Could this be the end for first class?

[lmsforever]

Totally agree with last poster  ,  I went to the Warley show in Brum I used first class on LM cramped and they declassified it at Rugby (  got my money back though) but I wont bother again.But for my annual trip to Glasgow in Feb its got to be first the ambiance and service from staff is terric on Virgin.No politician is going to rob me of using first they have no right to do so ,given the way they have mucked our country up.

[D854_Tiger]

Totally agree with last poster  ,  I went to the Warley show in Brum I used first class on LM cramped and they declassified it at Rugby (  got my money back though) but I wont bother again.But for my annual trip to Glasgow in Feb its got to be first the ambiance and service from staff is terric on Virgin.No politician is going to rob me of using first they have no right to do so ,given the way they have mucked our country up.

 

To be fair there doesn't seem to be any shortage of first class service planned for those IEPs, even if breakfast will now be accompanied by rather more throb of diesels than was planned.

[brianusa]

The class system is part of what defines British society. Although it is more hidden than it used to be, it still is pervasive. Further to this, many people, such as senior civil servants and I suspect MPs get first class travel as a perk. So my guess is, it is unlikely to disappear.

And why should it? We all have different attitudes to life, different financial abilities so if we want to flaunt it, why not? There will always be the 'little guy' but that does not mean that others shouldn't achieve more in life.

 

Brian.

[Dunsignalling]

And why should it? We all have different attitudes to life, different financial abilities so if we want to flaunt it, why not? There will always be the 'little guy' but that does not mean that others shouldn't achieve more in life.

 

Brian.

I'd suggest that, if the politicians and civil servants who are eternally bu**ering about with our railway system are to understand what effect their meddling really has, abolishing first class (or at least making them pay the extra themselves) would be quite a good starting point.   

 

John

Edited July 23, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[The Fatadder]

Surely this should be a decision for the actual railway companies, not for DFT or the government to decide.  I doubt I will be the only one to significantly cut back on rail travel should they get rid of the First compartment on the 166s between Reading and Gatwick.  The main draw for first (and the justification of the price tag) is that it is a much quieter environment, with a guaranteed table, seat and enough room to work.  If I am not going to get any work done, I may as well just drive!

 

Surely if the idea is to make a difference on the level of over crowding, is to have longer or more frequent trains during rush hour....

[cal.n]

I think much more profit is being made on with First Class travellers than standard class. On Virgin Trains West Coast, a weekend upgrade only costs £10-£25 depending on journey and that includes hot drinks, soft drinks, snacks (crisps, fruit ect), free Wi-Fi, plug socket at every seat, table at every seat and the numbers they lose with this extra space used, more staff time on first class and access to lounges at stations. 

[The Stationmaster]

Surely this should be a decision for the actual railway companies, not for DFT or the government to decide.  I doubt I will be the only one to significantly cut back on rail travel should they get rid of the First compartment on the 166s between Reading and Gatwick.  The main draw for first (and the justification of the price tag) is that it is a much quieter environment, with a guaranteed table, seat and enough room to work.  If I am not going to get any work done, I may as well just drive!

 

Surely if the idea is to make a difference on the level of over crowding, is to have longer or more frequent trains during rush hour....

 

The problem is basically that the DfT and also this idiot Grayling are taking it upon themselves to make decisions, including operational safety decisions, which are way out of their experience and ability - a problem becoming increasingly prevalent with Britain's nationalised (i.e. franchised) passenger railway.  In this case it is a typical political approach to a short term 'fix' designed to appeal to a few folk who can't get seats.  Actually of course on many suburban routes/trains far more than 'a few' folk can't get seats and abolishing 1st class won't actually make much difference as most of those who think they'll now get a seat won't for the simple reason that there are relatively few 1st class seats there to abolish.

 

Instead what will happen - as indeed has happened on Paddington suburban services with declassification of Class 165s and some declassification on Class 166s - is that a section (albeit small probably) of the market is upset and the operator loses money - several thousand £s in the case of one refund to a commuter on our branch.  The real reason for declassification is very simple - not only does it make a good headline (despite often being an empty promise) but it saves money when the franchisee seeks  changes to their contract in order to provide extra vehicles and NR avoid the cost of lengthening station platforms,  So it's a cheap, quick, fix - even if it actually fixes nothing.  Overall however, particularly on those routes where longer distance commuting takes place, I suspect any steps to remove 1st Class accommodation are going to lead to loss of revenue and possibly even its total loss as passengers shift from newly less comfortable rail travel to something offering greater comfort. 

 

One other factor of course is that many senior Civil Servants and (so I understand in certain circumstances) MPs no longer receive tax payer subsidised reimbursed 1st Class rail travel but are only allowed a Standard class fare at our expense.  Simples - if they can't have it why should anybody else?  (Which is exactly what some of us said would happen when their 'reimbursement' for 1st class tickets was ended.)  Mind you if what I have seen on some West of England trains is any guide certain parts of the NHS are more than happy to pay for 1st Class rail tickets for some of their staff and that makes considerable sense if they need a space to work while travelling - I'll say no more but note the 'if'.

[Derekl]

First class is also priced quite sharply. I noticed while planning a forthcoming trip to Europe that the fare differentials between first and second are far lower than in the UK. The Interrail pass for over 60s for 5 of 15 days is £219 Standard/second or £291 first, a differential which it seems to me is a reasonable option. That generally does not apply in the UK - I would not normally consider first if paying myself, although when I was employed on the basis that first class rail was paid, I took full advantage. I think, as noted above, that little perk has long since gone for many.

 

For all the arguments about who decides what, it is open to the Department to advertise a franchise on the basis of no first class travel. Given the somewhat shaky nature of British democratic decision making at this level, I doubt there is much to be done about it. I suppose franchise bidders may simply say no on the basis that they can't make a buck without first class, but I haven't noticed any of teh proposed franchisees being that pro-active.

 

I did think when I fist saw the story "Is this the end for first class" that we had long since lost any semblance of first class government.....

[brianusa]

 

 

"I did think when I fist saw the story "Is this the end for first class" that we had long since lost any semblance of first class government....."

 

 

It would appear that it a lot of the world is you are not alone and certainly no worse than the current US government, if indeed it can be called that. A lot of the worlds leaders suffer the same problems

 

Brian.

[28XX]

All this sort of thing is, sadly, a triumph for the socialist great unwashed majority who, frankly are getting above themselves.

 

First Class accommodation is an essential provision for the chaps who run The Empire, God knows, keeping the fuzzy-wuzzys on-task in the mines, fields and factories is a hard enough job without having to suffer the ignominy of travelling with them. I say an Act of Parliament should be passed to require the TOCs to provide proper First Class carriages, complete with anti-macassars, table dining service with china tableware and silver cutlery, physically separated from third, on all trains forthwith.

 

Yours

 

Wing Commander Bingo Bollox (retired)

Edited July 31, 2017 by 28XX

[jjb1970]

All this sort of thing is, sadly, a triumph for the socialist great unwashed majority who, frankly are getting above themselves.

 

First Class accommodation is an essential provision for the chaps who run The Empire, God knows, keeping the fuzzy-wuzzys on-task in the mines, fields and factories is a hard enough task without having to suffer the ignominy of travelling with them. I say an Act of Parliament should be passed to require the TOCs to provide proper First Class carriages, complete with anti-macassars, table dining service with china tableware and silver cutlery, physically separated from third, on all trains forthwith.

 

Yours

 

Wing Commander Bingo Bollox (retired)

 

While I agree with much of that, it doesn't go far enough, we need to bring back conscription for the lower classes and restrict driving licenses to those in the upper income tax bracket.

[28XX]

I quite agree jjb, however it's not about income, it's about Breeding. 2nd class is quite adequate for those who have been successful in Trade.

[jjb1970]

I quite agree jjb, however it's not about income, it's about Breeding. 2nd class is quite adequate for those who have been successful in Trade.

 

Almost right, but personally I think second class is too good for the sort of people who had to buy their own furniture, if they are allowed to travel (and I am the first to concede that there are reasons for allowing them to travel, such as when we need more expendables for the army) then they can go on the roof.

[Gwiwer]

The railways are busier than they have ever been.  More accommodation is very urgently needed.  We can suggest that some of the fault lies in the under-investment in rolling sock for a generation which has resulted in some routes suffering chronic overloading with 1- or 2-car trains expected to convey hundreds of people.  But in some degree the explosion in passenger numbers could not have been foreseen therefore the TOCs are left to play catch-up.

 

The "passive" first class provided by Southern is really a waste of effort but no doubt a sweetener to the remaining first class ticket holders on the Brighton line who might have influence over and above just being vocal.  It is worth remembering that many are in city jobs which might have some sort of impact on the operator.  The provision of a door (often locked open) and antimacassars on otherwise standard-class seats does not justify the fares charged.  Abuse is rife with a large number of people, when challenged (which is increasingly uncommon), suggesting they can't see the difference.  If the antimacassar is absent there is none.  Standard class passengers are regularly wedged in conditions which would be unlawful were cattle instead of humans being conveyed.

 

Increased line speeds and reduced journey times have extended the effective London commuter "belt" to cities far distant such as Leeds.  It is some years now since an early morning train up to Kings Cross was put on in response to demand and was nicknamed "The Brickie" due to the fact that it conveyed large numbers of builders.

 

There is a demand for first class on the longer runs.  There is a demand on some of the shorter runs also but there has been a steady drift away from two-class provision since the 1970s when most routes offered such.  First class was sometimes the only way one got the front seat and a "driver's eye view" in a DMU.  How many first class tickets were ever sold between Tumby Woodside and Firsby in rural Linclnshire is a moot point but the provision was there.  Between London and Scotland however is another matter.

 

There is a market and there is a product to be sold in the first class seats.  GWR offers at-seat catering and on a handful of trains a full dining service - which is also offered to standard class passengers but only if seats remain available.  But the TOCs have to strike the right balance.  The HST which leave Penzance around 5am conveys one and a half first class carriages which would be full for the greater part of the journey.  It's next trip down from London mid-morning might only carry a handful of first class passengers but a full load in standard.  Cross Country are saddled with a huge problem in that the 220s are effectively only 2½ carriages of standard accommodation but an entire one of first.  GWR has reconfigured its HST sets to increase standard and reduce first class accommodation and has probably struck the best balance available for now.  Cross Country has done nothing and suffers woeful overcrowding.  Whether the first class coach is made available to those packed into gangways, doorways and anywhere else they can find depends very much on the conductor.  Some will, some won't.  I once found myself left behind at Camborne when the class 220 set was already crammed full from Penzance and St. Erth and the conductor refused to allow anyone else on board.  The first class coach had empty seats ........

 

Get the balance right and it works.  Get it wrong at your peril.  But make it clear what is on offer.  Southern class 377 units are almost indiscriminately used on two-class longer-distance services and suburban trips which are standard-only.    That unit which arrived with first-class ticket holders from Brighton might (though it normally does not) find itself then creeping round to London Bridge or out to Sutton all stations.  Explain why anyone can use any seat on those trains to the person who pays thousands for the benefit of an antimacassar on his trip to and from the Sussex coast every day.

[Dunsignalling]

While I agree with much of that, it doesn't go far enough, we need to bring back conscription for the lower classes and restrict driving licenses to those in the upper income tax bracket.

Those in the upper income tax bracket should be compelled to employ chauffeurs.

[jim.snowdon]

For many months during 2015 I regularly used the 08:10 Holyhead service from Euston, and although it was a five car Voyager set, the standard class car next to the first was routinely made up for first class, although the level of first class demand didn't exactly strain the proper first class accommodation. Sanity has since prevailed, and this working is back to the normal 4 x standard + 1 x first. there was also the period in 2008-9, before some of the 9-car Pendolino sets were strengthened to 11 cars when Virgin WC declassified one of the first class cars.

 

What it illustrates is that there is the flexibility for the train operator to adjust the number of cars in the train in which first class service (as against first class seats) is provided. There is nothing to stop a set that might run with all of the first class cars well loaded on one service from being downrated to a smaller number of cars in which first class service is provided on its next working.

 

Jim

[Pete the Elaner]

The statement itself makes no commitments & does not really say anything at all.

Class 313/314/315 are 40 years old & have never had any 1st class so an all-standard train is nothing new.

 

It is just a politician trying to look like he is trying to achieve something.

[brianusa]

Surely the problem is the inability to add extra carriages as has been mentioned.  While overcrowding has been a problem since the early days(?) there is little excuse for it now except for the fact that it would be difficult to add the extra carriages to the modern HSTs and equivalent trains.  The lack of extra anything these days means that once there were extra carriages in sidings, they couldn't be easily added because of the complex hook ups, coupling, etc in todays trains, on top of which there are no locos to shunt them.  As long as railways are run on a shoe string and without the necessary investment this problem can only continue and get worse.

 

Brian.

[Gerald Henriksen]

Given the amount of money being spent - government subsidy, fares, and the provision of government money for capital projects - I don't think it is fair to say that the railways are being run on a shoestring.  

 

The issue of whether the necessary investment is being made is another topic but it is fair to say that a significant amount of money is being invested in capital projects (whether that money is being spent wisely is open to interpretation).

 

Extra carriages is something that has changed over the years, but is not unique to the UK nor is it relevant to the overcrowding issue.   Having spare equipment in sidings is by definition something that is only applicable to occasional demand occurrences whereas the issue that the new policy is aimed at is the chronic daily overcrowding - an issue that by its nature would have permanently emptied out those spare sidings should they exist.

 

I have no ideas about the numbers but certainly the impression is that there are likely more seats moving around the network today than anytime in the last 20 years at least, thus the real problem is likely a network capacity issue.  Which is not to say some trains wouldn't benefit from an extra carriage or so, but the limitations in platform length, siding length, signal blocks, etc are all combining to mean the government is currently or will soon face the laws of physics, and thus facing some very unpleasant choices.

[Dunsignalling]

Surely the problem is the inability to add extra carriages as has been mentioned.  While overcrowding has been a problem since the early days(?) there is little excuse for it now except for the fact that it would be difficult to add the extra carriages to the modern HSTs and equivalent trains.  The lack of extra anything these days means that once there were extra carriages in sidings, they couldn't be easily added because of the complex hook ups, coupling, etc in todays trains, on top of which there are no locos to shunt them.  As long as railways are run on a shoe string and without the necessary investment this problem can only continue and get worse.

 

Brian.

The move from loco-hauled passenger formations to self-contained reversible set trains is a matter of policy, driven by considerations of consistent performance and high utilisation. Whether that constitutes running the system "on a shoestring" is open to debate.

 

In order to keep time, units on todays railways have to be driven more-or-less flat out for a much greater proportion of the journey than was the case when BR ran mainly loco-hauled services.

 

From the mid-1970s, fixed formations gradually became the norm for fast inter-city services. For less glamorous duties, they adopted the Sprinter concept which extended the long-standing principle that any increase in train length brings with it a proportionate increase in power from electric services to diesel-worked ones. keeping power-to-weight ratios constant. Whether the train is of 3, 6 or 9 coaches, it will perform the same. Drivers therefore know that, barring failures, any train they board is up to the job. 

 

With locomotive haulage, all eggs are in one basket and, nowadays, failure means cancellation. Back in the day, BR had loads of under-employed equipment that had been rendered surplus by declining traffic and most timetables had enough slack to allow the addition of a coach or two without causing delays.

 

It simply doesn't work that way any more and nobody could justify replacing vehicles that spent more time idle than working once they wore out. Nowadays, on the railways as virtually everywhere else, the accountant is king and the concept of holding expensive assets spare is anathema. For capacity reasons, line speed equals service speed and one train even a couple of percentage points off its specified performance will gradually impact on others.   

 

Those European railways that do embrace the idea of having "spare" stock for contingencies tend to be much more state-financed than in Britain. Either that or their model of state funding obtains more bang-per-buck than ours; another subject for debate. Political interference in the rail industry leading to the eternal bugbear of delayed projects or getting half what was planned for three-quarters of the money, did not go away with privatisation. Crossrail, for example, could and should have been up-and-running 20 years ago. IIRC it was in the process of being shelved when I was at Signal School in 1992.

 

John

Edited August 1, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[caradoc]

For many months during 2015 I regularly used the 08:10 Holyhead service from Euston, and although it was a five car Voyager set, the standard class car next to the first was routinely made up for first class, although the level of first class demand didn't exactly strain the proper first class accommodation. Sanity has since prevailed, and this working is back to the normal 4 x standard + 1 x first. there was also the period in 2008-9, before some of the 9-car Pendolino sets were strengthened to 11 cars when Virgin WC declassified one of the first class cars.

 

Jim

 

I've never heard of the situation on that Holyhead service; Was one of the Standard class vehicles actually reclassified to First class, with all the necessary signage, and therefore barred to Standard ticket-holders ?

 

Regarding the Pendolinos, the 696xx First class vehicle was reclassified as Standard for the summer, on the 9-car sets this vehicle is now permanently reconfigured for Standard class so these sets have 3 First class vehicles compared to 4 in the 11-car sets.

 

The issue of overcrowded trains is a perennial one which, as mentioned above, reclassifying a few First class seats is not on its own going to solve. A pertinent question regarding commuter services is how much should be spent relieving overcrowding by providing extra stock which will only be used twice a day, five days a week, and which will increase the cost of providing the service without increasing revenue.  

Edited August 1, 2017 by caradoc

[jim.snowdon]

I've never heard of the situation on that Holyhead service; Was one of the Standard class vehicles actually reclassified to First class, with all the necessary signage, and therefore barred to Standard ticket-holders ?

 

Regarding the Pendolinos, the 696xx First class vehicle was reclassified as Standard for the summer, on the 9-car sets this vehicle is now permanently reconfigured for Standard class so these sets have 3 First class vehicles compared to 4 in the 11-car sets.

 

The issue of overcrowded trains is a perennial one which, as mentioned above, reclassifying a few First class seats is not on its own going to solve. A pertinent question regarding commuter services is how much should be spent relieving overcrowding by providing extra stock which will only be used twice a day, five days a week, and which will increase the cost of providing the service without increasing revenue.  

It was, all bar the First Class bit on the outside of the carriage, and it wasn't in connection with anything obvious either, such as events at Chester Racecourse.

 

Jim

[The Stationmaster]

The move from loco-hauled passenger formations to self-contained reversible set trains is a matter of policy, driven by considerations of consistent performance and high utilisation. Whether that constitutes running the system "on a shoestring" is open to debate.

 

In order to keep time, units on todays railways have to be driven more-or-less flat out for a much greater proportion of the journey than was the case when BR ran mainly loco-hauled services.

 

From the mid-1970s, fixed formations gradually became the norm for fast inter-city services. For less glamorous duties, they adopted the Sprinter concept which extended the long-standing principle that any increase in train length brings with it a proportionate increase in power from electric services to diesel-worked ones. keeping power-to-weight ratios constant. Whether the train is of 3, 6 or 9 coaches, it will perform the same. Drivers therefore know that, barring failures, any train they board is up to the job. 

 

With locomotive haulage, all eggs are in one basket and, nowadays, failure means cancellation. Back in the day, BR had loads of under-employed equipment that had been rendered surplus by declining traffic and most timetables had enough slack to allow the addition of a coach or two without causing delays.

 

It simply doesn't work that way any more and nobody could justify replacing vehicles that spent more time idle than working once they wore out. Nowadays, on the railways as virtually everywhere else, the accountant is king and the concept of holding expensive assets spare is anathema. For capacity reasons, line speed equals service speed and one train even a couple of percentage points off its specified performance will gradually impact on others.   

 

Those European railways that do embrace the idea of having "spare" stock for contingencies tend to be much more state-financed than in Britain. Either that or their model of state funding obtains more bang-per-buck than ours; another subject for debate. Political interference in the rail industry leading to the eternal bugbear of delayed projects or getting half what was planned for three-quarters of the money, did not go away with privatisation. Crossrail, for example, could and should have been up-and-running 20 years ago. IIRC it was in the process of being shelved when I was at Signal School in 1992.

 

John

 

Actually shelved in 1994 John - hence a job I was lined up for with Crossrail was duly canned only about 3 weeks after appearing on the SO vacancy list (but at least someone there had the good grace to tell me what was happening - notwithstanding themselves being on course for redundancy).

 

The odd thing about  Crossrail and such things as Chelsea - Hackney was that these were being 'talked about' many years ago - some as far back as 1948 - but while UK Govt vacillated the French not only came up with such ideas but actually built the RER lines through Paris while Britain cancelled such projects as Crossrail.  Mind you when it comes to 'spare' stock I don't think there's any railway in the same league as SNCF, their TGV set utilisation is abysmal and only looks good on paper because of the high mileages of many individual trains; measured by hours in traffic out of hours available they look pretty poor.

[rockershovel]

France has a much higher degree of continuity, because Ministries there SET policy and Ministers are simply their political representatives.

 

I had a rather curious conversation with a French colleague a while ago, passing the time watching tv in the hotel bar. He couldn't understand the joke of Sir Humphrey knowing so much more, and being so much more competent than Jim Hacker: to him, this was simply a comment on the natural order of things..

[Reorte]

The move from loco-hauled passenger formations to self-contained reversible set trains is a matter of policy, driven by considerations of consistent performance and high utilisation. Whether that constitutes running the system "on a shoestring" is open to debate.

With more frequent services would it even be possible to do the necessary shunting in between the other trains (even if there hadn't been layout rationalisations)?