Snow Hill Lines Likely To Stay at 4tph Long Term

[centraltrains]

West Midlands Railway have posted quite detailed and insightful responses to frequently asked questions in their latest Snow Hill Line updates.

However in response to "Why can’t we timetable more services and longer trains?", we learn the intention is not to return to the pre-covid 6 trains per hour frequency.

Snow Hill route recovery plan – May 22

Thank you for your patience.

www.westmidlandsrailway.co.uk

Summary:

The current improved concept is to maintain a 4tph base timetable in the medium to long term but rebalance it to a 15 minute service frequency alongside other operators

In Full:

Why can’t we timetable more services and longer trains?​

You said …

“7.56 Stourbridge to Snow Hill only has 4 carriages. I just missed the 7.30 train (not your fault) and had to wait 26 minutes for the next one. Please run more services and/or run services with more carriages on them at this time.”

“WMR strike again, 3 carriages on what I recall used to be a 6-carriage train before Covid???”

“Why are you now running 3 carriage trains in busy periods, 6 should be the minimum”

“The 16.24 to Kidderminster is now 3 carriages. It's the busiest service of the afternoon as far as I can see and always a squeeze to get on. Why not increase the carriages to this service and reduce the amount of carriages for the next service?”

Our response: Our current Snow Hill lines base timetable is designed to deliver four trains per hour (tph) through the core section in each direction on weekdays. With 2tph to/from Stratford upon Avon and one each at Dorridge & Whitlocks End in the east, and then 2tph to/from Worcester and 2tph to/from Kidderminster on the western leg of the route. As detailed above, each of these services is covered by 13 actual trainsets which run back and forth each day like a pinball from one end to another. However, the base concept of this timetable is based on is our pre-covid 6tph operation. Effectively, as customer numbers dropped and crew shortages began to bite during the early stages of the pandemic, we had to strip back services by removing circuits and from the existing 6tph / 10-minute frequency core timetable. We were not able to unilaterally redesign our timetable as our services are interwoven around other long-distance express and freight trains. In effect, we are currently running a 6tph timetable, with 2 services removed, rather than a timetable which was designed for 4tph.

We have also been sharing the remaining available train carriages with other operators while various new train fleets have met with manufacturing delays. With fewer carriages to play with, traincrew availability challenges and changes to commuting patterns, this has meant that for much of the last year we have operated a 4tph service, but within the constraints of the old timeslots – or paths – being designed for a 6tph operation.

This leaves some 20/40 minute gap in frequencies where they used to be 10/20 minute. Again, we understand this is not ideal and can dissuade customers from coming back to travel by train. With a better understanding of the returning commuter patterns, as well as timescales for our new trains coming online over the next year, our timetable strategy team have been working on a complete overhaul of the base route timetable alongside Network Rail and Chiltern Railways. The current improved concept is to maintain a 4tph base timetable in the medium to long term but rebalance it to a 15 minute service frequency alongside other operators. Fundamentally, this allows us to implement a consistent five-carriage allocation for all services, rather than the current mix of train lengths. It also means more resilience can be built into the operation, such as increased turnaround times at places like Kidderminster, which means any slight delays in one direction are less likely to impact the return journey. The new timetable is still in the design phase and will go through an industry validation process, which involves checking there are no conflicting train paths or calling patterns. We will also consult customers and stakeholders before introducing any changes to make sure that they work for as many people as possible.

This is deeply disappointing as it means the Whitlocks and Dorridge branches will retain a disappointing 2tph frequency, although balanced out to more even gaps in the service.
To me, pre-covid, every 20 minutes was just about frequent enough to use it as a "turn up and go" service, but half hourly thoroughly exceeds this threshold.

I imagine with the other operators involved, it would be very hard to revert these changes in the future back to 6tph through the core.

This is a very backwards step compared to the 2018 30-year rail strategy vision which proposed increasing the branch frequency to 6tph.



To me, living on one of the branches, it feels like a vote of no confidence in the recovery of the lines, thus I will most likely mitigate the inconvenience this poor frequency locks-in brings by learning to drive.

 

[Birmingham]

Thoroughly disappointing. Combined with the same frequency cuts on the Cross City, the region’s transport really is going down the pan. It also suffers the halving of frequency on cross-country routes for long-distance travel.

Frequency means so much imo.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is a very backwards step compared to the 2018 30-year rail strategy vision which proposed increasing the branch frequency to 6tph.

It strikes me as a very sensible move. Fewer, longer trains. More punctual, more reliable and cheaper to run.

I'm not sure I'd call 3tph turn up and go unless you like standing around for 19 minutes. I even use a timetable for 4tph on Merseyrail. To me, 6tph to my station is the bare minimum where I'd consider just rocking up randomly without recourse to the timetable, I don't even think Metrolink's 5 is good enough for that type of usage. But it's hardly difficult, if a clockface timetable is used, to remember four numbers (minutes past each hour in each direction).

To me, living on one of the branches, it feels like a vote of no confidence in the recovery of the lines, thus I will most likely mitigate the inconvenience this poor frequency locks-in brings by learning to drive.

I think that's gross hyperbole to be honest. Half hourly is still a very useful service. It's below that that it gets more questionable.

 

[centraltrains]

It strikes me as a very sensible move. Fewer, longer trains. More punctual, more reliable and cheaper to run.

I'm not sure I'd call 3tph turn up and go unless you like standing around for 19 minutes. I even use a timetable for 4tph on Merseyrail. To me, 6tph to my station is the bare minimum where I'd consider just rocking up randomly without recourse to the timetable, I don't even think Metrolink's 5 is good enough for that type of usage. But it's hardly difficult, if a clockface timetable is used, to remember four numbers (minutes past each hour in each direction).



I think that's gross hyperbole to be honest. Half hourly is still a very useful service. It's below that that it gets more questionable.

The important of frequency is a subjective matter, to which each individual will come to their own decisions about. For me, if using the train is a choice, 20 minute frequency is the minimum I need to be content with the service (the maximum extended-wait for cancelled services plays factor here).

I'd argue that shorter more frequent trains are more attractive from a usability perspective than longer less frequent services - if there is truth to this then really we should be short-term subsidising these frequencies to encourage more public transport use. This is a city-commuter line, so I'd expect good frequencies. I admire London frequencies, and felt the balance of every 20 minutes was about right for the comparative size. If we afforded shorter frequent trains in the days of Class 150s, we should be able to again (although I understand the economics match up differently)!

It feels like the effort to encourage people back into using trains has been low. On my branch, the most popular morning service was the ~08:10 from Whitlock's End, which hasn't been reinstated*. The alternatives are 08:40 (get's in too late) or the 07:50 (requires people to get up earlier and hang around Birmingham for around ~50 minutes before 9am starts). If working from home is an option, then these timings don't play nicely with commuting times and I'd argue further discourage people from going back to the office.

*It was briefly reinstated in sometime in July-September 2020, in December they switched which diagram was ran, I think this was mainly based on which trains lined up well for schools in Hagley as for a bit they ran an additional afternoon service after many complaints from the schools/parents.



You can call it hyperbole if you'd like - I've been thinking about it since starting to commute again after the pandemic, my personal situation may also play into the decision too, I could explain more but I think this reply is long enough for now!

 

[Bletchleyite]

The important of frequency is a subjective matter, to which each individual will come to their own decisions about. For me, if using the train is a choice, 20 minute frequency is the minimum I need to be content with the service (the maximum extended-wait for cancelled services plays factor here).

It's interesting you mention the latter. I would personally prefer a punctual, reliable half hourly service to a 20 minute frequency one with cancellations and delays all over the place. Until you go down past half hourly (and certainly below hourly), the key things I want are punctuality, reliability and enough capacity.

I'd argue that shorter more frequent trains are more attractive from a usability perspective than longer less frequent services - if there is truth to this then really we should be short-term subsidising these frequencies to encourage more public transport use. This is a city-commuter line, so I'd expect good frequencies. I admire London frequencies, and felt the balance of every 20 minutes was about right for the comparative size. If we afforded shorter frequent trains in the days of Class 150s, we should be able to again (although I understand the economics match up differently)!

You mean TfL frequencies? Half hourly is pretty much par for the course in much of South East commuterland, or sometimes you get a pattern like 2 fast, 2 slow but you'd not use the slows so they're pretty much irrelevant to a trip to London and more about connectivity. I think a lot of people from outside the SE think it's a land of milk, honey and 12-car trains every 5 minutes. It very much is not. 2 useful trains per hour is by far the most common sort of service - and some, when you get more into the sticks, are hourly.

Yes, Victoria to East Croydon and Euston to Watford Jn are pretty frequent, but so's Sandhills to Liverpool Central or New St to International or Wolves - they're just the coming together of multiple services.

It feels like the effort to encourage people back into using trains has been low. On my branch, the most popular morning service was the ~08:10 from Whitlock's End, which hasn't been reinstated*. The alternatives are 08:40 (get's in too late) or the 07:50 (requires people to get up earlier and hang around Birmingham for around ~50 minutes before 9am starts). If working from home is an option, then these timings don't play nicely with commuting times and I'd argue further discourage people from going back to the office.

And that's the problem the timetable recast is fixing. The present service is 3tph with a diagram dropped, so giving you a roughly 20-40 split which is inconvenient as you say. But if the options were 0750 and 0820 then that might be quite a bit more useful.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

It's interesting you mention the latter. I would personally prefer a punctual, reliable half hourly service to a 20 minute frequency one with cancellations and delays all over the place. Until you go down past half hourly (and certainly below hourly), the key things I want are punctuality, reliability and enough capacity.



You mean TfL frequencies? Half hourly is pretty much par for the course in much of South East commuterland, or sometimes you get a pattern like 2 fast, 2 slow but you'd not use the slows so they're pretty much irrelevant to a trip to London and more about connectivity. I think a lot of people from outside the SE think it's a land of milk, honey and 12-car trains every 5 minutes. It very much is not. 2 useful trains per hour is by far the most common sort of service - and some, when you get more into the sticks, are hourly.

Yes, Victoria to East Croydon and Euston to Watford Jn are pretty frequent, but so's Sandhills to Liverpool Central or New St to International or Wolves - they're just the coming together of multiple services.



And that's the problem the timetable recast is fixing. The present service is 3tph with a diagram dropped, so giving you a roughly 20-40 split which is inconvenient as you say. But if the options were 0750 and 0820 then that might be quite a bit more useful.

There is no guarantee a half hourly service will suddenly magically be extremely punctual than a 20 minute frequency.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is no guarantee a half hourly service will suddenly magically be extremely punctual than a 20 minute frequency.

It obviously depends on why it's unpunctual/unreliable, but you can "loosen" diagrams to achieve this. if cancellations are being caused by short staffing, it almost certainly will fix it.

 

[BeijingDave]

To me, pre-covid, every 20 minutes was just about frequent enough to use it as a "turn up and go" service, but half hourly thoroughly exceeds this threshold.

More than once every half hour on these kinds of routes is something of a luxury at the moment.

I don't see a big deal in waiting 25 minutes if I just miss a train. Are you really that impatient that you won't use a suburb-to-city rail service if it's only every half hour?

 

[SCDR_WMR]

Outrageous decision based purely on cost cutting and to keep the TOC below it's prescribed level of service (80% of pre-covid) by the DfT.

Both the Dorridge and Whitlock's lines require a minimum of a 3tph service, and Stratford at least a 2tph. These were very busy lines pre-covid both for commuting and for local leisure.

 

[trundlewagon]

At least it's being retimed to give a 15-minuye frequency rather than the 10/20 nonsense we seem to be stuck with on the Cross City for the long term.

It is interesting though that one of the earlier Snow Hill route recovery blogs said they'd be up to establishment by October so they could run the full pre-Covid timetable again...

Snow Hill route recovery plan - March 22

Living with Covid There has been lots of talk in recent months about society “learning to live with covid” alongside our normal lives. At an industry level, the railway is learning to adapt to the new commuting patterns, increased demand for leisure journeys and rebuild itself after two years of...

www.westmidlandsrailway.co.uk

We predict that this should happen in July based on our current timetable, and later on in October to recover the full establishment required for our pre-pandemic scale timetables.

 

[Birmingham]

I'd argue that shorter more frequent trains are more attractive from a usability perspective than longer less frequent services

Absolutely agree, this really doesn’t get enough attention. I do think higher frequency is more valuable than longer services; especially on commute flows like the Snow Hill (and I think this is where it hurts the most on CrossCountry too: their commute flows like Cheltenham-Bristol and Cheltenham-Birmingham).

 

[centraltrains]

It's interesting you mention the latter. I would personally prefer a punctual, reliable half hourly service to a 20 minute frequency one with cancellations and delays all over the place. Until you go down past half hourly (and certainly below hourly), the key things I want are punctuality, reliability and enough capacity.

Generally, the Snow Hill Lines weren't too unreliable.

I think the thing which effects reliability the most, is being staffed/serviced from 3 depots, which often limits Worcester trains from turning back trains to make up time, meaning more often Whitlock's/Dorridge services face the brunt of cancellations when heavy delays occur. The Cross City line being serviced solely from New Street seems to be able to react much better to issues.

The turn around times are generally tight as is, generally: Worcester: 2-7 mins, Kidderminster: 5 mins, Dorridge: 5 mins, Whitlock's: 8 mins, Startford: 3/20 mins (20 if via Dorridge).

At the moment Whitlock's/Dorridge - Worcester diagrams are self-contained (bounce between Whitlocks-Worcester-Whitlocks-Worcester all day) and I don't immediately see where recasting would introduce more timing if it is just shifting the times they run at without introducing more diagrams.

You mean TfL frequencies?

Yes - and GEML before it went to TfL Rail/Crossrail. I feel it should be closer to rapid frequencies (like trams) given it's an urban commuter line. It will be the same frequency as semi-express services such as Birmingham to Leicester & Nottingham (which I'm sure could be argued as being 5/6 coach voyager hourly rather than a turbostar twice hourly too).

I don't see a big deal in waiting 25 minutes if I just miss a train. Are you really that impatient that you won't use a suburb-to-city rail service if it's only every half hour?

It's a mixed bag of different aspects which make it less attractive from many levels:

I'll probably still use it, just I'll no longer plan to base my everyday life around the trains, seek jobs which don't require it for a commute (you might get a laugh from that as I'm just finishing university and perhaps unrealistically expect that I'll be able to seek the location of a job ).
With the current 40/20 gap - I'm much more inclined to run for a train if there's about to be a 40 minute gap (and thus set off my Asthma) whereas I use to relax knowing a train would be soon regardless. For me, 30 minutes would still be of a "I should run" threshold.
And then waiting longer if there's a cancellation.. or maybe I should just be grateful that I'd be meeting the 30 minute threshold more often!



Although, they've been training/recruiting enough drivers to reach 6tph again, so I wonder how they'll use the extra staff.

 

[Watershed]

Absolutely agree, this really doesn’t get enough attention. I do think higher frequency is more valuable than longer services; especially on commute flows like the Snow Hill (and I think this is where it hurts the most on CrossCountry too: their commute flows like Cheltenham-Bristol and Cheltenham-Birmingham).

Absolutely. Frequency is a significant component in demand. Obviously providing more, shorter trains generally uses fewer resources (certainly fewer drivers) than fewer, longer trains.

But up until now the judgment has clearly been that the increased resources are warranted by the demand it satisfies and causes. There has been an appalling lack of honesty and public consultation about some of the permanent timetable cuts that are happening under the guise of Covid.

 

[BeijingDave]

Absolutely. Frequency is a significant component in demand. Obviously providing more, shorter trains generally uses fewer resources (certainly fewer drivers) than fewer, longer trains.

But up until now the judgment has clearly been that the increased resources are warranted by the demand it satisfies and causes. There has been an appalling lack of honesty and public consultation about some of the permanent timetable cuts that are happening under the guise of Covid.

You can only drive demand so much. What you say makes sense in the context of London and surrounding areas. Perhaps not so much in the context of places like Dorridge and Frodsham, when increasing a frequency to 20 minutes might well generate a little extra demand but may well tip the scales so that overall costs > revenues.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

You can only drive demand so much. What you say makes sense in the context of London and surrounding areas. Perhaps not so much in the context of places like Dorridge and Frodsham, when increasing a frequency to 20 minutes might well generate a little extra demand but may well tip the scales so that overall costs > revenues.

Do you live near Dorridge or on the snow hill lines?

There is a huge number of rail users on all of these lines whether it's from Leamington, Dorridge, Whitlock's, Kidderminster or Worcester! Bus travel is also very high as the frequency is very good, even now, across most lines /areas.

It is important that rail offers a high frequency service or it looses passengers to buses, something passengers would prefer not to do.
Having to wait 30-40 minutes when commuting or going to school has a big impact on passenger numbers, not everyone wants to get to work 30 minutes early because the next would make them late for work.

If there were more services on the North Warwick line in particular it would have a much bigger impact that the Dorridge line as that also has the Chiltern services. Stratford is definitely under served.

 

[Sprinter107]

The North Warwicks has never been as busy off peak as the Dorridge line, even when they ran at 3tph. In the middle of the day there was more fresh air than passengers.
Dorridge and Solihull have extra calls by Chiltern trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is important that rail offers a high frequency service or it looses passengers to buses, something passengers would prefer not to do.

My view on parallel rail and bus routes is well known, but that aside there's no great problem if someone chooses to switch from rail to bus, it's still public transport. Rail and bus where they do parallel tend to be slightly different in what is offered - rail is generally quicker but less frequent, bus very slow but more frequent. It's where people are switching to car that is an issue. And nobody's really going to do that because of a drop from 3 to 2tph, because driving into Birmingham (the main market) is really unpleasant and expensive. It's just not enough of a drop.

 

[centraltrains]

In the middle of the day there was more fresh air than passengers.

Would that not be expected on most commuter/urban lines?

 

[Birmingham]

You can only drive demand so much. What you say makes sense in the context of London and surrounding areas. Perhaps not so much in the context of places like Dorridge and Frodsham, when increasing a frequency to 20 minutes might well generate a little extra demand but may well tip the scales so that overall costs > revenues.

These are suburban lines in our second largest city. They’re not sleepy halts.

 

[Sprinter107]

Would that not be expected on most commuter/urban lines?

Maybe, maybe not. The Dorridge line has a very frequent parallel bus service to Birmingham, passing very closely to the stations at Solihull, Olton, Acocks Green, and Tyseley, but still the train service is busy, even off peak. Possibly justifying its 3 trains per hour. It even seemed to hold it own during Covid. In contrast, the line out to Whitlocks End doesn't have a parallel bus service, the only station with a bus to Birmingham passing near is Hall Green. So, youd think it would be the busier of the two off peak, but it wasn't, even with 3 off peak trains per hour. Peak hours, its very busy. So, the more frequent trains didnt attract as many passengers as the Dorridge line, despite being similar suburbs. Two per hour off peak is just about right for Whitlocks End.

 

[centraltrains]

Just for the takes of comparison, taking a look at the oldest and newest historic timetables in my collection... Shirley (since Whitlocks wasn't the terminus then) had the following departure times into Birmingham:
May 1992: 0700, 0723, 0738, 0753, 0808, 0819, 0835, 0903, 0930, 0953 ... then half hourly until the evening peak.
September 1996: 0654, 0714, 0737, 0754, 0809, 0819, 0834, 0858 ... then approximately every 20 minutes until the evening peak.
...
December 2018: 0630, 0651, 0703, 0729, 0752, 0810, 0820, 0840, 0903 ... then approximately every 20 minutes until the evening peak.
May 2019: 0629, 0638, 0703, 0729, 0736, 0752, 0810, 0818, 0826, 0840, 0903 ... then approximately every 20 minutes until the evening peak.
Current: 0638, 0659, 0728, 0743, 0801*, 0843, 0903 ... then every 40 then 20 minutes until the evening peak.

*looks like my recall for the current timings was wrong... whoops... only an extra 10 minute earlier than the 0810 was.

If they reintroduced peak time extras including within the 9am hour then perhaps it wouldn't be so bad.

 

[Sprinter107]

Yes, that gap between 08.01 and 08.43 definitely needs plugging. And one about 09.20ish. It would be nice to have an even interval off peak too. Don't like 40 / 20.

 

[Horizon22]

Yes - and GEML before it went to TfL Rail/Crossrail. I feel it should be closer to rapid frequencies (like trams) given it's an urban commuter line. It will be the same frequency as semi-express services such as Birmingham to Leicester & Nottingham (which I'm sure could be argued as being 5/6 coach voyager hourly rather than a turbostar twice hourly too).

And how busy are these trains on Snow Hill lines off-peak (and even peak for that matter)? Because when I was previously there outside a few busy periods, it only got really busy in between Stourbridge - Solihull. Most of the time there was a lot of fresh air. I can tell you the GEML frequencies are often quite busy, especially in the early mornings where you've got 9-car train after 9-car train rammed, even post-pandemic.

Frequency vs capacity is always a key argument with proponents on both sides, and each have their merit and you could say both have worked / not worked dependent on which example you wish to give in the country, so not sure its clear either way.

These are suburban lines in our second largest city. They’re not sleepy halts.

There are in reality several very lightly-used stations outside of the other small/mid-sized towns on route. The issue is at the ends are quite sizable

Absolutely. Frequency is a significant component in demand. Obviously providing more, shorter trains generally uses fewer resources (certainly fewer drivers) than fewer, longer trains.

But up until now the judgment has clearly been that the increased resources are warranted by the demand it satisfies and causes. There has been an appalling lack of honesty and public consultation about some of the permanent timetable cuts that are happening under the guise of Covid.

How've you worked that out? It's likely to be more diagrams overall with more trains...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, that gap between 08.01 and 08.43 definitely needs plugging. And one about 09.20ish. It would be nice to have an even interval off peak too. Don't like 40 / 20.

The recast is, I believe, to actual 30 minute intervals. 40/20 isn't ideal but is because it wasn't possible to just change to 30/30 without other TOCs changing as well, hence the Dec 2022 recast involving Chiltern, Avanti, LNR.....

The situation is the same on the south WCML where all three Northampton-Euston services per hour arrive at Euston within ten minutes of each other (xx23, xx25 and xx33) which means despite having 3tph you've really only effectively got 1tph - the recast will bring an even* interval 2tph service which is far more useful.

* Ish. It'll be off 2 minutes at one end or the other because only one of the two will call at Watford Jn (which will have 4 other trains per hour) and another stop isn't taken out to compensate. But near enough.

 

[The Planner]

Only part of Dec 22 affecting Chiltern is the Nuneaton Leamingtons causing a clash at Leamington. Snow Hill recast is a different beast.

 

[centraltrains]

And how busy are these trains on Snow Hill lines off-peak (and even peak for that matter)?

Historically, in 2012, one service made the top 10 most overcrowded services statistics (https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/dec/19/crunch-time-most-overcrowded-train). (Not sure if the 150s were still in operation then?)
Certainly pre-covid, all 5pm hour Birmingham - Whitlocks trains were sardine tin crushed (however all were scheduled as 3 coaches).

 

[Horizon22]

Historically, in 2012, one service made the top 10 most overcrowded services statistics (https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/dec/19/crunch-time-most-overcrowded-train). (Not sure if the 150s were still in operation then?)
Certainly pre-covid, all 5pm hour Birmingham - Whitlocks trains were sardine tin crushed (however all were scheduled as 3 coaches).

And it would have only been busy Stourbridge - Snow Hill in my experience (and as you say maybe just a few coaches) and probably the 4tph is fairly representative of off-peak demand. It might better to have a more intense "inner service" for those that are genuinely busier, but that might be harder to find suitable capacity for.

As an aside, pretty much every train on that list (or equivalent today) now has increased capacity & stock, not increased frequency. When you get to an intensively used network, only the former is possible anyway.

 

[centraltrains]

And it would have only been busy Stourbridge - Snow Hill in my experience (and as you say maybe just a few coaches) and probably the 4tph is fairly representative of off-peak demand. It might better to have a more intense "inner service" for those that are genuinely busier, but that might be harder to find suitable capacity for.

2019 timetable shows it as 3 coaches although running at the slightly later 0757 time.

I wonder if anything could/could've been done to get passenger numbers up on the Whitlock's branch. The (relatively) sparse 30's semi-ds suburbs probably don't help.

 

[Sprinter107]

Its not a quiet backwater by any means. It certainly justifies its 2tph off peak, on summer weekends and Bank Holidays, the Stratford trains along there are very busy. But it isn't as busy as the Dorridge line. I'm not sure how you would increase those numbers.

 

[Watershed]

How've you worked that out? It's likely to be more diagrams overall with more trains...

Whoops, mixed that up. It's worth noting that it's by no means a 1:1 scaling of services to diagrams though - e.g. running 6tph may only use 30% more crew than running 4tph (even though it's a 50% increase in services).