May 2022 Timetable Changes

[Bald Rick]

This is sort of nonsense GBR needs to get a grip of there is already a half hourly LNER service and the TPE service so XC should be focussing on restoring more services operating south where frequency and capacity is already constrained.

This reeks of old railway ORCATs raid to me which is no longer relevant.

GBR are in no position to do this - they don’t have the accountability to do so (Yet).

 

[david1212]

CrossCountry timetable has finally appeared. A tiny step in the right direction, but very disappointing.

Two of the hourly Bristol to Manchester service have been restored at 14:00 and 16:00 from BRI, and three from MAN at 07:05, 09:05 and 17:05. Additionally 1E44 from Southampton starts from Bristol instead running in the path of the 13:00 as as far as Birmingham. There appears to be a new Bristol to Cardiff early morning service that looks to be a 170.

North East-South Coast remains suspended except one service each way that starts/terminates at Banbury and a morning Nottingham-Reading, Southampton still has only 1/3 of it's pre-covid service, and many stops are still skipped for "social distancing".

This is sort of nonsense GBR needs to get a grip of there is already a half hourly LNER service and the TPE service so XC should be focussing on restoring more services operating south where frequency and capacity is already constrained.

This reeks of old railway ORCATs raid to me which is no longer relevant.

But that should have no real affect on restoring services in the southern half of the network. It’s not as if there are any shortages in the Voyagers or HSTs fleet.

Reading - Bournemouth and all calling points ought to return to hourly as up to 2019. With changes and waiting Reading - Basingstoke then Basingstoke - Bournemouth services are not a realistic alternative. Likewise Birmingham to the South West.

What resources do XC not have now that they had in 2019 ? If something has to give it should be York northwards where there are more alternative services.

I have to agree. Whatever is going on with XC? It’s such a toxic concession/franchise.

Simples! - It is Arriva. Outwardly at least their attitude seems to be to run absolute minimum service both frequency and capacity. Chiltern is another example. Adrian Shooter must be appalled after all the improvements he instigated.

While GBR is not yet implemented in full now the operators are concessions not franchises do all the fares not go into a single pot and hence ORCATs is dead?

 

[dk1]

Reading - Bournemouth and all calling points ought to return to hourly as up to 2019. With changes and waiting Reading - Basingstoke then Basingstoke - Bournemouth services are not a realistic alternative. Likewise Birmingham to the South West.

What resources do XC not have now that they had in 2019 ? If something has to give it should be York northwards where there are more alternative services.

They don’t which is exactly what I was saying.

 

[JonathanH]

What resources do XC not have now that they had in 2019 ? If something has to give it should be York northwards where there are more alternative services.

Someone may have realised that running fewer services with longer trains is a better model than frequent services with short trains.

Simples! - It is Arriva. Outwardly at least their attitude seems to be to run absolute minimum service both frequency and capacity. Chiltern is another example. Adrian Shooter must be appalled after all the improvements he instigated.

Someone in the DfT is signing this off. Arriva run the trains they have to run.

 

[Starmill]

Someone may have realised that running fewer services with longer trains is a better model than frequent services with short trains.

Does that actually have anything to do with it? Running a less frequent service between Bournemouth and Reading is mainly about saving train crew isn't it. Correct me if I am wrong, but they don't seem to all be pairs from Bournemouth either? Having some services continue to skip Winchester clearly doesn't have anything to do with running longer trains either.

 

[dk1]

Someone may have realised that running fewer services with longer trains is a better model than frequent services with short trains.

Which unfortunately isn’t as has been gone over many times before. Bristol & the West have lost their direct services to Manchester & Reading, Oxford & Southern England their direct trains to Derby, Sheffield & the North East.

 

[Starmill]

Which unfortunately isn’t as has been gone over many times before. Bristol & the West have lost their direct services to Manchester & Reading, Oxford & Southern England their direct trains to Derby, Sheffield & the North East.

The argument can potentially be made in respect of the 2tph between York and Newcastle, but definitely not in respect of Bournemouth.

Either Bournemouth is worth serving or it is not.

 

[dk1]

The argument can potentially be made in respect of the 2tph between York and Newcastle, but definitely not in respect of Bournemouth.

Either Bournemouth is worth serving or it is not.

Bournemouth is most definitely worth serving. I have never said otherwise.

 

[swt_passenger]

Reading - Bournemouth and all calling points ought to return to hourly as up to 2019. With changes and waiting Reading - Basingstoke then Basingstoke - Bournemouth services are not a realistic alternative. Likewise Birmingham to the South West.

What resources do XC not have now that they had in 2019 ? If something has to give it should be York northwards where there are more alternative services.




Simples! - It is Arriva. Outwardly at least their attitude seems to be to run absolute minimum service both frequency and capacity. Chiltern is another example. Adrian Shooter must be appalled after all the improvements he instigated.

While GBR is not yet implemented in full now the operators are concessions not franchises do all the fares not go into a single pot and hence ORCATs is dead?

Operational Research Computer Allocation of Tickets to Services, invented by BR to provide management information? Why would it possibly no longer be needed with GBR, they still need to be able to work out where the money is earned to drive investment decisions.

The idea of an actual “ORCATS Raid” as a revenue grab from a competitor might be killed off, but I bet the underlying information gathering will go on.

 

[class 9]

Reading - Bournemouth and all calling points ought to return to hourly as up to 2019. With changes and waiting Reading - Basingstoke then Basingstoke - Bournemouth services are not a realistic alternative. Likewise Birmingham to the South West.

What resources do XC not have now that they had in 2019 ? If something has to give it should be York northwards where there are more alternative services.




Simples! - It is Arriva. Outwardly at least their attitude seems to be to run absolute minimum service both frequency and capacity. Chiltern is another example. Adrian Shooter must be appalled after all the improvements he instigated.

While GBR is not yet implemented in full now the operators are concessions not franchises do all the fares not go into a single pot and hence ORCATs is dead?

I’m no fan of Arriva, but all the decisions regarding XC are made by the DfT, as it’s a management contract, they do as there told.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I’m no fan of Arriva, but all the decisions regarding XC are made by the DfT, as it’s a management contract, they do as there told.

yes, but in most cases the way it currently works is the DfT asks the TOC for ideas with regard to service expansion/contraction or cost savings which are then given to the DfT for approval (or not).

 

[Watershed]

Someone may have realised that running fewer services with longer trains is a better model than frequent services with short trains.

It doesn't provide any additional capacity and it only saves a few drivers. You still need the same number of Train Managers and catering staff (if you're to provide full facilities throughout).

It increases Generalised Journey Times by quite a lot (nominally half an hour), which significantly reduces the attractiveness of the railway. And with the way it's been implemented by XC, it means the loss of direct connections between stations that have long enjoyed them.

I'll put it this way. XC (and Virgin before them) didn't increase to a half hourly service for fun. There are plenty of services over the years that were dropped because the demand didn't justify them - but these weren't, up until Covid came.

Someone in the DfT is signing this off. Arriva run the trains they have to run.

The DfT has a significant input into what happens, but ultimately if an operator says it can only run XYZ, it doesn't really matter what the Department wants. The DfT does sign off on everything, but they don't dictate to operators what proposals they should be putting forward.

XC are bringing back a few additional Bristol-Manchester services in the new timetable. Clearly there is an aspiration to reinstate more, but that is all that they think they will be able to resource for now. A very disappointing position but it just goes to show how slow and inflexible the railway is.

 

[Starmill]

Bournemouth is most definitely worth serving. I have never said otherwise.

Exactly. I wasn't suggesting that you personally hadn't, just that if it's worth serving whatsoever, it's worth serving properly.

 

[dk1]

Exactly. I wasn't suggesting that you personally hadn't, just that if it's worth serving whatsoever, it's worth serving properly.

Okay. Yes, should be at least hourly.

 

[Bald Rick]

What resources do XC not have now that they had in 2019?

Drivers

 

[Starmill]

Operational Research Computer Allocation of Tickets to Services, invented by BR to provide management information? Why would it possibly no longer be needed with GBR, they still need to be able to work out where the money is earned to drive investment decisions.

The idea of an actual “ORCATS Raid” as a revenue grab from a competitor might be killed off, but I bet the underlying information gathering will go on.

The model still needs to be maintained and prepared for periods and timetables for what has arguably been its more important use for years now, including before the pandemic, which is Moira, an internal modelling application.

 

[lammergeier]

Drivers

Not true. Certainly the depots on the line I work (NE/SW) are generally at establishment, with the exception of New St although that has run short for years. My depot actually has more drivers now than pre-covid as we were short then but have recruited during covid. We managed to cover the pre-covid work absolutely no problem. What we don't have is a rest day work agreement because the DfT won't sign it off. With RDW I'm sure we could run the full pre-covid service which is how we did it before, but until the government accepts there is a cost involved it won't happen.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

We managed to cover the pre-covid work absolutely no problem. What we don't have is a rest day work agreement because the DfT won't sign it off.

You’ve answered the question there - there aren’t enough drivers to run the service without RDW which for cost reasons the funder is no longer prepared to fund.

 

[Starmill]

Not true. Certainly the depots on the line I work (NE/SW) are generally at establishment, with the exception of New St although that has run short for years. My depot actually has more drivers now than pre-covid as we were short then but have recruited during covid. We managed to cover the pre-covid work absolutely no problem. What we don't have is a rest day work agreement because the DfT won't sign it off. With RDW I'm sure we could run the full pre-covid service which is how we did it before, but until the government accepts there is a cost involved it won't happen.

If rest day working will only be generally taken up if it involves premium rates, then inevitably it's absolutely not going to be approved regardless, though if it's part of an existing agreement then that may continue for a time. So the fact that the work could be covered if only a premium rate were paid is neither here nor there unfortunately. There is more chance of overtime at normal rates if it is to run heavily used services, but even then it's not certain.

 

[Acton1991]

They do have West Ealing and Hanwell, but Acton ML remains at 2tph.

Annoying (for me!) but not unexpected. Thank you so much.

 

[Starmill]

You’ve answered the question there - there aren’t enough drivers to run the service without RDW which for cost reasons the funder is no longer prepared to fund.

Indeed. You have the drivers you have. If you want more drivers, or you want to incentivise them into providing more hours, then you need to make a compelling case for that extra funding. Otherwise you run what trains you can cover.

 

[lammergeier]

If rest day working will only be generally taken up if it involves premium rates, then inevitably it's absolutely not going to be approved regardless, though if it's part of an existing agreement then that may continue for a time. So the fact that the work could be covered if only a premium rate were paid is neither here nor there unfortunately. There is more chance of overtime at normal rates if it is to run heavily used services, but even then it's not certain.

Who said anything about premium rates? RDW was for years paid at flat rate. Only recently did it go up to time and a quarter. And I'm just answering the point about drivers - there is no shortage of drivers compared to pre-covid

You’ve answered the question there - there aren’t enough drivers to run the service without RDW which for cost reasons the funder is no longer prepared to fund.

I'm not disputing that, merely pointing out that we don't have fewer, or at least significantly fewer drivers compared to pre-covid. What's changed is the lack of RDW. So yes, if they don't want to pay for overtime then fine, no problem, but I don't see how we can get close to a pre-covid timetable without either that or a significant recruitment campaign, both of which cost money

 

[Watershed]

Not true. Certainly the depots on the line I work (NE/SW) are generally at establishment, with the exception of New St although that has run short for years. My depot actually has more drivers now than pre-covid as we were short then but have recruited during covid. We managed to cover the pre-covid work absolutely no problem. What we don't have is a rest day work agreement because the DfT won't sign it off. With RDW I'm sure we could run the full pre-covid service which is how we did it before, but until the government accepts there is a cost involved it won't happen.

But even 'just' New Street being under establishment is a substantial issue. After all, they interact with all of XC's services. So whilst there's nowhere that they are unique in signing (other than perhaps a few curves/uncommon diversions), other depots will have to more than pull their weight if they're to make up for NS.

And as you say, RDW would need to return for the other depots to even cover their own 'contributions' to the full timetable. So without RDW (the return of which seems less and less likely as time passes) you are on a hiding to nothing.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

but I don't see how we can get close to a pre-covid timetable without either that or a significant recruitment campaign, both of which cost money

That’s why there’s no intention from the funder in many cases to go back to a pre-covid timetable, on the whole they are happy with the existing level of service.

 

[lammergeier]

But even 'just' New Street being under establishment is a substantial issue. After all, they interact with all of XC's services. So whilst there's nowhere that they are unique in signing (other than perhaps a few curves/uncommon diversions), other depots will have to more than pull their weight if they're to make up for NS.

And as you say, RDW would need to return for the other depots to even cover their own 'contributions' to the full timetable. So without RDW (the return of which seems less and less likely as time passes) you are on a hiding to nothing.

I agree, it's an issue. But it's a long standing one and nothing new. Which brings us back to the original question - what do we not have that we did have in 2019? The answer is not drivers.

That’s why there’s no intention from the funder in many cases to go back to a pre-covid timetable, on the whole they are happy with the existing level of service.

I don't disagree.

One other thing that is not factored in or appreciated as much is the diagrams are less productive with a reduced timetable. Whereas previously there were ample opportunities for a 15 min turnaround at New St, with a reduced timetable these turn arounds are closer to an hour. Same at Newcastle and no doubt Reading, Bristol, Manchester etc where previously there was a half hourly service.

 

[Bald Rick]

What we don't have is a rest day work agreement because the DfT won't sign it off.

which means there’s not enough drivers to cover the work.

With RDW I'm sure we could run the full pre-covid service which is how we did it before, but until the government accepts there is a cost involved it won't happen.

perhaps go back and ask for a RDW deal based on what it was until it expired, rather than asking for more?

 

[Watershed]

I agree, it's an issue. But it's a long standing one and nothing new. Which brings us back to the original question - what do we not have that we did have in 2019? The answer is not drivers.

A reasonable attitude to negotiations from all parties. Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it, but that's just not going to happen if we're realistic. And the passengers are the poor 'piggies in the middle' of it all.

One other thing that is not factored in or appreciated as much is the diagrams are less productive with a reduced timetable. Whereas previously there were ample opportunities for a 15 min turnaround at New St, with a reduced timetable these turn arounds are closer to an hour. Same at Newcastle and no doubt Reading, Bristol, Manchester etc where previously there was a half hourly service.

Indeed. Though XC are operating rather less than half their pre-Covid service (on the Voyager routes, and closer to that than 100% on the Turbostar routes), they won't have saved anything close to 50% of diagrams. There are economies of scale with a more frequent timetable, and the current timetable is the worst of all worlds in a lot of ways.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

the current timetable is the worst of all worlds in a lot of ways.

It’s not the worst for the funder though and it’s what service they wish to but that’s the deciding factor at the moment.

It’s no different to bin collections, the user may find the best option is to have their bin emptied weekly but if the funder only wants fortnightly collections that’s what you get even though it might be the worse case option for yourself.

 

[Goldfish62]

A reasonable attitude to negotiations from all parties. Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it, but that's just not going to happen if we're realistic. And the passengers are the poor 'piggies in the middle' of it all.


Indeed. Though XC are operating rather less than half their pre-Covid service (on the Voyager routes, and closer to that than 100% on the Turbostar routes), they won't have saved anything close to 50% of diagrams. There are economies of scale with a more frequent timetable, and the current timetable is the worst of all worlds in a lot of ways.

It could of course be that XC/DfT are trying to resolve the long term overcrowding problem by deliberately driving passengers away. It's a tactic that BR used.

Providing 50% of the service but no overall additional capacity, plus forcing many passengers into an inconvenient change on a journey that was previously direct really is not going to attract a single passenger, but will undoubtedly deter more than a few.

1970s BR would be proud of the tactics.

 

[Watershed]

It’s not the worst for the funder though

It meets their short-term aim of limiting opex on the railway, yes.

But the longer it goes on, the more occasional travellers that will look to see when they can take a direct train from Reading to Derby for example, see there are no such trains any more, and give up on the railway. So it has an insidious long-term effect, let alone the short-term effect on emissions, congestion etc.

Sadly the government has little motivation to consider factors beyond the balance sheet - essentially because the pandemic has significantly reduced the political importance attached to the railway providing a good level of service.

There's a far higher "column inches to pounds" ratio through bunging a little bit of money on another ludicrous reopening study.