Cross Country services - the future?

[HSTEd]

Actually that's a good point I'd not realized.

If you lengthen Voyagers to 6-7 cars, then the services that are today worked by 8-10 car double sets would have to lose carriages, as 12-14 cars wouldn't fit the platforms in many places...

Then lengthen the set to 10 carriages and do it properly

 

[Eagle]

Then lengthen the set to 10 carriages and do it properly

And have massive overprovision on the majority of services? :P

 

[HSTEd]

And have massive overprovision on the majority of services? :P

The end of doubled up Voyagers would allow the HSTs to be sent off to the scrap heap by 2019, with attendant benefits in terms of timetabling and maintenance.
The "overprovision" would likely be short-term due to the introduction of Advanced Purchase fares that are I believe not really available for XC at this point.

 

[Eagle]

The "overprovision" would likely be short-term due to the introduction of Advanced Purchase fares that are I believe not really available for XC at this point.

If you think there's that much suppressed demand...

 

[HSTEd]

If you think there's that much suppressed demand...

Well we have seen repeatedly insane gains in demand due to the availability of low cost advance purchase tickets, infact you could probably free sufficient additional units (thanks to never having to double them up again) to actually do the Operation Princess timetable properly.

 

[Eagle]

... infact you could probably free sufficient additional units (thanks to never having to double them up again) to actually do the Operation Princess timetable properly.

AXC would need a bunch of VT's Voyagers back to do that, of course.

Of course this would also free up TPE's 185s (or 350s) from the Scotland route which could be used on strengthening Manchester–York routes. Or a big cascade which results in some Pacers being kicked out of the North.

 

[IanXC]

Actually that's a good point I'd not realized.

If you lengthen Voyagers to 6-7 cars, then the services that are today worked by 8-10 car double sets would have to lose carriages, as 12-14 cars wouldn't fit the platforms in many places...

Any thoughts on which station has the shortest platforms on the core route?

My back of the envelope calculation suggests doubled up 5 car 221s are already 12 meters longer than an 8 car HST formation(!)

 

[Eagle]

(!)

You're surprised? A train with ten vehicles is slightly longer than another train with ten vehicles. Sounds about right to me.

 

[Class 33]

Doubt it, most people would still get on the first train they could find going to where they wanted to go to (the only time they wouldn't is if they physically couldn't get on the train) so you would probably find the first train is rammed and the second is fairly quiet.



Perhaps but passengers like clock face timetables it means they can quickly learn the timetable and know when there train will be always and anything that makes life easier for the passenger is worthwhile in my book. Also it seems to me that clock face timetables are efficient, why would we want two trains within minutes of each other and then nothing for an hour or more? Surely it's a better use of resources to have two trains every half hour (or roughly that anyway)? To me honest clock face seems to be something of a win win.

The modern timetable has departures from Bristol Temple Meads to Birmingham at xx:00 and xx:30 every hour from 07:00 until 20:30 (with one early morning at 06:15). Surely that's better than the old timetable?

Bear in mind that at the times when the services were running as intensively as just 7 or 8 minutes apart, one service would be heading to Manchester/Liverpool whilst the other would be heading to York/Newcastle/Scotland. And some of the services run non-stop up to Birmingham. Also the times of the day when there are gaps between services of roughly an hour to an hour and a half, would be at times of the day when less people are travelling. Looking at the old 1990 timetable of those departure from Bristol to the North, I can certainly see the sense and practicalities of such timetabling.

However I can certainly see the sense in the clock face timetables we have today. It's very easy for passengers to learn and remember. And if such "random" like timetables were introduced today, a lot of passengers would probably complain. I can see the headlines in The Daily Mail and The Metro now.... "Cross Country Trains introduce baffling new timetable....".

Even with the current clock face timetables, I do feel that at certain busy peak times they can manage to slot in additional limited stop services to ease over-crowding on the other services.

For instance one additional such service I've roughly timetabled to try and fit in with existing services.

Derby 1700
Birmingham New Street(arrive) 1743
Birmingham New Street(depart) 1755
Bristol Temple Meads (arrive) 1923 ( it could potentially arrive 10 minutes earlier than that, but I've included some recovery time)
Bristol Temple Meads (depart) 1930
Exeter St. Davids (arrive) 2024
Exeter St. Davids (depart) 2026

...And then the usual stops onto Plymouth or Penzance.


I do hope things improve on these Cross Country services in the near future. Either through putting extra carriages onto services(some of the services at least), and/or (less likely) introducing additional services to ease over-crowding. This is what I want the government to spend money on and sort out, deal with and significantly improve the existing problems on the UK rail network. Not go and spend £32billion on a high speed London-Birmingham line! Sort out problems on the rest of the network first, then look into building that high speed line.

 

[Eagle]

For instance one additional such service I've roughly timetabled to try and fit in with existing services.

Nice pathing, but it wouldn't work. This would effectively form an extra daily diagram* and XC don't have the spare stock to do that (without undoubling something).

*and of course you might as well add to the diagram, for instance, something northbound that arrives at Derby at 16.45 to form this service. And so on.

 

[IanXC]

You're surprised? A train with ten vehicles is slightly longer than another train with ten vehicles. Sounds about right to me.

I guess I had just not really thought about it like that. Having seen double Voyagers fit easily into platforms at places like Leeds, I think I had assumed that HSTs would have been closer to the maximum platform length. I think I'll put that down to it being late and move on before I fall into my own hole.

I do wonder though how much of a problem this would be, there would still be 5 car units (ex 4 car units) so a doubled up unit of 10 vehicles would still be possible.

Also 11 cars might be possible with limited stops, certainly ECML stations can cope with that, so as far as Wakefield Westgate is fine. Birmingham New Street and major stops after Bristol Temple Meads should be fine too. I'm not certain about Sheffield, Chesterfield, Derby, Burton, Tamworth and Cheltenham though - even if none are (and 11 car services are limited stop), 11 car operation on XC being dependant on platform extensions at Sheffield, Derby and Cheltenham doesn't seem excessive.

 

[Eagle]

11- and 12-car are fine for Basingstoke to Bournemouth too AFAIK, and stations to Manchester should be good in anticipation of 11-car 390s anyway.

 

[IanXC]

11- and 12-car are fine for Basingstoke to Bournemouth too AFAIK.

Birmingham International and Coventry are presumably fine too with the 11 car Pendolino programme, Leamington and Banbury might be a problem, but I would have thought Oxford and Reading would be fine.

 

[ainsworth74]

For instance one additional such service I've roughly timetabled to try and fit in with existing services.

Nice idea but where is the extra unit going to come from to cover the service both in terms of finding a spare unit (XC have a very high proportion of their units in diagrammed every day meaning little or no spares) and also in terms of diagramming (where is the unit physically coming from to run the service it can't just be magicked out of the air at Derby and then where does it go back to?).

Far better to keep the existing timetable (sorry but I'm not convinced by what you've said in an earlier paragraph ) and not faff with one off extra relief trains and instead extend existing units to increase capacity within the existing timetable.

 

[Eagle]

Leamington and Banbury

Banbury: down main 300 m, up main 290 m
Leamington: down main 308 m, up main 246 m (agh, not quite long enough for 11, even if you have the ends hanging off)

 

[ainsworth74]

Leamington: down main 308 m, up main 246 m (agh, not quite long enough for 11, even if you have the ends hanging off)

Where are the signals? If they're set back from the platforms it wouldn't matter if the ends are hanging off (at least not as much anyway).

 

[IanXC]

Banbury: down main 300 m, up main 290 m
Leamington: down main 308 m, up main 246 m (agh, not quite long enough for 11, even if you have the ends hanging off)

Even if you add that one to the list of lengthenings then its still probably only about 6 stations that need any work doing, if you ignore north of Edinburgh and south of (maybe) Exeter.

 

[HSTEd]

Are Voyagers fitted for SDO?

 

[Blindtraveler]

can the bornmoth to manchester be fully opperated by duel voltage eMUs?
If so then I'd pull the voyagers off this, replacing them with the best semens can do in the way of a re-designed 444, (end doors- with 8 coaches, micro buffets, luggage racks fit for purpose, 110mph max speed and propper IC quallitty seating, not the excuse for it that units e.g 185s have.

These could use same paths and timetable and would free up voyagers innicially for refurb, bi(moding/extending to minimum 8 coaches and then put them on the southwest/northeast/Scotland runs.

The HSTs would be retained and would work the ABD - PNZ and possibly a new INV BHM service calling major HML stations then Edinburgh, newcastle, york, leeds, sheffield, Darby, East mids parkway, Leicester and Birmingham creating new Scottish links for these stations.

A hot and cold at seat meal order service would be introduced for longdistance pax, and idia I believe works well in india. finally new 172s would be ordered for LM allowing there 170s to be refurbed and cascaded0to XC to strengthen there current fleat.

 

[Invincibles]

I would be tempted to anger everyone by terminating all XC services at Newcastle (or at a push Edinburgh) rather than sending them off to further destinations. This would then pave the way for Scotrail to provide better services between Aberdeen and Newcastle, as they seem pretty good at getting new stock.

The result should be more spare voyagers to strengthen the existing services and potentially to create an extra relief working of the type that is suggested above. (Cross Country HSTs could move to Etches Park and so they would form a relief from Bristol through Birmingham to Derby(/Sheffield) in the morning and then run the relief from Derby to Birmingham and Plymouth in the evening. Indeed using 2 in this way would enable a similar train an hour earlier that would give extra capacity through the Bristol peak.

For the longer distance trains I actually would like to see more purpose built units operating, based on an existing style but with better facilities for business travellers to work and better catering etc. Something based around sleeper style stock, with rooms, would offer this as those who wanted desk and working facilities could use the rooms for that and those who wanted a comfortable rest would be able to do so between morning appointments in Edinburgh and evening engagements in the south. This is a model which is very popular in China where the longer distance day trains all convey coaches of such accomodation. As they would run one 10+ hour journey in the day they could then return through the night adding sleeper capacity. I do believe that the ability to work on the move is going to become increasingly important as everything goes more and more wireless.

It is very easy to say longer trains etc, but I do think that the current XC network can be made better with a few small changes and that it is a lot better than the one I used when I first started travelling and there were cancellations and big delays on carriages that were definitely fit for retirement (even post virgin refurb)

 

[The Planner]

Where are the signals? If they're set back from the platforms it wouldn't matter if the ends are hanging off (at least not as much anyway).

Right at the end of the platforms more or less, you would probably also hang out the back end and foul the main lines.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

For instance one additional such service I've roughly timetabled to try and fit in with existing services.

Derby 1700
Birmingham New Street(arrive) 1743
Birmingham New Street(depart) 1755
Bristol Temple Meads (arrive) 1923 ( it could potentially arrive 10 minutes earlier than that, but I've included some recovery time)
Bristol Temple Meads (depart) 1930
Exeter St. Davids (arrive) 2024
Exeter St. Davids (depart) 2026

...And then the usual stops onto Plymouth or Penzance.

Hammers through plenty of freight at Water Orton, and you would be 2 minutes after a Cross City out of New St, can't be done like that, 1751 could possilbly work.

 

[IanXC]

can the bornmoth to manchester be fully opperated by duel voltage eMUs?

Not unless the Chitern main line is electrified. The gap in the route for electrification of some kind currently is Coventry-Reading.

 

[Eagle]

Not unless the Chitern main line is electrified. The gap in the route for electrification of some kind currently is Coventry-Reading.

Coventry–Basingstoke is the gap at the moment; post-GW electrification it'll be Coventry–Oxford and Reading West–Basingstoke.

 

[DarloRich]

PLEASE STAND BEHIND THE YELLOW LINE - VOYAGER BASHING IS ABOUT TO BEGIN!

They really are the most horrible long distance trains known to man. They are the most tiny, cramped, claustrophobic, uncomfortable, noisy, dirty, smelly, rattley pieces of sh*t ever conceived.

The seats were designed by some sort of sadomasochistic Nazi pervert, they are made out of cardboard and padded with old newspapers. Every piece of trim and equipment is designed, ( and this takes some sort of perverted genius) to resonate at a slightly different frequency, all of which conflict with one another. The seat is so thin as to be unable to hold even the most normal of bottoms. I find it cuts of the circulation to my legs because the edge is at just that right spot to cause maximum discomfort. The lack of catering on most of the services is a joke.

The people who specified and designed these units should be shot. I guess they never had to travel on them. They are a disgrace and an embarrassment to the railways.

They simply are not suitable for any kind of long distance train travel. Most apologists and Virgin trains/ XC lovers will say that most people do not use them for long distances and that some one else did the spec for them.

Well I and many others ARE on them long distances. You try Edinburgh - Plymouth on a Voyager and then an HST. Guess which is nicer (even after the XC "refurbishment" of the HST).

Because of all this I avoid XC like the plague. I hate to travel on their trains. It is not an enjoyable experience. About the most i can stand is Birmingham- Derby or York- Darlington.

The Friday I travelled from Birmingham to York, stood next to the disabled toilet by first class in a voyager was the final straw. I would have loved the chief executive of XC to have been with me and shared the pleasant experience of being wedged into a doorway and inhaled the stench of somebody else’s faeces cooking for 3 hours.

NEVER AGAIN

 

[Blindtraveler]

in that case id plug the electric gap and proceed as above.

As to cutting services back to northern stations you couldnt cape everything at NCL as EC trains wouldnt cope and the0frazzled XC punter woant be at all happy being shuved onto a 380 or similar for the cross border run calling all shacks.

Caping things at EDB is ok but only if new units of a calibre similar to the 175s are procured for the0SR Express work. again, 4 HSTs a day and some unsuitable turbostars woant make you friends in Dundee and Aberdeen

 

[fordylad]

Can someone explain what's so wrong with voyagers? I'm not here to defend them.
Ive never had a problem on one despite travelling from Oxford to Stockport fairly often,

 

[Blindtraveler]

rather than reinventing the wheel, a quick forum search for the term voyagers should answer this

 

[fordylad]

Cool I'll try that thanks

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Trouble with all these schemes is, Cross Country is a problem child financially for both Arriva and DfT.
It is an inter-city-type operation run without much premium fare traffic.
Overcrowding doesn't always mean high yields.

The "Thor" project at least shows DfT is interested in making some positive changes, but not wholesale replacement of Voyagers.
On the other hand if it proves too expensive nothing will happen.

It's just possible that DfT will let ICWC on the basis of replacing some of their Voyagers, enabling their transfer to XC, but the current signals pre-ITT are not encouraging.
The current XC franchise runs to 2016 and the Voyagers are leased till then.

 

[Zoe]

It's just possible that DfT will let ICWC on the basis of replacing some of their Voyagers, enabling their transfer to XC, but the current signals pre-ITT are not encouraging.

That would also assume they would end up going to XC and not to another TOC like FGW (or the winner of the new franchise) in order to allow a least part HST replacement on the Paddington to Plymouth/Penzance route. EMT would be another possible destination, again to allow HST replacement.