Re: The accuracy of passenger forecasts for reopening line investment cases.

"Peter Fox" <peterfoxdore@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

As far as I know the Robin Hood line has been a great
success. Certainly it seems well used whenever I use it (which is not very
often admittedly).


The first phase of the Robin Hood Line was well used and reasonably
successful because it was achieved at low cost - very little new track
was needed, so the line could be re-opened at marginal cost. Ridership
grew quickly and exceeded initial expectations on Phase 1, but has not
grown significantly since.

Phases 2 and 3 have fallen well short of expectations, with very much
higher costs than Phase 1 including new track and civil engineering,
and very disappointing ridership. The extension to Worksop (Phase 3)
has been particularly disappointing. The concerns about the economics
of this re-opening have been reported in past issues of Modern
Railways and are widely known, if not by you.

The economics of the Phases 2 and 3 were based on the idea that an
large initial subsidy from the local authorities in the area would
encourage a rapid growth in ridership, after which the subsidy could
be reduced. Unfortunately, this growth didn't happen and a short term
subsidy has ended up effectively being permanent - this on top of a
substantial local authority contribution to capital costs.

The local public transport market is well adequately served by buses.
The bus service could be significantly improved for a small fraction
of the cost of subsidising the rail service, but closing the line
would be politically difficult, so it will have to struggle on.

If the subsidy was removed, fares would have to rise, ridership would
decrease further and the line would inevitably close. This would be a
huge embarrassment to all concerned, so it won't happen. But it does
indicate how difficult it is to justify re-opening a line, especially
when it isn't just a question of using a previously freight-only line
for passenger services.

Part of the problem is that the perception remains among some people
that the Robin Hood Line is a success. Phase 1 was, but only because
the economics were heavily skewed by being able to use existing
freight tracks. Economically speaking, Phases 2 and 3 were
disastrous, because they had to carry their full costs, and only
proved that they cannot. Rebuilding a rural branch line in an area
that is already well served by buses, and with a rapidly improving
road network, is almost impossible to justify.

The protagonists for Uckfield-Lewes have had a rude awakening, and
those for the East-West route between Milton Keynes, Oxford and
Bedford are just about to. Put simply, there are far better uses than
this for public money.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The accuracy of passenger forecasts for reopening line investment cases.
    ... success. ... The first phase of the Robin Hood Line was well used and reasonably ... so the line could be re-opened at marginal cost. ... and very disappointing ridership. ...
    (uk.railway)
  • Re: WVM again
    ... motorists rather a cost to motorists caused by "society" not providing ... journeys than simply the direct tax raised by the use of motor vehicles. ... move to motorised transport is occurring regardless are in a hell of a mess. ... the subsidy to date will have to be picked up some time soon. ...
    (uk.rec.cycling)
  • Re: This can run your car
    ... :> disaster because it cost to much to run, yet it was a fantastic plane. ... :> make it an overnight commercial success. ... Power a wheelchair or a bicycle with it, ... :> novelty. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: How did the channel tunnel get built?
    ... Although it's possible that the plan against which success is ... built by Government rather than a commercial ... In Norway they are trying to replace all ferries by tunnels, ... state's duty and bugger the cost. ...
    (uk.railway)
  • Re: A quiet afternoon
    ... arguments--the one on whether automobiles are subsidized. ... I should add that about half of that is congestion cost, ... it's a considerably lower fraction than the subsidy to mass ... but less than mass transit, ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)