The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

The Ability of Public Transport to Cope withTarget Passenger Increases: Final Report

7. KEY ISSUES AND IMPLICATIONS FOR RAIL TARGETS

7.1 Introduction

7.1.1 This chapter summarises the implications of the observed patronage levels on the ability to meet growth targets at peak times. This analysis was then used as the basis for the discussions with rail companies, local authorities, SPT and the Scottish Executive. The chapter considers rail services around each of the four study cities, on a route-by-route basis, and identifies the ability of the routes to cope with both the Local Transport Strategy (LTS) and Scottish Strategic Rail Study (SSRS) patronage growth.

7.2 Implications for Rail in Glasgow

7.2.1 This section considers main line rail services in the Glasgow area, including the low level lines through the City Centre. Given its unique circumstances, the issues surrounding the Glasgow Underground are dealt with in Section 9, based on discussion with SPT.

Overview

7.2.2 In order to be able to meet the SSRS growth figure for Glasgow, there needs to be capacity for 46% more passengers on local rail services. To meet the LTS target requires an ability to handle 25% more passengers. Neither target is focused upon the journey to work but, for the purposes of this analysis, each route has been appraised on the basis of being able to cope with these growth rates at peak times. To meet the SSRS target requires existing occupancy levels to be no more than around two-thirds, while the LTS target requires no higher than 80% occupancy at present.

7.2.3 In the morning peak period (i.e. 0800-0900 arrivals into Glasgow City Centre), the survey data suggest that growth of only 6% can be accommodated by the available spare seats across all routes. In terms of total train capacity, growth of approximately 37% could be achieved within the existing level of service provision. In the evening peak period (i.e. 1700-1800 departures from Glasgow City Centre), 19% growth in patronage could be catered for with the existing spare seats across all routes; in terms of total train capacity, this increases to 53% growth that is possible, again based on the existing level of service provision.

7.2.4 It was evident from Table 5.7, however, that this spare capacity is not spread uniformly across the network. As a consequence, some routes will be better placed than others to cope with patronage growth, as shown in Table 7.1.

7.2.5 The only SPT route that appears fully able to cope with both the LTS target and the SSRS predicted growth rate is the Maryhill route. Only the Shotts line is totally unable to cater for the patronage increases, based on the existing level of service provision.

Table 7.1: Ability to Cope with Target Passenger Increases at Peak Times (by Rail Route)

able to meet target;

- not able to meet target;

n/a - data not available ( see Chapter 5)

Strengthened Services

7.2.6 One relatively straightforward solution to provide additional capacity may often be to operate longer trains. Thus, of particular interest are the occurrences of services that have already been strengthened by the addition of extra carriages, since this often results in trains operating at the maximum length at which the platforms can handle ( see Table 5.3). In these situations, additional capacity cannot be provided on these trains unless significant infrastructure work is carried out to lengthen station platforms.

7.2.7 According to SPT data, the vast majority of services operate as single 2 or 3 car units even within the peak periods. However, a total of 73 services per weekday during the currency of the Winter 2000/01 timetable were booked to be strengthened, either from 2 up to 4 carriages or from 3 up to 6 carriages. In order to be able to accommodate the 2020 target rail growth, there must be no more than two-thirds occupancy of these services at the present time. Table 7.2 shows those services that were found to exceed this limit in terms of the seated capacity, with those shown in bold also exceeding two-thirds of the total train occupancy.

7.2.8 42 individual strengthened services exceeded two-thirds of seated capacity and would therefore not have sufficient seats to be able to absorb the SSRS growth to 2020. 23 of these services would not even be able to accommodate the growth within the overall booked train capacity. In terms of seated capacity, 31 of the strengthened services would be unable to accommodate sufficient growth to meet the LTS target of a 25% increase in public transport trips by 2011. Just 9 services, however, would not be able to offer enough train capacity to meet this target. This means, of course, that the overwhelming majority of services would either be able to cope with no change to train length, or could be strengthened to provide additional capacity within the current infrastructure constraints. For the latter, there would be rolling stock (and associated staffing) implications - these are discussed below on a route basis.

Table 7.2: Strengthened Services - Patronage in Excess of Two-Thirds Seated Capacity

Summary of Requirements to Meet Target Growth

7.2.9 From the above analysis, it is clear that in most cases any additional capacity required should be able to be catered for by the operation of longer trains over the existing infrastructure. While this clearly has some cost implications, in terms of additional rolling stock and associated maintenance and, perhaps, some minor infrastructure works, service strengthening within existing train length limits should avoid most of the more significant costs of infrastructure upgrading needed to cope with higher train frequencies. Purely in terms of capacity provision, it would appear that many of the infrastructure-related works detailed in Section 5.2 may not actually be necessary, unless the operation of longer trains results in major infrastructure work being required at terminal stations. There may, however, be other reasons for pursuing such works, including identified demands for more frequent or new services and the provision of sufficient capacity to cater for increases in the number of freight trains.

7.2.10 Table 7.3 summarises the likely requirements to enable each line to provide sufficient seated capacity to meet the 25% LTS growth target, albeit with some limited standing (generally of less than 10 minutes duration) still likely on specific services. In many cases, the requirements include additional diesel multiple units (DMUs) or electric multiple units (EMUs). In a few cases, sufficient capacity cannot be provided without infrastructure work.

Table 7.3: Likely Requirements to Enable Peak Period Seated Capacity to Meet the LTS Growth Target by 2011

7.2.11 To carry out all necessary service strengthening that is possible within the infrastructure constraints would be expected to require no more than 6 additional 2 car DMUs and up to 22 additional 3 car EMUs across the entire Glasgow network. A small amount of additional rolling stock would also be likely to be required to provide maintenance and train failure cover. The overall requirement could be reduced should any existing rolling stock be available during peak periods, but this is unlikely.

7.2.12 It is anticipated that some rolling stock will be displaced from the Glasgow to Dunblane route upon introduction of the new ScotRail rolling stock and that this may be cascaded to the South West lines, thus reducing the requirement for additional stock there. At present, it is not known how many trains will be reallocated to these lines. With the DMUs, the additional requirement has been expressed as 2 car trains, since these are already operational on those lines involved, but all recent DMU orders in Scotland have been for 3 car trains. It may be possible that, for example, four 3 car trains could cover the additional requirement rather than the six 2 car trains, with some redeployment of rolling stock between different routes. This would need to be the subject of a more detailed rolling stock utilisation study.

7.2.13 These additional trains would not provide sufficient additional capacity on all routes, however. To provide for this, additional measures would be required on the Ayrshire Coast and South West routes to provide additional track capacity or the potential to operate 6 car trains. While the required platform extensions on the East Kilbride line appear to have some certainty of being completed, the current status of the additional passing loop between Barrhead and Kilmarnock and the Ayrshire Coast IOS measures is not known. Should these measures be implemented, up to 3 further DMUs and 2 to 4 more EMUs would be needed.

7.2.14 Table 7.4 summarises the predicted requirements in order to meet the 46% SSRS growth. They are generally not too much greater than for the LTS targets, though some additional infrastructure pinch points appear to become critical.

7.2.15 Assuming that this growth was to be catered for on all routes, approximately 8 additional 2 car DMUs and up to 30 additional 3 car EMUs would be required for service strengthening within the existing infrastructure capabilities. This would still leave the following routes short of capacity:

• Ayrshire Coast - as for the LTS target, requiring infrastructure works for additional train paths and a further 4 to 6 EMUs
• Croy - some significant overcrowding likely in the morning peak, which may be resolved by some specific further service strengthening; if not, however, additional train paths or platform lengthening may be required
• Shotts - further capacity likely to be required beyond the strengthening to 4 cars of existing trains, but this would require platform extensions or an additional train in each peak subject to pathing availability
• South West - as for the LTS target, but with some additional services likely to require strengthening and adding 2 more DMUs to the requirement for the LTS scenario

Table 7.4: Likely Requirements to Enable Peak Period Seated Capacity to Meet the SSRS Predicted Growth by 2020

7.3 Implications for Rail in Edinburgh

Overview

7.3.1 In order to be able to meet the SSRS growth figure for Edinburgh, there needs to be capacity for 34% more passengers on local rail services by 2020. To meet the LTS (general public transport) target requires an ability to handle 26% more passengers. Neither target is focused upon the journey to work but, for the purposes of this analysis, each route has been appraised on the basis of being able to cope with these growth rates at peak times. To meet the SSRS target requires existing occupancy levels to be no more than 74%, while the LTS target requires no higher than 79% occupancy at present.

7.3.2 In the morning peak period (defined as 0800-0900 arrivals into Edinburgh City Centre), the survey data suggest that growth of only just over 1% can be accommodated by the available spare seats across all routes. In terms of total train capacity, growth of approximately 37% could be achieved within the existing level of service provision. In the evening peak period (i.e. 1700-1800 departures from Edinburgh City Centre), no growth in patronage can be catered for with the existing spare seats across all routes; in terms of total train capacity, 28% growth could be accommodated.

7.3.3 It was evident from Table 5.9, however, that spare capacity is not spread uniformly across the Edinburgh routes. Table 7.5 shows the extent to which the various routes would appear to be able to cope with patronage growth under the current level of service provision. It should be borne in mind that this analysis is based upon the survey data, which are the result of one day snapshots of activity and utilisation.

Table 7.5: Ability to Cope with Target Passenger Increases at Peak Times (by Rail Route)

able to meet target;

not able to meet target

7.3.4 The only Edinburgh route that is currently fully able to cope with both the LTS target and the SSRS predicted growth rate in terms of seated capacity is the Newcraighall. Both the Glasgow Queen Street and Dunblane routes are unable to cater for any target passenger increases, based on the existing level of service provision, although this may be influenced by the service problems at the time of surveying.

7.3.5 As was revealed in Table 5.14, many of these routes are programmed to receive strengthened services resulting from the DMUs currently on order. The aggregate impacts across all Edinburgh peak services are shown in Table 7.6.

Table 7.6: Edinburgh-Wide Impacts of Planned Capacity Enhancements

7.3.6 At the city-wide level, these increases in capacity resulting from service strengthening should provide sufficient additional seated capacity to enable the LTS target growth to be catered for in the morning peak and virtually catered for in the evening peak. The SSRS predicted growth would not be fully catered for in either peak period, in that standing for more than 10 minutes would still be expected to occur. The implications of the programmed capacity changes are discussed below, in the context of the route by route analysis.

Summary of Requirements to Meet Target Growth

7.3.7 From this analysis, it is evident that the service strengthenings planned in the next 18 months will significantly improve the situation and virtually eliminate the existing overloading problems. In many cases, sufficient spare capacity should be created to be able to cater for target growth. Table 7.7 summarises the likely further action required on each Edinburgh-based route to provide sufficient seated peak period capacity to cater for the 26% LTS target growth.

Table 7.7: Likely Requirements to Enable Peak Period Seated Capacity to Meet the LTS Growth Target by 2010

7.3.8 In most cases, it would appear that any further capacity needed should be able to be met through additional service strengthening. The Fife lines may be able to cope with the growth and keep any standing times to within 10 minutes, but it appears possible that some limited further strengthening may be desirable. The Kirknewton line would certainly require an additional DMU and the North Berwick line would ideally benefit from an additional 2 to 4 cars, requiring in a change in the fleet composition for the line.

7.3.9 The only other outstanding problem line is Bathgate, where current infrastructure constraints prevent increases in service frequencies or further train lengthening beyond the 6 cars proposed. However, it would be expected that the measures associated with the Bathgate to Airdrie reopening would resolve the service frequency constraint. This problem should therefore be able to be solved, though with a requirement for additional rolling stock.

7.3.10 Table 7.8 reveals the predicted further requirements to meet the SSRS growth target, which is only 8% higher growth than the LTS target. As a result, the requirements are not particularly different.

7.3.11 On balance, it would seem that the Dunblane and Glasgow Queen Street services combined should be able to cope with the SSRS growth target, albeit with some modification of stopping patterns perhaps being required. The further service strengthening of Fife line trains would become more of an issue to meet this target, as would the strengthening of some North Berwick trains to avoid more significant overloading for longer journey lengths.

Table 7.8: Likely Requirements to Enable Peak Period Seated Capacity to Meet the SSRS Growth Target by 2020

7.4 Implications for Rail in Aberdeen

7.4.1 The LTS target for Aberdeen is to triple rail's mode share for journey-to-work, from 2% to 6% based on 1991 figures. It is not clear how much progress, if any, has been made towards this target. The SSRS predicted growth for trips to/from Aberdeen by 2020 is 13% for intra-Scotland trips and 17% for all journeys, including Anglo-Scottish ones.

7.4.2 It should again be borne in mind that this analysis is based upon the survey data, which are the result of one day snapshots of activity and utilisation. The analysis presented in Table 5.11 revealed that the SSRS growth would lead to seat occupancy being exceeded in the evening peak to the south, as well as exacerbating the observed overcrowding in the morning peak from the north. However, had the service operated as planned on the survey day, without cancellations and short formation trains, it appears that there would have easily been sufficient peak capacity to cater for the SSRS growth on both routes. It is not possible to tell from the survey data whether there is regular overcrowding from beyond Dyce on the morning peak train from Inverness; if so, this may pose a specific problem. Given the observed relatively low loading on the return Inverness train in the peak, it is unlikely that this is the case. However, there would perhaps be merit in further survey work of train occupancy levels in the Aberdeen area to more robustly identify the current situation.

7.4.3 There is clearly not sufficient capacity in the peak periods to cope with a tripling of passenger numbers, as the LTS target requires. Approximately 50% growth could apparently be catered for in both peak periods within the available seated capacities. Significantly greater growth could be catered for to/from the north within the overall train capacity, with standing passengers on the 10 minute section to/from Dyce.

7.4.4 To achieve greater growth would be likely to require the strengthening of existing services or additional services, perhaps as part of the proposed Aberdeen Crossrail - such additional capacity is unlikely to be required for a considerable time, but there must be doubts that the current service frequencies on the routes into Aberdeen would be able to attract significant growth in patronage.

7.5 Implications for Rail in Dundee

7.5.1 From the survey data ( see Table 5.12), it would appear that the target increases of both 14% for all public transport (from the LTS) and 18% from the SSRS can be catered for within the existing level of service provision. None of the routes to/from Dundee appear to pose any problems for the growth. The 21% SSRS growth including Anglo-Scottish trips is also well within the scope of the current service, although in any case the increase in Anglo-Scottish trips would probably not coincide with traditional peak times.

7.6 Summary

7.6.1 It would appear from this analysis, albeit based upon fairly limited train occupancy data, that much of the required patronage growth can be catered for within either the existing or planned provision, even at peak times. A number of specific likely problems have been identified and an approximation made of the additional resources or infrastructure enhancement likely to be required. Virtually all peak capacity problems would seem to be able to be solved with a relatively small increase in the available train fleet (and presumably staff and other resources), without major infrastructure work. Specific, localised problems may still remain should the full target growth be required to be met on all routes at peak times.

7.6.2 The views of the relevant authorities and operators to the rail targets, and rail's ability to meet them, are dealt with in the following two chapters.

« Previous | Contents | Next »