Government to scrap return tickets!!

[Nick C]

Just been talking to a colleague who has family in Oxford - apparently it's a bit of mis-reporting, as the 15-minute city thing (i.e. having everything you need for everyday life within walking distance) and the traffic restrictions are two totally separate initiatives. She says that the traffic there is horrific, and mostly made up of people coming in from out of town who, to quote her "ought to be using the park and ride" - I'm not sure why anyone would want to drive into Oxford City Centre (or any city centre for that matter) if they didn't have to, but there you go...

 

Looking at the map (https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/traffic-filters-2022/maps/map-of-traffic-filter-locations) it seems to be more about reducing cross-city traffic - though I can see that having the effect of increasing traffic at the main ring-road junctions...

[6990WitherslackHall]

When I'm going out on train, I always buy return tickets. I have a railcard as well which makes the journeys I make a little bit cheaper. 

 

Don't know how I'd manage with return tickets.

 

[TheQ]

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

 

No problem, Everything will be within a 15 minute Zimmer push soon !!!!!

 

Brit15

Fifteen minutes is not even the end of the C class road, , an hours fast walk to the nearest shop down a green lane... 

[The Stationmaster]

23 hours ago, Nick C said:

I can quote you several incidents in which passengers have either directly been in danger due to not having a competent member of staff avaliable to assist (e.g. North Pole Junction, North London PTI), or would have been in danger if there hadn't been (e.g. Salisbury). I was about to add "just because no-one has been killed, doesn't make it safe" - but that's not true either, because This one at Waterloo did result in a fatality...

I think you could - without looking too hard - find as many, if not more, instances of passengers getting off trains of their own volition in various situations of delay etc when there were on-train staff (in addition to the Driver) as occurred when there weren't on-train staff.  And at least one of those 'unauthorised-evacuation' incidents resulted ina fatality after the passenger climbed out of a train shich had several onboard staff.

 

20 hours ago, black and decker boy said:

The quantity of people travelling isn’t the problem as such as passenger numbers are now close to 2019 levels and some operators are now higher than that benchmark,

 

however, revenue from those travellers is still way down, last stats I saw was passengers at 95%, revenue at 75%
 

Which tells a fairly clear story - if you do away with the means to buya ticket and the means to check that a passenger has bought a ticket then revenue will drop.  i realise that is very simplistic as I suspect some of the revenue drop is down to reduced purchase of season tickets and probably in pert due to the Govt inspired idea of a flexible multi-trip ticket instead of a season ticket (or maybe LNER no longer issuing return tickets for some journeys?).  

 

Clearly what needs to be addressed first is not so much costs but the reason for the greater decline in revenue than the decline in passenger numbers.   But I doubt that something like that is too difficult for the politicos and DafT to actually understand.

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, Nick C said:

Just been talking to a colleague who has family in Oxford - apparently it's a bit of mis-reporting, as the 15-minute city thing (i.e. having everything you need for everyday life within walking distance) and the traffic restrictions are two totally separate initiatives. She says that the traffic there is horrific, and mostly made up of people coming in from out of town who, to quote her "ought to be using the park and ride" - I'm not sure why anyone would want to drive into Oxford City Centre (or any city centre for that matter) if they didn't have to, but there you go...

 

Looking at the map (https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/traffic-filters-2022/maps/map-of-traffic-filter-locations) it seems to be more about reducing cross-city traffic - though I can see that having the effect of increasing traffic at the main ring-road junctions...

I can't understand why anyone wold even need to drive into the centre of Oxford let alone do it (unless they have some sort of personal mobility problem).  The parking is expensive according to the city's website,  

 

I can see a major reason when there is no public transport - my daughter starts work at 07,00 when on a day shift and there is no way she can get there by public transport unless she leaves home the previous night (her day shift ends at 20.00 so she won't even be home in time to start the journey to work for the next morning).  But she works and parks at the Nuffield  Hospital or the John Radcliffe so she does go near the centre anyway after coming off the bypass..

[Michael Hodgson]

 .

Edited February 8, 2023 by Michael Hodgson

[Bernard Lamb]

23 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Why should I have to pay twice as much for my ticket as the bloke sitting opposite me and his good lady did for theirs?

With dynamic pricing it will be rather more than that.

Welcome to the brave new world of real competition.

I do however expect a long wait for a company willing to take on open access oportunities on the WCML.😀

Bernard

[black and decker boy]

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

 

Which tells a fairly clear story - if you do away with the means to buya ticket and the means to check that a passenger has bought a ticket then revenue will drop.  i realise that is very simplistic as I suspect some of the revenue drop is down to reduced purchase of season tickets and probably in pert due to the Govt inspired idea of a flexible multi-trip ticket instead of a season ticket (or maybe LNER no longer issuing return tickets for some journeys?).  

 

Clearly what needs to be addressed first is not so much costs but the reason for the greater decline in revenue than the decline in passenger numbers.   But I doubt that something like that is too difficult for the politicos and DafT to actually understand.

The lost revenue is pretty easy. Massive decline in peak time travellers (and rise in off peak), massive loss of season tickets, loss of business travellers in 1st class.

 

fare evasion might be up a bit but not to the tune of

 

strikes clearly contribute currently too.

 

this quote is from Rail Minister last week

Unsurprisingly, and you don’t need a chartered accountant like me to tell you this, the impact on the industry’s bottom line has been stark. Revenue is around £125-175 million lower each month and costs keep rising year on year.

"Any other industry would have collapsed years ago but the railways have only survived because of the taxpayer and the public purse. The source of over 70% of income over the past 2 years at a cost of £1,000 per household. I won’t mince my words: operating the railways is currently financially unsustainable and it isn’t fair to continue asking taxpayers to foot the bill.

[APOLLO]

So shut the railways down / severely curtail services whilst demonising public car ownership etc etc. ?

 

Trouble ahead, more than we have now.

 

Brit15

 

 

[APOLLO]

1 hour ago, black and decker boy said:

 

Unsurprisingly, and you don’t need a chartered accountant like me to tell you this, the impact on the industry’s bottom line has been stark. Revenue is around £125-175 million lower each month and costs keep rising year on year.

"Any other industry would have collapsed years ago but the railways have only survived because of the taxpayer and the public purse. The source of over 70% of income over the past 2 years at a cost of £1,000 per household. I won’t mince my words: operating the railways is currently financially unsustainable and it isn’t fair to continue asking taxpayers to foot the bill.

 

So why build HS2 ?

 

Brit15

[andyman7]

2 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

 

So why build HS2 ?

 

Brit15

The costs do not spread evenly over all rail services. London - Birmingham - Manchester is an economic powerhouse and that route generates enormous benefits. The same cannot be said of hundreds of miles of rural and semi rural routes for which the cost/benefit ratio is much poorer.

[APOLLO]

Quote

you don’t need a chartered accountant like me to tell you this, the impact on the industry’s bottom line has been stark. Revenue is around £125-175 million lower each month and costs keep rising year on year.

 

Accountants, they know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

 

Brit15

[black and decker boy]

37 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

 

So why build HS2 ?

 

Brit15

I suspect that had the current regime been asked to sign off HS2 this year to start construction they would have said no. The business case is no doubt a lot worse than it was in 2019.

 

it’s hard to turn off a project that is now deep into construction and resembles a 100mile long worksite - any avoidable landscape damage is now done, 30,000 jobs directly employed, many times that across supply chains, £millions invested by private contractors in new plant, equipment & people.

 

Talk from ‘leaks’ that the eastern leg is to be formally cancelled in full (and HS2 service reduced to 10 trains per hour) and parts of NPR to go in the bin too.

[APOLLO]

Certainly I'm not against HS2 but the quote above by the Rail Minister was very anti railway (on a cost basis) indeed.

 

With such current railway funding issues I really doubt the term "revenue neutral" for the new ticketing system is real. I fear another ticket price gouging wrapped up in fancy words.

 

Going forward we in the UK will need ALL our railways, and probably more, unless the deep plan is to lock us all up at home !!

 

Londoners (indeed all city dwellers) read this

 

https://www.c40.org/

 

Brit15

[jjb1970]

In this case I really think people need to step out of the railway bubble to look at the state of government finances, spending commitments and growth forecasts. 

 

It's not a question of whether axes will fall on government spending plans or whether they will ratchet up revenue, it's a question of where the axes will fall and how revenues will be raised.

 

Railways will not be immune.

[Dunsignalling]

There is, however a point that could be made regarding the London suburban network. With declining commuter numbers, there may be savings to be made. Not by reducing train lengths, but by cutting service frequencies, e.g. 6 TPH vice 8 or 3 TPH vice 4. 

 

Cutting traffic congestion would result in an immediate improvement in punctuality and stop the TOCs citing crew shortages as an excuse for incompetence. Financial savings would ensue from cutting the need for overtime working and the number of units to be maintained, whilst making next to no difference to the service offered.  

 

John

Edited February 9, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[phil-b259]

2 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

There is however a point that could be made regarding the London suburban network. With declining commuter traffic, there may be savings to be made. Not by reducing train lengths, but by cutting service frequencies, e.g. 6 TPH vice 8 or 3 TPH vice 4. 

 

Cutting traffic congestion would result in an immediate improvement in punctuality and stop the TOCs citing crew shortages as an excuse for incompetence.  

 

John

 

Except it has been proven that if frequencies are cut ridership goes down!

 

Similarly increases in ridership have been seen where the frequency has gone up as the result of infrastructure improvements - including places outside London like the Turo - Falmouth branch

 

Thats why the London mayor considers that a 4tph regular interval service is a must - people can make spur of the moment decisions to travel without needing to consult a timetable and organise their lives around it.

[Dunsignalling]

23 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Except it has been proven that if frequencies are cut ridership goes down!

 

Similarly increases in ridership have been seen where the frequency has gone up as the result of infrastructure improvements - including places outside London like the Turo - Falmouth branch

 

Thats why the London mayor considers that a 4tph regular interval service is a must - people can make spur of the moment decisions to travel without needing to consult a timetable and organise their lives around it.

 

I wouldn't rely on the London Mayor to know anything about anything!

 

Rural ridership goes up once frequency gets down to hourly and drastically if it can be cut to half-hourly.  We are unlikely ever to discover if any benefit is to be had by offering more! 🙃 

 

If people are going to be deterred by "only" having a train every 20 minutes rather than one every 15 (or every ten vice seven and a half), it would serve only to demonstrate how overly cossetted the denizens of the metropolis have become. Few would switch to using their cars at 3 TPH vice 4 if only because the mayor seems determined to confine that choice to the rich. 

 

In any case, keeping train lengths the same (or even using cars from units rendered surplus to increase them) may be preferable to reducing the capacity of services. Shorter trains are far more likely to become randomly overcrowded whilst others run half empty. Unchanged or bigger trains on marginally increased headways will tend to even out demand fluctuations.

 

Much has been invested in enabling longer formations to run, and it would seem stupid not to exploit the fruits of that. 

 

John

 

Edited February 9, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[Pete the Elaner]

11 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Thats why the London mayor considers that a 4tph regular interval service is a must - people can make spur of the moment decisions to travel without needing to consult a timetable and organise their lives around it.

 

That does indeed make a big difference to how I use a train.

I used to live in a village with a 1 TPH service. I had to know when the next train was due & leave my house at the right time to catch it. If this was not convenient, I had the option of taking a bus.

I live within walking distance of MK Central now. I leave mine when I'm ready & catch the first train. It is rare for me to have to wait longer than 15 minutes. I may even go into London tomorrow night after work to meet friends. I won't even check the timetable first. This is exactly why I moved here.

[Bernard Lamb]

23 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

There is, however a point that could be made regarding the London suburban network. With declining commuter numbers, there may be savings to be made. Not by reducing train lengths, but by cutting service frequencies, e.g. 6 TPH vice 8 or 3 TPH vice 4. 

 

Cutting traffic congestion would result in an immediate improvement in punctuality and stop the TOCs citing crew shortages as an excuse for incompetence. Financial savings would ensue from cutting the need for overtime working and the number of units to be maintained, whilst making next to no difference to the service offered.  

 

John

I do not know which particular routes you are looking at John, but that would not work on the southern end of the WCML. There is a mad rush from the concourse when the platform information appears and if you are not quick off the mark you might not get a seat. Even late evening services are like this. In fact an extra train around 23.00 would be a big help in getting people home in reasonable comfort after an evening out. Whatever time I travel seems to be very busy, from 15.20 to well after 23.00. But we all know that and capacity is a major reason for needing HS2. At any price.

Bernard

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

That does indeed make a big difference to how I use a train.

I used to live in a village with a 1 TPH service. I had to know when the next train was due & leave my house at the right time to catch it. If this was not convenient, I had the option of taking a bus.

I live within walking distance of MK Central now. I leave mine when I'm ready & catch the first train. It is rare for me to have to wait longer than 15 minutes. I may even go into London tomorrow night after work to meet friends. I won't even check the timetable first. This is exactly why I moved here.

But at 3 TPH you still wouldn't need to check a timetable and you would still be unlikely to have more than a 15 minute wait for a train unless you turned up just in time to see the previous one disappearing off the end of the platform.

 

I see no justification for over-provision on routes where capacity can be matched to demand by modest reductions in frequency.

 

FWIW, the town where I live (Pop. 16,000+ and growing quite fast) has similar public transport provision to your previous village but the bus "alternative" takes three times longer to/from the most popular destination, so it's usually quicker to wait for the next train.

 

John

 

Edited February 9, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[APOLLO]

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

In this case I really think people need to step out of the railway bubble to look at the state of government finances, spending commitments and growth forecasts. 

 

It's not a question of whether axes will fall on government spending plans or whether they will ratchet up revenue, it's a question of where the axes will fall and how revenues will be raised.

 

Railways will not be immune.

 

Drove to Liverpool yesterday to the Chinese Supermarket. Not been for a while, opposite on the docks is a huge construction site with a lot of tower cranes - The £500 million new Everton football stadium is well underway.

There is NO shortage of money in Liverpool for "men" kicking around a bag of wind !!!!!!

 

Not all private money either.

 

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/liverpool-councils-spending-bramley-moore-24589846

 

 

Oh and the prices of food in the supermarket are up around 20%+ since our last visit.

 

Couldn't be "Green" go by train and lug a 20Kg bag of rice etc through Liverpool to the station !!

 

Brit15

[woodenhead]

25 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

 

Drove to Liverpool yesterday

 

 

in your flying car 😄

[Tom Burnham]

56 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

That does indeed make a big difference to how I use a train.

I used to live in a village with a 1 TPH service. I had to know when the next train was due & leave my house at the right time to catch it. If this was not convenient, I had the option of taking a bus.

I live within walking distance of MK Central now. I leave mine when I'm ready & catch the first train. It is rare for me to have to wait longer than 15 minutes. I may even go into London tomorrow night after work to meet friends. I won't even check the timetable first. This is exactly why I moved here.

This should be one of the key advantages of trains and why I think it's odd that rail ticketing has been and is being made more like air travel with having to book for a specific time. If you are heavily penalised for getting a different train from the one you're booked on, it significantly reduces the effective speed, as you'll need to arrive at the station much earlier than you otherwise might. I guess that will increase the turnover of retail units at the station anyway!

[woodenhead]

I thought that the Government/DFT wanted to expand Oyster style travel in the South East - that is very much turn up and go style so it would not require pre-booking any specific train.

 

Would it be just longer distance and cross country services that can become very full that such specific ticketing would be targetted at.