XC trains behing heavily used by Wolverhampton to Birmingham commuters: how could this be resolved?

[Kite159]

Moderator note: Split from

CrossCountry compulsory reservations: forcing passengers into 1st class

CrossCountry seem to have started doing compulsory reservations on some services, but only between Birmingham New Street and Wolverhampton. This appears to be part of an attempt to prevent walk-ups from Birmingham to Wolverhampton from being issued on these services if there are no seats...

www.railforums.co.uk

They exist in the electronic timetable data, which is what journey planners use when determining the reservation status of a train (and hence whether they can sell tickets without a reservation if the train shows as fully reserved).

There's certainly a problem with overcrowding - I just saw well over 100 people get off the 19:01 from Birmingham New Street at Wolverhampton - but this isn't the way to fix it. Perhaps First should be declassified for that section.

I would disagree with declassifying First Class for that section. The easiest solution to deal with overcrowding is to skip the Wolverhampton call all together. Force the commuters to use alternative trains which start at New Street and are longer than a 4/5 coach voyager.

 

[tomoufc]

I would disagree with declassifying First Class for that section. The easiest solution to deal with overcrowding is to skip the Wolverhampton call all together. Force the commuters to use alternative trains which start at New Street and are longer than a 4/5 coach voyager.

First class should be declassified permanently anyway. It doesn’t make any more money than standard, and can’t be justified on social and environmental grounds.

 

[Haywain]

It doesn’t make any more money than standard,

You know this for a fact, do you? If so, could you provide evidence?

 

[tomoufc]

You know this for a fact, do you? If so, could you provide evidence?

I assume you mean on the revenue side, not the social and environmental argument (which I think is obvious). Not sure what standard of evidence you’re after, or whether it’s available, but it’s my abiding impression from reports of fairly recent work on this, eg https://www.railway-technology.com/...ass-to-ease-congestion-could-it-work-5881702/

 

[30907]

I assume you mean on the revenue side, not the social and environmental argument (which I think is obvious). Not sure what standard of evidence you’re after, or whether it’s available, but it’s my abiding impression from reports of fairly recent work on this, eg https://www.railway-technology.com/...ass-to-ease-congestion-could-it-work-5881702/

He appears to have been talking about commuter trains not long-distance ones.
The problem is that the Wolverhampton corridor is predominantly served by longer-distance trains, none of which except the Eustons have a huge capacity, and protecting the XCs in some way will probably push passengers onto other 4-car trains.
You could do some clever timetabling - running the XCs just behind a Pendolino or another relatively quiet service (are there any?), or even running an extra train (good luck finding platform, path, crew and stock!) - but the simplest and cheapest solution is likely to be to use longer trains on XC.

 

[The Planner]

XC is the fastest service between the two as it doesn't stop. Though removing Wolves wouldn't really gain anything from a timetable perspective, just reduces revenue for XC.

 

[SargeNpton]

I would disagree with declassifying First Class for that section. The easiest solution to deal with overcrowding is to skip the Wolverhampton call all together. Force the commuters to use alternative trains which start at New Street and are longer than a 4/5 coach voyager.

As passengers from Wolverhampton may wish to travel to Manchester what would be required is to make it a pick-up only call. The Wolverhampton stop would then disappear from the screens at New Street.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As passengers from Wolverhampton may wish to travel to Manchester what would be required is to make it a pick-up only call. The Wolverhampton stop would then disappear from the screens at New Street.

Doesn't work because people may wish to travel to Wolves from further south.

I wonder if it might be helped by creating a set of fares slightly lower than the current ones routed WMT/Avanti Only? A lot of people will choose the cheaper option even if only by 10p, and that'd keep local journeys off the short TfWs as well. I usually argue against doing this but in this case there seems a solid reason for it. A lot will be on WM passes but not everyone.

 

[SargeNpton]

Doesn't work because people may wish to travel to Wolves from further south.

I wonder if it might be helped by creating a set of fares slightly lower than the current ones routed WMT/Avanti Only? A lot of people will choose the cheaper option even if only by 10p, and that'd keep local journeys off the short TfWs as well. I usually argue against doing this but in this case there seems a solid reason for it. A lot will be on WM passes but not everyone.

That's true. I had overlooked that.

 

[Haywain]

I assume you mean on the revenue side,

You said it doesn't make money, so obviously the revenue.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Doesn't work because people may wish to travel to Wolves from further south.

I wonder if it might be helped by creating a set of fares slightly lower than the current ones routed WMT/Avanti Only? A lot of people will choose the cheaper option even if only by 10p, and that'd keep local journeys off the short TfWs as well. I usually argue against doing this but in this case there seems a solid reason for it. A lot will be on WM passes but not everyone.

On the subject of fares; I know people who live in Birmingham and they use a day rover type ticket (£5 or £7.50, not sure of the exact details) that includes travel on bus, tram and also rail; and the last includes Coventry (I think) - Birmingham - Wolverhampton (and valid on Avanti and XC as well as LNw/WM). This may help to explain the overloading between Birmingham and Wolverhampton and possibly on LNw/WM between Coventry and New St.

I wonder how much income is distributed to rail from these tickets - presumably a tiny amount for each ticket, but possibly compensated because there's a large number of purchasers, few of whom use rail.

 

[Bletchleyite]

On the subject of fares; I know people who live in Birmingham and they use a day rover type ticket (£5 or £7.50, not sure of the exact details) that includes travel on bus, tram and also rail; and the last includes Coventry (I think) - Birmingham - Wolverhampton (and valid on Avanti and XC as well as LNw/WM). This may help to explain the overloading between Birmingham and Wolverhampton and possibly on LNw/WM between Coventry and New St.

I wonder how much income is distributed to rail from these tickets - presumably a tiny amount for each ticket, but possibly compensated because there's a large number of purchasers, few of whom use rail.

I wonder if it would be possible for XC to opt out of the TfWM ticket scheme? Aren't they generally optional schemes as things stand, with the odd few bus operators not joining? That'd take you closer to the German approach where such tickets are generally only valid on regional services, not InterCity ones.

 

[CharlieSpotted]

You could do some clever timetabling - running the XCs just behind a Pendolino or another relatively quiet service (are there any?), or even running an extra train (good luck finding platform, path, crew and stock!) - but the simplest and cheapest solution is likely to be to use longer trains on XC.

There were some quieter trains, the ones via Tame Bridge, but of course those are now gone...

Now, in the evening peak at least, everything (local or long-distance) is in a range between "Busy but bearable" and "Rammed".

TFW are also not helping matters by repeatedly short-forming, of course.

 

[JonathanH]

If Birmingham to Wolverhampton passengers are not supposed to use the CrossCountry trains, should they be kept off the TfW ones as well?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If Birmingham to Wolverhampton passengers are not supposed to use the CrossCountry trains, should they be kept off the TfW ones as well?

Ideally yes as they're short trains with limited capacity. In Germany they'd also be kept off the Avantis, but these typically have enough capacity so in this context it wouldn't make sense to do so.

Having said that, if double sets to Pwllheli become the norm that'd mean a 6 car set on this route where it'd be a lot less of a problem (the CAFs are better at taking crowds than Voyagers due to the door layout).

 

[HSTEd]

I'm not sure this is really worth worrying about.

The last thing we need is more system complexity from trying to keep passengers from using the trains that best suit their journeys.

 

[JonathanH]

The last thing we need is more system complexity from trying to keep passengers from using the trains that best suit their journeys.

The need is to keep passengers on the trains with the capacity for the journeys those people are making, without the inefficiency of using long trains where they aren't needed.

There would still be five or six trains an hour open to travellers between Birmingham and Wolverhampton.

 

[tomoufc]

You said it doesn't make money, so obviously the revenue.

You did, apologies. How's my evidence for you?

 

[Falcon1200]

I'm not sure this is really worth worrying about.

Indeed, and also very difficult to sort out, given that there is no segregated access to individual platforms at either New Street or Wolverhampton, so differential fares or compulsory seat reservations will not prevent passengers using the long distance trains for local journeys.

 

[HSTEd]

The need is to keep passengers on the trains with the capacity for the journeys those people are making, without the inefficiency of using long trains where they aren't needed.

There would still be five or six trains an hour open to travellers between Birmingham and Wolverhampton.

Well, are passengers regularly being left behind on XC services?
That is the only reason I can possibly see for even considering such measures.

As it is, attempting to enforce this will create a huge headache for everyone and simply cause more arguments.

 

[The Planner]

There is 6 minutes difference in journey time from catching a xx.30 off New St vs the Liverpool at xx.34, or you wait for the stopper at xx.41.
The xx.01 is slightly different as its the xx.08 Avanti to Scotland that is next, a 12 minute difference to Wolves. After that its the stopper at xx.11 which gets you to Wolves at xx.37. You can see why people catch the XC. Surprising that the WMT Shrewsbury doesn't get hammered, unless it is.

 

[Peter0124]

There is 6 minutes difference in journey time from catching a xx.30 off New St vs the Liverpool at xx.34.

I don't mean to interrupt but wouldn't the difference actually be 2 minutes?
The Liverpool only takes 2 mins longer with a stop at Smethwick.

 

[HSTEd]

I don't mean to interrupt but wouldn't the difference actually be 2 minutes?
The Liverpool only takes 2 mins longer with a stop at Smethwick.

Well if you are in a position to take the xx.30 then it takes you six minutes longer to get where you are going if you take the xx.34 instead.

You can't return that four minutes sitting at the station to obtain four minutes wherever you wanted to be.

 

[Peter0124]

-Deleted-

 

[Starmill]

I wonder if it would be possible for XC to opt out of the TfWM ticket scheme? Aren't they generally optional schemes as things stand, with the odd few bus operators not joining? That'd take you closer to the German approach where such tickets are generally only valid on regional services, not InterCity ones.

There is no chance of CrossCountry going for this. They are 100% aware that they cannot conduct standard ticket checks onboard during this fifteen minute journey at the times when it actually matters, because there are only three or four coaches of space and too many people to check, even if they had revenue on every train. It's also a losing battle trying to do anything with the gatelines at either station. So even if your suggestion were a possibility, it would result in a loss of all of the relevant revenue, but make little difference in practice to travel patterns.

Doesn't work because people may wish to travel to Wolves from further south.

I wonder if it might be helped by creating a set of fares slightly lower than the current ones routed WMT/Avanti Only? A lot of people will choose the cheaper option even if only by 10p, and that'd keep local journeys off the short TfWs as well. I usually argue against doing this but in this case there seems a solid reason for it. A lot will be on WM passes but not everyone.

Used to be the case for Avanti West Coast, it was about 20% cheaper. Sadly in 2020 they hiked their price so it's now only 10p cheaper, and as such is of little effect. Avanti could lower the price or choose to begin offering Advance tickets as TfW do, but there's little incentive for that. The Secretary of State could lawfully instruct Avanti to make representations to the market about filling some of their unused capacity on short journeys, but I don't think the Minister would really be bothered?

A simple poster campaign at the relevant stations which lists the departure times of the Avanti West Coast services (and, of course, is kept up to date!) and states there's likely seat availability on those would probably be a good idea and would get a few switchers.

 

[Haywain]

You did, apologies. How's my evidence for you?

Unconvincing. It appears to concentrate on tickets sold rather than revenue generated (per seat). But this is really off topic for this thread.

 

[A S Leib]

Could more promotion of the tram help? I know that it's significantly slower for changing at New Street station, but depending on where one's exact origin / destination in Wolverhampton / Birmingham is, it's only around a ten minute difference. The problem is that I don't know how much capacity the trams have for Bilston, Wednesbury and West Bromwich passengers.

Birmingham – Wolverhampton (and Birmingham – Coventry) feels like a line which ideally would be four-tracked and with frequent enough local services to keep those passengers off of long-distance services, although presumably cost's prevented that so far.

 

[Merle Haggard]

If Birmingham to Wolverhampton passengers are not supposed to use the CrossCountry trains, should they be kept off the TfW ones as well?

Curiously, looking 1 month in advance & about now in the day, TfW seems to be the cheapest for the journey - £3.60. So obviously, they're not worried about crowding out longer distance passengers to Central Wales.

 

[A S Leib]

Curiously, looking 1 month in advance & about now in the day, TfW seems to be the cheapest for the journey - £3.60. So obviously, they're not worried about crowding out longer distance passengers to Central Wales.

For Aberystwyth* there's more passengers to / from Wolverhampton than Birmingham New Street (8923 vs 3755 annually). There's 5080 to / from Euston, but some – as is my own preference – might be changing at Wolverhampton for Preston and north services.

*For Machynlleth – Shrewsbury 3926, London Euston 2373, Birmingham New Street 1265, so still not tonnes of through passengers to Birmingham. I think the statistics for the Pwllheli branch would have been heavily affected by the Barmouth Bridge works. For Telford and Shrewsbury, the passenger flows to / from Wolverhampton are around half of Birmingham's.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Birmingham – Wolverhampton (and Birmingham – Coventry) feels like a line which ideally would be four-tracked and with frequent enough local services to keep those passengers off of long-distance services, although presumably cost's prevented that so far.

Absolutely! But the cost factor against it is to all intents and purposes permanent. The most achievable solution would be longer trains all round though of course that introduces the problem of avoiding over-capacity elsewhere. And the experience of GWR with its mix of unit lengths on long-distance services hardly inspires confidence in the most obvious way of dealing with that problem.