What is an "appropriate" service?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

My thanks to BandHcommuter for raising this question; it came up on one of the line-specific boards but I feel it merits general coverage ... so here it is:

I think the term that we're all looking for an apppropriate service covers it all. But "appropriate" differs for different journeys. 

I have some difficulty with the term "appropriate" in this context (the dictionary doesn't help), because it not only differs for different journeys, but also for different stakeholder perspectives. For example: users, potential users, non-users, subsidising authorities, service operators, infrastructure owners, businesses, local residents, environmental campaigners, enthusiasts, the pro-car lobby, taxpayers and many more will generally will all have their own idea of what is appropriate for a particular route, and a good smattering of prejudice will come in to the mix. Does appropriate mean:

Lowest net burden on the taxpayer (most affordable)?
Highest economic benefit per pound of subsidy (best value for money in treasury terms)?
Most cars off the road per pound of subsidy?
The same service level as on routes of similar characteristic elsewhere?
A service that makes a profit?
Consistency with local planning and spatial strategies?
The service that fits best into the timetable within finite resources?
Some, all or none of these - and then what if they conflict?

And then there are trade offs, potential competition for resources, and political intervention.

Discuss!

I introduced the term "appropriate" a while back ... looking to provide an aspirational target for lines / services / franchises which appeared to be operating in such a way that they provided very few indeed of the elements that you listed in your post, yet provided the opposite of many of them.

[Conner]

An appropriate service is one that is suitable for the majority of people. An appropriate service will nearly always be nearly full.

[Lee]

An appropriate service is one that is suitable for the majority of people. An appropriate service will nearly always be nearly full.

Q) Name a service that is appropriate by your definition , and also one that isnt.

[Conner]

An appropriate service is one that is suitable for the majority of people. An appropriate service will nearly always be nearly full.

Q) Name a service that is appropriate by your definition , and also one that isnt.

Appropriate: London-Penzance HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s. Not too often. Suitable timings for different groups of people. Always busy but not always overcrowded.
Not Appropriate: Portsmouth-Cardiff. Right timigs but too often overcrowded.

[Lee]

Not Appropriate: Portsmouth-Cardiff. Right timigs but too often overcrowded.

I was on the 1722 travelling between Bristol - Oldfield Park on Wednesday , and even with 4 coaches , many passengers were standing.

[Timmer]

I was on the 1722 travelling between Bristol - Oldfield Park on Wednesday , and even with 4 coaches , many passengers were standing.

A lot of Oldfield Park commuters use this service, so as you say even with four coaches it is a very busy service. After unloading at Oldfield Park, a few minutes later it soon fills up again at Bath Spa. If, for whatever reason, this service is short formed or cancelled they stop the 17.30 to Padd HST^▸ (High Speed Train) at Oldfield. Imagine the chaos if they didn't.

[simonw]

One of the greatest ironies of many train routes is that they are frequently busy for only part of their journey, and for many other parts they are empty.

An 30 minute interval service between Swansea and London may seem fine, but running an eight carriage set for 3 hours does not make sense. From Swansea to Cardiff, 4 carriages are needed, Cardiff to Bristol 6 carriages, Bristol to Reading 8 carriages and from Reading to London 10 carriages. For convenience, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) run this service as a 7-8 carriage set that is frequently deserted at Swansea and overcrowded at Reading.

Likewise, a 3 carriage train from Cardiff to Portsmouth may seem OK overall, but at peak times Bristol-Westbury can be very overcrowded.

My definition of an appropriate service requires FGW to provide a punctual, reliable service, with seats and a buffet or trolley service where applicable. We are are clearly far from this definition at the  moment!

It would help if FGW could lay on a lot of extra peak time trains to meet particular overcrowding issues, but is this economical? Who spend money on drivers and trains that can only be used a few hours a day?

[Shazz]

, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) run this service as a 7-8 carriage set that is frequently deserted at Swansea and overcrowded at Reading.

You've obviously never been on a peak cardiff > swansea service!

The last one i was on i struggled to find a seat

[Lee]

I was on the 1722 travelling between Bristol - Oldfield Park on Wednesday , and even with 4 coaches , many passengers were standing.

A lot of Oldfield Park commuters use this service, so as you say even with four coaches it is a very busy service. After unloading at Oldfield Park, a few minutes later it soon fills up again at Bath Spa. If, for whatever reason, this service is short formed or cancelled they stop the 17.30 to Padd HST^▸ (High Speed Train) at Oldfield. Imagine the chaos if they didn't.

Would there be any merit in taking out the stop at Oldfield Park in the 1722 service , and inserting one at Oldfield Park permanently in the 1730 service instead?

[BandHcommuter]

So moving on from the desirability of the service, and let's assume that there is a consensus as to what an appropriate service level is. Let's also assume that to move from the existing provision to an appropriate level involves running more trains.

It would be normal to appraise the case for doing so by comparing costs with benefits (and there are various numerate and qualitative ways of measuring the latter). The rail industry seems to be getting itself into enormous difficulty on the cost side, such that real and perverse incentives exist to avoid running trains (except on the few profitable routes).

As an example, say I want to run a new hourly service on a short 15-20 mile route (or something which I can do with just one train, there and back in an hour). I want to operate from 0600 to 2200. How much does this cost for a year?

Well I read on forums like this that it will cost me ^100k to lease a single coach unit.
I need a driver and guard for say two and a bit shifts a day. So I probably need to employ five of each to cover 7 days, leave, sickness, training etc. FGW^▸ (First Great Western) advertise for drivers at ^33k, let's guess conductors about ^20k, Add on 25% for NI, pensions and other employment costs and I get an annual wage bill of ^330k.
According to the ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) website I have to pay NR^» (Network Rail - home page) variable track access and capacity charges of around 36p per vehicle mile. That's about another ^80k

I have already reached half a million pounds (rather more than my fares income) and I have yet to do any day to day maintenance on my train, or buy fuel, or pay station access charges, or include ticket sales costs, training costs, management overheads etc. etc. The government tell me that my proposal might be excellent value for money in wider economic terms, but it's just unaffordable, so they won't offer subsidy - unless they divert funding from elsewhere, and who wants to do that?

With such a high cost base, it might appear extremely difficult for even an enterprising operator to make the case to run extra trains. More importantly, it must be very tempting for an operator or subsidy provider to cut services to the minimum they can get away with, given the huge potential savings that can accrue.

It must be possible to attack these costs in some way, but it might involve asking fundamental and difficult questions. For example- do we need conductors? (many routes in the London area and abroad operate with one member of staff on board). Is rolling stock technically over-specified? Are train drivers overpaid?

I don't have the answer to any of this, but put it forward for further discussion.

[Lee]

Using the costs of an extra train to provide an "enhanced" service on the Severn Beach Line as an example , here is a breakdown (costs from Andrew Griffiths):

Lease cost of unit (2 - coach Class 14x) - ^140000

Maintenence of unit - ^140000

Fuel for unit - ^180000

Staff (drivers and conductors) - ^420000 for 2 crews plus reliefs.

Station and track access charges - ^40000

Total yearly costs - ^920000

Driver only operation has been looked at , but more in the context of reducing overall journey time.

[Timmer]

Would there be any merit in taking out the stop at Oldfield Park in the 1722 service , and inserting one at Oldfield Park permanently in the 1730 service instead?

Yes. if the 8.00 ex Bath HST^▸ (High Speed Train) can stop at Keynsham in the morning, I see no reason why the 17.30 cant stop at Oldfield Park in the evening to take pressure off the 17.22 Pompey service. But would that leave FGW^▸ (First Great Western) with an excuse to make this service two carriages rather than four?

[Lee]

Duly noting that this isnt the quiz section , here is a question for you :

Who put forward the timetable contained in the link below as their idea of an appropriate service , and would you agree with their view?
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/lf/CoIUTS.xls

[John R]

I would say it looks appropriate. Maybe the Oxford Services could be extended to Milton Keynes in due course. 

[BandHcommuter]

Duly noting that this isnt the quiz section , here is a question for you :

Who put forward the timetable contained in the link below as their idea of an appropriate service , and would you agree with their view?
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/lf/CoIUTS.xls

I don't know the source, but it seems techincally fairly thorough and well developed, so possibly from within the industry or SRA^» (Strategic Rail Authority - about)/DfT^» (Department for Transport - about).

Looking at it quickly, it seems to provide a clockface service pattern in the Bristol area, with some extra peak trains. I assume the trains which show numbers next to both diagram 1 and 2 at the top are double length trains. I don't know to what extent this timetable would meet demand, whether it is operationally feasible, nor whether it would be good value for money.