trains they are having foisted on them. Why does a (typically) less regular traveller take priority over some poor sod enduring the trains five days a week.
Wait a minute wasn't somebody up thread (possibly even you) suggesting that fines , diversions etc and the resulting bad press would put leisure travellers off which would be a great travesty ?

Is it not also true that Leisure travellers not being able to board the train they have pre booked months ago (or access the seat they reserved) because apparently they are less of a priority to someone that gets the train everyday is also somewhat discouraging to leisure travellers ?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,842
I guess that the electrification is of no benefit then, nor is the longer services to Scotland, which they can use, but not towards Manchester because there is insufficient capacity and a Northern service 4 minutes later. Is it worth doubling rolling stock costs to allow passengers to save 5 minutes getting in to Manchester? The less regular passenger clearly takes priority because they're paying more. The cheapest Walk up from MAN-GLC is £70.10, a season ticket holder's journey cost is £2.26. And the next train to Glasgow will be two hours later if a long distance passenger is forced off because there are too many people going to Bolton aboard, a Boltonian will have to wait a whole 3 minutes!
Virtually no one does walk up. Surely someone who is paying for every day should be treated better ? Recurring revenue rather than gouging irregular travellers (in the main).

You’re missing the point - there are too many passengers. The commuter trains are rammed. There are entire new towns been built on the route. Before Bolton. Capacity is inadequate. They have just spent billions on Manchester / NW infrastructure. And it can’t cope. Already. So the solution is to give paths to trains which don’t allow those people who have been so let down to assist with relieving overcrowding. It is an admission of the failure to have capacity that they are even discussing this. Surely you can see that ?

Most commuter trains into Waterloo are now 10 or 12 carriages. Presumably similar for other London terminii. What about those into Manchester ? On a prime route. That is heavily used and for which new stock is being built. But not enough. It’s treating regular passengers with utter disdain. Can you not see this isn’t good enough ?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,541
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Most commuter trains into Waterloo are now 10 or 12 carriages. Presumably similar for other London terminii. What about those into Manchester ? On a prime route. That is heavily used and for which new stock is being built. But not enough. It’s treating regular passengers with utter disdain. Can you not see this isn’t good enough ?

But the fix to this isn't to crowd out an IC service with local passengers. It's to extend the EMU services to 8-car, and plan for 12 in a few years' time.
 

Senex

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Messages
2,752
Location
York
But the fix to this isn't to crowd out an IC service with local passengers. It's to extend the EMU services to 8-car, and plan for 12 in a few years' time.
This seems to be very much a British problem. Mainland European administrations seem to manage to segregate out users of long-distance trains from users of local services quite easily through the fares structures (even when those structures are hugely simpler than ours are!). I suppose if places like Manchester and Liverpool and Leeds and Birmingham had proper Verkehrsverbünde dealing with the provision and pricing of local traffic it could all be very much easier.
As for the TPE routes in particular, if that operation continues to be very successful, how long will it be before the new five-car trains are crowded out with longer-distance passengers just as the three- and four-car ones are now (and just as the four- and five-car XC stock has been for years)? What is the appropriate length for long-distance trains? Remeber the original HST design was for seven cars, and how rapidly that turned into eight?
 

Wombat

Member
Joined
12 Jul 2013
Messages
299
Times from Piccadilly to Bolton, with a stop at Oxford Road in all cases:
TPE (350) 18 minutes
Northern Airport/Hazel Grove to Blackpool (319) 19 minutes, with stops at Deansgate and Salford Crescent
Northern Alderley Edge to Wigan (75mph DMU) 19 minutes, with stop at Salford Crescent.

The TPE timings seem generous.
Thanks! I asked because I wondered if a significantly reduced journey time on the intercity service might be more attractive for commuters, but the difference seems to be negligible.
 

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,842
Rubbish. Was the Bletchley-Hull Super Off Peak Return I bought this morning a mirage?

I looked at the Advances but it would have saved a very small amount so I didn't bother.
Yet Bolton to Glasgow today. 71.50
Do it on 4 July 14.50 (picked a random date)

Huge savings by booking in advance on that route. So people will.
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,766
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
Yet Bolton to Glasgow today. 71.50
Do it on 4 July 14.50 (picked a random date)

Huge savings by booking in advance on that route. So people will.
People do use Advance tickets. People also buy walk-up tickets. Your original statement ("virtually no one does walk up") is not correct. Your response only provides arguments why some people choose to buy advance tickets.
 

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,842
I think you will find that the volumes of walk ups are minimal when there are large differentials in fares. Unless someone else is paying/it’s emergency no notice travel. Most People don’t earn enough to be able to pay out half a day to a day of their wages just on extra train travel. So they plan ahead. And book ahead. Certainly boltonians will - we make Yorkshiremen look like Mikey Carroll ...
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,541
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Yet Bolton to Glasgow today. 71.50
Do it on 4 July 14.50 (picked a random date)

Huge savings by booking in advance on that route. So people will.

What the fare is on 4th July doesn't really influence me if I want to travel today, though, does it?

No doubt if I'd decided to go to Hull (yes, I have reasons) a month ago it'd have been cheaper with Advances, but I decided yesterday (I knew I was going to go at some point, but an opportunity presented itself), and by then the discount was paltry and so the couple of quid extra worth paying for flexibility.
 

LittleAH

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2018
Messages
176
Isn't one of the big issues for TPE the amount of passengers boarding their services with Northern only tickets? Not only would a fully fledged Bolton call cause more problems with overcrowding but they would then lose out on more revenue.

I went to Sheffield last week and at least two passengers were caught with a northern only Manchester - Sheffield ticket.
 

Wtloild

Member
Joined
8 Aug 2018
Messages
189
Commuters belong on long, high-density commuter trains. InterCity passengers need shorter, lower-density trains for their longer, pricier journeys. What's the fundamental issue with this? Every single European country does it. They are not all wrong, surely.

That'd make sense if the Northern trains were longer, but they're shorter and thanks to Northern procuring mere 3 or 4-coach trains, they will continue to be shorter for a generation.

I do feel sorry for TPE, who are the victims of Northern & DfT's inadequacy.
 

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,842
It’s the usual on here. Support the railway. The passengers should fit in with the railway. It is obvious the planning for the future, as well as the execution, is a shambles. There aren’t enough units to run sufficient length trains for commuters. And the solution is to deny those commuters use of trains which are pathed and take up capacity on a route they don’t have to be on.

Can you railwaymen not see that is not acceptable To have have spent all that time and money. And end up with insufficient capacity and need to block out trains. It’s a mess.

It is used out of Paddington as those trains were quicker. It is no doubt used out of Euston and KGX for the same reasons. BUT the commuter trains into London are at the capacity of the platforms... 10-12 carriages usually. Or at least eight. Is that what Northern are doing?. Where have platforms been lengthened to accommodate greater AND adequate capacity.
 

Darandio

Established Member
Joined
24 Feb 2007
Messages
10,674
Location
Redcar
Can you railwaymen not see that is not acceptable To have have spent all that time and money. And end up with insufficient capacity and need to block out trains. It’s a mess.

Why do you assume that anyone with a differing opinion is a 'railwayman'?
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
It’s the usual on here. Support the railway. The passengers should fit in with the railway. It is obvious the planning for the future, as well as the execution, is a shambles. There aren’t enough units to run sufficient length trains for commuters. And the solution is to deny those commuters use of trains which are pathed and take up capacity on a route they don’t have to be on.

Can you railwaymen not see that is not acceptable To have have spent all that time and money. And end up with insufficient capacity and need to block out trains. It’s a mess.

It is used out of Paddington as those trains were quicker. It is no doubt used out of Euston and KGX for the same reasons. BUT the commuter trains into London are at the capacity of the platforms... 10-12 carriages usually. Or at least eight. Is that what Northern are doing?. Where have platforms been lengthened to accommodate greater AND adequate capacity.
Look at it from the other side:
What would you do if you had too little rolling stock for all the services you needed to run (or only just enough if you can get it used to maximum effect), you had a massive local flow of people crowding onto the one long-distance train an hour and you had to advise or console the passenger who was left sitting on your platform in tears because they hadn't been able to get onto their train, so their connections would be broken and they might be marooned and unable to travel another hour on into Scotland?

Suddenly, stopping people making local journeys of just a couple of stops so that you don't have to deal with the consequences of unregulated travel doesn't seem so unreasonable.
But maybe you are the sort who would shrug their shoulders, turn their back and hide away in an office, rather than try to devise a way that would ensure that long-distance travellers get what they have paid for and that people making relatively short journeys with quite a few options are made to allow others with greater needs to take precedence. Which is all that the "railwaymen" you seem to despise are trying to do.
You need to influence the DfT and their political overlords, who seem to be the ones who decided the amount of rolling stock available, rather than abusing the people trying to make it work as well as possible.
 

ic31420

Member
Joined
23 Aug 2017
Messages
312
I went to Sheffield last week and at least two passengers were caught with a northern only Manchester - Sheffield ticket.

How would one know one has a Northern Only ticket?

Can't remember the last time I bought an advance ticket. 2014 would be a guess. That's the only time Ican think of.
 

Mogster

Member
Joined
25 Sep 2018
Messages
902
Thanks! I asked because I wondered if a significantly reduced journey time on the intercity service might be more attractive for commuters, but the difference seems to be negligible.

TPEs 350s are significantly more attractive than any stock Northern offers on the route.

I suspect the punters “feel” the TPE service will get them home faster, even though the timetabled time difference is actually negligible.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
It's the old commuter self-entitlement thing again, "I pay lots for my travel every year, therefore I'll get any train that I want". The fact is that they often pay less than 2/3 of the full fare per mile for peak time travel totalling many miles per year whilst the long distance traveller making single journeys pays full price. However bad travel on Northern services was years ago is irrelevant, this thread is talking about now. Increased demand for rail travel around Manchester is a reality and TOCs are required to ensure travellers can make their journeys on the appropriate trains. It's time that those in the north who have been bleating about London getting more trains (because there are many more passengers to carry) accept what happens down south, i.e. long distance services are frequently not provided for them to travel on. Apart from the Reading problem, which is GWR only where passengers blatantly ignore the rules and some even prevent passengers taking their booked seats, the other instances of set down/pick up restrictions, generally run smoothly as tickets can be TOC specific. That is the case for MAN - BON, where TPE only tickets can be used to keep commuters on the trains that run for them. I would imagine that if TPE suffers from persitent abuse of services, they could decide to run their trains via Golbourne in the peak. Thus the opportunity to squeeze long distance travellers out from their correct trains is permanently removed.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,686
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
It's the old commuter self-entitlement thing again, "I pay lots for my travel every year, therefore I'll get any train that I want". The fact is that they often pay less than 2/3 of the full fare per mile for peak time travel totalling many miles per year whilst the long distance traveller making single journeys pays full price. However bad travel on Northern services was years ago is irrelevant, this thread is talking about now. Increased demand for rail travel around Manchester is a reality and TOCs are required to ensure travellers can make their journeys on the appropriate trains. It's time that those in the north who have been bleating about London getting more trains (because there are many more passengers to carry) accept what happens down south, i.e. long distance services are frequently not provided for them to travel on. Apart from the Reading problem, which is GWR only where passengers blatantly ignore the rules and some even prevent passengers taking their booked seats, the other instances of set down/pick up restrictions, generally run smoothly as tickets can be TOC specific. That is the case for MAN - BON, where TPE only tickets can be used to keep commuters on the trains that run for them. I would imagine that if TPE suffers from persitent abuse of services, they could decide to run their trains via Golbourne in the peak. Thus the opportunity to squeeze long distance travellers out from their correct trains is permanently removed.

I see you couldn’t resist reminding everyone about commuters and what they pay for their travel! ;)

Okay here’s a question for those familiar with the Bolton situation. Is it the case that the Northern services have adequate capacity (ie room to at least stand in some reasonable amount of comfort, as opposed to crush loading)? Or is this simply a case of people choosing the TPX trains because they are non-stop?

The Reading situation I can sort of sympathise with as over time they seem to have been squeezed off the service due to rising commuter demand further west, with the “commuter service” having at times been quite an indifferent alternative, although has presumably improved to some extent since electrification.

In both the cases of Reading and Bolton they’re quite significant flows which don’t really get a wonderful “commuter” service. We’re there to be one I don’t think this discussion would be happening.

Diverting via Chat Moss isn’t really a satisfactory solution, as it does of course deprive Bolton long-distance users of their service to the north, these long-distance users being the group you were apparently seeking to protect from those nasty commuters!
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
I see you couldn’t resist reminding everyone about commuters and what they pay for their travel! ;)
With comments like:
"Virtually no one does walk up. Surely someone who is paying for every day should be treated better ? Recurring revenue rather than gouging irregular travellers (in the main)."
clearly south-eastern travel conditions are becoming more common in the north-west. Unfortunately, (for non-commuting passengers) the same arrogant self-entitlement behaviour that London commuters practice/suffer from has also arrived. Those spouting about their (assumed) rights on such matters need to be reminded (or maybe informed for the first time) that their contribution to the fare box is significantly less than those who's travel doesn't add to the overcrowding problem.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
I see you couldn’t resist reminding everyone about commuters and what they pay for their travel! ;)
Quite rightly too. There is widespread economic illiteracy about the realities of commuter provision, be it bus or train (or road network capacity, for that matter) and each time the reality is explained there is just a chance that someone might read it and learn.
A long-distance train on one of our main lines, especially the E and WCMLs but possibly Chiltern and GWR too, will run all day and may be pretty well filled most of the day every day. It doesn't take a lot of thought to see that it will make a lot better return on the investment in commuter capacity.
A commuter train, even though it may be full to bursting point, will only be making a couple of journeys loaded in the morning and evening peaks and probably isn't used at all over the weekend. This is exacerbated by the staffing costs where, unless you make the staff work split shifts, two crews are needed to cover the needs of people making just one relatively short journey each way in the day.
I know that in the SE lots of trains are longer and fuller through the day than used to be the case and commuting distances are getting longer, but there is still no contest in the return-on-assets competition.
p.s. I meant to illustrate it with a comparison from 40 years ago: we went to a party in S London. Our host grumbled about his season ticket costs, until a quick comparison revealed that his fare per mile was less than the quarter fares we had just paid to get there 150 miles down the WCML!
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,229
Location
Greater Manchester
Okay here’s a question for those familiar with the Bolton situation. Is it the case that the Northern services have adequate capacity (ie room to at least stand in some reasonable amount of comfort, as opposed to crush loading)? Or is this simply a case of people choosing the TPX trains because they are non-stop?
The TPE services that commuters might be tempted to use do not stop at Bolton, and that is not going to change. The TPE services that are going to commence calling at Bolton, subject to the restrictions that are the topic of this thread, are at times of day when there are few if any Bolton to Manchester commuters.

For avoidance of doubt, the southbound services that will be set down only will arrive at Bolton at the following (approximate) times:
1005, 1106, 1205, 1305, 1405, 1505, 1605, 1707, 1805, 1906, 2006, 2106, 2201, 2305.

The northbound services that will be pickup only will depart Bolton at the following approximate times:
0513, 0642, 0743, 0844, 0944, 1044, 1144, 1244, 1344, 1444, 1544, 1944, 2044, 2139.

At these times of day the alternative Northern services normally have lots of empty seats. Commuters who work in Bolton and travel from Manchester are a rare breed!

Edit 30/06/2019: times amended in line with RTT.
 
Last edited:

VT 390

Established Member
Joined
7 Dec 2018
Messages
1,366
TPEs 350s are significantly more attractive than any stock Northern offers on the route.

I suspect the punters “feel” the TPE service will get them home faster, even though the timetabled time difference is actually negligible.
As the TPE 397's will replace the 350's soon it will mean that it will be even worse for Bolton passengers to use the service as it has end doors and less standing space, though with more seats.
 

riceuten

Member
Joined
23 May 2018
Messages
510
Of course, the solution could be for there to be sufficient trains Bolton to Manchester to make this a marginal choice...just a thought

The same issue persists Watford Junction to London Euston - this is "enforced" by non-display of set down only trains and the very occasional excessing of people back to Milton Keynes to Euston. But, frankly, it's barely worth the candle, and it isn't an issue mainly because of the plethora of other choices - something Bolton to Manchester does not presently have.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,686
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
With comments like:
"Virtually no one does walk up. Surely someone who is paying for every day should be treated better ? Recurring revenue rather than gouging irregular travellers (in the main)."
clearly south-eastern travel conditions are becoming more common in the north-west. Unfortunately, (for non-commuting passengers) the same arrogant self-entitlement behaviour that London commuters practice/suffer from has also arrived. Those spouting about their (assumed) rights on such matters need to be reminded (or maybe informed for the first time) that their contribution to the fare box is significantly less than those who's travel doesn't add to the overcrowding problem.

I don't really want to ignite this debate again apart from to reiterate that I think at least some of your methodology on this is flawed, however surely the industry should be attempting to implement a solution that achieves the best compromise possible for a given capacity problem, not basing decisions on chips on shoulders about X allegedly paying more than Y?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top