Cross Country treating customers as sardines

[A S Leib]

You're right about the DfT but 18 (If I've counted correctly) of the current Cabinet are MPs for constituencies served by Cross Country (or are very near).

I've seen MPs criticising Avanti, Northern and GWR's performance on social media, but less so CrossCountry. I think it suffers in that regard by not being the only viable option for most shorter (=more common) journeys, so e.g. XC issues between Plymouth and Exeter might be ignored for longer than GWR issues between Paignton and Exeter.

 

[Trainman40083]

Aren't there some Class 67s going spare?

I never thought Class 67s got much speed up on passenger stock.

 

[Trainman40083]

I've always held that, of all operators, XC are the ones who would benefit most from bi-modal 80x's due to our nation's patchwork electrification.

Hear hear! As I said, any train is better than no train! Regarding your 153 proposal, that's not as mad as it might sound. The 170s that XC runs are capable of working in multiple with 153s, iirc.

Regarding the Mk5A's, I seem to recall a bunch of Class 67s in storage; iirc, they are cleared for 125mph (correct me if I'm wrong?), so it might not be entirely out of the question to run Class 67s with a rake of coaches as a stopgap? Unless the couplers aren't compatible?

The only time I encountered a Class 170/153 combination, was in Central Trains days. A Nottingham to Cardiff/Crewe service that split at Derby...Every so often, it came to an abrupt stop, unexpectedly

 

[Trainbike46]

Aren't there some Class 67s going spare?

And what would they be hauling?

 

[Tetragon213]

And what would they be hauling?

Could they (theoretically) be hooked up to the Mk5As? Or even Mk3s (assuming the ones GA offloaded a while ago weren't just turned to razor blades)?

Iirc TfW uses 67s to haul a rake of Mk4s, and the 67s are cleared up to 125 I think?

 

[Haywain]

Regarding the Mk5A's, I seem to recall a bunch of Class 67s in storage; iirc, they are cleared for 125mph (correct me if I'm wrong?),

I think that speed is entirely theoretical and hasn't been utilised in practice.

 

[12LDA28C]

CrossCountry also ran electric-hauled Scotland-Birmingham services as I recall.

Via the WCML yes, not to mention Glasgow - Poole and Glasgow - London Paddington with a loco change at either Preston or Birmingham New Street.

 

[12LDA28C]

Could they (theoretically) be hooked up to the Mk5As? Or even Mk3s (assuming the ones GA offloaded a while ago weren't just turned to razor blades)?

67s aren't compatible with the Mk5 driving trailers.

 

[Tetragon213]

67s aren't compatible with the Mk5 driving trailers.

Ah, that's a shame!

 

[Tetchytyke]

Was it not that there was a similar frequency across “the core” (ie similar number of daily trains overall serving the NW/NE through Birmingham to the South Coast/ SW but starting and end points were more numerous and therefore had only a few through trains a day serving them?

No. The pre-Operation Princess frequency was roughly half what it is now. To the north east it was roughly hourly, with 1tp2h going via Leeds and the other 1tp2h going via Doncaster. Only about half the trains went beyond Newcastle.

The theory behind Operation Princess was that smaller trains more often would be more attractive (which it certainly was!) but that it would overall offer the same capacity as before and that this would all be fine.

Virgin XC wanted to keep a number of HSTs but the SRA said no. XC only eventually got some HSTs back when Arriva took over but, sadly, Arriva never really used them to their full potential.

Overcrowding has always been an issue with the Voyagers. I spent many a journey back from Birmingham to Newcastle sitting in a luggage rack all the way back in 2007.

It was apparent pretty much immediately that Operation Princess was a disaster. Arriva have densified the 220/221s as much as they can: they used to have more table seats, more luggage racks, and a shop but these were all ripped out to allow more space.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was apparent pretty much immediately that Operation Princess was a disaster. Arriva have densified the 220/221s as much as they can: they used to have more table seats, more luggage racks, and a shop but these were all ripped out to allow more space.

Though ironically they've just chosen a very thick-backed seat for their refurbishment, which means they can't densify further, which they could if they picked a thin-backed seat instead. It's a very strange choice indeed.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Though ironically they've just chosen a very thick-backed seat for their refurbishment, which means they can't densify further, which they could if they picked a thin-backed seat instead. It's a very strange choice indeed.

Agreed on that. Really they needed to choose the railway equivalent of the slimline Recaro seats you see on aircraft.

 

[Indigo Soup]

The theory behind Operation Princess was that smaller trains more often would be more attractive (which it certainly was!) but that it would overall offer the same capacity as before and that this would all be fine.

I can't help but wonder if the 220s and 221s would have a better reputation if the original order had been for (say) 5-car 220s and 8-car 221s. That works out about right for a 40% increase in capacity, which (IIRC) is what Operation Princess did to demand.

Of course, the SRA would probably have said 'no' to such a radical proposal. I'm not sure I quite understand the point of a regulator trying to prevent anyone taking commercial risks on a privatised railway that's supposed to encourage innovation and investment....

 

[Trainman40083]

I can't help but wonder if the 220s and 221s would have a better reputation if the original order had been for (say) 5-car 220s and 8-car 221s. That works out about right for a 40% increase in capacity, which (IIRC) is what Operation Princess did to demand.

Of course, the SRA would probably have said 'no' to such a radical proposal. I'm not sure I quite understand the point of a regulator trying to prevent anyone taking commercial risks on a privatised railway that's supposed to encourage innovation and investment....

I feel sure the original proposal was for all 6 car units, which on an every 30 minutes frequency might well have worked... No doubt the DfT came back with 3 cars, would be adequate

 

[The exile]

I've seen MPs criticising Avanti, Northern and GWR's performance on social media, but less so CrossCountry. I think it suffers in that regard by not being the only viable option for most shorter (=more common) journeys, so e.g. XC issues between Plymouth and Exeter might be ignored for longer than GWR issues between Paignton and Exeter.

It is for not inconsiderable flows like Birmingham to Oxford and Bristol.

 

[sprinterguy]

I feel sure the original proposal was for all 6 car units, which on an every 30 minutes frequency might well have worked... No doubt the DfT came back with 3 cars, would be adequate

The original proposal, as published in Modern Railways in March 1998 at least, was for an all 4 car fleet. The Crosscountry contingent of tilting 221s was bumped up to 5 cars in length by December that year.

It was the Office of Passenger Rail Franchising (OPRAF) who ultimately had control over passenger franchise commitments and aspirations at that time, responsibilities that subsequently passed to the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) and only latterly the DfT in 2006.

 

[sprinterguy]

Was it not that there was a similar frequency across “the core” (ie similar number of daily trains overall serving the NW/NE through Birmingham to the South Coast/ SW but starting and end points were more numerous and therefore had only a few through trains a day serving them?

No. The pre-Operation Princess frequency was roughly half what it is now. To the north east it was roughly hourly, with 1tp2h going via Leeds and the other 1tp2h going via Doncaster. Only about half the trains went beyond Newcastle.

Looking at some old timetables, for weekdays during the winter timetable in each case:

Sheffield - Birmingham
1999: 16tpd
(11 via Leeds)
Op Princess: 33tpd
(Roughly 50:50 ex-Leeds or Doncaster)

Birmingham - Bristol
1999: 19tpd
(4 from the WCML, 13 continued further South West)
Op Princess: 29tpd
(8 from the WCML, 21 continued further South West and 4 continued to Cardiff)

Stafford - Birmingham
1999: 17tpd
(1 from Glasgow, 2 from Edinburgh, 3 from Liverpool, 13 from/via Manchester)
Op Princess: 49tpd
(9 from Liverpool, 20 from Preston and further north, 24 from/via Manchester)

Note that today, this traffic is now split three ways between West Midlands Trains (Liverpool services), Avanti (Preston and North) and Crosscountry (Manchester).

Birmingham - Oxford
1999: 18tpd
(2 from Edinburgh/Newcastle via ECML)
Op Princess: 32tpd
(23 from WCML origins, 7 from East Coast origins)

 

[Indigo Soup]

Note that today, this traffic is now split three ways between West Midlands Trains (Liverpool services), Avanti (Preston and North) and Crosscountry (Manchester).

While they're not in the core, don't the Transpennine WCML routes originate from Cross-Country routes through Manchester as well?

 

[Trainman40083]

While they're not in the core, don't the Transpennine WCML routes originate from Cross-Country routes through Manchester as well?

Possibly so, Crewe, Manchester, Bolton, Preston loop

 

[sprinterguy]

While they're not in the core, don't the Transpennine WCML routes originate from Cross-Country routes through Manchester as well?

Yeah that's right, formerly a handful of services a day between Edinburgh/Glasgow and Manchester/Liverpool, pre-Operation Princess. Some worked by 158s, others full Intercity formations that continued south from Manchester.

Became a 2-hourly frequency through Man Picc under Operation Princess, with origins alternating between Edinburgh and Glasgow.

 

[Snow1964]

DfT have just published a heavily redacted letter on the remediation following the XC temporary cuts to timetables

The numbers in the tables have been redacted, but the list of destinations had dates upto 10th November (so should now be back to normal). The staffing tables ran from period 5 24-25 to period 1 in 25-26, so looks like they agreed to fully staff XC by end of April.

4. On 26 July 2024, the Secretary of State issued a Remedial Plan Notice outlining that the Operator notified the Secretary of State on 3 July 2024 that it is likely to fall below the Breach Performance Level and Default Performance Level relating to the Enforcement TOC on Self Cancellations Benchmark during one or more of the following Reporting Periods 2505, 2506, 2507 and 2508, if this were to occur it would constitute a contravention of the Rail Contract pursuant to paragraph 8.2 of Chapter 4.4 of the Rail Contract ("Benchmark Contravention").

5. On 2 August 2024 the Operator submitted a remedial plan (the “Remedial Plan”) (as set out in Annex 1) in respect of the Benchmark Contravention and in accordance with paragraph 4 of Chapter 9.4.3 of the Rail Contract, for the purpose of securing and facilitating compliance with the Remedial Plan Notice that sets out all appropriate actions and tasks required for completion of the obligation.

6. The Secretary of State is satisfied that the Remedial Plan submitted by the Operator to the Secretary of State which is annexed in Annex 1 to this letter satisfies the matters referred to in paragraph 4.2(a) to (d) of Chapter 9.4.3 of the Rail Contract.

7.ThePartieswishtoenterintothisRemedialAgreementinrespectoftheimplementationof the following agreed measures and their associated timescales proposed within the Remedial Plan for the purpose of ensuring that the Operator's performance against the TOC On Self Cancellations Enforcement Benchmark (the “Applicable Benchmark”) will be better than the Breach Performance Level relating to the Applicable Benchmark.

8.TheOperatorshalluseallreasonableendeavourstoreinstatepassengerservices,where this can be achieved effectively and reliably, before 10 November 2024, subject to maintaining the delivery of the outputs required under this Remedial Agreement.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67814e979b205eeb6cede4b6/xc-trains-limited-remedial-agreement-letter-9-august-2024.pdf

On separate subject, minister confirmed during the Westminster Hall debate on Tuesday that all 12 ex Avanti 221s would be in operation with XC by mid May

 

[Snow1964]

Last year had a whole thread (now locked) on trains to Southampton for cruises being chaotic. Today Southampton cruise port announced expecting even bigger season in 2025.

Rebekah Keeler, cruise strategy manager at Southampton port owner ABP, said: “2025 will be another fantastic year. We already have more ship calls planned, and the highest number of shore power connections confirmed.

“We continue to see growth in the global cruise sector, and Southampton is leading the way for the UK and northern Europe.

Southampton port projects ‘fantastic year’ for cruise | Travel Weekly

More ship calls planned for south coast hub

travelweekly.co.uk

Looks like 3rd of May will be busy day (5 big ships)
Celebrity Apex (capacity 2910 at double, 3405 max)
Iona (capacity 5206 at double, 6264 max)
MSC Virtuosa (capacity 4842 at double, 6334 max)
Sky Princess (capacity 3660 at double, 4610 max)
Ventura (capacity 3192 at double, 3597 max)

These are turnarounds, so could potentially get 20,000+ arriving and another 20,000+ departing. Rather more than capacity of a few double voyager sets

 

[Starmill]

Indeed although the vast majority of people going on the cruises will be driving, being picked up and dropped off, part of a tour group using a bus, live locally enough to justify a taxi for their party, or coming on the SWR mainline services.

 

[A S Leib]

Indeed although the vast majority of people going on the cruises will be driving, being picked up and dropped off, part of a tour group using a bus, live locally enough to justify a taxi for their party, or coming on the SWR mainline services.

Given how few large cruise ports the UK has as far as I know, I'd imagine flights to Southampton (Gatwick, Bournemouth?) would account for some people as well.

 

[Tetragon213]

Maybe it's time to bring back boat trains again?

I'd be quite concerned regarding luggage capacity for those days; cruise passengers inevitably bring a lot of luggage with them, and I have precisely zero confidence in the Voyagers being up to the task of dealing with all that. They barely manage to hold everything on non-rush services!

 

[Krokodil]

Maybe it's time to bring back boat trains again?

There's a formation of Mk3 FOs sitting around Crewe with not a lot of work

 

[Indigo Soup]

Indeed although the vast majority of people going on the cruises will be driving, being picked up and dropped off, part of a tour group using a bus, live locally enough to justify a taxi for their party, or coming on the SWR mainline services.

A significant number will be coming from far enough afield that they might consider a boat train, if one existed. A lot of the operators do run coaches from as far afield as southern Scotland. There's a market there for passengers who don't want to fly, and the service being provided by the cruise operator means that the risk of delays sits with them, rather than the passenger.

I suspect that if (say) P&O chartered a train to run Glasgow-Birmingham-Southampton via some sensible route, it would pick up a decent loading. The overlap between the 'cruise from Southampton' market and the 'Granny wants put on a through train' market is pretty considerable. But the operational and economic constraints of (a) the British railway network and (b) the cruise industry mean that it's more advantageous to charter a fleet of coaches instead.

 

[BlueLeanie]

Didn't a Cruise Firm charter services in the past from Glasgow?

 

[Snow1964]

A significant number will be coming from far enough afield that they might consider a boat train, if one existed. A lot of the operators do run coaches from as far afield as southern Scotland. There's a market there for passengers who don't want to fly, and the service being provided by the cruise operator means that the risk of delays sits with them, rather than the passenger.

I suspect that if (say) P&O chartered a train to run Glasgow-Birmingham-Southampton via some sensible route, it would pick up a decent loading. The overlap between the 'cruise from Southampton' market and the 'Granny wants put on a through train' market is pretty considerable. But the operational and economic constraints of (a) the British railway network and (b) the cruise industry mean that it's more advantageous to charter a fleet of coaches instead.

It says a lot about railway pricing that a fleet of coaches each with a driver and host costs less than operating a couple of trains. The main catch seems to be you need someone to take you to a motorway service station where many pick ups are.

Incidently the cruise companies do offer fixed price coaches to Southampton, and can be booked months ahead. Cross Country do not allow bookings until a few weeks ahead.

Just for the debate I picked the busy 3rd May as example, cross country selling fare to get to Southampton cruise port around 1-2pm (typical check in time), train back from Southampton week later, departing about 10-11am
example from Sheffield (one change at Birmingham) 2 people on cross country website is massive £172 each way (or £94 via London on outward, still £172 on return)

I know this forum has a ticketing website, but how many of these casual cruise travellers would know about it, especially when there are links or adverts on cruise sites to the coaches, but nothing to rail alternatives

 

[Harpo]

Southampton’s catchment for cruises is vast. On a recent cruise we met people from East Anglia, West Wales, West Mids, South London and, er, Southampton.

Unlike flying, there’s no real luggage/weight limit, so rail with two large suitcases, two suiters and two backpacks plus station parking fees took seconds to dismiss as unworkable.