Train companies claiming to have "longer carriages"

[43074]

Where are you getting the idea that three hour journeys are the norm on XC services? There's huge churn at each major city that they serve.

There seems a misconception that, just because a train runs from Aberdeen to Penzance, this is somehow a "Normal" journey (rather than the same seat being occupied a dozen different times during the train's journey) - unfortunately this clouds discussion over XC services on here

A three hour journey on XC is not inconceivable at all though, there are plenty of longish journeys which are busy flows - Exeter to Birmingham, York to Birmingham, Leeds to Edinburgh, the Thames Valley to Manchester, Cornwall to Bristol etc. I'd be willing to bet they are a sizeable chunk of XCs business all together.

Plus they're far more valuable from a revenue point of view than the lots of people making short journeys you quote, that's why the economics of XC have always struggled and requires relatively expensive fares over the shorter distances to return a premium to the DfT, under the current model anyway.

 

[221129]

Where are you getting the idea that three hour journeys are the norm on XC services?

There is a hell of a lot, I would suggest clearly more than you think.

 

[43 302]

Indeed, but you also don't need to worry about pathing a HST into a Voyager path anyway as there are enough weekday Voyager runs with a HST pathing so can easily slot a HST onto one of those diagrams without needing to worry about pathing.

Does this mean that when your two extra power cars become available, you will be able to increase the number of HST sets out per day; but without changing the paths? Also, I guess if a set swap takes place, a voyager can comfortably fill an HST path and the HST can take the next one pathed for an HST that otherwise would have been a voyager?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Isn't the new seat primarily for refurbed Pendolinos, the seats of which are 20-ish years old (except the 2012 build)?
They may also get fitted in the new AT300s but that's a much smaller fleet.

They are being fitted in the new AT300s.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Rightly or wrongly, I'm under the impression from this thread that XC services do not generate sufficient revenue to justify new trains. Therefore, if there is a long lead time to receive new orders, can some new trains be ordered to replace some of the earlier 80xs, and the older trains (and hence more depreciated = lower cost) transferred to XC when this new order is eventually received.

Until Coronavirus hit, there was no "mastermind" formulating cascade policies, it was up to the franchise to determine its fleet at bid time, to the DfT spec.
XC was on the point of being re-franchised but that was axed until the Williams review is out of the way.
Lease costs are determined by the Rosco involved, who carry the depreciation cost, not the TOC.
Now DfT is in control, but it has much bigger problems on its plate than getting new trains for XC.
There's no telling how this will work out, but I think it's more likely the mid-life 22x fleet will be concentrated on XC than new trains ordered.

 

[Purple Orange]

Rightly or wrongly, I'm under the impression from this thread that XC services do not generate sufficient revenue to justify new trains. Therefore, if there is a long lead time to receive new orders, can some new trains be ordered to replace some of the earlier 80xs, and the older trains (and hence more depreciated = lower cost) transferred to XC when this new order is eventually received.

I read this a lot on here too, but I never see any evidence to back it up. It makes me wonder how that can be the case when we are faced with overcrowded services on much of the route. I would be interested to understand a breakdown of how profitable certain routes are on XC. Could it be that Manchester-Birmingham for instance is very lucrative, but there are sections of journeys that act as a significant financial impediment?

I am in the camp of splitting up XC services, principally the Manchester-Birmingham leg to facilitate more EMU running. Then it all depends on passenger flows from Bristol and Reading.

 

[class 9]

Rightly or wrongly, I'm under the impression from this thread that XC services do not generate sufficient revenue to justify new trains. Therefore, if there is a long lead time to receive new orders, can some new trains be ordered to replace some of the earlier 80xs, and the older trains (and hence more depreciated = lower cost) transferred to XC when this new order is eventually received.

XC is profitable, yes a new fleet may push it into the red, but I'm sure there is pent up demand that would be realised with sufficient capacity.
TPE loses money hand over fist, so much so that First have written off over £100 million on the franchise, this hasn't stopped substantial investment in 3 types of new stock!

 

[philthetube]

Rightly or wrongly, I'm under the impression from this thread that XC services do not generate sufficient revenue to justify new trains. Therefore, if there is a long lead time to receive new orders, can some new trains be ordered to replace some of the earlier 80xs, and the older trains (and hence more depreciated = lower cost) transferred to XC when this new order is eventually received.

This is a common statement and I have no reason to believe it is not true, but.

we keep hearing that cross country trains are always rammed and that cross country set fares are high so what is going on.

 

[class 9]

This is a common statement and I have no reason to believe it is not true, but.

we keep hearing that cross country trains are always rammed and that cross country set fares are high so what is going on.

It's been paying a premium to the Government for the last few years, so yes its profitable.
Not all services are rammed.
High fares are often used to try and manage demand.

 

[Purple Orange]

XC is profitable, yes a new fleet may push it into the red, but I'm sure there is pent up demand that would be realised with sufficient capacity.
TPE loses money hand over fist, so much so that First have written off over £100 million on the franchise, this hasn't stopped substantial investment in 3 types of new stock!

And what makes the TPE franchise unprofitable? Does it relegate to government premiums like XC below, or is it something else? Equally, TPE can be rammed.

It's been paying a premium to the Government for the last few years, so yes its profitable.
Not all services are rammed.
High fares are often used to try and manage demand.

 

[tbtc]

A three hour journey on XC is not inconceivable at all though, there are plenty of longish journeys which are busy flows - Exeter to Birmingham, York to Birmingham, Leeds to Edinburgh, the Thames Valley to Manchester, Cornwall to Bristol etc. I'd be willing to bet they are a sizeable chunk of XCs business all together.

Plus they're far more valuable from a revenue point of view than the lots of people making short journeys you quote, that's why the economics of XC have always struggled and requires relatively expensive fares over the shorter distances to return a premium to the DfT, under the current model anyway.

I'm not saying it's not inconceivable, just that a three hour journey time is more than the average passenger does on XC.

Yet we keep having debates based on the "tail" rather than the "dog" - the smaller number of long distance passengers get far too much attention - witness the suggestions on here that XC needs buffets/facilities similar to the longer distance ECML/WCML/ GWML services (when, in fact, XC is probably closer to TPE in terms of journey times, churn of passengers are busy intermediate stations, relative lack of "business" travel).

There is a hell of a lot, I would suggest clearly more than you think.

There are some, sure (I've been one myself on many occasions...), but I'd argue that a significant majority of XC passengers are doing journeys of under three hours.

Nobody's saying that there are *no* passengers doing longer journeys - I'm just saying that such passengers are a minority.

 

[221129]

I'm just saying that such passengers are a minority.

And with all due respect, I'm saying that's wrong. A significant minority at least. Whether you like it or not XC is a long distance IC operator.

 

[43074]

I'm not saying it's not inconceivable, just that a three hour journey time is more than the average passenger does on XC.

Well CrossCountry's MD would appear to disagree with you as well:

CrossCountry currently serves 122 stations, although it does not manage any of them. Nor does it maintain any of its own trains. According to statistics from the Office of Road & Rail, around 64% of its passenger journeys are for leisure, against 23% for commuting and just 13% business travel. Farebox revenue in the 2017-18 financial year totalled £529·9m, of which standard class tickets accounted for £471·4m, first class £43·1m and season tickets £25·9m.

[Tom] Joyner [CrossCountry's MD] feels that the CrossCountry franchise is unique. ‘One of the most interesting statistics is that on our longer distance routes our average customer only travels with us twice a year. That is significantly different to the majority of UK train operators, but for those people who use us, we’re a really important part of their life.’

CrossCountry: Making a difference

Once regarded as a 'forgotten' franchise, and wrestling with capacity challenges, CrossCountry is well placed to play an expanded role in reshaping the UK rail sector, Managing Director Tom Joyner tells Tony Miles.

www.railwaygazette.com

(The article can be read for free if you register)

 

[Purple Orange]

I'm not saying it's not inconceivable, just that a three hour journey time is more than the average passenger does on XC.

Yet we keep having debates based on the "tail" rather than the "dog" - the smaller number of long distance passengers get far too much attention - witness the suggestions on here that XC needs buffets/facilities similar to the longer distance ECML/WCML/ GWML services (when, in fact, XC is probably closer to TPE in terms of journey times, churn of passengers are busy intermediate stations, relative lack of "business" travel).



There are some, sure (I've been one myself on many occasions...), but I'd argue that a significant majority of XC passengers are doing journeys of under three hours.

Nobody's saying that there are *no* passengers doing longer journeys - I'm just saying that such passengers are a minority.

I agree about the three hour issue, but that is true for all but a few intercity services. And if we are to put a block on better buffet/shop facilities (clearly Virgin thought it was worthwhile) then where do we draw the line? Anything under 90 mins and no shop? So London to Birmingham would be downgraded in that case. London to Bristol would be a push, given the volume of commuter traffic from Reading. I’d say the intercity services on XC need a shop. They are too long to not have facilities to cater for a market segment they are attempting to attract.

 

[Richard Scott]

I have a family member living in Edinburgh, which means a journey on XC often has to occur but it is avoided if at all possible. I've even taken to the seated carriage on sleeper train (meaning a trip to London first) to avoid XC. If I'm honest the sleeper option is cheaper hence the reason and I'm in no particular hurry. The other option is go up the West Coast, as this can sometimes work out cheaper but occasionally get foiled by a Voyager instead of a Pendolino. Not one member of my family has anything good to say about Voyagers and all try and avoid XC, if they can. The lack of proper buffet and uncomfortable seating (their words not mine and they are not in the slightest bit interested in trains) and when I do use XC (if no alternative) there are a number of people who are on for a long haul. When I do this journey it's as a normal passenger and the experience is not a good one.

 

[irish_rail]

I don't want to get in the way of your alarmist/hysterical suggestion... but there's the inconvenient fact that sluggish HSTs can't match Voyager acceleration therefore wouldn't be able to be slotted into other diagrams very easily (without shaving off the engineering allowances and therefore creating significant chances for services to run late).

But I've tried to explain this several times on here and there's apparently no stopping the nostalgists (especially now they can crowbar in the current health situation)





I presume that the idea is along the lines of the 802s being a simple contract (rather than the "full package" that Hitatchi provide as part of the 802 contract, plus the understandable situation that the development costs being recouped in the initial order mean that subsequent IET300s can be produced at a lower net cost (i.e. the first batch bore the R&D)?



Where are you getting the idea that three hour journeys are the norm on XC services? There's huge churn at each major city that they serve.

There seems a misconception that, just because a train runs from Aberdeen to Penzance, this is somehow a "Normal" journey (rather than the same seat being occupied a dozen different times during the train's journey) - unfortunately this clouds discussion over XC services on here

I'm not referring to 3 hour XC journeys. I said First group franchises. I'm referring to GWR and the London to Penzanxe route where London to Plymouth for one example is 3 hours 15 and therefore not particularly suitable for the unpopular fainsa seating.

Regarding bringing in surplus HSTs , if used as a 2+7 and driven well, add in the ridiculous amount of dwell time on XC services on the SW - NE route, the HST would barely lose time. And allowing safer travel with the loss of a couple of minutes potentially is probably preferable to an on time 4 car voyager rammed to the gunwhales.

 

[irish_rail]

I don't want to get in the way of your alarmist/hysterical suggestion... but there's the inconvenient fact that sluggish HSTs can't match Voyager acceleration therefore wouldn't be able to be slotted into other diagrams very easily (without shaving off the engineering allowances and therefore creating significant chances for services to run late).

But I've tried to explain this several times on here and there's apparently no stopping the nostalgists (especially now they can crowbar in the current health situation)





I presume that the idea is along the lines of the 802s being a simple contract (rather than the "full package" that Hitatchi provide as part of the 802 contract, plus the understandable situation that the development costs being recouped in the initial order mean that subsequent IET300s can be produced at a lower net cost (i.e. the first batch bore the R&D)?



Where are you getting the idea that three hour journeys are the norm on XC services? There's huge churn at each major city that they serve.

There seems a misconception that, just because a train runs from Aberdeen to Penzance, this is somehow a "Normal" journey (rather than the same seat being occupied a dozen different times during the train's journey) - unfortunately this clouds discussion over XC services on here

But also just to add, regarding XC journey times, those travelling from the south west will usually travel at least as far as Birmingham (although admittedly a fair few alight at Bristol). So that's 3hrs 30 from Plymouth to Birmingham, and I've done it enough times as a punter to know there are lots and lots of passengers on the train for that long. Just because ooop north folk use XC to get to their local city, down here we are a little less flush for choice when travelling long distances and are stuck with XC if wanting to avoid travelling via London.

 

[RT4038]

Well CrossCountry's MD would appear to disagree with you as well:

CrossCountry: Making a difference

Once regarded as a 'forgotten' franchise, and wrestling with capacity challenges, CrossCountry is well placed to play an expanded role in reshaping the UK rail sector, Managing Director Tom Joyner tells Tony Miles.

www.railwaygazette.com

(The article can be read for free if you register)

And none of the quotes refers to the average journey length of a passenger on a Cross-Country train.....

 

[Purple Orange]

I have a family member living in Edinburgh, which means a journey on XC often has to occur but it is avoided if at all possible. I've even taken to the seated carriage on sleeper train (meaning a trip to London first) to avoid XC. If I'm honest the sleeper option is cheaper hence the reason and I'm in no particular hurry. The other option is go up the West Coast, as this can sometimes work out cheaper but occasionally get foiled by a Voyager instead of a Pendolino. Not one member of my family has anything good to say about Voyagers and all try and avoid XC, if they can. The lack of proper buffet and uncomfortable seating (their words not mine and they are not in the slightest bit interested in trains) and when I do use XC (if no alternative) there are a number of people who are on for a long haul. When I do this journey it's as a normal passenger and the experience is not a good one.

This. The general public expect a certain level of service on long distance trains, irrespective of whether their part of the journey is only 30 minutes or not.

 

[43074]

And none of the quotes refers to the average journey length of a passenger on a Cross-Country train.....

No, but the fact the larger proportion of their revenue is from leisure travellers and they travel on average twice a year shows these aren't just people doing Birmingham to Derby etc. Obviously some of the season tickets will be doing that, but that's only a fifth of their income if the article is anything to go by.

 

[route:oxford]

This. The general public expect a certain level of service on long distance trains, irrespective of whether their part of the journey is only 30 minutes or not.

I'm not so sure.

My main expectation is a M&S "Simply Food" within a major station and a Sainsbury's, Tesco or Waitrose "Express style" store within a 2 minute walk of a major station. Between 7am and 7pm, on cross-border services, I expect a trolley service of tea, coffee and light refreshments.

Indeed, the thought of trekking up a train touching up to 100 filthy and potentially Covid-19 Poz head rest handles, then 10 door buttons each way to and from the buffet makes me feel quite sick, and likely to be yet another reason for people not to leave their seat other than the usual theft of personal items and loss of seat.

 

[norbitonflyer]

No, but the fact the larger proportion of their revenue is from leisure travellers and they travel on average twice a year shows these aren't just people doing Birmingham to Derby etc. Obviously some of the season tickets will be doing that, but that's only a fifth of their income if the article is anything to go by.

I don't think there is much correlation between distance, purpose and frequency of journey. Leisure travel, like business travel, can be short distance or long. You might travel from Birmingham to Derby for a football match, to visit family, or indeed as part of a longer journey given that both stations have a large number of interchange possibilities. And each leisure traveller may only make the journey twice a year, but if for each season ticket holder there were a hundred people who make the journey twice a year, the occasional travellers would still outnumber the commuters on any particular day.

 

[Deepgreen]

That was my assumption. But I'd have thought they would have proof-read an email that presumably has been sent out to all of their registered customers.

The standard of written material that the railway (and other sources) puts out these days is dire. Nothing is properly proof-read and most rely on people with little or no knowledge of their subject cobbling stuff together. This also applies to 'real-time' information, where far too many messages are displayed which appear to have been written by children.

 

[Stephen Lee]

Nothing has been decided yet.

This is only an option so no one knows if it is really gonna happen.

 

[221129]

This is only an option so no one knows if it is really gonna happen.

Which is what I said.

 

[Stephen Lee]

Also i wondered if some Class 220s can be cascaded to strengthen some regional services or some 170s/158s can be cascaded to XC

 

[221129]

Also i wondered if some Class 220s can be cascaded to strengthen some regional services or some 170s/158s can be cascaded to XC

Voyagers arent suited to that kind of work.

 

[Stephen Lee]

Voyagers arent suited to that kind of work.

So can XC get 158s/more 170s?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

And what makes the TPE franchise unprofitable? Does it relegate to government premiums like XC below, or is it something else? Equally, TPE can be rammed.

You have to look at the wider franchise picture (although franchises are toast now anyway).

XC was refranchised in 2007 to Arriva, and that deal with DfT is still in place (with extensions and direct awards).
It has never had the scope to radically change its rolling stock, just tinkering round the edges.
During that period it has been mostly loss-making but has gradually got to about par - nothing like the premiums of other IC franchises.
A new franchise was due to start about now but has been put on hold until the Williams review process has concluded.
No contracts are in place for new trains.

TPE was refranchised to First in 2015, on a business plan which delivered premiums to DfT (from being heavily loss-making previously).
That plan called for 3 new fleets of trains, now largely delivered.
However their performance has collapsed and First Group are paying the penalty to the tune of at least £100 million to keep going.

All bets are now off for both franchises going forward, but at least we can see Voyagers/Meridians coming free soon from Avanti/EMR, which we couldn't before.
Re-equipment previously has been hide-bound by the lack of suitable diesel trains (125mph).

 

[swt_passenger]

So can XC get 158s/more 170s?

They’re already known to be getting more 170 middle carriages. It’s been announced by them and mentioned in earlier threads. I expect 158s is the last thing they’d be thinking of...