Post by Dmitri on May 31, 2005 12:59:55 GMT
www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1634726,00.html
"In the age of steam, express trains averaged over 80mph... today they're lucky if they beat 60
By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
MANY train journeys on Britain's busiest routes are much
slower than they were under British Rail and some even take longer than in the age of steam. The high-speed inter-city routes are slower now than in the 1980s, according to an analysis of train timetables.
Nationalised BR tempted people on to trains by advertising reductions in journey time, but the privatised companies have switched the focus to reliability rather than speed and several have added extra minutes to the timetable to avoid penalties for delays.
Journeys on the Great Western Main Line now take up to 20 minutes longer than in 1980, using the same trains. The fastest journey from London to Edinburgh took just under four hours in the 1990s but now takes ten minutes longer. On some regional routes, journeys were faster when Queen Victoria was on the throne.
The occasional steam train was faster than the equivalent service today, usually because stretches of line were closed by Richard Beeching in the 1960s, necessitating longer routes today, or because the Victorians prized their express services and therefore made fewer stops en route. According to Bradshaw's Threepenny Railway Guide from 1900, three express trains an hour linked Liverpool and Manchester, taking just 40 minutes. A century later, it takes seven minutes longer. It took 35 minutes to travel from Portsmouth to Southampton in 1898, compared with 46 minutes today. In the 1930s, steam expresses regularly averaged more than 80mph.
More surprising is the slowdown since the 1970s, when trains were often faster with the same stopping patterns and using the same diesel or electric engines. In the 1970s, BR branded its new high-speed train the Intercity 125 to underline its top speed of 125mph. But the average speed has steadily declined and is now only 61mph between London and Norwich. The slowdown is partly explained by additional stops to improve frequency at stations along the route. Barry Doe, a timetable consultant, said: "It is true that BR used to focus on a proper express service. But even the extra stops now do not fully explain why many journeys take quarter of an hour longer. Some journeys are longer even with the same stopping patterns."
South West Trains, the biggest company, reported a 14 per cent improvement in punctuality, due almost entirely to the introduction of a new timetable in December. A few minutes have been added to many journeys, allowing the company to incur delays and still arrive on time. Passengers often find that trains are held at stations because they have arrived early.
SWT said some of the extra minutes were needed because sliding doors take longer to use than the slam doors. Many trains have also been lengthened to cope with increased demand, and the extra weight has reduced acceleration. The original Great Western Intercity 125s had seven coaches but now have eight. The network also carries 2,500 more trains a day compared with 1995, making it more difficult to accommodate expresses.
A spokesman for GNER, which operates between London and Edinburgh, said: "People are more interested in their train arriving at the published time rather than shaving a few minutes off the journey."
But the Rail Passengers' Council said speed was crucial in the battle against airlines. There are 46 flights a day from London to Manchester and 70 to Edinburgh. Anthony Smith, the council's national director, said: "Passengers are baffled why, despite new trains and advanced signalling, their journey takes longer than it used to 20 or even 50 years ago."
Howard Johnston, of Rail magazine, said even the West Coast Main Line, the only route to be upgraded for faster trains, was slower than promised. "We used to have trains with romantic names like the Flying Scotsman or the Cheltenham Flyer, but nowadays trains no longer fly.""
"In the age of steam, express trains averaged over 80mph... today they're lucky if they beat 60
By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
MANY train journeys on Britain's busiest routes are much
slower than they were under British Rail and some even take longer than in the age of steam. The high-speed inter-city routes are slower now than in the 1980s, according to an analysis of train timetables.
Nationalised BR tempted people on to trains by advertising reductions in journey time, but the privatised companies have switched the focus to reliability rather than speed and several have added extra minutes to the timetable to avoid penalties for delays.
Journeys on the Great Western Main Line now take up to 20 minutes longer than in 1980, using the same trains. The fastest journey from London to Edinburgh took just under four hours in the 1990s but now takes ten minutes longer. On some regional routes, journeys were faster when Queen Victoria was on the throne.
The occasional steam train was faster than the equivalent service today, usually because stretches of line were closed by Richard Beeching in the 1960s, necessitating longer routes today, or because the Victorians prized their express services and therefore made fewer stops en route. According to Bradshaw's Threepenny Railway Guide from 1900, three express trains an hour linked Liverpool and Manchester, taking just 40 minutes. A century later, it takes seven minutes longer. It took 35 minutes to travel from Portsmouth to Southampton in 1898, compared with 46 minutes today. In the 1930s, steam expresses regularly averaged more than 80mph.
More surprising is the slowdown since the 1970s, when trains were often faster with the same stopping patterns and using the same diesel or electric engines. In the 1970s, BR branded its new high-speed train the Intercity 125 to underline its top speed of 125mph. But the average speed has steadily declined and is now only 61mph between London and Norwich. The slowdown is partly explained by additional stops to improve frequency at stations along the route. Barry Doe, a timetable consultant, said: "It is true that BR used to focus on a proper express service. But even the extra stops now do not fully explain why many journeys take quarter of an hour longer. Some journeys are longer even with the same stopping patterns."
South West Trains, the biggest company, reported a 14 per cent improvement in punctuality, due almost entirely to the introduction of a new timetable in December. A few minutes have been added to many journeys, allowing the company to incur delays and still arrive on time. Passengers often find that trains are held at stations because they have arrived early.
SWT said some of the extra minutes were needed because sliding doors take longer to use than the slam doors. Many trains have also been lengthened to cope with increased demand, and the extra weight has reduced acceleration. The original Great Western Intercity 125s had seven coaches but now have eight. The network also carries 2,500 more trains a day compared with 1995, making it more difficult to accommodate expresses.
A spokesman for GNER, which operates between London and Edinburgh, said: "People are more interested in their train arriving at the published time rather than shaving a few minutes off the journey."
But the Rail Passengers' Council said speed was crucial in the battle against airlines. There are 46 flights a day from London to Manchester and 70 to Edinburgh. Anthony Smith, the council's national director, said: "Passengers are baffled why, despite new trains and advanced signalling, their journey takes longer than it used to 20 or even 50 years ago."
Howard Johnston, of Rail magazine, said even the West Coast Main Line, the only route to be upgraded for faster trains, was slower than promised. "We used to have trains with romantic names like the Flying Scotsman or the Cheltenham Flyer, but nowadays trains no longer fly.""
;D ;D
