Northern Short forming

[Purple Orange]

I understand that but repeating the same 2 vs 4 car dmu comments all the time won't change anything. I guess there's plenty of other places where short forms are causing problems and most of us realise that now is actually the time to just be patient. There's no easy solutions, however much you dislike it.

The thread is about short forming isn’t it? And I’m not repeating the comments so much as countering the dismissal I had about the issue of it not being a good enough situation. It’s really not hard to grasp, yet it appears some think it’s absolutely ok.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Is it financially less disadvantageous for a ToC to operate a short-formed train than to cancel the particular service?

 

[skyhigh]

Is it financially less disadvantageous for a ToC to operate a short-formed train than to cancel the particular service?

Yes

 

[Robertj21a]

The thread is about short forming isn’t it? And I’m not repeating the comments so much as countering the dismissal I had about the issue of it not being a good enough situation. It’s really not hard to grasp, yet it appears some think it’s absolutely ok.

It may not be 'absolutely ok' but it's not going to change! (at least in the short term).

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Is it financially less disadvantageous for a ToC to operate a short-formed train than to cancel the particular service?

Yes

What sort of financial differential is there, which no doubt will influence the decision?

 

[HSP 2]

As I said earlier, I totally get that it's annoying if it's your train every morning that is short formed, but the operator has to prioritise. Your unit may spend the rest of the day 25% full, avoiding key centres during the peaks and thus be the logical choice to short form. May I ask how long your commute on a full and standing train is?

In post #51 drived ask the above question to Purple Orange, but I have not noticed an answer to it.

But as Purple Orange mentions 331s & 769s it sounds like his commute is some where between Bolton and Alderley Edge.

I also would like to know where his commute is to / from.

 

[Purple Orange]

In post #51 drived ask the above question to Purple Orange, but I have not noticed an answer to it.

But as Purple Orange mentions 331s & 769s it sounds like his commute is some where between Bolton and Alderley Edge.

I also would like to know where his commute is to / from.

From Wilmslow to the centre of Manchester, usually to Oxford Rd & Deansgate. I may have missed that question. Its roughly 25 minutes and I tend to get a seat in the morning (its not about me personally getting a seat), but it is getting noticeably busier each week and people have been stood on a 4 car train, albeit that people are spreading out more which is undestandable. However on a 2-car train it is getting towards a pre-pandemic level of crowding, especially travelling out of manchester, with people standing from the centre of manchestet to cheadle hulme.

What I don't quite understand, is how feedback from a passenger that short forming trains is not good enough, generates so much defensive comments about the way things are done.

 

[Robertj21a]

From Wilmslow to the centre of Manchester, usually to Oxford Rd & Deansgate. I may have missed that question. Its roughly 25 minutes and I tend to get a seat in the morning (its not about me personally getting a seat), but it is getting noticeably busier each week and people have been stood on a 4 car train, albeit that people are spreading out more which is undestandable. However on a 2-car train it is getting towards a pre-pandemic level of crowding, especially travelling out of manchester, with people standing from the centre of manchestet to cheadle hulme.

What I don't quite understand, is how feedback from a passenger that short forming trains is not good enough, generates so much defensive comments about the way things are done.

Surely, by now, we have all heard your 'not good enough' comment many, many, many times.......
We may well agree.

Now what ?

 

[O L Leigh]

From Wilmslow to the centre of Manchester, usually to Oxford Rd & Deansgate. I may have missed that question. Its roughly 25 minutes and I tend to get a seat in the morning (its not about me personally getting a seat), but it is getting noticeably busier each week and people have been stood on a 4 car train, albeit that people are spreading out more which is undestandable. However on a 2-car train it is getting towards a pre-pandemic level of crowding, especially travelling out of manchester, with people standing from the centre of manchestet to cheadle hulme.

Whilst not strictly relevant to the discussion at hand, I do think that this is emblematic of a problem that the railways are going to be increasingly facing.

Previously, when discussing how train services might be reduced to save money, I predicted that reducing commuting capacity would be self-defeating if we expect people to be returning to rail. My argument was that we ought to be preserving pre-pandemic levels of capacity, together with the various projects currently underway to improve capacity, such that passengers will feel confident to return to using the trains. Crowding is one thing, but getting back to pre-pandemic levels of overcrowding as a consequence of reduced capacity would only serve to put people off using rail by convincing them that it is a wretched way to travel.

 

[Bikeman78]

How much more investment would you want for Northern?
More new trains, infrastructure ?

More electrification springs to mind. Had we just got on with it several years ago, some of the EMUs going for scrap could be put to good use freeing up DMUs to go elsewhere. For example, the Cardiff Valleys is a two car railway again now. We've gone back 20 years.

 

[Robertj21a]

More electrification springs to mind. Had we just got on with it several years ago, some of the EMUs going for scrap could be put to good use freeing up DMUs to go elsewhere. For example, the Cardiff Valleys is a two car railway again now. We've gone back 20 years.

I thought much of the Welsh valleys were due to get a brand new tramway network?

 

[Bikeman78]

I thought much of the Welsh valleys were due to get a brand new tramway network?

It is in 18 months or so but that's no help now. It shouldn't have to go backwards before it goes forwards. If there were still 2019 numbers of passengers travelling now the valleys would be utterly screwed.

 

[Robertj21a]

It is in 18 months or so but that's no help now. It shouldn't have to go backwards before it goes forwards. If there were still 2019 numbers of passengers travelling now the valleys would be utterly screwed.

Thanks, at least a solution is in sight. Like many other areas, there's various short term problems which, I guess, we just have to live with - there's no realistic alternative.

 

[VideozVideoz]

The only time this would be a problem is a few weekend trains to and from Scarborough. Mid morning arrivals into Bridlington and Scarborough were full, mostly day trippers, and it was the first week of tickets sold in "£1 sale"

First week of £1 tickets was actually wc 6th Sept

 

[driverd]

I think the interesting point for me is that train formation/length isn't something stipulated in the ITT/franchise agreement (not sure if there's a clause around how many seats should be provided across the day or something similar - I'm sure someone will know). This means that "short-forming" is simply a measure of what the TOC is delivering against their own plan. So, simply, the TOC could chose to plan shorter trains and remove the problem all together.

Yet they don't. They're transparent about their plan. I'd have thought, atleast from clued up people (such as those on these forums), they'd have a degree of understanding around this and as pointed out so many times before, be glad of a train, even if they have to stand for 20 or so minutes.

I must say, what this particular forum is doing, is strongly re-enforcing the opinion that do what you may for passengers, including providing more frequent, more modern, refurbished trains with increased journey opportunities and connectivity, and the user will still find something to moan about.

Even when the problem is arising simply as a result of teething issues with a train designed to fix this very problem.

And the person complaining professes they usually get a seat.

Glass half empty much?

 

[Starmill]

This is the railway that fills station buildings with posters about criminal proceedings if you don't have a ticket, sells the ticket first, and then allows you to find that you can't even get in the train. At least with a bus if you can't get on you don't have to pay the driver.

Can you imagine a supermarket that required you to pay in advance before entering for what you wanted, then when you get inside the shelves are empty and it's pretty impossible to get your money back.

If you physically can't board a train as a result of it being short formed, and as a result your journey does not even begin, then there's absolutely no case for not providing a refund for an unused ticket, even if otherwise non-refundable or subject to a £10 fee. It's less clear cut if you had already begun to use the ticket and might depend on what availability there was of alternatives offered. However, as you imply it's not necessarily going to be an easy thing to actually get that refund paid. If you travel anyway, a claim for delay compensation could be made if a arriving a qualifying period of time late.

 

[Purple Orange]

Surely, by now, we have all heard your 'not good enough' comment many, many, many times.......
We may well agree.

Now what ?

That’s a rather childish position to take. I was asked a question. I answered. I’ve had several responses about my opinion, asking me a question as to why I felt that way about the service provision, so I responded. It’s very much on topic too. If it annoys you, I suggest you don’t read.

Whilst not strictly relevant to the discussion at hand, I do think that this is emblematic of a problem that the railways are going to be increasingly facing.

Previously, when discussing how train services might be reduced to save money, I predicted that reducing commuting capacity would be self-defeating if we expect people to be returning to rail. My argument was that we ought to be preserving pre-pandemic levels of capacity, together with the various projects currently underway to improve capacity, such that passengers will feel confident to return to using the trains. Crowding is one thing, but getting back to pre-pandemic levels of overcrowding as a consequence of reduced capacity would only serve to put people off using rail by convincing them that it is a wretched way to travel.

This. I feel that Northern and may be risking that too.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I must agree with @Purple Orange that the inevitable "Would you rather the service was cancelled?" response to posts is frustrating, and doesn't really add anything to the discussion of whatever the issue is. It comes across as a "thought-stopping"/gaslighting technique more than anything. Most of us on this site know that things can't change for the better overnight, and don't expect them to.

 

[py_megapixel]

To try to inject a bit of positivity into this thread:
Today I had a bit of a day out on several Northern trains. Every unit I was on had toilets, TrainFX, lighting and everything else in fine working order. I was generally impressed by the standard of cleanliness and presentation. Everything ran as scheduled, give or take a minute here and there. And the new upholstery on seats has improved comfort somewhat.

I think people who complain incessantly about modern Northern forget just how little time it's been since they they were putting units out in service with seats falling to pieces (sometimes literally); dated interiors with worn paint; threadbare and torn upholstery; dingy lighting; and disgusting floors with decades worth of embedded dirt. I say on weekdays because if it was a Saturday you were sometimes lucky to get a train at all. They were chronically short of DMUs - problems across the rest of the country meant their handmedowns from other TOCs didn't arrive; the 195s were late, but they nevertheless had to stretch their fleet even further than Serco-Abellio had thanks to the routes up the west coast from Manchester being transferred from Greater Anglia.

Yes, I still dislike travelling on Sprinters for any major length of time, owing to the noise and the cramped seating. I will still bemoan how much worse Northern is doing than its counterparts in the south. Complete fleet replacement should definitely be the goal at some point in the future, as should reversing some of the silly timetabling decisions (such as Alderley-Southport).

But a reasonably good condition Sprinter is far better than a Pacer, or indeed some of the Sprinters that early Arriva Rail North were sending out. And these things are not really their fault. We can discuss whose fault it is another time (I take the view that it is, in part, attributable to a certain Chris Grayling) but that is neither here nor there. It's not an ideal state of affairs. Northern has a very long way to go. But I think it's hard to deny that they are making the best of what they have in the present time.

 

[6Gman]

The thread is about short forming isn’t it? And I’m not repeating the comments so much as countering the dismissal I had about the issue of it not being a good enough situation. It’s really not hard to grasp, yet it appears some think it’s absolutely ok.

I don't think anyone is saying "it's absolutely ok".

What people are pointing out is that it's the product of a combination of circumstances (including Covid and the introduction of new stock) and that there is no reasonable short-term solution.

 

[Purple Orange]

I don't think anyone is saying "it's absolutely ok".

What people are pointing out is that it's the product of a combination of circumstances (including Covid and the introduction of new stock) and that there is no reasonable short-term solution.

I completely understand that. @61653 HTAFC succinctly put the “would you rather it was cancelled” responses in the right light. Yet those people who are closing down discussions with that phrase certainly come across in a way that short forming is ok.

 

[Taunton]

I must say, what this particular forum is doing, is strongly re-enforcing the opinion that do what you may for passengers, including providing more frequent, more modern, refurbished trains with increased journey opportunities and connectivity, and the user will still find something to moan about.

A railway-centric point of view. "Refurbished" on SWR suburban trains meant stripping out 25% of the seats in the 455s, despite "getting a seat" being one of the key desires of commuters.

Increased journey opportunities, yes there are a few (not a lot; the vast majority are on established lines). Yet you don't hear that because say Waitrose have built new supermarkets around the country you should thus not comment on service shortfalls.

Trains being "more modern" is again a railway-centric viewpoint. Anyone who thinks the (new) Class 800s are somehow a comfort improvement on the (when new) HSTs is deluding us all. This is in complete contrast to my (new) car, which is light years ahead of my (when new) late 1970s one.

 

[driverd]

A railway-centric point of view. "Refurbished" on SWR suburban trains meant stripping out 25% of the seats in the 455s, despite "getting a seat" being one of the key desires of commuters.

I can't comment on the 455s. In the North, the state of a 150 now, as compared to 18 months ago, is literally unrecognisable. The list is vast- clean, repainted panels, rebuilt seat backs and bases, new moquette, USB charge points, accessible toilets fitted, train fx with auto announcements. I'm not saying that these trains are perfect but you'd be very hard pushed not to see a marked improvement.

Increased journey opportunities, yes there are a few (not a lot; the vast majority are on established lines). Yet you don't hear that because say Waitrose have built new supermarkets around the country you should thus not comment on service shortfalls.

It's not that you shouldn't comment. A more appropriate analogy would be:

Waitrose have invested in new hybrid delivery vans. Due to teething issues, deliveries can only be made with old vans and so you may be waiting longer for your delivery.

I'd argue that most people would understand and have some patience, given the circumstances. It's not ideal, but is there a legitimate better solution? Especially when the new vans (or rather, 769s) are being introduced to directly act upon feedback and improve the customer experience and capacity.

Trains being "more modern" is again a railway-centric viewpoint. Anyone who thinks the (new) Class 800s are somehow a comfort improvement on the (when new) HSTs is deluding us all. This is in complete contrast to my (new) car, which is light years ahead of my (when new) late 1970s one.

It's not "railway-centric", it's matter of fact. Trainfx, charge points, a truly accessible railway - these are all more modern than what was 2 years before.

No one is saying these changes are ideal, and they've not all been the best/right ones or implemented correctly. We recognise that as an industry. Just as we recognise short forming isn't ideal (and now as train crew, I see this more than ever), but what I am saying is, taken in the context of everything else that's trying to be achieved, what does anyone actually expect us to do? I think no one expects a solution tomorrow, and within 2-3 months or so, the 769s should have bedded in, which to me, seems like a reasonable and sensible timescale.

 

[Starmill]

And accessible toilet, onboard information and a train which isn't literally falling to bits as many Sprinters were three years ago is pretty much the bare minimum standard. The issue to people in the industry is that everyone put up with the absence of those for much too long.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

A railway-centric point of view. "Refurbished" on SWR suburban trains meant stripping out 25% of the seats in the 455s, despite "getting a seat" being one of the key desires of commuters.

Those old seats were hideously uncomfortable, with loose seat cushions that would be thrown around by the likes of the "Staines Massive"... and the middle seats of threes were usually occupied by briefcases rather than passengers. The refurbishment may have reduced the number of seats but it made riding those units a pleasure rather than a chore.

I can't comment on the 455s. In the North, the state of a 150 now, as compared to 18 months ago, is literally unrecognisable. The list is vast- clean, repainted panels, rebuilt seat backs and bases, new moquette, USB charge points, accessible toilets fitted, train fx with auto announcements. I'm not saying that these trains are perfect but you'd be very hard pushed not to see a marked improvement.

Just a shame they kept the awkward seating layout the units were built with. Something similar to the SWT/SWR 455s would have been far more suitable, or at the very least getting rid of the airline seats on the '3' side which are only suitable for small children or contortionists.

 

[tpjm]

So people keep saying but I saw lots of disabled people on valley lines trains long before before PRM compliance was even started on those routes. It's not a deal breaker for many people. I doubt many disabled would care if a non compliant set were attached if it made the train longer and thus reduced overcrowding.

"Many disabled" don't have obvious difficulties. People of Reduce Mobility (PRM) extends way beyond people who use wheelchairs or walking aids. Thinking solely about the 'obvious' ones - what about customers with visual or hearing impairments? They also benefit from rolling stock being RVAR/PRM-NTSN compliant. People need to stop imagining a wheelchair user when they think 'disabled'.

The thread is about short forming isn’t it? And I’m not repeating the comments so much as countering the dismissal I had about the issue of it not being a good enough situation. It’s really not hard to grasp, yet it appears some think it’s absolutely ok.

Having read all of your comments on here, it seems that you accept the issue is one that needs a strategic resolution, yet seem content with reporting the tactical blows day by day, short-form by short-form. Clearly, by being branded a "short-formed service", Northern know they are falling short and not delivering the agreed (DfT/RNP) plan. They will be picked up on this as the DfT now considers short-forms in the same category as delays and cancellations. It will be in Northern's best interests to solve this, through short or medium-term interventions, but in the moment, it's a choice for Control - cancel or short-form. Also worth thinking about this perspective: short-forms are not a problem unless the train is full/over comfortable capacity. Yes, the capacity should be there, but if it's not and there's only 2 customers on a train at 23:50, but by short-forming, Control have kept the service running, I'd count that as a positive outcome for those customers?

 

[Bikeman78]

"Many disabled" don't have obvious difficulties. People of Reduce Mobility (PRM) extends way beyond people who use wheelchairs or walking aids. Thinking solely about the 'obvious' ones - what about customers with visual or hearing impairments? They also benefit from rolling stock being RVAR/PRM-NTSN compliant. People need to stop imagining a wheelchair user when they think 'disabled'.

I still don't understand why you think that attaching a non compliant unit is a bad thing. The compliant bit is still the same. What is particularly barmy is that the DFT was happy to let them run during lockdown when no one was travelling but all the dispensations expired just as people started to travel again. They might as well have binned them all at the start of the year.

 

[skyhigh]

I still don't understand why you think that attaching a non compliant unit is a bad thing. The compliant bit is still the same.

Because the general punter won't know how to spot what portion of the train has the visual displays or priority seating etc from the platform. If they get on the non-compliant end they'll just think 'oh, this train isn't fitted'. We absolutely should aim to only run compliant units.

 

[Purple Orange]

Having read all of your comments on here, it seems that you accept the issue is one that needs a strategic resolution, yet seem content with reporting the tactical blows day by day, short-form by short-form. Clearly, by being branded a "short-formed service", Northern know they are falling short and not delivering the agreed (DfT/RNP) plan. They will be picked up on this as the DfT now considers short-forms in the same category as delays and cancellations. It will be in Northern's best interests to solve this, through short or medium-term interventions, but in the moment, it's a choice for Control - cancel or short-form. Also worth thinking about this perspective: short-forms are not a problem unless the train is full/over comfortable capacity. Yes, the capacity should be there, but if it's not and there's only 2 customers on a train at 23:50, but by short-forming, Control have kept the service running, I'd count that as a positive outcome for those customers?

Thank you for acknowledging this. Concerning day-by-day, I’m just highlighting my experience, and while I agree a short formed train means nothing of consequence if there are just a few passengers on a late night train, the instances I wanted to highlight were actually on peak trains that were very busy.

As an aside, the trains leaving at around about 23:00-midnight tend to be full with punters who’ve been out on a weeknight. My partner and I were out the middle of last week, and at 10:30pm there was bumper-to-bumper traffic in central Manchester, which tells me there is a huge market for public transport (whatever the form) to soak up greater volumes of passengers.

 

[Robertj21a]

Thank you for acknowledging this. Concerning day-by-day, I’m just highlighting my experience, and while I agree a short formed train means nothing of consequence if there are just a few passengers on a late night train, the instances I wanted to highlight were actually on peak trains that were very busy.

As an aside, the trains leaving at around about 23:00-midnight tend to be full with punters who’ve been out on a weeknight. My partner and I were out the middle of last week, and at 10:30pm there was bumper-to-bumper traffic in central Manchester, which tells me there is a huge market for public transport (whatever the form) to soak up greater volumes of passengers.

Bumper to bumper traffic at 10.30pm suggests to most people that the car is king. I doubt that many people would be happy (particularly nowadays) to rely on public transport in the late evening or night (other than London) - it's often just too unreliable and possibly full of drunken idiots.