Department for Transport launches CrossCountry franchise consultation

[Bletchleyite]

FWIW, there is another solution to this "churn" problem - doors at thirds.

 

[TheDavibob]

FWIW, there is another solution to this "churn" problem - doors at thirds.

Not purely, though (though it is a good start). There's a similar "churn" problem on their turbostar routes: if I'm going long-distance (eg. Cambridge - Leicester) on a train I know won't be quite full and is three-car, I will aim for the middle coach *even if* I have a reservation on A or C, mainly because the other passengers with reservations (typically reasonably infrequent travellers at the times I'd do such trips) will still take an age to fight their way onto the reserved carriages, whereas I'll just be able to jump onto coach B and plop myself down in seconds. Of course, nothing like comparable to end doors, but still not perfect.

 

[godfreycomplex]

If they dump Guildford then there goes the cheaper purchase tickets to Oxford and possibly other stations.

Also I can't see Great Western Railway adding in another service from Guilldford to Reading. It departs Guildford at 6.04. Maybe in the evening they would but currently it's non stop, do they want a non stop service to Guilldford? The non stop works because it's a long distance service.

I'll admit I don't use the service so often because it's often cheaper to go via London, which includes having to help clog up the tube with luggage.

The current North Downs trains are all that luggage friendly either or at least not the one I'm currently on. Still it has more seats.

The primary reason Guildford trains are there is to maintain route knowledge for the diversionary route via Haslemere. This needs to be retained whatever happens, therefore so do the Guildford (and Bath Spa; Manchester-Cardiff and a few others ) services.

 

[xotGD]

I agree with the idea of trains starting/terminating at Leeds, especially once TPE provide a direct Leeds - Edinburgh service. There would then be enough room for the Leeds - Wakey - Sheff commuters as well as the long distance passengers. Services from Scotland/Newcastle (one per hour) run via Donny and split at New St - once portion to the south west, the other to Reading/Southampton.

 

[nw1]

More than anything else... make busy routes longer!

The Bournemouth to Manchester seems to be perpetually busy on the Reading-Birmingham section unless you're travelling before 7am or after 9pm. Therefore these need to be at least 8, perhaps 10 coaches at least north of Reading; basically as long as the platforms can take. 4 or 5 coaches seem adequate south of Reading or on the trains that start at Reading, except in the peaks.

Might be nice if the northern destinations could be swapped about a bit more (permitting occasional through journeys to Crewe from the Reading direction, for instance, maybe even to Scotland via WCML though we've had this discussion before) but longer trains and more stock on busy sections is the absolutely essential improvement needed.

 

[jayah]

Had a quick browse before the document disappeared, questions included:

Do you think Birmingham to Nottingham and Leicester should move to the West Midlands franchise?

Should XC stop serving smaller stops, enforce pick up/set down only or opt out of local travelcard products to alleviate crowding around large cities?

Should the once or twice per day destinations be pruned from the network? Examples being Guildford, Bath Spa, Aberdeen, Cardiff via Bristol, Bournemouth, Cornwall too. Expected that local operators will fill in the gaps

Given desire by other operators to run more services on the East Coast beyond Newcastle, should XC stop running one of the services as far? DfT envisage 2 hourly extensions to Glasgow to remain.

They shouldn't serve small stations, but should continue to serve places like Aberdeen and Cornwall if/when there is long distance demand. DfT seem obsessed about asking if this or that route would work better in this or that franchise. If the service and stock are the same, some of us struggle to see the point.

 

[swt_passenger]

The primary reason Guildford trains are there is to maintain route knowledge for the diversionary route via Haslemere. This needs to be retained whatever happens, therefore so do the Guildford (and Bath Spa; Manchester-Cardiff and a few others ) services.

Not absolutely essential, as XC maintain route knowledge via Andover without running any passenger services that way.

 

[bussnapperwm]

Would it not be easier to have the cross country "Vomiter" franchise, along with a separate cross country "Central Citylink" 170 operated franchise.

The 170 operated franchise could then take over stuff like the east Midlands Derby to Stoke and Nottingham to Norwich runs and Hereford/Shrewsbury to Birmingham (in Shrewsburys case, split the ATW service there with the current semi fast service combining with Leicester and running 1 Cardiff - Norwich (extended from Nottingham replacing EMT), 1 Hereford - Leicester and 1 Gloucester - Stoke via Derby each hour

 

[xotGD]

Would it not be easier to have the cross country "Vomiter" franchise, along with a separate cross country "Central Citylink" 170 operated franchise.

The 170 operated franchise could then take over stuff like the east Midlands Derby to Stoke and Nottingham to Norwich runs and Hereford/Shrewsbury to Birmingham (in Shrewsburys case, split the ATW service there with the current semi fast service combining with Leicester and running 1 Cardiff - Norwich (extended from Nottingham replacing EMT), 1 Hereford - Leicester and 1 Gloucester - Stoke via Derby each hour

A Midlands equivalent of TPE. Sounds like a good idea. Even better if they operate loco-hauled services.

 

[IanXC]

What to do in and north of Yorkshire is a real conundrum in my opinion.

Remember that whilst the 2 services towards York leave Birmingham at around a half hour clockface, by the time the Scottish service has been into Leeds the via Doncaster has caught it up and they end up only 10 minutes apart at York.

As far as the Leeds to Scotland departures go, from Leeds this will presumably end up being xx52 for the TPE and xx08 for the XC which again is not really ideal and doesn't add much to connectivity. In terms of capacity there probably is a case for more than 4/5 coaches per hour - does that need more services tho?

Leeds has the problem of a distinct lack of platform capacity to contend with - could space really be found for another terminating service with a long layover? (Not withstanding plans for a further platform to be build). I'm not even sure there is space for another dwell for a reversal - lets say if you wanted to send the current Leeds - Scotland to somewhere like Bradford.

On the other hand Doncaster probably can live without a Birmingham link - the key conurbations in the area are all linked to Sheffield - and now with an express clockface 30 minutes Doncaster to Sheffield and vv.

If you're looking for a new destination to divert one of these XC services to, I'd suggest if you wanted to avoid going north of York you're looking at Bradford or possibly Hull (which of course could be via Doncaster or via Leeds).

Its too late for me to comprehend at this time of night, but might it be possible to line up the current 2 XCs to be around 20 minutes apart between Birmingham and Sheffield - and add a Sheffield terminator to make 3tph on that stretch?

 

[morgainelive]

Personally i feel this whole franchise has been a mess! overcrowded cramped the current turbostar routes are riduculously cramped uncomfy and always end up beiing 2 cars cant believe Stansted to Bham is staying with xc . this route badly needs 4 car higher capacity trains and platform upgrades to accomodate them the service is always full and standing at Cambridge and Leicester esp when 2 cars turn up the seats are awful too

 

[Kettledrum]

The consultation has an interesting question about "churn" when boarding/alighting from stations.

IME most of this is caused by passengers hunting for their reserved seats, particularly infrequent leisure passengers of the sort who've always made up much of the XC customer profile. This crowds the aisles and causes queues in the vestibules and out onto the platforms.

I found this question annoying. As a frequent XC traveller on both short and long distances, the problem with churn is mainly caused by services being chronically over crowded. If there were more coaches and people wouldn't have to climb over other people crammed in the aisles and vestibules, together with their luggage, the "churn" wouldn't be an issue.

I felt many of the questions were an irritating distraction.

I use Tamworth station a lot. Why are we asking about cutting services when so many are chronically over crowded? If some of the longer distance services don't stop there, what on earth is going to happen to all the displaced passengers?????? The shorter distance commuter trains are crammed too, with fewer services and fewer coaches.

I use Bournemouth station a lot. Why are we asking about shortening the journeys so they don't serve Bournemouth when it's really well used???

As a regular passenger it's blindingly obvious that the trains need significant numbers of extra coaches......and better on board cleaners. This is getting the basics right.

Any other changes would be a distraction and would suck management time and energy (and possibly money) away from the chronic over-crowing issue.

I do not subscribe to the view that the way to avoid over-crowding is to reduce services to a really low level, and charge incredible high fares that passengers stop using the services. No trains at all = No overcrowding. I'm sure that isn't the view at the DfT but the consultation doesn't give me the confidence that the DfT understand that XC simply needs coaches, coaches and more coaches.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Although I do agree with the comments about people using Crosscountry services for short distance journeys. I travel from Aberdeen to Penzance every day and it really annoys me when you see people using these services between places like York and Bristol. THESE SERVICES SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR SUCH SHORT JOURNEYS!

Uhhhhh? Are you a human being, or are you one of the trains?

 

[JohnRegular]

Users of this forum seem to use the Aberdeen-Penzance service as an example of a silly service that's just there for the claim of running such a long distance train, rather than serving an actual practical purpose.
I'm on it right now, and it is well used! It opens up a lot of journeys that otherwise couldn't be made without a change, and people will choose that over changing every time. Sure a lot of people are just going to Edinburgh, but far from everyone- I'm going to Bristol, I have friends who use the service to go to Leeds, etc. There are valid reasons to consider dropping the service, but it's certainly not carting around fresh air, and the once-a-day direct journies are useful, and I don't think it would be a mistake for them to remain in the next franchise.

 

[700007]

Uhhhhh? Are you a human being, or are you one of the trains?

Where's the like button?

 

[JonathanH]

When the refurbished HSTs arrive, and the IEPs, I can't imagine anyone choosing to use a voyager.

If a train runs at the time people want to travel, they will catch it. The idea that people don't use Voyagers when some other form of rolling stock is available is laughable.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The primary reason Guildford trains are there is to maintain route knowledge for the diversionary route via Haslemere. This needs to be retained whatever happens, therefore so do the Guildford (and Bath Spa; Manchester-Cardiff and a few others ) services.

Couldn't things like this be covered by route refresh days? To use Bristol depot as an example, they must already have them between Bristol and Swindon (Didcot?), which would cover Bath, and between Gloucester and Newport via Chepstow, which you could also probably fiddle to cover the line via the Severn Tunnel too. Given that XC themselves proposed culling most of these once-a-day services, they must have some solution to keeping up knowledge of them despite the passenger services being withdrawn.

 

[corsaVXR]

Not purely, though (though it is a good start). There's a similar "churn" problem on their turbostar routes: if I'm going long-distance (eg. Cambridge - Leicester) on a train I know won't be quite full and is three-car, I will aim for the middle coach *even if* I have a reservation on A or C, mainly because the other passengers with reservations (typically reasonably infrequent travellers at the times I'd do such trips) will still take an age to fight their way onto the reserved carriages, whereas I'll just be able to jump onto coach B and plop myself down in seconds. Of course, nothing like comparable to end doors, but still not perfect.

alternative idea attached - would be expensive as effectively 4 different body shells, but would cater for both long and short distance travellers

 

[route:oxford]

If a train runs at the time people want to travel, they will catch it. The idea that people don't use Voyagers when some other form of rolling stock is available is laughable.

You can just imagine...

Me standing in Oxford and travelling to BHX.

"Oh look, a Voyager, I'll just wait an hour until the next one and see if it's a different unit, hopefully security isn't too busy".

 

[The Planner]

Its too late for me to comprehend at this time of night, but might it be possible to line up the current 2 XCs to be around 20 minutes apart between Birmingham and Sheffield - and add a Sheffield terminator to make 3tph on that stretch?

Yuck, that sounds like a horrible rewrite to make work.

I use Tamworth station a lot. Why are we asking about cutting services when so many are chronically over crowded? If some of the longer distance services don't stop there, what on earth is going to happen to all the displaced passengers?????? The shorter distance commuter trains are crammed too, with fewer services and fewer coaches.

That would be dealt with via the Midlands Connect strategy as you would have more locals between Birmingham/Leicester/Tamworth. Though none of that would happen before the re-franchise, more like the next one!

 

[DenmarkRail]

Here is an idea - Note I have not taken pathings, or timings into account, so sorry if it doesn't make practical sense.
1 train per hour between Plymouth and Edinburgh / Glasgow (alternating hourly), with the Glasgow services continuing onto Penzance.
1 train per hour between Bournemouth and Manchester Piccadilly. Alternating 2 times a day via Crewe, to allow a split, for one half to continue to Aberdeen.
1 train 2 per hours between Exeter St Davids to Liverpool Lime Street. (2tp3h, as it would heavily overlap with the via Crewe portion of Bournemouth train, and VTWC / LNWR)
1 train per hour between Southampton central and Newcastle.
1 train per hour between Cardiff central and Nottingham.

Whats moving / changing?
Penzance to Aberdeen has been replaced with the Bournemouth to Aberdeen 2 times daily. To retain a direct XC Scotland link, a train from Penzance to Glasgow will run every 2 hours.
Bournemouth to Manchester / Aberdeen will give a direct Scotland link to stations such as Reading, Southampton, Winchester, and Stafford. This will only run 2 times a day via Crewe, to save time.
Penzance to Manchester has moved to GWR, operating 2 times a day, now in BOTH directions.
Services from Manchester Piccadilly to Bristol have been replaced by Exeter to Liverpool, to give a better Intercity service to Liverpool.
Southampton to Newcastle remains unchanged
Cardiff to Nottingham remains unchanged
Birmingham New Street to Nottingham moves to WMT
Birmingham to Stansted airport moves to LNWR
Birmingham to Leicester moves to WMT

Again, I get this couldn't happen due to pathing constraints, but this is sort of an ideal for me.

 

[JamesRowden]

Couldn't things like this be covered by route refresh days? To use Bristol depot as an example, they must already have them between Bristol and Swindon (Didcot?), which would cover Bath, and between Gloucester and Newport via Chepstow, which you could also probably fiddle to cover the line via the Severn Tunnel too. Given that XC themselves proposed culling most of these once-a-day services, they must have some solution to keeping up knowledge of them despite the passenger services being withdrawn.

Bath is part of the Bristol-Westbury-Taunton diversion.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If a train runs at the time people want to travel, they will catch it. The idea that people don't use Voyagers when some other form of rolling stock is available is laughable.

You can just imagine...

Me standing in Oxford and travelling to BHX.

"Oh look, a Voyager, I'll just wait an hour until the next one and see if it's a different unit, hopefully security isn't too busy".

I think it's a bit more subtle than that. Rolling stock can play a role. Personally, I will avoid travelling on a Voyager if by leaving at a slightly different time, I can travel on a Pendolino without any significant inconvenience. Similarly, I'll avoid travelling on a Meridian if there's a convenient HST alternative - in both cases because of comfort. Travelling within London, If I'm not in a hurry, I have sometimes deliberately taken a route that I know will take 10-15 minutes longer in order to get a more comfortable train (for example, a SouthEastern networker instead of a DLR train. In fact, I did that only yesterday).

So it's certainly NOT laughable that at least some people will seek to avoid certain rolling stock. On the other hand, it is only going to be a few people. It's not going to be large numbers of people avoiding Voyagers. (It could be larger numbers for other rolling stock, such as pacers - but that's not really relevant to Cross-Country).

 

[The Planner]

Here is an idea - Note I have not taken pathings, or timings into account, so sorry if it doesn't make practical sense.
1 train per hour between Plymouth and Edinburgh / Glasgow (alternating hourly), with the Glasgow services continuing onto Penzance.
1 train per hour between Bournemouth and Manchester Piccadilly. Alternating 2 times a day via Crewe, to allow a split, for one half to continue to Aberdeen.
1 train 2 per hours between Exeter St Davids to Liverpool Lime Street. (2tp3h, as it would heavily overlap with the via Crewe portion of Bournemouth train, and VTWC / LNWR)
1 train per hour between Southampton central and Newcastle.
1 train per hour between Cardiff central and Nottingham.

Whats moving / changing?
Penzance to Aberdeen has been replaced with the Bournemouth to Aberdeen 2 times daily. To retain a direct XC Scotland link, a train from Penzance to Glasgow will run every 2 hours.
Bournemouth to Manchester / Aberdeen will give a direct Scotland link to stations such as Reading, Southampton, Winchester, and Stafford. This will only run 2 times a day via Crewe, to save time.
Penzance to Manchester has moved to GWR, operating 2 times a day, now in BOTH directions.
Services from Manchester Piccadilly to Bristol have been replaced by Exeter to Liverpool, to give a better Intercity service to Liverpool.
Southampton to Newcastle remains unchanged
Cardiff to Nottingham remains unchanged
Birmingham New Street to Nottingham moves to WMT
Birmingham to Stansted airport moves to LNWR
Birmingham to Leicester moves to WMT

Again, I get this couldn't happen due to pathing constraints, but this is sort of an ideal for me.

Giving GWR a service to Manchester is bonkers. So I also take it Birmingham to Manchester has lost a service? that is never going to wash either. Liverpool to the West Country can be dealt with one change as it stands at New St or Stafford.

 

[SeanM1997]

Some alterations I would like to see from the new franchise, is a regular pattern of hourly services - and no peak time extensions to the like of Penzance, Paignton, Aberdeen, Bath, Guildford etc. but instead they are absorbed to more local services. Stations such as Doncaster would lose their services. Also new links to Liverpool, Hull and Heathrow Airport (once Western Link is built) could be brought in. Kenilworth and Worcestershire Parkway would also get new services. This would lead to the following services:
1ph Manchester Piccadilly - Exeter St David's via Stoke
1ph Manchester Piccadilly - Bournemouth via Stoke and Coventry
1ph Manchester Piccadilly - Stansted Airport via Crewe and Leicester, avoiding Wolverhampton
1ph Liverpool Lime Street - Cardiff Central via Crewe and Bristol Parkway
1ph Edinburgh - Plymouth via Leeds
1ph Hull - Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 via Leeds and Coventry
1ph Nottingham - Cardiff via Gloucester
1ph Nottingham - Birmingham New Street
1ph Birmingham New Street - Leicester

 

[DenmarkRail]

Giving GWR a service to Manchester is bonkers. So I also take it Birmingham to Manchester has lost a service? that is never going to wash either. Liverpool to the West Country can be dealt with one change as it stands at New St or Stafford.

Don't really see it as bonkers. It would allow XC to deploy stock used to other crammed routes. GWR has the capacity to run this service... I don't really see why Penzance to Manchester runs in the first place.

And how has Birmingham to Manchester lost a service? I don't see where I've killed it?

 

[The Planner]

And how has Birmingham to Manchester lost a service? I don't see where I've killed it?

Services from Manchester Piccadilly to Bristol have been replaced by Exeter to Liverpool, to give a better Intercity service to Liverpool.

So the current Manchester Bristols still run?

 

[The Planner]

Kenilworth and Worcestershire Parkway would also get new services.

Kenilworth is highly unlikely to get anything, and it can only be served by 4 car trains anyway unless someone forks out to sort the platform out. Same goes for Worcestershire Parkway, will be surprised if any of the long distance stuff ever stops.

1ph Manchester Piccadilly - Exeter St David's via Stoke
1ph Manchester Piccadilly - Bournemouth via Stoke and Coventry
1ph Manchester Piccadilly - Stansted Airport via Crewe and Leicester, avoiding Wolverhampton
1ph Liverpool Lime Street - Cardiff Central via Crewe and Bristol Parkway
1ph Edinburgh - Plymouth via Leeds
1ph Hull - Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 via Leeds and Coventry
1ph Nottingham - Cardiff via Gloucester
1ph Nottingham - Birmingham New Street
1ph Birmingham New Street - Leicester

So it looks like from that list, Bournemouth, Southampton and York lose a train per hour? What happens to the Newcastle Reading/Southamptons? replaced by the Hull Heathrow? Why avoid Wolves with the Stansted?

 

[DenmarkRail]

So the current Manchester Bristols still run?

Would go via Birmingham.

 

[SeanM1997]

Kenilworth is highly unlikely to get anything, and it can only be served by 4 car trains anyway unless someone forks out to sort the platform out. Same goes for Worcestershire Parkway, will be surprised if any of the long distance stuff ever stops.



So it looks like from that list, Bournemouth, Southampton and York lose a train per hour? What happens to the Newcastle Reading/Southamptons? replaced by the Hull Heathrow? Why avoid Wolves with the Stansted?

Bournemouth only gets hourly and Southampton 3p2h anyway, so only Southampton would loose 1p2h service. Document already suggests not enough space around Northallerton, and Hull is a major service without a connection. There are already many TransPennine from York and Newcastle to connect onto the service at Leeds, which would provide a half hourly service to Birmingham.

Theres also limited paths between Wolverhampton and Birmingham, but more capacity on the diversionary path which goes via Bescot, which would allow for an additional service to the North West to still fit in the current service patterns.