XC in CP 6

[The Ham]

Given that by 2020 a fair amount of the XC rail network will have wires on it, although only the Manchester to South Coast route will be able to run as EMU's. What is likely to be the proirity for wiring up the gaps and what new XC services may their be?

My thoughts are that the following routes should be fairly high up the list as they remove a lot DMU's from under the wires for only about 210 miles of electrification. The two routes York/Sheffield (about 45 miles) and wire up Derby/Birmingham (about 40 miles) and wire up the routes between Birmingham/Bristol and Cardiff (about 125 miles) and then the following XC services would be run as EMU services:
- (Southampton) Reading to Newcastle (85 miles of wires)
- (Cardiff) Bristol Temple Meads to Manchester Piccadilly (125 miles of wires, assuming both the route to Bristol and the more direct route to Cardiff)
- Bournemouth to Manchester Piccadilly (CP5 scheme)
- Cardiff Central to Nottingham (165 miles of wires, although this is milage which is included in the routes above, so is efectively "free")

That would only leave the following services as DMU's (miles of wires would be in addition to the above):
- (Penzance/Newquay) Plymouth to Edinburgh Waverley (Glasgow Central/Aberdeen) (350 miles of wires to include the extentions, however only 145 miles of wires to be able to run Plymouth to Glasgow Central)
- Guildford to Newcastle (35 miles*)
- Paignton to Manchester Piccadilly (100 miles of wires, or 10 miles if the line to Plymouth has been done)
- Birmingham to Stansted Airport (125 miles of wires)

*assuming replacing the sections of third rail with OHLE as well as removing a section of a diesel island

There would likely be plans for these routes to be electrified over the next 2 or 3 control periods with options to extend some of the routes over the same timeframe or because of the extra Voyagers that would be avaiable, i.e. extending some of the Newcastle/Reading & Guildford services to Gatwick, with plans for those to be electificated as well.

As to have EMU's running all XC services you would need to wire up 730 miles (605 for just the Voyagers) which is highly unlikely to be suitable to be all done in one control period, as there are proberbly other routes with a higher proirity (i.e. to allow SWT's to get rid of some/all of their DMU's).

One other route that has been suggested in another thread is:

How about:-

Nottingham-Bristol every 2 hours calling at Loughborough-Leicester-Bedford-Bletchley-Bicester-Oxford-Swindon-Bath Spa- Bristol TM

Sheffield-Southampton every 2 hours calling at Chesterfield-Derby-Loughborough-Leicester-Bedford-Bletchley-Bicester-Oxford-Reading-Basingstoke-Winchester-Southampton

This would then provide an hourly service between Leicester, Bedford and Oxford.

Martin

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Given that by 2020 a fair amount of the XC rail network will have wires on it, although only the Manchester to South Coast route will be able to run as EMU's. What is likely to be the proirity for wiring up the gaps and what new XC services may their be?

My thoughts are that the following routes should be fairly high up the list as they remove a lot DMU's from under the wires for only about 210 miles of electrification. The two routes York/Sheffield (about 45 miles) and wire up Derby/Birmingham (about 40 miles) and wire up the routes between Birmingham/Bristol and Cardiff (about 125 miles) and then the following XC services would be run as EMU services:
- (Southampton) Reading to Newcastle (85 miles of wires)
- (Cardiff) Bristol Temple Meads to Manchester Piccadilly (125 miles of wires, assuming both the route to Bristol and the more direct route to Cardiff)
- Bournemouth to Manchester Piccadilly (CP5 scheme)
- Cardiff Central to Nottingham (165 miles of wires, although this is milage which is included in the routes above, so is efectively "free")

That would only leave the following services as DMU's (miles of wires would be in addition to the above):
- (Penzance/Newquay) Plymouth to Edinburgh Waverley (Glasgow Central/Aberdeen) (350 miles of wires to include the extentions, however only 145 miles of wires to be able to run Plymouth to Glasgow Central)
- Guildford to Newcastle (35 miles*)
- Paignton to Manchester Piccadilly (100 miles of wires, or 10 miles if the line to Plymouth has been done)
- Birmingham to Stansted Airport (125 miles of wires)

*assuming replacing the sections of third rail with OHLE as well as removing a section of a diesel island

There would likely be plans for these routes to be electrified over the next 2 or 3 control periods with options to extend some of the routes over the same timeframe or because of the extra Voyagers that would be avaiable, i.e. extending some of the Newcastle/Reading & Guildford services to Gatwick, with plans for those to be electificated as well.

As to have EMU's running all XC services you would need to wire up 730 miles (605 for just the Voyagers) which is highly unlikely to be suitable to be all done in one control period, as there are proberbly other routes with a higher proirity (i.e. to allow SWT's to get rid of some/all of their DMU's).

One other route that has been suggested in another thread is:

The core Cross country Network has a very high BCR of 5.2 (Electrification as far south west as Plymouth). Don't know about Birmingham to Stansted airport but I Imagine that would be done as part of a Felixstowe to Nuneaton Electric Freight Scheme (In which case Birmingham to Nuneaton wouldn't be that much more in terms of Electrification).

 

[Cherry_Picker]

If they also wired Birmingham to Derby then it would only be a dozen miles or so.

 

[O L Leigh]

Given the amount of freight traffic that comes over the hill at Arley from Hams Hall and Landor Street, I can't honestly imagine that this section wouldn't also get wired as part of the Felixstowe to Nuneaton scheme. It would appear that rather a lot of the freight traffic going through Nuneaton either runs north-south or east-west, so to make the most of any wires running east I would think that the wires really ought to run west as well.

However, we are talking about a LOT of wiring here. I'd love to believe that it's all going to happen, but, well I guess we shall just have to wait and see.

O L Leigh

 

[David]

A lot of that also depends what colour government we have. Conservatives (despite what a lot of people have you believe (both here and elsewhere)), do spend a lot of money on the railways, where as Labour think the railway network (and everything associated with it) is the devil's playground and should be avoided!

 

[Muzer]

Once again, remember that the wires won't extend to Bournemouth - so the Manchester to Bournemouth route will have to be cut back to Manchester to Southampton, or they'll have to get dual-voltage stock (if there's enough power in the DC system! If not, electrodiesels...), if they want this to happen.

 

[The Ham]

Once again, remember that the wires won't extend to Bournemouth - so the Manchester to Bournemouth route will have to be cut back to Manchester to Southampton, or they'll have to get dual-voltage stock (if there's enough power in the DC system! If not, electrodiesels...), if they want this to happen.

I had been suggested by someone else that if the wires didn't reach Bournemouth (and there are rummours that they may by 2020 or atleast very soon after), that the Manchester trains and the Newcastle trains switch end points. Meaning the Newcastle trains run to Bournmouth (as there are other gaps in the wires on that route, so would remain as Voyagers for the short term) and the Manchester services run to Southampton/Reading.

 

[Muzer]

Indeed. This might work, assuming you either don't mind Southampton/Winchester/Basingstoke not getting many Manchester services per day, or there is enough room on the SWML to run both to Southampton.

 

[starlightEXPRESS]

I had been suggested by someone else that if the wires didn't reach Bournemouth (and there are rummours that they may by 2020 or atleast very soon after), that the Manchester trains and the Newcastle trains switch end points. Meaning the Newcastle trains run to Bournmouth (as there are other gaps in the wires on that route, so would remain as Voyagers for the short term) and the Manchester services run to Southampton/Reading.

It's been a while since I've been on an XC voyager south of Reading. What are typical loadings like? Do many passengers from north of Oxford travel to Basingstoke and points further south (and vice versa)? Would it be practical (once RDG-BSK and SWML OHL electrification is complete) to split the route, with SWT running EMU services south from RDG, releasing Voyagers to strengthen the core (non-electrified) routes through Birmingham?

 

[The Ham]

Indeed. This might work, assuming you either don't mind Southampton/Winchester/Basingstoke not getting many Manchester services per day, or there is enough room on the SWML to run both to Southampton.

It follows the existing service pattern where the Bournemouth/Manchester services run once an hour and the Southampton/Newcastle services run every other hour and the Reading/Newcastle services running every other hour (i.e. a once an hour service from Reading to Newcastle, just half of them start in Southampton rather than reading)

 

[Muzer]

Do Southampton/Newcastle services currently run every other hour? I haven't checked the timetable but it *seemed* less than that from the frequency I actually see them.

EDIT: Ah, just checked - it's only four trains a day each way, but when they are running, it is indeed every other hour.

I'm not sure myself it'd be worth cutting off much of the south from being one change away from Manchester for much of the day. Of course, correct me if I'm wrong, but I would have thought Manchester would be a more popular destination, hence the trains that go further.

 

[The Ham]

It's been a while since I've been on an XC voyager south of Reading. What are typical loadings like? Do many passengers from north of Oxford travel to Basingstoke and points further south (and vice versa)? Would it be practical (once RDG-BSK and SWML OHL electrification is complete) to split the route, with SWT running EMU services south from RDG, releasing Voyagers to strengthen the core (non-electrified) routes through Birmingham?

Whenever I've seen/used them they are fairly full at Basingstoke with a lot of people getting on/off there but still quite a number staying on.

Because of the wiring up due by 2020 (even assuming that they only go as far as Southampton) about 7 Voyagers would be freed up from converting the Manchester to South Coast service to EMU (or about 12% of the total 22x fleet which XC has access to currently).

However by having 8 EMU's (one being spare) as 7 coach sets (which would allow them to be reconfigured as 5, 7 or 9 coach sets so as to be able to meet demand in the longer term) XC would have about 22% more coaches than at present or the same as if project Thor had added one extra coach into each set (although it would be with a lower number of seats because of the need to build end coaches for the EMU's, but with the advantage that there would be no need to remove Voyagers from service any more so than just for standard maintenance).

However the big advantage is that given the fairly small amount of extra wires required to run more of their services by EMU's it could allow a large increase in the number of coaches and seats as time goes by as more EMU's are able to be used.

 

[swt_passenger]

Do Southampton/Newcastle services currently run every other hour? I haven't checked the timetable but it *seemed* less than that from the frequency I actually see them.

EDIT: Ah, just checked - it's only four trains a day each way, but when they are running, it is indeed every other hour.

However although it's only four though trains between the nominal end points of the service, there are indeed six services on the route each way that were extended 'south of Reading'.

In the northbound direction, you'd include the one that starts at Winchester at 0800, (which would be the 0746 ex Southampton (SOU) if it were pathable) and the last northbound train from SOU (1746) which only goes as far as York.

In the southbound direction, the first two SOU arrivals 0917 and 1117 originate from New Street and Leeds respectively, there are then three that come through from Newcastle (arr 1317, 1517 and 1717) because at the last timetable change the original 'sixth path' was diverted to Guildford. Some people will also recall that this was the awkward southbound train that initially ran via Andover to SOU, then for a short while became an Eastleigh terminator. So now the original late Newcastle - Guildford service runs through to SOU, arr 2220. So it is effectively the sixth southbound SOU extension, but 3 hours later than when you'd expect to see it in the standard 2 hourly pattern...

After a few edits hope that all makes sense...

 

[JamesRowden]

One that I have been wondering about is whether the Birmingham-Preston-Glasgow/Edinburgh service should be transfered back to XC and extended to Paddington or Southampton. This could take the path of the Southampton/Reading-Newcastle servce which could be redirected via Bedford.

 

[Muzer]

However although it's only four though trains between the nominal end points of the service, there are indeed six services on the route each way that were extended 'south of Reading'.

In the northbound direction, you'd include the one that starts at Winchester at 0800, (which would be the 0746 ex Southampton (SOU) if it were pathable) and the last northbound train from SOU (1746) which only goes as far as York.

In the southbound direction, the first two SOU arrivals 0917 and 1117 originate from New Street and Leeds respectively, there are then three that come through from Newcastle (arr 1317, 1517 and 1717) because at the last timetable change the original 'sixth path' was diverted to Guildford. Some people will also recall that this was the awkward southbound train that initially ran via Andover to SOU, then for a short while became an Eastleigh terminator. So now the original late Newcastle - Guildford service runs through to SOU, arr 2220. So it is effectively the sixth southbound SOU extension, but 3 hours later than when you'd expect to see it in the standard 2 hourly pattern...

After a few edits hope that all makes sense...

Ah, I see. I just did a search for trains between Southampton Air and Newcastle. That makes more sense that there are some that don't go all the way on either end.

 

[Eagle]

Yeah, it is pretty close to a two-hourly service. And if it was swapped to Manchester, five out of six would get there (rather than four out of six that get to Newcastle) because it's quite a bit closer.

Bear in mind that in the days of VXC (post-Princess) there were no services at all to Manchester from south of Reading.

 

[anthony263]

With the power supply problems on the route beyond Southampton to Weymouth perhaps Network Rail & SWT have talked about continuing the wires to Weymouth replacing the 3rd rail as a means to solve this.

Perhaps as well it might encourage Crosscountry to look at running some summer saturday services to Weymouth.

 

[Eagle]

Perhaps as well it might encourage Crosscountry to look at running some summer saturday services to Weymouth.

What would encourage them is more stock. At the moment Weymouth is the least of their concerns on summer Saturdays, considering the overcrowding in the core on those days.

 

[swt_passenger]

Ah, I see. I just did a search for trains between Southampton Air and Newcastle. That makes more sense that there are some that don't go all the way on either end.

Interestingly, if you'd done such an enquiry (ie from SOA) when it first started you'd have found even less trains, because in the up direction two of them skipped Parkway, (and three skipped Winchester), apparently for pathing reasons with freights. This was not sorted out until a few timetables later and all the necessary calls added back in.

The original times are in a pdf produced by thefab444 here:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=493481&postcount=61

...if anyone is interested in the early difficulties of adding these services. Just shows that all these proposals to add this and that extra service are not necessarily possible.

 

[1e10]

With the power supply problems on the route beyond Southampton to Weymouth perhaps Network Rail & SWT have talked about continuing the wires to Weymouth replacing the 3rd rail as a means to solve this.

Perhaps as well it might encourage Crosscountry to look at running some summer saturday services to Weymouth.

XC services to Weymouth would be great. On summer days FGW sprinters are packed out and it makes travelling unbearable.

 

[AndyLandy]

Indeed. This might work, assuming you either don't mind Southampton/Winchester/Basingstoke not getting many Manchester services per day, or there is enough room on the SWML to run both to Southampton.

Last I heard, it was purely down to a lack of stock that meant that only half the Newcastle-Reading services extended to Southampton. I would expect that should Southampton-Manchester get wired and additional stock procured for XC to run it, we'd see the Newcastle services moved to an hourly calling pattern, giving a regular 2tph Southampton-Birmingham service.

If the wires only go as far as Southampton rather than Bournemouth, switching over the services to SOU-MAN and BMH-NCL makes all the sense in the world.

 

[brianthegiant]

A lot of that also depends what colour government we have. Conservatives (despite what a lot of people have you believe (both here and elsewhere)), do spend a lot of money on the railways, where as Labour think the railway network (and everything associated with it) is the devil's playground and should be avoided!

hmm, do you have any evidence for this claim?

lets not forget that due to the long timescales much of what is done by any administration is initiated by the the previous one. eg Labour fixed flaws in privatisation, Tories pushed on with HS2 & built crossrail.

If more is being spent on railways now than in 70s/80/90s I think it's due to a number of factors, in particular public/politic perception has changed & railways are seen as a successful modern form of transport & less of an archaic money drain than previously. I think the party political aspect can be overstated.

 

[swt_passenger]

Last I heard, it was purely down to a lack of stock that meant that only half the Newcastle-Reading services extended to Southampton.

It isn't, it's lack of paths. I provided the link to the GWML RUS section about this only a couple of days ago as it also came up in the 458/5 thread:

A notional timetable was used for an hourly
and two-hourly extension from Reading
to Southampton, assuming that the paths
north of Reading were fixed. Both options
were assessed against the December 2009
timetable to identify any conflicts with the
existing passenger and freight services. The
hourly option produced a large number of
conflicts with existing freight services and
empty coaching stock and in order to enable
all services to operate as now, a significant
amount of infrastructure would be required.
This option was therefore discounted due to
the business case being unable to support the
level of capital expenditure required.
The two-hourly option, providing an additional
six trains per day in each direction between
Reading and Southampton proved to be
operationally feasible on current infrastructure

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=486056&postcount=4

 

[Muzer]

I wonder how much the new goods loop (?) at between SOA and ESL will help?

 

[ainsworth74]

A reminder that if there is a desire to discuss the relative merits of Labour and Conservative administrations for the railway then I would ask that this discussion is done in it own dedicated thread. This thread is for discussing CrossCountry during Control Period Six and is not an appropriate place for that discussion to take place.

 

[swt_passenger]

I wonder how much the new goods loop (?) at between SOA and ESL will help?

When I discussed this a couple of years ago, it was more to do with lack of paths in the Basingstoke area. They can make more paths available through Winchester etc by diverting freights via Redbridge, Romsey, Andover etc, but that does nothing for Basingstoke.

I think they have medium term plans for another long freight recess loop at Basingstoke, but I think it would only work in one direction. What I'm really trying to point out is that just because the current service is 2 hourly we mustn't necessarily assume that the other hour is free, either one way of both ways...

 

[Eagle]

XC services to Weymouth would be great. On summer days FGW sprinters are packed out and it makes travelling unbearable.

And how would more services between Bournemouth and Weymouth alleviate overcrowding between Bristol and Weymouth?

 

[1e10]

And how would more services between Bournemouth and Weymouth alleviate overcrowding between Bristol and Weymouth?

I could instead travel BRI > SOU > WEY.

 

[swt_passenger]

I could instead travel BRI > SOU > WEY.

You can do that already. It would be easier to strengthen SWT's Weymouth services. But are they ever overcrowded at that end of the route?.

 

[Eagle]

I could instead travel BRI > SOU > WEY.

That'd be at least an hour longer. Albeit more frequent (Bristol to Southampton is hourly, Bristol to Weymouth is two-hourly).

But are they ever overcrowded at that end of the route?.

Sometimes, but not that often. It's at these times of year you appreciate the 2tph service (after the other 10 months of the year wondering what the point of all these trains is).

Of course a XC service probably won't be much faster than a SWT service; its only grace would be the stops it skips, and even then the XC would probably stop at Poole and probably Wareham or Dorchester, which would match the fast SWT.

The obstacle to strengthening Weymouth services, of course, is the well-known restriction on running EMUs in multiple west of Poole. But if as we're discussing the line gets converted to AC then multiple EMUs probably won't be a problem.