Ideas for improving the CrossCountry timetable

[TheGuy77]

I couldn't find any open threads about this topic, but if I'm wrong, please tell me as well as send me one that's open.

With CrossCountry getting 7 (i think?) new Voyagers from Avanti I was thinking how we could improve XC's timetable with them.

What I would do first is increase the frequency of the Reading-Newcastle trains to hourly from 5 per day, and perhaps run some or all of them via Coventry as this only adds on 8 minutes which we could knock off from the 17 spent at Derby. We could also have them call at Chesterfield, Burton and Tamworth, which, again, can be knocked off from the time spent at Derby. We could also have a couple of these services extended to Bournemouth, Guildford or even Ramsgate.

Speaking of Reading-Newcastle, we could have some more Edinburgh-Plymouth services running via Doncaster. This would make Leeds station feel less crowded.

We could also extend all the Manchester-Bristol trains to Paignton and have 1tp2h call at Weston-super-Mare. Some of these services could also run to Plymouth or Penzance instead. I'm sure CrossCountry once thought about (and did) extending Manchester-Bristol trains to Exeter.

Another thing I would do is make sure that all Voyager services are made up of at least 5 coaches (8 coaches for Edinburgh/Glasgow/Aberdeen-Plymouth/Penzance services), and the 4 car units can be coupled to form 8-car services. Nobody wants to be standing for 10 hours from Edinburgh to Penzance on a 4-car 220. That 1 extra coach can make all the difference.

Same thing with the Turbostars. Minimum 3 coaches (4 for full Cardiff-Nottingham and Birmingham-Stansted services). Declassify First Class as well for extra capacity.

I know that my ideas will never be considered, let alone them happening. 12 5-car voyagers does not seem like enough to make all these ideas come to life. But remember, this is about ideas/suggestions, not about what will actually happen.

 

[800001]

I couldn't find any open threads about this topic, but if I'm wrong, please tell me as well as send me one that's open.

With CrossCountry getting 7 (i think?) new Voyagers from Avanti I was thinking how we could improve XC's timetable with them.

What I would do first is increase the frequency of the Reading-Newcastle trains to hourly from 5 per day, and perhaps run some or all of them via Coventry as this only adds on 8 minutes which we could knock off from the 17 spent at Derby. We could also have them call at Chesterfield, Burton and Tamworth, which, again, can be knocked off from the time spent at Derby. We could also have a couple of these services extended to Bournemouth, Guildford or even Ramsgate.

Speaking of Reading-Newcastle, we could have some more Edinburgh-Plymouth services running via Doncaster. This would make Leeds station feel less crowded.

We could also extend all the Manchester-Bristol trains to Paignton and have 1tp2h call at Weston-super-Mare. Some of these services could also run to Plymouth or Penzance instead. I'm sure CrossCountry once thought about (and did) extending Manchester-Bristol trains to Exeter.

Another thing I would do is make sure that all Voyager services are made up of at least 5 coaches (8 coaches for Edinburgh/Glasgow/Aberdeen-Plymouth/Penzance services), and the 4 car units can be coupled to form 8-car services. Nobody wants to be standing for 10 hours from Edinburgh to Penzance on a 4-car 220. That 1 extra coach can make all the difference.

Same thing with the Turbostars. Minimum 3 coaches (4 for full Cardiff-Nottingham and Birmingham-Stansted services). Declassify First Class as well for extra capacity.

I know that my ideas will never be considered, let alone them happening. 12 5-car voyagers does not seem like enough to make all these ideas come to life. But remember, this is about ideas/suggestions, not about what will actually happen.

i believe the extra sets are to lengthen current services.

 

[swt_passenger]

I couldn't find any open threads about this topic, but if I'm wrong, please tell me as well as send me one that's open.

With CrossCountry getting 7 (i think?) new Voyagers from Avanti I was thinking how we could improve XC's timetable with them.

What I would do first is increase the frequency of the Reading-Newcastle trains to hourly from 5 per day, and perhaps run some or all of them via Coventry as this only adds on 8 minutes which we could knock off from the 17 spent at Derby. We could also have them call at Chesterfield, Burton and Tamworth, which, again, can be knocked off from the time spent at Derby. We could also have a couple of these services extended to Bournemouth, Guildford or even Ramsgate.

Speaking of Reading-Newcastle, we could have some more Edinburgh-Plymouth services running via Doncaster. This would make Leeds station feel less crowded.

We could also extend all the Manchester-Bristol trains to Paignton and have 1tp2h call at Weston-super-Mare. Some of these services could also run to Plymouth or Penzance instead. I'm sure CrossCountry once thought about (and did) extending Manchester-Bristol trains to Exeter.

Another thing I would do is make sure that all Voyager services are made up of at least 5 coaches (8 coaches for Edinburgh/Glasgow/Aberdeen-Plymouth/Penzance services), and the 4 car units can be coupled to form 8-car services. Nobody wants to be standing for 10 hours from Edinburgh to Penzance on a 4-car 220. That 1 extra coach can make all the difference.

Same thing with the Turbostars. Minimum 3 coaches (4 for full Cardiff-Nottingham and Birmingham-Stansted services). Declassify First Class as well for extra capacity.

I know that my ideas will never be considered, let alone them happening. 12 5-car voyagers does not seem like enough to make all these ideas come to life. But remember, this is about ideas/suggestions, not about what will actually happen.

There are numerous existing threads that have covered this, but not necessarily with the most obvious titles. I’d try a search within the June 2024 thread, or the ECML Dec 2024 thread in this sub-forum.

There is definite evidence concerning Reading to York or Newcastle, which is to be ‘mostly hourly” from May/June 2025, and is dependent on receiving some of the additional trains from the WCML. That’s explicitly stated in the latest XC track access application.

On the other hand nothing whatsoever has appeared about extensions, eg to Paignton, or reinstating the Reading to Southampton extensions.

Cardiff’s new single through service to Edinburgh and back starts Dec 2024 and is covered somewhere, but it’s a tweak of an existing Plymouth to Edinburgh service with joining and splitting in each direction.

IIRC some missing trains in the Cambridge/Stansted area are being reinstated in similar timescales, ie in 2025.

I've attached a pdf of the recent track access application because the links to NR‘s site don’t seem to last:

 

[Killingworth]

I'm all for more stopping at Chesterfield when I'm going south.

I'm also in favour of going north via Doncaster from Sheffield to York, Newcastle and Scotland to save 20 minutes.

Running 4 coach trains should be kept to an absolute minimum, certainly not through the central core during busy periods.

Knocking time off at Derby in both directions would be fine, if only all the trains ran to time, but they don't. It's a valuable cushion of recovery time. The more a long distance train gets behind schedule the more booked paths it misses. It potentially messes up many others as they are also delayed and in Cross Country's case the ripples can stretch as far as Cornwall or Aberdeen!

 

[The Planner]

I couldn't find any open threads about this topic, but if I'm wrong, please tell me as well as send me one that's open.

With CrossCountry getting 7 (i think?) new Voyagers from Avanti I was thinking how we could improve XC's timetable with them.

What I would do first is increase the frequency of the Reading-Newcastle trains to hourly from 5 per day, and perhaps run some or all of them via Coventry as this only adds on 8 minutes which we could knock off from the 17 spent at Derby. We could also have them call at Chesterfield, Burton and Tamworth, which, again, can be knocked off from the time spent at Derby. We could also have a couple of these services extended to Bournemouth, Guildford or even Ramsgate.

The extra Voyagers are part of the increase to the Reading Newcastle from May 25 as noted here. They can't go via Coventry as there isnt the capacity. Just because it only adds on 8 minutes doesnt mean its easy to timetable either.

Speaking of Reading-Newcastle, we could have some more Edinburgh-Plymouth services running via Doncaster. This would make Leeds station feel less crowded.

XC would do the opposite if they could, none via Donny and all via Leeds.

We could also extend all the Manchester-Bristol trains to Paignton and have 1tp2h call at Weston-super-Mare. Some of these services could also run to Plymouth or Penzance instead. I'm sure CrossCountry once thought about (and did) extending Manchester-Bristol trains to Exeter.

Weston would just be too detrimental to journey times, the same reason as why they dont do Gloucester.

Nobody wants to be standing for 10 hours from Edinburgh to Penzance on a 4-car 220. That 1 extra coach can make all the difference.

Nobody does anyway as the people going end to end can likely be counted on one hand.

 

[TheGuy77]

How about this instead:

We start at Bournemouth. Another 4/5 car voyager is coupled to an existing Bournemouth-Manchester service that is only made up of 4/5 coaches. Both units travel together as usual up to Birmingham New Street, where they detach. The Manchester unit goes up to Manchester as usual. The other unit would run all stations up to Leeds, and I chose Leeds so as many people as possible are connected to Reading. The idea of detaching essentially means that two services are merged into one, resulting in less disruption. The spare units would run the same Reading-Newcastle service via Doncaster as now, calling at the exact same stations.

 

[800001]

How about this instead:

We start at Bournemouth. Another 4/5 car voyager is coupled to an existing Bournemouth-Manchester service that is only made up of 4/5 coaches. Both units travel together as usual up to Birmingham New Street, where they detach. The Manchester unit goes up to Manchester as usual. The other unit would run all stations up to Leeds, and I chose Leeds so as many people as possible are connected to Reading. The idea of detaching essentially means that two services are merged into one, resulting in less disruption. The spare units would run the same Reading-Newcastle service via Doncaster as now, calling at the exact same stations.

But then in reverse do these couple at Birmingham? Requiring both units to present right time to enable coupling?

 

[TheGuy77]

But then in reverse do these couple at Birmingham? Requiring both units to present right time to enable coupling?

There would be recovery time at Birmingham (about 15 minutes or so). I'm sure they're looking into the detach/coupling principle for the new Edinburgh-Cardiff service.

 

[Killingworth]

How about this instead:

We start at Bournemouth. Another 4/5 car voyager is coupled to an existing Bournemouth-Manchester service that is only made up of 4/5 coaches. Both units travel together as usual up to Birmingham New Street, where they detach. The Manchester unit goes up to Manchester as usual. The other unit would run all stations up to Leeds, and I chose Leeds so as many people as possible are connected to Reading. The idea of detaching essentially means that two services are merged into one, resulting in less disruption. The spare units would run the same Reading-Newcastle service via Doncaster as now, calling at the exact same stations.

Nightmare. Very limited space at Leeds already for terminating trains. Uncoupling a north bound right time train is probably OK, but if delayed messes up platforms and paths. However that's minor compared with coupling up delayed trains in a busy station like New Street. Eating up recovery time is a risky business, once a day maybe, but hourly may be a risk too far.

 

[TheGuy77]

I don't think Leeds is a good idea actually. Perhaps terminate at Sheffield instead.

 

[swt_passenger]

There would be recovery time at Birmingham (about 15 minutes or so). I'm sure they're looking into the detach/coupling principle for the new Edinburgh-Cardiff service.

One northbound attach per day at Birmingham, and one southbound split at Gloucester. Doesn't really suggest they want to do a lot of it.

 

[The Planner]

There would be recovery time at Birmingham (about 15 minutes or so). I'm sure they're looking into the detach/coupling principle for the new Edinburgh-Cardiff service.

Recovery time in what train? 15 minutes between one train arriving and the next? What if they are both late?

 

[mangyiscute]

I think reinstating the Reading-Newcastle (although I'd terminate them all at York personally since it would mean more spare units) to hourly is the most important thing currently, these trains aren't that well used and I think its because theyre timed rather randomly, so passengers will just aim for the Manchester service since they know those times in their head.
Other than that, nothing is going to change in the near future. The main thing for me would be using the fleet to target doubling up the potentially most crowded trains - for example, if there's a big cricket match in Birmingham, and there will be a lot of people leaving Birmingham station at about 7pm, try and ensure that all of the services leaving Birmingham at 7pm are double units to alleviate crowding (when I went to the ashes in Birmingham last year the Bournemouth train in the evening had to leave behind hundreds of people as it was only 4 coaches and they'd cancelled the trains before and after).

 

[Killingworth]

I think reinstating the Reading-Newcastle (although I'd terminate them all at York personally since it would mean more spare units) to hourly is the most important thing currently, these trains aren't that well used and I think its because theyre timed rather randomly, so passengers will just aim for the Manchester service since they know those times in their head.
Other than that, nothing is going to change in the near future. The main thing for me would be using the fleet to target doubling up the potentially most crowded trains - for example, if there's a big cricket match in Birmingham, and there will be a lot of people leaving Birmingham station at about 7pm, try and ensure that all of the services leaving Birmingham at 7pm are double units to alleviate crowding (when I went to the ashes in Birmingham last year the Bournemouth train in the evening had to leave behind hundreds of people as it was only 4 coaches and they'd cancelled the trains before and after).

A big part of the difficulties with CrossCountry is that users in Devon will see it differently to those in Northumberland and it's the same for all other places it tries to serve.

My wife used to travel from Sheffield to Newcastle once a week, always using the service via Doncaster whenever possible to save 20 minutes and the crowds through Leeds.

For us we'd want that via Leeds to terminate at Newcastle and the via Doncaster to carry on into Scotland!

 

[mangyiscute]

A big part of the difficulties with CrossCountry is that users in Devon will see it differently to those in Northumberland and it's the same for all other places it tries to serve.

My wife used to travel from Sheffield to Newcastle once a week, always using the service via Doncaster whenever possible to save 20 minutes and the crowds through Leeds.

For us we'd want that via Leeds to terminate at Newcastle and the via Doncaster to carry on into Scotland!

My argument would be that York to Newcastle already has frequent services as well as 1tph by XC so extending that Reading service past York is not really adding much extra to the network, at the cost of perhaps 2/3 units. You could still do Sheffield to Newcastle either direct through Leeds, or changing at Doncaster/York on the quicker route, which I think offers plenty of options and if it means that some key busy services can be doubled, I think it is worth it.

 

[YorkRailFan]

With CrossCountry getting 7 (i think?) new Voyagers from Avanti I was thinking how we could improve XC's timetable with them.

Now confirmed to be 12 with an extra 5 coming from Avanti.

I would say perhaps run more XC services via Crewe, if possible with the pathing, to allow for say Crewe (and beyond) to Bristol (for instance) journeys and more Crewe-Reading journeys. I think Newcastle-Reading services being extended to Southampton would be good, as it used to happen a couple of times a day. I would also make Birmingham-Stansted hourly and not have 1tph terminate at Cambridge.

 

[TheGuy77]

It seems like dividing/attaching units mid-route isn't effective, so here is my revised idea:

Manchester-Bournemouth
Keep the hourly service, but run via Solihull (except for 3tpd), as Avanti already has links from Birmingham Intl/Coventry to Manchester calling at all of XC's stations, apart from Macclesfield.

Reading-Newcastle
Increase the frequency of the service, and extend the services to five coaches long. A few of these services a day (maybe 3) run to Bournemouth and another few 3 to Scotland. Run these trains via Coventry in lieu of the ones from Manchester, so as many places are connected to each other as possible.

Manchester-Bristol
Extend all of these services to Exeter (I'm sure it's possible because it was mentioned on Wikipedia). Keep the 3tpd that run to Paignton.

Cardiff-Nottingham (and maybe Edinburgh-Plymouth?)
Have a few of these services run via Worcester Shrub Hill.

Birmingham-Stansted
Have all the trains terminating at Cambridge extend to Stansted. It's only 1 stop so it shouldn't be too much of a challenge.

Edinburgh-Plymouth
Have all of these trains call at Worcestershire Parkway. I'm sure these trains were meant to call here anyway.

 

[swt_passenger]

It seems like dividing/attaching units mid-route isn't effective, so here is my revised idea:

Manchester-Bournemouth
Keep the hourly service, but run via Solihull (except for 3tpd), as Avanti already has links from Birmingham Intl/Coventry to Manchester calling at all of XC's stations, apart from Macclesfield.

XC have repeatedly stated a preference to run all their Bournemouth and Reading services via Coventry to target the airport market.

Manchester-Bristol
Extend all of these services to Exeter (I'm sure it's possible because it was mentioned on Wikipedia). Keep the 3tpd that run to Paignton.

The proposal (consulted on a few years ago) to run more trains to Exeter required the extensions to Paignton to be dropped.

Edinburgh-Plymouth
Have all of these trains call at Worcestershire Parkway. I'm sure these trains were meant to call here anyway.

AIUI from previous discussions XC had made it clear they had no intention of calling long distance services at Worcester Parkway.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Manchester-Bournemouth
Keep the hourly service, but run via Solihull (except for 3tpd), as Avanti already has links from Birmingham Intl/Coventry to Manchester calling at all of XC's stations, apart from Macclesfield.

Reading-Newcastle
Increase the frequency of the service, and extend the services to five coaches long. A few of these services a day (maybe 3) run to Bournemouth and another few 3 to Scotland. Run these trains via Coventry in lieu of the ones from Manchester, so as many places are connected to each other as possible.

That means Coventry only gets 3tpd to Bournemouth, Southampton and Basingstoke. An easier solution would be to make Coventry set down only on Northbound and pick up only on Southbound.

 

[The Planner]

It seems like dividing/attaching units mid-route isn't effective, so here is my revised idea:

Manchester-Bournemouth
Keep the hourly service, but run via Solihull (except for 3tpd), as Avanti already has links from Birmingham Intl/Coventry to Manchester calling at all of XC's stations, apart from Macclesfield.

Why? what's the benefit as you still have to hit the path north of New St. You would just end up dawdling through Tyseley.

Reading-Newcastle
Increase the frequency of the service, and extend the services to five coaches long. A few of these services a day (maybe 3) run to Bournemouth and another few 3 to Scotland. Run these trains via Coventry in lieu of the ones from Manchester, so as many places are connected to each other as possible.

Doesn't work as they are in different parts of the hour along the Coventry corridor.

Cardiff-Nottingham (and maybe Edinburgh-Plymouth?)
Have a few of these services run via Worcester Shrub Hill.

Journey time impact is such that you push people on to the ones that don't go via Worcester.

Edinburgh-Plymouth
Have all of these trains call at Worcestershire Parkway. I'm sure these trains were meant to call here anyway.

No they weren't. The only ones that will ever call there (and that is if XCs arm is properly twisted) is the Bristol Manchester.

 

[A S Leib]

What, if anything, would need to happen for Leicester – Peterborough to go up to twice per hour? Does XC have enough 170s, and would Peterborough have enough space for another terminating service?

 

[800001]

What, if anything, would need to happen for Leicester – Peterborough to go up to twice per hour? Does XC have enough 170s, and would Peterborough have enough space for another terminating service?

Nothing to stop a unit shunting into Nene Sidings when it terminates (would obviously require route knowledge).
This would mean using platforms 4 or 5.

 

[TheGuy77]

It doesn't seem like any of my ideas are very logical. What about your ideas?

 

[mangyiscute]

It doesn't seem like any of my ideas are very logical. What about your ideas?

With the current fleet allocation and driver numbers, I think keeping it similar to what it is now is the best idea.
If newer stock can be ordered, that is the time to look at how to revise services and hopefully increase the total number of units running.

 

[Christmas]

Run from Haymarket to Glasgow Queen Street rather than Central. This would give Falkirk a direct link to the East Coast and catch out Lumo with their apparent intention to run to Glasgow.

 

[800001]

Run from Haymarket to Glasgow Queen Street rather than Central. This would give Falkirk a direct link to the East Coast and catch out Lumo with their apparent intention to run to Glasgow.

Does Queen Street have capacity?

 

[swt_passenger]

It doesn't seem like any of my ideas are very logical. What about your ideas?

I guess having only been here a few days you haven’t found all the previous similar threads. There really are a few started every year, dozens of them in total…

So here’s a selection from this sub-forum:

Search results for query: Cross country

 

[Christmas]

Does Queen Street have capacity?

Limited capacity but still possible. The Edinburgh to Glasgow is still only half hourly. Platform 1 is empty for a good proportion of every hour and could accommodate a 4 car Voyager.

 

[Starmill]

The proposal (consulted on a few years ago) to run more trains to Exeter required the extensions to Paignton to be dropped.

This is correct of course. But it's also worth adding that in 2019 a small number of extra services were added between Exeter St Davids and Bristol Temple Meads, most of which ran through from Manchester Piccadilly.

A true half-hourly express service Bristol - Taunton - Exeter would of course be wildly popular, just impossible to resource (even once all of the new Voyager trains are productive).

 

[Grecian 1998]

I think the general consensus is that XC need to get to a position where they can deliver effectively the services they currently run plus an hourly Newcastle - Reading before worrying about extensions to anywhere else.

I suspect XC's main interest in altering their services is hoping that one day paths become available allowing them to serve Leeds, Birmingham International and Coventry half hourly using the Newcastle - Reading services. Bristol - Exeter half hourly is probably of more interest to them than any other extension given the consultation a few years ago. Although as has been stated, this would require more trains.