Future of Cross Country Services?

[irish_rail]

Very frustrating that all Plymouth XC services bar one go to Yorkshire and the East, when direct connections with the North west - Manchester/ Liverpool would be very useful.

 

[Ianno87]

Very frustrating that all Plymouth XC services bar one go to Yorkshire and the East, when direct connections with the North west - Manchester/ Liverpool would be very useful.

Unfortunately, the alternative is to reduce the number of trains through Birmingham New Street and/or worsen performance through extra crossing moves.

 

[Kettledrum]

XC is basically trying to do two things.


The third role, which XC doesn't really want, is carrying local travellers on journeys where alternative services are non-existent or less attractive. This fills up the trains for short distances meaning either overcrowding that puts off the business travellers, or having to run a much longer train over a long route simply because one small part is crowded. In practice the former tends to happen - otherwise there would be lots of cheap tickets available.

I'm not sure why XC don't really want this. The season ticket and other commuter income must be really significant for commuters into Birmingham, Bristol, Sheffield, Leeds etc - and XC are getting this passenger income for running the trains they were running anyway, with no additional cost.

 

[Xavi]

I'm not sure why XC don't really want this. The season ticket and other commuter income must be really significant for commuters into Birmingham, Bristol, Sheffield, Leeds etc - and XC are getting this passenger income for running the trains they were running anyway, with no additional cost.

The problem is that the short trip and season ticket revenue is often shared with other TOCs. The lack of capacity, partially due to the volume of short-distance trips, means longer distance advances (where XC would keep all the revenue) cannot be sold because it would result in severe overcrowding. The resulting data then makes the accountants believe XC is a loser with low demand for longer distance trips (exacerbated by a huge proportion of longer trips being bought through splitting), so we're stuck with the awful 4/5-car trains. Privatisation at its very worst.

 

[Class 170101]

Very frustrating that all Plymouth XC services bar one go to Yorkshire and the East, when direct connections with the North west - Manchester/ Liverpool would be very useful.

Unfortunately, the alternative is to reduce the number of trains through Birmingham New Street and/or worsen performance through extra crossing moves.

Or get more trains and extend the existing Bristol terminators to Plymouth?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

For the XC trains that go from Bournemouth and Southampton, do they empty out much at Reading?

 

[swt_passenger]

For the XC trains that go from Bournemouth and Southampton, do they empty out much at Reading?

Yes, it is usual to be in a reasonable queue to get off northbound XC trains at Reading. A fair number of passengers then carry on to Paddington with GWR.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Yes, it is usual to be in a reasonable queue to get off northbound XC trains at Reading. A fair number of passengers then carry on to Paddington with GWR.

When Basingstoke-Reading eventually gets electrified it sounds like the demand would exist for either Bournemouth-Paddington or Southampton-Paddington via Reading

 

[edwin_m]

Yes, it is usual to be in a reasonable queue to get off northbound XC trains at Reading. A fair number of passengers then carry on to Paddington with GWR.

Why? Going to Paddington via Reading surely isn't much quicker than going to Waterloo and getting the Underground, especially as few will have an ultimate destination at Paddington station. If it's a fares anomaly then there are better ways of fixing it than running a through service.

Are these more likely to be Heathrow passengers choosing HEX rather than the Reading coach link?

 

[swt_passenger]

When Basingstoke-Reading eventually gets electrified it sounds like the demand would exist for either Bournemouth-Paddington or Southampton-Paddington via Reading

As mentioned in the Western Route study, both in the context of through trains and western access to Heathrow, and discussed in a number of previous threads, so hardly a new idea.

 

[najaB]

Not a criticism of anyone in particular, but it's interesting how a thread started to discuss the future of XC's operations in Scotland has lead to discussion of the best route from Reading to central London/Heathrow.

 

[swt_passenger]

Why? Going to Paddington via Reading surely isn't much quicker than going to Waterloo and getting the Underground, especially as few will have an ultimate destination at Paddington station.

I use it if heading to the wider Paddington area including say Kensington from Winchester. If the connections work off the XC at around xx33 it is comparable if not faster than the Waterloo route. I don't use it for a fares advantage, just use the normal any permitted validity.

If you do a plain vanilla NRES enquiry for Winchester to London (all stations) you get Paddington as well as Waterloo by default, and you can see the comparative timings.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not a criticism of anyone in particular, but it's interesting how a thread started to discuss the future of XC's operations in Scotland has lead to discussion of the best route from Reading to central London/Heathrow.

It happens, there's parallel stuff about XC in Scotland going on in the West Midlands and Chiltern thread at the moment.

I just feel a need to answer irrelevant questions (often from the same person)...

I expect the context is that some posters think that if they can come up with a way of transfer demand away from XC south of Reading, they can use the trains somewhere else, such as on a proposed route to Scotland via the WCML...

 

[Andyh82]

It's very simple to fix XC in the next franchise.

Additional trains, either HSTs or new, to ensure all Voyager services are at least 8 cars.

Timetable remains exactly the same today, except with some journeys able to be extended to the next major destination, if paths are freely available, and the lack of rolling stock was the only reason why the service terminated where it did.

No need for the higher than average fares that try to price people off XC services as there should now be loads of room.

I wonder how many HSTs would be required to operate all services with doubled up voyagers and a few extra to enable some extended services.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

It's been mentioned the possibility of spare end cars being left over to intermediate coaches were redistributed among the Voyagers. Could some of the pairs be used for limited extensions of services? eg The Manchester-Bournemouth would arrive at Bournemouth, the 2 car unit would detach from the train and go onto either Poole only or Poole, Wareham, Dorchester South and Weymouth?

 

[najaB]

Could some of the pairs be used for limited extensions of services?

No. They cannot run in service without intermediate coaches. Hence why 221144 isn't out and about very often.

 

[nw1]

I have used the Paddington route from Southampton a number of times, but largely when engineering work has disrupted the main Waterloo route necessitating the slow diversion via Staines (slow more due to unfavourable pathing than the Staines route being that much slower than the direct Surbiton route). I think there was one occasion when I went via Paddington because I was going somewhere easier to get to that way (near Regents Park IIRC).

As for XC... main comment I would make is Reading to Birmingham is often very overcrowded, and turning back some trains at Newcastle would help the provision of stock - I really think all of the Bournemouth-Manchester trains should be at least 8-car between Reading and Birmingham. If TPE cover the Leeds-Edinburgh market then I'd agree there might be relatively little point in XC continuing north of Newcastle bar a few services a day - how about XC take over the Birmingham - WCML - Glasgow/Edinburgh route instead, with these trains originating alternate hours from Bristol (or Plymouth) and Reading (or Southampton/Bournemouth)? It would mean the London-Birmingham-Scotland Virgin services would have to be truncated at Wolverhampton once more... but I'd have thought the provision of through WCML Scotland services from Bristol and Reading would be more useful than having another "slow" London service anyway.
So from Reading the existing Manchester service could be retained (but with longer trains) while alternate Newcastle services go WCML to Glasgow or Edinburgh instead.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How much do XC trains empty out and fill up when they're at Birmingham new Street?

 

[squizzler]

Is there joined up lobbying by the cities which are served by this franchise? With any new cross country little over two years away, now is the time for the widely spread towns and cities served by Cross country to create a united front to campaign for the capacity and performance they deserve.

This alliance could develop their own memorable branding along the lines of Northern Powerhouse. Following the energy metaphor, and mindful of the wide distribution of the towns and cities in the alliance, maybe a name reminiscent of the "National Grid" would be appropriate?

 

[TheDavibob]

Is there joined up lobbying by the cities which are served by this franchise?

i.e. most of the cities? Cross-country serves 11 of the 13 biggest metropolitan areas in Great Britain. Joined up lobbying strikes me as an awful lot of effort.

 

[squizzler]

i.e. most of the cities? Cross-country serves 11 of the 13 biggest metropolitan areas in Great Britain. Joined up lobbying strikes me as an awful lot of effort.

Of course joined up lobbying is a lot of effort - it's all about collaboration in search of greater rewards than you acheive alone. Granted with the metropolitan areas already doing quite nicely thank you, a lobbying group for a better XC franchise will be led by the next tier of cities. Not quite a pitchfork rebellion, granted, but I am envisioning a consensus of cities whose principle operator is XC.

It is nonetheless in their interest for big provincial economies to demolish the paradigm where journeys typically involve transfer between mainline termini at London - since if you have to go through London anyway it becomes harder to resist doing business there by default. XC is the best opportunity that provincial economies have to short circuit London and do business direct with each other.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Of course joined up lobbying is a lot of effort - it's all about collaboration in search of greater rewards than you acheive alone. Granted with the metropolitan areas already doing quite nicely thank you, a lobbying group for a better XC franchise will be led by the next tier of cities. Not quite a pitchfork rebellion, granted, but I am envisioning a consensus of cities whose principle operator is XC.

Are you new around here?

 

[A Challenge]

I think that XC price one or two WCML tickets, XC should only be allowed to price WCML routes if they run on the WCML. Is there space at Piccadilly to run through 13/14, probably stop Manchester Oxford Road and/or Deansgate) and then run via Bolton or Chat Moss to Preston (non-stop) and to Glasgow/Edinburgh that way, as an extension to Cardiff to Manchester?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think that XC price one or two WCML tickets, XC should only be allowed to price WCML routes if they run on the WCML. Is there space at Piccadilly to run through 13/14, probably stop Manchester Oxford Road and/or Deansgate) and then run via Bolton or Chat Moss to Preston (non-stop) and to Glasgow/Edinburgh that way, as an extension to Cardiff to Manchester?

Even if there was, XC don't have enough rolling stock for any extensions. They'd need some more, whatever that might be, before such a thing could be considered.

 

[edwin_m]

Even if there was, XC don't have enough rolling stock for any extensions. They'd need some more, whatever that might be, before such a thing could be considered.

Unless extra paths could be found, that would effectively replace the Transpennine service but lose the link between Manchester Airport and Scotland, which I believe generates a good amount of patronage. Also DMUs would be running under the wires for the entire distance, and few people would use for the through journey because changing at Birmingham would be quicker.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I think that XC price one or two WCML tickets, XC should only be allowed to price WCML routes if they run on the WCML.

XC (or any operator) should only be allowed to price tickets where they run a significant part of the route most likely to be taken by the passenger. There are too many XC-controlled fares where only a small minority of the journey, or sometimes none at all, involves an XC service.

 

[Tetchytyke]

There are procedures in place if another TOC believes that they should be pricing a particular flow.

The reason why Manchester-Scotland was transferred out of the XC franchise- first to VTWC and then on to TPE- was because it was too unreliable in its previous guise and splitting the service in Manchester made more operational sense. I don't see that a great deal has changed. Wilmslow and Stockport to Scotland is not exactly a lucrative market.

 

[Senex]

The reason why Manchester-Scotland was transferred out of the XC franchise- first to VTWC and then on to TPE- was because it was too unreliable in its previous guise and splitting the service in Manchester made more operational sense. I don't see that a great deal has changed. Wilmslow and Stockport to Scotland is not exactly a lucrative market.

Which makes very good sense. The problem was that as always it was done on the cheap, using rolling stock not suitable for a 225-mile journey to offer pretty horrible standard of discomfort and overcrowding, exactly as DfT specified for the much shorter trans-Pennine runs.

 

[antharro]

For a time I and my partner were regular travellers between Bournemouth and Wolverhampton. She experienced sitting under the luggage rack on a crush loaded 4 carriage Voyager coming south, where a majority of people left at Reading. I've experienced similar conditions going north, to the point where I upgraded to first to get out of the crush. I raised it with XC who said "best we can do with the trains we have available to us".

It's my opinion that once GWR start retiring their HSTs, those that don't go to Scotland should go to XC so proper length trains can be run on their services, and also to allow Voyagers to be doubled up. This would then mean that the ones going to Scotland shouldn't have short swing links as these would be required for XC. The Voyagers could be split at Reading as 8 cars isn't really needed going south of Reading most of the time.

That would make moves at Reading a little trickier to plan as they wouldn't be able to use the bay platform due to length, but I'd imagine that could be worked out.

 

[221129]

For a time I and my partner were regular travellers between Bournemouth and Wolverhampton. She experienced sitting under the luggage rack on a crush loaded 4 carriage Voyager coming south, where a majority of people left at Reading. I've experienced similar conditions going north, to the point where I upgraded to first to get out of the crush. I raised it with XC who said "best we can do with the trains we have available to us".

It's my opinion that once GWR start retiring their HSTs, those that don't go to Scotland should go to XC so proper length trains can be run on their services, and also to allow Voyagers to be doubled up. This would then mean that the ones going to Scotland shouldn't have short swing links as these would be required for XC. The Voyagers could be split at Reading as 8 cars isn't really needed going south of Reading most of the time.

That would make moves at Reading a little trickier to plan as they wouldn't be able to use the bay platform due to length, but I'd imagine that could be worked out.

It won't happen.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Which makes very good sense. The problem was that as always it was done on the cheap, using rolling stock not suitable for a 225-mile journey to offer pretty horrible standard of discomfort and overcrowding, exactly as DfT specified for the much shorter trans-Pennine runs.

The overcrowding on Manchester-Scotland services is much worse than it needs to be thanks to TPE's insistence on selling large numbers of cheap Advance tickets to keep revenue out of VT's hands. The frequency with which the overwhelming majority of seats are reserved, even at peak hours, is a bit of a giveaway in this respect. As long as seating capacity continues to fall short of demand I do think that TOCs should be restricted in the number of Advances they can sell on particular services in order to leave room for passengers paying the (sometimes much) higher walk-up fares, otherwise there is no walk-up railway. At the very least reservations for Advances should be charged for.

Perhaps one longer-term benefit of the Northern Powerhouse, even if it does not in fact result in big ticket items like HS3/NPR, is decision makers in Westminster/Whitehall realising that it's not just rail services to/from London that need decent increases in capacity. Cross Country is of course a prime example!