New DfT rail usage figures, big increase

[station_road]

When I did it last time was finding massive inconsistencies in average number of passengers per vehicle by operator, and made me wonder how Heathrow Express can still justify paths on crowded lines instead of trains to Cotswolds and South West etc.

On the previous thread (referenced in a post above) it was established that the paths don't really exist after Airport Junction on the main lines so even if you got rid of HEX, it wouldn't lead to extra paths for longer distance journeys.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Depends on the train of course but I have seen data that pertains to do just that


Possibly but there are no guarantees with anything in life. However it is something the industry should aspire to achieve simply because it will assist in placing the corect number of carriages in the right place so that over provision and overcrowding should happen less.

It'll be like lots of things in this world, great idea until it shows money needs to be spent and suddenly a clear statistic becomes blurred

 

[Krokodil]

Possibly but there are no guarantees with anything in life. However it is something the industry should aspire to achieve simply because it will assist in placing the corect number of carriages in the right place so that over provision and overcrowding should happen less.

My post you quoted originally talked about stopping patterns, not crowding in general.

 

[The exile]

However it is something the industry should aspire to achieve simply because it will assist in placing the corect number of carriages in the right place so that over provision and overcrowding should happen less.

Of course, a lot of that so-called overprovision is simply the inevitable result of correct provision on a previous /future working. Didn’t a politician make a bit of a fool of themselves back in the day slating the running of nearly empty trains out of London in the morning peak, saying they should be used to strengthen the busy inbound workings?

 

[dk1]

Of course, a lot of that so-called overprovision is simply the inevitable result of correct provision on a previous /future working. Didn’t a politician make a bit of a fool of themselves back in the day slating the running of nearly empty trains out of London in the morning peak, saying they should be used to strengthen the busy inbound workings?

That sounds about right

 

[Class 170101]

Of course, a lot of that so-called overprovision is simply the inevitable result of correct provision on a previous /future working.

Agree this isn't over provision unless it could have been deployed better on other workings to give better provision overall
eg Service A forms Service C later so two trains strengthened versus just Service B would be better than doing service B and ingoring services A and C. But lots of variables to consider.

Didn’t a politician make a bit of a fool of themselves back in the day slating the running of nearly empty trains out of London in the morning peak, saying they should be used to strengthen the busy inbound workings?

politicans making fools of themselves, how unusual.

 

[Meerkat]

How has Heathrow Express managed a 22% increase in passenger km per journey?!

A wholesale swing to T5 away from T2&3? Some change to how terminal transfer hops are counted?

 

[LickeyIncliner]

How has Heathrow Express managed a 22% increase in passenger km per journey?!

A wholesale swing to T5 away from T2&3? Some change to how terminal transfer hops are counted?

Higher proportion of journeys to/from Paddington, lower between the terminals at Heathrow? Was there an exceptionally high proportions of inter-terminal transfers in the previous data? (Just a suggestion of how the change might occur...)

 

[Meerkat]

Higher proportion of journeys to/from Paddington, lower between the terminals at Heathrow? Was there an exceptionally high proportions of inter-terminal transfers in the previous data? (Just a suggestion of how the change might occur...)

Do they even count transfers - don’t you just walk on and off with no barriers?

 

[John R]

Do they even count transfers - don’t you just walk on and off with no barriers?

No, you either tap in and out and there’s no charge, or you are given a free pass to travel between the terminals.

 

[Meerkat]

No, you either tap in and out and there’s no charge, or you are given a free pass to travel between the terminals.

So they can count them.

 

[Horizon22]

It might be that a higher percentage of HeX travellers are going to T5 and not T2/3 (who are instead electing for the 6tph for the Elizabeth line).

If overall passengers number are down - and of the remaining passengers a higher majority goes to T5 - then this will statistically drive a decent increase in passenger km

 

[John R]

So they can count them.

Not sure why they would and would have to split them between Elizabeth Line and HEx services as the barriers cover both services.

 

[Meerkat]

It might be that a higher percentage of HeX travellers are going to T5 and not T2/3 (who are instead electing for the 6tph for the Elizabeth line).

If overall passengers number are down - and of the remaining passengers a higher majority goes to T5 - then this will statistically drive a decent increase in passenger km

It would have to be a serious swing to change the passenger km per journey by 22% though!

Not sure why they would and would have to split them between Elizabeth Line and HEx services as the barriers cover both services.

Does any money change hands, either real money or internal accounting?

 

[Horizon22]

It would have to be a serious swing to change the passenger km per journey by 22% though!

Agreed. It might be a statistical error as there’s only 3 stops!

 

[Stephen42]

How has Heathrow Express managed a 22% increase in passenger km per journey?!

A wholesale swing to T5 away from T2&3? Some change to how terminal transfer hops are counted?

An error in the data seems most likely. The km per passenger journey has jumped to 31.4km, the previous value was 25.7495km which is exactly 16 miles and has been the figure for every quarter since 2020.

31.4km is 19.5 miles which I believe is longer than the maximum passenger journey possible on Heathrow Express.

 

[dk1]

Greater Anglia set themselves 'Target 80' which was a challenge to grow their passenger numbers by around 5 million in the 2024/25 financial year. It was confirmed yesterday that the final figure was easily exceeded with over 82m journeys recorded.

 

[SteelWeelApeal]

Greater Anglia set themselves 'Target 80' which was a challenge to grow their passenger numbers by around 5 million in the 2024/25 financial year. It was confirmed yesterday that the final figure was easily exceeded with over 82m journeys recorded.

If only the DfT had this approach…

 

[Goldfish62]

If only the DfT had this approach…

It's reported in the current Modern Railways that it's expected from this month that the TOC Annual Business Plans will be based on cost net of revenue, therefore TOCs will be incentivised to grow revenues.

About time too!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

About time too!

Weren't they always incentivised to grow revenues in the days of franchising? Since they basically kept all their revenues, possibly minus a fixed cost paid to the DfT.

 

[John R]

Weren't they always incentivised to grow revenues in the days of franchising? Since they basically kept all their revenues, possibly minus a fixed cost paid to the DfT.

Yes, for those on franchises (some had already moved to management contracts though, most notably GTR), but that hasn’t been the situation for the last five years.

Franchise terms involved paying a cost or receiving a subsidy which would be defined for each year of the franchise at the outset. (It was more complex than that, but that was the basic principle.)

 

[chris_in_salop]

Of course, a lot of that so-called overprovision is simply the inevitable result of correct provision on a previous /future working. Didn’t a politician make a bit of a fool of themselves back in the day slating the running of nearly empty trains out of London in the morning peak, saying they should be used to strengthen the busy inbound workings?

But surely that politician has a point. A transport system that seemingly can only deliver massive overcrowding or massive over-capacity is not a good transport system.

Just because a solution is an operational impossibility at the moment doesn't mean that we should just shrug our shoulders.

 

[Trainbike46]

There have been threads in the past (now locked)

Today DfT released some numbers and it included this (national rail excluding Elizabeth line) latest period 3rd Feb to 2nd March



If some days are at 98% of 5 years ago (pre covid) then surely there must be pressure to restore some of the cut services, or is there a deliberate policy of making rail overcrowded and unattractive option these days if capacity is struggling.

Wondered what others think, especially when some operators eg SWR are running half hourly 8car trains (which 5 years ago were every 15 minutes and 10cars). Yesterday my local line had some 2car Cardiff-Portsmouth trains at evening peak hour (which 5 years ago were 5car), all seems inconsistent with average usage of upto 98% of pre covid.

The cynic in me also wonders why these have been slipped out quietly, along with other releases on a Wednesday lunchtime (when everyone is focused on Primeministers Questions).

Domestic Transport Usage by Mode

www.gov.uk

The excluding elizabeth line is slightly funny. I assume they also excluded TfL rail (but would like them to be specific about that in their detailed description of data to be sure).

However, some of the Elizabeth line services were operated by GWR for most of 2019, and I suspect they haven't compensated for that at all.

Then again, on a national level it likely isn't a massive difference.

Greater Anglia set themselves 'Target 80' which was a challenge to grow their passenger numbers by around 5 million in the 2024/25 financial year. It was confirmed yesterday that the final figure was easily exceeded with over 82m journeys recorded.

That's great to hear!

It's reported in the current Modern Railways that it's expected from this month that the TOC Annual Business Plans will be based on cost net of revenue, therefore TOCs will be incentivised to grow revenues.

About time too!

Thank god, that should have happened years ago!

 

[Stephen42]

The excluding elizabeth line is slightly funny. I assume they also excluded TfL rail (but would like them to be specific about that in their detailed description of data to be sure).

However, some of the Elizabeth line services were operated by GWR for most of 2019, and I suspect they haven't compensated for that at all.

Then again, on a national level it likely isn't a massive difference.

More details is published in the methodology note and an adjustment is made for GWR running services in 2019:

From September 2023 onwards, the ‘Daily domestic transport use by mode’ statistics include a second rail usage time series which excludes Elizabeth Line services (and other relevant services that have been replaced by the Elizabeth Line) from both the travel week and its equivalent baseline week in 2019, where appropriate.

Before May 2022, services which would correspond to the current western Elizabeth Line services were operated by TfL Rail and Great Western Railway (GWR). Therefore, journeys allocated to the Elizabeth line in the current travel week, and journeys allocated to the relevant TfL Rail/GWR services in the equivalent baseline week are removed. This allows for a more meaningful like-for-like comparison of rail demand across the period because the effects of the Elizabeth line on rail demand are removed.

 

[coppercapped]

Weren't they always incentivised to grow revenues in the days of franchising? Since they basically kept all their revenues, possibly minus a fixed cost paid to the DfT.

Up to the time Covid hit and the contracts were changed to keep the TOCs in business the income from all purchases of generic, non-company-specific rail tickets was passed to Rail Settlement Plan (a division of the Rail Delivery Group) which divvied up the income between the different TOCs based on the proportions calculated by the ORCATS (Operational Research Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Services) programme.

The DfT kept no part of the fares income; depending on the income/profits/subsidy profile agreed when the franchise was let the TOCs either paid the DfT any surplus or received a subsidy.

 

[The exile]

. A transport system that seemingly can only deliver massive overcrowding or massive over-capacity is not a good transport system.

Just because a solution is an operational impossibility at the moment doesn't mean that we should just shrug our shoulders.

So how does a transport system cope for example with the following:

20,000 people wish/need to travel from A to B between 07.00 and 08.00
25 people wish / need to travel from B to A between 07.00 and 08.00
Those 20,000 wish / need to return between 16.30 and 17.00
The 25 drift back at various times...
Demand between those times is approximately 250 per hour in each direction.

Public policy (outside the transport system) might be devised to alter that demand - but the transport system alone cannot.

 

[Horizon22]

But surely that politician has a point. A transport system that seemingly can only deliver massive overcrowding or massive over-capacity is not a good transport system.

Just because a solution is an operational impossibility at the moment doesn't mean that we should just shrug our shoulders.

Unless you want to implement teleportation (after which the rail industry is defunct anyway!), then yes we should shrug our shoulders! They do not have a point.

If a train runs A>B in peak direction and that is the demand flow, it has to run back from B to A or somewhere else (or to depot) and that is naturally going to have less (or zero) passengers on board. How do you suggest we solve this?

 

[Snow1964]

So how does a transport system cope for example with the following:

20,000 people wish/need to travel from A to B between 07.00 and 08.00
25 people wish / need to travel from B to A between 07.00 and 08.00
Those 20,000 wish / need to return between 16.30 and 17.00
The 25 drift back at various times...
Demand between those times is approximately 250 per hour in each direction.

Public policy (outside the transport system) might be devised to alter that demand - but the transport system alone cannot.

To some extent some of the problems are a direct result of rationalisation 50 years ago, and no urge to restore selected things even where populations have moved and demand has changed.

As an example there are some commuter services where the trains continue almost empty on return for extra 10-20 miles, because a reversing crossover at station on edge of conurbation no longer exists, whereas if the could get reverse earlier could do a second commuter run.

There are even sections where trains reverse using flyovers or fly-unders, so tracks are at different levels, but no one has built two level stabling sidings to avoid trains having to go miles extra to stable between peaks. It's not like electric trains need smoke or exhaust dispersal so can't park except in open

 

[The exile]

As an example there are some commuter services where the trains continue almost empty on return for extra 10-20 miles, because a reversing crossover at station on edge of conurbation no longer exists, whereas if the could get reverse earlier could do a second commuter run.

Not challenging the - just interested to know some examples….

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I would also like some examples. My understanding is that in pretty much all our commuter hubs (London, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, etc.) the thing that limits the frequency of the commuter trains is capacity at the terminals, not the fact that stock is unavailable because it's running an extra 10 miles out into the country and therefore can't do a 2nd commuter run (a problem that, to the extent that it exists, could in any case easily be solved by buying more stock). Lack of stock does in some cases mean trains are shorter than they really ought to be, but I don't think it's seriously impacting the numbers of commuter trains running.