Crosscountry- can someone explain the madness?

[Starmill]

Isn't the problem with XC that each unit is full for around 40 minutes in the morning rush and 40 minutes in the evening rush, but for the rest of the day they are half empty?

So, they provide a useful commuter service for flows like Oxford-Banbury, Bristol-Taunton, Derby-Birmingham etc, but most of the rest of the day they are carting around fresh air. The non-London city destinations just don't generate enough traffic outside of the peaks to justify either longer trains or greater frequencies - whether we like it or not.

Most of the journey pairs actually do generate significant traffic both ways during the interpeak hours, e.g. York to Newcastle, Derby to Sheffield, Plymouth to Exeter, Stoke-on-Trent to Manchester and Cheltenham to Bristol.

 

[py_megapixel]

Isn't the problem with XC that each unit is full for around 40 minutes in the morning rush and 40 minutes in the evening rush, but for the rest of the day they are half empty?

Have you ever actually been on a 4-car unit somewhere near the core of the network outside of rush-hour?

They're not completely full, but they're far from empty.

 

[starlightEXPRESS]

In short, no, it isn't.

So what is the problem then. Why can't XC pay its way? Why does it require more subsidy than every other intercity franchise?

Have you ever actually been on a 4-car unit somewhere near the core of the network outside of rush-hour?

They're not completely full, but they're far from empty.

Firstly I said "half empty" and not "empty"...

Yes. I have been on XC services outside of the peaks - particularly on the Reading-Birmingham stretch, but on other parts as well. And compared to the intercity TOCs running to and from London at the same time of day, the loadings are very low.

A "not completely full" 4-car voyager carries the same number of passengers as a lightly loaded 11-car pendolino.

Most of the journey pairs actually do generate significant traffic both ways during the interpeak hours, e.g. York to Newcastle, Derby to Sheffield, Plymouth to Exeter, Stoke-on-Trent to Manchester and Cheltenham to Bristol.

This is exactly my point. XC is an intercity franchise serving multiple local travel markets. As I said: "The non-London city destinations just don't generate enough traffic outside of the peaks to justify either longer trains or greater frequencies - whether we like it or not."

 

[class 9]

Isn't the problem with XC that each unit is full for around 40 minutes in the morning rush and 40 minutes in the evening rush, but for the rest of the day they are half empty?

So, they provide a useful commuter service for flows like Oxford-Banbury, Bristol-Taunton, Derby-Birmingham etc, but most of the rest of the day they are carting around fresh air. The non-London city destinations just don't generate enough traffic outside of the peaks to justify either longer trains or greater frequencies - whether we like it or not.

They certainly aren't carting fresh air about, not full full but reasonably loaded.

 

[starlightEXPRESS]

They certainly aren't carting fresh air about, not full full but reasonably loaded.

So what is the problem then? Why can't XC pay its way? If the loadings are as good as you claim, why does it require more subsidy than every other intercity franchise?

 

[Watershed]

So what is the problem then. Why can't XC pay its way? Why does it require more subsidy than every other intercity franchise?

Because it doesn't serve London, which is by far the biggest rail market in the country. Where GWR, LNER etc. are filling 9 and 10 car IETs running into London several times an hour, XC typically fill a 4 or 5 car train running once an hour.

Operating the Turbostar and outlying Scottish and Cornish routes hardly helps with profitability. If the network were reduced to the core Southampton/Reading-Manchester and Exeter/Bristol-York/Newcastle routes, I think it might have a fighting chance of breaking even on a standalone basis.

Of course once Network Rail subsidies are accounted for, it would still be loss-making, but that goes for just about every TOC.

 

[class 9]

So what is the problem then. Why can't XC pay its way? Why does it require more subsidy than every other intercity franchise?

Prior to covid, XC was returning a premium to government.

So what is the problem then? Why can't XC pay its way? If the loadings are as good as you claim, why does it require more subsidy than every other intercity franchise?

Prior to COVID it did pay its way, it's was returning a premium to government.

 

[starlightEXPRESS]

Because it doesn't serve London, which is by far the biggest rail market in the country. Where GWR, LNER etc. are filling 9 and 10 car IETs running into London several times an hour, XC typically fill a 4 or 5 car train running once an hour.

Operating the Turbostar and outlying Scottish and Cornish routes hardly helps with profitability. If the network were reduced to the core Southampton/Reading-Manchester and Exeter/Bristol-York/Newcastle routes, I think it might have a fighting chance of breaking even on a standalone basis.

Of course once Network Rail subsidies are accounted for, it would still be loss-making, but that goes for just about every TOC.

Yes exactly. The majority of passengers using XC are making relatively short journeys.

If the network were reduced to the core "X" through Birmingham, it wouldn't be much better, because this problem would still be there.

 

[Watershed]

Yes exactly. The majority of passengers using XC are making relatively short journeys.

If the network were reduced to the core "X" through Birmingham, it wouldn't be much better, because this problem would still be there.

I think we are talking at cross purposes. XC is fundamentally not a very profitable network because, outside of its core, it involves carrying few passengers at (in comparison to other routes) low to medium fares, with trains that are expensive to lease and crew.

It has capacity issues in the core X because of these people making short journeys. It doesn't have those issues at the extremities.

 

[starlightEXPRESS]

Prior to COVID it did pay its way, it's was returning a premium to government.

But not if you include the Network Grant - it was the worst performer among the intercity TOCs (per passenger mile).

 

[py_megapixel]

So what is the problem then? Why can't XC pay its way? If the loadings are as good as you claim, why does it require more subsidy than every other intercity franchise?

Citation needed for that claim. It's thrown around a lot on here but I'm not really sure it's true.

Yes. I have been on XC services outside of the peaks - particularly on the Reading-Birmingham stretch, but on other parts as well. And compared to the intercity TOCs running to and from London at the same time of day, the loadings are very low.

I wonder if it partly has something to do with CrossCountry's seeming inability to price tickets properly.

A TOC as extensive as they are will always end up serving a range of different journey lengths and types - and yet while other long-distance TOCs reflect this with different tickets, CrossCountry applies blanket policies to their whole range. Why on earth should a journey from Glasgow to Penzance have the same time restrictions as one from Birmingham to Cheltenham? It's also not uncommon to see advance tickets available on only one or two services with no rhyme or reason. What happened to using them to spread less time-sensitive passengers out and encourage them to pick the less busy trains?

Another problem might be the way they are operating the service. Most long-distance XC services have several members of staff on board. Does the catering really make a profit? If not, get rid of it or cut it back to the most suitable parts of the route only, and reduce to two-person operation with just a driver and conductor on each train. And see if they can get their hands on some cheaper and more efficient rolling stock (it might be that nothing is available, though new 80x series stock can't be that expensive if procured properly, considering what Lumo are offering).

And a "not completely full" 4-car voyager carries the same number of passengers as a lightly loaded 11-car pendolino.

There are plenty of lightly loaded 11-car pendolinos pottering around and that doesn't really seem to bother anyone.

 

[starlightEXPRESS]

I think we are talking at cross purposes. XC is fundamentally not a very profitable network because it involves carrying few passengers at (in comparison to other routes) low fares over the fringes.

It has capacity issues in the core X because of these people making short journeys. It doesn't have those issues at the extremities.

Then I think we are in agreement. The part of the core which is fully loaded or close-to-fully loaded is much smaller than most people realise.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

So what is the problem then. Why can't XC pay its way? Why does it require more subsidy than every other intercity franchise?


Firstly I said "half empty" and not "empty"...

Yes. I have been on XC services outside of the peaks - particularly on the Reading-Birmingham stretch, but on other parts as well. And compared to the intercity TOCs running to and from London at the same time of day, the loadings are very low.

And a "not completely full" 4-car voyager carries the same number of passengers as a lightly loaded 11-car pendolino.




This is exactly my point. XC is an intercity franchise serving multiple local travel markets.

XC has pretty much always lost money (back in the day when the thing was being franchised , I was surprised at the bottom line) - mind you old XC was expensive to operate with things like run-rounds at Reading needing shunters to hook on / off the 47's etc. Loco availability and failures in service was / appeared high , -which left lots of delightful things for spotters to observe (73's out of Brighton etc) , but these things had to be hired in.

So the award winning Virgin bid , promised a doubling of service frequency , but at more than double the operating cost in terms of train crew, on board staff and of course the lease costs of the 22X fleet - which were dearer than the old hand me-downs of 47's and 253;s etc. (at least XC did not use ruinously expensive class 50's !!!)

Fast forward to democratic consultation - every stakeholder wanted a call for cherished (in particular) local commuter flows Leamington and Solihull into Brum for example, Fife to Edinburgh over the Bridge (thus saving Scotrail some cost peak units) , Bolton to Manchester , Plymouth towards Truro and so on and so on

Most were designed into the "Princess Timetable" - and of course later , largely removed to great dismay of numerous communities etc. The whole business was - and is - predicated on many, many flows - unlike the high volume "simple" flows on say East Coast with London as the main destination and fairly easy to understand (yes - there are the "floating" calls for Retford and no-one denies the importance of such cities as Leeds , Newcastle , Edinburgh and so on.

So there were are - hugely diverse flows , often a plethora of short distance "peak" flows , not a huge amount of revenue and high costs. To the credit of Arriva - they managed to make it a bit more "economic" or VFM - but I suspect it is time for a really good and hard look at "what is the purpose" of "Cross Country" ....of course , everyone has a view on this.....

 

[Class 317]

To add to the profitability discussion having a very dispersed network must increase staffing, depot and other operating costs like catering etc.

Low seating capacity per car also can't help.

 

[cactustwirly]

Then I think we are in agreement. The part of the core which is fully loaded or close-to-fully loaded is much smaller than most people realise.

It's basically Oxford to Manchester and Derby/Sheffield to Bristol that is busy. Well certainly before Covid.
Was not uncommon to see services full and standing at Basingstoke either.

I think the destinations should be cut.
Perhaps terminating the Reading to Newcastle service at York. And run it through Leeds to relieve the SW services.

Terminate the SW services at Newcastle and Bournemouth services at Southampton.

Replace the whole fleet with 802s, they are cheaper to operate and shouldn't require doubling up so saving on staff costs.

So what is the problem then? Why can't XC pay its way? If the loadings are as good as you claim, why does it require more subsidy than every other intercity franchise?

XC primarily uses Voyagers which are inefficient and expensive tooperate.
They have a very poor capacity, and often have to be doubled increasing staff costs.
Not too fuel efficient either.

 

[GoneSouth]

Isn't the problem with XC that each unit is full for around 40 minutes in the morning rush and 40 minutes in the evening rush, but for the rest of the day they are half empty?

So, they provide a useful commuter service for flows like Oxford-Banbury, Bristol-Taunton, Derby-Birmingham etc, but most of the rest of the day they are carting around fresh air. The non-London city destinations just don't generate enough traffic outside of the peaks to justify either longer trains or greater frequencies - whether we like it or not.

I doubt you use XC very often if that’s what it think. I find it a bit hard to predict, some days it’s comfortable and uncrowned, some days it’s ridiculous. Saturdays are constantly rammed, Sundays can be too. I’ve been on trains leaving Birmingham after 8 pm which are standing. So no, not just a 40 minute rush.

 

[Dr Day]

So the problem isn't simply 'XC doesn't have enough capacity and there is no identified way of providing it' but more 'the incremental cost of providing extra capacity where and when it is needed is more than the incremental revenue that would be generated'.

There are plenty of threads around where and when trains are over crowded, but when and where is there spare capacity? Presumably places like Paignton which XC tried to cut back but got blocked by politics?

 

[Mogz]

The whole problem is that the Voyagers are fundamentally flawed trains and completely unsuitable for anything.
They are very inefficient in terms of operating costs and also space. The seating capacity is woefully bad, and so is the luggage storage. The passenger experience on them is very average as well.

The only way to improve XC is to scrap the Voyagers and start again with a complete fleet of bi mode 802s

^this.

No more to say!

 

[Parallel]

Partly because of the complexity of the XC network, I’d imagine it’s very difficult getting stock in the right places to strengthen. With so many flows and peaks across their network, it seems like a headache. Running an hourly service has probably put off some from travelling too due to it not being as attractive as a half hourly service which will have more travel opportunities.

In GWR territory, XC are not even running hourly towards Plymouth at the moment, which is pushing customers onto the GWR Castle Cardiff-Penzance services and making them very busy, especially on Saturdays - and those services are only four coaches and already carry considerable local (and regional) traffic.

 

[quantinghome]

There are major medium distance flows served by XC. By rights these should be generating decent passenger levels throughout the day.

Based on city size, Leeds-Sheffield-Derby-Birmingham should have about the same demand as Leeds-Manchester-Liverpool, if not more. But it has nowhere near the same number of seats. Prior to the covid-induced doubling up, Leeds-Birmingham had a mere 200 seats some hours, which is ludicrous compared to TPE. And the seats are expensive because of the flawed Voyager concept - heavy, inefficient layout, fuel guzzlers, lots of crew needed to double up etc.

Other intercity TOCs have increased the number of seats and grown their market. XC should have done the same, but its potential has never been realised because the DfT have adopted a do nothing approach.

The solution is much more seat capacity with lower running costs per seat, achieved by one of the following:

1. present the west coast 221 / midland 222 train leasing company(ies) with an ultimatum - reduce the hire charges for your rubbish trains or we'll go elsewhere and you'll have assets doing nothing.
2. go elsewhere

 

[class397tpe]

I think we are talking at cross purposes. XC is fundamentally not a very profitable network because, outside of its core, it involves carrying few passengers at (in comparison to other routes) low to medium fares, with trains that are expensive to lease and crew.

It has capacity issues in the core X because of these people making short journeys. It doesn't have those issues at the extremities.

The fares are not low to medium, they are pretty much the highest compared to other TOCs. This is true for flexible tickets, and they are recently being extremely stingy with releasing advance tickets.

E.g. for similar distances:
London to Edinburgh super off-peak single is £82.20 with LNER, or £112.60 with Avanti
London to Glasgow off-peak single is £112.60 with Avanti
London to Penzance off-peak single is £102.90 with GWR
But Sheffield - Exeter off-peak single is £156.90 with CrossCountry, and is actually the shortest distance & journey time out of any of these.

Also, having a quick look at the next weeks shows there are basically no advance fares being offered by CrossCountry. Looking at every day for the next month or so, typically a (still pretty pricey) advance fair is offered for 0 or 1 trains per day on weekdays (typically the HST departure). The other routes I mentioned have plenty of advances offered on nearly all trains for tomorrow! It's honestly ridiculous how much XC charge.

There are plenty of lightly loaded 11-car pendolinos pottering around and that doesn't really seem to bother anyone.

Also plenty of very empty 9 car LNER & GWR trains.

There are plenty of threads around where and when trains are over crowded, but when and where is there spare capacity? Presumably places like Paignton which XC tried to cut back but got blocked by politics?

From my experience of the NE-SW route, the capacity is south of Exeter, and north of Newcastle. Exeter - Bristol can be very well loaded - I've been on Paignton terminators at 11am that were nearly full between Exeter and Bristol!

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Do XC actually need to release advance ticket quotas for their trains, which already appear to be rather busy?

 

[GoneSouth]

Do XC actually need to release advance ticket quotas for their trains, which already appear to be rather busy?

No idea but I do know we’re paying through the nose because XC hasn’t been allowed to grow its service Like LNER, GWR and Virgin/Avanti. Particularly unlock if you happen to live between Bristol and Derby as you have zero options other than top dollar XC.

I have another confusing question about XC. At Leeds, departures for Leeds Bradford airport (bus link only) are advertised as being operated by XC. I’m fairly sure there isn’t a XC branded fleet of coaches running up to Yeadon and it’s probably run by a local operator. I assume XC throw some money at this in some way, Any ideas how this works? Do they really have anybody buying through tickets with XC to the airport?

 

[gc4946]

No idea but I do know we’re paying through the nose because XC hasn’t been allowed to grow its service Like LNER, GWR and Virgin/Avanti. Particularly unlock if you happen to live between Bristol and Derby as you have zero options other than top dollar XC.

I have another confusing question about XC. At Leeds, departures for Leeds Bradford airport (bus link only) are advertised as being operated by XC. I’m fairly sure there isn’t a XC branded fleet of coaches running up to Yeadon and it’s probably run by a local operator. I assume XC throw some money at this in some way, Any ideas how this works? Do they really have anybody buying through tickets with XC to the airport?

The A1 airport service is now operated by Transdev https://www.transdevbus.co.uk/flyer/services/YCD/A1.
Yorkshire Tiger (owned by Arriva, now bought by Transdev) previously operated the service so it could be a legacy thing

 

[Pinus contorta]

No idea but I do know we’re paying through the nose because XC hasn’t been allowed to grow its service Like LNER, GWR and Virgin/Avanti. Particularly unlock if you happen to live between Bristol and Derby as you have zero options other than top dollar XC.

I have another confusing question about XC. At Leeds, departures for Leeds Bradford airport (bus link only) are advertised as being operated by XC. I’m fairly sure there isn’t a XC branded fleet of coaches running up to Yeadon and it’s probably run by a local operator. I assume XC throw some money at this in some way, Any ideas how this works? Do they really have anybody buying through tickets with XC to the airport?

Probably a relic from the Virgin days. There used to be a Virgin rail-air link to Luton Airport from Milton Keynes Central. I can't remember if it offered through ticketing when I used it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Probably a relic from the Virgin days. There used to be a Virgin rail-air link to Luton Airport from Milton Keynes Central. I can't remember if it offered through ticketing when I used it.

It was sold as an add-on. The route still exists, without through fares, somewhat downgraded, as the Stagecoach 99, operated using standard Stagecoach spec double decker buses, and is mostly used not by people connecting from the WCML to Luton Airport (because why wouldn't they just fly from a more local airport?) but rather people commuting from Luton to work in warehouses near junction 13 in MK.

It is a useful (if slightly secondary) route, but not for what it was created for. Indeed, the two busiest stops exist only to break the route up so it classes as a local bus route, allowing Bus Service Operator's Grant to be claimed.

 

[gc4946]

In short, no, it isn't.

XC's loadings more than most depend on the time of day and week. Short-to medium-distance commuters at peak times between varieties of locations mixed with longer-distance leisure travellers.
There's no discrete pattern of flows unlike travel to/from London.
Something today's railways will need to cater for.

 

[route101]

Last time I used Cross Country I had 3 tickets for my journey to half the cost. An advance was like £60 one way yet when I split the journey into 3 day returns I almost halved the cost.

 

[Xavi]

If fares were comparable with other long-distance operators XC usage would grow even further at all times of the day. There are virtually no advance fares and anytime fares are a joke.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

If fares were comparable with other long-distance operators XC usage would grow even further at all times of the day. There are virtually no advance fares and anytime fares are a joke.

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