The railways in 1963 vs 2023 - what would you prefer?

[Philip]

If doing a comparison over 60 years of the UK railways in the year 1963 compared with in 2023, which would you prefer to use & experience?

In 1963 most of the line & station closures of the 60s hadn't happened at that point (although many stations were beginning to close) which meant a much more accessible railway compared with today - if you wanted to visit a small town or a village there'd be a good chance of being able to take a train rather than relying on buses as today. Railways were cheaper to use back then and there were still many steam locomotives in service but by then the first generation of diesel locomotives and of DMUs had arrived, along with some EMUs, making for an interesting variety of stock. This, along with traditional features such as semaphore signals and boxes still in abundance, meant you could argue strongly that the railway had more character back then, as well as better staffing. It wasn't still in the dark ages either, as modern progress was being made with early electrification projects in full swing.

On the case for the 2023 railway, no one can argue that the railways are much safer now; stronger train bodyshells which remain largely intact in a collision, better quality track & signalling, better maintenance too. The railways are also much cleaner in general - greatly reduced fuel emissions with many more electric trains/lines around now and cleaner diesel trains, toilets which don't dump the contents onto the track. Much better disabled access & train interiors, much improved service on the lines which survived the 60s cull, I'm guessing a more reliable railway even including the recent problems of cancellations and in general a more professional image compared with 60 years ago.

Would you prefer to be a regular user of the 1963 UK railway, or the 2023 one?

 

[FlyingPotato]

If I was having a one off experience, 1963 - Different trains, different lines, more named trains and so on

But as a regular user - 2023. While there are problems with the railways today, the benefits usually outweigh them. Reliability and frequency are a lot better today than in 1963.
Most of the benefits I can think of, have already been mentioned.

Overall, definitely 2023.

 

[yorksrob]

1963 for me.

The network hadn't yet been destroyed and the trains were far more comfortable.

 

[FlyingPotato]

If I was having a one off experience, 1963 - Different trains, different lines, more named trains and so on

But as a regular user - 2023. While there are problems with the railways today, the benefits usually outweigh them. Reliability and frequency are a lot better today than in 1963.
Most of the benefits I can think of, have already been mentioned.

Overall, definitely 2023.

The one big attraction for 1963, is that I think there would be a direct train between my place of study and my Hometown which doesn't exist anymore

 

[W-on-Sea]

More branch lines open, sure.....mostly (a few notable exceptions aside) with a few slow and infrequent trains on....

Today's railway is far from perfect (and the bus services that link formerly rail-connected towns with the network vary widely in quality and frequency)....but on most counts (let us return to the pre-industrial action and pre-COVID era and suspend belief that it is still early 2020...) services are more frequent on a majority of lines, more reliable, cleaner and safer.

What was better then? Stations, perhaps.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Personally - I don't care about signals. I don't care about steam locomotives. Nor about "safety" - in general, yes - but in the railway context - no, not even then with the "unsafe" railway we had, it was still by far the safest way to travel and in any case safer than self-driving (which appears to be the default or only way to make many journeys either reliably or quickly or punctually, nowadays). And quite probably safer than present buses. It's my opinion that persistent attempts to make the railway (actually anything, really) ever closer to 100% safe has gone beyond the point at which the attendant disadvantages begin to outweigh the risks. In rail terms that includes, for example, extended journey times in stopping services as a result of the "performance" with doors, and very reduced speed limits through stations on non-stopping trains as a result, presumably, of raised platform heights and thereby reduced clearances.

So were pretty much left with rolling stock/passenger comfort and network. And those things were, in my view, both better then than now. Having refreshed my experience of 1960s DMUs at East Lancs about a year ago, I still prefer - a forward view, good windows, low backed seats and plenty of them, space for bicycles and other luggage and so on. And I preferred to be able to travel directly from Beverley to York; from Scarborough to Whitby; and so on and so on. The only thing that was negative in comparison was (outwith what was the Southern Region) clockface timetabling.

 

[simonw]

If doing a comparison over 60 years of the UK railways in the year 1963 compared with in 2023, which would you prefer to use & experience?

In 1963 most of the line & station closures of the 60s hadn't happened at that point (although many stations were beginning to close) which meant a much more accessible railway compared with today - if you wanted to visit a small town or a village there'd be a good chance of being able to take a train rather than relying on buses as today. Railways were cheaper to use back then and there were still many steam locomotives in service but by then the first generation of diesel locomotives and of DMUs had arrived, along with some EMUs, making for an interesting variety of stock. This, along with traditional features such as semaphore signals and boxes still in abundance, meant you could argue strongly that the railway had more character back then, as well as better staffing. It wasn't still in the dark ages either, as modern progress was being made with early electrification projects in full swing.

On the case for the 2023 railway, no one can argue that the railways are much safer now; stronger train bodyshells which remain largely intact in a collision, better quality track & signalling, better maintenance too. The railways are also much cleaner in general - greatly reduced fuel emissions with many more electric trains/lines around now and cleaner diesel trains, toilets which don't dump the contents onto the track. Much better disabled access & train interiors, much improved service on the lines which survived the 60s cull, I'm guessing a more reliable railway even including the recent problems of cancellations and in general a more professional image compared with 60 years ago.

Would you prefer to be a regular user of the 1963 UK railway, or the 2023 one?

With rose tinted glasses 1963, in reality 2023.

1963: lots of variety but dirty slow trains with often large gaps between them calling at often run down unpainted stations.

2023: little variety but faster trains, often far more frequent, generally calling at better maintained stations and whilst some are less comfortable, trains are generally cleane r.

Preserved railways do not portray the reality of 1960s rail tr avel.

 

[The Planner]

Personally - I don't care about signals. I don't care about steam locomotives. Nor about "safety" - in general, yes - but in the railway context - no, not even then with the "unsafe" railway we had, it was still by far the safest way to travel and in any case safer than self-driving (which appears to be the default or only way to make many journeys either reliably or quickly or punctually, nowadays). And quite probably safer than present buses. It's my opinion that persistent attempts to make the railway (actually anything, really) ever closer to 100% safe has gone beyond the point at which the attendant disadvantages begin to outweigh the risks. In rail terms that includes, for example, extended journey times in stopping services as a result of the "performance" with doors, and very reduced speed limits through stations on non-stopping trains as a result, presumably, of raised platform heights and thereby reduced clearances.

So were pretty much left with rolling stock/passenger comfort and network. And those things were, in my view, both better then than now. Having refreshed my experience of 1960s DMUs at East Lancs about a year ago, I still prefer - a forward view, good windows, low backed seats and plenty of them, space for bicycles and other luggage and so on. And I preferred to be able to travel directly from Beverley to York; from Scarborough to Whitby; and so on and so on. The only thing that was negative in comparison was (outwith what was the Southern Region) clockface timetabling.

Which stations have reduced passing speeds?

 

[devon_belle]

I love railway history, but it should remain just that: history. Faster, regular, and more frequent journeys, with high passenger safety has to be appreciated.

It is unfortunate that during the time between 1963 and 2023, many routes and stations have been lost, and the railway has routinely failed to invest in infrastructure and stock which could have provided even faster, longer, and more reliable trains. I wonder what we will say in 2063... I'll get back to you on that one.

If you offer me a time machine, I'll definitely go back to 1963 and have a nose around!

 

[Bletchleyite]

For fun? 1963, as can be experienced on preserved lines.

For getting somewhere? 2023 without a doubt. I don't want my WCML journey times doubled, thanks.

 

[ac6000cw]

The 2023 version, definitely.

 

[Geoff DC]

1963 definitely.
You could turn up at almost any station and ask for a ticket to almost anywhere else and within no time at all you would be given a piece of cardboard that would enable you to go exactly where you wanted and at a reasonable price. You didn't have to book a few days before to avoid eyewatering costs.
Plus if you were travelling long distance the trains were comfortable & usually served really excellent meals.
Not sure when the decline set in, but it became most noticeable for me when ****achy IETs replaced HSTs on long-distance GWR services & Beardy introduced voyagers on Virgin XC.

 

[Bevan Price]

1963 (although circa 1959 was even better). Less frequent trains, maybe; sometimes a bit dirty. Some late running.
But - cancellations due to staff shortages? - almost unknown.
Connections - reasonable attempts to hold connections - you wouldn't normally see your connection depart just as you arrived in a nearby platform.
Fares- simple mileage based fares, no random changes of definition of "peak hours".
Few inadequate "short length" trains (although that was starting to happen.)
Overcrowding not unknown, but was mainly only at peak hours, or on some Summer Saturdays.
"Joined-up" railway rather than fragmented "non-network" that we now have.
Seats in corridor/open stock generally more spacious than now, and on average, much better alignment with windows.
(Although I would exclude Gresley Quad-Arts from the "comfort" description - they were dire - legroom very poor.)
And from an enthusiasts' point of view, much more variety of motive power, including some steam - although several interesting classes, including most 4-4-0s had disappeared in the 1950s.

 

[satisnek]

As a railway enthusiast, definitely 1963. But outside of railways, I don't think 1963 would have much to offer me, so I'll stick to the present!

 

[HSTEd]

2023 every day.
1963 has no air con, no modern high intensity timetable and the trains have pretty poor performance.

 

[yorkie]

1963 definitely.
You could turn up at almost any station and ask for a ticket to almost anywhere else and within no time at all you would be given a piece of cardboard that would enable you to go exactly where you wanted and at a reasonable price. ...

Are you sure?

According to a source I found, the 1963 cost was 3p per mile:

https://www.railwaymuseum.org.uk/sites/default/files/2018-06/rail-fares-resource-pack.pdf

Period 1962-1964
Rate/mile 3d

According to the Bank of England inflation calculator that's 52p today.

York to Sheffield is 46miles via Pontefract (it may have been a bit different via the old main line at the time), which would translate to around £24 each way, i.e. £48 return. Would this have been valid on longer routes, such as via Leeds?

The fares today range from £21.80 Off Peak Day Return to £30.60 Anytime Return; this fare is equally valid via longer routes such as via Leeds. There is no need to specify the route you are taking with this ticket.

Is my source incorrect, or have I made a mistake?

Of course inflation is difficult to measure, as everyday items such as milk, biscuits etc will have increased at a much slower rate (i.e are cheaper in real terms) than (say) property prices, but if we are talking about whether or not train travel has become cheaper or more affordable, we perhaps ought to be considering wages and/or disposable income?

Rail fares were really good value about 20 years ago and there is no doubt that recent rises have been unfair, but if you were to compare 1963 with 2003, you'd definitely find 2003 to be far better value. Indeed around 20 years ago was possibly the sweet spot for rail fares being the most affordable for the average person?

Fares- simple mileage based fares, no random changes of definition of "peak hours".

Do you have any examples of how this worked for journeys such as York to Sheffield; was it as simple as charging the fare based on the shortest reasonable route, the longest reasonable route or an average? Also, were the fares cheaper than today, particularly for those who travel outside of peak times, and do you have any examples?

 

[Dr Hoo]

From the perspective of the villages in the Hope Valley 1963 was pretty poor, with most of the small number of local trains only shuttling between Sheffield and Chinley, where it was necessary to change to travel to/from Manchester. Rubbish service on Sundays.

Now we have pretty regular hourly through services in modern and comfortable Class 195s.

Plus plenty of cheap fares for many with railcards or Derbyshire Wayfarers. (Yes, I know that that doesn't cover everyone or all journeys.)

 

[6Gman]

For fun? 1963, as can be experienced on preserved lines.

For getting somewhere? 2023 without a doubt. I don't want my WCML journey times doubled, thanks.

This.

As an enthusiast - 1963. As a passenger - 2023.

And I'm baffled by the suggestion that trains were more comfortable in 1963. Horsehair cushions that pricked your legs, draughty windows, indifferent heating. And first generation DMUs were much noisier and smellier than current units.

 

[Irascible]

If I wasn't commuting, 1963 for sure - if there's something interesting to look at out the window I'm fine with slower journeys. Mk1 stock & first gen DMUs could both be comfortable if they were properly maintained.

As a commuter the only thing I'd want to be riding in 1963 would be a tube train, you can stand as well in an old one as a new one. I used the Northern Line for years with stock that predated 1963, so I got the same experience anyway.

 

[RobShipway]

When it comes to railway lines open and having more opportunities to travel by rail, then for me it is 1963 Pre - Beeching. However, when it comes to safety and environment, then it is today in 2023 that is a lot better.

Unfortunately, many lines closed by the Beeching act can no longer be re - opened as there is buildings and many other objects in the way nowadays of where those lines once ran or they have been converted into necessary cycle paths to keep cyclists safe. I will be very surprised if there is a large number of old lines reopened, despite the Government having ideas about doing so.

 

[dk1]

2023, no point going back it'll only disappoint.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Which stations have reduced passing speeds?

Beverley and Cottingham for example. I suspect there are many many more.

Are you sure?

According to a source I found, the 1963 cost was 3p per mile:

https://www.railwaymuseum.org.uk/sites/default/files/2018-06/rail-fares-resource-pack.pdf

According to the Bank of England inflation calculator that's 52p today.

I believe that says 3d. 3d = 1.25p Inflation adjustment gives 21.82p/mile today.

 

[sprinterguy]

Certainly if I had access to a time machine, I would enjoy spending a week or so exploring the Beeching-era network.

For general use though, I believe there's greater utility to be had from the present day railway in terms of increased frequency and decreased journey times than there was when the geographical reach of the railway network was greater.

 

[yorksrob]

And I'm baffled by the suggestion that trains were more comfortable in 1963. Horsehair cushions that pricked your legs, draughty windows, indifferent heating. And first generation DMUs were much noisier and smellier than current units.

On the Southern we had luxurious shiny new CEP's and not quite as luxurious, but still quite comfortable HAP's in Kent.

PAN-PUL's in Sussex with the first CIG's coming on line in the next year.

On some of those secondary routes that we no longer have, rickety old push - pull steam sets had even been replaced with state of the art new thumpers.

Full thumper service on the Hastings main line etc.

Not an ironing board seat or clinical florescent light in sight.

And if that wasn't enough, you could upgrade to first class !

 

[yorkie]

Beverley and Cottingham for example. I suspect there are many many more.

I believe that says 3d. 3d = 1.25p Inflation adjustment gives 21.82p/mile today.

Ah, I read that "d" confusingly meant pennies however what I didn't realise is that old pennies became half pennies.

So it was similar to today, when using the shortest route. What's unclear is whether this was valid via a similar range of routes, and if not, what the cost would have been.

 

[The Planner]

Beverley and Cottingham for example. I suspect there are many many more.

What were they in the past?

 

[Magdalia]

I'm not quite old enough to remember 1963, but I do remember 1973. I would definitely go back and have 1963, which would be 1973 but better.

My trips up to London could be on the 0930 Cambridge Buffet Express, travelling in a nice comfortable MarkI coach with the option of visiting the Gresley buffet car. I could trundle round East Anglia in a DMU, or on the occasional loco hauled service. I could go from Cambridge to Oxford on the train. I could do a summer day trip to Sunny Hunny on a loco hauled train, plus the occasional excursion to more exotic destinations. At Ely I'd have the Yarmouth-Birmingham, Harwich-Manchester and Lowestoft-York trains to get me to the Midlands and the North, all of them with a buffet car.

And the staff, though they may not have been much use a lot of the time, would have delivered if there was any disruption and moved heaven and earth to get me home.

There's one thing I'd miss from 2023 and that's Thameslink. It is nice to be able the get across London without having to use the Underground.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not quite old enough to remember 1963, but I do remember 1973. I would definitely go back and have 1963, which would be 1973 but better.

There's something to be said for the optimistic time of the early HSTs and potential for the APT. But what was true of back then was that stations were really, really dirty, and often badly run down.

The railway - and public realm generally - is so much cleaner now.

 

[Magdalia]

But what was true of back then was that stations were really, really dirty, and often badly run down.

The railway - and public realm generally - is so much cleaner now.

That's a fair point. On the railway, steam traction was inherently dirty so there was little incentive to keep stations clean.

That would have been less of a problem for me here in the Fens in 1963, as steam had already disappeared almost completely.

 

[Belfastmarty]

Interesting question, especially as I have a 60th birthday hoveing in to view in the not too distant future. I think it really needs to be asked as 2 different questions: If doing a comparison over 60 years of the UK railways in the year 1963 compared with in 2023, which would you prefer to use & experience (a) from the perspective of an enthusiast and (b) from the perspective of a traveller. For me, as an enthusiast, 1963 is the answer. Modernisation plan in full swing, steam still in operation, Beeching yet to be implemented, many elements of railway operation basically unchanged from grouping times, plentiful locos, plentiful freight, plentiful branch & rural lines, sempaphore signalling etc etc. From a traveller perspective definitely 2023, the modern railway is (usually) modern, clean, fast, safe & relatively comfortable, although present day staff shortages and the disjointed organisation detract from the positives.