Direct cross country trains from Sheffield to Oxford

[class 9]

We were meant to be getting some back but that was before the DfT started to demand 10%+ cost savings on operators next year. With talk of the HST's being withdrawn in May, or at least a significant reduction in their usage, despite going through C6 as we speak and the previous plan to increase to 4 diagrams per day, it wouldn't surprise me if May service enhancements are postponed.

They could stop the Director merry-go-round, that'd save 10%!!!

 

[30907]

If they truly cross at Banbury, that’s an incredibly tight turnaround!

It's 10minutes which is exceptionally tight for a long distance train.

Going to Oxford would add an hour to the round trip, Reading 2, Basingstoke 3 - all supposing the turnround can be platformed, which would be challenging.

 

[Falcon1200]

It's 10minutes which is exceptionally tight for a long distance train.

It certainly is, but today the Newcastle arrived at Banbury 11 late, yet the return working departed only 3 late, after a 3 minute turnround.

 

[30907]

It certainly is, but today the Newcastle arrived at Banbury 11 late, yet the return working departed only 3 late, after a 3 minute turnround.

Yes, I noticed that too.

 

[Kilopylae]

Well then, if terminating at Oxford is going to be so complex and difficult than the answer is to terminate somewhere not Oxford but a more useful station such as Basingstoke.

Terminating at Reading or Barnaby just because it is convenient is a classic example of the railway running for own convenience and not the convenience of passengers who use it

What would be wrong with Reading?

 

[181]

What would be wrong with Reading?

When XC terminate at Reading (as half the remaining trains on this route do), anyone going south (or west) of Basingstoke has to change twice, whereas continuing to Basingstoke would enable a single change onto the SWR network. I thnk I understand the operational reasons for terminating at Reading, but it doesn't help with the usefulness of the service.

 

[baza585]

What would be wrong with Reading?

Not ideal for passengers from Yorkshire and the North East to beyond Basingstoke but much better than Banbury which is a nonsense.

 

[Killingworth]

Rumour has it that they are returning from the May 2023 timetable change.

I've heard it stronger than a rumour, but a lot can happen over 5 or 6 months.

 

[BluePenguin]

Unsure why it is that you consider Basingstoke to be an ideal destination for XC, more so than Reading. But I'll leave that to one side.

I keep seeing this phrase used and I don't understand why, in specific circumstances such as this one, it's such a terrible thing

What would be wrong with Reading?

When XC terminate at Reading (as half the remaining trains on this route do), anyone going south (or west) of Basingstoke has to change twice, whereas continuing to Basingstoke would enable a single change onto the SWR network. I thnk I understand the operational reasons for terminating at Reading, but it doesn't help with the usefulness of the service.

Reading is not an ideal place to terminate due to the lack of direct connections from there. GWR services are available for those heading west which are already covered by XC. Oxford and Banbury only have Chiltern connections

Nobody uses CrossCountry for travelling to London so this can be ignored. People predominantly use XC for north to south journeys.

As 181 correctly explains, passengers must first travel from Reading to Basingstoke on the GWR stopper, which is neither as quick or convenient as a direct train. Only then is it possible to travel to Portsmouth, Fareham, Winchester, Southampton, Bournemouth, Weymouth.

I fully appreciate and understand why operationally it may not be possible to terminate at Basingstoke, although in an ideal world it would be best. People vote with their feet and usually opt for the fewest changes. Each change brings more possibilities for something to go wrong - missing a connection, leaving something on the train, longer journeys etc. Passengers like XC as it enables them to mitigate these factors

To address my point about the railway doing what is most convenient for them and them only: We have seen time and time again examples of good journey opportunities gone over night. Once the service is removed it rarely ever returns. It is a case of won’t rather than can’t.


I used to have the same argument about services via Maidstone terminating at Canterbury West instead of Ramsgate. The extension of these services to Ramsgate enabled more connections from places like Deal to Canterbury

Other examples include the Tonbridge - Victoria services relegated to a Redhill shuttle, Teeside Airport becoming Parliamentary only and the loss of the HS1 loop.

 

[peterson]

But Reading just has the raw passenger numbers to warrant the frequent connection to Birmingham. Its Entries/Exists are always right up the top of the passenger tables. And that's before you add in local connections within the conurbation (within top 20 in Eng) eg Wokingham. So I'm not sure the connectivity argument from Basingstoke wins out over pure population, therefore I think Reading is the best terminating point for XC from the Midlands if they can't be extended to So'ton (or Guildford!)

 

[Man_with_beard]

Why can't some of the Edinburgh to Bristol/Plymouths run a full service from Birmingham N St to Bournemouth once or twice a day so Reading & Southampton don't miss out on the North East? And at the same time have the Manchester doing some Bristol TM or Plymouth/Penzance services. Would the timetable allow this? I know arrivals at New Street from Manchester are xx:58'ish so can easily form into a xx:12 Plymouth service.

 

[The Planner]

Why can't some of the Edinburgh to Bristol/Plymouths run a full service from Birmingham N St to Bournemouth once or twice a day so Reading & Southampton don't miss out on the North East? And at the same time have the Manchester doing some Bristol TM or Plymouth/Penzance services. Would the timetable allow this? I know arrivals at New Street from Manchester are xx:58'ish so can easily form into a xx:12 Plymouth service.

More of the Manchester Bristols come back in May 23, as do the Reading Newcastles unless costs get in the way.

 

[JonathanH]

I know arrivals at New Street from Manchester are xx:58'ish so can easily form into a xx:12 Plymouth service.

That doesn't mean a platform is available from xx:58 to xx:12 at Birmingham New Street, and the NE to SE paths don't match up at all. It is much more straightforward to run NE to SW and NW to SE which have broadly always been the primary routes, going back to BR days.

 

[Peterthegreat]

Pre-Covid the service was:
Hourly - Manchester - Bournemouth
Two hourly Newcastle - Reading
alternating with
Two hourly Newcastle - Southampton.

Currently we have
Two hourly Manchester - Bournemouth
alternating with
Two hourly Manchester Reading
Two trains per day Newcastle - Banbury.

 

[fgwrich]

But Reading just has the raw passenger numbers to warrant the frequent connection to Birmingham. Its Entries/Exists are always right up the top of the passenger tables. And that's before you add in local connections within the conurbation (within top 20 in Eng) eg Wokingham. So I'm not sure the connectivity argument from Basingstoke wins out over pure population, therefore I think Reading is the best terminating point for XC from the Midlands if they can't be extended to So'ton (or Guildford!)

Adding to this, I believe Reading has an XC train crew depot there. Basingstoke or anywhere else would require the train crew to travel to said station. Though presumably, XC staff are willing to travel as I believe there used to be the odd Eastleigh starter / terminator.

But yes, I too would like to see the bi-hourly XC re-instated down this way. Along with a few more XC Calls at Winchester (Less sure about Brokenhurst I'll admit).

 

[O L Leigh]

Reading is not an ideal place to terminate due to the lack of direct connections from there. GWR services are available for those heading west which are already covered by XC. Oxford and Banbury only have Chiltern connections

Nobody uses CrossCountry for travelling to London so this can be ignored. People predominantly use XC for north to south journeys.

Reading is a destination in itself, being a regional centre of employment, university town and so on. I also think that you undersell just how many connections there are from Reading. Not everyone is going to change for London, Oxford/Banbury or Swindon/Bristol and points west. Reading is a hub for a very large number of feeder services that bring in and take out large numbers of passengers to connect with long distance services there in preference to going into London.

On your second point, I'm not so sure that "nobody uses CrossCountry for travelling to London", especially from Oxford. A quick glance at the NR journey planner shows that it takes only 4 minutes longer from Oxford to Paddington via XC with a change than going direct, effectively giving Oxford an extra fast London service each hour. There's an awful lot that get on at Oxford at all times of day, and I can't believe that none of them are ultimately going on to London. Obviously I do understand that folk prefer fast, direct journeys over slow circuitous ones, but the XC option allows passengers to skip the Slough stop that the direct services make, which is something that some passengers may prefer to do.

Now of course, any putative Basingstoke service would still serve Reading and still serve that need, but I do think you're being a bit hasty in writing it off as a destination.

To address my point about the railway doing what is most convenient for them and them only: We have seen time and time again examples of good journey opportunities gone over night. Once the service is removed it rarely ever returns. It is a case of won’t rather than can’t.

I disagree. Compared to the original iteration of the covid response, this is an additional service that had not previously existed. That it's primary purpose is to maintain staff competencies is really neither here nor there. Also, given the talk about restoring the pre-covid service from May, I'm unsure why you are worried about the former service not returning. That this specific service is primarily for operational purposes is, as I've explained, a way of ensuring that the pre-covid service can be reintroduced seamlessly, thereby ensuring that the service does not disappear due to staff competencies having been lost.

But on the wider point, any service has to be capable of being resourced. Extending the service from Reading to Basingstoke would require additional units and crew. It would take it out of range of Manchester depot, make it difficult to diagram for Birmingham depot and would shift a lot of additional work onto Bournemouth depot. These aren't excuses, but they are challenges that would need to be considered and addressed. Any extension to the service has to be looked at carefully and decisions made about how it can be delivered. It may seem like commonsense to you to extend a service to give what you consider to be better connectivity and merely "operational convenience" when they are not, but you cannot simply start joining dots and then complain when the railway operators disagree for, I suspect, very good, sound reasons.

Besides, XC are still serving the South Coast and giving connectivity with the SWR network with the Bournemouth and Southampton services.

 

[Benjwri]

There's an awful lot that get on at Oxford at all times of day, and I can't believe that none of them are ultimately going on to London.

It's quite an important link, and is regarded as a 'hack' by people who commute regularly in the area, in that you can get a XC train to Reading and then swap to a GWR service from the West, thereby getting a quite train and saving what would almost definitely be an all standing service to London.

 

[route101]

The connection from Reading to Southampton if there is no direct XC service can involve 3 services. Not all fast Weymouth's stop at Basingstoke either.

Why can't some of the Edinburgh to Bristol/Plymouths run a full service from Birmingham N St to Bournemouth once or twice a day so Reading & Southampton don't miss out on the North East? And at the same time have the Manchester doing some Bristol TM or Plymouth/Penzance services. Would the timetable allow this? I know arrivals at New Street from Manchester are xx:58'ish so can easily form into a xx:12 Plymouth service.

There used to be an Edinburgh to Reading service before Covid.

 

[30907]

The connection from Reading to Southampton if there is no direct XC service can involve 3 services. Not all fast Weymouth's stop at Basingstoke either.

There is an hourly connection with 1 change (into the semi-fast, as has been the case since 1967!)

There used to be an Edinburgh to Reading service before Covid.

Worked in marginal time at the Edinburgh end, so it could come back if the Newcastle service did.

 

[weeklycommuter]

Adding to this, I believe Reading has an XC train crew depot there. Basingstoke or anywhere else would require the train crew to travel to said station. Though presumably, XC staff are willing to travel as I believe there used to be the odd Eastleigh starter / terminator.

But yes, I too would like to see the bi-hourly XC re-instated down this way. Along with a few more XC Calls at Winchester (Less sure about Brokenhurst I'll admit).

XC should restore the full hourly 2019 Manchester-Bournemouth service with all the same stops including all trains calling at Brockenhurst and not terminate every other train at Reading. All their current trains call at Winchester again (XC have developed this bad habit since 2019 of cutting out useful stations which were in their 2019 timetable). However the problem with the original 2019 XC timetable of four North South trains each way each hour including Newcastle-Reading (not currently running) and Manchester-Bristol (some currently running) is that the single set Voyagers, especially the four car sets, did not have enough seats. I therefore consider that in the absence of more rolling stock it would be better just to run Newcastle-Plymouth and Manchester-Bournemouth services on the full routes every hour with double set Voyagers than try to restore the 2019 timetable with trains that do not have enough seats. In 2020 the Newcastle-Reading and Manchester-Bristol services were dropped so the Newcastle-Plymouth and Manchester-Bournemouth services could be run with double set Voyagers to avoid overcrowding. To restore the four 2019 North South timetable services each way each hour as usable services XC need more rolling stock as single set Voyagers were just hopeless for these services. XC should stop running trains Edinburgh to Aberdeen and Glasgow, those paths should be given to other operators as XC does not have enough rolling stock. I note the limited XC services to Aberdeen stopped calling at the stations in Fife served by other train operators running on the same route. Surely it would be better for another operator to take them over and run them properly including serving the stations in Fife. I do not know if an hourly Newcastle-Reading service can be restored on the full route as I do not know what will happen to the six hourly York-Newcastle train paths, these were allocated 2 XC, 2 TPE, 2 LNER but LNER have said they want a third path each hour. The Newcastle-Reading and Newcastle-Plymouth XC hourly services ran at almost the same times each hour, only a few minutes apart, between York and Newcastle so I am not sure how useful it was to have both running between York and Newcastle.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

XC should restore the full hourly 2019 Manchester-Bournemouth service with all the same stops including all trains calling at Brockenhurst and not terminate every other train at Reading. All their current trains call at Winchester again (XC have developed this bad habit since 2019 of cutting out useful stations which were in their 2019 timetable). However the problem with the original 2019 XC timetable of four North South trains each way each hour including Newcastle-Reading (not currently running) and Manchester-Bristol (some currently running) is that the single set Voyagers, especially the four car sets, did not have enough seats. I therefore consider that in the absence of more rolling stock it would be better just to run Newcastle-Plymouth and Manchester-Bournemouth services on the full routes every hour with double set Voyagers than try to restore the 2019 timetable with trains that do not have enough seats. In 2020 the Newcastle-Reading and Manchester-Bristol services were dropped so the Newcastle-Plymouth and Manchester-Bournemouth services could be run with double set Voyagers to avoid overcrowding. To restore the four 2019 North South timetable services each way each hour as usable services XC need more rolling stock as single set Voyagers were just hopeless for these services. XC should stop running trains Edinburgh to Aberdeen and Glasgow, those paths should be given to other operators as XC does not have enough rolling stock. I note the limited XC services to Aberdeen stopped calling at the stations in Fife served by other train operators running on the same route. Surely it would be better for another operator to take them over and run them properly including serving the stations in Fife. I do not know if an hourly Newcastle-Reading service can be restored on the full route as I do not know what will happen to the six hourly York-Newcastle train paths, these were allocated 2 XC, 2 TPE, 2 LNER but LNER have said they want a third path each hour. The Newcastle-Reading and Newcastle-Plymouth XC hourly services ran at almost the same times each hour, only a few minutes apart, between York and Newcastle so I am not sure how useful it was to have both running between York and Newcastle.

On paper, running single sets at double the frequency seems to make sense... however as the Sprinterisation of TransPennine showed, increased frequency leads to greater usage and before you know it overcrowding becomes a problem again. The problem then becomes that you don't have the stock to run double sets at the higher frequency so you either have to suck up the overcrowding or revert to the lower frequency of double sets.

 

[fishwomp]

On paper, running single sets at double the frequency seems to make sense... however as the Sprinterisation of TransPennine showed, increased frequency leads to greater usage and before you know it overcrowding becomes a problem again. The problem then becomes that you don't have the stock to run double sets at the higher frequency so you either have to suck up the overcrowding or revert to the lower frequency of double sets.

Running half the services, for almost the same cost (lease of stock, track access, less one driver and train manager), the railway can achieve fewer passengers. That's not a win...

The impact of reduction in frequency is far worse on passenger numbers than it would be for the transpennine experience. Transpennine always linked the three biggest populations: Manchester, Huddersfield, Leeds. Reducing frequency from 4 to 2 extends journeys by at most 15 minutes. Cross-country today doesn't do that: it links NE-SW and NW-SE. When it had twice-hourly, it linked NE-SE+SW, and NW-SE+SW.. Now Sheffield to eg. Oxford involves a 1-hour stay in Birmingham, compared to 0 minutes previously.

There was a massive trumpeting of the journey time improvement from Birmingham to Sheffield in 2019 - minutes shaved off in many places.. this was all for nothing: almost half the passengers now have a whole hour back on the journey..

 

[BluePenguin]

There’s been quite a lot of activity on this thread over the last few days. Does anyone have more information on when Southampton to Newcastle is likely to be restored?

 

[Peter A]

There’s been quite a lot of activity on this the read over the last few days. Does anyone have more information on when Southampton to Newcastle is likely to be restored?

At one point it was rumoured that it will return with the ECML timetable recast - with TPE running two-hourly Newcastle to Manchester Piccadilly (the other hour running to Scarborough) as was introduced in December and XC running an hourly service to York, extending to Newcastle every two hours when the extra TPE journey isn't running.

With things the way they are at the minute I don't think anyone is really sure. In an ideal world they'd probably take extra Voyagers off Avanti or Meridians off EMR when they're released and then return in coordination with the ECML recast. I think the reality is nobody's sure if there's going to be the staff or money to run these services atm.

 

[weeklycommuter]

Running half the services, for almost the same cost (lease of stock, track access, less one driver and train manager), the railway can achieve fewer passengers. That's not a win...

The impact of reduction in frequency is far worse on passenger numbers than it would be for the transpennine experience. Transpennine always linked the three biggest populations: Manchester, Huddersfield, Leeds. Reducing frequency from 4 to 2 extends journeys by at most 15 minutes. Cross-country today doesn't do that: it links NE-SW and NW-SE. When it had twice-hourly, it linked NE-SE+SW, and NW-SE+SW.. Now Sheffield to eg. Oxford involves a 1-hour stay in Birmingham, compared to 0 minutes previously.

There was a massive trumpeting of the journey time improvement from Birmingham to Sheffield in 2019 - minutes shaved off in many places.. this was all for nothing: almost half the passengers now have a whole hour back on the journey..

To restore the all the hourly each way Edinburgh-Plymouth Manchester-Bournemouth Manchester-Bristol and Newcastle-Reading (five a day to Southampton) services in the 2019 Cross Country timetable the Government would have to approve more rolling stock for Cross Country Trains either new or off lease from previous operators such as Avanti Voyagers and EMR Meridians. The single set four car and five car Voyagers did not have enough seats and the trains suffered from overcrowding. Anyone wanting to restore the currently missing services which were in the 2019 Cross Country timetable should be writing to their MP and to the Department for Transport calling for Cross Country Trains to have more rolling stock.

 

[The Planner]

To restore the all the hourly each way Edinburgh-Plymouth Manchester-Bournemouth Manchester-Bristol and Newcastle-Reading (five a day to Southampton) services in the 2019 Cross Country timetable the Government would have to approve more rolling stock for Cross Country Trains either new or off lease from previous operators such as Avanti Voyagers and EMR Meridians. The single set four car and five car Voyagers did not have enough seats and the trains suffered from overcrowding. Anyone wanting to restore the currently missing services which were in the 2019 Cross Country timetable should be writing to their MP and to the Department for Transport calling for Cross Country Trains to have more rolling stock.

Clearly they don't need more to run them as they were. Which would always be the case.

 

[fishwomp]

Clearly they don't need more to run them as they were. Which would always be the case.

Indeed. The trains were full because they were needed and used.

The way to reduce the overcrowding - other than extra stock - is not to reduce frequency and usage, but is to get more usage out of the current stock, probably by curtailing at the extremes of the route. Turning at York, allowing the TPE and LNER to provide the onward travel to Newcastle for example, or never running them as far as Edinburgh.

At the southern end (SWML) there are plenty services south of Basingstoke that could make a connection, or at least end at Southampton instead of Bournemouth.

How full were services at that those extremities? After all, those extremities are all electrified too.. voyagers are not a great use of that!

 

[Killingworth]

Indeed. The trains were full because they were needed and used.

The way to reduce the overcrowding - other than extra stock - is not to reduce frequency and usage, but is to get more usage out of the current stock, probably by curtailing at the extremes of the route. Turning at York, allowing the TPE and LNER to provide the onward travel to Newcastle for example, or never running them as far as Edinburgh.

At the southern end (SWML) there are plenty services south of Basingstoke that could make a connection, or at least end at Southampton instead of Bournemouth.

How full were services at that those extremities? After all, those extremities are all electrified too.. voyagers are not a great use of that!

Observing how crowded they can be north of Newcastle that may not be seen too favourably either there or in Scotland.

 

[fishwomp]

Observing how crowded they can be north of Newcastle that may not be seen too favourably either there or in Scotland.

I experienced that Edinburgh to Newcastle too - but maybe that's something TPE 's Hitachis could fix..

 

[Killingworth]

I experienced that Edinburgh to Newcastle too - but maybe that's something TPE 's Hitachis could fix..

Since Covid the best normal journey from Sheffield to Newcastle takes about 20 minutes longer at most times of the day. Consequently I'm biased in favour of XC running via Doncaster as that is a journey I often used to make - but haven't since Covid.

It's the perennial problem. We all want one train that starts at our local station, frequently, and goes to our destination as fast as possible with minimal intermediate stops and without having to change.

TPE could be a solution north of Newcastle, pity they couldn't continue south to Sheffield.