50 years on ... how should we look forward to the next 50 years?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

27th March 2013 will be the 50th anniversary of the publication of Dr Richard Beeching's "The reshaping of British Railways" report.

report: http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=13
maps: http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=35

Have the fifty years that followed been a disaster for the railways, or could we look back at a success where the slimmed down system is carrying a very great deal more traffic than it was in those days?  Is that extra traffic because of the Beeching report and its implementation, or in spite of it?

How should we look forward and plan for the next fifty years?

[Andy W]

It is also well worth a look at the map drawn up by Richard Fairhurst - one of the Cotswold line members.

http://www.systemed.net/atlas/

Zoom in, it is excellent, and shows quickly how the railway network has shrunk.

[eightf48544]

Very interesting question.

I have a copy of the 100 years of the Railway Study Association which has an article speculating on this very question.

The main theme is there will be "change" it will be ineviatible.

A lot will be obvious more electrifcation, more automation leading hopefully to more reliability. The interesting though the author has is about staff. If things are going right then you will need fewer staff but more staff when things so go wrong. They suggest you will need dual trained staff who are basically customer facing and deal with passengers on a day to day basis when things are running OK but are capable of and trained to and more importantly authorised  to take decesions when things wrong.

The other thing is that the fare system has to be sorted out it's drowing under the weight of its own contridictions.

As to the effects of the Beeching system I go with Chairman Mao on the Frech Revolution "that it's too early to tell". Many of the problems with the railways started with the competitive building  manias of the mid 19 th C.

[grahame]

Perhaps, 50 years on, [someone] should look at "The shaping of British Railways for the future" ... considering where we want to be in 25 and 50 years, and how we should get there from where we are now - a strategy plan that swings longer than the pendulum of political government swapping from one horse to another every few years, often at great expense.

Discussion statement:

In Utopia a travel and transport system would provide "resources that let people and goods travel to where they want to go / need to be, at a time they want to travel, consistently, in comfort and at reasonable cost to the traveller, the state, and the wider economy. To be environmentally friendly, reliable and flexible. To be easy to find our about and book, straightforward, healthy and enjoyable to use, and to allow people to make best use of their time. To be safe and secure."

[Electric train]

It is easy with hindsight to condemn Beeching, there were a number of contributory decisions made post WW2 some due to austerity, some just poor; the decision to stay with steam while the rest of Europe was electrifying or using diesels, the choices made with some of the motive power units in the 1950's modernisation plan some not even lasting 10 years.  Then there was the continued use by BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) and DoT of the financial model for the viability of a line and stations which perpetuated right into the 1980's.  The were some excellent choices made though the Intercity brand this was a BR marketing tool, the adoption of containers the HSDT^▸ (Original name for High Speed Train) (125).  The decision in the 1950's to go for 25kV AC overhead electrification and not to stick with the 1500V DC^▸ (Direct Current).

What will we see in the next 50 to 100 years.  The opening of other new lines (standard 100mph line) not necessarily over previously abandon lines some may be principally for freight, new stations, rebuilt / relocated stations some more redoubling or quadrupling and of course HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) will be built.

A lot more electrification at 25kV and the conversion of third rail areas to overhead 25kV

[broadgage]

My forecast is that in 50 years, that the rail map will be very similar to todays.
There will be some new and reopened lines, and some closures, but not that many.

I predict that most of the network will be electrified, with battery powered multiple units and coal burning steam locos  for branch lines and secondary routes. Oil will be far too costly to regularly use for railway fuel.
Shunting will be done by battery locos at larger depots, with horses being used for small yards and depots.

Owing to the increased cost of electricity, speeds will be generally lower than todays with increased passenger numbers being handled by long relatively slow trains.
30 coach electric trains on the east and west coast routes,once an hour, with a maximum speed of 100MPH and a timetabled start to stop average of about 60.
Speed will be less important than is the case today since airlines and fast long distance road transport will be virtually extinct.
Fares much simplified, but broadly similar to those charged today, on average, in real terms.
More through portions of trains to destinations without a through service at present, for example from the South to Scotland.
More sleepers and more restaurants , if we cant afford to go faster, lets at least make it seem quicker by eating, drinking, and sleeping !

[macbrains]

Interesting - "coal burning" is certainly something to ponder on

rgds
Rob

[swrural]

I don't see a future 'clamour for coal' any more than the just-experienced 'dash for gas'.   If that were acceptable energy policy, then Broadgage's predicted elimination of long distance road transport would not be a likely scenario either (coal and oil will be eliminated).  However, I do think that not only is the end of the i.c.e. probable, but also, more significant, will be the elimination of short distance car travel, even electrically powered.

It will be the pattern of living, working and shopping that decides it.  In major urban centres, light mass transit is already taking over.  In the South West, we will see one of the last bastions of private car transport.  Bristol may lead the way with trams and the like, but it has to overcome its topographical challenges more inventively than it has until now (it will do), and the third city, Plymouth (Bournemouth is the second, may I remind colleagues) has similar challenges.

I don't see people charging up and down to London every day, unless people have a psychological need to escape their families.  Technology will render such strange practices redundant (has done already, truth be told).  None of such people make anything with their hands, in a workshop in London; they just send emails and design things, often to people sat yards away.

 

[broadgage]

I certainly dont see a general "clamour for coal" and did say that I expect most routes to be electrified.
I can however see a return to coal burning steam engines for secondary routes, especialy for freight and long heavy passenger trains.
Battery multiple units would probably be a better bet for short, local trains.

There is growing evidence that oil production has reached a peak and is now declining, those who do not support this view tend to accept that the peak is relatively near though not yet reached.

It has been suggested that if it were not for the economic situation, that oil prices would be twice the present figure. Others hold that the present economic situation has been CAUSED by the sudden increase in oil prices of a few years ago.

At any rate, it seems most unlikely that oil derived fuels will be affordable for large scale transport, whether public transport or private cars.
I have no doubt that some cars and aircraft will be used in 50 years time, but only a few and at a price far out of reach of most people.
There are a number of alternatives to crude oil, but it seems most unlikely that these will be available in sufficient volumes and at low enough prices to replace the crude oil used at present.

The future is IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) electric, and expensive electricity at that which will have to be used more prudently at present. Mainly from renewable sources.
I do not see a large scale return to steam, but for lightly used routes that cant be electrified, and with diesel fuel no longer affordable, it may be the best option.

[grahame]

Some interesting inputs and thoughts there.  I too wouldn't be shocked to see us turn a corner with the speed (and sophistication, pehaps) of trains.  In the airline industry, supersonic planes are no longer flying in scheduled passenger service, and perhaps we'll end up with a 90 m.p.h. top speed electric train network (however the electricity is generated, in most cases it's going to be better to feed it through wires than carry your own generators).  Longer trains, yes - for that's how you get good throughput, but also signalling systems which allow inter-train distance to be less than the current (stopping distance + 1 signal section?).

Clock face services - almost undoubtedly (but will time have gone metric, with 10 hours in the day, and 100 minutes in the hour?).  Ticketing and information services much improved - the current uneasy mixture of what's still an early-use technology (electronics) on top of an archaic fare structure will - surely - be swept away.

Some redoubling, perhaps some extra loops, but the signalling and train length stuff above, and a consistent train speed, will allow far more seats to pass through each track than at present.  Hopefully 4 track now won't have to wait until 2063 to get the extra tracks.

People will still take time to load / unload.  So we may well see station widening, where alternate trains use alternate platforms; there are elements of that at Clapham Junction, and I can see stations like Chippenham and Westbury both going up to 4 platforms.   Hopefully 2 islands, with "regional" arriving (from Sailsbury and Bristol alternately), express pulling in across the platform for a 2 way swap of passengers, and then the two proceeding - to Norwich via the East / West link for the regional train, and London (central station, via Crossrail?) for the express.

I'm not going to predict / advocate huge re-openings (but some) ... nor closures, although I do question the reversal and intermediate station near the junction on the Looe branch.

[SandTEngineer]

Actually the lower the maximum speed and the more the trains are similar in construction means greater throughput.  Signalling headways on most main lines are already braking distance plus less than one signal section.  This why jumping from 125mph to 140mph+ does wonders for journey time but competely blows capacity out of the water

[broadgage]

I also expect to see the return of mixed trains, those conveying both passengers and freight.
Cant see it being feasible to add passenger vehicles to long heavy goods trains, but I can certainly forsee branch line trains that consist of a few passenger vehicles and a few vans for light or perishable freight.

My forecast increase in oil prices will increase the need for local goods trains for mail, milk, newspapers and parcels. Onward transport from the NEAREST station, not a "hub" many miles away could be by horse, by electric vehicle, and by bike. Exceptionly bulky or heavy articles would require either a large team of horses, or steam traction engine.

[ellendune]

I predict that most of the network will be electrified, with battery powered multiple units and coal burning steam locos  for branch lines and secondary routes. Oil will be far too costly to regularly use for railway fuel.
Shunting will be done by battery locos at larger depots, with horses being used for small yards and depots.

I very much doubt the coal burning steam locos.  They are very inefficient in energy terms as they are always on whether or not they are moving. Coal will also be expensive as it will be being used to produce gas.

As for horses - when they were last used wagons were much smaller and the 4 wheel wagons are limited to 45 mph. 

[james666]

As Niels Bohr said, "Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future."  This was the Railway Magazine's reaction to the Beeching Report in their May 1963 editorial:

Whether or not one agrees with all the details of "the plan" or not, it has to be admitted that Dr. Beeching^s report, "The Reshaping of British Railways" (referred to elsewhere in this issue of The Railway Magazine), is basically correct and backed by such a weight of carefully-prepared evidence as to be almost unassailable.  It has been described as brutal, brilliant and right and if carried out in toto will, in a few years, produce a change in the railway scene which few people could have envisaged.
[...]
We wonder how many of our readers noticed the odd coincidence that the already famous Beeching report appeared on the centenary of the birth of Henry Royce of Rolls-Royce fame.  When Royce joined forces with Rolls it was to pioneer a new development which appeared to have a future.  That future has now provided the dimming of what appeared to be the unending high noon of the railways.

With hindsight it's an astonishingly defeatist attitude from the railway's friends but it reflects the powerful intellectual currents of the time - continuing deference to authority, disdain for the "old ways" and an enthusiasm for radical experiments.  We will probably seem equally foolish in 50 years time.  In fairness it must be pointed out that not everyone swam with the tide.  For example, from the Letters page of the June 1963 issue:

SIR ^ I am very surprised and disappointed to read your last number and your tame acceptance of the findings of Dr. Beeching^s Report.   You present his findings, which are only one side of a many sided question, and you produce none of the reasoned and sensible arguments of many opponents of the scheme up and down the country^  C. Leslie W. Smith

 

[TonyK]

The clearest vision is 20/20 hindsight. Beeching was asked to do a job on the basis of the state of play in 1963, not consider the future in any deep and meaningful way. So he had in mind a population of 53 million, with car ownership on the rise and railway use in decline. The Modernisation Plan of 1955 had proposed the phasing out of steam as a motive power, and Beeching took into account that there still a few thousand in use. We didn't really start going with diesel until around 1956, presumably as a result of the war. To keep all the existing lines and modernise would have required thousands of new units (bit like now!) with no guarantee they would be used in a big way.

Freight was changing too. A lot of coal was used by trains and needed carrying around to where it was needed. Get rid of steam trains, and you lose that traffic. Householders too were eschewing coal in favour of cheaper and cleaner electricity and gas. Most of our gas then came from coal, but the North Sea gas fields were being developed, and plans were already being made for the mass conversion of the later 1960s. Britain was at the cutting edge of nuclear power, with fusion power just around the corner, so cheap that it would not be economic to charge for it. Dr Beeching wrote his report against a mixed background of declining rail use, inefficient infrastructure and rolling stock, and rising affluence and optimism. He did not do a bad job.

Fast forward 50 years, with a population 20% higher than in 1963 and still growing, falling North Sea gas and oil, most of the nuclear power stations nearing closer with nothing much likely to fill the gap within a decade, and chronic traffic congestion in our cities, the trains are filling again despite the cost, and Dr Beeching is being blamed for the mess by almost everybody except me and probably a number of other posters here. There were hard decisions taken, maybe some wrong ones, but at least it focused the resources in the busiest areas, and created better and faster mainlines. One wrong decision that I am glad was overturned was the closure of the Severn Beach line, proposed by Beeching but saved by public outcry, and expected to carry a million passengers this year.

What will the future look like? Sorry broadgage, it won't be steamy, at least not on the railways. The dirtiest coal-burning power station fuelling the least efficient electric loco is still a more energy efficient way of transporting passengers. In time, all transport, public and private, will be electrically driven. Eventually, the whole rail network will be electrified, with main lines at 25Kv, possibly shorter branch lines at 750 volt DC^▸ (Direct Current). The real game-changer could be tram-train, if the Yorkshire trials go well. As steel wheel on steel rail, powered by electricity, is highly efficient and non-polluting at the point of use, we could yet see a network of light rail in every city. It will also be worth looking at closed lines, to see how much effort would be needed to reinstate them, compared to the benefits. Any planning application involving building on a dismantled railway should be looked at from a transport view at the same time.

The power will come from a mix of sources, underpinned by new nuclear plants. Before you shout "Fukushima!", these may be smaller Thorium-fired plants, incapable of blowing their tops. We were once involved in this technology, but as an article in The Telegraph shows, the race is now between the Chinese and the Japanese to crack the problems. We will also progressively turn more of our burgeoning waste into electricity, in ways similar the new facility in Avonmeath, operated by New Earth Solutions, and soon to incorporate a 13Mw power station. We may use wave power, if the government can be persuaded to divert money that way from wind power. We will see only one, maybe two, generations of wind turbines before the problems of reliability, inefficiency, and lack of storage, become so obvious that not even the government can ignore them any more.

Battery-powered trains have been considered by the Transport Research Laboratory in a published Report which finds that they probably are feasible, albeit with a bit of wishful thinking.

What we don't do well in this country is continuous forward planning. We built the first commercial power supply from a nuclear power station in 1959, then carried on building until 1995. Then we stopped because we had enough, since when the percentage of power produced by nuclear has dropped from 26% to 16%. We stop when have a train fleet with a 25-year design life, then panic 27 years later.  Similarly, the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) electrification was announced and cancelled twice previously, with the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) being refurbed to extend their lives (thankfully) as a consequence. The project was called in again after the 2010 election, although faced with the prospect of having to replace the HSTs, it looks very definite that the work will be completed this time. As the first IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) enter service, we need to have somebody in government planning their replacement. If not - well, we know what will happen.