Appalling Overcrowding

Status
Not open for further replies.

Masboroughlad

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2011
Messages
1,474
Location
Midlands
Travelled from Wolverhampton to Leeds tonight on the return half of an off peak return (costing £46).

The journey from Wolves to Manchester was full and standing.
Manchester to Leeds - people could hardly get on.

When will these two companies get a grip with the amount of people that want to travel? I suppose that while they can milk travellers for every penny, knowing they will travel whatever they are treated like, nothing will ever change.

I do hope that one day we will see supply matching demand - comfortably. Yes I know a ticket doesn't guarantee a seat - but at the crazy prices we have to pay - IT SHOULD!!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
7,778
Travelled from Wolverhampton to Leeds tonight on the return half of an off peak return (costing £46).

The journey from Wolves to Manchester was full and standing.
Manchester to Leeds - people could hardly get on.

When will these two companies get a grip with the amount of people that want to travel? I suppose that while they can milk travellers for every penny, knowing they will travel whatever they are treated like, nothing will ever change.

I do hope that one day we will see supply matching demand - comfortably. Yes I know a ticket doesn't guarantee a seat - but at the crazy prices we have to pay - IT SHOULD!!

Manchster leeds was hammpered by engineering works today and was at severely reduced capcity. Its the same every sunday night unfortunately, people travel back towards where they work after the weekend but most companies dont realise sunday isnt everyones day of rest anymore.
 

150222

Member
Joined
9 Jul 2011
Messages
1,002
Travelled from Wolverhampton to Leeds tonight on the return half of an off peak return (costing £46).

The journey from Wolves to Manchester was full and standing.
Manchester to Leeds - people could hardly get on.

When will these two companies get a grip with the amount of people that want to travel? I suppose that while they can milk travellers for every penny, knowing they will travel whatever they are treated like, nothing will ever change.

I do hope that one day we will see supply matching demand - comfortably. Yes I know a ticket doesn't guarantee a seat - but at the crazy prices we have to pay - IT SHOULD!!

It is not the respective faults of Transpennine Express and CrossCountry, they don't have enough stock.
 

Masboroughlad

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2011
Messages
1,474
Location
Midlands
Manchster leeds was hammpered by engineering works today and was at severely reduced capcity. Its the same every sunday night unfortunately, people travel back towards where they work after the weekend but most companies dont realise sunday isnt everyones day of rest anymore.

It's not very good really is it?

I know it's all about diagramming, but I reckon the train I was on tonight could have easily have been a 6 or 9 car 185 and just about coped. (was on the 2021 off Man Pic). 3 car train was just an insult!
 

Clip

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,616
Travelled from Wolverhampton to Leeds tonight on the return half of an off peak return (costing £46).

The journey from Wolves to Manchester was full and standing.
Manchester to Leeds - people could hardly get on.

When will these two companies get a grip with the amount of people that want to travel? I suppose that while they can milk travellers for every penny, knowing they will travel whatever they are treated like, nothing will ever change.

I do hope that one day we will see supply matching demand - comfortably. Yes I know a ticket doesn't guarantee a seat - but at the crazy prices we have to pay - IT SHOULD!!

You are aware of course that there was a football match on in Wolverhampton this afternoon/evening with one of the Manchester teams playing? Always going to add to the over crowding im afraid and until the DfT give more stock then it always will.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
7,778
You are aware of course that there was a football match on in Wolverhampton this afternoon/evening with one of the Manchester teams playing? Always going to add to the over crowding im afraid and until the DfT give more stock then it always will.

I think that may answer the question. The game finished at about 6 o clock so perfect for people on that train... nothing can be down about football matches im afraid...
And masboroughlad it couldnt of been 9 car as stations wouldnt cope.
 

Masboroughlad

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2011
Messages
1,474
Location
Midlands
You are aware of course that there was a football match on in Wolverhampton this afternoon/evening with one of the Manchester teams playing? Always going to add to the over crowding im afraid and until the DfT give more stock then it always will.

Yes, I realised this far too late!

I don't think ordinary travelling Joe Public should suffer (even more than usual) when there is a football match on.

There was something on the tele the other day about Football clubs being more responsible for the knock on effects of matches (costs etc). I think this should extend to putting on Footex trains.

I know nothing is likely to change - it just really p***es me off! We pay far more for rail travel today but stand a much lower chance of getting a seat.
 
Last edited:

TDK

Established Member
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Messages
4,126
Location
Wrexham
Ive never understood how it has been acceptable to replace 37's with more importantly a rake of maybe 8 MK2's with a 2 car 175 or a 3 car 158 etc.

coz 37's are noisy, un economic, underpowered over thirsty on fuel cannot be run round and outdated. Simple really however the capacity problem is mainly down to the Dft and not the TOC's I belive
 

Masboroughlad

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2011
Messages
1,474
Location
Midlands
I think that may answer the question. The game finished at about 6 o clock so perfect for people on that train... nothing can be down about football matches im afraid...
And masboroughlad it couldnt of been 9 car as stations wouldnt cope.

I know, know..... Too many factors at play....

A train that you could walk through of 9 carriages would be fine. Selective door opening (or good old common sense) would overcome the short platform problem!
 

Clip

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,616
I know, know..... Too many factors at play....

A train that you could walk through of 9 carriages would be fine. Selective door opening (or good old common sense) would overcome the short platform problem!

And there is your problem. There is a lot of people who travel by train who have no common sense when selcetive door opening is in operatin and inevitably miss their stop due to being in the wrong carriage and not listening to any announcments.
 

tsr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
7,393
Location
Between the parallel lines
Let's face it - at times, our railways simply don't cope!

It's more than "at times", though, isn't it? In fact, we may as well say that our railways cannot cope with the surge in demand that the cynical may suggest is the opposite result to what the government and other bodies and organisations expect when they continually raise fees.

With regards to stations other than major terminals and also stations in the South-East, I am appalled by the lack of platform lengthening where demand for longer trains is often shown - and where geographical constrictions are not notably in evidence.

I think this is one of the key barriers to the use of greater numbers of carriages (which, let's face it, is often going to be the only sensible solution, especially when pathings and so on are restricted (e.g. due to engineering works) and a comparatively small number of trains can be run).

The other major barrier is the time it takes to build and supply carriages to TOCs to meet forecasted or actual demand, or else to move stock around the country before it can be used. It can take an inordinate and ridiculous amount of time to acquire new multiple units, carriages and locos - partly due to EU procurement and bidding rules, partly due to a lack of efficient larger-scale British manufacturing, and partly because of all the longwinded administrative processes between and in different organisations that must be slowing things down by orders of magnitude. We talk about projects for building stock stretching many years in the future when it will probably be more efficient to predict the short term and build stock quickly for the short term if necessary (it can always be sold on or kept in good-quality storage if unused for a few years, but this seems hardly likely).

I understand there are other factors, such as maintenance schedules, asset management routines (most of which can probably be made more efficient), training for new stock types, building regulations, planning permission, etc. etc.

Now, of course, the content of my post has been stated many, many times before, but it bears repeating, and I feel this is a good simplification which government departments (etc.) may understand a little better!

Perhaps if we want an even simpler answer, we can go right back to LHCS for everything, which would probably enable better tidal flow capabilities and more flexible maintenance as necessary.
 

plymothian

Member
Joined
26 Sep 2010
Messages
656
Location
Plymouth
Re. The call for 1 ticket = 1 seat and when sold that's it.

How many people would play up merry hell when they couldn't get on their trains because it's full, or the next, or the next? What would happen to people who wanted to go somewhere now ie walk ups?
 

CosherB

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2007
Messages
3,040
It's simple. Your journey was largely in the north of England. We are starved of rail investment here (so not enough stock, and old stock - like Donkeys - to boot) as London and the SE gets the lion's share of any money going! :roll:
 

CC 72100

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2012
Messages
3,627
It is not the respective faults of Transpennine Express and CrossCountry, they don't have enough stock.

Although without turning this into a Voyager bashing thread (or at least trying not to), CrossCountry do not help themselves with such under-utilisation of their HST fleet. Because when we've got such overcrowding on some XC services, it's way more logical to have your 7 coach trains sat doing nothing and send out the 4 coach ones :roll:

When other TOCs continually say how much they would like more stock, and XC don't use what they do have to the best of their ability, it's hardly surprising people have to endure overcrowding like this
 

SWTCommuter

Member
Joined
17 Oct 2009
Messages
311
It's simple. Your journey was largely in the north of England. We are starved of rail investment here (so not enough stock, and old stock - like Donkeys - to boot) as London and the SE gets the lion's share of any money going! :roll:

Here is a list of TOCs in order of subsidy per passenger mile for 2010-2011. The two most highly subsidised are Northern and TPE. Not counting East Coast (which serves the the north and south), the least-subsidised TOCs are FCC and SWT, which serve London and the SE.

First Capital Connect -0.9
East Coast 0.7
South West Trains 2.4
Southern 3.5
Virgin 3.7
National Express East Anglia 4.2
c2c Rail 6
First Greater Western 6.2
Chiltern 10.1
East Midlands Trains 12.5
CrossCountry 16.9
London Midland 17.8
Southeastern 18.7
First TransPennine Express 20.9
Northern 34
 

TheJRB

Established Member
Joined
14 Feb 2011
Messages
1,165
Location
Ashford, Kent
Aside from a lack of stock, why can SDO not be implemented to a greater extent? I know it's used quite a lot down here. I suppose a big issue is stock without gangways when working in multiple. Although on my local line on rare occasion two two-car units working in multiple without gangway serve stations with platforms long enough for only one carriage.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
7,778
Here is a list of TOCs in order of subsidy per passenger mile for 2010-2011. The two most highly subsidised are Northern and TPE. Not counting East Coast (which serves the the north and south), the least-subsidised TOCs are FCC and SWT, which serve London and the SE.

First Capital Connect -0.9
East Coast 0.7
South West Trains 2.4
Southern 3.5
Virgin 3.7
National Express East Anglia 4.2
c2c Rail 6
First Greater Western 6.2
Chiltern 10.1
East Midlands Trains 12.5
CrossCountry 16.9
London Midland 17.8
Southeastern 18.7
First TransPennine Express 20.9
Northern 34

Any wonder its subsidised with unattractive rail services? I bet the airdale line electrification has paid itself back. 2/3 car pacer every hour to a 4 car 333 every half an hour. Well used.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
There's a difference between subsidy and investment...

Massive difference... Investment leads to less subsidy! SO by that logic the north has been starved of investment as it has the highest subsidy...

I really want to see ways to reduce that subsidy, but without anything major i cant see where its going to come from.
 
Last edited:

Erniescooper

Member
Joined
27 Mar 2010
Messages
515
Here is a list of TOCs in order of subsidy per passenger mile for 2010-2011. The two most highly subsidised are Northern and TPE. Not counting East Coast (which serves the the north and south), the least-subsidised TOCs are FCC and SWT, which serve London and the SE.

First Capital Connect -0.9
East Coast 0.7
South West Trains 2.4
Southern 3.5
Virgin 3.7
National Express East Anglia 4.2
c2c Rail 6
First Greater Western 6.2
Chiltern 10.1
East Midlands Trains 12.5
CrossCountry 16.9
London Midland 17.8
Southeastern 18.7
First TransPennine Express 20.9
Northern 34

TRANSPORT SPENDING PER HEAD

London - £2,731
South-east of England - £792
East Midlands - £311
West Midlands - £269
Yorkshire and Humberside - £201
North-west of England - £134
Eastern England - £43
South-west of England - £19
North-east of England - £5

Taken from a report by The Institute for Public Policy Research North last year. The South East could hardly claim to be hard done by.
 

CosherB

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2007
Messages
3,040
Here is a list of TOCs in order of subsidy per passenger mile for 2010-2011. The two most highly subsidised are Northern and TPE. Not counting East Coast (which serves the the north and south), the least-subsidised TOCs are FCC and SWT, which serve London and the SE.

I wasn't talking about subsidy, but about investment in infrastucture and particularly in new rolling stock.
 

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
Yes, I realised this far too late!

I don't think ordinary travelling Joe Public should suffer (even more than usual) when there is a football match on.

There was something on the tele the other day about Football clubs being more responsible for the knock on effects of matches (costs etc). I think this should extend to putting on Footex trains.

I know nothing is likely to change - it just really p***es me off! We pay far more for rail travel today but stand a much lower chance of getting a seat.

At the risk of upsetting Mr Clip, I thoroughly agree. If you are the cause of regular widespread chaos, it's only justified that you should pay for delaling with it. Regarding football specials though, it's a tough one even if the teams were willing to foot the bill (highly unlikely, it's not cheap!). The only available stock in many cases is likely to be from charter companies, and frankly I can't see many of them coming back for seconds once their rakes of well kpet (ish!) coaches have been trashed, which sadly is bound to happen sooner or later. I certainly agree though that normal public train services and large groups of football fans (or rugby etc), do not mix.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,234
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
Let's face it - at times, our railways simply don't cope!

It's more than "at times", though, isn't it? In fact, we may as well say that our railways cannot cope with the surge in demand that the cynical may suggest is the opposite result to what the government and other bodies and organisations expect when they continually raise fees

Sunday night can be a very busy evening (as people head home from a weekend away - often with a large amount of luggage). However its hard enough to get staff to work Sundays (on a basic timetable) without adding extra trains.

But, yeah, the railway cannot cope with huge surges in demand - the only way round this would be to have stock sat idle for most of the day/ week/ year. With the exception of slam-doors, any new stock generally hasn't meant withdrawl of older trains (which could sit idle in sidings for most of the week, to be called upon at busy times, like under BR), it's meant the older trains are retained in daily service (e.g. Pacers).

There isn't much slack in the system, but then how can we create it? Good luck going to the Government to ask for hundreds of new coaches to be built so that we can keep them idle for most of the week.

Here is a list of TOCs in order of subsidy per passenger mile for 2010-2011. The two most highly subsidised are Northern and TPE. Not counting East Coast (which serves the the north and south), the least-subsidised TOCs are FCC and SWT, which serve London and the SE

Oddly your list doesn't include Arriva Trains Wales

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-15659301

According to figures from the Office for Rail Regulation, last year ATW received the highest public subsidy per passenger mile of any franchise across the UK

...although "subsidy per passenger mile" is obviously only one measure.

I don't think ordinary travelling Joe Public should suffer (even more than usual) when there is a football match on.

There was something on the tele the other day about Football clubs being more responsible for the knock on effects of matches (costs etc). I think this should extend to putting on Footex trains

I've no problem with football clubs paying for (some of) the cost of policing in the grounds, the policing outside the grounds... but are we now asking for football clubs to pay for the transportation of tens of thousands of fans too?

If there was violence then I could understand, but surely we don't need to segragate all football fans? And, if you do want to segragate them, what stock is spare for these Footexes?

Ive never understood how it has been acceptable to replace 37's with more importantly a rake of maybe 8 MK2's with a 2 car 175 or a 3 car 158 etc.

The problems with that argument are chiefly;

  • How many 37s hauled around eight coaches? Maybe four or five, but eight? On average?
  • How many 37s were running anything like as regular a service (e.g. to use the OP's example route Birmingham - Manchester is half hourly, Manchester - Leeds is four fast trains an hour - plus two an hour via Bradford)
  • At the time of DMUs taking over from loco-hauled, passenger numbers were on the way down
 
Last edited:

D1009

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2012
Messages
3,166
Location
Stoke Gifford
It is not the respective faults of Transpennine Express and CrossCountry, they don't have enough stock.

As i understand it on Sundays the Machester to Leeds scheduled service consists of one tph via Salford Crescent (reverse) Manchester Victoria then non stop to Huddersfield via Rochdale and Brighouse. This is against 4 tph via the direct route during the week. Even allowing for this route taking approximately 1 hour longer between Piccadilly and Leeds, given the service is reduced by so much, why is there insufficient rolling stock to make all trains 6 cars ?
 

SWTCommuter

Member
Joined
17 Oct 2009
Messages
311
Oddly your list doesn't include Arriva Trains Wales

I took it from the DFt website. Presumably they don't list ATW because it is the responsibility of the Welsh Assembly.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/dft-business-plan-indicators-input-01/




TRANSPORT SPENDING PER HEAD

London - £2,731
South-east of England - £792
East Midlands - £311
West Midlands - £269
Yorkshire and Humberside - £201
North-west of England - £134
Eastern England - £43
South-west of England - £19
North-east of England - £5

Taken from a report by The Institute for Public Policy Research North last year. The South East could hardly claim to be hard done by.



On the face of it, that is certainly a shocking discrepancy, especially the North East.

However, if you accept Norman Baker's figures when he was questioned about the IPPR report in the Commons, the North East receives beween 2.85% and 6.32% of UK central government transport spending. According to Wikipedia, the population of the northeast is 4.3% of the UK population so spending per head of population would appear roughly average.

11. Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central) (Lab): What proportion of central Government spending on transport is spent in the north-east

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker): According to the latest figures published by the Treasury, of the £10,380 million spent on transport in the UK directly by central Government in 2010, £293 million was spent in the north-east, which was broadly comparable with expenditure in the preceding years under the Labour Government. An additional £363 million was spent by local authorities, with some of the funding coming from central Government.

Chi Onwurah: The Minister referred earlier to the transport spending announced in the autumn statement, but the Institute for Public Policy Research found that of that only 0.04% was spent in the north-east. The Government will be spending £2,731 per head in London compared with a mere £5 in the north-east, and we know that high-speed rail will not even get as far as Leeds until 2033, so will the Minister look at decentralising transport spending so that the north-east does not continue to be left behind?

Norman Baker: First, we are looking at decentralising transport spending. Secondly, the proportion of expenditure in the north-east is not particularly out of line with the population there. Thirdly, the IPPR report to which the hon. Lady refers is not complete; it did not, for example, include the December announcements on local major projects and did not take into account the further £1 billion from the regional growth fund. It is not a complete analysis.

http://www.publications.parliament....120112/debtext/120112-0001.htm#12011294001248

It would be interesting to know IPPR North calculated 'spending per head'.

'Mr Cox [of the IPPR] conceded that much of the spending in London was due to the Olympics.'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-16235349

Personally, I would prefer the money being spent on the Olympics to be spent in the regions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top