Compulsory Reservations- Poll

[miami]

As you say, the train is not full at that point on the network, so you will not be anxious about getting a seat, and thus not a barrier to travelling spontaneously.

Thus no point in compulsory reservations. The only point in CR is when the train is full and you want to leave full fare passengers behind rather than allow them to stand, because it ruins the experience for deep-discount passengers.

Perhaps those traveling on discounted tickets should be kicked off the train in those circumstances.

 

[Bletchleyite]

However, on a late spring Friday late afternoon, everybody and their grandparents will want to board a TGV from Gare de Lyon to the Med. All trains are double Duplex, the LGV SE has no spare paths and all trains are completely full - what do you do then? A number of standees would not be a problem, but at some point it becomes a security risk.

Assuming you mean safety (i.e. Sicherheit)[1], no, it doesn't. It's a comfort issue. Trains[2] are designed to be safe with a crush-load, i.e. as many as physically fit, and for regional and commuter trains that is a normal method of operation.

[1] In UK English "security" specifically relates to safety from crime/terrorism, not safety generally, it's a common mistranslation from other European languages that often use the same word for both, though I didn't think German did?
[2] In general; I believe TGVs aren't designed to carry that much weight because the CR policy was planned from the start, but they could have been.

 

[Hadders]

but at some point it becomes a security risk.

I'm struggling to understand what the security risk is?

 

[takno]

As you probably realized I am generally against CR. However, you point out an interesting issue. Indeed, if there is spare capacity anyway, CR is indeed just an additional, unnecessary hurdle.

However, on a late spring Friday late afternoon, everybody and their grandparents will want to board a TGV from Gare de Lyon to the Med. All trains are double Duplex, the LGV SE has no spare paths and all trains are completely full - what do you do then? A number of standees would not be a problem, but at some point it becomes a security risk.

So I understand that on these services they need CR. The question then is, how do you communicate that only Friday afternoon TGVs to the Med need a reservation when everything else does not?

A general CR policy then becomes much easier to communicate to the public.

That said, while I understand that CR is mandatory in TGV if you board or disembark in Paris, there is no reason why this should also apply if you go from St Pierre des Corps to Angouleme (where the TGV will always have some capacity from those who left the train at St Pierre) - or on an IC between Narbonne and Montpellier. Indeed, I think that in these cases, CR really makes the services unattractive and SNCF could easily generate more income by foregoing CR.

I can at least imagine that London services are similar, ie good reasons for CR when you board the Edinburgh train at KX, but none whatsoever at Newcastle going to Berwick-upon-Tweed.

Electronic reservation panels should easily help with differentiating.

That sounds like a reason for a platform quota on those specific trains - same principle as we tend to run at the end of large festivals. There's no need to remove half the capacity of the train by restricting it only to people who've booked a seat. In general the French system is woeful - if they have a scrum on the last train of the day it's probably because they run so few trains the rest of the day, and then waste half the capacity on their Ouigo thing.

Just to clarify, London to Edinburgh is a 4 hour jaunt which is well within impulse journey territory. The same train will be the main train to Darlington and Newcastle, which are both very manageable day trips. These aren't the sort of thing where you buy travel insurance, plan the next day off work just in case, or even pack a change of underwear. You can't manage the platform at kings cross like people are at the start of some grand adventure

 

[LUYMun]

Booking seats should be reserved for intercity/long-distance/cross-country trains in my opinion. I think if the journey is longer, it would be more understandable to book a seat. If all journeys made pre-booked seats compulsory, the ticket sales department would be having a PITA from sorting who sits where between every station for a particular journey especially when someone goes one stop along. All this takes more effort than necessary compared to 'turn up and sit' (or so I call it).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm struggling to understand what the security risk is?

I think it was a mistranslation. Most European languages use the word that translates directly to "security" in English to mean both "safety" (against being injured or killed by way of an accident) and "security" (against being the victim of a crime or terrorism).

It isn't however a safety issue either, just a comfort one, unless something is specifically designed around CR and so reduced numbers of passengers than might otherwise be possible e.g. Channel Tunnel evacuation processes.

 

[squizzler]

I suspect that the fares reform (and the associated compulsory train/seat reservations) will facilitate Mobility as a Service. I think MaaS needs to be an important weapon in the arsenal of means by which the railway returns to growth after the pandemic.

For those interested in MaaS, I started a thread to investigate how it might be rolled out across Great Britain.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suspect that the fares reform (and the associated compulsory train/seat reservations) will facilitate Mobility as a Service. I think MaaS needs to be an important weapon in the arsenal of means by which the railway returns to growth after the pandemic.

As I've replied on that thread, regardless of what I think of CR (on which I have a fairly balanced view, probably 50-50, as it has great advantages and also great disadvantages) I think MaaS is an utter gimmick and we'd be better spending on getting the basics right as the Europeans do in preference.

There are good reasons for CR, primarily centred on comfort - MaaS is not in my book one of them.

 

[zwk500]

There are good reasons for CR, primarily centred on comfort

If your primary justification for CR is comfort, then why make the entire train restricted for the sake of a few? Make 1st Class CR, but leave standard available to walk-ons. After all, those who place a premium on comfort should expect to pay that premium. If there's demand for a 'premium standard' as Avanti are proposing, maybe that could be CR as well. Then, on the day, if there's spare seats the Guard can be given discretion to sell upgrades to maximise the revenue without harming the ambiance. But 'open standard' would remain accessible to walk-ons, with optional reservations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If your primary justification for CR is comfort, then why make the entire train restricted for the sake of a few? Make 1st Class CR, but leave standard available to walk-ons. After all, those who place a premium on comfort should expect to pay that premium. If there's demand for a 'premium standard' as Avanti are proposing, maybe that could be CR as well. Then, on the day, if there's spare seats the Guard can be given discretion to sell upgrades to maximise the revenue without harming the ambiance. But 'open standard' would remain accessible to walk-ons, with optional reservations.

That was suggested above, and there is indeed precedent for that elsewhere - most notably India, where the Second Class Unreserved overcrowding makes the rush hour Northern Line look like a fresh-air express.

(Indian Railways operate so far below the level of demand that any of the CR classes sell out months in advance - it's not like Europe where most of the time a seat will be available walk-up)

 

[Austriantrain]

Assuming you mean safety (i.e. Sicherheit)[1], no, it doesn't. It's a comfort issue. Trains[2] are designed to be safe with a crush-load, i.e. as many as physically fit, and for regional and commuter trains that is a normal method of operation.

1. Thank you for safety/security. My English is not so bad; but some mistakes I never seem to avoid!

2. At least in Austria, overcrowding of a train is considered a safety issue after a certain point because of escape routes eg in case of a fire.

 

[Bletchleyite]

2. At least in Austria, overcrowding of a train is considered a safety issue after a certain point because of escape routes eg in case of a fire.

The UK doesn't generally take that line, because presumption in the event of a problem on a train is that the preference is to remain on board if possible, therefore fast evacuation doesn't need to be planned in the manner of air travel.

 

[Austriantrain]

I feel your argument defeats itself here.

As I said when I entered the discussion: it is not up to me to judge whether travel patterns in the UK are such that CR makes sense.

I just wanted to point out some factors that I think are relevant. And I can state with some certainty that if CR ever came to Austria, it would certainly be a major factor driving people away from rail towards the car. Me among them. I use Intercity trains traveling to work daily, using season tickets, and I have absolutely no intention to make a reservation twice a day with the risk I might not even find a free seat when I am finally done at work and want to go home. I would simply use my car. The door-to-door journey time is the same; it would be more expensive, but it would be worth it for me for added flexibility.

The UK doesn't generally take that line, because presumption in the event of a problem on a train is that the preference is to remain on board if possible, therefore fast evacuation doesn't need to be planned in the manner of air travel.

I think the major safety issue seen here with Intercity trains - in contrasts to local or underground services, where crush-loads are of course possible - is that too many passengers mean too much luggage with no space to put it, so blocking the aisles, doors etc. Unlike passengers, luggage can’t self-evacuate

 

[Hadders]

An example from today.

I was late finishing work and missed my Thameslink train home from St Pancras by a couple of minutes. No problem the next one is in 15 minutes but unfortunately it was cancelled. These things happen but in normal times not everyone would be able to get onto the next train. I'm a savvy traveller and knew there was an LNER train from Kings Cross departing 5 minutes after the cancelled train. I hot footed it across the road and boarded the LNER train. I didn't have a reservation (no-one was checking either) but I found an empty seat and sat there but I would have been prepared to stand for the short journey home.

The cancelled train hardly constitutes disruption but the action I took minimised my delay and meant the railway doesn't need to pay me a delay repay claim.

Should this sort of thing be banned? Should travellers on non inter-city trains have to suffer crush loading in the event of a cancellation?

 

[southern442]

Should this sort of thing be banned? Should travellers on non inter-city trains have to suffer crush loading in the event of a cancellation?

It wouldn't even just be in terms of cancellation. Let's assume I wanted to get to Bedford, I would perhaps get on the first fast train that I see, which would no doubt be an intercity train from the high level. If there were compulsory reservations then I'd have to wait down at the low level for a train that would take longer anyways, but not only that I would probably end up missing several of them due to not being able to board etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It wouldn't even just be in terms of cancellation. Let's assume I wanted to get to Bedford, I would perhaps get on the first fast train that I see, which would no doubt be an intercity train from the high level. If there were compulsory reservations then I'd have to wait down at the low level for a train that would take longer anyways, but not only that I would probably end up missing several of them due to not being able to board etc.

Or you could take a reservation on the EMR train, as most likely there would be one available. Or you'd get on the first train "down below" because 700s are veritable people eaters.

CR has negative points, but I think most people arguing against it are arguing based on an outdated view that CR means "must book days beforehand at a booking office" - it's just not like that any more.

 

[Hadders]

CR has negative points, but I think most people arguing against it are arguing based on an outdated view that CR means "must book days beforehand at a booking office" - it's just not like that any more.

I totally understand that there are ways to book seat reservations easily and up to the time of departure (I have done so myself on several occasions!). I also understand the negative publicity the railway gets from over crowded trains.

But consider an alternative scenario, consider a train going from London to Edinburgh, I want to travel on it from Peterborough to Newcastle. The train calls at Peterborough, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Newcastle and Edinburgh.

I try to book a ticket a couple of days before travel but I can't get a reservation on the train, the system says it is fully booked. However a bit of research reveals the train is only fully booked between Doncaster and York. I'd be happy to use an unreserved seat, and stand between Doncaster and York if necessary but a system of compulsory reservations won't allow this. The train arrives at Peterborough, there are empty seats, but with compulsory reservations I wouldn't be able to travel. My view is this would be very brand damaging to the railway.

 

[Kite159]

Last August I was heading towards Aberdeen using a flexible ticket (as I was breaking my return journey over a few days at various places), the same period where Aberdeen was thrown into the local lockdown so my plans changed the night before I was due to travel (previously I was going via the WCML). On that evening searching on the LNER threw up no seat reservations for the entire London - Dundee leg on the 10:00 departure, but by splitting the reservations up (London - York, York - Newcastle, Newcastle - Edinburgh, Edinburgh - Dundee) I managed to get on, changing seats a couple times along the way (until I ended up in coach C due to my seat from York - Newcastle having someone behind who was coughing quite hard and I didn't feel safe.

 

[Austriantrain]

CR has negative points, but I think most people arguing against it are arguing based on an outdated view that CR means "must book days beforehand at a booking office" - it's just not like that any more.

I think that misrepresents the issue.

Of course, nowadays you could reserve a seat with a single click on your phone.

It doesn’t change a thing though. If the train is not full, it is an additional, if small, hurdle. But if the train is full, or, probably much more often, if you only think it might sell out (even though in the end it might not), you will still have to reserve in advance, sometimes hours or even days ahead, to be sure to be able to travel.

What you cannot do anymore is go somewhere and return on a flexible schedule, depending on the length of your meeting or the weather on your outing. Better phrased: you can, but be prepared to return very late at night when trains start to empty again.

 

[6Gman]

This all sounds ridiculously complicated and that alone is enough to discourage train travel. Simplicity and flexibility is the key, rather obvious really. Being in love with new technology doesn't justify complication. Arrive at station, buy ticket with a choice of pay by card or cash, get the next train, sit down where you want hopefully. Throwing that away is slow commercial suicide. Spain has it wrong, copying them is plain stupidity.

Thank you for saying what I wanted to say, but saying it better!

If having a booked seat is important to me (e.g. if I'm taking the family to Plymouth - a 3+hr journey) then I'll reserve. If I'm having a day out in London and have no idea what time I'll want to travel home then I'll take my chance. If I have to stand for all/ part of the journey that's a chance I'll take.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

A rail market based upon compulsory reservations will be smaller than one without. If the rail industry wishes to continue it's headlong rush to self-destruction (started by COVID messaging) then so be it.

Some people will find CR more attractive, some will think it so - until they are the one who can no longer take the train they fancied. Others will know that they cannot fix to a specific time and either book lots of reservations (presumably not permitted), or make other (non-rail) arrangements.

One of the reasons that I do not travel by National Express is the need to fix on a specific departure, both ways, and then be stuck with those times if the weather is bad, or better etc. The second reason being the limited frequency on most routes - which rail beats hands down until they insist on CR which then limits me to a single time (once decided on and booked with CR).

 

[gallafent]

One of the reasons that I do not travel by National Express is the need to fix on a specific departure, both ways, and then be stuck with those times if the weather is bad, or better etc. The second reason being the limited frequency on most routes - which rail beats hands down until they insist on CR which then limits me to a single time (once decided on and booked with CR).

Compulsory reservation doesn't mean “fixed and unchangeable reservation” though. That would be rubbish. If I change my mind about when I want to travel I just change the reservation. I remember doing this years ago in France using paper tickets on compulsory reservation trains (TGVs I guess, can't remember) — you just give the ticket to the man, ask to change the train it's booked on, and he gives you a fresh one (or the same one maybe) with the new booking on it. Would all be done electronically these days of course … but there's no reason you shouldn't be able to change the reservation as many times as you like up until the departure of the train you're actually reserved on …

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Compulsory reservation doesn't mean “fixed and unchangeable reservation” though. That would be rubbish. If I change my mind about when I want to travel I just change the reservation. I remember doing this years ago in France using paper tickets on compulsory reservation trains (TGVs I guess, can't remember) — you just give the ticket to the man, ask to change the train it's booked on, and he gives you a fresh one (or the same one maybe) with the new booking on it. Would all be done electronically these days of course … but there's no reason you shouldn't be able to change the reservation as many times as you like up until the departure of the train you're actually reserved on …

Assuming the train you want to change your reservation to has 'availability'. Otherwise, find a bench and enjoy the wait.

 

[Flying Snail]

So either, Train is full (y booked) CR prevents anyone else travelling or train has free seats CR is just extra unnecessary hassle.

It seems the majority of discussion is about how it isn't really much more inconvenience, hardly a reason to introduce it.

What is the benefit? Really, anyone who wants a reservation can already get one, why does it affect these people that others do not use reservations?

It seems the main thrust is certain people who are not happy until everyone else is behaving in their preferred way.

 

[Austriantrain]

So either, Train is full (y booked) CR prevents anyone else travelling or train has free seats CR is just extra unnecessary hassle.

It seems the majority of discussion is about how it isn't really much more inconvenience, hardly a reason to introduce it.

What is the benefit? Really, anyone who wants a reservation can already get one, why does it affect these people that others do not use reservations?

It seems the main thrust is certain people who are not happy until everyone else is behaving in their preferred way.

I do think there are reasons to introduce CR, namely if you absolutely do not have enough capacity and it cannot be increased either. I agree that sitting in a train for hours when everything around you is full of standing people is not a nice way to travel.

But the question is: is this a regular occurrence or a rare exception? Can you lengthen trains first or increase their number? Can you maybe use ticket prices to encourage people to use trains that are not as full?

If you cannot do those things and very overcrowded trains happen all the time, then you cannot avoid CR, in my opinion.

In all other cases, I still think it is a bad idea. You will certainly get away with it if the competitive position of rail to other modes of transport is strong (think Paris - Bordeaux: the train takes two hours, by car it takes almost six, and if you calculate the time to go to and from the airport and waiting times there, the plane will also be more than 4 hours).

Where rail is not so strong competitively, you will probably lose passengers.

 

[yorksrob]

I feel your argument defeats itself here. If you are making a single stop trip on an intercity service at the fringes, you will be at liberty to just book yourself on the next departure when ready to leave the house, whilst on the way to station or, if you are old skool, the ticket machine at the station. As you say, the train is not full at that point on the network, so you will not be anxious about getting a seat, and thus not a barrier to travelling spontaneously.

But if on your way to an important appointment you will probably have worked out your journey in advance using an online journey planner, and under the new regime most people will take the opportunity to lock in their outbound train. It's all a total non-issue.

I'm amused by the association of the terms "old skool" and "ticket machine" !

 

[cuccir]

I'm very much in the "it'll stop people travelling by rail camp".

Pre-Pandemic, I commuted on the East Coast Mainline, Durham to Newcastle. There are no 'local' services on the stretch between Dunbar and Morpeth and again between Newcastle and York. I have to decide whether or not to return to commuting - I could continue to work from home maybe 60-70% of the time if I wish. If LNER go reservation only, it would be a cross against returning to the regular commute; if other one of the long-distance operators went for that (most likely CrossCountry) then it would basically be enough to stop me. I'm sure it would be a push for other commuters in the region.

I also wonder what happens in the region on a busy Saturday. Newcastle are playing at home, the tweens are all travelling to the Metrocentre, daytrippers are travelling in and out of York.... many of these people are likely to be barely aware of which train company is which, never-mind that they're meant to reserve a space on some of them. I don't see it happening that if there's a 20 minute gap between services, that these users are going to hold off from travelling on the first train that pulls in. And sure some will book but others won't/reservations will be full. And then what happens? Any attempt to enforce this will be difficult, and will put people off rail travel.

What about the Aberdeen-Leeds evening service which is the last southbound train through Newcastle, Durham, Darlington and York? Are people sat having a drink going to make a reservation for this? Is someone going to miss an encore at a gig, the end of a show at a theatre, because they have to get the earlier train? Will staff working late find they can't book a reservation when there's a Newcastle match on, or during York races? Again, any attempt at enforcement will lead people to make different travel plans.

Then there's the question of cost/value. People are willing to pay for 'open' Anytime or Off-Peak tickets because it gives them flexibility. You're paying to be able to choose any train, to take the next one without question if there are delays, to decide to have an extra pint, a dessert at restaurant, another quarter of an hour at the park, without having to make changes to your booking. Will LNER cut the cost of fairs now that the ticket has lost that flexibility? Why should I pay the same for a product which no longer entitles me to the same level of service?

It might be that LNER identify some peak-time services to make reservation only: the Edinburgh-Newcastle-York-London only services which are looking to compete directly with air travel, for example. And maybe even some of the peak-time into London and out of London stoppers as well. I can see that this might attract some business without denting their other markets. But I can only see a reservations only policy denting the local commuter/leisure market - and destroying it if CrossCountry were to follow suit.

Tldr; Compulsory reservations will significantly cut the commuter and leisure market in the North-East. I'm sure there'd be other regions where the outcome would be similar.

 

[Watershed]

I'm very much in the "it'll stop people travelling by rail camp".

Pre-Pandemic, I commuted on the East Coast Mainline, Durham to Newcastle. There are no 'local' services on the stretch between Dunbar and Morpeth and again between Newcastle and York. I have to decide whether or not to return to commuting - I could continue to work from home maybe 60-70% of the time if I wish. If LNER go reservation only, it would be a cross against returning to the regular commute; if other one of the long-distance operators went for that (most likely CrossCountry) then it would basically be enough to stop me. I'm sure it would be a push for other commuters in the region.

I also wonder what happens in the region on a busy Saturday. Newcastle are playing at home, the tweens are all travelling to the Metrocentre, daytrippers are travelling in and out of York.... many of these people are likely to be barely aware of which train company is which, never-mind that they're meant to reserve a space on some of them. I don't see it happening that if there's a 20 minute gap between services, that these users are going to hold off from travelling on the first train that pulls in. And sure some will book but others won't/reservations will be full. And then what happens? Any attempt to enforce this will be difficult, and will put people off rail travel.

What about the Aberdeen-Leeds evening service which is the last southbound train through Newcastle, Durham, Darlington and York? Are people sat having a drink going to make a reservation for this? Is someone going to miss an encore at a gig, the end of a show at a theatre, because they have to get the earlier train? Will staff working late find they can't book a reservation when there's a Newcastle match on, or during York races? Again, any attempt at enforcement will lead people to make different travel plans.

Then there's the question of cost/value. People are willing to pay for 'open' Anytime or Off-Peak tickets because it gives them flexibility. You're paying to be able to choose any train, to take the next one without question if there are delays, to decide to have an extra pint, a dessert at restaurant, another quarter of an hour at the park, without having to make changes to your booking. Will LNER cut the cost of fairs now that the ticket has lost that flexibility? Why should I pay the same for a product which no longer entitles me to the same level of service?

It might be that LNER identify some peak-time services to make reservation only: the Edinburgh-Newcastle-York-London only services which are looking to compete directly with air travel, for example. And maybe even some of the peak-time into London and out of London stoppers as well. I can see that this might attract some business without denting their other markets. But I can only see a reservations only policy denting the local commuter/leisure market - and destroying it if CrossCountry were to follow suit.

Tldr; Compulsory reservations will significantly cut the commuter and leisure market in the North-East. I'm sure there'd be other regions where the outcome would be similar.

CrossCountry have already marked (almost?) all of their services as reservation compulsory in the timetable data. That's not changing from May.

Right now the problems with that are hidden, as passenger loadings are only 10% of pre-Covid. However, once lockdown eases and leisure travellers (and some commuters) return, it'll be back to the 'dark days' of last summer where many searches for journeys would come up with no, or hardly any, trains. All available reservations will be taken (or there won't be the same seat available throughout the journey).

They never enforced the policy except on a handful of exceptionally busy services frequented by beach daytrippers, but it's still going to become a big issue - if nothing else for those passengers with the temerity to check their journey before they travel!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Compulsory reservation doesn't mean “fixed and unchangeable reservation” though. That would be rubbish. If I change my mind about when I want to travel I just change the reservation. I remember doing this years ago in France using paper tickets on compulsory reservation trains (TGVs I guess, can't remember) — you just give the ticket to the man, ask to change the train it's booked on, and he gives you a fresh one (or the same one maybe) with the new booking on it. Would all be done electronically these days of course … but there's no reason you shouldn't be able to change the reservation as many times as you like up until the departure of the train you're actually reserved on …

SNCF have (and have had for years) "TVMs" that do exactly that. Insert your ticket, pick a new train, pay if there's a charge, it spits out a new one.

Is someone going to miss an encore at a gig, the end of a show at a theatre, because they have to get the earlier train?

I know people do it very occasionally, but when was the last time you purchased a gig or theatre ticket on a whim, and not at least a day or two in advance when you could, having done so, reserve a seat on the relevant train? Mostly there will only be one such train anyway - the railway isn't known for a frequent service after 2300.

It might be that LNER identify some peak-time services to make reservation only: the Edinburgh-Newcastle-York-London only services which are looking to compete directly with air travel, for example. And maybe even some of the peak-time into London and out of London stoppers as well. I can see that this might attract some business without denting their other markets.

I suspect this, rather than a blanket policy, may be what happens, which is just going back to what BR did with it. Horne talks about using it to divert people off very busy trains (I guess where pricing them off hasn't succeeded). Avanti could do the same for Euston-Scotland fasts, perhaps requiring reservations as far as Warrington BQ but not thereafter, where it tends to get quieter (as a lot get off at the North West stations) and it does perform a local service role. These don't stop south of WBQ so don't perform a local service role on that stretch.

But I can only see a reservations only policy denting the local commuter/leisure market - and destroying it if CrossCountry were to follow suit.

Tldr; Compulsory reservations will significantly cut the commuter and leisure market in the North-East. I'm sure there'd be other regions where the outcome would be similar.

CrossCountry is one big problem anyway, and has been since Operation Pumpkin started. Reservations or no, it either needs a rough doubling of capacity, or for all the cases where it provides the local service to have a supplementary local service tucked in behind it, or both. Relief may well be coming in the form of the WCML 221s, the 222s and later the Brum northbound HS2 services, but for now the problem there isn't compulsory reservations, it's capacity that is so low that there is no hope of meeting demand other than having people packing onto excessively short DMUs for long distance trips as they would on the Northern Line from Kings Cross to Bank, and that isn't OK however you manage it.

 

[Statto]

So either, Train is full (y booked) CR prevents anyone else travelling or train has free seats CR is just extra unnecessary hassle.

It seems the majority of discussion is about how it isn't really much more inconvenience, hardly a reason to introduce it.

What is the benefit? Really, anyone who wants a reservation can already get one, why does it affect these people that others do not use reservations?

It seems the main thrust is certain people who are not happy until everyone else is behaving in their preferred way.

Exactly, those who want reservations can already get one, CR will put people off from traveling.

In normal times, i often plan a trip to the West Midlands weather depending, i often get a different train home from the one i planned, like i'll get the train from Coventry & change at Crewe to Liverpool, instead of changing at Birmingham New Street, i end up catching the AWC service[sometimes i'llk wait for the AWC connection at Crewe to Liverpool, sometimes the first Northbound service as i want to get home asap], normally there's plenty of seats available on both trains i'm catching so i'll take my chances & won't book a seat, being barred from those trains because i didn't book a CR will put me off.

Virgin Trains did it, think AWC still do it, but on the 390s there's a coach [coach U on 11 car train]that's left as an unreserved coach