TFL Rail Replacements

[markymark2000]

Looking at the TFL service updates and seeing the upcoming rail replacement services, it got me thinking. Why are TFL running so many rail replacements? In my experience, TFL revenue protection on rail replacement is minimal and so they effectively become a free bus service which stops only at train/tube stations. This must lose TFL a hell of a lot of money (both from reduced fare from legit passengers only ending up paying part fare because the zones traveled are reduced but also freeloaders who would have caught a normal bus and paid but instead used the RRB because it's free) which is in addition to the cost of actually providing the RRBs. Further, by forcing buses to call at all stops to pick up and drop off, you are adding so much time onto the service meaning more buses needed to complete the cycles which again, costs a lot of money. I'd argue that in many cases, RRBs are overcrowded and thus more are put on than actually needed as a result of people coming off normal routes because the RRB is a free for all.

A few examples that I have found where RRBs could not run or be amended are as follows:
1. This weekends Richmond - Acton Central RRB. At Gunnersbury and Kew Gardens stops, PU/SD restrictions could be put on the service to force people onto the 65 or 391
2. Also this weekend, there is a Tower Hill to Canning Town replacement for the District and Hammersmith & City lines. Really, PU/SD restrictions should be put into place between Bow Road and Aldgate (excluding Whitechapel) to push people travelling to/from the city onto the 25 (Doesn't serve Tower Hill but does serve Bank station which links to Monument) and 205 (Doesn't serve Tower Hill but does serve Liverpool Street for connections)
3. Next weekend there is a DLR replacement from Canning Town to London City Airport (non stop). This should really not run and force all passengers onto the 474 and work with operators to provide dupes.

In each of these 3 examples, huge amounts of revenue could be saved and by introducing stop restrictions for passengers, you are reducing the dwell time which can in turn reduce PVR. You are also reducing the amount of people using the bus so there is scope for a frequency reduction which again, reduces PVR.

The only people that I can see being affected by these proposals are those who would have made a longer journey and not a local journey. Could this be worked by making the Oyster system smarter so that if you tap out of a station and then tap onto a route (which is specially approved each week to be an appropriate RRB route), then it scraps the bus fare and just charges you the difference in fare as if it was a through train journey? This instance would work for example 1 if you were travelling from Hammersmith to Kew Gardens, you would have to change at Gunnersbury and due to the restrictions, you would be forced onto the 391. Tap out at Gunnersbury and tap onto 391 at the RRB stop within 10-15 mins of tapping out, you get the bus fare free.
For the other way though where an RRB is needed first, you would likely have to get the person to manually dispute the fare as otherwise you are going to need some complex analytics system in place to work out who to discount the bus fare for.
While some fare revenue may be lost here from people who would have made the journey anyway (using example 1, someone who already travels from Hammersmith to Gunnersbury then catches the 391) but the money lost would be minimal compared to the amount of revenue being lost now.

With TFLs financial situation, they need every penny they can get their hands on and the way they currently run RRBs does not help the situation.


Abbreviation list:
RRB - Rail Replacement Bus
TFL - Transport for London
PU - Pick up Only
SD - Set Down Only

 

[30907]

How do the running times of the RRBs compare with those of service buses?

 

[markymark2000]

How do the running times of the RRBs compare with those of service buses?

RRBs are very marginally quicker by a few minutes but you will use up that time waiting specifically for an RRB.

 

[RJ]

I've been driving these routes for years now. I'm trying to cover the whole TfL network outside of Zone 1 and am getting there.

Rail replacement buses have designated calling points close to each station. I don't think people who would have used the train should be excluded from the replacement service if one is running.

Rail replacement buses aren't always that quick. If you board this particular service in Richmond, you get a full tour of the town centre before it passes the station again and heads towards Kew. Then it's sat in solid traffic pretty much to Gunnersbury.

Often replacement routes are forced to make detours that make journey times longer than service routes. Heathrow Terminal 5 to Hammersmith for instance takes roughly 53 minutes on the N9. I was a regular on the Night Tube replacement service and it took me 73 minutes end to end. The average was 93 minutes and some took more than 2 hours. There is sometimes enormous variability in run times so in that respect it's luck of the draw who you get at the wheel. That particular route meanders significantly to serve all the stations. Extreme example but quite a few exist where the rail replacement service is slow for some journeys.

Another one is the Stratford to Richmond evening replacement service. London Overground give 173 minutes of running time even though it only needs about 100. The bus is in the journey planners but because of the running times, people are pushed onto other service buses and routes involving interchanges. If you're going down to Richmond, it even suggests getting off the replacement bus and using the half hourly N65 between Kew Gardens and Richmond!

The 391 does parallel the District Line and requires significant assistance when it's closed. The rail replacement service is a collaborative effort between the Underground and Overground when the Richmond brand is closed. Forcing everyone onto the 65 and 391 doesn't help London Overground passengers in Acton or Willesden Junction which is often the closures limit.

What isn't obvious is that service routes are often enhanced during closures - if you can find a list of TfL route operating numbers, any that have a U suffix will be extras that operate to support services where there is a significant parallel with the closed line. The 238U operates Stratford - East Ham during east end District Line closures for example. Fares are collected. Over the years quite a few rail replacement routes have been scrapped.

There's no point in charging special fares for rail replacement buses - it would cause more problems than it solves, especially for travel excluding Zone 1 where flat fares are in operation.

3. Next weekend there is a DLR replacement from Canning Town to London City Airport (non stop). This should really not run and force all passengers onto the 474 and work with operators to provide dupes.

I drove the Canning Town to City Airport express route last time it operated and copped abuse from people waiting at Pontoon Dock and West Silvertown. They were making rude gestures and shouting because the bus was showing rail replacement service but ordered not to stop for them.

Airport traffic filled up the buses. There are H&S issues associated with suitcases rolling around on the 474s which are not equipped with luggage racks and the jostling about associated with the stagecarriage nature of the service. I'm not sure people should be made to drag luggagge up and down narrow staircases either. As a compromise the replacement service is operated with single deck buses which have a higher lower deck capacity.

At Canning Town I was implored by people to drop them at the intermediate stations - on several seperate occasions people claimed the 474 has reliability problems with large gaps in the service. I can't comment on how true that is but sympathise as buses are often parked up in the bus station awaiting a late running relief driver.

I don't know what changes will be made in light of social distancing on these airport buses but I daresay it will be a lot quieter than last time.

 

[markymark2000]

Thank you for your detailed reply, it's very neutral.

Rail replacement buses have designated calling points close to each station. I don't think people who would have used the train should be excluded from the replacement service if one is running.

While I can agree here, I think it can sometimes be at a detriment to the normal services and their revenue with people cramming onto an RRB rather than paying. Where a local bus duplicates the RRB route, it makes sense to reduce down the RRBs and push people onto normal buses but this should only be done if the fare situation can be sorted.

Often replacement routes are forced to make detours that make journey times longer than service routes. Heathrow Terminal 5 to Hammersmith for instance takes roughly 53 minutes on the N9. I was a regular on the Night Tube replacement service and it took me 73 minutes end to end. The average was 93 minutes and some took more than 2 hours. There is sometimes enormous variability in run times so in that respect it's luck of the draw who you get at the wheel. That particular route meanders significantly to serve all the stations. Extreme example but quite a few exist where the rail replacement service is slow for some journeys.

Another one is the Stratford to Richmond evening replacement service. London Overground give 173 minutes of running time even though it only needs about 100. The bus is in the journey planners but because of the running times, people are pushed onto other service buses and routes involving interchanges. If you're going down to Richmond, it even suggests getting off the replacement bus and using the half hourly N65 between Kew Gardens and Richmond!

I think in some examples it makes full sense to run RRBs to ensure people can get on the move quickly and as you say they can divert to serve specific points. In numerous cases though the RRB does follow service routes. I think that is mainly why I wouldn't by against all RRBs, it's just those which duplicate should be withdrawn or reviewed with PU/SD restrictions.

The 391 does parallel the District Line and requires significant assistance when it's closed. The rail replacement service is a collaborative effort between the Underground and Overground when the Richmond brand is closed. Forcing everyone onto the 65 and 391 doesn't help London Overground passengers in Acton or Willesden Junction which is often the closures limit.

I appreciate that and hence why I thought about the PU/SD so the service runs basically for Overground passengers from north of the line and drops them where they want to go but for people travelling locally (Gunnersbury or Kew Gardens to Richmond), you have to use the local buses.

What isn't obvious is that service routes are often enhanced during closures - if you can find a list of TfL route operating numbers, any that have a U suffix will be extras that operate to support services where there is a significant parallel with the closed line. The 238U operates Stratford - East Ham during east end District Line closures for example. Fares are collected. Over the years quite a few rail replacement routes have been scrapped.

I didn't know this. In which case, this is exactly my idea and it just needs expanding to cover more areas to reduce the amount of RRBs.

I drove the Canning Town to City Airport express route last time it operated and copped abuse from people waiting at Pontoon Dock and West Silvertown. They were making rude gestures and shouting because the bus was showing rail replacement service but ordered not to stop for them.

Airport traffic filled up the buses. There are H&S issues associated with suitcases rolling around on the 474s which are not equipped with luggage racks and the jostling about associated with the stagecarriage nature of the service. I'm not sure people should be made to drag luggagge up and down narrow staircases either. As a compromise the replacement service is operated with single deck buses which have a higher lower deck capacity.

That will be in part because they have to wait and pay £1.50 for the normal bus and that is the issue isn't it. Making people pay extra on their journey. Hence why I was trying to counter by suggesting a smart Oyster system thing which auto refunds if it knows need to use an RRB. I think also it may come from people who want to use the buses at no cost. Someone making the journey every day is saving at least £3 on their travel. Why pay for a bus when you can use a rail replacement for free. Personally I know I wouldn't dare do it because of the risk but I do know a lot of people who will be prepared to walk more just to use an RRB (think if they use a normal bus to 1 stop beyond a station, they will use the free RRB and walk the extra rather than pay for the normal bus).

As for your point on airport traffic filling buses, that makes sense. I hadn't thought of that one.

At Canning Town I was implored by people to drop them at the intermediate stations - on several seperate occasions people claimed the 474 has reliability problems with large gaps in the service. I can't comment on how true that is but sympathise as buses are often parked up in the bus station awaiting a late running relief driver.

See, if you were to cut RRBs, you would have to work with the main service operator to put on more trips. Alternatively as all money goes into the same pot, use any operator with Oyster acceptors to run extra short services. The only issue I forsee here is a legacy TFL problem with buses not having route number and destinations for all routes which means you need a lot more boards on the front of buses to show where the buses are running.

 

[Boo_]

When I controlled in London TFL allowed underground tickets on the bus. Passenger's don`t have to tap in if they are on pay as you go if they inform driver, they are using their oyster card as a Underground fare they should be waved on.

 

[markymark2000]

When I controlled in London TFL allowed underground tickets on the bus. Passenger's don`t have to tap in if they are on pay as you go if they inform driver, they are using their oyster card as a Underground fare they should be waved on.

Is that normal buses or RRBs?

 

[Boo_]

Is that normal buses or RRBs?

I had it in my pack that TFL did when I did some stand controller work for abellio. abput 5 years ago. That there was local bus ticket acceptance from Tower gate way to Barking. and I used to wave people onto local TFL services when there was a gap in service.

I have found this

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/432364/response/1053173/attach/3/Big%20Red%20Book%20v4.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

if you turn to Page 120 on the Big Red Book

So drivers should on their EMT put in a code that given to them that then means they would get a button on their EMT to count passangers

 

[markymark2000]

I had it in my pack that TFL did when I did some stand controller work for abellio. abput 5 years ago. That there was local bus ticket acceptance from Tower gate way to Barking. and I used to wave people onto local TFL services when there was a gap in service.

I have found this

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/432364/response/1053173/attach/3/Big%20Red%20Book%20v4.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

if you turn to Page 120 on the Big Red Book

So drivers should on their EMT put in a code that given to them that then means they would get a button on their EMT to count passangers

Didn't know that existed. That's the only hurdle to my suggestion overcome there. Now, let's save money on TFL rail replacement haha.