Can GBR bring XC back up to INTERCITY standard?

[JonathanH]

To mix it up a bit, let's have a thread about fusing TPE and XC together!

No need, the whole thing is being fused together, particularly if the XC network does indeed get split up between traincrew depots currently part of other operators. That is however, two years, plus some planning time, of the current operation staying as it is.

 

[Pete_uk]

Once XC get good quality 8 or 9 carriage trains with nice seats then yes (to the question in the title of the thread)

 

[Zomboid]

Yet another ‘let’s rip up the XC network and/or replace the entire fleet’ suggestion thread. We can’t have had one since about May.

Ultimately that is what needs to happen to overcome the issues...

 

[Brubulus]

IMHO, in terms of the current TOC setup, Stansted/Leicester/Nottingham-Birmingham should be with EMR, Birmingham-Cardiff with TfW, and Norwich-Liverpool is correctly with EMR. They are ex-Regional Railways/Central Trains routes, after all. I think a trolley service of drinks and snacks is adequate for those services.

As for the 'Voyager' route network, I'd be sorely tempted to chop off the north of Newcastle (or even north of York) branch plus Cornwall and use the freed-up rolling stock and crew resources to boost train lengths and frequencies on the core network where XC is the main longer-distance operator. Sure, you'd lose some revenue from abandoned sections (to other TOCs), but since everyone seems to be complaining about overcrowding on Voyager services, you should be able to make that up from carrying more customers on the core network.

Capacity should generally cover demand. The railway should not become more unfriendly to passengers. As a last resort, there could be a way to hide certain trains between certain station pairs in ticket planners but pick up drop off restrictions have much more impact on XC than on London operators, given how it could prevent journeys such as Wolverhampton-Oxford.

Regional express can have high quality service - MK4 at TfW shows it. Given that the Cardiff-Nottingham route is a key link from Wales to the Midlands, it should probably also get the intercity treatment. I concede that anything more than a trolley or vending machine on Birmingham-Stansted would be ridiculous given the nature of the route as effectively multiple short routes strung together.

In terms of frequencies, there really needs to be 2tph from Birmingham to Leeds, and potentially this may need to replace the Reading-Newcastle via Doncaster service if there is no other way to accommodate it.

Ultimately that is what needs to happen to overcome the issues...

Total fleet replacement is absolutely necessary for CrossCountry.

 

[ac6000cw]

Unless additional services were provided to replace XC north of York or Newcastle, there would simply be overcrowding on the existing trains, not to mention the reduction in through journey opportunities. XC trains are not empty on those northern sections, far from it!

Adding extra capacity to the other services is GBR's problem, and outside the scope of this thread

No need, the whole thing is being fused together, particularly if the XC network does indeed get split up between traincrew depots currently part of other operators. That is however, two years, plus some planning time, of the current operation staying as it is.

Which is plenty of time to kick the can down the road into the next government, if they want to.

 

[A S Leib]

I'd be sorely tempted to chop off the north of Newcastle (or even north of York)

There are more passengers from Sheffield to Edinburgh than to Cleethorpes, Bradford, Grimsby or Bristol, more to Newcastle than to Huddersfield or Retford, and on the UK's busiest domestic air route which doesn't involve London or Northern Ireland.

 

[irish_rail]

Or:

Give Manchester services to Avanti.
Give Birmingham to Stansted to Anglia
Give NE/SW to EMR

Ahem , I think GWR would be a rather better fit for SW to NE than EMR!

 

[vuzzeho]

I kinda wish XC wasn't doing this refresh of the Voyagers now, because what they really need (when GBR takes over) is a complete interior overhaul. An interior layout with more seats, and of course, more Voyagers. Hell, with a very comprehensive rework (battery conversion?), they could even take the unused 180s too. I agree that it also should be brought up to proper intercity standards - hot food, comfortable seats, on-train amenities, a seat for most passengers! Let's hope GBR gets on it.

 

[Harpo]

Or:

Give Manchester services to Avanti.
Give Birmingham to Stansted to Anglia
Give NE/SW to EMR

Give Cardiff - Birmingham to TfW. Please!!

 

[The Ham]

The number of voters for whom XC matters is tiny, and the seats aren't marginal. Spending on other areas of government and not the railway is going to be more important as far as the red wall voters go. XC simply isn't a voting matter because the issues are spread across the country.

Likewise, the point about whether XC is a 'proper intercity' operator won't register with most voters.

The thing is the cost to build a new longer fleet for XC is fairly small and whilst navy don't use trains, and many don't always link more rail use means less other people driving (and therefore holding them up) there is always a favourite factor of the positive headlines about "investment" and "jobs" which can come about from such trains.

Let's assume that new 80x class trains were going to be built in Derby, providing 50% more seats across the day, then it would get some cut through.

The other thing to note is that Labour (Lib Dems, Greens, etc) could easily say they would be looking to do more of the same, whilst others (implying Reform and the Tories) would be looking to make cuts to that sort of investment, directly harming job prospects in Derby and reducing opportunities for others to improve their chances by curtailing rail journeys. Maybe even, "delivering capacity to services which have been in much need of extra capacity for the last 14 years"

A new fleet of 5 and 9 coach trains (impacting a reasonable percentage of the country, including the Southwest which can have many of the issues of other regions, like the high house prices of the Southeast and the lack of good jobs of other regions and the complications which being rural can bring) would likely get a lot of cut through with the voting population.

Yes it's unlikely to change the minds of those who would vote one way or another, but if Great British Railways manage to bring XC up to intercity standards seen elsewhere (including TPE) then it could be a positive factor in their mind. Repeat that a few more times with other things (and not just the railways) and it could be enough to win a few more seats.

 

[richardderby]

judging by the cancelled trains on Cross country today, they will have their work cut out just to operate a service...

 

[Essex Express]

The best option is split XC up with services operated by the class 220 and 221 going to Intercity and staffed by other operators eg GWR, LNER and AWC. With the class 170 services run as a regional operation and adding EMR Norwich to Manchester, Liverpool services as a stand alone operation. A similar split of TPE services operated by the class 397 and class 802 transfer to Intercity and the class 185 services either merged into Northern or kept as TPE. Again services transfered to Intercity are staffed by again LNER and AWC.

 

[Trainbike46]

In my view, the issues at XC primarily stem from the rolling stock. It does not have enough capacity and is too expensive. I wouldn't make massive changes to the network. This is only talking about the network currently operated by Voyagers. The 170 routes are a separate story, and not really IC routes in my view.

In my view, the short term solution is:
- For XC to come to an agreement with the relevant staff that ensures there's never any need to lock out a unit in a 2-unit consist
- All the remaining ex-avanti 221s to go to XC

This would give the XC long-distance fleet 78 22x to work with, a mix of 4 and 5 car units.

This will improve capacity and reduce overcrowding, and is therefore a good start. However, long-term more is needed.

Therefore, in the long term I would suggest:
- LNER should expand their CAF order to get both more trains and longer trains (somewhere between 250 and 265m), to expand capacity on their busiest routes compared to a 9/10-car 80x
- LNER cascades the bimode 5-car 800s to XC (10 5-cars)
- if possible, turn the 5-car 801 into bimodes as well and cascade those too (up to 12 5-cars)
- GWR electrification to Oxford, Bristol (both ways), and Swansea, at least
- GWR orders 125mph full length EMUs with level boarding, for use on Cardiff, Swansea, Oxford, and Bristol trains
- GWR cascades freed up 5-car 80x to to XC (up to 58 5-cars)
- send all voyagers off-lease
- XC depots in LNER and GWR land merged/handed over to LNER/GWR
- LNER, GWR provide staff to operate XC xervices in their area, allowing for more efficient diagramming.

In the best case scenario this would give XC 80 5-car 80x, which would be a significant capacity uplift compared to the 78 22x it would replace - as it would replace a fleet of low-capacity 4 and 5 car trains with a fleet of higher-capacity 5-car trains. It would also be a comfort upgrade, and hopefully would enable an overall cost reduction per seat available.

Use of the Pick Up Only / Set Down Only flags in the timetable would probably solve a few issues for XC, although under Virgin and pre-Covid Arriva, this of course meant then losing out on all that nice TOC only tickets and ORCATS for stupidly short distances, in some cases.

I think it's important to always ask if those flags are actually benefitting passengers.

An example from Avanti that I think make sense and is justified are the Watford Junction stops, only allowing travel away from London. This makes sense, you don't want very local journeys to flood the ICWC services, when much more frequent local services are available.

An example of a bad use of pick up / set down only was on the Liverpool to Euston train I was on recently, that was pick-up only in Rugby. Why on earth are they banning any Liverpool to Rugby passengers from that train? It's not like the Liverpool to Rugby flow is going to overwhelm the services, and it is a long distance flow anyway.

Ultimately people should be pushed off InterCity XC for local journeys well served by other operators. Manchester-Stockport-Stoke, Birmingham International - New Street/Wolverhampton, Leeds-York etc.

There are lots of local flows served primarily or also served by IC operators across the country, that's not a problem in and of itself, if the IC is of sufficient capacity.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2025 ==

I kinda wish XC wasn't doing this refresh of the Voyagers now, because what they really need (when GBR takes over) is a complete interior overhaul. An interior layout with more seats, and of course, more Voyagers. Hell, with a very comprehensive rework (battery conversion?), they could even take the unused 180s too. I agree that it also should be brought up to proper intercity standards - hot food, comfortable seats, on-train amenities, a seat for most passengers! Let's hope GBR gets on it.

The 180s are simply not reliable enough - their only destination should be recycling (or an OAO, if they want them, not that I would recommend it!)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2025 ==

Let's assume that new 80x class trains were going to be built in Derby, providing 50% more seats across the day, then it would get some cut through.

Why would you assume that more 80x would be built in Derby, not in Newton Aycliffe?

Yes it's unlikely to change the minds of those who would vote one way or another, but if Great British Railways manage to bring XC up to intercity standards seen elsewhere (including TPE) then it could be a positive factor in their mind. Repeat that a few more times with other things (and not just the railways) and it could be enough to win a few more seats.

I agree. Also, the message is that the government cares about the regions, one that is popular even with people who don't use the railways.

 

[Killingworth]

The trouble with all XC threads is that viewpoints differ right across the country. Cut off north of Leeds, York, Newcastle and all the other suggestions going south. Fixed units of 6,7,8 or 9 car - bring back HSTs. Full dining car, buffet counter or trolley.

Those viewpoints tend to be influenced by where across the nation a service is used, time of day, and time of year. Gloucester to Birmingham, Chesterfield to Cheltenham, Alnmouth to Edinburgh, Ely to Leicester and Sheffield to Newcastle are a few of the trips I've made in recent years. Most have experienced some shortcomings in the service.

The lottery of being able to travel on fully manned units on fully formed diagrams that avoid umpteen potential delays makes for stressful journeys even when all goes to plan.

12 coach Thameslink, 9 car Elizabeth line. Would that as much attention was given to providing capacity nationwide. Back to my first sentence, far too many viewpoints for any easy solutions especially when government finance is needed and so many local political interests are potentially in conflict to resolve connections with other routes.

 

[YorksLad12]

In my view, the issues at XC primarily stem from the rolling stock. It does not have enough capacity and is too expensive. I wouldn't make massive changes to the network. This is only talking about the network currently operated by Voyagers. The 170 routes are a separate story, and not really IC routes in my view.

In my view, the short term solution is:
- For XC to come to an agreement with the relevant staff that ensures there's never any need to lock out a unit in a 2-unit consist
- All the remaining ex-avanti 221s to go to XC

This would give the XC long-distance fleet 78 22x to work with, a mix of 4 and 5 car units.

This will improve capacity and reduce overcrowding, and is therefore a good start. However, long-term more is needed.

Therefore, in the long term I would suggest:
- LNER should expand their CAF order to get both more trains and longer trains (somewhere between 250 and 265m), to expand capacity on their busiest routes compared to a 9/10-car 80x
- LNER cascades the bimode 5-car 800s to XC (10 5-cars)
- if possible, turn the 5-car 801 into bimodes as well and cascade those too (up to 12 5-cars)
- GWR electrification to Oxford, Bristol (both ways), and Swansea, at least
- GWR orders 125mph full length EMUs with level boarding, for use on Cardiff, Swansea, Oxford, and Bristol trains
- GWR cascades freed up 5-car 80x to to XC (up to 58 5-cars)
- send all voyagers off-lease
- XC depots in LNER and GWR land merged/handed over to LNER/GWR
- LNER, GWR provide staff to operate XC xervices in their area, allowing for more efficient diagramming.

In the best case scenario this would give XC 80 5-car 80x, which would be a significant capacity uplift compared to the 78 22x it would replace - as it would replace a fleet of low-capacity 4 and 5 car trains with a fleet of higher-capacity 5-car trains. It would also be a comfort upgrade, and hopefully would enable an overall cost reduction per seat available.

Several problems with this, the most obvious being that a 5-car 80x is longer than a five-car 22x. The rear car on a 2x5 set is already locked out of use because the combined set is too long for some platforms on the route. At best then, you'd 'only' have 9 cars, possibly only 8... in which case, given the lead times, order some 7-car 80x bimodes (or even more 810s, if they ever get fixed).

Plus, Agility Trains might not want to give their trains to a different operator. It might not be permissible in the contract.

In general, I'm against half-sets because of the crewing issue, and that they might be joined the 'wrong' way round. With LNER, First Class is always at the London end; with XC it's at the front. Or back. Or middle. Or front and middle or back and middle or front and back. But never the same two days in a row (in my experience). A fixed-formation 7-car set would help (First Class at the Plymouth end?) improve the overall feel of the service, add seats, fit current platforms and make it more "InterCity"-like.

The trouble with all XC threads is that viewpoints differ right across the country. Cut off north of Leeds, York, Newcastle and all the other suggestions going south. Fixed units of 6,7,8 or 9 car - bring back HSTs. Full dining car, buffet counter or trolley.

Those viewpoints tend to be influenced by where across the nation a service is used, time of day, and time of year. Gloucester to Birmingham, Chesterfield to Cheltenham, Alnmouth to Edinburgh, Ely to Leicester and Sheffield to Newcastle are a few of the trips I've made in recent years. Most have experienced some shortcomings in the service.

The lottery of being able to travel on fully manned units on fully formed diagrams that avoid umpteen potential delays makes for stressful journeys even when all goes to plan.

12 coach Thameslink, 9 car Elizabeth line. Would that as much attention was given to providing capacity nationwide. Back to my first sentence, far too many viewpoints for any easy solutions especially when government finance is needed and so many local political interests are potentially in conflict to resolve connections with other routes.

True

 

[vuzzeho]

The 180s are simply not reliable enough - their only destination should be recycling (or an OAO, if they want them, not that I would recommend it!)

That's why I said a comprehensive rework and suggested a battery conversion.

 

[Zomboid]

That's why I said a comprehensive rework and suggested a battery conversion.

Given they're hydraulic you'd be just as well to start again

 

[Trainbike46]

Several problems with this, the most obvious being that a 5-car 80x is longer than a five-car 22x. The rear car on a 2x5 set is already locked out of use because the combined set is too long for some platforms on the route. At best then, you'd 'only' have 9 cars, possibly only 8... in which case, given the lead times, order some 7-car 80x bimodes (or even more 810s, if they ever get fixed).

Some platforms should be extended yes. And selective door opening should be used. We should not be locking out perfectly good cars that could be used by passengers.

Plus, Agility Trains might not want to give their trains to a different operator. It might not be permissible in the contract.

The contract might be a challenge, true. One of the advantages of this plan is that maintenance can mostly stay at the existing agility trains depots, which may help limit issues.

 

[BranstonJnc]

New question, can we have a pre-defined Intercity service on all relevant Intercity routes, run from a single central command structure, with things like proper buffet cars and meal services?

Obviously, trains would need to be a 'proper length' to warrant having the facilities (can't do it on a 5 car), but realistically, it's possible. A single, unified, Intercity fleet of 8/9/10 cars with dual-mode capability, extremely high acceleration and all of the amenities is what's needed. Whether its London to Sheffield, London to Edinburgh, Scotland to Edinburgh... All of it. Give me a bloody restaurant and a proper First Class.

 

[Zomboid]

I think the question is why do we no longer have those things, where they have been withdrawn?

In fact, where have they been withdrawn?

 

[Mgameing123]

Until relatively recently (i.e. the last government) some civil service mandarins had serious proposals about shutting most of XC down, making claims that the majority of journeys made on XC could be done by alternative, faster, nicer routes, often for a lower fare. Where no reasonable, alternative existed, they'd have got the relevant "local" operator to expand their network.

I suspect that is part of the reason why so little was spent and little effort made into improving CrossCountry.

With GBR, I think XC will actually end up being a cooperative approach between each of the new GBR regions, ending the nonsense of separate depots and traincrew. E.g. a ScotRail driver may work from Aberdeen to Edinburgh.

Honestly if I live in Reading and need to go to Manchester. I'd rather use extra time taking a direct train over going through the mess that is London terminals.

 

[Energy]

Given they're hydraulic you'd be just as well to start again

DEMU. I guess you can use the resistor bank feed to recover energy from breaking, unclear how difficult it would be to allow energy to flow the other way. If possible then a battery module in the shape of the existing resistor banks could work rather nicely.

 

[Zomboid]

DEMU. I guess you can use the resistor grid feed to recover energy from breaking, unclear how difficult it would be to allow energy to flow the other way.

I was referring to 180s

 

[Energy]

I was referring to 180s

Ahh, I thought you were referring to the 220/221s. Scrap the 180s, they're a small fleet not worth the engineering effort or cost.

All of it. Give me a bloody restaurant and a proper First Class.

Passengers aren't travelling long distances on XC routes*, I'm not convinced that a comprehensive restaurant car is desired. XC needs many seats so it can sell them at a low price. It's not like XC first class is ever particularly busy.

*the routes should stay as is, they clearly serve people well and chopping up will reduce connectivity.

 

[HSTEd]

New question, can we have a pre-defined Intercity service on all relevant Intercity routes, run from a single central command structure, with things like proper buffet cars and meal services?

Obviously, trains would need to be a 'proper length' to warrant having the facilities (can't do it on a 5 car), but realistically, it's possible. A single, unified, Intercity fleet of 8/9/10 cars with dual-mode capability, extremely high acceleration and all of the amenities is what's needed. Whether its London to Sheffield, London to Edinburgh, Scotland to Edinburgh... All of it. Give me a bloody restaurant and a proper First Class.

A train restaurant is an exceptionally expensive operation to operate.
It will haemmorhage money in all but the most exceptional circumstances.

 

[danielnez1]

I'd like to see a micro-buffet of sorts - with a microwave combi so hot food is available to order.

The talk about cutting routes is sometimes alarming. I've often travelled from Newcastle through to Sheffield, Birmingham and Bristol for work purposes, and students will use the services for long distances when traveling to/from Uni as well.

 

[43096]

Honestly if I live in Reading and need to go to Manchester. I'd rather use extra time taking a direct train over going through the mess that is London terminals.

I would neither go via London, not use XC. Car wins every time now - it didn't used to.

 

[Zomboid]

I'd like to see a micro-buffet of sorts - with a microwave combi so hot food is available to order

I think the other on WiFi and they bring it to your seat thing they offer on LNER is a decent solution. Shouldn't take up too much space to have a little galley and a microwave to compliment the trolley.

Though I've never actually managed to use the LNER system, it's always been switched off...

 

[The Ham]

Why would you assume that more 80x would be built in Derby, not in Newton Aycliffe?

Is "I was being thick and not remembering the right rolling stock manufacturer" a valid answer?

The trouble with all XC threads is that viewpoints differ right across the country. Cut off north of Leeds, York, Newcastle and all the other suggestions going south. Fixed units of 6,7,8 or 9 car - bring back HSTs. Full dining car, buffet counter or trolley.

Those viewpoints tend to be influenced by where across the nation a service is used, time of day, and time of year. Gloucester to Birmingham, Chesterfield to Cheltenham, Alnmouth to Edinburgh, Ely to Leicester and Sheffield to Newcastle are a few of the trips I've made in recent years. Most have experienced some shortcomings in the service.

The lottery of being able to travel on fully manned units on fully formed diagrams that avoid umpteen potential delays makes for stressful journeys even when all goes to plan.

12 coach Thameslink, 9 car Elizabeth line. Would that as much attention was given to providing capacity nationwide. Back to my first sentence, far too many viewpoints for any easy solutions especially when government finance is needed and so many local political interests are potentially in conflict to resolve connections with other routes.

Whilst there's certainly regional and seasonal variations, the general consensus is that there aren't enough seats.

If that means that when more rolling stock is ordered then a few services are under used, then that's not really going to be much of an issue.

Between 2022/23 and 2023/24 XC saw passenger growth of 17.99%, now whilst that's from a low baseline in the 9 months since then the rolling 12 month average has increased by over 11% (previously it took between 2012 and 2015 to increase by the same amount) and XC probably aren't running as many services as it was in 2015 (and they had the HST's then too).

Even if growth falls back to grow by 4% then in three years time XC would be back to pre COVID numbers, which is probably the sort of timeline to order and deliver a new fleet.

However, even if delivery was a bit faster and growth was a bit slower, you're not talking a big difference.

Although conversely, it may well be that growth carrys on at a rate between 4% and 11%, in which case we could hit pre COVID numbers as soon as December this year (would have to be the upper end of that range, so unlikely - however also not impossible).

Some platforms should be extended yes. And selective door opening should be used.

If I recall the 80x's have automatic selective door opening on then, so unless there's another operational reason a train can't overhang a platform, then it shouldn't be an issue.

 

[Halish Railway]

The talk about cutting routes is sometimes alarming. I've often travelled from Newcastle through to Sheffield, Birmingham and Bristol for work purposes, and students will use the services for long distances when traveling to/from Uni as well.

I agree with this. For all of XC’s faults it’s route selection and frequencies is an incredible attribute that few other comparable countries in Europe have an equivalent of.

I’d also draw attention to how through running takes place for both the benefit of both passengers doing long distance journeys and for operational reasons. I don’t see how the Edinburgh to Plymouth route could be spilt at New Street for example, creating two additional services that need to occupy one of the 12 through platforms for an extended period of time, rather than having a less than 10 minute dwell.