Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 04:55 29 Mar 2024
- Bus plunges off South Africa bridge, killing 45
* Easter getaway begins with flood alerts in place
- Easter travel warning as millions set to hit roads
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
29th Mar (1913)
Foundation of National Union or Railwaymen (*)

Train RunningCancelled
07:00 Bedwyn to Newbury
07:22 Newbury to Bedwyn
08:13 Newbury to Bedwyn
08:46 Bedwyn to Newbury
09:54 Bedwyn to Newbury
10:22 Newbury to Bedwyn
11:29 Newbury to Bedwyn
11:57 Bedwyn to Newbury
12:52 Bedwyn to Newbury
Short Run
04:54 Plymouth to London Paddington
05:12 Reading to Bedwyn
05:33 Plymouth to London Paddington
05:55 Plymouth to London Paddington
06:00 Bedwyn to London Paddington
06:37 Plymouth to London Paddington
07:03 London Paddington to Paignton
08:35 Plymouth to London Paddington
10:35 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
Delayed
21:45 Penzance to London Paddington
23:45 London Paddington to Penzance
05:03 Penzance to London Paddington
06:05 Penzance to London Paddington
07:10 Penzance to London Paddington
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance
08:15 Penzance to London Paddington
09:04 London Paddington to Plymouth
09:37 London Paddington to Paignton
10:04 London Paddington to Penzance
11:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 29, 2024, 05:07:08 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[98] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[97] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[86] Return of the BRUTE?
[74] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[53] If not HS2 to Manchester, how will traffic be carried?
[23] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
 
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Future passenger numbers (to 2045) and how to cope  (Read 11003 times)
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« on: December 11, 2015, 06:25:26 »

From The Scotsman

Quote
A major redevelopment of Waverley Station has been announced with a new mezzanine level to free space for more platforms was proposed today by owner Network Rail.

It said the move could be needed to cope with passenger numbers more than doubling over the next 30 years

This concerns Edinburgh's Waverley station - so how do those numbers stack up for elsewhere?

"Doubling in 30 years" is what you'll get from a constant compound growth of 2.3% per annum; current rolling stock provision for the future is calculated on 3% compound growth (which means there would be 2.42 passengers in 2045 for every 1.00 in the most recent figures) and the latest growth figure quoted for franchised services is 5.7%.  If that carried on for 30 years, we would have 5.27 passengers for every one today in 2045.

There is already "some concern" ( Cheesy ) that parts of the rail infrastructure are unable to cope with today's demand, and that there is already a shortage of rolling stock, so we're not even starting out from an "up to date" position ... but that comment (from me) is complicated by the fact that improvements are not continual, but rather come in big steps, whereas traffic growth is much more a steady curve.

Where do you think we'll be in 30 years?   Will the growth continue?    Reduce?   Will we even see reductions in rail travel in some years?  Will better use of resources be made by levelling out the peaks?   Will any improvements simply fuel even more growth?

Some comments on the Scotsman's article:

Quote
I'll start using public transport when it can take me from my house to my golf club, work, or wherever else I feel like going, whenever I decide to go there. And back home again.

Quote
How about spending the money on trains to cope with the increase in numbers. As a regular user on the new borders railway, i am left without a seat on a daily basis due to a 2 carriage train at peak time! It's horrible! At this rate, I'm going to start using my car. Don't even get me started on the continuous lateness of the peak time trains!!

Quote
When the public transport system was privatised it was because it was inefficient and under subscribed. Now it is over subscribed and has no investment - private companies don't want to spend money improving services because their directors are there to make sure there is a return (removal of cash) from the business to pay dividends to private shareholders.

Public transport should be run for the 'people' - not for shareholders!!

Quote
So with an improved layout, it would be able to handle the passengers from a rail link to the Airport? And to think the Council said such a thing was impossible!
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5398



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 11, 2015, 15:32:42 »

I expect significant growth in passenger numbers for two main reasons.

Firstly, the population is increasing rapidly, look at the birth rate ! the rail passengers who will need space in 5, 10, or 15 years have already been born. Even a sudden drop in the birth rate will still leave a rapidly growing adult population for many years. In addition more and more people are moving to the UK (United Kingdom), at least a million every 3 years. Even if a change of government policy reduces FUTURE immigration into the UK, those already here and en route need considering, remembering that many young children are among the immigrants, and will of course grow up.

Secondly, rail travel is becoming more popular as an alternative to driving or flying, and this is likely to increase as oil supplies deplete in coming decades. Younger adults are now less likely to drive than in the past, and whilst some no doubt walk, cycle or take the bus, most are probably taking the train rather than driving.

So we have a growing population AND a greater proportion of that increased population choosing to use trains.

As has been well reported on these forums, many trains are very overcrowded and increased capacity is urgently needed simply to accommodate the Present numbers, let alone allow for significant increases.

Suppose that a certain service has seats for 500 but is used by 750 passengers. One might suppose that the overcrowding could be eliminated by providing 750 seats.
I disagree, many potential customers might be put off travel by the gross overcrowding and decide to drive instead.  If a train with 750 seats was provided instead of the one with 500 seats, then the increased chance of getting a seat would almost certainly attract more passengers off buses and out of cars. 900 passengers might now use the train, 750 seated and 150 standing.
Chance of getting a seat on the 500 seat train=67%
Chance of getting a seat on the 750 seat train=83%
That is a worthwhile improvement, but still leaves 150 standing.
Providing a train with 1000 seats might be expected to leave 100 vacant seats, but in practice the virtual certainty of getting a sea would attract even more passengers.

If instead, the single train with 500 seats and 750 passengers was replaced with 2 similar trains running say 20 minutes apart, then the increased frequency would probably attract more customers IN ADDITION to those attracted by the increased likelihood of getting a seat, and both trains would probably end up nearly full in the first year and overcrowded thereafter.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4256


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 11, 2015, 16:36:03 »

Improvements in capacity always fuel growth, on rail as on roads and elsewhere, at least until something better comes along that makes the current method obsolete, such as rail and improved roads putting canals (mostly) out of business. This doesn't just hold true for transport, of course. So far, so obvious.

Then there are all the technological changes coming to transport which will make it ^ mostly for driving ^ cheaper and easier: electric cars are going to take off in the next decade as range increases and, probably more importantly, so does the charging network; self-driving cars are probably already technologically viable but it's some years till they become customer-ready (or the public ready for them); before fully self-driving cars (and lorries etc) become available we'll see an ever increasing array of aids to the driver in particular stressful situations such as parking, stop-start traffic and fog; the oil price is plunging but for how long?

I don't think we can say yet how these factors will interact to attract traffic off rails and on to roads, or vice versa, but travel is not a static quantity: more travel on one mode will tend to create more on other modes that feed into/from it.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2738


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 11, 2015, 17:33:54 »

What always strikes me in discussions about capacity is that it really depends on which flows you are considering.  There are some places like Waterloo or Edinburgh Waverley that will not be able to cope with more trains without drastic interventions like Crossrail 2 and 3, double decked trains and mezanies etc.  That will cost serious money and present major challenges

But there are also plenty of places were significant growth can be (or at least ought to be) accommodated easily.  Things like replacing 3 car trains with 4 car trains on the Cardiff-Portsmouth run would be one of those things.  Changes like that ought to make economic sense.  Because a 4 car train has the same staffing costs as a 3 car train and yet potentially carries more paying passengers.

So major schemes will be needed but we must not neglect smaller incremental schemes which in comparison cost peanuts and which make a real difference to both passengers and the productivity of the railway.  There is no fundamental reason why the Northern franchise should need a big subsidy whilst the SWT (South West Trains) franchise pays a big premium.  If Northern ran longer trains their productivity would increase.  And the flip side of course is that adding capacity to some Northern routes will be much less expensive than re-engineering the routes into Waterloo.     
Logged
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2738


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: December 11, 2015, 17:48:33 »

I'd also add, that thoughts like those above do make me wonder about re-balancing growth across the country.

Should we invest billions into keeping pace with demand growth in London where capacity improvements (not just on the railway but in terms of housing and offices too) would be cheaper to deliver in, lets say Swindon or Bristol or Sunderland?

You might say that London needs the infrastructure investment because lots of people want to live and work there.  But perhaps it is the other way round and the jobs in London are fuelled by the infrastructure investment.   Spend the money outside London and I think it might be a cheaper way to boost economic activity. 

The way of the future does seem to be for employment to become focused in cities.  South Wales is a case in point here.  Cardiff/Newport is booming and the valleys are depleted.  But South Wales actually has a huge amount going for it because the distances are small and the former industry in the valleys can be cleared for housing and the railway built to transport coal can be upgraded to carry workers to the shops and offices of Cardiff.     
Logged
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2738


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2015, 17:51:42 »

I'd also add, that thoughts like those above do make me wonder about re-balancing growth across the country.

Should we invest billions into keeping pace with demand growth in London where capacity improvements (not just on the railway but in terms of housing and offices too) would be cheaper to deliver in, lets say Swindon or Bristol or Sunderland?

You might say that London needs the infrastructure investment because lots of people want to live and work there.  But perhaps it is the other way round and the jobs in London are fuelled by the infrastructure investment.   Spend the money outside London and I think it might be a cheaper way to boost economic activity. 

The way of the future does seem to be for employment to become focused in cities.  South Wales is a case in point here.  Cardiff/Newport is booming and the valleys are depleted.  But South Wales actually has a huge amount going for it because the distances are small and the former industry in the valleys can be cleared for housing and the railway built to transport coal can be upgraded to carry workers to the shops and offices of Cardiff and that kind of development comes at a fraction of the cost of driving a tunnelled railway though the centre of London.  So I say, in a time of austerity, consider spending less on London mega projects and instead spend some relatively moderate amounts on  upgrading transport in smaller towns and cities.       
Logged
simonw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 589


View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: December 11, 2015, 18:50:53 »

I am about to go to Gemany for a Christmas weekend, and it is surprising {not} that every city we looked at had comprehensive, fully integrated train systems, connected by the ICE network.

If Network Rail are serious about planning for the future, then need with local cities to develop proper local transport systems, and link more cities to the HS (High Speed (short for HSS (High Speed Services) High Speed Services)) network, with a high train gauge (not track) to allow double deck trains, longer trains, more flexible route options.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2015, 11:02:06 »

Having "rebased" my graphs - see http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=16599.msg189101#msg189101 - they now show recent growth trends much better - I would suggest this is a better base for extrapolation than the previous graphs based 10 years ago.

Cities in the South West (GWR (Great Western Railway) territory)





Cities in the South West (SWT (South West Trains) territory)





Cities elsewhere in the UK (United Kingdom)





Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5398



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2017, 10:17:09 »

It seems to me, that the need for a lot more capacity by say 2045 has just become even clearer.
The government is about to announce plans to prohibit sales of new petrol and diesel fuelled cars by 2040.

Existing and reasonably foreseeable battery cars are already viable for short journeys and under optimum conditions for longer trips up to about 100 miles. It seems a bit unlikely that affordable EVs will be suited to doing hundreds of miles in a day.
This points to greater demand for rail travel, especially on intercity routes. 2040 may seem too far ahead to be worth worrying about just yet, but noting just how long major rail projects take to plan and execute, action needs to start now.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2017, 10:27:30 »

The government is about to announce plans to prohibit sales of new petrol and diesel fuelled cars by 2040.

Do those plans extend to trains too??   Seems a bit odd to plan to ban diesel cars, and to prolong the use of diesel power in trains ....
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5398



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2017, 11:13:40 »

No mention of trains AFAIK (as far as I know).
Trains make better use of fuel than cars, so cars are arguably a higher priority but hopefully electrification will be back on the agenda by 2045.

Oil is cheap at present, but I would expect that the long term trend will be upwards as supplies deplete. Oil derived fuels will be essential  for some purposes for the foreseeable future, so the sooner we start saving oil for such purposes the better.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4256


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: July 26, 2017, 12:49:01 »

And what about diesel generators, industrial and agricultural machinery, domestic and commercial heating, boats of all shapes and sizes, and of course aircraft?
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5398



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: July 26, 2017, 13:08:30 »

And what about diesel generators, industrial and agricultural machinery, domestic and commercial heating, boats of all shapes and sizes, and of course aircraft?

Diesel generators, indispensable for emergency purposes. For outdoor events minimise use and consider temporary grid connections instead.

Industrial and agricultural machinery, unavoidable in many cases, battery power viable for the smaller machines, and horses are a possibility for some agricultural work.

Heating, minimise use by insulation, consider renewably generated electricity as a partial or total alternative.

Boats, minimise use of fuel and consider a return to sails, for both large ships and for pleasure craft. For ferries making frequent but relatively short crossings, battery power is already viable.

Aircraft, little alternative to oil derived fuels, we will have to fly less! Battery power is possible for smaller aircraft.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #13 on: July 26, 2017, 13:33:16 »

The government is about to announce plans to prohibit sales of new petrol and diesel fuelled cars by 2040.

Do those plans extend to trains too??   Seems a bit odd to plan to ban diesel cars, and to prolong the use of diesel power in trains ....

Seems others might agree ... from the RMT (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers):

Quote
RMT general secretary Mick Cash said:
"Today's announcement on emissions from the Government exposes the rank hypocrisy of their decision to shelve long-planned rail electrification works.

"Puffed up news announcements about plans that are a generation away will not mask the reality of scrapped modernisation programmes on our railways in the here and now."

I don't always agree with Mick Cash ...
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4256


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: July 26, 2017, 13:38:55 »

The announcement seems to only apply to cars and vans, not HGVs and buses (or even motorcycles) let alone sources other than road vehicles. In practice, 23 years is a very long time in this context and it's likely only specialist vehicles will still be made with internal combustion engines by then. Volvo is to cease their manufacture altogether from 2019, for instance. And it's only new vehicles from that – those already around will remain. At least under the current plan.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page