If 20% of train services are to be cut due to the change in usage patterns, what would you cut?

[The Ham]

I suspect most office workers are going to end up being ****s (tuesday, wednesday and thursdays, though I know some who will be both meanings....)

I agree, however there'll be just enough people not being ****s to mean that a Wednesday probably wouldn't be much different from Tuesday or Thursday.

 

[Kite159]

Paddington - Didcot semi-fast to remain 2tph with 1tph extended to Oxford.

One slight issue is the lack of wires from Didcot to Oxford meaning it will have to be a bimode or a turbo under the wires

 

[NorthKent1989]

I think there will be a timetable reshuffle but not until at least 2022 or even 2023.

As much as I think that home working will be here to stay it’s still very early to predict a post Covid world.

That being said, people are looking to move out of the big cities and into suburban towns and country towns I’ve noticed, I reckon train travel will be geared to leisure travel and outer suburban commuting in the future, lockdown for many has made them realised that rather than pay £900 pcm for a room in zone 2, they can pay a tiny bit more for a flat to themselves or even a house outside London, or elsewhere in the country, I know many people who have made that decision to either work from home 2/3 days a week or are getting out of London completely.

I cannot see Thameslink changing it’s timetable for a long time to come, the Cambridge to Maidstone service is dead in the water now for the time being.

Southeastern may reduce off peak services, the Victoria-Orpington route could even go back to 2tph, even when things opened up in the summer that line didn’t seem nearly as busy as it did off peak in 2019, but, it’s too early to tell.

The Dartford routes will go through a change

- Sidcup going back to 4tph, Cannon Street rounders and Gravesend semi fast to Hither Green

- 6tph on the Woolwich line, Thameslink, Cannon Street rounders and Charing Cross to Dartford

- Bexleyheath Line I think will stay the same frequency

There maybe a reshuffle once CrossRail finally opens at Abbey Wood.

London Overground won’t expand beyond its current operations.

HS1 Will keep to its current operations, no off peak service to Maidstone West and no extension to Hastings.

 

[Ianno87]

I prefer Friday as an "in the office" day. Firstly, as others have said, trains are quieter and so are the roads. Secondly, as it is dress down day, no need to iron a shirt.

What is this I-Ron of which you speak?

I agree, Fridays are great for getting your head down in something in relative peace, as it tends to be the day free-est of meetings and calls.

 

[30907]

As people here are probably aware, Leeds - Lancaster is now Skipton - Lancaster.

Not now - was until December, partly Covid and partly Leeds Platform 0 work.

 

[bramling]

All very good but the two sets of services from Bedford (Brighton and Gatwick) are directed at different service groups south of the river, so you are basically removing Thameslink services from Norwood Junction, Purley, Earlswood, Salfords and halving at Horley and Redhill.

Just because both services call/terminate at Gatwick doesn't mean they follow same calling pattern after London Bridge, The Brighton trains are essentially fast to Gatwick caklling only at ECR, whereas the Gatwick train is a stopping service calling at many stations.

I'd suggest it is very hard to cut Thameslink services back as there are different implications either side of the central core and additionally the need to keep frequency up in the core especially as it is now on the Tube Map. I suspect the maximum you could do is withdraw the peak extras and close some services earlier in the evening.

I can’t see the base Thameslink service being cut back (unless an issue like lack of crew availability forces it). As you say trimming peak extras is far more likely, though I wouldn’t bank too much on a massive amount of that either.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

Part 4: Southeastern

• All HS1 services to remain as they are with the exception of St Pancras - Faversham which is to be withdrawn.
• 1tph Victoria - Ramsgate and 2tph Victoria - Dover to remain.
• 2tph Victoria - Ashford via Maidstone East to remain, but with the 1tph Canterbury West extension withdrawn.
• 1tph Charing Cross - Dover to remain.
• 1tph Charing Cross - Ramsgate to remain, but with additional calls at Chilham and Chartham.
• Charing Cross - Hastings reduced to 1tph.
• Charing Cross - Tunbridge Wells to remain at 2tph.
• Charing Cross - Sevenoaks to remain at 2tph.
• Sittingbourne - Sheerness reduced to 1tph
• Strood - Tonbridge to remain at 1tph
• Strood - Maidstone West withdrawn
• Victoria - Orpington to remain at 2tph
• Victoria - Bromley South reduced to 1tph
• Victoria - Gravesend to remain at 2tph
• Charing Cross - Hayes to remain at 2tph
• Charing Cross - Dartford via Charlton reduced to 1tph
• Charing Cross - Dartford via Bexleyheath reduced to 1tph
• Charing Cross - Dartford via Sidcup to remain at 2tph
• Charing Cross - Gravesend via Sidcup reduced to 1tph
• Cannon Street rounder via Bexleyheath to remain at 2tph
• Cannon Street rounder via Sidcup to remain at 2tph
• Cannon Street - Orpington reduced to 1tph
• Cannon Street - Hayes reduced to 1tph
• Grove Park - Bromley North shuttle to remain at 3tph

I can’t see the base Thameslink service being cut back (unless an issue like lack of crew availability forces it). As you say trimming peak extras is far more likely, though I wouldn’t bank too much on a massive amount of that either.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if Thameslink doesn't get cut at all.

 

[30907]

Employers will want to reduce their office floorspace and introduce hot-desking, so will bring in measures to prevent that sort of extreme unevenness in office demand and therefore in commuting.

No doubt they will, particularly when rental increases become due - but whether their staff will be so keen I don't know; I suspect many will value the being able to choose their office days (note - I have WFH most of my life, but my wife hasn't, and she and most of her colleagues valued having their own desk - as indeed did I 40 years ago!).
I think this will push against spreading the white-collar commute evenly.

BTW is the collapse of Friday commuting a national phenomenon, or concentrated on London? My Airedale line commuting contact reports that Fridays immediately B.C. were "a bit quieter but not hugely."

 

[telstarbox]

On the other hand residential rents have come down recently so commercial rents may have to follow if landlords don't want a lot of vacancies.

 

[JamesRowden]

Part 4: Southeastern

• All HS1 services to remain as they are with the exception of St Pancras - Faversham which is to be withdrawn.
• 1tph Victoria - Ramsgate and 2tph Victoria - Dover to remain.
• 2tph Victoria - Ashford via Maidstone East to remain, but with the 1tph Canterbury West extension withdrawn.
• 1tph Charing Cross - Dover to remain.
• 1tph Charing Cross - Ramsgate to remain, but with additional calls at Chilham and Chartham.
• Charing Cross - Hastings reduced to 1tph.
• Charing Cross - Tunbridge Wells to remain at 2tph.
• Charing Cross - Sevenoaks to remain at 2tph.
• Sittingbourne - Sheerness reduced to 1tph
• Strood - Tonbridge to remain at 1tph
• Strood - Maidstone West withdrawn
• Victoria - Orpington to remain at 2tph
• Victoria - Bromley South reduced to 1tph
• Victoria - Gravesend to remain at 2tph
• Charing Cross - Hayes to remain at 2tph
• Charing Cross - Dartford via Charlton reduced to 1tph
• Charing Cross - Dartford via Bexleyheath reduced to 1tph
• Charing Cross - Dartford via Sidcup to remain at 2tph
• Charing Cross - Gravesend via Sidcup reduced to 1tph
• Cannon Street rounder via Bexleyheath to remain at 2tph
• Cannon Street rounder via Sidcup to remain at 2tph
• Cannon Street - Orpington reduced to 1tph
• Cannon Street - Hayes reduced to 1tph
• Grove Park - Bromley North shuttle to remain at 3tph

I would suggest that a much better compromise for quality of service, cost, and flexibility to adapt to an unknown level of future demand would be:

• Remove the peak extra services to improve the reliability and speed of peak services running to the present off-peak pattern (with minor alterations to account for the longer peak dwell times if necessary). This can reduce the need for staff overtime to cut costs without redundancies.
• Optimise the length of the trains to match demand once the vulnerable have had the opportunity to be vaccinated and there is therefore no justification for restrictions since almost no lives would be saved (except for those who refused to be vaccinated, or can't have the vaccine and so will need to be supported while shielding).
• Once the medium term situation stabilises post covid, a measured amount of the Networker stock can be released to save money.

I would think that a similar change could be made to all operator services which operate stock formed of multiple units connected together off-peak (as long as there is enough stock going off-lease soon enough). For example, with South Western, it may be worth transferring some of their stock to South Eastern or Southern to allow older trains to go off lease.

For long multiple units like class 390/700/80Xs, it may be worth reforming units into shorter sets to save money. For the 700s and 80Xs it should be possible to acquire new driving carriages for these shorter sets so that some could be cascaded to other routes to allow older stock to be released.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

I would suggest that a much better compromise for quality of service, cost, and flexibility to adapt to an unknown level of future demand would be:

• Remove the peak extra services to improve the reliability and speed of peak services running to the present off-peak pattern (with minor alterations to account for the longer peak dwell times if necessary). This can reduce the need for staff overtime to cut costs without redundancies.
• Optimise the length of the trains to match demand once the vulnerable have had the opportunity to be vaccinated and there is therefore no justification for restrictions since almost no lives would be saved (except for those who refused to be vaccinated, or can't have the vaccine and so will need to be supported while shielding).
• Once the medium term situation stabilises post covid, a measured amount of the Networker stock can be released to save money.

I would think that a similar change could be made to all operator services which operate stock formed of multiple units connected together off-peak (as long as there is enough stock going off-lease soon enough). For example, with South Western, it may be worth transferring some of their stock to South Eastern or Southern to allow older trains to go off lease.

For long multiple units like class 390/700/80Xs, it may be worth reforming units into shorter sets to save money. For the 700s and 80Xs it should be possible to acquire new driving carriages for these shorter sets so that some could be cascaded to other routes to allow older stock to be released.

How is reforming units to become shorter and accquiring new driving carriages going to save any money whatsoever in the short term?

You'd be spending even more money in the short term to do something like that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

For long multiple units like class 390/700/80Xs, it may be worth reforming units into shorter sets to save money. For the 700s and 80Xs it should be possible to acquire new driving carriages for these shorter sets so that some could be cascaded to other routes to allow older stock to be released.

Of all the 80x there are, according to Wiki:

800: 34 x 9-car, 59 x 5-car
801: 30 x 9-car, 12 x 5-car
802: 14 x 9-car, 46 x 5-car
(didn't realise there were quite that many 9s!)

So total of 78 9s and 117 5s. I've ignored the Avanti and EMR sets for now, the former because the stats aren't to hand, the latter because they're a different design.

Obviously with MUs it's not just a case of a depot shunt, you'd actually have to do some considerable modification (including fitting and removing diesel power packs as required), but out of that lot you could form 156 7-car sets with 39 5-car sets left over. That might work better for lower traffic levels, as 5 is barely suitable for anything due to the amount of wasted space. You could perhaps use double 5s on the busiest trains and 7s on everything else, including perhaps on a reduced-frequency (4tph total) TPE.

Doing this sort of thing has precedent - EMT did it with the 222s - by taking coaches out of the 9s, they extended most of the 4s to 5. Virgin did it as well to some extent.

 

[JamesRowden]

How is reforming units to become shorter and accquiring new driving carriages going to save any money whatsoever in the short term?

You'd be spending even more money in the short term to do something like that.

Take 3 9-Car 800s. Buy 8 driving carriages to reform them into 7 5-Car 800s. Send 4 of the new 800s to Cross Country to allow 4 220/221/222s to go off lease (if the 800s can be cleared to run on the routes). There are probably many different ways of doing this.

 

[JonathanH]

For the 700s and 80Xs it should be possible to acquire new driving carriages for these shorter sets so that some could be cascaded to other routes to allow older stock to be released.

Better to augment the 707s using the spare intermediate cars and avoid the cost of new driving cars.

Take 3 9-Car 800s. Buy 8 driving carriages to reform them into 7 5-Car 800s. Send 4 of the new 800s to Cross Country to allow 4 220/221/222s to go off lease (if the 800s can be cleared to run on the routes).

Again, just find something shorter to put the extra cars into - reforming 9 and 5 car sets is better than buying new driving cars.

However, yes, there is a huge opportunity in the offing to bin off the 22x fleet without any more new build stock by a combination of reducing service frequencies, cutting routes short and displacing rolling stock from other routes.

 

[edwin_m]

On the other hand residential rents have come down recently so commercial rents may have to follow if landlords don't want a lot of vacancies.

Commercial rents are likely to fall as there is less demand for office space. The next few years are going to be tough for office developers and landlords. That will reduce but not eliminate the inclination of companies to downsize their offices, as there are many other costs associated with running them that won't change much.

The other change is that WFH is probably now seen as an acceptable norm, where many people would have been opposed to it on principle before 2020. Companies that try to refuse it will find it harder to attract talented employees or have to pay more to persuade the people they want to accept the time and inconvenience of a daily commute. Obviously some individuals will prefer to work in an office and some types of job require a physical presence, but there are enough where neither applies to make a difference to the numbers.

So if may staff choose not to come to the office each day, then once social distancing is no longer necessary companies will be under financial pressure to downsize office space that nobody is using, even if rents are lower. They will probably re-balance the space to have fewer desks and more spaces for meetings and interactions, but these activities need less space per person so the net effect will still be a reduction.

 

[JamesRowden]

Better to augment the 707s using the spare intermediate cars and avoid the cost of new driving cars.

I think that the price of leasing the 2 additional driving cars (after potentially implementing your 707 idea if appropriate) should be more than made back by the saving of releasing a whole set of the other stock, provided that the other stock is at the end of its lease unless either:

• Rolling stock prices massively reduce as a result of lower demand (which would mean that there would be less need to make services shorter or less frequent to save money since the ROSCOs would have taken a significant part of the covid hit for the railway)
• The ROSCOs resist because the lack of variety of ROSCOs means that they can collectively (not necessarily organised) make it more difficult for the government to get additional carriages for existing stock to off load other stock (although manufacturers might start offering a discount on new builds due to lower demand).
• Government buying the ROSCOs or stock at a discounted price due to above reasons.
• The demand for rail returns much faster than expected than in the document linked in the OP of the original thread, either naturally or through passengers being attracted by less busy trains, congested roads and/or cheaper tickets.

So in other words how the railway should respond to covid is a very complicated question because we don't know exactly what will happen to demand, and we don't even know how much things will cost.

 

[PTR 444]

Ideas for Chiltern:

• 2tph Marylebone - Aylesbury via Amersham to remain.
• Marylebone - Gerrards Cross stopper to remain.
• Marylebone - High Wycombe terminator withdrawn.
• Marylebone - Aylesbury via High Wycombe to remain.
• 2tph Marylebone - Oxford to remain.
• Marylebone - Banbury withdrawn. Leamington - Stratford to run as a 1tp2h shuttle between these two stations only.
• 2tph Marylebone - Birmingham to remain. 1tph of these to additionally serve Hatton and Lapworth
• 1tp2h shuttle between Leamington Spa and Moor Street withdrawn.

 

[JonathanH]

• Marylebone - Banbury withdrawn. Leamington - Stratford to run as a 1tp2h shuttle between these two stations only.
• 2tph Marylebone - Birmingham to remain. 1tph of these to additionally serve Hatton and Lapworth
• 1tp2h shuttle between Leamington Spa and Moor Street withdrawn.

There will be much less need for 2tph Marylebone to Birmingham once the differential Chiltern / route High Wycombe fares are withdrawn. With this in mind, what may be better is a stopper to Birmingham which is overtaken by a train which calls at all of the main stations. Therefore 1tph Marylebone to Birmingham and retain the Banbury stopper / Leamington to Birmingham stopper. If the Class 68 + Mk3 sets are withdrawn, it may make sense to remove the extensions west of Birmingham as well and simply run from Birmingham Moor Street, leaving the Stourbridge sidings vacant. Perhaps 4tph evenly spaced Beaconsfield - High Wycombe - Princes Risborough - Haddenham with 2tph running to Oxford and 1tph to Birmingham and the final tph covering Seer Green / Saunderton and Kings Sutton terminating at Banbury. I don't think the Aylesbury stopper needs to run south of Princes Risborough in that timetable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There will be much less need for 2tph Marylebone to Birmingham once the differential Chiltern / route High Wycombe fares are withdrawn.

The question is whether they will be withdrawn. Competition will certainly end, but price differentiation still has value, because it widens the market - just ask SNCF, who put considerable effort into what appears to be competing with themselves.

 

[gingerheid]

The question is whether they will be withdrawn. Competition will certainly end, but price differentiation still has value, because it widens the market - just ask SNCF, who put considerable effort into what appears to be competing with themselves.

I don't know what the situation in France is, but here the competition was ultimately previously driven by lack of (mainly) peak time capacity. If that ceases to be a problem, ...

With a cynics hat on... as far as Thameslink goes, this looks like a perfect opportunity to withdraw the Cambridge - Maidstone plans that were increasingly surrounded by deafening silence and carried every appearance of never happening anyway! Greater Anglia could also abandon the hourly service to Peterborough on the same basis.

 

[Ken H]

Yeah, I think that Wednesday will be the "peak" day.

For example, with the "new mums" at the place I work (a fairly ordinary office building where the vast vast majority of full time people were in the office for five days a week), some want to do the first three days of the working week, some want to do the middle three days of the working week, some want to do the final three days of the working week - which means Wednesday becomes busier than other days (going off topic, but my understanding from talking to people in this position is that two days a week often isn't sufficient to make it worth returning to work, given the corresponding loss in benefits).

So, if that's anything to go by then, even if the people returning to offices are doing a mixture of one/two/three/four/five days, I think Wednesday will be the busiest day of the week (and therefore various team meetings scheduled for Wednesday as it'll be the only time everyone is in at the same time)

That means we could be in a situation where a four coach EMU is sufficient for a London commuter TOC on a Monday, an eight coach required on a Tuesday, twelve coaches on a Wednesday, back to eight coaches on Thursday and four on a Friday - but infrastructure will have to be based around the once-a-week "peak" day, which may mean some units sat idle a lot of the week (compared to the way that recessions were in BR days, when passenger numbers nosedived, but at least stabilised to a fairly similar level of demand for the five days of the woking week).

We're obviously just speculating but I think that the talk of whether commuting levels go back to 30%/ 50%/ 70% of 2019 levels often ignores the fact that it's probably not going to be well balanced across the five working days of the week (but that the railway will be expected to cater for that kind of demand on the busiest day of the week, which may make the economies of ordering replacement stock a bit "interesting" - i.e. whether it's worth buying trains for just a couple of journeys a week).

BR were okay to have dozens of "mature" coaches sat idle most of the year, to be pressed into action on "seaside specials" and what not, but modern rolling stock doesn't work like that.

firms will want to downsize offices, and will therefore move to hot desks. Which employees will have to book. evening out travel demand. Also, I work in IT, and we released changes on Thursdays. so when i went 4 day week, i was asked to take Mondays off, so I was in on Fridays in case the release went wrong.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Jan 2021 ==

Not now - was until December, partly Covid and partly Leeds Platform 0 work.

thanks for correction. U R right, of course!

 

[squizzler]

If people are going to work three days a week, this will mean that the expectation of everyone being at their assigned desk when the office is open (personal leave excepted) is a thing of the past. Perhaps white collar businesses - keen to downsize their property leases - will move to six days a week opening? That means, for instance, that two people doing three days a week can both be assigned the same desk.

This would allow commuting to be spread over six rather than five days. Along with a continuation of the trend towards flexible working hours which was already in motion before the pandemic and has accelerated in many industries due to government requests to avoid travel at peak times, and travel to and from work could become so spread out - over more days of the week and also within those days - that there is no longer a need for a peak service in the traditional sense.

All of which is good for transport providers and their customers.

 

[HST43257]

If people are going to work three days a week, this will mean that the expectation of everyone being at their assigned desk when the office is open (personal leave excepted) is a thing of the past. Perhaps white collar businesses - keen to downsize their property leases - will move to six days a week opening? That means, for instance, that two people doing three days a week can both be assigned the same desk.

This would allow commuting to be spread over six rather than five days. Along with a continuation of the trend towards flexible working hours which was already in motion before the pandemic and has accelerated in many industries due to government requests to avoid travel at peak times, and travel to and from work could become so spread out - over more days of the week and also within those days - that there is no longer a need for a peak service in the traditional sense.

All of which is good for transport providers and their customers.

I reckon a 4 open day situation is more likely. 2 days in the office and 3 at home (everyone at home on a Friday).

 

[edwin_m]

If people are going to work three days a week, this will mean that the expectation of everyone being at their assigned desk when the office is open (personal leave excepted) is a thing of the past. Perhaps white collar businesses - keen to downsize their property leases - will move to six days a week opening? That means, for instance, that two people doing three days a week can both be assigned the same desk.

This would allow commuting to be spread over six rather than five days. Along with a continuation of the trend towards flexible working hours which was already in motion before the pandemic and has accelerated in many industries due to government requests to avoid travel at peak times, and travel to and from work could become so spread out - over more days of the week and also within those days - that there is no longer a need for a peak service in the traditional sense.

All of which is good for transport providers and their customers.

More likely they'll just go to hot-desking, which is much more flexible both for the employee and for the company.

 

[The Ham]

If people are going to work three days a week, this will mean that the expectation of everyone being at their assigned desk when the office is open (personal leave excepted) is a thing of the past. Perhaps white collar businesses - keen to downsize their property leases - will move to six days a week opening? That means, for instance, that two people doing three days a week can both be assigned the same desk.

This would allow commuting to be spread over six rather than five days. Along with a continuation of the trend towards flexible working hours which was already in motion before the pandemic and has accelerated in many industries due to government requests to avoid travel at peak times, and travel to and from work could become so spread out - over more days of the week and also within those days - that there is no longer a need for a peak service in the traditional sense.

All of which is good for transport providers and their customers.

There would certainly be some who would like the flexibility of being able to work on a Saturday if it then ment that they could remove the need for childcare.

However I'm not sure that would be all that useful for a working in the office day.

 

[squizzler]

I reckon a 4 open day situation is more likely. 2 days in the office and 3 at home (everyone at home on a Friday).

That rather goes contrary to the logic of providing for increased employee flexibility and also getting more value out of the fixed assets like the buildings and equipment. A six day office would be better in both regards.

The trend of offices will probably mirror that of how we socialise. There used to be people who would go to their local pub or social club every evening after dinner. You just knew that that would be where you could find them in the evening drinking a pint or two until kicking-out time. Nowadays, going out is more likely to happen only occasionally when specifically meeting up with friends or having dinner out, with use of agencies like facebook for most of the rest of the time. Pubs are open for longer these days, but not because people spend longer in them.

Workplaces might be open for longer hours for two reasons: for employees coming in for specific meetings or to work as a team, and for those who find it a more productive working space than at home. The first group would need to agree core times when everyone is available and likely to fall within the traditional office times of nine-to-five weekdays. The second might benefit from quieter times like Saturdays and sessions extending into early mornings/late evenings, where they benefit from a spell of working round others and a spell when they have the space almost to themselves.

 

[43096]

I reckon a 4 open day situation is more likely. 2 days in the office and 3 at home (everyone at home on a Friday).

Only opening an office 4 days out of 5 working days is pointless. Leasing of the building and other facilities costs are basically the same, but you’d get less use out if it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Workplaces might be open for longer hours for two reasons: for employees coming in for specific meetings or to work as a team, and for those who find it a more productive working space than at home. The first group would need to agree core times when everyone is available and likely to fall within the traditional office times of nine-to-five weekdays. The second might benefit from quieter times like Saturdays and sessions extending into early mornings/late evenings, where they benefit from a spell of working round others and a spell when they have the space almost to themselves.

Most of the offices I've worked in are open (in the sense that you can go to them) 24/7. Sometimes a different procedure is required for entry "off-hours" as the main reception may be closed, but that's all. Office buildings don't generally have lots of support staff there all the time.