Avanti Class 221s to Cross Country

[Thunderer]

Look, I'm no qualified mathematician, but let me do some simple calculations:
A Mk2 Standard Class has 64 seats if I'm not mistaken, a Mk2 First Class has 42 seats if I'm not mistaken.
For reference wiki says a 5 car voyager has 246 seats (class 221), or a 4 car has 200 seats (class 220).
Let's be generous and say each loco hauled set had only 7 coaches, which before voyagers, most did; so (5x64)+(1x42) not counting any RFBs or Kitchen cars = 362 seats.
It is noted you get about 2 XC services per hour north of Birmingham/Derby; I'm not counting Nottinghams since those were apparently 158s at one time, and still sometimes 2 car 170s.
With 362 seats, you get less than 2 voyagers (even 2x4car), but with the added advantage you can walk through the entire train. Keep in mind some loco hauled sets had 2 first, or 6 standard class in a 7 rake, so more than 362 seats.
Now let's take D6975's example from post #104 of 13 coaches, presumably from the 1970s and 1980s.
From looking at lots of pictures, they seem to have a BG, Kitchen car and a BFK or BSK, so you're still left with about 10 full coaches. For example that's 7 standard + 3 first, giving you 574 seats, plus the BFK, Kitchen and BG. Even with just 10 coaches, for eg. BG+(5x64)+Kitchen+(2x42)+BFK, you get 404 just in the full seated coaches.
Now it may have been a while ago, but pretty much, we did used to have more seats on cross country trains, and you could walk through the lot, it's painfully obvious.
Yes I know we get double voyagers from time to time, but let's be honest how many times have you seen a 4 car voyager turn up...
And yes I know they're decent trains, just too short.
With rising passenger numbers in 40 years we've had... less seats and now 7 more voyagers, that you still can't walk through if it's double? I just don't see how anyone can argue our current situation is better.

Spot on! I’ve been saying this for years. No disrespect to our younger rail members here as this was before their time (when we had a real railway under BR) but I can remember travelling in the mid 1980’s on 10,11 sometimes 12 or 13 coach trains on XC routes between Bristol and the Midlands/North and there was nearly always enough space for everyone, walk on saver/away-day fares were affordable plus as enthusiasts we had the enjoyment of a loco hauled train. I see now that the latest XC headlines is their new Voyager service (one a day ) between Cardiff and Edinburgh. Back in 1984 I can remember the 1V92 Edinburgh/Glasgow to Swansea, which was often a class 50 from New Street and a early morning return train from Cardiff. What XC have now is reduced XC routes (not serving Weymouth, Brighton, Poole, Liverpool, and Scotland via the WCML) plus no variation in the routes e.g. All Bournemouth XC trains run to Manchester, none to the North East or Scotland anymore. The Voyagers were procured by Virgin for “Operation Princess” but no one could see the fundamental flaw with that operation - the Birmingham bottle-neck, so when Operation Princess was dropped, XC were left with a fleet of woefully inadequate trains to serve the required capacity and its been like that for over 20 years Refurbing them with worse seats and throwing a hideous colour scheme over them will not solve the one major problem - Capacity. What is needed for XC is a fleet of 9 car bi-mode AT300’s, but the DFT won’t make that happen anytime soon with ex-Avanti 221’s going spare.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Spot on! I’ve been saying this for years. No disrespect to our younger rail members here as this was before their time (when we had a real railway under BR) but I can remember travelling in the mid 1980’s on 10,11 sometimes 12 or 13 coach trains on XC routes between Bristol and the Midlands/North and there was nearly always enough space for everyone, walk on saver/away-day fares were affordable plus as enthusiasts we had the enjoyment of a loco hauled train. I see now that the latest XC headlines is their new Voyager service (one a day ) between Cardiff and Edinburgh. Back in 1984 I can remember the 1V92 Edinburgh/Glasgow to Swansea, which was often a class 50 from New Street and a early morning return train from Cardiff. What XC have now is reduced XC routes (not serving Weymouth, Brighton, Poole, Liverpool, and Scotland via the WCML) plus no variation in the routes e.g. All Bournemouth XC trains run to Manchester, none to the North East or Scotland anymore. The Voyagers were procured by Virgin for “Operation Princess” but no one could see the fundamental flaw with that operation - the Birmingham bottle-neck, so when Operation Princess was dropped, XC were left with a fleet of woefully inadequate trains to serve the required capacity and its been like that for over 20 years Refurbing them with worse seats and throwing a hideous colour scheme over them will not solve the one major problem - Capacity. What is needed for XC is a fleet of 9 car bi-mode AT300’s, but the DFT won’t make that happen anytime soon with ex-Avanti 221’s going spare.

The question ultimately is what the trains are used for. If the operator chose to use the voyagers for long distance inter city express type services which required appropriate ticketing, then there really would n't be a problem. But as we know, the XC timetable is an interurban service where passengers might make local journeys on the express service such as Leeds-Wakefield, Chesterfield-Derby, Tamworth-Birmingham ands Bristol-Taunton. . I am assuming that these journeys would incur a fine when using a local ticket, in such countries in mainland Europe.

Whether Virgin and the SRA intended that I guess we won't know, but in my view it is the level of rail service and how it is ticketed and "policed" which is important

 

[Thunderer]

The question ultimately is what the trains are used for. If the operator chose to use the voyagers for long distance inter city express type services which required appropriate ticketing, then there really would n't be a problem. But as we know, the XC timetable is an interurban service where passengers might make local journeys on the express service such as Leeds-Wakefield, Chesterfield-Derby, Tamworth-Birmingham ands Bristol-Taunton. . I am assuming that these journeys would incur a fine when using a local ticket, in such countries in mainland Europe.

Whether Virgin and the SRA intended that I guess we won't know, but in my view it is the level of rail service and how it is ticketed and "policed" which is important

I completely agree with your comments, but since the drive is towards greener public transport and to encourage people to use it more often, that, coupled with a growing population, will require a lot more capacity, not only on XC routes, but on most other routes as well if getting people off the roads and private cars is a serious long term plan and not just a Government gimmick. I personally have nothing against Voyagers themselves, its just the lack of capacity for the long distances they serve. Even two 220’s coupled together only provides 384 standard seats which I think is even less than a standard XC 7 coach HST provided back in the 1980’s/1990’s, so effectively, with regards to capacity, we have even less now to serve more people.

 

[godfreycomplex]

Was this later modified? I've never found this problem

It was, many years ago. Contributed to several SPADs in the early days, AIUI

 

[JamesT]

I completely agree with your comments, but since the drive is towards greener public transport and to encourage people to use it more often, that, coupled with a growing population, will require a lot more capacity, not only on XC routes, but on most other routes as well if getting people off the roads and private cars is a serious long term plan and not just a Government gimmick. I personally have nothing against Voyagers themselves, its just the lack of capacity for the long distances they serve. Even two 220’s coupled together only provides 384 standard seats which I think is even less than a standard XC 7 coach HST provided back in the 1980’s/1990’s, so effectively, with regards to capacity, we have even less now to serve more people.

Though as noted previously, the current timetable is more frequent. So across the day you have a similar capacity.
The problem has been that was frozen is aspic in the early 2000s rather than being extended to meet demand.

 

[Wyrleybart]

I completely agree with your comments, but since the drive is towards greener public transport and to encourage people to use it more often, that, coupled with a growing population, will require a lot more capacity, not only on XC routes, but on most other routes as well if getting people off the roads and private cars is a serious long term plan and not just a Government gimmick. I personally have nothing against Voyagers themselves, its just the lack of capacity for the long distances they serve. Even two 220’s coupled together only provides 384 standard seats which I think is even less than a standard XC 7 coach HST provided back in the 1980’s/1990’s, so effectively, with regards to capacity, we have even less now to serve more people.

I am sure it probably happens hundreds of times a day where a passenger travelling from Wolverhampton to Birmingham wants to catch the next train, That might be an 8 car 350, an 11 car 390 or a 4 car 220. The 390s are maximum length as are the 350s forthids particular journey. I agree that 7 and 8 car 220s woulds be useful but I also think the industry needs to be smarter somehow.

 

[Trainman40083]

I am sure it probably happens hundreds of times a day where a passenger travelling from Wolverhampton to Birmingham wants to catch the next train, That might be an 8 car 350, an 11 car 390 or a 4 car 220. The 390s are maximum length as are the 350s forthids particular journey. I agree that 7 and 8 car 220s woulds be useful but I also think the industry needs to be smarter somehow.

You would think that the best fares for that flow would be for the trains that have the greatest spare capacity. And of course, there is also the Shrewsbury to Birmingham dmus as well.

 

[Kite159]

You would think that the best fares for that flow would be for the trains that have the greatest spare capacity. And of course, there is also the Shrewsbury to Birmingham dmus as well.

Even if you go down the rabbit hole of cheaper advance fares on certain operators (i.e. TfW Rail), some customers will chance their luck in boarding the first available service in the hope the guard doesn't come round checking tickets & if the guard does come round checking tickets they notice said customer is travelling on the incorrect train & sells a new ticket.

 

[Falcon1200]

You would think that the best fares for that flow would be for the trains that have the greatest spare capacity.

But how do you ensure that passengers with tickets valid only for the trains with greatest spare capacity do not board another service, if one turns up first?!!

The Wolverhampton/Coventry corridor has a great deal of short distance use on long distance trains, but none of the major stations involved has segregated access to individual platforms, so it is uncontrollable.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Spot on! I’ve been saying this for years. No disrespect to our younger rail members here as this was before their time (when we had a real railway under BR) but I can remember travelling in the mid 1980’s on 10,11 sometimes 12 or 13 coach trains on XC routes between Bristol and the Midlands/North and there was nearly always enough space for everyone

I also used XC regularly over many years but I don't remember anything like 12/13-car trains, it was mainly 6/7 car, and 7-car HSTs when they came in.
The Plymouth-Glasgow/Edinburgh sleeper might have been 13-car, but it had mail cars as well and split at Carstairs.

Nobody has yet shown how XC can be as profitable as LNER/Avanti/GWR services using full length trains, with its regional and local focus and no premium custom.
The SRA refused to "throw more money" at XC at the point Arriva took over from Virgin. Things have not changed much since.
TPE is a directly-similar operation and uses mostly 5 (occasionally 2x3-car=6)-car trains.

 

[BlueLeanie]

Spot on! I’ve been saying this for years. No disrespect to our younger rail members here as this was before their time (when we had a real railway under BR) but I can remember travelling in the mid 1980’s on 10,11 sometimes 12 or 13 coach trains on XC routes between Bristol and the Midlands/North and there was nearly always enough space for everyone,

Can someone with good records clarify how many XC services a day were diagrammed to operate with 10 or more passenger coaches in the 1980s?

I remember taking an XC service from the Banbury to Glasgow on a Sunday in the early 1990s, I'm sure it took considerably longer than 4 hours between Birmingham and Glasgow.

 

[Trainman40083]

Can someone with good records clarify how many XC services a day were diagrammed to operate with 10 or more passenger coaches in the 1980s?

I remember taking an XC service from the Banbury to Glasgow on a Sunday in the early 1990s, I'm sure it took considerably longer than 4 hours between Birmingham and Glasgow.

I only really remember several of the Summer Saturday holiday trains.

 

[Bald Rick]

I also used XC regularly over many years but I don't remember anything like 12/13-car trains, it was mainly 6/7 car, and 7-car HSTs when they came in.

There were definitely 12 coach trains - typically on trains like the Sussex Scot / Cornish Scot or similar. They were the exception not the rule; there might have been a few of these per day on any given route, interspersed with 7coach HSTs, and shorter formations of hauled stock. Up until the mid 80s, some trains would have been lengthened at peak weekends, and there may have been the occaional releif - I certainly cuaght a near emoty relief from Reading to Birmingham on a summer Saturday in 1985 or thereabouts.

The main thing was that the service on each ‘leg’ of the Cross Country route was roughly hourly, with a couple of extras at certain times.

 

[Topological]

I also used XC regularly over many years but I don't remember anything like 12/13-car trains, it was mainly 6/7 car, and 7-car HSTs when they came in.
The Plymouth-Glasgow/Edinburgh sleeper might have been 13-car, but it had mail cars as well and split at Carstairs.

Nobody has yet shown how XC can be as profitable as LNER/Avanti/GWR services using full length trains, with its regional and local focus and no premium custom.
The SRA refused to "throw more money" at XC at the point Arriva took over from Virgin. Things have not changed much since.
TPE is a directly-similar operation and uses mostly 5 (occasionally 2x3-car=6)-car trains.

6/7 was my memory. I used to change at Stafford to use the CrossCountry from Stafford to Preston as a way of getting a longer first-class upgrade in. In those days the train ran via Piccadilly and was a much slower route to Preston than changing at Crewe. The current offering on the WCML routes is a massive improvement from every angle (9/11 car Pendolino doing the Birmingham to Scotland, 2 voyagers on the Birmingham to Manchester, and a much improved Manchester to Preston service). The old WCML loco hauled always seemed much longer than the CrossCountry when sitting in Piccadilly.

It does seem like CrossCountry should be given the full set of 221s, but I do not think the comparison is so bad with what we had at the end of the 1990s.

This is also not saying that there were not longer trains, it is just that I never saw them in all of my use of CrossCountry services.

 

[YorksLad12]

TPE is a directly-similar operation and uses mostly 5 (occasionally 2x3-car=6)-car trains.

Yes, but TPE runs four times per hour between Leeds and Manchester, whereas XC only runs hourly between Leeds and Sheffield.

Just on set lengths in the olden days; were they 20m long on 23m long? That would make a difference.

 

[Topological]

Yes, but TPE runs four times per hour between Leeds and Manchester, whereas XC only runs hourly between Leeds and Sheffield.

Just on set lengths in the olden days; were they 20m long on 23m long? That would make a difference.

Possibly TPE Manchester to Scotland is relevant here?

The net effect of the new service is large on Preston to Scotland though as you now have a separate Manchester to Scotland and an Avanti Pendolino from Birmingham. Previously many of the CrossCountry trains went via Manchester (in the loco-hauled days) meaning that they were doing Birmingham AND Manchester to Scotland.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Possibly TPE Manchester to Scotland is relevant here?

Certainly almost as busy. If it was 4 car Voyagers it'd be leaving people behind routinely.

 

[Topological]

Certainly almost as busy. If it was 4 car Voyagers it'd be leaving people behind routinely.

Reminding also of when I took it as a 2-car 158 (splitting at Preston with another 2-car going to Birmingham), I do not know if there was a northbound working that was only a 2-car 158, or whether there were different balancing moves. Certainly, there were 158s to Portsmouth Harbour. None of those were 12-cars.

So yes there were 12-car Cross Country somewhere, but most were not and there were plenty of cases where the current timetable is better for both CrossCountry and TPE (covering for Cross Country) and Avanti (also covering former Cross Country).

None of this is an argument against giving CrossCountry all available 221 though. More to balance some of the claims that things used to be so much better on capacity.

 

[Discuss223]

Reminding also of when I took it as a 2-car 158 (splitting at Preston with another 2-car going to Birmingham), I do not know if there was a northbound working that was only a 2-car 158, or whether there were different balancing moves. Certainly, there were 158s to Portsmouth Harbour. None of those were 12-cars.

So yes there were 12-car Cross Country somewhere, but most were not and there were plenty of cases where the current timetable is better for both CrossCountry and TPE (covering for Cross Country) and Avanti (also covering former Cross Country).

None of this is an argument against giving CrossCountry all available 221 though. More to balance some of the claims that things used to be so much better on capacity.

What a lot of people forget when criticising the Class 221 and 220 is that they also replaced 2 car Class 158s, which Virgin XC were operating from Manchester to Brighton and on other XC services via the Thames Valley. A four car Voyager is a Godsend in comparison. The HSTs that they replaced were formed of 5 or 6 coaches in latter years and the seating capacity on the HSTs was lower density than Voyagers. Arriva have good rolling stock in Voyagers, so much so that they have just won the Golden Spanner award. It makes perfect sense that Arriva would want to take more of them on. The transfer can only be a good thing.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

What a lot of people forget when criticising the Class 221 and 220 is that they also replaced 2 car Class 158s, which Virgin XC were operating from Manchester to Brighton and on other XC services via the Thames Valley. A four car Voyager is a Godsend in comparison. The HSTs that they replaced were formed of 5 or 6 coaches in latter years and the seating capacity on the HSTs was lower density than Voyagers. Arriva have good rolling stock in Voyagers, so much so that they have just won the Golden Spanner award. It makes perfect sense that Arriva would want to take more of them on. The transfer can only be a good thing.

Virgin used their 158s on Manchester to Brighton in it’s entirety?? Are you sure? I thought it was just for stretches such as Swindon Cheltenham and Manchester Crewe hops?

I agree that the Voyagers are very good trains.

 

[Discuss223]

Virgin used their 158s on Manchester to Brighton in it’s entirety?? Are you sure? I thought it was just for stretches such as Swindon Cheltenham and Manchester Crewe hops?

I agree that the Voyagers are very good trains.

https://flickr.com/photos/131806380...A-cZnbvu-DRV6GF-2gAE6h1-4raWVZ-2gAE4Jr-q3HxDy This seems to suggest that they ran the whole stretch. It was a very different time for the railways compared to now. Capacity was in less demand across the network, 2 car trains were being put on Barnsley-Sheffield-Leicester-London runs and Hull Trains were using 3 car trains for their London runs. In some ways, Voyagers were a capacity increase. I'm sure that the transfers will bring a great boost to capacity and possibly even allow for more ten coach formations, something which was a rarity with predecessor Virgin CrossCountry.

Flickr: Class 158 158749 Virgin trains Leamington 09-08-2000

 

[BlueLeanie]

Virgin used their 158s on Manchester to Brighton in it’s entirety?? Are you sure? I thought it was just for stretches such as Swindon Cheltenham and Manchester Crewe hops?

158s did the Edinburgh to Manchester Airport diagram under BR and then Virgin.

Also a regular at Banbury on the NW-South Coast diagrams.

Two-car sets were very much the normal pre-Voyager!

I do sometimes wonder if XC under BR would have had an earlier renaissance if they had managed to slip through an order for 30 5-car 158 sets in 1989. The time saving on loco changes and run-arounds would have slashed journey times.

 

[43096]

The HSTs that they replaced were formed of 5 or 6 coaches in latter years and the seating capacity on the HSTs was lower density than Voyagers.

An HST trailer has more seats than a Voyager equivalent.

Voyagers are an appallingly designed train from the passenger’s perspective - and that includes the incredibly space-inefficient internal layout.

 

[Merle Haggard]

https://flickr.com/photos/131806380...A-cZnbvu-DRV6GF-2gAE6h1-4raWVZ-2gAE4Jr-q3HxDy This seems to suggest that they ran the whole stretch. It was a very different time for the railways compared to now. Capacity was in less demand across the network, 2 car trains were being put on Barnsley-Sheffield-Leicester-London runs and Hull Trains were using 3 car trains for their London runs. In some ways, Voyagers were a capacity increase. I'm sure that the transfers will bring a great boost to capacity and possibly even allow for more ten coach formations, something which was a rarity with predecessor Virgin CrossCountry.

Yes, I remember those - HSTs replaced by 2 car 170s. They (and others from interesting stations served by new MML services) also provided the only service for anyone wanting to travel from South of Leicester to London. For those stations, the service on paper had an increased frequency, but the 2-car trains were usually very full and standing by Leicester so they then ran non-stop to St Pancras. My own personal record at Wellingborough is watching three successive overloaded 2 car 170s, timetabled to call every half hour, run through slowly without stopping.
At least XC don't run non-stop when the trains are full - they give you a sporting chance to squeeze on. Nor did they replace the HST sets with 2 cars.

 

[JonathanH]

Also a regular at Banbury on the NW-South Coast diagrams.

Two-car sets were very much the normal pre-Voyager!

Virgin XC had five 2-car 158s. They operated two services a day on the Liverpool / Birmingham to Portsmouth axis and some trains between Liverpool / Manchester and Scotland. Yes, they operated daily but essentially just on a handful of low demand services.

The normal for ten years pre-Voyager was otherwise 7-car sets of Mark 2s or 7-car HSTs.

 

[chazi898]

This may be a difficult one to counteract, but here goes..
The point I was trying to make was even with 2tph frequency north of Birmingham, you can still theoretically get less seats on 2 voyagers, than a standard 10 coach rake 40 years ago. Now it's not up to me whether 400 seats across 2tph or 400 seats across 1tph is better, but a reminder is in order that on 4 car voyagers, 1 of those coaches is First Class, so if its full and standing (and I know first class on the rare occasion is full and standing, sort of), for people jumping on, you've essentially got a 3 coach train to warrior battle your way in to. This is why I emphasised a full length walkable train is better, because even if its 4+4car, people in Standard Class can't spread out, its still a 4 coach train to them, just, another set of people (the other 4 car) is tagged on. Class 350s do better in this case because you can walk through, as I did a few months ago.
It's easy to be pessimistic about this stuff, and also say we used to have 2 cars 20 years ago, but the UK population 20 years ago was about 59 million, now it's knocking on the door of 70 million. This stuff just clearly doesn't hold up anymore.

 

[Discuss223]

40 years ago and today are hardly fair comparisons.

 

[chazi898]

Yes, that's the problem... 40 years ago there was about half the amount of people travelling by rail, now there's double the people, and yet shorter trains (some cases, not all). I've already done the calculations, the maths just isn't mathing.

 

[BlueLeanie]

This may be a difficult one to counteract, but here goes..
The point I was trying to make was even with 2tph frequency north of Birmingham, you can still theoretically get less seats on 2 voyagers, than a standard 10 coach rake 40 years ago. Now it's not up to me whether 400 seats across 2tph or 400 seats across 1tph is better, but a reminder is in order that on 4 car voyagers, 1 of those coaches is First Class, so if its full and standing (and I know first class on the rare occasion is full and standing, sort of), for people jumping on, you've essentially got a 3 coach train to warrior battle your way in to. This is why I emphasised a full length walkable train is better, because even if its 4+4car, people in Standard Class can't spread out, its still a 4 coach train to them, just, another set of people (the other 4 car) is tagged on. Class 350s do better in this case because you can walk through, as I did a few months ago.
It's easy to be pessimistic about this stuff, and also say we used to have 2 cars 20 years ago, but the UK population 20 years ago was about 59 million, now it's knocking on the door of 70 million. This stuff just clearly doesn't hold up anymore.

I'm not seeing anything that tells me with absolute confidence that the majority of XC Mk2 rakes that operated North of Birmingham were 10+ coaches.

The standard XC Mk2 rake seems to be 4/5 coaches plus shop/buffet plus brake vehicle.

How many Aircon Mk2s + MK1 Mini buffet + Brake can a 47 supply ETH to?

The other element that seems to be overlooked is that venerable 47s weren't quick off the mark. Particularly if they were hauling the fabled load 13!

Vastly improved journey times drove new business.

 

[chazi898]

I was taking an average from the many pictures I looked at around the late 70s mid 80s mark. Yes some of them were only 8 coaches, but some were 11 or 12 too. Just to do the calculation again, take a pre voyager rake of 7 coaches, (5x64)+30 for the RFB+32 for the BSO = 382. That's almost 2 class 220 voyagers, but you can walk the length of the train in this case. So an early 80s XC train surely trumps 2 voyagers, stock permitting...