Wouldn't it be great if Cross-Country took some of the redundant HST's?

[bnm]

It wouldn't be great for Cross Country shareholders

And they are the only people who's opinion matters

The German government have a say in a lot of things, but they may not own the franchise after December 2019. The DfT do tend to look at a bit more than what the incumbent operator wants to do before they send out the Invitation To Tender.

 

[yorksrob]

Isn't it just. The never scrap anything ever tendency are seemingly obvious to the fact that the 442s, mk3, 769 upgrades are floundering proving to be slow, expensive or unfit for purpose or a combination of the above.

It is a good job the rheum eyed nostalgists didn't hold sway I. The 19th century or we'd still be having discussions about whether we could retraction Rocket and Locomotion no. 1 and how open four wheel carriages could be used as congestion busters.

I'm afraid I don't really consider 19th century open top wagons to be an equivalent to 21st century InterCity comfort.

When will the modernistas on this forum (the sort who probably go weak at the knees at the sight of a brutalist multi-storey car park) accept that the travelling public couldn't give a tinkers cuss whether their train is 10, 20 or 40 years old, so long as it turns up, they can get a seat and it is relatively comfortable.

 

[yorksrob]

Whilst HSTs to CrossCountry could make sense as an interim step before either new (bi-mode hopefully) or cascaded (222s will probably be available before too long) trains can be delivered in the new franchise we do keep running into the wall that is the January 2020 disability compliance. Unless someone wants to spend a lot of money to make them compliant then you won't actually be able to use any cascaded HSTs beyond that date. Plus even if someone does decide to pay for the modifications it'll take quite a while for them to be done considering the existing backlog at Wabtec in Doncaster (still averaging less than a vehicle per month I believe right now?).

Considering that it I can see why the DfT are keen to tweak the timetable to eek out as much capacity as possible prior to the arrival of cascaded or new rolling stock in the next franchise.



It makes the engines modern (though even then I would imagine the underlying design is probably from the 90s) but not the fabric of the trains themselves.

I would amend the legislation so that only one priority carriage per train has to be fully compliant for disability reasons. Much fewer carriages to alter.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I will ask again: How do we fix the short term capacity issues faced on a daily basis on Cross Country trains? Buy new trains is the long term answer. What is the short term one?

One thing I would suggest is to take on the 350/2s when released from WMT, refit the interiors to be more InterCity like and run them in pairs from Manchester to Birmingham (Intl?) for connections to the other XC destinations. The change may not be as convenient, but XC is used mainly for overlapping short journeys and the capacity freed up would make it overall a benefit.

In the long term, new 7-car bi-modes have to be the answer.

 

[DarloRich]

Whilst HSTs to CrossCountry could make sense as an interim step before either new (bi-mode hopefully) or cascaded (222s will probably be available before too long) trains can be delivered in the new franchise we do keep running into the wall that is the January 2020 disability compliance.

There is going to have to be a derogation. The industry can not deliver enough stock that complies with the legislation to meet that deadline.

 

[DarloRich]

One thing I would suggest is to take on the 350/2s when released from WMT, refit the interiors to be more InterCity like and run them in pairs from Manchester to Birmingham (Intl?) for connections to the other XC destinations. The change may not be as convenient, but XC is used mainly for overlapping short journeys and the capacity freed up would make it overall a benefit.

In the long term, new 7-car bi-modes have to be the answer.

Is that going to fix the issues on the NE/SW core?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is that going to fix the issues on the NE/SW core?

It'll reduce them by releasing about 8 (from a very rough working out) Voyagers to allow 8 of the other diagrams to be doubled up. That'd make a very significant difference to levels of overcrowding.

 

[DarloRich]

It'll reduce them by releasing about 8 (from a very rough working out) Voyagers to allow 8 of the other diagrams to be doubled up. That'd make a very significant difference to levels of overcrowding.

ok - I would rather take enough HST to double up every voyager service

 

[bnm]

I will ask again: How do we fix the short term capacity issues faced on a daily basis on Cross Country trains? Buy new trains is the long term answer. What is the short term one?

Let's say 10 more HSTs we're procured. That's 70 Mk3s at one a month through Wabtec to life extend them. Starting after Wabtec have finished the Scotrail and GWR sets. It's not just about CET toilets and disabled access. There's bodywork corrosion to address, interiors to change from GWR/LNER to CrossCountry, and all the other jobs that'll be found on a 40 year old carriage. There's a reason the HST reliability, particularly with GWR, has been in free fall. They old.

So, 70 months for an entire fleet to be in service. Meanwhile the operator has to get a DfT derogation to use the vehicles acquired while they wait their turn through Wabtec. And you're in a queue behind GWR and Scotrail who already have contracts with Wabtec.

Then there's the power cars. Again, maintenance has been running down on them and Scotrail have already nabbed the better examples. So there's very likely work to do there too. Brush are busy patching up Class 43s for Scotrail and GWR.

That's a lot of work to do for something that could only realistically be used for another decade.

I'm sure that a new fleet of bi-modes can be procured and built in far less than 6 years. Cheaper to run, cheaper to maintain, modern design, safer. Will last 40 years.

Ah, I hear you say, "But Scotrail and GWR are life extending HSTs so why can't CrossCountry?"

They are. But are doing so to provide regional services with lower speed, less intensive use and with shortened sets. Now if CrossCountry were considering short HSTs to augment their Class 170 services I could just about see the reasoning. I see no logic in a fleet of HSTs being procured and updated for CrossCountry's main north/south long distance services.


Edited to add:

Now, @Bletchleyite suggestion of 350/2s on the Birmingham to Manchester corridor is eminently more feasible. I'd add that starting/ending them elsewhere in the West Midlands (Brum Intl, Coventry) would be an option, reducing the need to tie up platform space at New St.

 

[Rail Blues]

I will ask again: How do we fix the short term capacity issues faced on a daily basis on Cross Country trains? Buy new trains is the long term answer. What is the short term one?

Problem is, what you're proposing isn't a solution at all. It is a simplistic rather than a simple solution.

Post 2020 mk3s will be non compliant and without the sort of work that is taking Wabtec an age to complete they're useless. Wabtec are unable to to handle the work they have for Scotrail and Gwr, so how long til they get to the front of that long and costly queue? By which time the HSTs will be life expired or very close to it.

As countless other people have pointed out the slower acceleration will nadger the existing timetables impacting other TOCs.

So apart from that they're a perfect short term solution.

 

[ainsworth74]

I would amend the legislation so that only one priority carriage per train has to be fully compliant for disability reasons. Much fewer carriages to alter.

That would have been a sensible/pragmatic approach to old non-compliant vehicles (I see no reason why we can't have fully compliant new build!) but we are where we are and I don't see that there is any chance of such a change occurring.

There is going to have to be a derogation. The industry can not deliver enough stock that complies with the legislation to meet that deadline.

Which is a rather damning indictment of the industry in many ways isn't it? Not as if this deadline has suddenly appeared from nowhere it's been known about for a decade or more! But as I said to the honourable member for EPBs (@yorksrob ) we are where we are!

Personally I think that we will see derogation's but I'm not convinced we'll see blanket ones. I think, for example, Scotrail will secure one fairly easily as they have a plan in place for compliance for their HST fleet. I can see the EMT franchise getting a derogation for their HSTs because the next franchise will be committed to replacing them with new stock.

I'm not sure a proposal that boiled down to "lets use more non-compliant HSTs to increase capacity" would pass muster unless there was a very good answer to a follow up question along the lines of "what is your rolling stock plan to replace them with compliant stock or make them compliant and how long will that take?".

Personally speaking I still believe a far more sensible short term fix is to tweak the hell out of the XC timetable (as has been proposed already) to maximise capacity until either new stock or cascaded stock becomes available.

 

[DarloRich]

Let's say 10 more HSTs we're procured. That's 70 Mk3s at one a month through Wabtec to life extend them. Starting after Wabtec have finished the Scotrail sets. It's not just about CET toilets and disabled access. There's bodywork corrosion to address, interiors to change from GWR/LNER to CrossCountry, and all the other jobs that'll be found on a 40 year old carriage. There's a reason the HST reliability, particularly with GWR, has been in freefall. So, 70 months for an entire fleet to be in service. Meanwhile the operator has to get a DfT derogation to use the vehicles acquired while they wait their turn through Wabtec. And you're in a queue behind GWR and Scotrail who already have contracts with Wabtec.

There will have to be a derogation on the accessibility mods. They cant be delivered in time for the existing stock. Take the best examples of the off lease stock and form them up into new consists. Dump the rubbish. Don't change the interiors, don't repaint them just get them into service keep them together with string and sticky back plastic if you have to. These are short terms measures while your new trains come on stream. I don't care if the seats are brown, blue, green or red. I just want a seat that I have paid for.

Then there's the power cars. Again, maintenance has been running down on them and Scotrail have already nabbed the better examples. So there's very likely work to do there too. Brush are busy patching up Class 43s for Scotrail and GWR.

It is mechanical maintenance - other contractors are available. We arent talking about the warp core off the star ship enterprise for goodness sake! We are taking about a known locomotive with a long service history. Start the works now. Don't fanny about.

I'm sure that a new fleet of bi-modes can be procured and built in far less than 6 years. Cheaper to run, cheaper to maintain, modern design, safer. Will last 40 years.

agreed - however we as paying passengers have to stand next to a bog for 6 years do we? We can provide extra capacity now for little effort. I know it wont happen but it should.

Ah, I hear you say, "But Scotrail and GWR are life extending HSTs so why can't CrossCountry?"

They are. But are doing so to provide regional services with lower speed, less intensive use and with shortened sets. Now if CrossCountry were considering short HSTs to augment their Class 170 services I could just about see the reasoning. I see no logic in a fleet of HSTs being procured and updated for CrossCountry's main north/south long distance services.

As a mere paying passenger ( and it seems the only passenger on this board without the magic masonic first class discount handshake or a railcard) I can, at least as a short term measure until something new can be tendered, contracted, built, delivered and entered into service. We can take a known commodity and use it in the way it was designed for a short time period to improve the service to passengers. is that not a good thing?

 

[tbtc]

We could easily live in a world where more HST could be used on XC. It wont happen sadly which means those of us regular passengers have to stand next to a toilet breathing in anothers pooh fumes for 3 hours. but yeah, fast Voyagers. 14 seats. Great.

I am sick and tired of the wonderful Voyagers.They are not big enough. I am sick of sitting in a doorway (if I am lucky) or standing squashed & roasted next to a 'kin bog. Either XC have to price all the students and rail carders off the train or give us more seats. Or preferably both!

I'm not defending every aspect of Voyagers.

But as someone who works in the industry, you know that it's horrifically complicated to try to amend a service like (Aberdeen) Edinburgh - Plymouth (Penzance) to deal with slower trains, since adding an extra minute here and there (to cope with poorer acceleration) is going to mean finding your train stuck behind a stopper coming out of Leeds/ Birmingham etc, which is going to ruin the timetable.

Nothing to do with smelly toilets - everything to do with the railway being very complicated (as you know from your day job).

That's great. How can we fix the capacity issues in the short/medium term?

East Midlands Railway (East Midlands Rail?) are getting something like a bi-mode/ 802.

That frees up a couple of dozen "125mph long distance DMUs" (i.e. broadly similar to Voyagers, the only unelectrified stock that can cope with Voyager timings).

Or give up on Aberdeen/ Paignton/ Penzance etc - reduce the service beyond Exeter/ York etc (and let local TOCs pick up the strain).

Quoi?

Forum tradition seems to be that every thread about XC will eventually end up with someone suggesting that they reintroduce services to Brighton (or Liverpool, Ramsgate etc), regardless of the fact that those places don't have the capacity etc for a handful of randomly timed XC services (that they did in BR days).

Isn't it just. The never scrap anything ever tendency are seemingly obvious to the fact that the 442s, mk3, 769 upgrades are floundering proving to be slow, expensive or unfit for purpose or a combination of the above.

It is a good job the rheum eyed nostalgists didn't hold sway I. The 19th century or we'd still be having discussions about whether we could retraction Rocket and Locomotion no. 1 and how open four wheel carriages could be used as congestion busters.

Yes - this!

If we could churn out a refurbished accessible train - and even convert them to be self-powered (from all of the 319s/ 458s and whatnot that are going to be spare) then I'd be fine for us to reuse/ reduce/ recycle.

But it appears to be hideously expensive, more complicated than imagined and takes forever. The only silver lining being Viva's conversion of D trains into 230s but that's very much a cottage industry to solve niche problems (rather than a nationwide solution).

Got to deal with reality - however much some people fixate on the "proper" 1970s trains that they grew up with. This is obviously difficult for some posters to come to terms with, but you've got to look at the various Renatus/769 projects (and the queues for upgrading HSTs for ScotRail etc) and accept that "simply convert HSTs" is maybe a bit more complicated than some people would like.

I'm afraid I don't really consider 19th century open top wagons to be an equivalent to 21st century InterCity comfort.

When will the modernistas on this forum (the sort who probably go weak at the knees at the sight of a brutalist multi-storey car park) accept that the travelling public couldn't give a tinkers cuss whether their train is 10, 20 or 40 years old, so long as it turns up, they can get a seat and it is relatively comfortable.

Deal with reality, Rob, not emotions.

e.g. "can HSTs cope with paths designed for Voyager acceleration"... "are plans to upgrade HSTs for ScotRail etc going well"

Once you've answered that, we can worry about bringing back "proper" trains and all that jazz.

I would amend the legislation so that only one priority carriage per train has to be fully compliant for disability reasons. Much fewer carriages to alter.

Look at the furore over TPE trying to introduce a couple of non-accessible trains - replacing accessible Voyagers with lots of unrefurbished HSTs isn't going to solve anything.

The railway industry has known about accessibility deadlines for long enough to have a solution.

Let's say 10 more HSTs we're procured. That's 70 Mk3s at one a month through Wabtec to life extend them. Starting after Wabtec have finished the Scotrail sets. It's not just about CET toilets and disabled access. There's bodywork corrosion to address, interiors to change from GWR/LNER to CrossCountry, and all the other jobs that'll be found on a 40 year old carriage. There's a reason the HST reliability, particularly with GWR, has been in freefall.

So, 70 months for an entire fleet to be in service. Meanwhile the operator has to get a DfT derogation to use the vehicles acquired while they wait their turn through Wabtec. And you're in a queue behind GWR and Scotrail who already have contracts with Wabtec.

Then there's the power cars. Again, maintenance has been running down on them and Scotrail have already nabbed the better examples. So there's very likely work to do there too. Brush are busy patching up Class 43s for Scotrail and GWR.

That's a lot of work to do for something that could only realistically be used for another decade.

I'm sure that a new fleet of bi-modes can be procured and built in far less than 6 years. Cheaper to run, cheaper to maintain, modern design, safer. Will last 40 years

Agreed.

Get some 802s built and don't muck about.

 

[Rail Blues]

I'm afraid I don't really consider 19th century open top wagons to be an equivalent to 21st century InterCity comfort.

When will the modernistas on this forum (the sort who probably go weak at the knees at the sight of a brutalist multi-storey car park) accept that the travelling public couldn't give a tinkers cuss whether their train is 10, 20 or 40 years old, so long as it turns up, they can get a seat and it is relatively comfortable.

Maybe or maybe not. But you have to firstly get these trains into service, ensure they provide the amenities that 21st century passengers expect and ensure they are reliable and we aren't even close in most cases.It is becoming increasingly apparent that getting 40 year old stock fit for the 21st century is difficult, expensive and fraught with risk. Not a single one of these projects is going to plan or anything close to it.

No passengers may not care or even know exactly how old the train they are travelling on is, but nor do they have the bogus nostalgia that afflicts some rail enthusiasts. With new rolling stock increasingly cheap to lease, longevity, build times that compare with patching up aged stock for 21st century and increased reliability and reduced operating cost, the alternatives don't stack up.

 

[DarloRich]

Problem is, what you're proposing isn't a solution at all. It is a simplistic rather than a simple solution.

Post 2020 mk3s will be non compliant and without the sort of work that is taking Wabtec an age to complete they're useless. Wabtec are unable to to handle the work they have for Scotrail and Gwr, so how long til they get to the front of that long and costly queue? By which time the HSTs will be life expired or very close to it.

As countless other people have pointed out the slower acceleration will nadger the existing timetables impacting other TOCs.

So apart from that they're a perfect short term solution.

I want a seat. I don't want to stand next to the toilet breathing in anothers pooh fumes having paid £90 for the privilege. Get me more seats. I think the HST is the answer. Whats yours?

Which is a rather damning indictment of the industry in many ways isn't it? Not as if this deadline has suddenly appeared from nowhere it's been known about for a decade or more!

Agreed. It should have been sorted long ago. It wasn't and it wont be!

Personally I think that we will see derogation's but I'm not convinced we'll see blanket ones. I think, for example, Scotrail will secure one fairly easily as they have a plan in place for compliance for their HST fleet. I can see the EMT franchise getting a derogation for their HSTs because the next franchise will be committed to replacing them with new stock.

Agreed again - however the plan for many could be the government ballsed up our stock order and it is going to come in X instead of Y so we need some trains to cart the passengers about till then. Please give us a derogation! - the same government that ballsed up the order can hardly say no!

I'm not sure a proposal that boiled down to "lets use more non-compliant HSTs to increase capacity" would pass muster unless there was a very good answer to a follow up question along the lines of "what is your rolling stock plan to replace them with compliant stock or make them compliant and how long will that take?".

Agreed - my point is use the HST until your fancy new trains come on line.

Personally speaking I still believe a far more sensible short term fix is to tweak the hell out of the XC timetable (as has been proposed already) to maximise capacity until either new stock or cascaded stock becomes available.

All I want is a seat. I am sick of the toilet fumes or the doorway. I don't want to wait 6 years for a new train or 3 for a cascaded train. I want a seat and i want it now. That doesn't seem too much to ask.

East Midlands Railway (East Midlands Rail?) are getting something like a bi-mode/ 802.

That frees up a couple of dozen "125mph long distance DMUs" (i.e. broadly similar to Voyagers, the only unelectrified stock that can cope with Voyager timings).

Or give up on Aberdeen/ Paignton/ Penzance etc - reduce the service beyond Exeter/ York etc (and let local TOCs pick up the strain).

When are EMT getting these trains and when will the seats become available on XC? The issues with the Voyager have been known for at least a decade. To expect passengers to wait another X years is wrong. We all know they are too small for the job XC ask them to do.

Nothing to do with smelly toilets - everything to do with the railway being very complicated (as you know from your day job).

Come with me on a Friday out of New Street on a full price second class ticket and tell me 3 hours of pooh fumes aren't the issue. it is horrible. The tickets cost us real people a fortune ( no railcard, no special handshake first class club remember ) and we are treated with contempt by XC.

Maybe or maybe not. But you have to firstly get these trains into service, ensure they provide the amenities that 21st century passengers expect and ensure they are reliable and we aren't even close in most cases.It is becoming increasingly apparent that getting 40 year old stock fit for the 21st century is difficult, expensive and fraught with risk. Not a single one of these projects is going to plan or anything close to it.

No passengers may not care or even know exactly how old the train they are travelling on is, but nor do they have the bogus nostalgia that afflicts some rail enthusiasts. With new rolling stock increasingly cheap to lease, longevity, build times that compare with patching up aged stock for 21st century and increased reliability and reduced operating cost, the alternatives don't stack up.

What date can we expect these super new panacea trains in service? How many extra seats will they offer? What can you offer to deliver a solution to the capacity issues in the short term?

 

[xotGD]

What could/should have happened:

- Full length HSTs from GWR transfer to XC. As a short term measure until post-2020 stock arrives.
- Voyagers from XC transfer to Devon/Cornwall locals and Scotland.

That way, all existing coaching stock is made use of.

 

[DarloRich]

Now, @Bletchleyite suggestion of 350/2s on the Birmingham to Manchester corridor is eminently more feasible. I'd add that starting/ending them elsewhere in the West Midlands (Brum Intl, Coventry) would be an option, reducing the need to tie up platform space at New St.

Happy with that as a boost to capacity. While it gets more seats onto the SW/NE core it doesn't completely fix the problem.

 

[nat67]

It would be short term help, but what they really need is a fleet replacement with 7x23m bi-modes, the new Bombardier product looks ideal.

Not 23 more like 60 replace the God awful V things that catch fire and are wedged.

 

[Rail Blues]

All I want is a seat. I am sick of the toilet fumes or the doorway. I don't want to wait 6 years for a new train or 3 for a cascaded train. I want a seat and i want it now. That doesn't seem too much to ask

I want, I want, I want, I want... Listen to yourself. Personally, I want to be married to Penelope Cruz, but then life's a bummer isn't it?

The tickets cost us real people a fortune ( no railcard, no special handshake first class club remember ) and we are treated with contempt by XC.

You might garner a modicum of sympathy if you dropped the woe is me act and took the chip off your shoulder. Do you seriously think the rest of us travel for free or are wafted around in chauffeur driven Bentleys? You aren't the only one who experiences these inconveniences, stop acting the special snow flake.

. I think the HST is the answer. Whats yours?

You haven't offered a solution, you've offered pie in the sky. You may as well have said 'Flying cars are the solution for xc'. Complete and utter magical thinking. There is not a magic bullet short term solution
however much you stamp your feet and issue lists of 'wants.'

 

[sprinterguy]

Not 23 more like 60 replace the God awful V things that catch fire and are wedged.

There has been one engine fire in a period of several years. Funny how quickly some forum members seem to jump on isolated incidents such as this as if part of a wider trend. Based on those sorts of statistics the HST fleet is far more fire prone.

Plus the "23" referred to is the vehicle length, although back of the envelope calculations that I've undertaken before with the current diagrams suggests that 22 diagrams with 7-car bi-mode units would be sufficient to cover the Scotland - South West services and ensure that no XC inter-city service operates with less than five carriages (If the current Voyager fleet was also retained). A moot point in relation to this thread, but then again so is the idea that the Crosscountry franchise will be gaining redundant HST sets any time soon. They certainly won't be within the remaining tenure of the current franchise.

 

[mushroomchow]

Anything that reduces the likelihood of being stuck on a Voyager for multiple hours is a positive.

 

[nat67]

There has been one engine fire in a period of several years. Funny how quickly some forum members seem to jump on isolated incidents such as this as if part of a wider trend. Based on those sorts of statistics the HST fleet is far more fire prone.

Yes that is very true with the HST's it also seems to be the ones going to Scotland. Yes that is very true but the Voyagers are old and need new interiors and smell funny. Also with the HST's I cant see XC getting any more HST's not after the Wabtec fiasco. And it would cost a lot less to make new trains. But anything is better than a four or five car Voyager.

 

[nat67]

Anything that reduces the likelihood of being stuck on a Voyager for multiple hours is a positive.

I'm with you there

 

[sprinterguy]

I want, I want, I want, I want... Listen to yourself. Personally, I want to be married to Penelope Cruz, but then life's a bummer isn't it?

Providing sufficient seats to meet daily patterns of typical demand should be a fairly attainable goal for a TOC, though.

But anything is better than a four or five car Voyager.

I definitely agree with you there!

 

[nat67]

I definitely agree with you there!

But I would still like them to have a few HST's plus the five sets they have already got. Who wouldn't.

 

[Rail Blues]

Providing sufficient seats to meet daily patterns of typical demand should be a fairly attainable goal for a TOC, though.

I agree, but there isn't a magic bullet instant solution that Darlo was demanding and if there was, it certainly isn't cascaded HSTs as people have patiently tried to explain numerous times.

I also like to think with my matinée idol good looks, charm and immense wealth that marriage to the delightful Ms Cruz is more probability, if not a racing certainty. I can probably woo her with promises of free first class travel that Darlo thinks we all have.

 

[DarloRich]

I want, I want, I want, I want... Listen to yourself. Personally, I want to be married to Penelope Cruz, but then life's a bummer isn't it?

You might garner a modicum of sympathy if you dropped the woe is me act and took the chip off your shoulder. Do you seriously think the rest of us travel for free or are wafted around in chauffeur driven Bentleys? You aren't the only one who experiences these inconveniences, stop acting the special snow flake.

You haven't offered a solution, you've offered pie in the sky. You may as well have said 'Flying cars are the solution for xc'. Complete and utter magical thinking. There is not a magic bullet short term solution
however much you stamp your feet and issue lists of 'wants.'

Ok - so no answers then but lots of contempt for fare paying passengers. I simply want a seat I have paid a great deal of money for. I don't think that is to much to ask. Perhaps you have a nice railcard or the flexibility to book months and months in advance. I do not. Many normal people do not.

I have a very simple specification. I want to turn up at New Street on a Friday night and get a seat on a Cross Country train all the way home to the North East. I want to get a seat on the way back on a Sunday. That is all. That is not too great a demand surely?

I agree, but there isn't a magic bullet instant solution that Darlo was demanding and if there was, it certainly isn't cascaded HSTs as people have patiently tried to explain numerous times.

I also like to think with my matinée idol good looks, charm and immense wealth that marriage to the delightful Ms Cruz is more probability, if not a racing certainty. I can probably woo her with promises of free first class travel that Darlo thinks we all have.

Whats your solution to the overcrowding issues? Give us the benefit of your expertise?

 

[43096]

I have a very simple specification. I want to turn up at New Street on a Friday night and get a seat on a Cross Country train all the way home to the North East. I want to get a seat on the way back on a Sunday. That is all. That is not too great a demand surely?

Ever heard of seat reservations?

 

[43096]

Also with the HST's I cant see XC getting any more HST's not after the Wabtec fiasco.

So you know exactly what the issues encountered by Wabtec are, then? No, thought not.

 

[DarloRich]

Providing sufficient seats to meet daily patterns of typical demand should be a fairly attainable goal for a TOC, though.

One would hope so!

Ever heard of seat reservations?

Ever heard of a 4 car voyager full and standing? Seat reservations will not magic up a seat where one exists!