XC trains behing heavily used by Wolverhampton to Birmingham commuters: how could this be resolved?

[MarkyT]

I've noted The LM Shrewsbury stopper, taking 18m to WVH, usually leaves BHM 5m ahead of a northbound XC, taking 16m. It makes one additional stop at Smethwick Galton Bridge. This in itself looks like some sort of attempt to divert passengers away from the XC. The LM service, starting from BHM is also much more likely to be on time than a long-distance service.

 

[Meerkat]

Gives them 15 odd minutes to get through the entire train to police it. Get one person who argues or someone with a question and that's gone.

Why do they need to get through the entire train?
If it’s commuters then the news of the occasional penalty fare would soon spread.
But you would really need very clear signage and announcements at Birmingham New Street.

 

[MarkyT]

He has provided a multi million pound solution to still not make people use the stopper as its still slower than the XC.

Quite. Infrastructure improvements and the longer trains on the locals it might allow, are not going to alter behaviour without some commercial incentives. Good to know an extension is at least plausible if the stoppers do get significantly busier in the future, but that's a separate more general matter and there might be length constraints elsewhere that need tackling.

 

[The Planner]

Maybe just rejig the timetable so the Avanti or the Liverpool leaves/arrives at Birmingham first.

The Domino effect of trying to tweak XC is considerable.

Why do they need to get through the entire train?
If it’s commuters then the news of the occasional penalty fare would soon spread.
But you would really need very clear signage and announcements at Birmingham New Street.

For a short space of time and thats it, people clue on very quickly as to what they can get away with. Commuters will be on a season ticket, a travel west mids one at that, so unless you remove XC from that scheme it makes no difference.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Whenever I have done that trip northbound, it clears out at Wolves, I don't believe its leisure related.

Birmingham has a fair number of city centre attractions, and you've also got to consider the passengers heading to the NEC/Resorts World adjacent to Birmingham International.

Surely it's primarily down to 'commuters' wanting to get the next available train? May or may not necessarily be season ticket holders.

Not really - the next available train may be a WMT or Avanti service, but it's the non-stop ride that currently attracts people I think.

 

[The Planner]

Birmingham has a fair number of city centre attractions, and you've also got to consider the passengers heading to the NEC/Resorts World adjacent to Birmingham International.

Not really - the next available train may be a WMT or Avanti service, but it's the non-stop ride that currently attracts people I think.

If the NEC and Resorts World are such a draw, then surely this needs amending to International to Wolves? International to New St has a shedload of fast trains. The NEC shows are not a constant 7 day a week affair.

People will adjust their day so they finish whatever they are doing to catch a non stop train, its not a metro route like the Cross City where your train does the same thing regardless of time so it doesnt matter what train you get.

 

[Kite159]

It is fairly well demonstrated on most routes that the number of people who are prepared to pay a higher fee for more space and comfort is minimal, other than on a handful of long distance routes.

The number of people who would want to pay for first class between Wolverhampton and Birmingham is tiny.

With that argument, should XC do away with 1st class between Banbury & Oxford and Coventry to Birmingham where the trains get massively overcrowded? [and for Banbury - Oxford the alternative is a 2 hourly GWR stopper]

@MarkyT those WMT services to/from Shrewsbury in my experience are a bit hopeless at time keeping (mix of being held at Shrewsbury for the late running TfW services & wasting time outside Wolverhampton). Doesn't help that they have a short turnaround at Birmingham.

 

[JonathanH]

With that argument, should XC do away with 1st class between Banbury & Oxford and Coventry to Birmingham where the trains get massively overcrowded? [and for Banbury - Oxford the alternative is a 2 hourly GWR stopper]

No, the post I was responding to was suggesting that first class should be fitted on all trains other than short distance metro services. There is a place for first class on CrossCountry, and seemingly a need to remove short distance travellers.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

It’s not just Wolverhampton to Birmingham that’s overcrowded. Very large parts of the XC network are sardine conditions with an additional aroma of toilet.

The solution is for DfT to fund XC to lease some more fricking trains.

 

[A S Leib]

No, the post I was responding to was suggesting that first class should be fitted on all trains other than short distance metro services. There is a place for first class on CrossCountry, and seemingly a need to remove short distance travellers.

I think that First should be on CrossCountry, but only if they're running trains of seven carriages or longer (or, if / once able to, restoration of the missing Newcastle – Reading / Southampton and Bristol – Exeter ex Manchester services). Going by how few passengers stay on through Peterborough, I'm not convinced that there's a massive need for first class on Leicester / Stansted services either (or Cardiff ones; there's ~200 passengers per day between Cardiff Central and Gloucester / Cheltenham but only ~60 for Birmingham New Street and Nottingham).

It’s not just Wolverhampton to Birmingham that’s overcrowded. Very large parts of the XC network are sardine conditions with an additional aroma of toilet.

The solution is for DfT to fund XC to lease some more fricking trains.

Out of the 80x classes, which would be most suitable for XC, and if orders were to be made this year (which I doubt will happen, based on pessimism rather than knowledge), how early could they be brought into service? I know that 801s, 803s and 807s are out of the question because of not being bi-modes, which would limit them to Manchester – Birmingham (– Coventry) when it's been established in this thread that Wolverhampton should keep direct services to / from Leamington Spa and further south; would it be possible to have one capable of using third rail south of Basingstoke as well as overhead and diesel?

 

[py_megapixel]

Out of the 80x classes, which would be most suitable for XC, and if orders were to be made this year (which I doubt will happen, based on pessimism rather than knowledge), how early could they be brought into service?

Probably 805. They're a slightly more modern design than the others, there's already a production line going for them, and hopefully experiences with Avanti's batch would allow for the inevitable teething issues to be ironed out before any potential XC ones were due to arrive.

Even if you ordered only 58 sets (enough for 1:1 replacement but nothing more) it would still be a noticeable, if not game-changing, increase in capacity.

I think this is rather unlikely to happen, though.

 

[Peter0124]

If you ordered 805s you would probably want to double up the busiest diagrams then you'd have 10 cars.

 

[JonathanH]

If you ordered 805s you would probably want to double up the busiest diagrams then you'd have 10 cars.

Two 805s would be far too long for some stations on the route. Even two 5-car 221s can be difficult.

Anyway, don't get carried away. That sort of capacity uplift is not on the agenda.

 

[AlastairFraser]

If the NEC and Resorts World are such a draw, then surely this needs amending to International to Wolves? International to New St has a shedload of fast trains. The NEC shows are not a constant 7 day a week affair.

People will adjust their day so they finish whatever they are doing to catch a non stop train, its not a metro route like the Cross City where your train does the same thing regardless of time so it doesnt matter what train you get.

In the medium to long term, we should be able to facilitate people to take those one hop intercity rides when others are available, because there will be the stock available for Avanti and XC to extend services.
In the short term, we do need to find a way to incentivise people to use the trains with spare capacity.

 

[sprinterguy]

Out of the 80x classes, which would be most suitable for XC, and if orders were to be made this year (which I doubt will happen, based on pessimism rather than knowledge), how early could they be brought into service?

Class 810s, for possible entry into service in mid-2028. The 810s have been designed to match 22x performance on diesel.

 

[The Planner]

In the short term, we do need to find a way to incentivise people to use the trains with spare capacity.

You won't though. Given the choice, the vast majority of people will go for the quickest service and organise themselves around it, especially if they are on a season ticket as I would suspect most travelling New St Wolves are.

 

[AlastairFraser]

You won't though. Given the choice, the vast majority of people will go for the quickest service and organise themselves around it, especially if they are on a season ticket as I would suspect most travelling New St Wolves are.

Results from similar journey pairs where this kind of scheme has been implemented would tend to disagree e.g. Manchester to Stockport.

 

[HSTEd]

In the end crowding will control the distribution of passengers across services.

Anything else is going to require a lot of effort and I don't think its justifiable given the railway's staff costs.

 

[markymark2000]

Given that Cross Country can already manage to split public facing services for buses, could something similar be done for trains?

Here's an example from yesterdays engineering works.
Bus advertised as 15:50 from Wilmslow to Macclesfield 16:20 and Stoke 17:10 (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K70180/2024-01-14/detailed)
Another bus advertised as s 16:10 Macclesfield, Stoke 17:10, Stafford 17:40 (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K70181/2024-01-14/detailed)
In reality, these 2 services are a single bus running straight through. They are just simply split on passenger facing systems to stop journey planners suggesting to use the bus from Wilmslow to Stafford.

For the trains, this would work as having a normal service from Manchester, Stockport, Macclesfield, Stoke, Stafford then all stations beyond that as set down only. You then put on a new service from Wolverhampton, next stop the one after New Street, then that shows as pickup/drop off at all stops inbetween. There you go, no tickets can be sold for local travel and the service would never be advertised at Wolverhampton as stopping at Birmingham New Street. Has zero negative impact on passengers travelling from stops prior or stops after.
Only issue that I think would be seat reservations and in which case, I am not sure how that could be fixed but surely with tech being as good as it is, something could work or is some railway tech too old for it to work, you'd have to rebuild railway systems from scratch?

 

[YorkRailFan]

Two 805s would be far too long for some stations on the route. Even two 5-car 221s can be difficult.

Anyway, don't get carried away. That sort of capacity uplift is not on the agenda.

What about 810s? They have the capacity of a 7 carriage 222.

 

[baza585]

As a temporary solution until more capacity and/or retiming can be provided, why not equalise the walk up fares within the West Midlands and stop selling short distance advances.

Folk may still decide to stand on XC for a faster journey but it does reduce the attraction if the fares are the same.

 

[Meerkat]

For a short space of time and thats it, people clue on very quickly as to what they can get away with. Commuters will be on a season ticket, a travel west mids one at that, so unless you remove XC from that scheme it makes no difference.

That applies to most ticket control though, and they still bother. Good warning and publicised penalty fares will put a good many off.
And yes - short distance season ticket holders should be kept off XC where XC is busy. Isn't that when pricing would make a difference - an excluding XC season ticket would be a lump sum discount that would look more appealing than a few pence a day on walk ups. (and couldn't if be cost neutral for WMT as they would get all the money?)

 

[Bletchleyite]

And yes - short distance season ticket holders should be kept off XC where XC is busy. Isn't that when pricing would make a difference - an excluding XC season ticket would be a lump sum discount that would look more appealing than a few pence a day on walk ups. (and couldn't if be cost neutral for WMT as they would get all the money?)

Some upthread have expressed a view that'd be pointless because people would ignore it and there's not the time for ticket checks. But in my observation, even in the days when Virgin rarely if ever did Euston boarding checks, people largely didn't use the services that were pick up/set down at MKC incorrectly - the odd one did but it was enough to keep numbers down to avoid MKC commuters crowding the trains out, so yes, I agree this sort of thing (and maybe taking XC out of the West Midlands passes) might work as long as it's sufficiently publicised.

 

[185]

Should remove XC from the section altogether and stick 2x 350s on it, running Manchester - Birmingham every 30 mins.

4 & 5 car diesel voyagers are not fit for purpose on Manchester trains, with squat end doors, often taking 4-6 mins dwell time to load & unload.

 

[RailWonderer]

I think that First should be on CrossCountry, but only if they're running trains of seven carriages or longer (or, if / once able to, restoration of the missing Newcastle – Reading / Southampton and Bristol – Exeter ex Manchester services). Going by how few passengers stay on through Peterborough, I'm not convinced that there's a massive need for first class on Leicester / Stansted services either (or Cardiff ones; there's ~200 passengers per day between Cardiff Central and Gloucester / Cheltenham but only ~60 for Birmingham New Street and Nottingham).


Out of the 80x classes, which would be most suitable for XC, and if orders were to be made this year (which I doubt will happen, based on pessimism rather than knowledge), how early could they be brought into service? I know that 801s, 803s and 807s are out of the question because of not being bi-modes, which would limit them to Manchester – Birmingham (– Coventry) when it's been established in this thread that Wolverhampton should keep direct services to / from Leamington Spa and further south; would it be possible to have one capable of using third rail south of Basingstoke as well as overhead and diesel?

They've been allowed to lease 6 or 7 of the ex-Avanti Voyagers, though funding for more was declined.

Probably 805. They're a slightly more modern design than the others, there's already a production line going for them, and hopefully experiences with Avanti's batch would allow for the inevitable teething issues to be ironed out before any potential XC ones were due to arrive.

Even if you ordered only 58 sets (enough for 1:1 replacement but nothing more) it would still be a noticeable, if not game-changing, increase in capacity.

I think this is rather unlikely to happen, though.

The Voyagers just need a good refurbishment of the type Avanti did with theirs, and for more of them to run doubled up. They are midlife trains and I don't see them being replaced until they are life expired in 15-20 years time.

I like the idea of seasons tickets excluding XC but in certain areas (Oxford - Banbury) GWR would have to extend the Oxford fast and maybe run a second tph in the peaks to absorb the commuters now not using XC in this scenario.

Should remove XC from the Birmingham - Manchester section altogether and stick 2x 350s on it, running Manchester - Birmingham every 30 mins.

4 & 5 car diesel voyagers are not fit for purpose on Manchester trains, with squat end doors, often taking 4-6 mins dwell time to load & unload.

This has been proposed in the past but it means more trains terminating at New St plus west country and southern passengers having to change at New St and losing direct connectivity which is the point of XC.

At this point it's worth trying out and it would certainly help punctuality in the timetable.

 

[A S Leib]

I like the idea of seasons tickets excluding XC but in certain areas (Oxford - Banbury) GWR would have to extend the Oxford fast and maybe run a second tph in the peaks to absorb the commuters now not using XC in this scenario.

And of course XC is the only practical choice between Cheltenham, Birmingham, Tamworth and Derby.

 

[Starmill]

Would be more simple for Tickets sold to and from Coventry and Wolverhampton and stations in-between, have a "Not XC" restriction. Tickets to/from stations south east of Coventry and North of Wolves wouldn't be affected. Then XC Revenue protection patrol the trains with lots of announcements about validity.

XC revenue could check some trains, but most Friday afternoon, Saturday daytime and Tuesday - Thursday office commuter peak flow trains they simply cannot check Standard. It's just not going to happen. There are too many people standing to do a check.

Now they could work around this with two checks i.e. gateline and approaching the platform but that's strongly discouraged because it's so customer-unfriendly and creates extra congestion on platforms. Frequently it's also very ineffective because the platform will be used by another service two minutes before or afterwards.

XC know all this, and even if they could do something about it, they'd be diverting RPI resources away from the need to focus on ticketless travel and detection of fraud (fake tickets, re-use etc etc). Spending loads of time just checking Coventry - Wolverhampton would really undermine their ability to do that, which is more important in a business sense.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This has been proposed in the past but it means more trains terminating at New St plus west country and southern passengers having to change at New St and losing direct connectivity which is the point of XC.

At this point it's worth trying out and it would certainly help punctuality in the timetable.

The big advantage of moving the Manchester service to use 350s (perhaps just give it to WMT instead and have them keep some or all of the 350/2s refurbished to 2+2 for it?) is that it would free up Voyagers to strengthen other problem services.

Are there enough paths to run them to Coventry instead and terminate there? There was talk at one point of the TfW doing that so there must be at least one hourly path.

I suspect the vast majority of passengers from Manchester are going to Birmingham anyway, not the Westcountry nor Reading (though there is a reasonable flow to Bristol). One option would be for one of the trains to be a 350 worked WMT service and the other to be XC, doubled up with the freed up Voyagers, so retaining a Bristol through service but not a Reading one?

Of course that doesn't fully address the other XC leg which also passes through that corridor with short trains.

 

[JW4]

The big advantage of moving the Manchester service to use 350s (perhaps just give it to WMT instead and have them keep some or all of the 350/2s refurbished to 2+2 for it?) is that it would free up Voyagers to strengthen other problem services.

I don’t think WMT would want to keep the 350/2‘s for that given their usage costs and their failure to negotiate a cheaper usage cost from Porterbrook.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don’t think WMT would want to keep the 350/2‘s for that given their usage costs and their failure to negotiate a cheaper usage cost from Porterbrook.

TOCs do what the DfT tell them now, and the money comes directly from there. (Which probably means what will be done about the issue is in fact "nothing").

Anyway, Porterbrook might well agree a cheaper lease on them now, as it's likely to be that or scrap/long term storage like the 379s. Their bluff has been called by way of the 730 order (which I guess they gambled wouldn't happen) and so they have no planned home.