Whither XC after HS2?

[Bletchleyite]

From the post-HS2 WCML thread...

For the XC services what if there was a 2tph Liverpool to Oxford with 1tph extended to Bournemouth, and a South West/ Bristol to Manchester using Crewe as an interchange and timetabling so they arrive at similar times so Manchester can transfer to Oxford and Liverpool - Bristol. Birmingham can also be used for services from South West - Liverpool, and so on.

XC is an interesting question. If there's going to be 2tph of HS2 Manchester-Brum services, but Liverpool is unchanged, it could well be worth diverting the long distance XCs (i.e. the ones past Brum) to t'other end of t'M62 instead.

It might be worth with HS2 revisiting entirely what XC is for, because HS2 will unseat it as the fast service on many routes. It might be that it's best to split it up, or it might be that the original concept (relatively infrequent direct services for e.g. holidaymakers for whom too much changing is a big faff) is actually worth reviving in some form if they can be pathed, perhaps based on a two-hourly approach with splitting/joining.

What do others think? Does the idea of long distance direct services have value, or would we be better lopping up XC to the relevant local TOC and basing it around connections in Birmingham and London to/from HS2?

 

[Metrolink]

What do others think? Does the idea of long distance direct services have value, or would we be better lopping up XC and basing it around connections in Birmingham and London to/from HS2?

Long distance intercity. In my opinion XC should take on new routes, but moving all XC to Yorkshire isn’t the best idea. Liverpool is missed out with no fast services to Birmingham, or services at all to Oxford, Reading and the South. Liverpool and Lancashire are quite isolated when it comes to long distance services, and need extra connections which could be provided by XC. They are some lines deemed utterly useless and needs to be moved to a different operator such as Stansted - Birmingham. XC should focus on connecting the Midlands, the North West, the North East and the South West/ South Wales.

 

[irish_rail]

Long distance intercity. In my opinion XC should take on new routes, but moving all XC to Yorkshire isn’t the best idea. Liverpool is missed out with no fast services to Birmingham, or services at all to Oxford, Reading and the South. Liverpool and Lancashire are quite isolated when it comes to long distance services, and need extra connections which could be provided by XC. They are some lines deemed utterly useless and needs to be moved to a different operator such as Stansted - Birmingham. XC should focus on connecting the Midlands, the North West, the North East and the South West/ South Wales.

Liverpool is poorly served for a city of its size and importance in terms of services southbound. For sure XC services between Bristol or preferably Plymouth and Liverpool would be a very good thing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Long distance intercity. In my opinion XC should take on new routes, but moving all XC to Yorkshire isn’t the best idea. Liverpool is missed out with no fast services to Birmingham, or services at all to Oxford, Reading and the South. Liverpool and Lancashire are quite isolated when it comes to long distance services, and need extra connections which could be provided by XC. They are some lines deemed utterly useless and needs to be moved to a different operator such as Stansted - Birmingham. XC should focus on connecting the Midlands, the North West, the North East and the South West/ South Wales.

I certainly think "XC-lite" is a very poor fit in an IC TOC, and could do with being given to EMR or WMR (Leicester) and WMR or TfW (Cardiff). That could be done now rather than post HS2.

 

[Metrolink]

relatively infrequent direct services for e.g. holidaymakers for whom too much changing is a big faff

This is a very interesting point you have made from the WCML thread. I see where you are coming from here but there are many isolated cities and towns that need connections to other places. I think XC should not turn into a Summer Sunday or Parliamentary service.

 

[JonathanH]

If there are plans to do things like London-Birmingham-Manchester then XC doesn't need to duplicate that over the Birmingham-Manchester corridor.

I see where you are coming from here but there are many isolated cities and towns that need connections to other places.

Connections is the key word here. XC should not be an 'everywhere to everywhere' railway in the modern era like it was in the 1990s and before.

 

[Ianno87]

Connections is the key word here. XC should not be an 'everywhere to everywhere' railway in the modern era like it was in the 1990s and before.

It should very much be a medium-distance interurban operators whose trains just so happen to be convenient for a few long distance journeys. The long distance stuff should not be wagging the dog.

 

[Metrolink]

Connections is the key word here. XC should not be an 'everywhere to everywhere' railway in the modern era like it was in the 1990s and before.

Why? Anyone can say that you can change once or twice without harm but with waiting at a station for x amount of minutes yet it’s better to have direct services to places that need them. Liverpool is good example.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

XC is an interesting question. If there's going to be 2tph of HS2 Manchester-Brum services, but Liverpool is unchanged, it could well be worth diverting the long distance XCs (i.e. the ones past Brum) to t'other end of t'M62 instead.

To Hull? Interesting!

 

[py_megapixel]

Is HS2 really going to be duplicating XC? While a large proportion of passengers do get off at Birmingham, there's a reasonably large minority who stay on the train to continue further south. If I understand correctly, HS2 will not serve New Street, so the connection onto those services at Birmingham from HS2 will not be simple.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why? Anyone can say that you can change once or twice without harm but with waiting at a station for x amount of minutes yet it’s better to have direct services to places that need them. Liverpool is good example.

Liverpool-Brum won't have an HS2 service, and there is still a need for a Brum-Bristol service. Connecting those two up is not an utterly terrible idea as it adds utility.

Manchester-Bristol direct would have less value post HS2 because HS2 to Brum then Brum-Bristol would be a lot quicker even with the change.

 

[JonathanH]

Why? Anyone can say that you can change once or twice without harm but with waiting at a station for x amount of minutes yet it’s better to have direct services to places that need them. Liverpool is good example.

We have had these discussions before. Liverpool, Manchester and Preston don"t each need a service every three hours to Plymouth just so some people don't have to change trains.

Liverpool had a train every half an hour to Birmingham until March 2020 that had connections for both Cross Country routes further south. Preston one every hour.

Maybe XC switching Manchester for Liverpool on the Bristol / Exeter service makes sense post HS2 in place of the LNR service but it will need to continue to serve Liverpool South Parkway, Runcorn and Hartford.

It is essentially only possible to run half hourly from Birmingham to Bristol - one train from the route through Derby and one train from the route through Stafford, preferably the same destination all day and convenient connections to the other places.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To Hull? Interesting!

You know what I meant

Is HS2 really going to be duplicating XC? While a large proportion of passengers do get off at Birmingham, there's a reasonably large minority who stay on the train to continue further south. If I understand correctly, HS2 will not serve New Street, so the connection onto those services at Birmingham from HS2 will not be simple.

Moor St/Curzon St and New St are about 300m apart. The most direct route goes via a fairly scummy road tunnel with a pedestrian bit that I could see being upgraded considerably to provide perhaps a travelator type link, in which case it would be not really any more painful than going from the main trainshed to P13/14 at Manc Picc.

 

[Metrolink]

Is HS2 really going to be duplicating XC? While a large proportion of passengers do get off at Birmingham, there's a reasonably large minority who stay on the train to continue further south. If I understand correctly, HS2 will not serve New Street, so the connection onto those services at Birmingham from HS2 will not be simple.

I agree completely. XC is still vital in connecting Britain’s cities and with open paths on the WCML there is more room for North West - East Midlands trains or South West to Merseyside etc.

 

[py_megapixel]

Moor St/Curzon St and New St are about 300m apart. The most direct route goes via a fairly scummy road tunnel with a pedestrian bit that I could see being upgraded considerably to provide perhaps a travelator type link, in which case it would be not really any more painful than going from the main trainshed to P13/14 at Manc Picc.

I reckon that 300m walk could be enough to put people off the train though.

I wonder if a compromise could be running the Bristol services through to Crewe. That provides connections with all kinds of places, and Manchester still has a resonable connection with Oxford/Reading/Southampton/Bournemouth via Birmingham Internation, which I believe both HS2 and XC will serve.

 

[Metrolink]

We have had these discussions before. Liverpool, Manchester and Preston don"t each need a service every three hours to Plymouth just so some people don't have to change trains.

Liverpool had a train every half an hour to Birmingham until March 2020 that had connections for both Cross Country routes further south. Preston one every hour.

I see your reasoning but I’m not saying that the demand is focused on one station as a destination it’s multiple along that route. Like if Manchester or Liverpool to the South West became some sort of regular service, it serves Bristol, Taunton, Exeter, Plymouth, Cornwall and the same for in the North West.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I reckon that 300m walk could be enough to put people off the train though.

I wonder if a compromise could be running the Bristol services through to Crewe. That provides connections with all kinds of places, and Manchester still has a resonable connection with Oxford/Reading/Southampton/Bournemouth via Birmingham Internation, which I believe both HS2 and XC will serve.

If you're going to run them to Crewe rather than Manchester, why not run them the rest of the way to Liverpool to reinstate its "IC" service to Brum and beyond?

 

[Metrolink]

I wonder if a compromise could be running the Bristol services through to Crewe. That provides connections with all kinds of places, and Manchester still has a resonable connection with Oxford/Reading/Southampton/Bournemouth via Birmingham Internation, which I believe both HS2 and XC will serve.

Splitting trains at Crewe could be a possibility aswell.

 

[py_megapixel]

If you're going to run them to Crewe, why not run them the rest of the way to Liverpool?

My mistake! For some reason, I had in my head that you were considering bypassing Crewe on the run to Liverpool - which of course wouldn't make a lot of sense.

The only objection I'd have to running to Liverpool would be the additional diesel-under-the-wires mileage that it would entail, but if we're working on the assumption that XC will have a new fleet by then I guess it makes sense.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only objection I'd have to running to Liverpool would be the additional diesel-under-the-wires mileage that it would entail, but if we're working on the assumption that XC will have a new fleet by then I guess it makes sense.

Fair enough. I'd be fairly surprised if XC didn't acquire some 80x (or whatever the equivalent is by then) before HS2 fully opens, that is still a fair way off!

 

[JonathanH]

Splitting trains at Crewe could be a possibility aswell.

Not really, it just makes the journey from Liverpool to Birmingham slower (and hogs platforms 5/6).

I certainly think "XC-lite" is a very poor fit in an IC TOC, and could do with being given to EMR or WMR (Leicester) and WMR or TfW (Cardiff). That could be done now rather than post HS2.

If anything, the rest of XC is going to be closer to 'XC-lite' after HS2 than it is now, certainly on the routes north of Birmingham. There will be an argument for pulling the Nottingham service out of XC however as Nottingham to Birmingham will be so much quicker on HS2.

 

[Purple Orange]

Midlands Connect |

www.midlandsconnect.uk

I think Midlands Engine Rail will deal with much of the paths from Bristol to Birmingham and onwards.

Continuing XC in it’s current form will result in a highly inefficient railway, as a majority of it’s passengers will transfer to HS2 and the XC services will prevent alternative services from running that may have value.

If we look at the core services, some routes become superfluous:

• Manchester - Bristol
• Manchester - Bournemouth
• Edinburgh - Plymouth via Leeds
• Newcastle - Reading via Doncaster

WCML Routes:

The need for 2 XC tph on the WCML between Manchester & Birmingham is not needed due to the duplication of services. Bournemouth services for all stations north of Birmingham will be better served with a change at Old Oak Common for Reading & Oxford, while a route through to Waterloo is better for Basingstoke, Southampton & Bournemouth.

Bristol is a more complicated issue and this route could have a case for continuing.

ECML Routes:

Assuming either the HS2 eastern branch is built, or just the western branch with Trans Pennine Route Upgrade (TRU) or Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR), the best route for all passengers from Leeds, York, Newcastle & Edinburgh will be via HS2 eastern branch or via Manchester on NPR & HS2. North of Leeds, HS2 and NPR/TRU will occupy the available ECML paths up to Newcastle.

Sheffield, Chesterfield, Doncaster, Derby, Burton & Tamworth will still want a service to Birmingham therefore this section makes sense to continue.

South West Routes:

2 tph Plymouth - Birmingham continues as is.

South Coast Routes:

2 tph Bournemouth - Birmingham continues as is.

Midlands Engine Rail (MER):

MER appears to propose a number of services that would take up the existing XC paths. They seem to be:

• North East - Reading via Doncaster
• An additional Bristol - Birmingham path
• Utilising Moor Street to terminate Bristol services
• Linking Bristol with the East Midlands

With all of that, I think we will see:

• 1 tph Manchester - Bristol
• 1 tph Leicester - Bristol
• 1 tph Birmingham Moor Street - Bristol
• 2 tph Hull - Reading

 

[irish_rail]

We have had these discussions before. Liverpool, Manchester and Preston don"t each need a service every three hours to Plymouth just so some people don't have to change trains.

Liverpool had a train every half an hour to Birmingham until March 2020 that had connections for both Cross Country routes further south. Preston one every hour.

Maybe XC switching Manchester for Liverpool on the Bristol / Exeter service makes sense post HS2 in place of the LNR service but it will need to continue to serve Liverpool South Parkway, Runcorn and Hartford.

It is essentially only possible to run half hourly from Birmingham to Bristol - one train from the route through Derby and one train from the route through Stafford, preferably the same destination all day and convenient connections to the other places.

If this country is to rebuild then our major cities need connectivity! Liverpool, Merseyside and Lancashire should without doubt be better connected to the south west and especially very large cities such as Bristol and Plymouth. If Liverpool is connected to Edinburgh and Scarborough then I see no reason why it shouldn't be connected with the likes of Bristol and Plymouth.
Plymouth gets pointless hourly trains to places like Darlington , yet what is really needed is a range of destinations, with some in the North east and some in the North west.

 

[JonathanH]

Plymouth gets pointless hourly trains to places like Darlington , yet what is really needed is a range of destinations, with some in the North east and some in the North west.

Those 'pointless hourly trains to places like Darlington' go to Sheffield, Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh which are somewhat larger places.

Running them from Plymouth on one route keeps operations at Birmingham New Street simpler and the same connections every hour to the other northern destinations.

Like it or not, running to Manchester, Liverpool and Glasgow on one train isn't possible.

Does Plymouth to Birmingham justify 2tph?

If not, how workable is a plan where XC runs on a four hourly cycle alternately from Plymouth to Liverpool, Scotland via the North East, Manchester and Scotland via Lancashire. It would just be a logistical nightmare as Bournemouth and Euston trains would need to do the same thing and the whole network would need to be built to have a different pattern each hour.

 

[Purple Orange]

If HS2 had a junction to enable classic compatible services to access an electrified line to Bristol, would most people be suggesting that XC is disbanded completely?

An option I could see is making use of HS2 north of Crewe. If Birmingham to Bristol is electrified, we could have:

Newcastle, Durham, Darlington, York, Leeds, Huddersfield, Manchester Piccadilly HS2, Manchester Airport, Crewe, Stafford, Wolverhampton, Birmingham New Street, Cheltenham, Bristol. That would be faster than via Sheffield.

 

[irish_rail]

Those 'pointless hourly trains to places like Darlington' go to Sheffield, Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh which are somewhat larger places.

Running them from Plymouth on one route keeps operations at Birmingham New Street simpler and the same connections every hour to the other northern destinations.

Like it or not, running to Manchester, Liverpool and Glasgow on one train isn't possible.

Does Plymouth to Birmingham justify 2tph?

If not, how workable is a plan where XC runs on a four hourly cycle alternately from Plymouth to Liverpool, Scotland via the North East, Manchester and Scotland via Lancashire. It would just be a logistical nightmare as Bournemouth and Euston trains would need to do the same thing and the whole network would need to be built to have a different pattern each hour.

How about a world where the railway works for the customer and not for the railway......
The south west should have a connection with the north west, inconvenient though that may be. This is what is wrong with the current system, the customer is an after thought , second place to operational convenience. Totally wrong in my opinion. XC should be there to provide for potential custom, not just going for the easiest option operationally.

 

[swt_passenger]

To Hull? Interesting!

It’s been mentioned in a few previous discussions, and was based on something official by HS2 or DfT, so I’m fairly sure it won’t come as a surprise to many.

I don’t understand why Bournemouth and Southampton always get conveniently left off so many of these proposals. I‘m not convinced flows to say Reading Oxford and on towards Birmingham will automatically use another route...

 

[Peterthegreat]

If HS2 had a junction to enable classic compatible services to access an electrified line to Bristol, would most people be suggesting that XC is disbanded completely?

An option I could see is making use of HS2 north of Crewe. If Birmingham to Bristol is electrified, we could have:

Newcastle, Durham, Darlington, York, Leeds, Huddersfield, Manchester Piccadilly HS2, Manchester Airport, Crewe, Stafford, Wolverhampton, Birmingham New Street, Cheltenham, Bristol. That would be faster than via Sheffield.

I doubt it would be quicker. Leeds to Birmingham via Sheffield should be around 1 hour 55. Going via Huddersfield, Manchester, Crewe, Stafford and Wolverhampton is unlikely to be faster.

 

[adrock1976]

As what I had suggested in the InterCity post-HS2 thread I had started the other week:

Glasgow/Edinburgh Waverley - Bournemouth via Preston
Manchester - Reading/Southampton via Stoke-on-Trent
Edinburgh/Newcastle - Exeter/Plymouth/Penzance via Doncaster
Leeds - Exeter/Plymouth via Wakefield Westgate

Furthermore, North West England - South West England will be:

Liverpool Lime Street - Exeter/Plymouth calling Runcorn, Crewe, Shrewsbury, Hereford, Abergavenny, Severn Tunnel Junction, maybe Filton Abbey Wood, Bristol Temple Meads, Taunton, Tiverton Parkway, Exeter St Davids, and stations to Plymouth.

 

[Purple Orange]

I doubt it would be quicker. Leeds to Birmingham via Sheffield should be around 1 hour 55. Going via Huddersfield, Manchester, Crewe, Stafford and Wolverhampton is unlikely to be faster.

Leeds - Manchester will be 30 mins with NPR and 40 mins with TRU
Manchester - Crewe will be 15-20 mins
Crewe - Birmingham is 50-60 mins

It could well be a competitive time. If the train carries the HS2 track to Curzon Street, the Manchester route will win hands down.

It’s been mentioned in a few previous discussions, and was based on something official by HS2 or DfT, so I’m fairly sure it won’t come as a surprise to many.

I don’t understand why Bournemouth and Southampton always get conveniently left off so many of these proposals. I‘m not convinced flows to say Reading Oxford and on towards Birmingham will automatically use another route...

I think there will be Bournemouth to Birmingham and Plymouth to Birmingham as there is today. The question is whether those trains carry on further north to Manchester or Leeds, or do the go to another destination (Liverpool, Hull, Leicester or Nottingham) or terminate in Birmingham instead?