Poor quality passenger rail service increases demand for private car purchases

[Dai Corner]

Corrected!

I quite like where I live. It's about three miles from the nearest railway station.

My parents, and many places I find nice to visit are much further.

 

[The Ham]

Road = access for all (by private motor vehicle or by buses or taxis [or walking or cycling for short journeys])
Rail = access for some (those living near stations and wanting to go to places near to other stations)

Whilst access by road is in theory useable by all those modes, in some rural locations it's dangerous (due to the volume if traffic) to travel between settlements by walking or cycling. Likewise buses in rural locations are more likely to see cuts to services or be run at lower frequencies than railways.

Likewise rail generally connects where there's lots of people (there's noticeable exceptions, but it generally holds) and so for the vast majority of people they live within 3 miles of a station (whether that station goes where they want to go is another matter).

As such it's much more nuanced than the above suggests. Whilst the dream of having a car giving you more freedom is strong, the reality can be that the result is reduced freedoms for others where volumes of traffic (for example wider roads or country lanes which people can't walk along).

Next time you see a car advert look at how out of touch with reality the advert is, for example very few have more than one car shown. Obviously marketing doesn't want to show "reality" however only showing one or two cars, there being no other cars near where you want to park and the like is only possible in a world which is the polar opposite to what is actually the case.

Compare this to a cycle advert which got banned in France (the French advertising code prohibits the exploitation of fear and suffering in commercials) as

"Some images in the reflection of the car are, in our opinion, unbalanced and discredit the entire car sector,” the ARPP said in a letter sent to VanMoof. “The images of factories/chimneys and an accident create a climate of fear. So they will have to be adapted."

France bans Dutch bike TV ad for creating 'climate of fear' about cars

Ad for VanMoof bike unfairly discredits automobile industry, says watchdog

www.theguardian.com

Even though many would likely be more able to relate this to the reality of their life than that shown in car adverts.

It's even more subtle than that, look at many films where they are portraying some dystopian future or culture and those who are seen as badly off will be those who live in a place where their main mode of travel is walking. Even if, for example the hunger games, the main hero is trying to get a better life.

Even on a personal level over use of cars can result in reduced quality of health due to not getting enough exercise. To illiterate this to get to half of 1950's distances traveled by bike per person we'd need to increase the current rate by a factor of 2.4, even to get to a quarter of the 1950's rate would require an extra 20%.

Whilst I understand the world is very different, the point is that this is an easy metric to show to highlight the level of inactivity we are a country have which can (at least in part) be directly attributed to changes due to car use.

That's not to say that cars are bad, just that (like urbanisation has separated us from how our food is produced and the rythems of the planet) it changes the way we view the world and can make us more individualistic (which again isn't necessarily bad, unless we go too far).

Arguably, and those who suggest this highlight that the UK having more cars than tax payers as a reason why this could be the case, car use is too dominant and we need to adjust our current travel patterns (and this is only made more important because of pollution and global warming - which whilst EV's will be better than ICE at both of these public transport is better still and walking and cycling are even better still).

Whilst we do need cars, we also do need to look to see where we can reduce our use of them, as by doing (if enough did so, especially where each are making small reductions) so it'll actually make it better for the rest of the trips which you carry on making by car.

Of course, few will change (not even trying to reduce their car use by an average of 2 miles a week), as it will take them longer (even though when they drive to school they wait in their cars for over 5 minutes before school starts/ends) or the weather is bad (even though it's not forecast to rain that day and the temperature is pleasant enough) or the many other reasons why sub 1km trips are undertaken by cars.

 

[NorwichRailFan]

No one is doing enough to promote public transport usage, from the government to the Operators themselves.

 

[ChrisC]

No one is doing enough to promote public transport usage, from the government to the Operators themselves.

My local bus service was threatened with complete withdrawal last September. The route is now being heavily subsidised by the county council and will be reviewed again this September. Stagecoach have agreed to operate the route which was previously Trent Barton. It is now over 4 months since this change and the departures still are not displayed on the live departure screens at the Nottingham Victoria Bus Station.

 

[dk1]

Service is expensive, unreliable and 9 times out of 10, someone else is in your seat!

I never reserve. Never expensive for me

Agreed. You get a better class of people using trains than buses etc., and trains go pretty much everywhere it’s worth going to in this country.

And PlusBus is available for that last mile

 

[Ex-controller]

Only really read the original post and haven’t been following the thread, but taken from the start of the pandemic this doesn’t strike me as surprising at all. Anecdotally here in Glasgow, a city with historically low car ownership, there has been a sea change in car usage. Roads are far busier, neighbourhoods are crammed full with parked cars.

Glasgow has a pretty good commuter rail network, but ScotRail/Transport Scotland don’t seem to recognise that reducing frequencies until passenger numbers increase will undermine any attempt to increase usage. That, and the continued focus on working from home along with many workplaces no longer being focused on the city centre, means that the train service is nothing like as useful as it was.

It’s quite a sad situation IMO, one which only government intervention can fix, through recognition that a heavily subsidised service can be a boost for the wider economy, provides that the service is useful for the travelling public. This means things like reviewing ticketing and making services frequent enough to fit into people’s daily schedules. It has to be made easy to use before people will return. Every decision that is made just now is as if someone wants it to fail.

 

[The Ham]

Service is expensive, unreliable and 9 times out of 10, someone else is in your seat!

Define expensive.

Chances are most people compare it solely to the cost of fuel (whilst the railways should be trying to do better at this, isn't really that comparable), whilst fuel costs are circa 15p per mile, however there's a good chance that there's another 5p to 10p per mile in other variable costs.

That's before you get to the potential to reduce the number of cars that a household items. As the average cost of car ownership is over £3,000 a year. Even £1,500 is quite a lot of rail travel. Given the rise in WFH the number of times where 2 cars in a household are in use at the same time is likely to be reduced.

For example 2 people commuting to work 5 days a week they both use their cars 5 days a week and so having two makes sense. However if they are going to the office 3 days a week and having one day a week where they WFH together that's 2 days a week where two cars are in use.

As such unless it costs >£10 a day (90 days of travel over a year with a £1,000 annual cost is £10.52/day) then there's a good chance that going by rail for those few days would be cheaper, even with a budget for other travel (such as some weekend travel).

It's why WFH whilst impacting on rail in some ways, could actually be beneficial to it in other ways. However that did require people being aware of their actual cost of car ownership.

 

[yorksrob]

It's amusing reading all the half-baked arguments along the lines of "why do we need a road and a railway"

Surely motorists don't want us all clogging up the roads. Be careful what you wish for.

 

[cactustwirly]

Agreed. You get a better class of people using trains than buses etc., and trains go pretty much everywhere it’s worth going to in this country.

So places like Cirencester and a large part of the Cotswolds aren't worth visiting?

 

[dk1]

So places like Cirencester and a large part of the Cotswolds aren't worth visiting?

Only if I need to tick the Wetherspoons. Apart from that I doubt I’d bother personally.

 

[cactustwirly]

Whilst access by road is in theory useable by all those modes, in some rural locations it's dangerous (due to the volume if traffic) to travel between settlements by walking or cycling. Likewise buses in rural locations are more likely to see cuts to services or be run at lower frequencies than railways.

Likewise rail generally connects where there's lots of people (there's noticeable exceptions, but it generally holds) and so for the vast majority of people they live within 3 miles of a station (whether that station goes where they want to go is another matter).

As such it's much more nuanced than the above suggests. Whilst the dream of having a car giving you more freedom is strong, the reality can be that the result is reduced freedoms for others where volumes of traffic (for example wider roads or country lanes which people can't walk along).

Next time you see a car advert look at how out of touch with reality the advert is, for example very few have more than one car shown. Obviously marketing doesn't want to show "reality" however only showing one or two cars, there being no other cars near where you want to park and the like is only possible in a world which is the polar opposite to what is actually the case.

Compare this to a cycle advert which got banned in France (the French advertising code prohibits the exploitation of fear and suffering in commercials) as

France bans Dutch bike TV ad for creating 'climate of fear' about cars

Ad for VanMoof bike unfairly discredits automobile industry, says watchdog

www.theguardian.com

Even though many would likely be more able to relate this to the reality of their life than that shown in car adverts.

It's even more subtle than that, look at many films where they are portraying some dystopian future or culture and those who are seen as badly off will be those who live in a place where their main mode of travel is walking. Even if, for example the hunger games, the main hero is trying to get a better life.

Even on a personal level over use of cars can result in reduced quality of health due to not getting enough exercise. To illiterate this to get to half of 1950's distances traveled by bike per person we'd need to increase the current rate by a factor of 2.4, even to get to a quarter of the 1950's rate would require an extra 20%.

Whilst I understand the world is very different, the point is that this is an easy metric to show to highlight the level of inactivity we are a country have which can (at least in part) be directly attributed to changes due to car use.

That's not to say that cars are bad, just that (like urbanisation has separated us from how our food is produced and the rythems of the planet) it changes the way we view the world and can make us more individualistic (which again isn't necessarily bad, unless we go too far).

Arguably, and those who suggest this highlight that the UK having more cars than tax payers as a reason why this could be the case, car use is too dominant and we need to adjust our current travel patterns (and this is only made more important because of pollution and global warming - which whilst EV's will be better than ICE at both of these public transport is better still and walking and cycling are even better still).

Whilst we do need cars, we also do need to look to see where we can reduce our use of them, as by doing (if enough did so, especially where each are making small reductions) so it'll actually make it better for the rest of the trips which you carry on making by car.

Of course, few will change (not even trying to reduce their car use by an average of 2 miles a week), as it will take them longer (even though when they drive to school they wait in their cars for over 5 minutes before school starts/ends) or the weather is bad (even though it's not forecast to rain that day and the temperature is pleasant enough) or the many other reasons why sub 1km trips are undertaken by cars.

But public transport needs to improve massively, for lots of people to make the switch from cars.

I live in a very large town, and work in a large industrial park in a neighboring town.
There isn't a good public transport link, just a slow hourly bus that takes ages and doesn't get me to work on time

 

[yorksrob]

So places like Cirencester and a large part of the Cotswolds aren't worth visiting?

Perhaps we should include places which would/should have had a station if it wasn't for the Beeching lot.

 

[The Ham]

But public transport needs to improve massively, for lots of people to make the switch from cars.

I live in a very large town, and work in a large industrial park in a neighboring town.
There isn't a good public transport link, just a slow hourly bus that takes ages and doesn't get me to work on time

Indeed, however that requires everyone to accept that there may be a need for more government support to make it happen.

The alternative is the hidden costs of excessive car use (including higher costs fit good due to greater delays in moving stuff about).

 

[ar10642]

Corrected!

Just in my county of East Sussex, the majority of nice places to walk and see are not accessible by rail without long walks to them or bus journeys. A lot of the towns with railway stations are now getting so expensive that they are becoming the exclusive preserve of those selling up in London. Nice to know that where locals are being forced out to are not worth living in.

 

[chorleyjeff]

So places like Cirencester and a large part of the Cotswolds aren't worth visiting?

And fairly near me are the Forest of Bowland, West Pennine Moors, most of the Lake District and most of the Yorkshire Dales which are worth visiting but not by rail.
Even Morecambe is two changes and Liverpool only about 25 miles away is a change at Leyland or a long way round by Manchester, or Bolton with two changes. To pretend railway access is, even for urban dwellers, available for most people is not true. So I agree the thrust of your statement.

 

[yorksrob]

Just in my county of East Sussex, the majority of nice places to walk and see are not accessible by rail without long walks to them or bus journeys. A lot of the towns with railway stations are now getting so expensive that they are becoming the exclusive preserve of those selling up in London. Nice to know that where locals are being forced out to are not worth living in.

It is a tradgedy how East Sussex's railway network was so comprehensively destroyed in the 1960's.

 

[Llandudno]

Should taxpayers' funds be used to subsidise tourism?

The Conwy Valley, as you probably know judging by your username, is served by both bus and train and I believe railway tickets are valid on the bus as well. Presumably some travel by bus in one direction.


Don't know, but the priorities given to different reopenings seem arbritary. Portishead, with massive congestion on the road into Bristol, is still waiting, for example.

The Ebbw Vale branch reopening has killed the bus service into Cardiff, depriving towns without a station of a service. I wonder if the same will happen to the places served by the Okehampton-Exeter bus but not the train?


If a passenger flow can't support a commercial bus service or justify a local authority subsidy perhaps the car (subsidised if necessary for social reasons) is the appropriate mode? Almost certainly a railway isn't.

Conwy Valley train tickets can be used on the bus, but Conwy Valley Bus tickets can’t be used on the train…

Yet both services are subsidised!!!

 

[43066]

Just in my county of East Sussex, the majority of nice places to walk and see are not accessible by rail without long walks to them or bus journeys. A lot of the towns with railway stations are now getting so expensive that they are becoming the exclusive preserve of those selling up in London. Nice to know that where locals are being forced out to are not worth living in.

I know East Sussex very well, thanks, and have walked much of the South Downs way (which is doable by rail).

Towns without the railway such as Hailsham are pretty down at heel. Even places like Haywards Heath and Crawley (which have stations) aren’t places many would want to visit.

It is a tradgedy how East Sussex's railway network was so comprehensively destroyed in the 1960's.

If the Cuckoo line had remained open the character of places like Hailsham I mentioned above would be very different.

 

[yorksrob]

I know East Sussex very well, thanks, and have walked much of the South Downs way (which is doable by rail).

Towns without the railway such as Hailsham are pretty down at heel. Even places like Haywards Heath and Crawley (which have stations) aren’t places many would want to visit.



If the Cuckoo line had remained open the character of places like Hailsham I mentioned above would be very different.

And I expect the Cukoo line would be very well used today !

 

[coppercapped]

Just to emphasise the information given by @Fylsie in the post quoted

This seems a bit of hyperbole - especially seeing as new car sales dropped last year

2022 sales figures: car market slumps to worst performance for three decades

Detailed analysis of the UK new-car market in 2022: what sold, what didn't and full breakdown by brand

www.carmagazine.co.uk

and used car sales from the figures i can find dropped by 12% in Q3 of last year.

Yes the railways are a bit poor at the moment but thats due to many factors.

As for bus apps, being on the fylde the BP transport app is great and ive recently found that the stagecoach app is equally as good for those journeys i cant take on BP.

the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) has just published the statistics for new car sales in 2022, see its website at https://media.smmt.co.uk/december-2022-new-car-registrations/ . This shows that 1,614,063 new cars were registered in 2022, a fall of 2% compared to the year before.

So more people may have been considering (according to the OP's quote) buying cars, but in fact didn't.

However monthly car sales did increase over the last eight months of 2022 compared to the first part of the year but not enough to cancel out the drop in the first four months. 2021 sales were affected by the pandemic and supply chain shortages and show a significant drop compared to the 2,311,140 new car registrations in 2019. Interestingly these 2019 new car sales didn't seem to have an effect on railway passenger numbers which were still growing at that time.

Maybe cars and trains are not competing for the same market...?

 

[ar10642]

It is a tradgedy how East Sussex's railway network was so comprehensively destroyed in the 1960's.

It's just a park and ride for London and Brighton effectively.

I know East Sussex very well, thanks, and have walked much of the South Downs way (which is doable by rail).

Towns without the railway such as Hailsham are pretty down at heel. Even places like Haywards Heath and Crawley (which have stations)

None of the towns in East Sussex are that great except for Lewes which you pretty much have to be millionaire to live in now. The nice parts (e.g. Ashdown Forest, Cuckmere Valley, Sheffield Park etc) are mostly not accessible by rail on a practical level. Haywards Heath and Crawley are West Sussex.

 

[43066]

None of the towns in East Sussex are that great except for Lewes which you pretty much have to be millionaire to live in now. The nice parts (e.g. Ashdown Forest, Cuckmere Valley, Sheffield Park etc) are mostly not accessible by rail on a practical level.

Lewes is indeed very nice and quaint, but as you say approaching London prices. Sheffield Park is indeed incredibly remote (I’ve done it by rail to East Grinstead, Bluebell Line then a walk!).

Haywards Heath and Crawley are West Sussex.

Fair point. In my defence they’re close to the border, and it runs on north east to south west axis, so that Haywards Heath and Ardingly (both WS) are actually to the East of Brighton (ES) looking on a map.

 

[yorksrob]

It's just a park and ride for London and Brighton effectively.



None of the towns in East Sussex are that great except for Lewes which you pretty much have to be millionaire to live in now. The nice parts (e.g. Ashdown Forest, Cuckmere Valley, Sheffield Park etc) are mostly not accessible by rail on a practical level. Haywards Heath and Crawley are West Sussex.

I know it attracts some mirth for its age demographic, but Eastbourne genuinely is lovely.

 

[43066]

I know it attracts some mirth for its age demographic, but Eastbourne genuinely is lovely.

Indeed. Bexhill is also pleasant, albeit a lot sleepier. Notably of course the coast way railway connects the larger south coast Sussex towns to Brighton and London and they’re all fairly decent. Even Hastings seems better than it used to be.

Not that commutable to London due to the long journey times, however.

 

[ar10642]

I know it attracts some mirth for its age demographic, but Eastbourne genuinely is lovely.

Hmm. My old home town. Bits of it are nice but the town centre is dying on its arse, property too expensive and local employment opportunities are poor. An OK place to visit but not a great one to live in. It is no longer a very happy place.

 

[yorksrob]

Indeed. Bexhill is also pleasant, albeit a lot sleepier. Notably of course the coast way railway connects the larger south coast Sussex towns to Brighton and London and they’re all fairly decent. Even Hastings seems better than it used to be.

Not that commutable to London due to the long journey times, however.

Yes, Hastings has had a bit of a renaissance in recent years. Always loved it from thumper days.

Seaford's a bit of an undiscovered gem as well I think (also retained its railway, thankfully).

Hmm. My old home town. Bits of it are nice but the town centre is dying on its arse, property too expensive and local employment opportunities are poor. An OK place to visit but not a great one to live in. It is no longer a very happy place.

Shame. The seafront must be the most well kept place in England.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Just to emphasise the information given by @Fylsie in the post quoted

the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) has just published the statistics for new car sales in 2022, see its website at https://media.smmt.co.uk/december-2022-new-car-registrations/ . This shows that 1,614,063 new cars were registered in 2022, a fall of 2% compared to the year before.

So more people may have been considering (according to the OP's quote) buying cars, but in fact didn't.

However monthly car sales did increase over the last eight months of 2022 compared to the first part of the year but not enough to cancel out the drop in the first four months. 2021 sales were affected by the pandemic and supply chain shortages and show a significant drop compared to the 2,311,140 new car registrations in 2019. Interestingly these 2019 new car sales didn't seem to have an effect on railway passenger numbers which were still growing at that time.

Maybe cars and trains are not competing for the same market...?

I thought the sales of new cars was suppressed due to a shortage of new cars due to a shortage of computer chips from Chine due to .... Covid.

Meanwhile I have seen it reported that the prices of used cars has risen. Due to increased demand for cars.

Dont want to get mixed up between supply and demand.

 

[ChrisC]

When I was working, and took no more than 2 or 3 holidays a year away from home, I almost always took my car. These were usually with family members or friends and usually to destinations not very accessible by train like the Lake District, Norfolk and Suffolk Coast and the Far North and West of Scotland including many of the Western Isles especially Mull and the Uists.

When I retired, 8 years ago, I started going away on my own, around once a month and usually by train. Often these were to stay in a hotel in a large city or town with good rail connections and making use of regional rovers to explore and generally enjoy travelling by train.

The last 3 years, firstly mainly due to covid with all it’s restrictions such as compulsory reservations, social distancing and being expected to wear a mask I started to use my car to go away even when on my own. This has continued more recently due to reduced timetables, general unreliability and cancellations plus more recently the strikes.

Using my car, instead of rail, I have had holidays in often quieter locations that are not easily accessible by rail. There have been a couple of locations in North Yorkshire near Ripon and Pickering, the Lincolnshire Wolds near Louth and Gloucestershire and Worcestershire. All of them within 2-3 hours drive from home and although I have used my car whilst there, I have sometimes had day trips out my bus whilst there if the bus services have been adequate.

The reality now is that I’ve begun to enjoy the convenience of driving to my holiday destinations. Where I live is quite a distance from a main line station and it takes some time by bus to reach the station. EMR are still operating a much reduced timetable on my local line which no longer connects with the bus resulting in hour long waits. For example, I can drive up the A1 to locations way up in North Yorkshire and be there in almost less time than it even takes to get as far as 20 miles to Chesterfield station by public transport.
I will, however, still use the train if I am making long journeys for such as down to Cornwall and next week when I am staying for few days in London.

 

[GoneSouth]

Don't you ever want to go somewhere that doesn't have a station?

What would be the point of that, you’d have to go via some sort of vomit inducing road vehicle, and there’d be Nothing there when you arrive. If there is something worth going there for then the railway would go there.

Service is expensive, unreliable and 9 times out of 10, someone else is in your seat!

Why can’t you just ask them to move? Not difficult

Railway EVERY time for me. More than happy for my taxes to take that direction

Agreed

I prefer a motorway over a stopping service on a railway. A non-stop motorway bus is much nicer than dozen of stops on a metro.

I have just transferred from a rail replacement bus to a train heading for the West Country, I know which I’d rather use, and it doesn’t rhyme with puss

 

[Dai Corner]

What would be the point of that, you’d have to go via some sort of vomit inducing road vehicle, and there’d be Nothing there when you arrive. If there is something worth going there for then the railway would go there.

I have just transferred from a rail replacement bus

I hope you remembered to take a sick bag and were able to dispose of it responsibly after use.

But you've just proved that people will use road transport if they really want/need to get somewhere.