Will pre-Covid services all come back?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

From Daily Mail

Train timetables will NOT return to how they were before pandemic despite millions heading back to the office as ministers wind down £16bn emergency bailout

Insiders said services will remain how they are after Covid as fewer commuters
They claimed Treasury wants to torpedo the £16billion rescue package for firms
It comes as ex-ministers slammed Government proposals for revamping railways
One ex-transport minister said blueprint for Great British Railway was 'imperfect'

It comes as former ministers criticised the Government's proposals for revamping Britain's railways, hitting out at the decision to scale back electrification plans.

Ex-transport minister Stephen Hammond said Transport Secretary Grant Shapps's blueprint for the Great British Railway (GBR^▸ (Great British Railways)) is 'imperfect'.

[and]

Mr Hammond, who served in the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) between 2012 and 2014, said the Williams-Shapps review - which was published in May - 'signalled significant intent' from ministers to 'deliver a cleaner and greener rail system'.

I agree with the criticism, tempered by my wondering if Stephen Hammond would have come up with a perfect blueprint

Sir Michael Holden, who ran East Coast Rail, told the Sunday Times: 'We are at a watershed moment.

'The only way to save 10 per cent of train companies' costs in the short term is to take out whole fleets of trains.

'Such an act will mean that it's impossible in the foreseeable future to build back services should demand increase.'

One source added to the newspaper that the changes were reflective of society in the post-Covid world where people only commute two or three days a week.

Another insider blasted the staggering bailout sums given to the industry and said it would no longer fly with the Treasury.

Despite this there were huge queues last week as the work from home era started to wind down.

Travellers slammed overcrowding on platforms and in carriages as they desperately tried to get back to the office.

I suspect this article is old news to many members here .. and I should probably merge it elsewhere

[stuving]

I suspect this article is old news to many members here .. and I should probably merge it elsewhere

There was a similar article in today's Sunday Times, and the Mail Online may well have copied that (inaccurately). But I don't see anything we don't know in either. The Treasury are on a hunt for spending that can be cut back ASAP, and all departments are engaged in the customary arm-wrestling with them. DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) will be very concerned about timing, wanting to avoid decisions (i.e cuts) that prevent restoring services when custom recovers.

The rest is just "journalism". Various people have made their own predictions or interpretations of what will have to happen, and these can then be fed to more people as if facts. You encourage someone who needs no encouragement to comment to comment - and repeat the process -and there's your article.

[broadgage]

I very much doubt that most operators will restore train services to pre-covid levels.

Two main reasons for this, firstly there is a general view in in the railway industry of "what downgrades can we get away with" and the pandemic is a splendid excuse to lock in downgrades for decades to come.

Secondly, I suspect that there is a view in government circles that railways "have had their turn" as a priority for public spending and that it now the "turn" of roads and air transport. No need to worry about the carbon emissions of road and air, because they will call for studies into green innovations/purchase of indulgences.

And in the particular case of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) any significant improvement seems most unlikely due to rolling stock shortages, and an apparent lack of urgency to rectify these.

And on SWR^» (South Western Railway - about), they are withdrawing class 455 units despite the replacements not yet entering service.

[JayMac]

Or matching demand. It may take years for passenger numbers to recover.

[Robin Summerhill]

Or matching demand. It may take years for passenger numbers to recover.

I think a problem with discussing matters like these on a forum like this is that debate can become myopic, looking at matters purely from a railway perspective. Then we chuck in a few pre-existing prejudices and re-conceived notions that the government is pro car, ant rail and just wants to cut back as far as they can, and the debate rapidly becomes circular.

Whether train services will return to pre-COVID levels is something that should be market-led. It is fully understandable that the Treasury does not wish to pay for services to be run that nobody uses; that was what they were doing in the early 60s and look where that got us...

Indeed I would go further and say that the best way to ensure Beeching v 2.0 is for the Treasury to carry on subsidising the railways. That would give them far more of an incentive to cut out swathes of lines, and not just lightly used services. If the public comes back to the railways then the railways will or at least should provide the service to them. And yes I know that this then leads to a chicken and egg situation in that they are not going to come back if there aren’t the trains to take them where they want to go, but that is why the situation should be kept under almost permanent review, to make sure that perhaps even on a month-by-month basis, service levels match passenger levels and vice versa.

Commuter traffic is certainly down and in my view unlikely to return to pre COVID levels. For each of those companies who are instructing their staff to get back to the office there are a couple or three more that have realised just how much they can save on office costs.

It has been suggested that some may take advantage of only going into the office 2 or 3 days a week by moving further away to a better and perhaps cheaper area. Whilst I can see that happening on the margins there may well be others upon whom it has finally dawned what a waste of time and money most commuting actually is. I have never done a “proper” commute in all my working life, always living quite close to my place of employment .I had no objection to travelling for work purposes if somebody else was picking up the expenses tab, but paying for it myself out of already taxed income? I don’t think so... 

To illustrate, when I was working in the Housing department of North Wiltshire District council and they sold off their housing stock to a housing association and we moved offices, my commuting time quadrupled; from two minutes to eight... I doubt that I am completely in a minority of one.

But there is one final issue that needs to be addressed, and I don’t think the public transport providers can do it by themselves, and government action is required.  The government turned out to be just too good at discouraging people from using buses and trains (and to a more limited extent airlines), and now need to forcefully reverse that message. They put the fear of the Almighty into the public, and they now need to find a convincing way of knocking that fear back out of them again. I don’t think that issue is currently being properly addressed, which in a way is surprising, because it would do a lot to help save the money the Treasury are currently wishing to save!

[broadgage]

Or matching demand. It may take years for passenger numbers to recover.

And when the numbers DO recover it will no doubt take decades and cost billions to restore services to those existing before the pandemic.

In particular I expect that the elfansafety industry will no doubt take the opportunity to introduce new restrictions on platform lengths and line capacity.
"just because 9 car trains USED to stop there in 2020, that does not mean that 9 car trains can be allowed in 2025, without major infrastructure improvements"

"Whilst there existed, nearly ten years ago, detailed and costed  plans to extend the platform at [ABC] such plans  no longer comply with today's stricter safety standards. The gradient/curvature/ platform width/disabled access, will require considerable work."

Cant have too much safety.

[Robin Summerhill]

Or matching demand. It may take years for passenger numbers to recover.

And when the numbers DO recover it will no doubt take decades and cost billions to restore services to those existing before the pandemic.

In particular I expect that the elfansafety industry will no doubt take the opportunity to introduce new restrictions on platform lengths and line capacity.
"just because 9 car trains USED to stop there in 2020, that does not mean that 9 car trains can be allowed in 2025, without major infrastructure improvements"

"Whilst there existed, nearly ten years ago, detailed and costed  plans to extend the platform at [ABC] such plans  no longer comply with today's stricter safety standards. The gradient/curvature/ platform width/disabled access, will require considerable work."

Cant have too much safety.

BG^▸ (Brake Gangway (carriage)) - can you give us some examples pf where platform extensions have been stopped on H&S^▸ (Health and Safety) grounds?

Can you provide any examples (except the one I think at Pinhoe caused by the resiting of a signal) where a whole train can not be accommodated at a platform when once it could?

If not I feel that your post goes into the file marked "pre existing prejudices and pre conceived notions" that I refer to above.

[grahame]

Can you provide any examples (except the one I think at Pinhoe caused by the resiting of a signal) where a whole train can not be accommodated at a platform when once it could?

Coming to this out of context - but I'm aware of issues at Westbury where it' not been possible for the whole train to draw up unless the departure signal is already cleared, and at Saltash where the trains stop way back along the platform as they come up from Cornwall. Not sure of the history of that arrangement.

[IndustryInsider]

In particular I expect that the elfansafety industry will no doubt take the opportunity to introduce new restrictions on platform lengths and line capacity.

What sort of restrictions on line capacity are you expecting new H&S^▸ (Health and Safety) regulations to impact upon?

An increase in line capacity was a feature of most recent re-signalling schemes such as those in Cornwall, Banbury, Oxford, Bristol, etc...

"Whilst there existed, nearly ten years ago, detailed and costed  plans to extend the platform at [ABC] such plans  no longer comply with today's stricter safety standards. The gradient/curvature/ platform width/disabled access, will require considerable work."

I'm not aware of any detailed and costed plans for platform extensions in our region at least.  They've all been done.

[broadgage]

The sort of restrictions of which I was thinking include.
Slower and more cautious approaches to buffer stops.
Stopping further from red signals.
And probably others such as "rationalising" track layouts at junctions to reduce flexibility.

[IndustryInsider]

Fair enough…not the vague answer I was expecting.

Interestingly company policies are often more strict than the rule book - though there’s nothing stopping them from tightening up even further I suppose.  Generally though, the improvements in acceleration of the modern trains has countered any losses due to safety reasons, so no negative effects on capacity. 

Not sure stopping further away from a red signal would make too much difference if it was enforced, though more likely are stricter rules on speeds approaching red signals to be tightened further which IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) could have much more of an effect. ETCS^▸ (European Train Control System) should provide an increase in capacity as it is gradually rolled out of course, as there will be no lineside signals!

Junction rationalisation, if it happens, is more likely to be on cost grounds than any tightening of safety standards I’d have though.  After all, the cost cutting and rationalising single lead junctions that started to be introduced in the 70s/80s proved to be less safe.  Witness the Newton and Bellgrove Rail crashes.

[Electric train]

Fair enough…not the vague answer I was expecting.

Interestingly company policies are often more strict than the rule book - though there’s nothing stopping them from tightening up even further I suppose.  Generally though, the improvements in acceleration of the modern trains has countered any losses due to safety reasons, so no negative effects on capacity. 

Not sure stopping further away from a red signal would make too much difference if it was enforced, though more likely are stricter rules on speeds approaching red signals to be tightened further which IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) could have much more of an effect. ETCS^▸ (European Train Control System) should provide an increase in capacity as it is gradually rolled out of course, as there will be no lineside signals!

Junction rationalisation, if it happens, is more likely to be on cost grounds than any tightening of safety standards I’d have though.  After all, the cost cutting and rationalising single lead junctions that started to be introduced in the 70s/80s proved to be less safe.  Witness the Newton and Bellgrove Rail crashes.

SPAD^▸ (Signal Passed At Danger)'s are a major concern of ToC's and NR^» (Network Rail - home page); the accident a Salisbury this Autumn being an extreme example of when there is a mix of modern light weight traction units and bad rail conditions both are here to stay and need to be managed part of the is signal approach control.

Junction rationalisation is not done purely on the whim of cost of the renewal, the ongoing operation flexibility and maintenance are key parts to the decision making process.


Back to the question Will pre-Covid services all come back?   London inner (to zone 6) and outer suburban (40 ish miles) have been picking up reasonably quickly.  I suspect many other cities are seeing similar.

Its the more regional commuters that are not picking up so quickly, that could be people who used to spend 2 or more hours each way a day taking a life work balance; working from home for much of the time and only travelling to the office occasionally.

The impact is likely to effect "Intercity" frequency and capacity at times that used suit the pre Covid peak travel times.


On a more cynical point of view ....................  The Government have been trying for many years to find away to drastically cut the tax payers spend on the railways, but it was feared that bad headlines in the press read by commuters could impact on votes. 
Covid has given the Government the perfect excuse to seriously cut tax payers spend, although they will wrap it up in the 'levelling up' mantra, the process of cuts is potentially heading toward industrial disputes