How can CrossCountry realistically be improved?

[Bletchleyite]

Moderator note: Split from

XC down from 9 coach to 4, packed and 1st Class not declassified

On a late running 7:57 XC service from Banbury heading south. 25 minutes late. Down from 9 coaches to 4. Jammed in the vestibule next to the First Class coach. First Class is largely empty with a total of 6 passengers. Announcements apologising for the overcrowding. Those asking if First...

www.railforums.co.uk

XC has been an issue for, what, 20 years now? There really needs to be a plan to fix it, even if it's just the 222s for now.

 

[Kettledrum]

XC has been an issue for, what, 20 years now? There really needs to be a plan to fix it, even if it's just the 222s for now

I totally agree. No-one can be proud of this situation, and it must be awful for the train crews to work in such a pressurised situation as well as the passengers. There have been countless opportunities to do something through franchise and contract extensions, and other trains such as HSTs being withdrawn from other operators (Yes I know they would need to be adapted with plug doors etc, but it could have been done). There's just no political interest in improving the situation.

 

[O L Leigh]

I totally agree. No-one can be proud of this situation, and it must be awful for the train crews to work in such a pressurised situation as well as the passengers. There have been countless opportunities to do something through franchise and contract extensions, and other trains such as HSTs being withdrawn from other operators (Yes I know they would need to be adapted with plug doors etc, but it could have been done). There's just no political interest in improving the situation.

The issue is that the franchise really needed to have been let at the time it was due rather than being constantly rolled over while the DfT kicked the can further and further down the road. XC is running it's services to a specification set, what, something like 13 years ago.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The issue is that the franchise really needed to have been let at the time it was due rather than being constantly rolled over while the DfT kicked the can further and further down the road. XC is running it's services to a specification set, what, something like 13 years ago.

Which wasn't right then either! It hasn't been since Operation Pumpkin.

 

[nw1]

To be fair it wasn't just them. When TPE was just 185s they did the same thing, and it stank then, too.

XC has been an issue for, what, 20 years now? There really needs to be a plan to fix it, even if it's just the 222s for now.

Quite. No-one seems to care enough about the problem to deal with it.

OK, it will cost money to boost XC's fleet, but surely there is a concept of "public service" even under the right-wing government we are currently enduring?

222s would be fine, presumably they are all being released from the MML soon?

Run the Bournemouth-Manchester (or at least Southampton-Manchester, with Bournemouth on alternate hours) hourly with doubled-up units; run an hourly Reading-Birmingham shuttle with at least a 5-car (doubled up at busy times); and I suspect much of the problem would go away.

 

[RailWonderer]

Both these XC services were full and some standing at Oxford and they were 8 car services.

Realtime Trains - 1217 Southampton Central to Manchester Piccadilly

Realtime Trains is an independent source of live realtime running information for the Great British railway network.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Realtime Trains - 1427 Manchester Piccadilly to Southampton Central

Realtime Trains is an independent source of live realtime running information for the Great British railway network.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

This has been said before but the Voyagers are very inefficiently spaced trains. Only 3/4 of the coach have seats, the rest is the luggage racks, the bicycle racks that used to be the buffet area and the disabled loos with little standing room.
XC will recieve Avanti's Voyagers and potentially some 222s but then it's a matter of the limited capacity all over the country to run more services when needed.

 

[nw1]

Both these XC services were full and some standing at Oxford and they were 8 car services.

Realtime Trains - 1217 Southampton Central to Manchester Piccadilly

Realtime Trains is an independent source of live realtime running information for the Great British railway network.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Realtime Trains - 1427 Manchester Piccadilly to Southampton Central

Realtime Trains is an independent source of live realtime running information for the Great British railway network.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

This has been said before but the Voyagers are very inefficiently spaced trains. Only 3/4 of the coach have seats, the rest is the luggage racks, the bicycle racks that used to be the buffet area and the disabled loos with little standing room.

Having the service half the normal doesn't help either. Time for real improvements, not empty 'Build Back Better' BS.

 

[JonathanH]

XC has been an issue for, what, 20 years now? There really needs to be a plan to fix it, even if it's just the 222s for now.

Given what has been discussed in other threads, there should be significant environmental concerns about increasing the number of coaches on CrossCountry services, that need to be taken into account. A better option than taking on more units is using the 220 and 221 fleet on the parts of the route which need to run and removing operation under the wires as much as possible

 

[The Planner]

Both these XC services were full and some standing at Oxford and they were 8 car services.

Realtime Trains - 1217 Southampton Central to Manchester Piccadilly

Realtime Trains is an independent source of live realtime running information for the Great British railway network.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Realtime Trains - 1427 Manchester Piccadilly to Southampton Central

Realtime Trains is an independent source of live realtime running information for the Great British railway network.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

This has been said before but the Voyagers are very inefficiently spaced trains. Only 3/4 of the coach have seats, the rest is the luggage racks, the bicycle racks that used to be the buffet area and the disabled loos with little standing room.
XC will recieve Avanti's Voyagers and potentially some 222s but then it's a matter of the limited capacity all over the country to run more services when needed.

But surely on a long distance service like XC luggage space is imperative?

 

[Watershed]

But surely on a long distance service like XC luggage space is imperative?

Yes, but with the distribution of the luggage racks on Voyagers, and the tiny overhead racks, you end up with people putting suitcases next to them and with the ex-Shop area frequently completely empty.

The XC Voyagers are well overdue an interior refurb in any case. If the DfT had any sense they'd authorise XC to get rid of one of the loos and replace another with a small non-accessible one, replace the ex-Shop area with seats and install thinner seating so that you can fit in an extra row of seats in each coach whilst keeping an acceptable level of legroom.

 

[Crossover]

Run the Bournemouth-Manchester (or at least Southampton-Manchester, with Bournemouth on alternate hours) hourly with doubled-up units; run an hourly Reading-Birmingham shuttle with at least a 5-car (doubled up at busy times); and I suspect much of the problem would go away.

The challenge is also then coming up against infrastrucutre issues. For example, whilst on the "other" XC route, the likes of Burton-on-Trent may have issues with length - I have never known anything longer than a 9 car on services from Leeds to Birmingham.

If it failed on the depot, then they should send out a different unit. And if they haven't got enough units then they shouldn't be running a train service. They are the ones who decided to bid for the franchise

So rather than some form of a service, you'd just suggest throwing in the towel and running nothing? In what way is that going to help matters?

 

[RailWonderer]

Yes, but with the distribution of the luggage racks on Voyagers, and the tiny overhead racks, you end up with people putting suitcases next to them and with the ex-Shop area frequently completely empty.

The XC Voyagers are well overdue an interior refurb in any case. If the DfT had any sense they'd authorise XC to get rid of one of the loos and replace another with a small non-accessible one, replace the ex-Shop area with seats and install thinner seating so that you can fit in an extra row of seats in each coach whilst keeping an acceptable level of legroom.

Seats in the luggage rack area would make a very dark and dingy ambience, given the lack of windows there which wouldn't be popular with passengers. The Avanti ones have already been refurbed to a pleasant state so that will be a good start. Converting some FC to standard could be a solution though.

 

[TheBigD]

...XC will recieve Avanti's Voyagers and potentially some 222s but then it's a matter of the limited capacity all over the country to run more services when needed...

Will they?

Although often speculated on here and elsewhere I'm pretty sure that no proposals, decision or announcements have been made by either DfT, XC or the relevant Rosco, Beacon Rail (class 221) or Eversholt (class 222).

 

[trebor79]

Yes, but with the distribution of the luggage racks on Voyagers, and the tiny overhead racks, you end up with people putting suitcases next to them and with the ex-Shop area frequently completely empty.

The XC Voyagers are well overdue an interior refurb in any case. If the DfT had any sense they'd authorise XC to get rid of one of the loos and replace another with a small non-accessible one, replace the ex-Shop area with seats and install thinner seating so that you can fit in an extra row of seats in each coach whilst keeping an acceptable level of legroom.

Given teh other shortcomings of the units, and the fact they use so much fuel, it would be better to scarp them completely and replace with bi-modes. Maybe another 80x order, or ask Stadler for something based upon the FLIRT platform.

 

[JonathanH]

The XC Voyagers are well overdue an interior refurb in any case. If the DfT had any sense they'd authorise XC to get rid of one of the loos and replace another with a small non-accessible one.

Is that even feasible given where the exhaust pipes run?

I don't see any substantial refit coming given the parlous finances of the railway and possibly even the short remaining life of these units - it will need to be make do and mend.

 

[TheBigD]

Yes, but with the distribution of the luggage racks on Voyagers, and the tiny overhead racks, you end up with people putting suitcases next to them and with the ex-Shop area frequently completely empty.

The XC Voyagers are well overdue an interior refurb in any case. If the DfT had any sense they'd authorise XC to get rid of one of the loos and replace another with a small non-accessible one, replace the ex-Shop area with seats and install thinner seating so that you can fit in an extra row of seats in each coach whilst keeping an acceptable level of legroom.

Back in 2007 when Arriva won the XC franchise they proposed removing the 1 of the toilets in the Voyagers. They stated that for the 220s the toilet-passenger ratio would be the same as for the 3 car 170s (2 toilets for 200 seats). It was abandoned and the toilets left unchanged. Various reasons were given from technically too difficult, not cost effective etc etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The seating is already unacceptably tight so I doubt an extra row could be packed in without making it as bad as, say, a 150/2.

 

[Flying Snail]

So rather than some form of a service, you'd just suggest throwing in the towel and running nothing? In what way is that going to help matters?

Looking at the issue of one single service being cancelled it is true that short forming is better than a full cancellation. However looking at the overall service the ability to shorten trains is an easy out for operators, it means they do not have to ensure they have enough units available to still be able to run every service.

Operators that do not have the luxury of short forming are not cancelling trains at the same rate the likes of XC are short forming theirs because the consequences of cancellations is far worse for the TOC management than the almost invisible (to the statistic counters) problem of short overcrowded trains.

 

[stevetay3]

There are many ways to avoid Cross Country on most routes if you are not in a hurry, most likely will be cheaper as well. High time this awful operator is removed if it can not or will not operate the service to a reasonable level.

 

[O L Leigh]

High time this awful operator is removed if it can not or will not operate the service to a reasonable level.

Yeah, that's how we make the fleet reliable at a single stroke. [Facepalms]

 

[Freemo]

The challenge is also then coming up against infrastrucutre issues. For example, whilst on the "other" XC route, the likes of Burton-on-Trent may have issues with length - I have never known anything longer than a 9 car on services from Leeds to Birmingham.

It happens occasionally, I think the rear coach gets locked out of use. 0603 Birmingham to Edinburgh this morning was one according to RTT.

 

[stevetay3]

Yeah, that's how we make the fleet reliable at a single stroke. [Facepalms]

So they are unreliable ,they must have spare units somewhere to double up the reduced frequency , if they are unreliable that’s another reason to get rid. Cross country have been bad for years well reported on here.

 

[O L Leigh]

So they are unreliable ,they must have spare units somewhere to double up the reduced frequency , if they are unreliable that’s another reason to get rid. Cross country have been bad for years well reported on here.

You miss the point.

Trains fail. It's a fact of life which affects every operator no matter how well regarded. Just binning off Arriva is not a magic bullet.

 

[stevetay3]

You miss the point.

Trains fail. It's a fact of life which affects every operator no matter how well regarded. Just binning off Arriva is not a magic bullet.

I do not miss the point, surely an early morning peak hour service can be doubled up at short notice in the event of a failure The OPs service was peak time

 

[The Planner]

So they are unreliable ,they must have spare units somewhere to double up the reduced frequency , if they are unreliable that’s another reason to get rid. Cross country have been bad for years well reported on here.

What are you going to replace them with? 95% of the staff would be the same as would the rolling stock. The doubling up has occured by decimating the existing service and they don't run with a signifcant surplus.

 

[AlterEgo]

I do not miss the point, surely an early morning peak hour service can be doubled up at short notice in the event of a failure The OPs service was peak time

You are missing the point I’m afraid. You can’t just have lots of units sitting idle “just in case” especially where the leading complaint is the service is too expensive to run. It was your first complaint about them in this thread but you’d like to make it a more expensive service to run!

 

[stevetay3]

What are you going to replace them with? 95% of the staff would be the same as would the rolling stock. The doubling up has occured by decimating the existing service and they don't run with a signifcant surplus.

As has been said up thread if they constantly fail to produce the required level of service they should be removed and replaced with a company that can

 

[O L Leigh]

I do not miss the point, surely an early morning peak hour service can be doubled up at short notice in the event of a failure The OPs service was peak time

No, you just assume that this is the case.

Doubling-up formations is not evidence of a glut of Voyagers sloshing around Central Rivers. The same number of units have been redeployed in such a manner as to ensure equivalent capacity over each route (half the frequency, double the length). Every unit is allocated to a diagram and, therefore, the number of spares is extremely limited.

 

[stevetay3]

You are missing the point I’m afraid. You can’t just have lots of units sitting idle “just in case” especially where the leading complaint is the service is too expensive to run. It was your first complaint about them in this thread but you’d like to make it a more expensive service to run!

Cross country have not had enough units since day one, nor did Virgin

 

[O L Leigh]

As has been said up thread if they constantly fail to produce the required level of service they should be removed and replaced with a company that can

And as I said up-thread, simply binning off Arriva is not a magic bullet.