IEP - Capacity shortfall or plenty of seats?

[whole diary]

[broadgage]

I now expect that overcrowding will not only worsen, but will worsen to a greater extent than I previously expected.
It seems that services to the far west are to be downgraded mainly to 5 car DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), this despite previous statements that underfloor engines were not suited to long intercity trips.

With increasing numbers of half length DMUs, even on the longer distance routes, I expect crowding to worsen.

And yes I DO know that the new shorter units can be run in multiple, just like the (then) virgin voyagers ! Most voyagers still run as single units on routes previously worked by full length trains, and combined with rising passenger numbers this has led to appalling overcrowding.

[grahame]

At the risk of coming in on something that I'm not fully informed about ... a comment.

At present, HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) head out of Paddington in the peak filled to the gunwales - but then at Reading the loads drop and they carry on to other destinations - a considerably longer journey than that from London to Reading - with capacity to spare.   Now if a half of the train carried on and the other half headed back to London for another load ...   (Yes, I do know that lack of intermediate cabs, lack of line capacity, time taken to divide trains makes my wonderful idea become impossible ... but ...)

[ChrisB]

That could indeed take place somewhere like Exeter or Plymouth though.

Not sure what you mean by 'lack of intermediate cabs' though - there will be a cab at either end of each 5car.

[grahame]

Not sure what you mean by 'lack of intermediate cabs' though - there will be a cab at either end of each 5car.

I was musing about the possibility with current HST^▸ (High Speed Train) stock (and a Reading split!) ... looking at my current experience and not at a potential future which isn't a part of my personal expertise

[ChrisB]

ahh, ok, just re-read it. Thanks

GOing forward, I think it's quite possible that a 2x5car bi-mode or AT300 could split at intermediate stations & go forward/reverse. The Javelins on SouthEastern do at Ashford & it's quick & easy.

[Rhydgaled]

At present, HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) head out of Paddington in the peak filled to the gunwales - but then at Reading the loads drop and they carry on to other destinations - a considerably longer journey than that from London to Reading - with capacity to spare.   Now if a half of the train carried on and the other half headed back to London for another load

One problem is, while there may be free seats west of Reading, I very much doubt there is half a train worth of free seats (although I'm only a very occasional user of the line, like two or three times in the past many years). What if the loadings on a service require around 6 or 7 coaches, particular on off-wire routes? With the planned fleet there probably aren't nearly enough units to ensure everything that needs anything more than 5 coaches is a 9-car (or 10-car) train. And there is a lot of investment and publicity associated with new trains, more frequent PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-Bristol and PAD-Cheltenham through services, electrification and reduced journey times which will only attract more passengers. Plus the 10-car (2x5) formations would only have the same number of seats as a 9-car, so you are effectively paying for an extra coach doing no good to anyone while the sets are coupled. Then there's the matter of the split itself...

GOing forward, I think it's quite possible that a 2x5car bi-mode or AT300 could split at intermediate stations & go forward/reverse. The Javelins on SouthEastern do at Ashford & it's quick & easy.

Oh, it could do it, and it might well be quick and easy operationally, but in my opinion it should be a no-no on Intercity services because it isn't great for passengers. The Birmingham - Aberystwyth/Pwllheli services do it but that's ok because the class 158 units on the run have UEGs^▸ (Unit End Gangway) so passengers can move to the correct unit between stops when the guard points out they are in the wrong portion.

[ChrisB]

If the rear portion is terminating, they'll have to alight anyway. Moving forward to the other set isn't exactly onerous after alighting. It isn't as if the rear set will be going somewhere

[IndustryInsider]

I now expect that overcrowding will not only worsen, but will worsen to a greater extent than I previously expected.
It seems that services to the far west are to be downgraded mainly to 5 car DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), this despite previous statements that underfloor engines were not suited to long intercity trips.

With increasing numbers of half length DMUs, even on the longer distance routes, I expect crowding to worsen.

And yes I DO know that the new shorter units can be run in multiple, just like the (then) virgin voyagers ! Most voyagers still run as single units on routes previously worked by full length trains, and combined with rising passenger numbers this has led to appalling overcrowding.

You know how I love tinkering with timetables and diagrams, so I've done a very rough estimate of what the West Of England timetable might look like with the known facts and some assumptions, which are:

1)  It is likely that seven 9-car and twenty-two 5-car Bi-mode IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)'s will be ordered for the WoE services.
2)  From those twenty-nine sets, you'd probably be looking at six diagrams for the 9-car trains and 19 or 20 diagrams for the 5-car trains.
3)  We know that the aspiration is to run an hourly service between London and Plymouth/Penzance reducing the journey time to Penzance by around 15 minutes on the current timings.
4)  We know that the aspiration is to run an hourly stopping service between London and Exeter (which will presumably be extensions of an original Paddington to Westbury suggested service), and that there will be the odd train extending to/from Paignton as they do now.
5)  We know that some of the original order of 5-car IEPs had already been allocated to some of the Paddington/Westbury/Exeter/Paignton services as per the IEP Draft Specification we've often referred to on here.

So, armed with those facts I've done a quick sample timetable which takes into account all of the above, with some assumptions on journey times, and some very rough diagramming of the units that will become available.  Attached is what it looks like.

I've not gone down the route of complex splitting and joining of services en-route which might make further efficiencies, but still managed with little effort to cover all of the Penzance to Paddington hourlies with either 9-car or 2x5 car Bi-modes throughout.  I've also covered all of the peak Paignton/Exeter services with 2x5 car Bi-modes, and just a few off-peak Paddington<>Exeter services are only operated with 5-car sets - the 5-car trains are marked in yellow on the attachment, the 9-car trains are in red.

In total I've used six 9-car diagrams and twenty-four 5-car diagrams, which given the overflow of the already ordered Bi-modes from the original draft diagrams is probably easily achievable, and that (along with other efficiencies saved with an in-depth look at the diagrams) will probably result in a few more sets becoming available to help with the possible shortfalls I remain concerned about for South Wales, and Cotswold Line services.

So, in short, I don't personally expect overcrowding to worsen significantly on WoE services as a result of this proposed order - especially given the increase in the number of trains to spread the load - around 50% more between Paddington and Penzance for example.

[Edit:  Just spotted a couple of mistakes in my spreadsheet, the 17:26 PNZ-PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) would be formed off of diagram 508/9 and the 18:26 PNZ-PAD would then be diagram 905.  Also, the 21:40 PAD-PLY^» (Plymouth - next trains) would arrive EXD^» (Exeter St Davids - next trains) at 00:08 and PLY at 01:10]

[chrisr_75]

It's also pretty common for S.Wales services to be packed from PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-RDG^‡(resolve), empty out considerably at RDG and remain light-moderately loaded to CDF^» (Cardiff - next trains), then stuffed to the rafters again from there, so it's a bit more complex than just the PAD-RDG bit being busy! Sometimes the large influxes occur at Swindon or Bristol Parkway depending on the time of day.

[Zoe]

given the increase in the number of trains to spread the load - around 50% more between Paddington and Penzance for example.

The DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) document says Plymouth will be hourley and Penzance two-hourly which is roughly the same currently so where is this 50% increase in the number of trains to Penzance?

[IndustryInsider]

I based my timetable on this from the Government's response to the consultation:

"Respondents indicated a strong demand for the provision of two trains per hour from London to Exeter (one fast and one semi-fast), with one train per hour extended to Plymouth and Penzance.  Maintenance of the current level of Paignton through services and improvement in journey times were also highlighted as requirements.
We are pleased to confirm that we have been able to address this requirement with the new Franchise from the timetable change date in December 2018."

To me that meant an hourly service from Paddington to Penzance which increases the current 8 or 9 through day trains a day up to 14 in my example timetable.  If that's not the case and some only go as far as Plymouth then diagramming 9/10 car trains on each service becomes even easier.

[Zoe]

Yes, the same document later says:

The December 2018 timetable provides
a regular service of up to 2 trains per hour:

An hourly service non
-stop from Reading to Taunton, extending hourly to Plymouth
and two hourly to Penzance resulting in a journey time saving of 13 minutes as
illustrated in the table below.

A two hourly, stopping service between Paddington and Exeter.

This is a bit confusing considering the document first says that Paddington to Exeter will be 2 tph but then says the Exeter semi-fast service will only be two-hourly althoug I see in the quote above it says "up to two trains an hour" which will allow for the service to not be 2 tph every hour.

I have also read a discussion elsewhere where it is said that the 9 car trains will be used on the semi-fast Exeter services.

[Chris125]

I don't see any reason to think services will be mainly 5-car - there have been consistent suggestions that 19 trains, new or retained, would be needed for services to the West Country and this would fit with the 18 9/10-car sets the new fleet will allow.

[FarWestJohn]

I think the 50% increase to Penzance is the half hourly Plymouth to Penzance local service theoretically in 2018 after the re-signalling and extra Thames valley rolling stock.

[Rhydgaled]

I don't see any reason to think services will be mainly 5-car - there have been consistent suggestions that 19 trains, new or retained, would be needed for services to the West Country and this would fit with the 18 9/10-car sets the new fleet will allow.

If they are going to run as 10-car all the time, that would largely settle the capacity concerns on that route (south Wales and the Cotswolds still looking in trouble) but then you'd be paying for 10-car when you only need 9-car to provide the same number of seats if you had fixed formation 9-car units instead.

Unless of course the stuff about more-powerful engines on the extra units is a load of rubbish and they are going for a uniform fleet for maintenance reasons, in which case perhaps a 10-car bi-mode with six engines has a slightly better power:weight ratio than a 9-car bi-mode with 5 engines.