New ORR data, GWR shrinks 3% in a year

[whole diary]

[John D]

The latest quarterly passenger usage data has been issued by ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road, formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) covering Jan-March 2026

Per table 5 GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) ran 0.9% less trains than previous year
Per table 6 GWR ran 3% less vehicle km than previous year
GWR is at bottom (worst position by Operator) in both tables

So not only did it shrink in a year, trains had on average 2% less carriages.

Some of the 0.9% cut could be put down to flooding problems on Looe and Barnstaple lines, suspending services, but that doesn't explain the shortening of trains

Table 2 shows GWR had +2% more passengers, so that means on average had about 3% passenger increase per train (and on basis didn't add seats, that means 3% harder to find a seat)

Table 3 gives passenger km, and that was 0.3% up
Clearly this is a complete mismatch to the 3% cut in vehicle km

So basically (on average) trying to squeeze about 2-3 extra people per carriage. 

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/j1mdc31j/passenger-rail-usage-jan-mar-2026.pdf

Thought it worth a topic, because clearly cutting the trains whilst increasing passengers is controversial

[grahame]

Thought it worth a topic, because clearly cutting the trains whilst increasing passengers is controversial

It *is* (worth a topic) but we need to be very careful in how we read the stats.  Is there a stat reporting the distance or time the average passenger spends on a train?  Especially over the years.  If journey length drops, then more people can use the same seat ... I'm not suggesting it's happened.

I could also point out that shortening quieter (mid evening trains and late night trains on Monday to Wednesday) may be an efficiency saving - plenty of space.  "At home" I welcome 3 carriages rather than 2 on daytime trains - but on the trains between 19:00 and 21:00 2 is adequate and 3 - when it happens - unnecessary. 

[John D]

Thought it worth a topic, because clearly cutting the trains whilst increasing passengers is controversial

It *is* (worth a topic) but we need to be very careful in how we read the stats.  Is there a stat reporting the distance or time the average passenger spends on a train?  Especially over the years.  If journey length drops, then more people can use the same seat ... I'm not suggesting it's happened.

Yes, the quarterly summary takes data from ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road, formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) spreadsheets that are public, so if for instance want to compare to say 2019 (last year pre-Covid) or compare to say 10 or 15 years ago, can do so.

ORR tables give numbers for each Operator
table 1223 is number of passenger journeys
table 1233 is passenger km (passengers multiplied by distance)
So if divide one by other get average journey length

table 1243 is train km (distance operated)
table 1253 is vehicle (each carriage) km
So if divide, get average number of carriages per train

Clearly can compare average number of carriages now, to earlier dates, or do other ratios such as average number of passengers per coach, or change in average journey length etc.

Of course if go back to far, then need to factor in things like 26m IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train - replacement for HSTs (manufactured by Hitachi in Kobe, Japan)) vehicles vs 23m HST^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) coaches which distorts crowding as number of seats in each type are different.

[John D]

Just had a thought, if the branch lines affected by flooding were operated by short trains, which were suspended, and train lengths on average got shorter, then figures to some extent masking bigger train lengths cuts elsewhere on network

[grahame]

Just had a thought, if the branch lines affected by flooding were operated by short trains, which were suspended, and train lengths on average got shorter, then figures to some extent masking bigger train lengths cuts elsewhere on network

Gotta love stats!