What should be considered 'Inter-City' under GBR?

[miklcct]

Some certainly question whether it is fast or not.

It's easy. If it runs on the fast line on a 4-track railway, it is a fast service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some certainly question whether it is fast or not.

It's faster than the local trains.

It is one of the more debatable ICs, I suppose, but I wouldn't say it was lesser than the Avanti Euston-Brum or the Liverpool St to Norwich. Was it ICS (InterCity Shuttle) in BR days like the Birminghams were, indicating it to be in a rather different class to the Penzance?

 

[irish_rail]

It's faster than the local trains.

It is one of the more debatable ICs, I suppose, but I wouldn't say it was lesser than the Avanti Euston-Brum or the Liverpool St to Norwich. Was it ICS (InterCity Shuttle) in BR days like the Birminghams were, indicating it to be in a rather different class to the Penzance?

Agreed. If Euston Brum is IC then so is Padd Bristol. Train runs at 124mph for more than half of its journey, not quite sure what could possibly be considered as not Intercity about it!

 

[blueberry11]

I (used to) thought that intercity meant that it only stops at places (conurbations) known as a city, given that our definition of cities and towns is not what you expect. St David's is a city with 1700 residents, Canterbury also with 55,000. But on the other hand, Ipswich (144,000) and Reading (see my other post for population) are both towns. In other words, a small conurbation is not necessarily a town and a large conurbation (over 100,000 residents) is not necessarily a city. This video explains why

 

[HSTEd]

Then you will narrow the market. The LNR services appeal to people who wouldn't pay Avanti's prices (which, if fare reform a la LNER is applied will go up a load more) - they are people who would otherwise drive their old banger, go by coach or not go at all.

The principle of regional services offering the same journey for cheaper as a "bolt on" to their local role occurs all over the world by nationalised railways and is a good thing. It is not competition, it is market broadening.

The LNER market is fundamentally different to what is seen on the West Coast though.
For large parts of the route there is no meaningful "local" train competitor - if you want to travel on the ECML it is LNER or nothing (excluding a handful of OAO operators).

I'm not really convinced that carrying passengers on local trains is cheaper for the railway than just carrying everyone we can on the fast trains.
We have peak time trains on the WCML that run half-empty because of insanely aggressive peak pricing, meanwhile passengers are carried on slower trains simultaneously.

Market segmentation only makes sense if it increases revenue faster than costs - and given that revenue is now only a minor portion of the cost base, I am skeptical that it is sensible here.

EDIT:
As a hypothetical, it takes the fast train 1h20 to do London-Birmingham, it takes the slowest train on NRE (the only one without the Virgin pricing) 2hr21.
Is providing seats or whatnot on the 2hr21 train really cheaper for the railway than throwing a unreserved seating vehicle that resembles a Cl730 into a fast train?

In my view we'd be better off charging a seat reservation supplement for London-Birmingham and having a suitable unreserved vehicle in the formation.

After all, a vehicle on the fast train can make two trips for every one that one in the slow train makes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You are making a big assumption that revenue is the only goal.

 

[Transilien]

The LNER market is fundamentally different to what is seen on the West Coast though.
For large parts of the route there is no meaningful "local" train competitor - if you want to travel on the ECML it is LNER or nothing (excluding a handful of OAO operators).

It’s basically the same on the WCML north of Crewe. Also GBR’s goal isn’t just to compete with itself

 

[HSTEd]

You are making a big assumption that revenue is the only goal.

Well I'd argue the primary goal should probably be to reduce net subsidy to the industry, and the secondary goal is to grow traffic levels.

Avanti's ticketing practices might make sense in isolation, but the market of people willing to pay ~£94 to travel from London to Birmingham is much smaller than it used to be.
Trying to cling onto that high yield traffic stream has real costs for the rest of the railway.

I think it is likely that if we sacrificed some Avanti revenue by setting prices such that the trains were heavily loaded throughout the day, we'd achieve reductions in net subsidy.
An unreserved seating vehicle of the type I suggested would allow us to set a baseline fare that broadens the market as you describe, whilst dispensing with the costs of trying to carry people on slow-moving trains with terrible journey productivity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And then you do what - cut the locals to 0.5tph?

 

[HSTEd]

And then you do what - cut the locals to 0.5tph?

I'd cut the locals to the length that actually matches true local demand, with fares optimised to fill the rolling stock in use.

Padding out train lengths on the slows by filling them with London-Birmingham passengers is likely a false economy.

 

[A S Leib]

Most (all?) InterCity routes also call at towns along the way

I think the Flying Scotsman which comes closest, but even then you'd have to count Camden as a city (which I think is fair, as it's clearly part of the same conurbation as Westminster / City of London). Same for the Leeds services which are Peterborough only south of Doncaster.

Edit: by a literal definition, Leeds – Bradford Forster Square is more or less the only intercity service in the UK.

 

[Djgr]

I (used to) thought that intercity meant that it only stops at places (conurbations) known as a city, given that our definition of cities and towns is not what you expect. St David's is a city with 1700 residents, Canterbury also with 55,000. But on the other hand, Ipswich (144,000) and Reading (see my other post for population) are both towns. In other words, a small conurbation is not necessarily a town and a large conurbation (over 100,000 residents) is not necessarily a city. This video explains why

That's why it is really helpful to look at the routes that British Rail considered to be Inter City before privatisation.

It didn't get into crazy arguments about when is a city not a city but pragmatically links the major conurbations of the UK.

 

[HSTEd]

These posts seem to be taking the position that "Intercity" is primarily a matter of rolling stock, which I don't think is the common understanding.

If InterCity is no longer distinct enough to have its own rolling stock, is there any point in having it at all?
At that point it'd be better operationally to just have a uniform fleet of units that are entirely interchangeable.

 

[signed]

At that point it'd be better operationally to just have a uniform fleet of units that are entirely interchangeable.

If contactless/tap travel is to come on regional with GBR, while keeping it out of Intercity, you would still need service differentiation

 

[Bletchleyite]

If InterCity is no longer distinct enough to have its own rolling stock, is there any point in having it at all?
At that point it'd be better operationally to just have a uniform fleet of units that are entirely interchangeable.

Which would mean a unit not very good at anything!

 

[A S Leib]

If contactless/tap travel is to come on regional with GBR, while keeping it out of Intercity, you would still need service differentiation

I think the faster (excluding Eurostar) services between Amsterdam, Schiphol and Rotterdam need you to scan an extra validator on the platform if using contactless; could that work? Of course, you'd still need to specify which services you'd need the supplement for.

 

[Krokodil]

Which would mean a unit not very good at anything!

Enter the class 197...

 

[renegademaster]

If contactless/tap travel is to come on regional with GBR, while keeping it out of Intercity, you would still need service differentiation

Why would you need to keep contactless out of intercity if you are going that way?

 

[JonathanH]

Why would you need to keep contactless out of intercity if you are going that way?

I imagine to discourage / prevent local travel, and leave intercity trains for genuine long distance travel. Certainly seems to be something people argue for on this forum.

 

[Senex]

Some changes would need changed timetables and then you have the issue with infrastructure. Some areas would need more passing loops, four tracking and more rolling stock to provide a more consistent offering. ..... In Europe they expand the infrastucture to meet the uniformity of the service they want to or would like to provide.

And therein lies the key. They decide what pattern of service they want to offer, then see what infrastructure will be needed to provide it on a reliable basis, then build the infrastructure, and only then run the service. Look back for example at a number of Swiss plans, or look at what is being discussed in Germany as they consider how to get to a Taktfahrplan. We do what seems to be the usual British thing of trying to get a quart out of a pint pot and then wondering why the result doesn't offer reliability.

 

[JonathanH]

We do what seems to be the usual British thing of trying to get a quart out of a pint pot and then wondering why the result doesn't offer reliability.

We run more frequent 'mixed use' trains rather than the less frequent 'distinct use' trains favoured elsewhere.

 

[Fidelis]

I think the Flying Scotsman which comes closest, but even then you'd have to count Camden as a city (which I think is fair, as it's clearly part of the same conurbation as Westminster / City of London). Same for the Leeds services which are Peterborough only south of Doncaster.

Edit: by a literal definition, Leeds – Bradford Forster Square is more or less the only intercity service in the UK.

Using this literal definition then Hereford to Worcester both cities by royal assent since the 12th Century must be the Intercity service between the oldest cities.

 

[WideRanger]

I struggle to understand why the Intercity brand would be brought back for 'the fastest, longest trains'. Among train enthusiasts it has currency, but I doubt many others think about it. But at the same time, it really isn't a clear descriptor. There are lots of trains that run inter-city that would not meet most people's instinctive definition. And there is nothing intrinsic about it that suggests either speed, stopping pattern or anything else.

Back in BR days, when there were far fewer trains, and you really needed to make clear that these were a different type of train that weren't primarily regular commuter, I can see why it kind of made sense. But not now.

I'm probably affected by many years of riding Japanese trains, but I can't help be attracted to the simple to understand nature of:

• Normal - trains that stop literally everywhere
• Rapid - trains that miss some stops
• Express - trains that miss a lot of stops
• Limited Express - really only stop at the main stations
• Super Limited Express - Shinkansen trains (which also have different levels of stopping)

By focussing on the nature of the train, you can be released from silly arguments around whether X place is a City or not (which frankly, doesn't matter one jot, as the examples of Reading and St Asaph demonstrate).

 

[Bletchleyite]

By focussing on the nature of the train, you can be released from silly arguments around whether X place is a City or not (which frankly, doesn't matter one jot, as the examples of Reading and St Asaph demonstrate).

Did anyone ever argue about that when InterCity was a BR brand? And don't forget the brand has returned - EMR are using it to distinguish from their regional and London commuter services. Plus ScotRail, albeit with a 7 stuck in the middle.

 

[miklcct]

I'm probably affected by many years of riding Japanese trains, but I can't help be attracted to the simple to understand nature of:

• Normal - trains that stop literally everywhere
• Rapid - trains that miss some stops
• Express - trains that miss a lot of stops
• Limited Express - really only stop at the main stations
• Super Limited Express - Shinkansen trains (which also have different levels of stopping)

The problem is that a lot of trains in Great Britain can't be assigned in a simple way to any of the above. For example, how about a service which stops everywhere on the first half of the journey, then fast to its destination?

 

[Transilien]

By focussing on the nature of the train, you can be released from silly arguments around whether X place is a City or not (which frankly, doesn't matter one jot, as the examples of Reading and St Asaph demonstrate).

Only in places like this forum people argue that. A cities is not a city because of any offical designation, it is a city because people view it as one. Most of London is technically not an city but nobody argues that you shouldn't be calling it a city because customarily all of Greater London is a city. Its what makes places like London and Glasgow different from places of little to no significance!

 

[renegademaster]

I struggle to understand why the Intercity brand would be brought back for 'the fastest, longest trains'. Among train enthusiasts it has currency, but I doubt many others think about it. But at the same time, it really isn't a clear descriptor. There are lots of trains that run inter-city that would not meet most people's instinctive definition. And there is nothing intrinsic about it that suggests either speed, stopping pattern or anything else.

Back in BR days, when there were far fewer trains, and you really needed to make clear that these were a different type of train that weren't primarily regular commuter, I can see why it kind of made sense. But not now.

I'm probably affected by many years of riding Japanese trains, but I can't help be attracted to the simple to understand nature of:

• Normal - trains that stop literally everywhere
• Rapid - trains that miss some stops
• Express - trains that miss a lot of stops
• Limited Express - really only stop at the main stations
• Super Limited Express - Shinkansen trains (which also have different levels of stopping)

By focussing on the nature of the train, you can be released from silly arguments around whether X place is a City or not (which frankly, doesn't matter one jot, as the examples of Reading and St Asaph demonstrate).

We arent as geographically big as Japan (or Germany or whoever we are getting compared too) , i think thats the thing lots of people are missing. We dont have any "super limited express" services other than Lumo which is its own Ryantrain thing

 

[signed]

Why would you need to keep contactless out of intercity if you are going that way?

If the LNER trial is to be followed by GBR (and there is little to say otherwise), the direction of current UK (and other) rail is toward dynamic pricing and reserved-only Advance ticket.

Walk-up tickets, on the biggest relations, may well be scrapped with GBR we don't know. So contactless would be just irrelevant on those relations

 

[renegademaster]

If the LNER trial is to be followed by GBR (and there is little to say otherwise), the direction of current UK (and other) rail is toward dynamic pricing and reserved-only Advance ticket.

Walk-up tickets, on the biggest relations, may well be scrapped with GBR we don't know. So contactless would be just irrelevant on those relations

i dont see why they would completly get rid of anytime tickets, its a big cash cow. The LNER trial is about getting rid of the regulated off peak fares

 

[dk1]

Surprised no one has mentioned Diss yet. It only has a population of 10,000, and in my view, is one of the only UK stations exclusively serving intercity trains. Even more so when going between Diss and Stowmarket (population 21,000) as both of them are (market) towns. Plus, almost every service from Norwich stops at Diss and Manningtree.

Diss serves as a rail head for a larger proportion of south Norfolk as well as some parts of North East Suffolk.