Should Class 800 be ordered for the Cross Country franchise?

[toby_farman]

There won't be a new franchise awarded next year. It will either be extended again or control taken like LNER. Franchising is up in the air at the moment.

18 October 2020, wouldn't it be best to take it under public control?

 

[toby_farman]

There is no reason to replace the Voyagers yet, and there aren't that many other places they could go where they'd be ideally suited - XC will be the logical operator to receive the surplus 221 trains from the new WCML operator when their new units arrive, so some extra capacity will come from that - if any additional capacity is deemed warranted by the DfT, the remaining solo Voyager diagrams can be doubled up and additional 80x units ordered to fill the gaps. I think that's unlikely to happen before the extra stock comes across, so you'll probably be looking at 2024 earliest before anything other than Voyagers and HSTs work on CrossCountry, if at all.

You also need to stop typing in all bold text...

OK, but surely the voyagers are becoming less efficient and in 2020 it will make economic to replace them with "hybrids"?

 

[toby_farman]

You also need to stop typing in all bold text...

Just started using this site

 

[Darandio]

Given recent developments, i'd lean more towards it going back into public hands. Let's not forget that they cannot even decide what they want the next CrossCountry franchise to be.

 

[samuelmorris]

OK, but surely the voyagers are becoming less efficient and in 2020 it will make economic to replace them with "hybrids"?

I think Bimodes is the term you're looking for, although they technically are hybrids, they do not operate in the manner that is normally referred to by hybrids, 80x units (as yet) have no ability to reuse any energy produced via diesel power.
Yes indeed, as regular DMUs with very large engines Voyagers are quite inefficient. That alone, however, does not justify their replacement - the cost of acquiring new units is considerable - the bi-mode 800s came in around £2.8 million per vehicle.

It makes sense to me that if the ECML intercity operator is nationalised, so too should be the WCML operator, especially if HS2 ever goes ahead - the franchising system seems incapable of avoiding a monopoly, but that's far less an issue if the monopoly is the government.

 

[toby_farman]

There is no reason to replace the Voyagers yet, and there aren't that many other places they could go where they'd be ideally suited - XC will be the logical operator to receive the surplus 221 trains from the new WCML operator when their new units arrive, so some extra capacity will come from that - if any additional capacity is deemed warranted by the DfT, the remaining solo Voyager diagrams can be doubled up and additional 80x units ordered to fill the gaps. I think that's unlikely to happen before the extra stock comes across, so you'll probably be looking at 2024 earliest before anything other than Voyagers and HSTs work on CrossCountry, if at all.

Surely the pure diesels 220s/221s could go to ChiternRailways to replace the old Class68s+Mark3s on the Chiltern main line with no electrification and then order Azumas/IETs for the partially electrified XC route? That would stop the voyagers + super voyagers from going to waste whilst providing more capacity on the XC route? I guess we'll have to figure out what to do with the ex-EMR 222s though...

 

[toby_farman]

Yes indeed, as regular DMUs with very large engines Voyagers are quite inefficient. That alone, however, does not justify their replacement - the cost of acquiring new units is considerable - the bi-mode 800s came in around £2.8 million per vehicle.

Ok but the Super voyagers are being replaced on the WCML with FirstTrenitalia so why can't they be replaced on the XC route?

 

[toby_farman]

Because on the WCML they make up a small part of the fleet, less than 15%. They also carry out a large part of their work on unelectrified lines. It makes absolute sense to replace them with new units, especially as new electric units are also being ordered.
In XC's case, Voyagers are almost the entire fleet - they are the norm. If you replace them all, who else would use them instead? As unpopular as Voyagers may be, it would be incredibly wasteful to get rid of them at under 20 years of age when the likes of 150s and 156s are still operating elsewhere in the country.

Perhaps the 220s/221s could go to GWR to replace the shortened HSTs (4car "castle class")?

 

[Darandio]

Ok but the Super voyagers are being replaced on the WCML with FirstTrenitalia so why can't they be replaced on the XC route?

I'm not sure whether you are reading replies or not. The WCML franchise has just been awarded to a new operator, new trains were part of the bid. CrossCountry isn't getting a new operator any time soon, therefore no new trains.

 

[samuelmorris]

Ok but the Super voyagers are being replaced on the WCML with FirstTrenitalia so why can't they be replaced on the XC route?

Because on the WCML they make up a small part of the fleet, less than 15%. They also carry out a large part of their work on unelectrified lines. It makes absolute sense to replace them with new units, especially as new electric units are also being ordered.
In XC's case, Voyagers are almost the entire fleet - they are the norm. If you replace them all, who else would use them instead? As unpopular as Voyagers may be, it would be incredibly wasteful to get rid of them at under 20 years of age when the likes of 150s and 156s are still operating elsewhere in the country.

 

[toby_farman]

I'm not sure whether you are reading replies or not. The WCML franchise has just been awarded to a new operator, new trains were part of the bid. CrossCountry isn't getting a new operator any time soon, therefore no new trains.

Would the DFT include new trains in the Invitation To Tender/New operator bid thingy for the XC franchise?

 

[Monty]

Would the DFT include new trains in the Invitation To Tender/New operator bid thingy for the XC franchise?

To replace the HSTs? Quite possibly, as for the 170s and Voyagers it is less than clear, the units have at least 15 more years left in them.

 

[toby_farman]

To replace the HSTs? Quite possibly, as for the 170s and Voyagers it is less than clear, the units have at least 15 more years left in them.

15 more years??!!! How come EMR can replace the 15 year old 222 fleet with IETs in 2022, yet XC is expected to have pretty much the same type of trains for at least 35 years?

 

[samuelmorris]

15 more years??!!! How come EMR can replace the 15 year old 222 fleet with IETs in 2022, yet XC is expected to have pretty much the same type of trains for at least 35 years?

Electrification. The 222s are nowhere near end of life either.

 

[toby_farman]

170s

The class 170s are quite popular and could go on for a number of years with even just a light refurbishment.

 

[swt_passenger]

Would the DFT include new trains in the Invitation To Tender/New operator bid thingy for the XC franchise?

Highly unlikely. They normally express their requirements in terms of such and such an amount of seating capacity at key stations in the peak periods. Whether that means new trains or additional trains is normally very much up to the bidders to decide.

EMR were required to bid bimode trains to replace their HSTs and to justify the limited electrification of their main route. You cannot read that requirement across to XC.

 

[toby_farman]

Electrification. The 222s are nowhere near end of life either.

I may be wrong, but isn't more of the XC route electrified already than what is being electrified on the Midland Main Line?

 

[Darandio]

I may be wrong, but isn't more of the XC route electrified already than what is being electrified on the Midland Main Line?

The MML is relatively short. There are hundreds of route miles unelectrified where CrossCountry serve.

 

[toby_farman]

Highly unlikely. They normally express their requirements in terms of such and such an amount of seating capacity at key stations in the peak periods. Whether that means new trains or additional trains is normally very much up to the bidders to decide.

EMR were required to bid bimode trains to replace their HSTs and to justify the limited electrification of their main route. You cannot read that requirement across to XC.

Yeah but aren't the XC trains already at the limits of their capacity and also not making use of the overhead wires which are laid on a large proportion of their route? It just doesn't make sense to me to run diesel trains on electrified track, please explain.

 

[Mag_seven]

Apologies if its already been mentioned in this thread but cross-country routes were in the original IEP spec but were dropped around 2010 I think.

 

[toby_farman]

The MML is relatively short. There are hundreds of route miles unelectrified where CrossCountry serve.

What about London paddington to Penzance? Hundreds of unelectrified route miles yet they can still run bi-mode 802s there...

 

[toby_farman]

Apologies if its already been mentioned in this thread but cross-country routes were in the original IEP spec but were dropped around 2010 I think.

yeah so was the MML but they're still getting IEP-style trains there...

 

[samuelmorris]

What about London paddington to Penzance? Hundreds of unelectrified route miles yet they can still run bi-mode 802s there...

The agenda there was HST replacement (not least because they weren't disability compliant) - no such issue with Voyagers.

 

[toby_farman]

Hull trains is replacing their 19yr old 180s with 802s....

 

[Darandio]

What about London paddington to Penzance? Hundreds of unelectrified route miles yet they can still run bi-mode 802s there...

yeah so was the MML but they're still getting IEP-style trains there...

Both have franchises, new trains were part of the franchises. CrossCountry isn't any time soon so new new trains. I'm not sure how many more times it can be pointed out.

 

[Darandio]

Hull trains is replacing their 19yr old 180s with 802s....

Which is an open access operation, it's not remotely comparable.

 

[samuelmorris]

Hull trains is replacing their 19yr old 180s with 802s....

As an open access operator they can do what they like. Voyagers also aren't cripplingly unreliable like 180s.

 

[toby_farman]

The agenda there was HST replacement (not least because they weren't disability compliant) - no such issue with Voyagers.

Ok but XC has HSTs as well... If they're going to replace them they may as well do the unpopular Voyager + Super Voyager as well as they're not "efficient"...

 

[toby_farman]

As an open access operator they can do what they like. Voyagers also aren't cripplingly unreliable like 180s.

Side note: EMR are getting 180s - if they're so unreliable why would they want them

 

[samuelmorris]

Side note: EMR are getting 180s - if they're so unreliable why would they want them

Quite - we've raised this point a few times - they are only temporary to cover until new trains but even so, this does have bad news written all over it...