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

[hozza94]

Having been Midlands based during the week for work and being asked to travel to Manchester for a few time in the past 12 months. Can see why this is an issue as the train is relatively comfortable from Manchester, until it hits Wolves where sways of people gets on and stays on the train pass Coventry where I leave.

Maybe the focus should be a frequent high capacity link between Wolves, Birmingham and Coventry, rather than the talks of EMU between Manchester and Birmingham? Yes the latter is good to have, but the former is desperately lacking in capacity and frequency.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Having been Midlands based during the week for work and being asked to travel to Manchester for a few time in the past 12 months. Can see why this is an issue as the train is relatively comfortable from Manchester, until it hits Wolves where sways of people gets on and stays on the train pass Coventry where I leave.

Maybe the focus should be a frequent high capacity link between Wolves, Birmingham and Coventry, rather than the talks of EMU between Manchester and Birmingham? Yes the latter is good to have, but the former is desperately lacking in capacity and frequency.

Problem is capacity along the Stour Valley line between Wolves and Birmingham, which is severely constrained.

A partial solution to this would be: 1) negotiate an agreement with all TOCs operating along this corridor to use units of a minimum length and seating capacity, or 2) discuss a plan to incentivise people to use the WM Metro between Wolverhampton and Birmingham with TfWM - anything else would require significant upgrades.

 

[The Planner]

Problem is capacity along the Stour Valley line between Wolves and Birmingham, which is severely constrained.

A partial solution to this would be: 1) negotiate an agreement with all TOCs operating along this corridor to use units of a minimum length and seating capacity, or 2) discuss a plan to incentivise people to use the WM Metro between Wolverhampton and Birmingham with TfWM - anything else would require significant upgrades.

You would need to make the tram free to do that. Its 46 minutes from Wolves station to New St. 2½-3 times as long as the train and they can't carry as many people. Its only 5tph as well.

 

[AlastairFraser]

You would need to make the tram free to do that. Its 46 minutes from Wolves station to New St. 2½-3 times as long as the train and they can't carry as many people. Its only 5tph as well.

New St isn't necessarily where people want though - increased frequency to Bull St would do the job for a lot of Birmingham commuters, in conjunction with a significantly cheaper tram at least.
Of course we know the best option would for XC to run double Voyagers/Turbostars on all their services, except for a select few at quiet times.
But, while the DfT has its current attitude towards increasing capacity, we have to make more feasible plans.

 

[Topological]

Is there an argument for making the longer EMUs the fastest services and then letting the CrossCountry trains pick up the stops? That would change the incentives without a massive amount of change.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Is there an argument for making the longer EMUs the fastest services and then letting the CrossCountry trains pick up the stops? That would change the incentives without a massive amount of change.

This would likely mess up pathing for the XC services elsewhere unfortunately, unless you reduced the dwell time at New St (this would mean introducing a huge punctuality risk to the service however).

 

[The Planner]

New St isn't necessarily where people want though - increased frequency to Bull St would do the job for a lot of Birmingham commuters, in conjunction with a significantly cheaper tram at least.
Of course we know the best option would for XC to run double Voyagers/Turbostars on all their services, except for a select few at quiet times.
But, while the DfT has its current attitude towards increasing capacity, we have to make more feasible plans.

The tram isnt feasible, people will still take the quicker option.

 

[AlastairFraser]

The tram isnt feasible, people will still take the quicker option.

Even if they're financially incentivised to take the tram?

 

[Topological]

Even if they're financially incentivised to take the tram?

The problem is that the incentive is tiny.

There is also the fact that the tram is to serve all the places between Wolverhampton and Birmingham rather than the end-to-end flow.

Incentivising people to take the local trains is a possibility, but even then it would have to be almost free if the local train was still significantly slower than a fast train.

Worth remembering too that the whole thing relies on people with tickets for the slower trains not just then going on the fasts once they are through the barriers.

 

[The Planner]

Even if they're financially incentivised to take the tram?

What incentive is there apart from doubling the price of a Wolverhampton ticket, of all types including manipulating the TfWM season tickets? An all day Metro ticket is £6.70 to cover all zone, so already cheaper than the train by £2.50. What impact would dropping the tram ticket price have apart from increasing any subsidy it needs?

 

[Mogz]

Crosscountry trains are often used by commuters as there are few alternative services (eg between Oxford and Banbury there are only infrequent and irregular GWR stoppers as an alternative).

The fact is Crosscountry trains are just too damn short and have been since Operation Princess.

You don’t have to be that old to remember when you got 7-10 carriages hauled by a 47.

I know there’s no money available any more but a few extra carriages per train is all that’s needed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You don’t have to be that old to remember when you got 7-10 carriages hauled by a 47.

To be fair you got that on half the frequency. It was an error to increase frequency without increasing capacity, though, I agree. But old XC was less attractive because it didn't run as often so was less likely to be relevant to these journeys.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Crosscountry trains are often used by commuters as there are few alternative services (eg between Oxford and Banbury there are only infrequent and irregular GWR stoppers as an alternative).

Markets like York-Sheffield, Derby-Birmingham, Bristol-Birmingham have either no alternative to XC apart from driving, or (in the case of York-Sheffield) have a few daily stopping services.

 

[AlastairFraser]

What incentive is there apart from doubling the price of a Wolverhampton ticket, of all types including manipulating the TfWM season tickets? An all day Metro ticket is £6.70 to cover all zone, so already cheaper than the train by £2.50. What impact would dropping the tram ticket price have apart from increasing any subsidy it needs?

How about reducing tram prices to be in line with bus prices, and incentivising walk up Wolves to Brum users that way?

 

[The Planner]

How about reducing tram prices to be in line with bus prices, and incentivising walk up Wolves to Brum users that way?

Like I said, you end up subsidising the tram massively to do that.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Like I said, you end up subsidising the tram massively to do that.

But you get more passengers, which mitigates the subsidy increase.

 

[HSTEd]

But you get more passengers, which mitigates the subsidy increase.

Not necessarily, it is entirely possible to increase custom but net degrade the tram's revenue situation.

 

[The Planner]

But you get more passengers, which mitigates the subsidy increase.

A TfWM tram holds 210 people. So 1050 people an hour. But as I repeatedly say, for people to want to add 25-30 minutes to their journey even £2 wouldnt sway enough people.

 

[JonathanH]

You don’t have to be that old to remember when you got 7-10 carriages hauled by a 47.

Well into your 40s to recall any more than 7 carriages. The 7-carriage XC persisted from 1991 to 2002.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Not necessarily, it is entirely possible to increase custom but net degrade the tram's revenue situation.

Depends on the percentage increase in passengers.

A TfWM tram holds 210 people. So 1050 people an hour. But as I repeatedly say, for people to want to add 25-30 minutes to their journey even £2 wouldnt sway enough people.

It may provide a temporary fix until the DfT regain their senses and allow XC to obtain the correct amount of rolling stock for their needs

 

[Irascible]

It may provide a temporary fix until the DfT regain their senses and allow XC to obtain the correct amount of rolling stock for their needs

Except this is a local issue. I'm not saying they don't need more stock for actual cross country services which they absolutely do, but this one section isn't going to make a case.

Capacity isn't there - gosh, if only there was an extra main line route between these two places! I realise there's platform constraints so it'd need different but nearby terminals, if only something like that was ever constructed - trams are no good, any way of running a peak hours coach service people would want to use?

 

[AlastairFraser]

Except this is a local issue. I'm not saying they don't need more stock for actual cross country services which they absolutely do, but this one section isn't going to make a case.

Capacity isn't there - gosh, if only there was an extra main line route between these two places! I realise there's platform constraints so it'd need different but nearby terminals, if only something like that was ever constructed - trams are no good, any way of running a peak hours coach service people would want to use?

Unlikely, the roads between Wolverhampton and Birmingham just aren't fast enough, could even be slower than the tram in peak traffic (up to 50 mins).

I wonder if a 12 car electric crowd buster once an hour (initially during peak) is worth it, if a path can be found of course.

 

[JW4]

But don't worry they will continue to call at both Wolverhampton & Coventry for all those local passengers to cram onto the 4 coach trains to head to/from Birmingham New Street which will be more than any local passengers between Reading & Basingstoke or Winchester & Southampton...

If they were serious about reducing the number of local passengers doing short journeys they would be nonstop Birmingham to Stafford and nonstop Birmingham International to Leamington Spa.

@Kite159 you need to look at the impact CrossCountry skipping Wolverhampton and Coventry would have.

Wolverhampton–Birmingham International & Coventry has CrossCountry 1tph, Avanti 1tph London-Birmingham-North West & Scotland.
So you would cut the service to 1tph. Wolverhampton & Coventry to Leamington Spa, Banbury, Oxford, Reading, Basingstoke, Winchester, Southampton Airport Parkway, Southampton Central and Bournemouth loses its direct services.

Next is Wolverhampton & Coventry to Stoke-on-Trent, Macclesfield, Stockport and Manchester Piccadilly which would lose its direct services. Wolverhampton–Stafford would also lose 2tph.

Wolverhampton to Cheltenham, Bristol Parkway and Bristol Temple Meads loses its direct service.

For Wolverhampton the top 50 passenger flows for 2022/23 includes: (Credit to @RailAleFan for collating the data:

	FY 2022-2023
Ranking	From	To	TOTAL	Weekly	Daily		Operators (Current timetable)
1	Wolverhampton	Birmingham New Street	859227	16523	2360	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Birmingham-New-Street/	AW LM VT XC
3	Wolverhampton	Birmingham International	103442	1989	284	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Birmingham-International/	AW LM VT XC
5	Wolverhampton	Coventry	68056	1308	186	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Coventry/	LM VT XC
6	Wolverhampton	Stafford	65321	1256	179	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Stafford/	LM VT XC
8	Wolverhampton	Manchester Piccadilly	55936	1075	153	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Manchester-Piccadilly/	AW XC
9	Wolverhampton	Stoke-on-Trent	43694	840	120	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Stoke-on-Trent/	VT XC
23	Wolverhampton	Cheltenham Spa	9971	191	27	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Cheltenham-Spa/	XC
30	Wolverhampton	Oxford	7111	136	19	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Oxford/	XC
36	Wolverhampton	Leamington Spa	5709	109	15	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Leamington-Spa/	XC
39	Wolverhampton	Stockport	5557	106	15	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Stockport/	XC
44	Wolverhampton	Reading	5097	98	14	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Reading/	XC
45	Wolverhampton	Banbury	5089	97	13	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Banbury/	XC
50	Wolverhampton	Manchester Airport	4230	81	11

Labs - Flow Statistics - Wolverhampton

CrossCountry timetables also say “Change at one of these stations to avoid changing at Birmingham New Street - see inside for details”

 

[Starmill]

eg between Oxford and Banbury there are only infrequent and irregular GWR stoppers as an alternative)

As I said on another thread these have been changed now so that they are more regular. They're still very infrequent for most of the day at every two hours, of course, so your point still stands, but they have been increased slightly. They continue to not be available at all on Sundays, other than June - August.

 

[Russel]

Would making Wolverhampton pick up / set down only make much difference?

Enforcing it would be easier said than done, admittedly.

 

[Wolfie]

Moderator note: Split from

CrossCountry compulsory reservations: forcing passengers into 1st class

CrossCountry seem to have started doing compulsory reservations on some services, but only between Birmingham New Street and Wolverhampton. This appears to be part of an attempt to prevent walk-ups from Birmingham to Wolverhampton from being issued on these services if there are no seats...

www.railforums.co.uk

I would disagree with declassifying First Class for that section. The easiest solution to deal with overcrowding is to skip the Wolverhampton call all together. Force the commuters to use alternative trains which start at New Street and are longer than a 4/5 coach voyager.

That suggestion absolutely stinks for passengers who wish to board XC services in Wolverhampton.

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.

Wouldn't stop use of the TfWM Travelcard equivalent which l suspect the vast majority of commuters would use.

In that case I wonder how much of a difference could be made by just putting up an electronic sign somewhere prominent at Wolverhampton that says "Next Birmingham train in X mins from platform Y" but ignores the XC services.

Not a lot! Commuters know the regular service pattern and the more canny use RTT....

 

[Kite159]

@Kite159 you need to look at the impact CrossCountry skipping Wolverhampton and Coventry would have.

Wolverhampton–Birmingham International & Coventry has CrossCountry 1tph, Avanti 1tph London-Birmingham-North West & Scotland.
So you would cut the service to 1tph. Wolverhampton & Coventry to Leamington Spa, Banbury, Oxford, Reading, Basingstoke, Winchester, Southampton Airport Parkway, Southampton Central and Bournemouth loses its direct services.

Next is Wolverhampton & Coventry to Stoke-on-Trent, Macclesfield, Stockport and Manchester Piccadilly which would lose its direct services. Wolverhampton–Stafford would also lose 2tph.

Wolverhampton to Cheltenham, Bristol Parkway and Bristol Temple Meads loses its direct service.

For Wolverhampton the top 50 passenger flows for 2022/23 includes: (Credit to @RailAleFan for collating the data:

	FY 2022-2023
Ranking	From	To	TOTAL	Weekly	Daily		Operators (Current timetable)
1	Wolverhampton	Birmingham New Street	859227	16523	2360	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Birmingham-New-Street/	AW LM VT XC
3	Wolverhampton	Birmingham International	103442	1989	284	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Birmingham-International/	AW LM VT XC
5	Wolverhampton	Coventry	68056	1308	186	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Coventry/	LM VT XC
6	Wolverhampton	Stafford	65321	1256	179	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Stafford/	LM VT XC
8	Wolverhampton	Manchester Piccadilly	55936	1075	153	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Manchester-Piccadilly/	AW XC
9	Wolverhampton	Stoke-on-Trent	43694	840	120	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Stoke-on-Trent/	VT XC
23	Wolverhampton	Cheltenham Spa	9971	191	27	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Cheltenham-Spa/	XC
30	Wolverhampton	Oxford	7111	136	19	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Oxford/	XC
36	Wolverhampton	Leamington Spa	5709	109	15	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Leamington-Spa/	XC
39	Wolverhampton	Stockport	5557	106	15	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Stockport/	XC
44	Wolverhampton	Reading	5097	98	14	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Reading/	XC
45	Wolverhampton	Banbury	5089	97	13	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Wolverhampton/Banbury/	XC
50	Wolverhampton	Manchester Airport	4230	81	11

Labs - Flow Statistics - Wolverhampton

CrossCountry timetables also say “Change at one of these stations to avoid changing at Birmingham New Street - see inside for details”

The simple solution for those Wolverhampton passengers is to change at Birmingham New Street or even Stafford. As your stats clearly state the most popular flow from Wolverhampton is to Birmingham New Street. Better move those passengers away from 4/5 coach voyagers to alternative trains which terminate at Birmingham

No different to passengers for Basingstoke being forced to make an extra change so instead of boarding a voyager which isn't normally that heavily loaded (outside times when SWR have given up the ghost) at Basingstoke they will join the large crowds boarding at Reading.

 

[markymark2000]

I've said it before but it seemed to get brushed over. Why doesn't Cross Country have 2 services in retail systems? Operationally 1 train but for passenger facing systems including booking engines etc, it's actually 2 trains.

Southbound, 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 have a 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, there is a workaround though that would stop all online seat reservations from Wolverhampton.

 

[Wolfie]

The simple solution for those Wolverhampton passengers is to change at Birmingham New Street or even Stafford. As your stats clearly state the most popular flow from Wolverhampton is to Birmingham New Street. Better move those passengers away from 4/5 coach voyagers to alternative trains which terminate at Birmingham

No different to passengers for Basingstoke being forced to make an extra change so instead of boarding a voyager which isn't normally that heavily loaded (outside times when SWR have given up the ghost) at Basingstoke they will join the large crowds boarding at Reading.

Never going to happen, particularly in an election year in an area with a load of marginal seats. Wolvo and Basingstoke is a far from appropriate comparison too.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If we had a sensible fares system, I think the ideal solution would be - instead of all the different TOC-only tickets, to simply designate all trains as either local/regional/intercity, and charge a small premium for travelling on intercity trains. Similar to what I think used to be done years ago in much of Europe. Thus people would pay more for travelling on the long-distance XC Voyagers than on (slower) local trains that serve the same places.

However that would not be workable on today's railway: It would require a massive reorganisation of fares and timetables etc. to make it workable, so it's not a practical immediate solution to the problem of XC being packed out with local passengers to the detriment of people going longer distances.