2013's most overcrowded trains

[whole diary]

[didcotdean]

Spring 2013

1. 16:46 service from London Euston to Crewe (load factor 201%, 208 passengers in excess of its capacity of 206)
2. 07:33 service from Bedford to Brighton (load factor 171%, 360 passengers in excess of its capacity of 510)
3. 07:00 service from Oxford to London Paddington (load factor 168%, 196 passengers in excess of its capacity of 290)
4. 07:44 service from Henley-on-Thames to London Paddington (load factor 161%, 206 passengers in excess of its capacity of 340)
5. 07:21 service from Oxford to London Paddington (load factor 156%, 136 passengers in excess of its capacity of 242)
6. 07:32 service from Woking to London Waterloo (load factor 154%, 402 passengers in excess of its capacity of 738)
7. 18:13 service from London Euston to Birmingham New Street (load factor 152%, 382 passengers in excess of its capacity of 738)
8. 07:02 service from Woking to London Waterloo (load factor 151%, 378 passengers in excess of its capacity of 738)
9. 06:35 service from Caterham to London Victoria (load factor 149%, 210 passengers in excess of its capacity of 430)
10. 17:46 service from London Euston to Birmingham New Street (load factor 148%, 336 passengers in excess of its capacity of 698)

Autumn 2013
1. 16:46 service from London Euston to Crewe (load factor 211%, 229 passengers in excess of its capacity of 206)
2. 07:32 service from Woking to London Waterloo (load factor 173%, 540 passengers in excess of its capacity of 738)
3. 07:21 service from Oxford to London Paddington (load factor 173%, 176 passengers in excess of its capacity of 242)
4. 18:33 service from London Paddington to Heathrow Airport (load factor 169%, 330 passengers in excess of its capacity of 476)
5. 06:30 service from Manchester Airport to Middlesbrough (load factor 166%, 109 passengers in excess of its capacity of 166)
18:13 service from London Euston to Birmingham New Street (load factor 164%, 473 passengers in excess of its capacity of 738)
6. 18:13 service from London Euston to Birmingham New Street (load factor 164%, 473 passengers in excess of its capacity of 738)
7. 06:07 service from Banbury to London Paddington (load factor 157%, 348 passengers in excess of its capacity of 608)
8. 06:30 service from Scarborough to Manchester Airport (load factor 156%, 93 passengers in excess of its capacity of 166)
9. 06:28 service from Nottingham to St Pancras (load factor 155%, 212 passengers in excess of its capacity of 386)
10. 07:00 service from Oxford to London Paddington (load factor 153%, 127 passengers in excess of its capacity of 241)

[didcotdean]

2012 lists are here.

The subsequent strengthening of most of the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) crowded trains has been use of 3 car 165s on the services (although the Henley one as 2*2).

The Oxford Mail has gone to town on this today making the front page (using an unoriginal 'Worst Great Western' headline and some familiar (!) faces) and a withering editorial.

[ChrisB]

Someone local to the Rail Minister (you know who you are) needs to put her right...

Transport Minister Claire Perry said: ^Since 1995 passenger journeys on the railway have more than doubled, with 1.6 billion journeys being recorded in the last year. This means that on too many journeys, passengers have to stand in cramped conditions. Train operators must act now, they must find new ways to create space on the network and in their trains.^

Who controls the purchase & leasing of trains, generally speaking? Her Department.

Further, that editorial is complete twaddle. The DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) imposes the fare rise (yes, operators can not increase them, but will still need to pay extra to the DfT, so lose money if they don't) and controls the stock purchases/allocation. THe Operator has its hands tied and can actually do very little more.

I can only assume the editorial wasn't written by the reporter as I had a long discussion with the reporter about this & he then got his piece correct....

[grahame]

Someone local to the Rail Minister (you know who you are) needs to put her right...

Transport Minister Claire Perry said: ^Since 1995 passenger journeys on the railway have more than doubled, with 1.6 billion journeys being recorded in the last year. This means that on too many journeys, passengers have to stand in cramped conditions. Train operators must act now, they must find new ways to create space on the network and in their trains.^

Who controls the purchase & leasing of trains, generally speaking? Her Department.

But isn't it a complex relationship between the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company), the RoSCOs^▸ (Rolling Stock Owning Company), the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) and external requirements (such as the need for disables access toilets) which combine to make the differences?

You may love it or hate it, but converting a first class carriage to standard class, removing tables, providing additional standing space create space in a way that the overloading factor is reduced if the number of passengers remains static ... before you take a look at the leasing and purchase of trains. 

In reality, I would suspect that all parties are happy with an element of overcrowding for short periods, but have to be careful how they say so.   Taking the Bristol example, the economies of hiring an extra carriage because of peak hour overcrowding into Bristol from Keynsham, and back out in the evening, don't add up.  You're looking at a spend of (say) 170k per year = ^680 per day or ^56 per minute; the "trick" is spreading your income from the carriage out over as long a period of the day as possible - and that's one of the reasons that activities such as community rail, advance tickets, Club 55 make a real difference.

Looking at the crowding figures in the charts, I couldn't help noticing that with a further 14 people on the 17:36 from Swindon to Westbury (measured after leaving Chippenham), it might appear on the list.  Perhaps it will in Spring 2015 ...

[ChrisB]

Totally agree....but

.... converting a first class carriage to standard class, removing tables, providing additional standing space create space in a way that the overloading factor is reduced if the number of passengers remains static ... before you take a look at the leasing and purchase of trains.

All this has been/being done by this operator....and the Minister needs to accept this and give credit where credit is due. And then either find additional stock or....and stop slagging off the operator(s). It won't get anyone anywhere

[grahame]

All this has been/being done by this operator....and the Minister needs to accept this and give credit where credit is due. And then either find additional stock or....and stop slagging off the operator(s). It won't get anyone anywhere

There's no lack of credit (at least on my part, I hope - I'll leave you to judge the minister's credit or not) for what has been achieved and indeed on many aspects we've moved a long way "forward" (I quote that because some will argue that certain measures are retrograde).   But just because credit is given for what's already achieved doesn't mean that more can't be achieved; just depends what (if anything) you're happy to compromise

Class 165 - currently 270 seats in 3 coaches ( = 90 seats per coach)
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/train-operators-urged-to-tackle-overcrowding

Class 4DD - 508 seats in 4 carriages ( = 127 seats per coach)
http://www.semgonline.com/gallery/4dd.html

Probably too late now, but some of the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) reconfigured in this way, running to Reading with 1 intermediate stop and then not far beyond ... it's struck me that the dwell time at Twyford on the 17:06 / 18:06 (do I have those times right) probably eats up an extra path compared to a train that could unload through 8 doors per carriage not 2.  Ironic really as one of the problems with the 4DD was that it only had one door for 22 seats, compared to the 4EPB with 10 / 11 / 12 seats per door, and the extra dwell at stations was a reason it wasn't carried on with. 

I actually travelled on that final 4DD run that's described in October 1971 to see the train while still in service.  A sad memory in many ways; I'm so glad it was just the withdrawal of a train [type] and not of service from a station.

[Jason]

I hadn't realised the following:

"However, the report says the proportion of passengers standing appeared lower than other operators partly because a large number of customers commute between Reading and Paddington on long-distance services where standing is not included in the figures."

taken from http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/first-great-western-customers-suffer-7753110

[ChrisB]

Sort of understandable - little point in listing HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) from the southwest & wales as x% over capacity when it was under-capacity all the way to Reading. Sort of distorts the stats, as I suspect all 10 would be FGW^▸ (First Great Western) HSTs, especially in the pm peak.

[IndustryInsider]

I hadn't realised the following:

"However, the report says the proportion of passengers standing appeared lower than other operators partly because a large number of customers commute between Reading and Paddington on long-distance services where standing is not included in the figures."

taken from http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/first-great-western-customers-suffer-7753110

And both comments to the 'getreading' article are from people complaining there are too many first class carriages - despite work in progress to alter that, and negative comments on here about that programme.

Personally, I doubt any of the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s would normally appear in the (highly dubious) top 10 list as, whilst often crowded, there are very few occasions where passengers are standing throughout the entire carriage - so ten or fifteen crammed into a vestibule, and a further few inside the carriage, doesn't compare with many of the totally crammed Turbos between Southall and Ealing Broadway, on trains such as the 06:07 BAN-PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains).

[TaplowGreen]

I hadn't realised the following:

"However, the report says the proportion of passengers standing appeared lower than other operators partly because a large number of customers commute between Reading and Paddington on long-distance services where standing is not included in the figures."

taken from http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/first-great-western-customers-suffer-7753110

And both comments to the 'getreading' article are from people complaining there are too many first class carriages - despite work in progress to alter that, and negative comments on here about that programme.

Personally, I doubt any of the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s would normally appear in the (highly dubious) top 10 list as, whilst often crowded, there are very few occasions where passengers are standing throughout the entire carriage - so ten or fifteen crammed into a vestibule, and a further few inside the carriage, doesn't compare with many of the totally crammed Turbos between Southall and Ealing Broadway, on trains such as the 06:07 BAN-PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains).

I'm not sure that the fact that some peoples journeys may be marginally less horribly overcrowded than others really mitigates the situation or provides much comfort to those affected on either?......being kicked in the arse 9 times is marginally better than being kicked in the arse 10 times but its still pretty unpleasant.........and why is the list "highly dubious?"

[ChrisB]

Because it's a snapshot (i.e. probably a single count of all trains on a given day) rather than proper statistical data

[johoare]

According to the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) the data was collected between September and December 2013

[ChrisB]

Maybe different days on different TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) (but still only 1day per TOC)

[paul7575]

According to the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) the data was collected between September and December 2013

Which is a somewhat simplified interpretation compared to how the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)'s source info actually explains it.  A single day's snapshot definitely is all that some routes got:

In all cases, the spring data were collected before the May 2013 timetable change and autumn data were collected prior to the December 2013 timetable change. Some of these overcrowding figures are derived from one-off measurements of the passengers on a particular weekday and are not an average representation of overcrowding on the service over a period of time; so the figures represent a one-off snap-shot from spring 2013 or from autumn 2013 only and do not provide a guide to current overcrowding.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/352221/top-10-crowded-2013.pdf

Paul

[IndustryInsider]

And both comments to the 'getreading' article are from people complaining there are too many first class carriages - despite work in progress to alter that, and negative comments on here about that programme.

Personally, I doubt any of the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s would normally appear in the (highly dubious) top 10 list as, whilst often crowded, there are very few occasions where passengers are standing throughout the entire carriage - so ten or fifteen crammed into a vestibule, and a further few inside the carriage, doesn't compare with many of the totally crammed Turbos between Southall and Ealing Broadway, on trains such as the 06:07 BAN-PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains).

I'm not sure that the fact that some peoples journeys may be marginally less horribly overcrowded than others really mitigates the situation or provides much comfort to those affected on either?......being kicked in the arse 9 times is marginally better than being kicked in the arse 10 times but its still pretty unpleasant.........and why is the list "highly dubious?"

I quite agree and made no suggestion that it was.  The list is "highly dubious" for the reasons given by ChrisB and paul7755.  The list is a snapshot, and I'd love to know how the accuracy of the snapshot can be guaranteed when no trains on FGW are fitted with automatic passenger counting equipment?  I certainly wouldn't fancy counting the number of people on the 06:06 from BAN-PAD between Southall and Ealing when some folks usually can't even get on the train.