Might train services be cut from May?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

From the Daily Mail

One in five train services could be AXED next year as treasury tightens the purse-strings after propping up the network during Covid

Rail capacity could be slashed to 80 per cent of pre-pandemic service levels
One of many measures being considered to reduce strain on public purse
Rishi Sunak reported to ahve approved GBP2.1billion to ensure services still run

A fifth of rail services could be cut next year because Ministers are struggling to control a ballooning multi-billion-pound taxpayer bill.

Whitehall officials are looking at plans that could see rail capacity slashed to around 80 per cent of pre-pandemic service levels.

It is one of the measures under serious consideration following Treasury pressure to reduce the strain on the public purse from propping up the country?s rail network.

Experts have already warned that the financial challenges of coronavirus, compounded by a highly infectious new strain of the virus, are likely to result in a delayed recovery in rail passenger numbers.

Ministers warned last week that Tier 4 restrictions may be necessary for a couple of months, amid speculation some badly hit regions could be in lockdown until Easter.

It is understood any cuts would come in the next timetable change due in May.

[TaplowGreen]

Makes sense on commuter routes certainly as demand will be much lower going forward given the new working practices which have been/will continue to be adopted.

If the railway's future lies more in the leisure market however perhaps not such a good move.

Presumably it will have implications for job security/opportunities on the railways too.

[IndustryInsider]

Well, I guess it is quite likely that some services will be cut.

I guess it is not too bad if it is cutting some of the vast capacity into London for the peaks that is unlikely to be needed any time soon.  But very bad indeed if it is cutting some of the services completely on more rural routes.

[Electric train]

It is an inevitability, it will come with risks though.

Whilst some morning and evening peak fasts could be culled, it will result in longer commuting times, midday service frequency reduced however the ticket price is unlikely to drop; the risk could be the industries ability to react if / when demand increases.  Cutting is swift to implement reversing it could be very slow especially if staff are made redundant and stock is mothballed or scrapped 

[Lee]

Well, I guess it is quite likely that some services will be cut.

I guess it is not too bad if it is cutting some of the vast capacity into London for the peaks that is unlikely to be needed any time soon.  But very bad indeed if it is cutting some of the services completely on more rural routes.

Look on the bright side - At least it will give the Marie Antoinette "Let Them Take Buses" muppets the opportunity to peddle their signature mix of suppressed population figures based on outdated census data, and long-discredited Beeching-era "contribution to the wider network" methodology for our entertainment.

I can hardly wait...

[bobm]

On the subject of census data, the 2021 Census is due in the Spring.  I wonder if that will be affected?

[Robin Summerhill]

On questions such as this we can speculate all we like, but it is always best to base forecasts on observed and observable trend, and not crystal ball gazing.

I think we can safely say that any new normality will only arrive when we have seen the back of this pandemic. This will probably be lined to the roll-out of vaccines, and even trying to forecast that is currently difficult due to the practicalities of getting the stuff to the right place to put into people?s arms, and getting enough people to physically do the jabbing. At a guess (of the crystal ball gazing variety) we are probably looking at early next summer at the earliest, and possibly later.

The factors that will affect rail travel demand in future are many and various:

1 Many people have got used to working from home. Will they continue to do so?

2 Many people have got used to online shopping rather than wander shopping centres. Will they continue to do so?

3 The move toward discouraging car use in towns and cities will continue. It will become ever more difficult to drive in large urban areas and even harder to find parking space.

4 With the alternatives to the internal combustion engine that we currently have available, long distance motoring is likely to become less attractive. For example, even a car with a 300 mile battery range would need a long stop somewhere to recharge on a London to Glasgow run.

The answers to 1 and 2 cannot yet be predicted. We can speculate and we might think we know the answer, but right at this moment we don?t know we know. We will have to wait and see.

The answer to 3 is more predictable in the short to medium term, as the various policies adopted by the local authorities will be publicly available documents. The impact those policies will have on the local public transport infrastructure will vary quite substantially from place to place and should be forensic in that respect; what may suit Cardiff might not suit Bristol or may or may not suit Southampton and so on.

The changes due to 4 will probably see an increase in public transport use. The jury is out over whether rail, coach or air travel will reap the most benefit, as in essence that will involve individual choices to be made between cost, desire for speed and the reason for travel.


All that is a long way of saying that nobody realistically has a clue about the answer to the original question at the moment, and I suspect the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) and the government are thinking the same way too. That will not of course stop them doing anything daft in the short term, as that is one of the few things that virtually all governments down the years have been especially good at...

[grahame]

For these coming winter months, I'll predict very low passenger numbers on public transport - trains and buses, but with the longer distance journeys (i.e. biased towards trains) being harder hit.  But then, come "spring", with waves of people being vaccinated from the most vulnerable onwards, people are going to be coming out of their burrows and spreading their wings.  First journeys, and perhaps for the coming summer, may be tentative as we venture forth in our new world. So wouldn't it be a bit perverse to run a full train schedule through the winter, then switch to a cut-down one in the summer?

Of course, it's not as simple as that. The ways of the world / daily commute habits are changed at present and it's far from certain the metrics of the return of the commute.  And where the train service frequency is based on the need for capacity that isn't / won't be used, there is an argument for a trimming back. Journey time and convenience wise, 15 trains an hour at 4 minute headway on the Central Line rather than 30 an hour at 2 minute headway would be a minor inconvenience.  But taking the other extreme - a cut already made with the removal of the first train out of Oban into Glasgow, giving a first arrival at lunchtime rather than before 9 a.m. renders some journeys and commutes impractical by public transport.

Where it's services that are primarily there to provide capacity, their suspension is fair enough - provided that (and this is a massive proviso) that decisions are not made based on passenger levels during this winter for next summer; indeed some of the evidence from a thin summer of 2020 on certain leisure routes is that an increase and not a decrease in capacity would make sense.  I'm not suggesting extra rolling stock in the 'franchise' ... rather capacity reduction with no long distance services/journeys to become less that hourly, released IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) to run where they already run but on more local trains, and units released to be used to strengthen those services / destinations that were struggling with capacity even in summer 2020.

There is an opportunity to sort out some historic issues; sadly, there is also an opportunity to sweep away certain things which are inconvenient to operate, but key parts of the passenger's needs.

[Robin has posted while I am writing. I am posting anyway and may come back to him]

[grahame]

On questions such as this we can speculate all we like, but it is always best to base forecasts on observed and observable trend, and not crystal ball gazing.

Yes - very much best to observe and look at trends rather than use a crystal ball.   However, where there is very little observed or observable trend, we are left having to use second best - which is either a crystal ball within the gaps, or doing nothing at all and then reacting to things very late in the day once we observe something.

I would agree the factors you listed; I might be slightly more optimistic on timing, based on spread being less of an issue one "all" the vulnerable people have been vaccinated - there is talk of herd immunity at two thirds of the population, but of lockdown being eased when just a third has been vaccinated.

Let's hope that nothing irreversibly daft is done!

[eXPassenger]

My concern is how cost reductions would be applied.  The railways have a fixed cost base (trains on long term leases, unionised trained staff who are expensive to make redundant); this makes it difficult to reduce costs without making structural changes that would be expensive and time consuming to reverse.  We are also seeing that if Covid appears in the staff there is a significant reduction in capacity due to self-isolation.

The treasury may demand but the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) may be unable to deliver.

[TaplowGreen]

On questions such as this we can speculate all we like, but it is always best to base forecasts on observed and observable trend, and not crystal ball gazing.

I think we can safely say that any new normality will only arrive when we have seen the back of this pandemic. This will probably be lined to the roll-out of vaccines, and even trying to forecast that is currently difficult due to the practicalities of getting the stuff to the right place to put into people?s arms, and getting enough people to physically do the jabbing. At a guess (of the crystal ball gazing variety) we are probably looking at early next summer at the earliest, and possibly later.

The factors that will affect rail travel demand in future are many and various:

1 Many people have got used to working from home. Will they continue to do so?

2 Many people have got used to online shopping rather than wander shopping centres. Will they continue to do so?

3 The move toward discouraging car use in towns and cities will continue. It will become ever more difficult to drive in large urban areas and even harder to find parking space.

4 With the alternatives to the internal combustion engine that we currently have available, long distance motoring is likely to become less attractive. For example, even a car with a 300 mile battery range would need a long stop somewhere to recharge on a London to Glasgow run.

The answers to 1 and 2 cannot yet be predicted. We can speculate and we might think we know the answer, but right at this moment we don?t know we know. We will have to wait and see.

The answer to 3 is more predictable in the short to medium term, as the various policies adopted by the local authorities will be publicly available documents. The impact those policies will have on the local public transport infrastructure will vary quite substantially from place to place and should be forensic in that respect; what may suit Cardiff might not suit Bristol or may or may not suit Southampton and so on.

The changes due to 4 will probably see an increase in public transport use. The jury is out over whether rail, coach or air travel will reap the most benefit, as in essence that will involve individual choices to be made between cost, desire for speed and the reason for travel.


All that is a long way of saying that nobody realistically has a clue about the answer to the original question at the moment, and I suspect the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) and the government are thinking the same way too. That will not of course stop them doing anything daft in the short term, as that is one of the few things that virtually all governments down the years have been especially good at...

As far as 1 and 2 are concerned things are more predictable than you might think.

Remote working/"Working from home" is now a reality for vast numbers of people, and in many ways very palatable to them, and to their employers, who in straitened times can downsize their Office accommodation and make huge savings, especially in the big cities. The concept is now proven.

When things do get back to "normal", office presence of 1 or at most 2 days a week is more likely - many large and medium sized businesses are gearing up for this already and flagging it in their job advertisements.

As for shopping - well if you're continuing working from home, why not continue to do your shopping online and have it delivered there?

Point 3 falls between business and leisure - possible opportunities for the railways in the latter however they will need to improve the offering.

As to point 4, this is really where the railways should position themselves as an alternative to the car, and/or plane. Whether they are able to do so is moot, but may help to decide whether the future means expansion or contraction.

Challenges and opportunities.

[Robin Summerhill]

My concern is how cost reductions would be applied.  The railways have a fixed cost base (trains on long term leases, unionised trained staff who are expensive to make redundant); this makes it difficult to reduce costs without making structural changes that would be expensive and time consuming to reverse.  We are also seeing that if Covid appears in the staff there is a significant reduction in capacity due to self-isolation.

The treasury may demand but the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) may be unable to deliver.

There is a lot of sense in there and my thoughts have been running along similar lines since I last posted.

Thinning or curtailing services will not actually save much money per individual train. There will be  no savings on labour costs unless the number of staff employed is reduced, and longer term it is far easier to make staff redundant than to train up their replacements at a later stage. That was found out the hard way immediately post privatisation.

Perhaps some track access charges would be saved which in itself would be a double edged sword as far as the Treasury is concerned because it would reduce NRs^» (Network Rail - home page) revenue stream. All the fixed costs would still be there.

There are also other factors to take into account. It does not make any economic sense now or in the future for the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) or the government to do anything that will potentially reduce the traffic that is still there. The suggestion put forward earlier of culling early and late services is a case in point; most journeys are of the return variety, and if a passenger finds one of their trains taken off they won?t be on the one that?s still running either. With hindsight that was actually one of the dafter pre-Beeching ideas in the 1950s which had the effect of reducing a line?s patronage rather than save much money.

We had an example locally around the time of privatisation when the last train from Bath to Chippenham on a Saturday was at 2132. Consequently if we wanted to go to Bath for a show or similar, Shell and BP^» (Beyond Petroleum (Former name - British Petroleum) - home page) made a lot more money out of me than the railway did...

There is also the issue that under normal circumstances the TOCs appear to have very little slack in their staff rostering as the number of trains cancelled through staff shortages bears witness. At this time with an increased absentee level due to COVID, reducing staff numbers appears to me to be at the utter lunacy end of the daft spectrum.

So for the time being let us hope for no knee jerk reactions to anything. Wait and see until we know more for certain.

[Robin Summerhill]

As far as 1 and 2 are concerned things are more predictable than you might think.

Remote working/"Working from home" is now a reality for vast numbers of people, and in many ways very palatable to them, and to their employers, who in straitened times can downsize their Office accommodation and make huge savings, especially in the big cities. The concept is now proven.

When things do get back to "normal", office presence of 1 or at most 2 days a week is more likely - many large and medium sized businesses are gearing up for this already and flagging it in their job advertisements.

As for shopping - well if you're continuing working from home, why not continue to do your shopping online and have it delivered there?

Point 3 falls between business and leisure - possible opportunities for the railways in the latter however they will need to improve the offering.

As to point 4, this is really where the railways should position themselves as an alternative to the car, and/or plane. Whether they are able to do so is moot, but may help to decide whether the future means expansion or contraction.

Challenges and opportunities.

With respect I think you are falling into the usual trap.

I agree that, at this moment, it looks like mass commuting as we have known it for decades has come to an end. But what we don?t know is the level to which it will return post pandemic, and if it will then remain at a new static position or increase again over time. In two, five or ten years time things may be very different again. So we think we can see the trends but we don?t know the long term situation.

For many and for many reasons working as a team in an office is preferable to working alone and isolated from colleagues. When we know for certain then that will be the time to look at recasting timetables, not now. And indeed you partially accept that by the use of terms like very likely ? even you won?t stick your neck out and say that it will happen that way!

I think you misunderstand the point I was naming under point 2, which specifically relates to railway demand. If people no longer descend in droves on Oxford Street on Queens Street Cardiff or anywhere else, this will not only have an impact on the retail sector but also the transport providers who have taken them there in the past.

[ellendune]

Basically the answer is "we don't know" and nor does anyone else. It could be very different or it could drift back to the same.  Only a very small percentage modal shift from car to rail on business and leisure travel would more than make up for any lost commuter traffic. 

[Lee]

If you have genuine suspicions that something "irreversibly daft" might be in the offing, then i wouldnt necessarily wait and see what that might turn out to be.

In the mid-2000s, while the rail establishment were busy denouncing me and my compardres as conspiracy theorists for daring to suggest that a clandestine New Beeching might be afoot, we discovered through FOI^▸ (Freedom of Information) that not only had the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) and their consultants prepared numerous business cases to close various lines and stations, they had actually been doing so for around 2-3 years before we discovered the evidence. My point therefore, is that they might be preparing the "irreversibly daft" of tomorrow as we discuss this topic today, and the article might just have been thrown out there to gauge public reaction to the idea.

Just a thought.