Crosscountry- can someone explain the madness?

[Martin_1981]

Probably digressing slightly but I've often wondered if the Cross Country franchise may one day end up being distributed between other TOC's like Central Trains was back in 2007. If this was to happen I guess it might work something like:

Birmingham to Manchester - Avanti West Coast
Birmingham to Leeds/Newcastle/Edinburgh - LNER
Birmingham to South Coast - SWR or GWR
Birmingham to South West - GWR
Birmingham to Cardiff - ATW
Birmingham to Nottingham/Leicester - EMR or WMR
Birmingham to Stansted - EMR or Anglia

If that was to happen though, it would result in less through journeys and pretty much everything starting or ending at Birmingham. Be interested to know if anyone else has wondered this.

 

[satisnek]

I just refuse to use them. They can be avoided for most journeys, and doing so is often cheaper, too.

I try to, but living in the Midlands there's sometimes no other option. Like my visit to the KWVR last Saturday, I used EMR + Northern (express via Barnsley) for the outward journey from Derby to Leeds, but at the time I returned there was no practical alternative to the 4-car 220 all the way, and boy that was grim! It was actually more to do with the quantity and quality of the people on board rather than the train itself, but a longer train would have mitigated this of course.

 

[swt_passenger]

Probably digressing slightly but I've often wondered if the Cross Country franchise may one day end up being distributed between other TOC's like Central Trains was back in 2007. If this was to happen I guess it might work something like:

Birmingham to Manchester - Avanti West Coast
Birmingham to Leeds/Newcastle/Edinburgh - LNER
Birmingham to South Coast - SWR or GWR
Birmingham to South West - GWR
Birmingham to Cardiff - ATW
Birmingham to Nottingham/Leicester - EMR or WMR
Birmingham to Stansted - EMR or Anglia

If that was to happen though, it would result in less through journeys and pretty much everything starting or ending at Birmingham. Be interested to know if anyone else has wondered this.

New St cannot cope with all the extra reversals. Plenty of people have made similar suggestions, but usually for fewer of the routes.

 

[Parallel]

BNew St cannot cope with all the extra reversals. Plenty of people have made similar suggestions, but usually for fewer of the routes.

There is the potential for operators to share through services like Northern/Scotrail did recently with Glasgow - Newcastle. I.e. TfW Cardiff - Birmingham and EMR Birmingham - Leicester/Stansted. But many TOCs signing to Birmingham on stock they don’t currently operate would probably end up costing more than just having XC run the routes as now though.

 

[class397tpe]

Quite possibly. Seems at the moment that they are set in such a way as to choke any increased demand.

It just seems bonkers to me that the DfT have never authorised a significant capacity uplift, like they have for every other franchise at points in time, when there clearly is the demand (moreso than other franchises that had significant capacity increases).

So much wasted potential cause no one can be bothered to do anything.

 

[MetalMicky]

I think this is the crux of it. Nobody is fighting for the XC network due to there not really being a local market on many flows, and not being London centric.

There would probably be more uproar if XC altered the Birmingham - Leicester service than the Edinburgh - Plymouth one!

With XC not serving London, you would have thought that a capacity upgrade would be an excellent way of contributing to the Levelling up agenda. How many constituencies are served by the core network? Surely some MPs have the gumption to form a cross party pressure group to force this issue out of the sidings.

The thought of using the core network is so depressing and a must to avoid. If this capacity level is all we have to tempt motorists out of their cars, then heaven help the rail recovery. When the M5 motorway feels like the best option then we are failing badly as a nation.

How ridiculous that many of us go via London in order to have a less stressful overall journey, to the extent of dragging our luggage onto the Tube in preference to using CrossCountry. It speaks volumes.

 

[WAO]

It might be better to restrict voyagers mostly to lines not wired; i.e. not North West of Birmingham nor North of York, with surplus ac EMU's replacing them. The voyagers released could then strengthen the overcrowded services where they are most needed. Much of XC business is middle distance (I have read of a mean journey of 47 miles) so only a few services need be full. distance.

The route did used to be comfortable, pre-voyager, with 47 + 7 mark 2's or even earlier, with 45/1's and mark 1's, but it could still be packed tight!

WAO

 

[Mogz]

A realistic off-the-shelf solution would be replacing the Voyagers with a fleet of 80x’s. Preferably 9 car.

At the moment people are put off by the cramped, expensive, too-short Voyagers.

Even the GWR style offering with no buffet would offer an increase in capacity, better luggage provision, better leg-room and a better balance of tables/airline seats.

I used to advocate for a solution that would mean that XC had rolling stock akin to some of the best non-High Speed long distance trains in Europe with things like a choice of open and compartment coaches, restaurant provision, buffet counter and a family coach. The consensus seemed to be that such expensive luxuries are “not for us”
in the UK.

Nowadays I’d just be happy with anything that increased capacity and restored some of the lost links such as Liverpool and Brighton, even just for a couple of trains per day.

I use XC nearly every day for work. Not as a commuter but for travelling to destinations all over the country. I also use it for leisure.

I also remember what it used to be like under VT and (as a young person) IC.

I also use other TOCs to get to end destinations.

It could be and should be so much better than it is.

 

[Xavi]

It might be better to restrict voyagers mostly to lines not wired; i.e. not North West of Birmingham nor North of York, with surplus ac EMU's replacing them. The voyagers released could then strengthen the overcrowded services where they are most needed. Much of XC business is middle distance (I have read of a mean journey of 47 miles) so only a few services need be full. distance.

The route did used to be comfortable, pre-voyager, with 47 + 7 mark 2's or even earlier, with 45/1's and mark 1's, but it could still be packed tight!

WAO

The 47 miles average is a factor of split ticketing, I split Exeter to Chesterfield into 5 sections and save hundreds of pounds every trip. It suits DfT to say there’s low demand for long distance on XC.

Also, the ‘loss-making’ or ‘heavily subsidised’ XC is a product of ORCATS with XC being by far the highest TOC for sharing of revenue across multiple operators. Unfortunately, DfT believe all the figures.

 

[OrangeJuice]

With more people split ticketing (including me) does this not make worse the view that it's only for short distance travellers. Particularly when I split Stoke to Southampton into 4 or 7 tickets for example

 

[Mcr Warrior]

With more people split ticketing (including me) does this not make worse the view that it's only for short distance travellers. Particularly when I split Stoke to Southampton into 4 or 7 tickets for example

Will certainly skew the figures and make it appear that there are more shorter distance journeys than there actually are.

 

[robert thomas]

Travelling from West Wales I try to ensure that any Cross Country journey I do is priced by TFW.This might mean booking to somewhere I'm not travelling to but which is valid via Birmingham without any XC restrictions on time for example. If travelling to the North East/Scotland it is almost always cheaper to buy advance tickets and travel via London with an admitted time penalty but with more comfortable and less crowded trains

 

[Gareth]

Will certainly skew the figures and make it appear that there are more shorter distance journeys than there actually are.

One would hope the reforms coming with GBR would sort this out. It can't be helpful to plan services when you don't know where people are really going to. There should just be a reasonable direct fair available that makes split ticketing superfluous.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One would hope the reforms coming with GBR would sort this out. It can't be helpful to plan services when you don't know where people are really going to. There should just be a reasonable direct fair available that makes split ticketing superfluous.

There are a few reasons splitting save money. Sometimes on connectional journeys it's because Advances aren't offered on a through journey, e.g. there were no through Advances from anywhere on the south WCML to anywhere on Merseyrail for a long time, though I think there are now. Sometimes it's because for a day trip you can string togther heavily discounted (Super) Off Peak Day Returns. But more commonly it's because you have to have the same quota level available for all sections of a journey to issue an Advance at that level. The latter was going to be fixed by allowing each section to be calculated separately if necessary (i.e. effectively issuing the split but as a through ticket), which would have got rid of the need for the vast majority* of splits, but I don't believe it ever happened.

* The vast majority of journeys are single-vehicle ones, so the vast majority of splits are these split Advances for the above reason.

 

[XAM2175]

Is it not the case that LENNON and the other various revenue analysis tools can use sales data to effectively 'infer' long-distance trips from split tickets anyway?

 

[driverd]

Well, on a rammed 5 car voyager today. Glad to see that XC have managed to get things back to how they used to be so quickly. Whole train is full and standing.

It's interesting to see just how quickly people are returning to rail too. I regularly use this service and its very noticeable, week on week, how busy it's getting.

XC need to return to the pre-covid timetable ASAP.

Ideal capacity solution (for me) would be ex-AWC voyagers to strengthen the core SW-NE run, with 222s cascading off the 4 car voyagers as much as possible, with the released stock either going off lease or strengthening as appropriate. It's certainly not unimaginable that all SW-NE services should be 8-10 car, with a general ambition of a 7 car mimum XC railway.

 

[voyagerdude220]

Ideal capacity solution (for me) would be ex-AWC voyagers to strengthen the core SW-NE run, with 222s cascading off the 4 car voyagers as much as possible, with the released stock either going off lease or strengthening as appropriate. It's certainly not unimaginable that all SW-NE services should be 8-10 car, with a general ambition of a 7 car mimum XC railway.

I agree. Also I'd ensure that Cross Country had as many HST sets in service as possible to enable them to double up as many Voyagers as possible.

 

[class 9]

Avanti have just returned the first two 221s (221142 & 221143)back to the leasing company, so we'll see what happens, soon hopefully.

 

[AndrewE]

Avanti have just returned the first two 221s (221142 & 221143)back to the leasing company, so we'll see what happens, soon hopefully.

What was it that one of the Goons said? "You naive fool!"
XC don't serve London in any way, or any radial route from London. Whitehall wants savings, so XC won't be increasing capacity.
Forget the Building Back Better, (aka "Green crap,") "Levelling up" or any other slogans. They just don't care.
Don't hold your breath or you will expire before anything happens!

 

[class 9]

Well, if it doesn't happen it'll be no surprise, but a transfer to XC in theory is a no brainer, based at the same depot as the rest of the fleet and no training costs for crews.

 

[Agent_Squash]

Well, if it doesn't happen it'll be no surprise, but a transfer to XC in theory is a no brainer, based at the same depot as the rest of the fleet and no training costs for crews.

Also nicer than their own stock!

 

[swt_passenger]

Also nicer than their own stock!

That can soon be “refurbished away”…

 

[AndyMike]

My least favourite operator of all. The Voyagers are just horrible places to be, and clearly there are massive capacity problems.

 

[uglymonkey]

I don't like the Thameslink and GWR 800 units, but I agree the Voyagers are the worst of the bunch. I'll never forgive them for "hiding" at every high tide at Dawlish, in case they get a little bit wet - making me late for work on more than one occasion !

 

[irish_rail]

I'd cascade some of GWRs 5 car 80x to XC (a 5 car 802 has far greater capacity than a 5 car 221) and build some more 9 car 80x for GWR in order to eliminate some of the wasteful 2x5 car set running on GWR.

 

[AndrewE]

I'd cascade some of GWRs 5 car 80x to XC (a 5 car 802 has far greater capacity than a 5 car 221) and build some more 9 car 80x for GWR in order to eliminate some of the wasteful 2x5 car set running on GWR.

That's your mistake: DFT (i.e. Treasury) are in charge now... I suspect there won't be any more building.

 

[OrangeJuice]

Well, on a rammed 5 car voyager today. Glad to see that XC have managed to get things back to how they used to be so quickly. Whole train is full and standing.

It's interesting to see just how quickly people are returning to rail too. I regularly use this service and its very noticeable, week on week, how busy it's getting.

XC need to return to the pre-covid timetable ASAP

Well, on a rammed 5 car voyager today. Glad to see that XC have managed to get things back to how they used to be so quickly. Whole train is full and standing.

It's interesting to see just how quickly people are returning to rail too. I regularly use this service and its very noticeable, week on week, how busy it's getting.

XC need to return to the pre-covid timetable ASAP.

Ideal capacity solution (for me) would be ex-AWC voyagers to strengthen the core SW-NE run, with 222s cascading off the 4 car voyagers as much as possible, with the released stock either going off lease or strengthening as appropriate. It's certainly not unimaginable that all SW-NE services should be 8-10 car, with a general ambition of a 7 car mimum XC railway.

Out of interest was there an hour ago before the preceding train?

XC seem to have a weird mix of half hourly, hourly and two hourly services between Bristol and Plymouth. They've reinstated quite a few between Bristol and Birmingham, but that's mucked up the diagrams I assume as there are more single units about - just not with the full half hourly service!

 

[driverd]

Out of interest was there an hour ago before the preceding train?

It was on the core Birmingham - York stretch, so yes - hourly.

XC seem to have a weird mix of half hourly, hourly and two hourly services between Bristol and Plymouth. They've reinstated quite a few between Bristol and Birmingham, but that's mucked up the diagrams I assume as there are more single units about - just not with the full half hourly service!

Unfortunately this seems to be the case across the network. They need to desperately get a handle on this as it's really not encouraging people back to rail.

 

[hibtastic]

Had the luxury of ten cars on my Manchester to Birmingham International service yesterday. Quite pleasant really but those Voyagers are crying out for a decent refurb.

 

[irish_rail]

Out of interest was there an hour ago before the preceding train?

XC seem to have a weird mix of half hourly, hourly and two hourly services between Bristol and Plymouth. They've reinstated quite a few between Bristol and Birmingham, but that's mucked up the diagrams I assume as there are more single units about - just not with the full half hourly service!

Reinstating those Bristol to Birmingham services really has mucked up things. Nobody uses those trains, and the ones to the south west just get busier and more likely to be a 4 or 5 car than before the timetable change. We were much better off prior to May.