CrossCountry - Express or Local Service?

[agbrs_Jack]

It's frustrating when you're on a 4 coach voyager our of Piccadilly and passengers heading to Reading are having to stand due to Macclesfield commuters taking all the seats.

Discuss (nicely please).

It's frustrating when you're on a 4 coach voyager out of Birmingham New Street and passengers heading to Stoke and beyond are having to stand due to Wolverhampton commuters (even with 7-8 other trains every hour) taking all the seats.

 

[DanTrain]

To return to the original theme: on the 'core' of their Scotland-South route (that is, Newcastle - Birmingham - Bristol or Reading), XC's services are quite express anyway, and already have somewhat of a distinction between fasts and slows.

The Newcastle-Reading services are essentially the fasts: 1 morning service calls at Chesterfield, 1 evening service at Chester-le-Street, both in commuting hours, but other than that the least used station on this route is Leamington Spa at 2.5 million a year!

Even on the 'stoppers' (Scotland - South West services) they only really have 2 stops per train that you might consider removing: Chesterfield (1.8 million) and each service stops at either Burton or Tamworth.

On the periphery these services do start to rack up the stops and in particular a local Newcastle-Edinburgh service would be great to avoid the Northumberland stations, but other than that I can't see the scope for really reducing calls without passing very busy stations.

Some interesting points there. As for removing stops, I'm not sure any of those mentioned are that nescessary to remove.

Chesterfield has large usage, and serves somewhat as a major railhead for the surrounding area (including much of South Sheffield) and Tamworth is a useful interchange onto the WCML from the XC route (and in my opinion is under-used as such).

Burton could arguably be dropped, having the lowest usage on the 'core' (0.8 million), but even so it's a decent sized town in need of a decent service.

As for the station north of Newcastle, dropping many of them doesn't make much sense to me, as anyone heading from Edinburgh to Birmingham or south would likely use the WCML as it's quicker, so it's really only Edinburgh (and north) to Leeds, Sheffield and Derby that these stops inconvenience (as VTECs run non-stop once an hour I believe). With the new First East Coast calling at Dunbar and Morpeth, added to TPE serving that line soon, then I think there is a stong case to making it go non-stop.

 

[hooverboy]

to be honest I think TOC's should be in the business of running trains,not stations.

 

[cle]

Rather than detracting from what is there, work should be done (noting post Norton, for instance) to add an additional service per hour. I do agree that the XC services have a regional feel to them and stop a lot - but it is a small, dense country! And a lot of 'smaller' places are important interchanges or railheads.

If we're looking at Birmingham, I'd suggest adding on something like:
(Intl -) New St - Wolverhampton - Runcorn/LS Parkway (alt) - Liverpool
New St - Derby - Sheffield - Leeds
Reading - Oxford - New St - Stoke - Manchester

The extremities of the network have to be more semi-fast, as the settlements are smaller but there are connections everywhere. I can see Didcot eventually, for instance - whereas Banbury and Leamington again are debatable as mandatory.

 

[JamesT]

From a purely selfish POV, I'd like all the XC trains that pass through Oxford to stop at Birmingham International. Might make less chance of having to stand until Leamington Spa with my case if the load is spread.
I wonder if they might consider it anyway when HS2 comes, as the International - Interchange transfer might be more popular than New Street - Curzon Street

 

[cuccir]

Some interesting points there. As for removing stops, I'm not sure any of those mentioned are that nescessary to remove.

Chesterfield has large usage, and serves somewhat as a major railhead for the surrounding area (including much of South Sheffield) and Tamworth is a useful interchange onto the WCML from the XC route (and in my opinion is under-used as such).

Burton could arguably be dropped, having the lowest usage on the 'core' (0.8 million), but even so it's a decent sized town in need of a decent service.

Yes, I agree with this. Burton would be the only potential candidate for dropping on this route as reasonable connections can be made onto the longer distance trains via the Nottingham-Birmingham/Cardiff services (again, by the way, evidence that there is a distinction on a lot of the XC network between express and stopper services), but given only 1 in every 4 of the Scotland-South services stops there anyway it's not like there would be huge savings made; it's probably just about worth the level it currently has.

Out of interest, is Burton the only station entirely served by CrossCountry?!?

 

[swt_passenger]

From a purely selfish POV, I'd like all the XC trains that pass through Oxford to stop at Birmingham International. Might make less chance of having to stand until Leamington Spa with my case if the load is spread.
I wonder if they might consider it anyway when HS2 comes, as the International - Interchange transfer might be more popular than New Street - Curzon Street

Running both XC services via Coventry and International has been considered almost continuously, since well before HS2 became a firm plan. It has been in relevant route studies and their predecessors for years, the intent being that it would be done as soon as paths were possible.

 

[Domh245]

Out of interest, is Burton the only station entirely served by CrossCountry?!?

Nope, Burton, Hinckley, Narborough, South Wigston, and Willington are all only served by XC (but operated by East Midlands).

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Out of interest, is Burton the only station entirely served by CrossCountry?!?

Apart from the others mentioned above, Wilnecote is also entirely serviced by XC and yet the station is operated by WMT!

 

[crosscity]

Nope, Burton, Hinckley, Narborough, South Wigston, and Willington are all only served by XC (but operated by East Midlands).

..... Water Orton and Coleshill Parkway too (but operated by WM Trains).

 

[cactustwirly]

Melton Mombray, Oakham & Stamford only get a very limited service from EMT, with 99% of services provided by XC.

 

[sprinterguy]

With all the talk of XC timetable reform, has there ever been any serious discussion (by those in the industry and government, not on forums like this which count for nothing) about eliminating some stops on CrossCountry services to make them more genuine expresses, and then extending the local service to pick up the calls that have been dropped?

My first such recommendation would be to eliminate Stockport and Macclesfield calls from XC and VTWC services and putting on a new 2tph semi-fast Northern service from Piccadilly to Stoke to pick up the slack. It's frustrating when you're on a 4 coach voyager our of Piccadilly and passengers heading to Reading are having to stand due to Macclesfield commuters taking all the seats.

Discuss (nicely please).

Actual developments appear to be at odds with your suggestion, given that Macclesfield will be receiving twice the number of calls from Crosscountry services starting from next month. Even I can't understand the reasoning behind that; IMO the current arrangement of half the London services (via that route) and half the Crosscountry services calling, giving an hourly frequency of each plus an hourly local service is pretty much ideal.

One of the main benefits of long distance services calling at Macclesfield is to provide direct services to points south towards London, Birmingham and beyond, but it must also be recognised that, at present, the long distance services represent a significant proportion of the capacity between Manchester and Macclesfield (This will reduce to an extent from May with the introduction of Northern's second hourly local service): The only real shortcoming is that the Crosscountry trains are too short for the services they provide, a situation mirrored the country over and certainly not unique to the Manchester - Macclesfield flow (See also similar criticisms levelled at Milton Keynes commuters taking up seats out of Euston, and Reading commuters out of Paddington, even on lengthy inter-city trains).

I also see no reason why a significant market town that is something of a focal point for the surrounding area, with a population comparable to Banbury or Durham to take two random examples, should lose it's twenty-odd minute fast direct link to the nearest major city and centre of economic activity.

As for Stockport, it's a major interchange hub for a large surrounding area and it's a boon that it is served so comprehensively by everything that passes through.

 

[MarkyT]

Apart from the others mentioned above, Wilnecote is also entirely serviced by XC and yet the station is operated by WMT!

XC doesn't manage ANY stations AFAIK. It really would not make sense to set up an organisation to do that for just a handful of smaller locations around the Midlands.

 

[Starmill]

Even I can't understand the reasoning behind that; IMO the current arrangement of half the London services (via that route) and half the Crosscountry services calling, giving an hourly frequency of each plus an hourly local service is pretty much ideal.

There was supposed to be an increase in Northern services between Manchester and Macclesfield to 2tph which has now been cancelled. I would guess that XC wanted to reduce any incursion onto the revenue they earn from the very popular Macclesfield to Manchester flow by also increasing their own calls. As Northern are now not increasing their service, XC will provide around half of the journey opportunities to Macclesfield, increasing their share further.

 

[sprinterguy]

There was supposed to be an increase in Northern services between Manchester and Macclesfield to 2tph which has now been cancelled.

Hmm, I hadn't realised that had been shelved, very interesting and rather disappointing. When did that come to light/get brushed under the carpet?

 

[Jonny]

Rather than detracting from what is there, work should be done (noting post Norton, for instance) to add an additional service per hour. I do agree that the XC services have a regional feel to them and stop a lot - but it is a small, dense country! And a lot of 'smaller' places are important interchanges or railheads.

If we're looking at Birmingham, I'd suggest adding on something like:
(Intl -) New St - Wolverhampton - Runcorn/LS Parkway (alt) - Liverpool
New St - Derby - Sheffield - Leeds
Reading - Oxford - New St - Stoke - Manchester

The extremities of the network have to be more semi-fast, as the settlements are smaller but there are connections everywhere. I can see Didcot eventually, for instance - whereas Banbury and Leamington again are debatable as mandatory.

I would suggest a similar role for Chester-le-Street; there is a lot of population within 2km - compared to Durham - and un-explored railheading potential for Washington and Houghton/Hetton areas, especially given that road access (maybe apart from drop-offs) to Durham(DHM) and Newcastle (NCL) could be politely described as complicated (and expletives would be valid for either DHM or NCL on a weekday), and similar issues would arise at Sunderland.

 

[Starmill]

Hmm, I hadn't realised that had been shelved, very interesting and rather disappointing. When did that come to light/get brushed under the carpet?

The long sorry tale is documented here.

 

[sprinterguy]

The long sorry tale is documented here.

Ah, thanks for that. I've been casually keeping an eye on that thread, but hadn't checked in on it for a few days.