XC services will continue to be operated by Arriva XC, options beyond to be considered in due course

The department has reviewed all ongoing franchise competitions and other live rail projects in the context of the rail review. Due to the unique geographic nature of the Cross Country franchise, which runs from Aberdeen to Penzance and cuts across multiple parts of the railway, awarding this franchise in 2019 could impact on the review’s conclusions.

It has therefore been decided that this competition will not proceed. Services will continue to be operated by the existing franchisee with options beyond this to be considered in due course. The department will consider the responses to the Cross Country public consultation in the development of future options for the franchise.

All other ongoing franchise competitions and other live rail projects are continuing as planned.

Click to expand...

pt_mad said:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-announces-root-and-branch-review-of-rail
From the above page:


Leading on from the old thread which talked about the previous franchise competition, which will now not proceed, what are the implications and likely or potential outcomes of the existing XC operation continuing in its current form?

When, if at all, should we expect to hear something about a potential direct award? What will the short term needs be in terms of the existing operation continuing? When will a new agreement need to be in place between the DFT and the existing operator?

It would be best to keep discussion to the existing franchise and continuing operations related discussion only. Rather than speculating about potential new services or new routes, which I believe now has its own thread in the speculation sub forum.


My own observations from the past few weekends are that we are now back in autumn winter mode, where many more weekend travelers have come back out again for city visits which can be all weather activities. Meaning services have been busier again, with more and more XC services being full and standing in the weekend off peak, and passengers being fairly intolerant of perhaps not being able to board the first service they see and having to wait for the next due to crowding, or expecting to travel in comfort and finding that they may have to stand for some or all of their journey. Or passengers having difficulty in using their seat reservations due to trains being full or full and standing when they board.

I can't help but worry for front line staff going forward with the current level of demand and stock. Because, as pointed to in the old thread, if the rolling stock situation remains as it is for the short to medium term, logically some passengers probably won't be able to board the service they turned up for, and may have to watch one train leave and wait for the next in order to be able to board. And many expect to have a seat for journeys longer than say half an hour and unfortunately staff may end up on the wrong end of some public frustration at times.

Click to expand...

1. The expensive option: 802s. Capable of 125mph, capable of diesel operation. Production line still open. Would remove the fumes from New Street but would cost a few quid...
2. The cheapskate option: Get the four HT 180s, run them as two ten-coach diagrams on the busiest days of the week (assuming that they can fit through the New Street tunnels). All the problems of a micro-fleet but it'd be twenty coaches of 125mph DMUs. If the Powers That Be allow the 180s to go to GC for more Open Access then the railway really needs its collective heads examining.
3. The "wait a couple of years" option: Hope that EMR order 802s (or equivalent) so that the twenty seven 222s come onto the second-hand market.
4. The nostalgic option: Get some HSTs in, although they'd presumably have to be "fun sized" HSTs like the ScotRail ones and the GWR "Castles". Since ScotRail and GWR have the choice of the best trains, I don't know if there are going to be sufficient HSTs left of sufficient quality to keep XC going - I also don't think that a four coach train is going to be a magic bullet. But it'll keep enthusiasts happy.
5. The retrenchment option: There aren't enough trains to go round, so scale back operation so that there are enough trains to cover the bits that XC needs to provide seats for. Reduce Scottish services to every couple of hours, maybe reduce services north of York to hourly, consider terminating the "via Leeds" services *at* Leeds. Maybe reduce Plymouth to bi-hourly, forget about Paignton, trim back so that everything in the "core" is at least eight coaches long. It'll upset some people, but XC have enough problems without worrying about solving issues that are the responsibility of other TOCs.
6. The Manchester EMU option: Replace some/most services from Birmingham to Manchester with eight coach 110mph capable EMUs - that'd improve capacity between two of the most important cities in the country. Is it worth upsetting the (lower number of) people making irregular journeys all the way from Manchester to Bournemouth/ Exeter so that the (larger number of) people making regular journeys on the Manchester - Birmingham section can actually fit onto the trains? I'd say yes (but others will disagree!).
7. The really radical option: XC is too messy to function at the moment, too many branches, too much hard work given the number of places that the staff/trains begin and end each day. Whilst you can attract enough bidders to make other "InterCity" TOCs competitive, XC looks like the Problem Child - you're not going to attract many bidders at the moment, so consider some proper surgery. Without getting the crayons out and suggesting hundreds of new services, I'd take the opposite approach and suggest splitting the TOC into two - one that provides a half hourly Manchester - Reading service (inc Southampton/ Bournemouth) and one that does everything else. The Manchester - Reading corridor could be added to the WCML franchise, the remaining services (half hourly from Yorkshire to Devon, plus the 170-operated services) could be added to the East Midlands franchise. That'd simplify services, make it easier to wrap the XC routes into other TOCs, remove the behemoth that XC has become and replace it with two leaner franchises. This will upset people though...

tbtc said:

1. The really radical option: XC is too messy to function at the moment, too many branches, too much hard work given the number of places that the staff/trains begin and end each day. Whilst you can attract enough bidders to make other "InterCity" TOCs competitive, XC looks like the Problem Child - you're not going to attract many bidders at the moment, so consider some proper surgery. Without getting the crayons out and suggesting hundreds of new services, I'd take the opposite approach and suggest splitting the TOC into two - one that provides a half hourly Manchester - Reading service (inc Southampton/ Bournemouth) and one that does everything else. The Manchester - Reading corridor could be added to the WCML franchise, the remaining services (half hourly from Yorkshire to Devon, plus the 170-operated services) could be added to the East Midlands franchise. That'd simplify services, make it easier to wrap the XC routes into other TOCs, remove the behemoth that XC has become and replace it with two leaner franchises. This will upset people though...

Click to expand...