The Social Railway - Don't InterCity operators have such responsibilities too? XC bosses in particular, I'm thinking of you.

[Wilts Wanderer]

Stockport has all three Euston trains calling there but with a Piccadilly to Stockport ratio of between 5 & 6:1.

Does not justify ALL calling there and Beardie agreed with this years ago.

Beardie did not understand (nor was he interested in) a coherent national rail network. His business model was quite the opposite - segregate his train services as much as possible, and price them like airlines, maximising the end-to-end loadings at the expense of all else.

Great if you’re a Manchester businessman going to London, not great if you’re in Leicester needing to reach Milton Keynes via Nuneaton!

 

[Adrian1980uk]

BR used to do that all the time.
There are finite limits on what TOCs can do to add capacity withing their cost limits set by the DfT.
More Voyagers are now on the way to XC.

Yes BR used to do it but without going into the BR or privatized argument, I don't think too many people would wax lyrical over BR.
The fundamental problem is rolling stock leasing companies aren't really leasing companies taking on risk, they are just finance offering TOCs loans. The DFT don't seem to understand this either, why they need to sign off on new trains defeats me, they're not buying them just paying increased leasing charges.

 

[david1212]

XC management in particular seem to be particularly adept at slimming down their services to cherry pick only the most important, premier cities, look at their profit and loss account, take their annual bonuses and put their feet up.

I feel your anger might be better directed at Horseferry Road in London than XC in Birmingham.

Correct and as discussed many times before it goes back to 2007 when D(a)fT awarded Arriva the XC franchise with the only capacity expansion removing the shop in each Voyager set and fitting a few seats not adding adding at least an extra carriage to every set or equivalent e.g. leave the 20 221 5-car sets as is then from the 38 4-car sets create 18 5-car and 20 6-car sets.

More Voyagers are now on the way to XC.

Was going to be 7 to replace the HST capacity, it’s since been increased to 12, but it’s been discussed at length in quite a few threads now. It’s not going to be quick though, I’d be surprised if they all arrive by late 2025.

A 5-car Voyager is better than nowt but not a full replacement of the capacity of a 2+7 HST particularly luggage. Expanding the fleet by 5 more is far short of what is required.


In addition to the Social Railway there is the environmental aspect. Even with XC running an all diesel fleet many miles under the wires travel by train still must be environmentally better than by car.

The number of stations served and the journey time can never please all. Where a detour like Gloucester not serving is probably the best compromise but where passing e.g. Basingstoke, Chesterfield, Worcestershire Parkway not serving overall to me is wrong particularly where the primary reason is lack of capacity rather than journey time impact. Provided there is a reasonable alternative both capacity and frequency short distance commuting can be controlled by ticket pricing ( i.e. the lower price ticket, particularly weekly and longer, being restricted not XC ) together with on train inspection.

 

[43096]

The fundamental problem is rolling stock leasing companies aren't really leasing companies taking on risk, they are just finance offering TOCs loans.

Try teling that to the owners of the Class 379 fleet. Or the 175s. Or the Renatus 321s. Or.....

The DFT don't seem to understand this either, why they need to sign off on new trains defeats me, they're not buying them just paying increased leasing charges.

So you don't understand that the DfT (or Treasury if you prefer) is the one paying for the railway now that franchises are dead? They need to sign off on anything that will increase the subsidy required.

 

[Falcon1200]

Stockport Bolton Wilmslow Macclesfield Lea Green Dewsbury Huddersfield Newton le Willows Milton Keynes Wolverhampton Coventry Reading...

With the exception of Lea Green, Newton le Willows and possibly Dewsbury, none of those places is a nondescript location which does not warrant express trains stopping but are sizeable towns and in some cases key interchanges; Including Reading in the list in particular is ridiculous.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

A 5-car Voyager is better than nowt but not a full replacement of the capacity of a 2+7 HST particularly luggage. Expanding the fleet by 5 more is far short of what is required.
.

It looks like 12x221s will reach XC in the next year or so (when Avanti has its 805s in service and can release the Voyagers).
The XC operation has never had the revenue to fund significant extra stock, and there's precious little 125mph diesel stock available.
The promised expansion is as good as it gets really.

XC is not a "Social Railway" any more or less than any other TOC, it just runs trains to DfT spec.
It has a revenue/cost target, the Treasury takes the revenue and the DfT (ie the taxpayer) stumps up the costs.
We'll have to see what Labour does with it next year - not much will change, I suspect.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Yes BR used to do it but without going into the BR or privatized argument, I don't think too many people would wax lyrical over BR.
The fundamental problem is rolling stock leasing companies aren't really leasing companies taking on risk, they are just finance offering TOCs loans. The DFT don't seem to understand this either, why they need to sign off on new trains defeats me, they're not buying them just paying increased leasing charges.

The DfT have always had to sign off any new or increased rolling stock liability on the public purse. It’s got nothing to do with the classification of the expenditure.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

The DfT have always had to sign off any new or increased rolling stock liability on the public purse. It’s got nothing to do with the classification of the expenditure.

That's kinda the point I was making, the liability should be on the leasing companies, if you lease a car it remains the property of the leasing company and the only liability is the the contractual monthly payment.

 

[cactustwirly]

All intercity operators currently stop at top many nondescript places with passenger numbers that do not warrant most if not all express trains stopping, and have plenty of alternatives more suited to the often 10-20 minute journey most of their passengers make.

Stockport Bolton Wilmslow Macclesfield Lea Green Dewsbury Huddersfield Newton le Willows Milton Keynes Wolverhampton Coventry Reading...
and many, many more.

The primary income is city to city hence intercity. The government £Xbn plan for a 30 minute journey Liverpool Manchester is already achievable on TP if Lea Green & Newton le Willows are ditched and a semi fast calls there instead.

Everyone wants all trains to call at their local lamppost however govt should draw a line and speed up our fastest tier of trains.

Reading definitely deserves Intercity trains stopping there, it's completely different to Bolton, Macclesfield or Newton Le Willows

 

[Bletchleyite]

Reading definitely deserves Intercity trains stopping there, it's completely different to Bolton, Macclesfield or Newton Le Willows

With regard to Newton le Willows I think the OP is failing to understand that the vast majority of TPE might be inter-city but is not InterCity, but rather a regional express type service with fancy pointy nosed rolling stock that could just as easily have been left as part of Northern. The only part of TPE that could realistically become true InterCity would perhaps be two Liverpool to Newcastle services each hour and the hourly Mancunian Scots.

 

[Class 170101]

As someone from Nottingham I am a bit confused about this- I would never change at Chesterfield for a train and would always go to Sheffield or Derby (most likely Derby). The only reason you change trains in that area is:
1) for TPE to Cleethorpes (or Liverpool, but EMR go there direct) (only at Sheffield)
2) For XC to the North (could be possible at Chesterfield, but since this is likely going to be before a bigger trip, making use of the facilities and proximity to the city at Sheffield, everyone would go to Sheffield) (Trains to Derby are better than that of Sheffield from Nottingham, so most people would change at Derby for XC)
3) for Northern local services (only from Sheffield)

So basically there is no reason why we would ever get off at Chesterfield, and speeding up journeys would benefit Nottingham, not reduce them.

No, Chesterfield should be easier than Sheffield as its same platform interchange (usually). However there is a risk as a smaller station your connecting train may have started at Sheffield rather than say at Derby / New Street etc.

The social railway still has it's place,

Yes

but intercity services are not really under that banner.

I disagree, would you consider the 19:30 Euston to Glasgow (north of Preston), the 21:15 Manchester to Euston, 19:35 Edinburgh to Kings Cross as profitable? I doubt they are but they provide connections for people leaving places late to get home.

BR used to do that all the time.
There are finite limits on what TOCs can do to add capacity within their cost limits set by the DfT.
More Voyagers are now on the way to XC.

The Infrastructure will also restrict what you can do as well

 

[Topological]

With regard to Newton le Willows I think the OP is failing to understand that the vast majority of TPE might be inter-city but is not InterCity, but rather a regional express type service with fancy pointy nosed rolling stock that could just as easily have been left as part of Northern. The only part of TPE that could realistically become true InterCity would perhaps be two Liverpool to Newcastle services each hour and the hourly Mancunian Scots.

The term InterCity is used far too much in the UK, there are few services which are truly InterCity. Most journeys that we call InterCity serve flows of 20 minutes or less somewhere on their journey (almost all providing the only service for those flows).

 

[158756]

The primary income is city to city hence intercity. The government £Xbn plan for a 30 minute journey Liverpool Manchester is already achievable on TP if Lea Green & Newton le Willows are ditched and a semi fast calls there instead.

The calls at Lea Green and Newton-le-Willows exist because there used to be such a semi fast service, but it was removed to make way for the current level of TPE service. That's the trade off, if you want faster intercity services on the same infrastructure, they can't be as frequent as they are today.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The term InterCity is used far too much in the UK, there are few services which are truly InterCity. Most journeys that we call InterCity serve flows of 20 minutes or less somewhere on their journey (almost all providing the only service for those flows).

What we have quite a lot of is trains that call at all or most stations away from London then run fast as you get closer to it. The SWR Weymouths are a great example, but it's also true of the GWR Cornish expresses. It's rather a different model to what you get in many other countries - but I half recall there are some TGVs a bit like that and DB has a few too e.g. the Berchtesgaden IC train pair which run as RE past Freilassing.

The calls at Lea Green and Newton-le-Willows exist because there used to be such a semi fast service, but it was removed to make way for the current level of TPE service. That's the trade off, if you want faster intercity services on the same infrastructure, they can't be as frequent as they are today

It also replaces (as a parkway station - as I said above, don't underestimate the importance of these) the call at Warrington Central which existed when they ran via the CLC.

 

[43096]

That's kinda the point I was making, the liability should be on the leasing companies, if you lease a car it remains the property of the leasing company and the only liability is the the contractual monthly payment.

The leases are long-term commitments - usually until the next contract end date - so it is not surprpising that the ultimate guarantor of the lease (DfT/Treasury) wants to sign off on that commitment. I'm not sure what is so difficult to understand about DfT wanting approval?

 

[Clarence Yard]

That's kinda the point I was making, the liability should be on the leasing companies, if you lease a car it remains the property of the leasing company and the only liability is the the contractual monthly payment.

That wasn’t the point I was making.

The liability for the amount of lease cost lies with the DfT so they have to sign off any variation in any DfT TOC lease that could affect the price or the duration of the lease. TOCs have never had the freedom to do this alone, even pre-COVID.

In the case of a normal ROSCO lease, the unit remains the property of the ROSCO and the DfT TOC does indeed pay a periodic amount to the ROSCO.

 

[SteelWeelApeal]

As someone from Nottingham I am a bit confused about this- I would never change at Chesterfield for a train and would always go to Sheffield or Derby (most likely Derby). The only reason you change trains in that area is:
1) for TPE to Cleethorpes (or Liverpool, but EMR go there direct) (only at Sheffield)
2) For XC to the North (could be possible at Chesterfield, but since this is likely going to be before a bigger trip, making use of the facilities and proximity to the city at Sheffield, everyone would go to Sheffield) (Trains to Derby are better than that of Sheffield from Nottingham, so most people would change at Derby for XC)
3) for Northern local services (only from Sheffield)

So basically there is no reason why we would ever get off at Chesterfield, and speeding up journeys would benefit Nottingham, not reduce them.

Tbh I don’t see why you’d use XC going north from Nottingham. I’ve always found changing at Grantham faster and cheaper.

Ultimately though, as with 90% of the rest of their problems, the issue comes from not having enough trains. Oh what a difference having even just a small fleet of 7 car bimodes would make...

 

[Topological]

What we have quite a lot of is trains that call at all or most stations away from London then run fast as you get closer to it. The SWR Weymouths are a great example, but it's also true of the GWR Cornish expresses. It's rather a different model to what you get in many other countries - but I half recall there are some TGVs a bit like that and DB has a few too e.g. the Berchtesgaden IC train pair which run as RE past Freilassing.



It also replaces (as a parkway station - as I said above, don't underestimate the importance of these) the call at Warrington Central which existed when they ran via the CLC.

I was thinking about mid-journey too, like Chesterfield to Derby (arguably Chesterfield to Sheffield has Northern services and therefore is not solely served by InterCity). Other prominent examples are Wigan to Warrington, Warrington to Crewe, Loughborough to Derby, Newark to Grantham and many many others.

Maybe this is how we end up with a "Social" role for InterCity, but I would argue it is the train which is actually a regional train.

I am sure this is just a CrossCountry need more trains thread though.

 

[ChrisC]

Tbh I don’t see why you’d use XC going north from Nottingham. I’ve always found changing at Grantham faster and cheaper.

Ultimately though, as with 90% of the rest of their problems, the issue comes from not having enough trains. Oh what a difference having even just a small fleet of 7 car bimodes would make...

Going north from Nottingham, changing at Grantham would always be my first choice. Unfortunately these days the LNER trains to Newcastle and Edinburgh do not stop at Grantham. For most of the day, except for a 2 hourly train to York, there is nothing from Grantham to anywhere on the ECML north of Doncaster. With at least 2 changes of train required to reach Newcastle or Edinburgh from Nottingham, often with long waits for connections, using XC is now often the quickest and easiest option.

 

[Bevan Price]

Lea Green replaced - probably for political reasons - St. Helens Junction as an important stop between Liverpool & Manchester.
St. Helens has a population of over 100,000 - and for a town of ts size, it has a relatively poor railway service.

Newton Le Willows is a separate town, but dragged into St. Helens borough in 1974. The local population is about 24,000. In addition, the station acts as a park and ride station for a wide area. (In fact, Earlestown station is better located for many shopping & housing areas, but has no space for a large car park.).

Leaving both with nothing but slowish all-stations services to Liverpool & Manchester would be a bad idea, and would probably lose a lot of passengers. The real problem here is the DfT, and its failure to let operators have trains unfit for purpose (in terms of the number of coaches.)

 

[Llandudno]

I very much disagree with you. For travel from Nottingham with connections to/from XC services to the NE and Edinburgh, Chesterfield is a much easier and more convenient station to change at than Sheffield. The main advantage of changing at Chesterfield, especially for those with luggage, families with children and the less mobile, it is a same platform connection. Changing trains in Sheffield usually means having to get over the bridge to another platform.

There are always large numbers of passengers joining and leaving XC trains at Sheffield which can usually be seen with the crowds of people standing at the doors of Voyagers waiting to board. If Nottingham passengers change at Chesterfield, plus all the people from huge catchment area that Chesterfield has, which includes many people from the south side of Sheffield, it relieves the pressure on the platform at Sheffield. Before Chesterfield stops were significantly cut back during Covid journey planners almost always directed Nottingham passengers to change at Chesterfield for the NE and Edinburgh.

I understand the problem of passengers using XC trains for the short journey between Chesterfield and Sheffield but many long distance passengers also prefer the convenience of Chesterfield with its easier road access and large car park.

It also means that XC Advance tickets will not be available for passengers travelling to/from from Chesterfield to XC destinations as there will no longer be a through train so ordinary fares or split tickets will be necessary, which no doubt increases the current advance fare.

More cars on the M1/M42 or A38 from South Sheffield/north Derbyshire to Birmingham/NEC etc…

 

[Chucky]

The way XC is going, I wouldn't be surprised if it was eventually split up and absorbed into other TOCs. The Birmingham to Manchester section being diesel when the route is electrified for it's entirety has always struck me as particularly backwards/crazy. It would make far more sense to let Avanti or WMT run it with electrics if XC can't or won't.

 

[Deafdoggie]

It would make far more sense to let Avanti or WMT run it with electrics if XC can't or won't.

Because famously Avanti have lots of spare trains and drivers and never cancel anything!

 

[Chucky]

Because famously Avanti have lots of spare trains and drivers and never cancel anything!

Obviously I wasn't suggesting they just hand the service over without proper planning or preparation! Although now you mention it, thats exactly the sort of thing that would happen on today's railway!

 

[The exile]

. It's rather a different model to what you get in many other countries - but I half recall there are some TGVs a bit like that and DB has a few too e.g. the Berchtesgaden IC train pair which run as RE past Freilassing.

There are many readons for the different models - one being population density /distribution - another being the explosion of long-distance commuting, in particular to London (ironically encouraged by those intercity services). IIRC, pre COVID there were more annual season ticket holders from Weston-super-Mare to London than there had been from Swindon pre-HST.
It’s also fair to say that frequent stops on IC services are not as rare on the continent as we sometimes think. Think Koeln - Dortmund for example.

 

[Krokodil]

It also replaces (as a parkway station - as I said above, don't underestimate the importance of these) the call at Warrington Central which existed when they ran via the CLC.

NLW also acts as an interchange between the NE and Chester. Or at least it used to, before the Liverpool-NE service was reduced to hourly, with the service that offered the convenient connection disappearing in favour of a half-hour fester.

 

[6Gman]

This must be the only industry in the world that decides they don't want customers as they cause overcrowding rather than take on the challenge of adding more capacity to enable extra customers

Hotel chains do not expand to meet every peak demand.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Hotel chains do not expand to meet every peak demand.

That's because hotels are rather time consuming to build, and each room can only be occupied once per night, you can't do stuff like messing with the timetable or increasing fleet utilisation to deal with demand peaks like railways can.

 

[Envy123]

another being the explosion of long-distance commuting, in particular to London (ironically encouraged by those intercity services).

And insane house prices in the traditional commuter belt mean commuting from intercity stations with reasonable nearby house prices, like Peterborough and Stafford.