Alternative historical class restructuring

[ccityplanner12]

As I understand it, before 1956, there were 3 classes on British trains: 1st, 2nd & 3rd. Not all trains had all classes, & by the 1950s it had long been the case that the vast majority of trains had 1st & 3rd classes, but not 2nd. In 1956, 2nd & 3rd classes were merged, & in 1987 it was renamed Standard class.
I have been thinking about the potential consequence for BR's finances of the quirks of the system thrown up by instead restructuring classes in the following way:

• Local & suburban trains would 2nd & 3rd class, but not first
• Intercity trains & airport expresses would have 1st & 2nd classes, but not third. Third-class ticket holders would use slow trains for long-distance journeys.

This would throw up 2 major quirks, both intended:

• Cheap intercity fares would be available in 3rd class which would restrict users to only travelling on slow & regional trains. These would be marketed towards people who want to see the country on as little cash as possible & do not mind a journey that would otherwise take 3 hours instead taking 5 & involving a couple of changes (I'm thinking of something like London to Lancashire), especially those who wish to avoid the inflexibility of an advance fare, i.e. the youth & budget travel market.
• Intercity passengers would be able to travel in the premium section of suburban & regional trains. Someone getting an intercity train from, say, Barnes Bridge to Tynemouth would be able to travel in 2nd class on the initial & final legs of their journey, made on suburban trains. The idea of this is to directly compete with car journeys: one of the advantages of making an intercity journey by car is that you have a seat door-to-door. Those in areas where commuter trains are regularly used for the morning rush will associate them with uncomfortable standing journeys, & while you can travel off-peak for a seat, that is an added inflexibility & having a journey in the premium section guarantees it. Outbound intercity trains are likely to not be much busier than usual at peak times at least compared with suburban services (except right at the start for ultra-long-range commuters, but I believe that's a more recent phenomenon, there aren't many of those in 1956) & putting the intercity passengers in second gets all the bulky luggage out of third to free up more room for commuters.

 

[Flying Snail]

One of many problems with that would be the defining of trains as one category or another.

Some "local" journeys only have IC trains and other lines have trains that are both IC and local, for example every London or XC service in Cornwall, only a small number of services on the cornish main line could be classified as local/regional services.

 

[etr221]

The 1956 change was part of a UIC agreed, Europe wide, change to two classes.

This was essentially the culmination of a process that (for GB) began in the 1870s on the Midland Railway, which first (1872) admitted 3rd class passengers to all trains, and then (1875) abolishe 2nd class - steps later followed by the other companies, and which virtually all had made by WW1 - the last exception was for continental boat trains.

In Europe things had gone differently: while I don't know the details for all countries, my (not perfect) understanding of the French system before 1956 was that it was very similar to that you (the OP) are suggesting: the 'best' services were 1st and 2nd class only; while suburban/local services were 2nd & 3rd - and there the 1956 changes meant combining 1st & 2nd as 1st (with a fair number of 1st class only expresses), and redesignation of 3rd as 2nd.

Given that the first step was the admission of 3rd class passengers to all trains, it at least arguable that the original system in GB (from the 1830s to the 1870s), was similar, and that to at least to some extent, the overall change was to simplify the train service, by abolishing the distinction between (and hence need for) 'best' (express, upper class only) and 'ordinary' passenger trains.

 

[ccityplanner12]

Easements to accommodate regional services which run express for the Uppermost part of their route are something I'm working on. They would largely be arbitrary, & would depend on the region. To summarise:

• Southern region: all trains would have 3rd except Brighton Belle, Gatwick Express and (thinking in the long-term here) HS1.
• Western region: no distinction between 3rd & 2nd would be made west of Taunton.
• London Midland and North Eastern regions: LNWR- & GN-built routes usually maintain the same fast/slow distinction all the way to their destination, while the L&Y network doesn't go to London so doesn't really radiate out from a hub. Anglia would be like the Southern & have 3rd on the majority of trains. Most easements would affect the Midland lines. I'm especially thinking about any long-distance services which may have run from London & continued beyond Leeds. An alternative policy would be to have 3rd on all Midland trains except the Blue Pullman as it is less busy than the other lines (today at least. It strikes me as a rather freight-centric line so that's how it may have been operated in the past).

 

[randyrippley]

Just another attempt to preserve social barriers and keep the lower classes in place
No other reason for it