• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Modern Railways: LNER and compulsory reservations

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
And at that time rail patronage was around 40-45%? So having mandatory reservations would just exacerbate that issue, especially as PPM has on the whole been in the mid-90's throughout. Mandatory reservations don't take into account connections at all.

They can have some advantages regarding connections - if you know what connections everyone is making because they're booked on the same booking, you know which connections you might want to consider holding, or to get taxis there ready, or whatever.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
They can have some advantages regarding connections - if you know what connections everyone is making because they're booked on the same booking, you know which connections you might want to consider holding, or to get taxis there ready, or whatever.
I believe the industry lacks to customer focus to consider either a possibility. Certainly they are a long way from the sensible solution where passengers are texted a unique link to book a taxi to collect them from their Interchange when it's identified that they are without hope of meeting their last connection, for example. Inevitably a taxi won't be booked until manually authorised by telephone, which cannot happen until everyone is off the train and has been counted by the station staff. Only then does the wait for the taxi begin.
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
2,544
Location
North West
Once social distancing measures are no longer necessary, I'd have thought that compulsory reservations should cease to be necessary too.
 

SuperNova

Member
Joined
12 Dec 2019
Messages
957
Location
The North
I believe the industry lacks to customer focus to consider either a possibility. Certainly they are a long way from the sensible solution where passengers are texted a unique link to book a taxi to collect them from their Interchange when it's identified that they are without hope of meeting their last connection, for example. Inevitably a taxi won't be booked until manually authorised by telephone, which cannot happen until everyone is off the train and has been counted by the station staff. Only then does the wait for the taxi begin.
How would that work? What if someone's bought at a booking office, is travelling on an anytime ticket? How do you know what destinations people are going to? What's the data implications with GDPR?
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
How would that work? What if someone's bought at a booking office, is travelling on an anytime ticket? How do you know what destinations people are going to? What's the data implications with GDPR?
In a world where such a thing is possible there sure wouldn't be any conventional ticket offices! Eurostar currently have a taxi booking form which they send to people in a similar way.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I believe the industry lacks to customer focus to consider either a possibility. Certainly they are a long way from the sensible solution where passengers are texted a unique link to book a taxi to collect them from their Interchange when it's identified that they are without hope of meeting their last connection, for example. Inevitably a taxi won't be booked until manually authorised by telephone, which cannot happen until everyone is off the train and has been counted by the station staff. Only then does the wait for the taxi begin.

Yes, true, there's lots of things they (and for that matter airlines) could do with such data but aren't customer focussed enough to do so. There is no GDPR implication, why would there be?
 

moggie

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2010
Messages
426
Location
West Midlands
Presumably also because for COVID reasons the railway is operating well below capacity, and LNER are only reserving 50% of seats as well as operating a reduced timetable?



Yes, there are issues with it - I sit on the fence at about 50-50 on my views on it, but as most people are against on here that's tended me towards arguing for. What I was taking issue with was suggestions that it's dangerous, it's really not, and that really does down the issue with views that are dangerous, such as facism and the likes.
Well that depends in context what constitutes dangerous does it not? With proposed cuts to the rail timetable post pandemic, confirmed cuts to network investment (-10% of the RNEP budget), rail fare increase above inflation while fuel duty continues to be frozen, disarray in the DfT on how the railway is to address decarbonisation being forced on it by government, seemingly no strategy of how rail is going to address government fear based policy to overcome reticence to return to public transport and now this crazy proposal which can only place barriers to travel (the reason it's currently operating on some services) for users who have paid and should expect to 'turn up and go' then I believe there is a genuine danger of another regression in rail use much like the 70's and 80's. A Treasury looking for ways to pay for HS2 (I support it) might well be tempted to do a 'Beeching' and seek to save costs by targeting 'underused' lines. Cut the services first of course to ensure it becomes underused. And before someone says nonsense, reopening lines closed by Beeching is current policy just remember much of the trumpeting is merely for 'studies'. They can maintain this deception by simply delaying a response then asking for more while periodically re-announcing the policy to placate the gullible.

But then on another measure there's the economic peril the country is now in and the likely pairing back of wider spending on public services but which will most certainly include rail no matter what demand exists in a couple of years time as another split personality bit of Gov grapples with the problems of air pollution and all that comes with it. Arguably the economic policy of the last decade is why the UK economy has performed so badly in the pandemic period. Might it be because the country, or more precisely it's vital services were ill prepared to cope after a decade of austerity. Why else did the 'NHS need protecting'? I'd argue that those who have paid with their lives demonstrates the danger of electing incompetents. The worry is that if the current incumbents eventually are found out Nigel is lurking in the hedgerow just waiting to re-emerge with another populist bright idea. That would be dangerous to us all and definitely the rail network as we know it.
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Well that depends in context what constitutes dangerous does it not? With proposed cuts to the rail timetable post pandemic, confirmed cuts to network investment (-10% of the RNEP budget), rail fare increase above inflation while fuel duty continues to be frozen, disarray in the DfT on how the railway is to address decarbonisation being forced on it by government, seemingly no strategy of how rail is going to address government fear based policy to overcome reticence to return to public transport and now this crazy proposal which can only place barriers to travel (the reason it's currently operating on some services) for users who have paid and should expect to 'turn up and go' then I believe there is a genuine danger of another regression in rail use much like the 70's and 80's. A Treasury looking for ways to pay for HS2 (I support it) might well be tempted to do a 'Beeching' and seek to save costs by targeting 'underused' lines. Cut the services first of course to ensure it becomes underused. And before someone says nonsense, reopening lines closed by Beeching is current policy just remember much of the trumpeting is merely for 'studies'. They can maintain this deception by simply delaying a response then asking for more while periodically re-announcing the policy to placate the gullible.

Yet those underused lines are not relevant to the discussion because nobody is proposing to close any of the InterCity mainlines. Compulsory reservations is not an approach that fits small branch lines and rural stopping services, which are the lines that would be vulnerable to a "Beeching 2", not least because those services are never even anything close to full.
 

moggie

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2010
Messages
426
Location
West Midlands
Yet those underused lines are not relevant to the discussion because nobody is proposing to close any of the InterCity mainlines. Compulsory reservations is not an approach that fits small branch lines and rural stopping services, which are the lines that would be vulnerable to a "Beeching 2", not least because those services are never even anything close to full.
All predicated on a logical and sane approach to UK rail of course. I merely observe that in the context of 'danger' - a label used by others but challenged by yourself, evidence is growing which implies the opposite of logical and sane actions and therefore from the classic railway users perspective there is a 'danger' that incomprehensible change will impact negatively on the rail user. And on that basis it would be foolish / complacent to believe even core routes are not threatened by the same mindset. An obvious observation would be that if compulsory CR is introduced to InterCity lines then it follows that users connecting into them using 'secondary' feeder services will be left high and dry if that connection is missed - not entirely unusual? QED; a new more acute risk in terms of the consequence is introduced should the connection with the CR service be missed, which does nothing to encourage use of connecting services. Result - loss of passengers and a potential threat to their ongoing viability. Result: either the car to mainline station or car all the way might be a predictable outcome.

Now, I'm not suggesting this is going to happen overnight or even soon but you cannot deny that DfT have commenced a negative trend towards the 'classic' network, opposite to that which pertained prior to the pandemic and despite there being zero evidence of a significant drop in demand ONCE current pandemic restrictions are lifted from society AND people and commerce have time to adjust back to something like the 'old' norm. Only then might we see where adjustment to service provision based on a settled demand is warranted.

Insofar as CR is concerned, I simply fail to see what benefit it provides as optional reservation is already available. I and plenty of others have listed plenty of negatives.
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,157
Location
West of Andover
Doing the latest "LNER Viewpoint" survey and alongside other ideas at how to get people to book via the LNER website I couldn't help noticing they are asking about the idea of charging for selecting your own seat when booking. :|

Screenshot_20210416-131149.png
 

williamn

Member
Joined
22 May 2008
Messages
1,123
Came here to write exactly that re paid seat selection! There wasn't an opportunity in the survey to say how much I disagreed with this previously free service becoming paid-for. I can see the logic though as a way of bringing in extra revenue and its a concept which people are familiar with from airlines.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,535
Doing the latest "LNER Viewpoint" survey and alongside other ideas at how to get people to book via the LNER website I couldn't help noticing they are asking about the idea of charging for selecting your own seat when booking. :|
Bad news, but an entirely logical next step, particularly since there is a need to match use of seats up between a London to Doncaster and a Doncaster to York customer to prevent the opportunity being lost to sell another seat for London to York. Allowing customers free allocation of seats does have a non-zero cost to LNER in a future of compulsory reservations.

I suspect that the next step would need to be for any ticket to only be valid in the seat you are allocated.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Came here to write exactly that re paid seat selection! There wasn't an opportunity in the survey to say how much I disagreed with this previously free service becoming paid-for. I can see the logic though as a way of bringing in extra revenue and its a concept which people are familiar with from airlines.

With compulsory reservation it is actually quite important that not everyone selects, as the effect of that is to reduce the number of tickets you can sell on that train. So if they are going that way, then this will be necessary.

Bad news, but an entirely logical next step, particularly since there is a need to match use of seats up between a London to Doncaster and a Doncaster to York customer to prevent the opportunity to sell another seat for London to York.

I suspect that the next step would need to be for any ticket to only be valid in the seat you are allocated.

Beat me to it by half a second. Yes, this - for compulsory reservations offering free selection means you can sell fewer tickets because you end up with a London-Stevenage ticket in seat 1 and a Stevenage-Edinburgh one in seat 2, and then you can't sell a London-Edinburgh one as the train is "full". (As things stand it doesn't matter, as you can sell a walk-up and they can "seat hop" as necessary).

The other option is to oversell slightly (i.e. sell say 4 seats per coach without an allocated seat, one per vestibule side) but that has the potential to cause arguments.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,535
The other option is to oversell slightly (i.e. sell say 4 seats per coach without an allocated seat, one per vestibule side) but that has the potential to cause arguments.
It seems pretty clear that the purpose of this policy is not to go down the 'counted places' route - eg they eliminate all standing and everyone has a seat.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,820
Location
Yorks
I do think that if LNER insist on going down the compulsory reservation route, they should be forced to give up one of their intermediate distance paths for a turn up and go budget option, like LNWR.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
I do think that if LNER insist on going down the compulsory reservation route, they should be forced to give up one of their intermediate distance paths for a turn up and go budget option, like LNWR.
Indeed, and they will need to relinquish sufficient slots into Leeds to carry commuters on alternative high capacity services from Wakefield Westgate and Doncaster, and into Newcastle to carry commuters from Durham and Darlington, in my opinion.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,535
I do think that if LNER insist on going down the compulsory reservation route, they should be forced to give up one of their intermediate distance paths for a turn up and go budget option, like LNWR.
I suspect the DfT would see that as revenue lost to the railway, much as it might be good for passengers. In theory there is already an alternative on many of the flows anyway and limited station to next station travel in any case.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Indeed, and they will need to relinquish sufficient slots into Leeds to carry commuters on alternative high capacity services from Wakefield Westgate and Doncaster, and into Newcastle to carry commuters from Durham and Darlington, in my opinion.

Yes, I think if we go for compulsory reservation IC in this country - and I do think it has upsides - then we also need to ensure that every line has an adequate (minimum hourly) regional/regional express service for short-distance, turn-up-and-go needs. The WCML south of Crewe is an example of where such a service does exist - if Avanti went CR, you could use WMT if you wanted to go walk-up. But north of Crewe very much not (it is a real shame the proposed North Western Trains Crewe-Carlisle local didn't go ahead).

That could potentially be solved for that particular piece of line by extending the WMT Crewe service to Preston or Blackpool (as the TPE runs north of there).

(Excuse the non-LNER example, I am much less familiar with what similar situations exist that side of things)
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,820
Location
Yorks
Indeed, and they will need to relinquish sufficient slots into Leeds to carry commuters on alternative high capacity services from Wakefield Westgate and Doncaster, and into Newcastle to carry commuters from Durham and Darlington, in my opinion.


This is true. It always surprised me how many Leeds commuters those services used to soak up around the peaks. There will still be a need post covid.

Yes, I think if we go for compulsory reservation IC in this country - and I do think it has upsides - then we also need to ensure that every line has an adequate (minimum hourly) regional/regional express service for short-distance, turn-up-and-go needs. The WCML south of Crewe is an example of where such a service does exist - if Avanti went CR, you could use WMT if you wanted to go walk-up. But north of Crewe very much not (it is a real shame the proposed North Western Trains Crewe-Carlisle local didn't go ahead).

That could potentially be solved for that particular piece of line by extending the WMT Crewe service to Preston or Blackpool (as the TPE runs north of there).

(Excuse the non-LNER example, I am much less familiar with what similar situations exist that side of things)

Perhaps one of the Leeds services could be extended round to York and turned over to this purpose.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
This is true. It always surprised me how many Leeds commuters those services used to soak up around the peaks. There will still be a need post covid.

By that point in the journey are there always spare seats? If so, it won't be a major issue if a commuter could grab a reservation from a TVM when they arrive at the station, or on their phone. For instance, I can't see compulsory reservations on Avanti services between Stockport and Manchester (in that direction) being a great issue, say, because there are always enough getting off at Stockport for there to be seats spare.

If they moved to a system of global fares (i.e. ticket=reservation, and "Northern" tickets not accepted), then that would of course be a bit different. But CR doesn't require dedicated fares, and dedicated fares don't require CR. They often do go together, but they don't have to.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
By that point in the journey are there always spare seats?
Absolutely not. LNER carried large numbers of standing passengers in Standard between Leeds and Wakefield in 2019. The reduction in demand would need to be huge for them to all be accommodated in seats.

For instance, I can't see compulsory reservations on Avanti services between Stockport and Manchester (in that direction) being a great issue, say, because there are always enough getting off at Stockport for there to be seats spare.
Again, same point. Large numbers of passengers from Macclesfield and Stockport to Manchester needed to stand on Avanti services until March 2020.
 

43074

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Messages
2,003
I suspect the DfT would see that as revenue lost to the railway, much as it might be good for passengers. In theory there is already an alternative on many of the flows anyway and limited station to next station travel in any case.
On flows like Doncaster and Wakefield to Leeds there are certainly alternatives but they are either slower and less frequent (Northern) or already have gone down the road of recommending reservations (XC) and in any case both have their own capacity problems. Neither are acceptable alternatives for people, and when we are talking about markets that are likely to recover most quickly after Covid (education, leisure, and where office commuting accounts for a smaller proportion of trips before Covid) it doesn't make sense at all for the industry to pursue this.

The limited stop Anglo Scottish services are probably more suited to compulsory reservations but a more frequent service for the likes of Berwick and Alnmouth to Newcastle would be needed IMO.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
Yes, I think if we go for compulsory reservation IC in this country - and I do think it has upsides - then we also need to ensure that every line has an adequate (minimum hourly) regional/regional express service for short-distance, turn-up-and-go needs.
What I don't think is being appreciated is that there's no way to achieve that other than to pare back long-distance services significantly. At least until the 2040s when we begin to redevelop the timetable post HS2 Phase 2b... or those elements of 2b we get.

I suspect the DfT would see that as revenue lost to the railway, much as it might be good for passengers. In theory there is already an alternative on many of the flows anyway and limited station to next station travel in any case.
Your revenue loss will come from trains being marked online as "full" also. It's an unavoidable consequence of an attempt to make reservations genuinely compulsory, rather than merely strongly recommended.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Again, same point. Large numbers of passengers from Macclesfield and Stockport to Manchester needed to stand on Avanti services until March 2020.

Needed to, or chose to because it was quicker than the Northern service? There are a lot of people who stand on the Avanti services that call at MKC southbound in the morning peak, when a number of the slightly slower LNR services around the same time arrive at Euston with empty seats, because saving 10 minutes is more valuable to them than sitting down.

What I don't think is being appreciated is that there's no way to achieve that other than to pare back long-distance services significantly. At least until the 2040s when we begin to redevelop the timetable post HS2 Phase 2b... or those elements of 2b we get.

TBH I think my view tends towards the idea that with HS2 not that far off it's not worth pratting with it for now. HS2 is almost certain to adopt such a policy in full (i.e. compulsory reservation, dedicated ticketing and dynamic pricing), at which point the paradigm shifts anyway. It barely seems worth rocking the boat for that relatively short period.

When HS2 is delivered in full (hopefully "when"), you can then recast the existing services to be those walk-up regional services on the classic lines. Almost no country has mandatory reservation on regional services.

(HS1 isn't really comparable as it's a commuter service that happens to run quite fast and have a pointy snout - it's not really any different from LNRs that run fast to Leighton Buzzard, just 30mph faster)
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
Needed to, or chose to because it was quicker than the Northern service?
If you moved people onto the Northern services, there would be no capacity for people to board at Heaton Chapel and Levenshulme. So your options are to close those stations and tell those people to use the bus instead (good luck!), cut back long-distance trains and replace them with local ones, or to let people use long-distance trains.
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,157
Location
West of Andover
Needed to, or chose to because it was quicker than the Northern service? There are a lot of people who stand on the Avanti services that call at MKC southbound in the morning peak, when a number of the slightly slower LNR services around the same time arrive at Euston with empty seats, because saving 10 minutes is more valuable to them than sitting down.

If everybody from Stoke/ Macclesfield had to use the 3 coach Northern stopper, then the passengers from stops further along the line who have no choice will be standing.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,599
Location
Somerset
By that point in the journey are there always spare seats? If so, it won't be a major issue if a commuter could grab a reservation from a TVM when they arrive at the station, or on their phone. For instance, I can't see compulsory reservations on Avanti services between Stockport and Manchester (in that direction) being a great issue, say, because there are always enough getting off at Stockport for there to be seats spare.

If they moved to a system of global fares (i.e. ticket=reservation, and "Northern" tickets not accepted), then that would of course be a bit different. But CR doesn't require dedicated fares, and dedicated fares don't require CR. They often do go together, but they don't have to.
What’s also likely to happen is a lot of “ no shows” blocking people who really need to travel. To use my own example, on days when I’m not on a weekly season ticket, I have to reserve a seat on the 16.30 Bristol - Bath, because the online booking forces me to. 9 times out of 10, I make it to the station just in time for the previous train ( no compulsory reservation) so of course travel on that. Multiply that up once things normalise a bit a you start getting the stuff of negative headlines ( train regularly leaves half empty but passengers refused boarding!)
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
If everybody from Stoke/ Macclesfield had to use the 3 coach Northern stopper, then the passengers from stops further along the line who have no choice will be standing.

Run 6 or even 9 (with ASDO) coaches, then.

You don't have to look hard to other countries to see how they handle it.

(Yes, I know Stoke bay is too short - but then solve the actual problem!)
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,157
Location
West of Andover
Run 6 or even 9 (with ASDO) coaches, then.

You don't have to look hard to other countries to see how they handle it.

Then it won't fit in the bay platform at Stoke.


I think CR should be trailed on London Northwestern services, especially those which call at Bletchley. "Oh sorry sir, train is full of passengers from Milton Keynes, you will have to wait for the extended Tring stopper"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top