Train Price Rises

[mavhc]

More trains per hour is the only solution then

[FishCustard]

Solving overcrowding for us requires major engineering work

And engineering requires money and political will ("Good news - you're getting longer trains! Bad news - your station is shut for ten weeks while we stretch it."). There are also issues with running long passenger trains as certain types of stock don't like being coupled+powered over 12 cars. I think the modern ones (e.g. Electrostars) are okay, but try linking a bunch of Networkers together in service and you get weird electrical issues.

 

I generally think that the "rail tickets cost £££££ - capitalism sux" articles are missing the point that you genuinely can get reasonable fares by booking a short time in advance. Very very few people are going to turn up at King's Cross on the day and buy a fare to the other end of the land. However, the entire system is totally byzantine and ridiculous and needs to be rationalised. I think some sort of review has been commissioned, but Chris 'Failing' Grayling is probably about as likely to eat the report as act on it.

 

Not sure nationalisation is a one-hit-kill silver bullet either - under BR there was little investment in stock or infrastructure (or cleaning.....), and the nationalised infrastructure manager (Network Rail) is prone to bone-headed management decisions about engineering. That said, nationalised operations done sanely could work very well - increased chances of joined-up thinking, etc. Germany does it very well with DB.

Edited December 5, 2018 by FishCustard

[CAM]

Rail fares are split into buckets. When you buy an advance fare, it starts at the cheapest bucket. Once that bucket is empty, it moves on to the next more expensive bucket and so on. The later you leave it to book, the more expensive the bucket you are purchasing from. Roll-up fares on the day are always the most expensive as train companies like to know in advance how many people are going to be on a train.

 

I've only just started travelling by train to work and it hasn't had too many issues, more out of pure luck than anything.

[elsiegee40]

More trains per hour is the only solution then

Which is hard when there are pinch points like only 4 platforms at Waterloo East which is the last stop before the 6 platforms at Charing Cross. (For those not familiar with London train lines, the last 3 stations are London Bridge, Waterloo East and Charing Cross in that order) The new London Bridge station has expanded platform capacity and allowed mkre trains to terminate there which does help. There nothing that can be done at Waterloo East though. Edited December 6, 2018 by elsiegee40

[Achandler]

12 carriages, you are lucky!

 

During rush hour, we get 2 old diesel carriages, well the good old buses on rail trains (Pacers). The trains are full at the first station then no one can get on at all for the rest of the journey! All the stations on this particular route can handle 6 carriage trains, but you only get them off-peak when no one wants to go on them (if I was being optimistic, I would say they are using it to move stock about and it's clever).

 

We have electrified lines where they still run the Diesel pacer trains all day, can't be any value for money there.

 

I'm not a frequent rail passenger as it is expensive, slow and generally a crap experience. Living in the North also means places tend to cater for people driving and thus parking a little bit better as well, as places like Manchester operate as a "in then out" setup. so to got 5 miles East, you have to travel 6 Miles North then 6 Miles South again and takes hours, or 10 minutes driving.

 

I did however, while travelling off peak on a Sunday, go on an updated Diesel train, sure it was still noisy and cold (and they hadn't bothered with anything but cosmetics), but it had working LED lighting, new cushions on the seat and a new lining on the sides and ceiling. Maybe they think they can pretend these are totally new trains and no one will notice it's just a polished turd.

[Zammo]

I count myself very lucky that I use Chiltern Railways for my daily commute in to the city. Rarely late and not nearly as crowded as some others. Few people don't get seats even on the busy trains but ultimately the price of a ticket is still maddening...

[unixman_again]

And engineering requires money and political will ("Good news - you're getting longer trains! Bad news - your station is shut for ten weeks while we stretch it.").

 

Not necessarily. A couple of years ago they stretched the platforms on some of the Black Country stations without closing the stations. I have no idea why, as we didn't get longer trains. It might be something to do with HS2, although I doubt it.

 

IMO the only real answer to the woes on the network, is to fully automate it.

[Zammo]

Not necessarily. A couple of years ago they stretched the platforms on some of the Black Country stations without closing the stations. I have no idea why, as we didn't get longer trains. It might be something to do with HS2, although I doubt it.

 

IMO the only real answer to the woes on the network, is to fully automate it.

 

That wont happen in the near future. And it wouldn't help with platform size, train capacity, station size, track repairs, trees on the line, rising costs, backlog of maintenance etc.

 

In fact whilst I agree that we should be working towards automation, I can't see that it will solve any of the more immediate problems. The issue is not with the drivers making mistakes or being inefficient as far as I am aware.

[sted]

That wont happen in the near future. And it wouldn't help with platform size, train capacity, station size, track repairs, trees on the line, rising costs, backlog of maintenance etc.

 

In fact whilst I agree that we should be working towards automation, I can't see that it will solve any of the more immediate problems. The issue is not with the drivers making mistakes or being inefficient as far as I am aware.

 

you can run automated trains closer together though (yes needs more rolling stock) but you need less gaps between trains etc so in theory you increase the networks capacity even more if you automate points etc dont need the same safety margins as you do when people are involved and if there is a snarl up ahead speed can be altered so that stuffs still moving instead of stationary etc

[Zammo]

you can run automated trains closer together though (yes needs more rolling stock) but you need less gaps between trains etc so in theory you increase the networks capacity even more if you automate points etc dont need the same safety margins as you do when people are involved and if there is a snarl up ahead speed can be altered so that stuffs still moving instead of stationary etc

 

I agree, efficiencies can and will be made by automation but it not as simple as putting more trains on the track. There are many areas of the rail network that still act as bottlenecks, not least some of the London Terminals. Commuter stations often only have a couple of platforms and sometimes no ability for fast trains to pass through if a train is stopped at the platforms. The cost to improve them would reach into the billions or be essentially impossible. Similarly on the line that I take we sometimes get "stuck" behind a train with technical difficulties and can't pass because the track does not have capacity. Finally, adding more trains to the tracks does nothing to help with the over all ageing infrastructure which is the chief cause of problems (repair work over running, signal failures, vandalism etc).

 

Almost all signalling is done electronically and with varying levels of automation in the UK anyway.

 

I think automation can and will help, but it probably only solves 20% of the problem.

[mavhc]

Seems like more UK tax is spent on railways than roads each year, wonder what causes that.

[sted]

I agree, efficiencies can and will be made by automation but it not as simple as putting more trains on the track. There are many areas of the rail network that still act as bottlenecks, not least some of the London Terminals. Commuter stations often only have a couple of platforms and sometimes no ability for fast trains to pass through if a train is stopped at the platforms. The cost to improve them would reach into the billions or be essentially impossible. Similarly on the line that I take we sometimes get "stuck" behind a train with technical difficulties and can't pass because the track does not have capacity. Finally, adding more trains to the tracks does nothing to help with the over all ageing infrastructure which is the chief cause of problems (repair work over running, signal failures, vandalism etc).

 

Almost all signalling is done electronically and with varying levels of automation in the UK anyway.

 

I think automation can and will help, but it probably only solves 20% of the problem.

up to a point but in an automated system you could run trains on the "wrong line" (so north on a southbound line etc) to get round some of those types of issues

[Zammo]

up to a point but in an automated system you could run trains on the "wrong line" (so north on a southbound line etc) to get round some of those types of issues

 

You can do that on a non-automated line, so long as the appropriate provision has been made on the design of the tracks.

[elsiegee40]

up to a point but in an automated system you could run trains on the "wrong line" (so north on a southbound line etc) to get round some of those types of issues

Only by having the points in place to do it...and a quiet enough down line to run an up train on. The lines going into London are already very busy. Any solution will require both engineering work and automation costs as well as upgrades to rolling stock and that os going to be expensive.

 

London is one massive pinch point. Only crossrail (when it opens) and a few Thameslink services go through London. Most have to stop and go back out again. In pretty much every other UK city, trains go through the main station and on to somewhere else. This doesn't and can't happen in London.