CrossCountry - Express or Local Service?

[route:oxford]

XC doesn't go to Wales either.

That's not true.

only serves a small part of Scotland.

It serves all the way to Aberdeen.

 

[HowardGWR]

Has there been a serious land slip in South Wales?

I think the poster and the OP had in mind 'Voyager' services.

 

[headshot119]

I think the poster and the OP had in mind 'Voyager' services.

I must need to pop to specsavers, I distinctly remember commuting into Bristol for a three week period on a voyager or super voyager every morning.

 

[daikilo]

Cardiff is in Wales last time i checked.

Mea culpa, I tend to forget the Nottingham-Cardiff 170 oddity. In BR days Cardiff services went further afield.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

A number of people on the Forum would like some kind of "perfect world" Germanic split between different types of trains - fair enough.

Realistically, since we are where we are, it's not going to be simple to achieve that kind of "blank sheet of paper" world though.

IF you eliminate the "local" stops from XC (albeit some of them are fairly big stations - e.g. nearly four million journeys a year at Stockport - more than Stoke - despite the OP's desire for Stoke to gain a couple of extra fast services to Manchester per hour whilst Stockport loses its longest Manchester services each hour) then what frequency does XC become? Do you downgrade it to an hourly service? In which case, presumably?

And, if Stockport's four million journeys per year are insignificant enough for XC then do you curtail the network at Bristol/ Edinburgh? Certainly no stations in Cornwall/ Fife get numbers anywhere near Stockport's ones. I used to commute by XC daily from Sheffield to Leeds and get annoyed at the scrum of Wakefield passengers, but then Wakefield is a place with around two and a half million journeys per year (at Westgate alone), so it seems silly for an InterCity TOC to avoid.

And how many Manchester - Reading passengers actually are there (to be inconvenienced by short distance passengers)?

Fair enough, bring in some pick up/set down restrictions (which are admittedly hard to enforce on short distance journeys) but I think that the bigger priority should be more capacity on the core - rather than fewer stops - which may need to come at the expense of sending so many 125mph trains all the way to Paignton etc (or crayonista plans for putting additional towns on the "map").

Also, the OP is talking about VTWC not stopping at Stockport or Macclesfield? That'd put a *huge* pressure on the local services - if you can't use the eleven coach 390 then you're going to cram onto a Sprinter - which is potentially bad news for passengers wanting Knutsford/ Buxton (etc) who will see their services over-run by short distance passengers too.

In theory, it sounds good - maybe at privatisation XC could have focussed more on longer distance passengers - instead it got lumbered with the obligation to stop at tiny places like Chester le Street and Dronfield (due to the absence at the time of "local" services on those sections of line). But, given how things are now, I don't think we have capacity to provide alternative services (where are the paths over Stockport Viaduct for a semi-fast Stoke service, and why aren't we using them for other things?).

More seats are what are needed, maybe that means we should run some eight coach 110mph EMUs from Manchester to Birmingham instead (retaining some token through service to Bristol/ Reading, but Manchester had no direct Bristol service for a period under Virgin and coped).

Also worth pointing out that, under BR, Cross Country stopped at some much smaller places than it currently does - e.g. Crossgates to provide additional peak capacity into Leeds - 'twas ever thus.

If I was in charge, XC would have a load of 110mph 350s with a proper layout running from Birmingham International to Manchester and Liverpool (replacing the half-hourly London Mid Liverpool from New Street and relegating LM’s Euston to New Street trains to more stops via Stechford).

The 8 car 350s to Piccadilly would stop at places like Sandwell and Coseley, Stone, Congleton and even Cheadle; and the Voyagers would go to Liverpool or Manchester (e.g. the fast LM Birmingham to Liverpool becoming Voyagers and an XC Voyager fast via Stoke to Manchester; so you might end up with a Bournemouth to Manchester and a Bristol to Liverpool. Connections at Wolves with the 350s running right behind the Voyagers to ‘alternative destinations’ (like an XX30 Voyager to Picc and and XX33 350 to Liverpool off New Street and vice versa) to keep competitive journey times.

 

[dk1]

Mea culpa, I tend to forget the Nottingham-Cardiff 170 oddity. In BR days Cardiff services went further afield.

What about the 07:00 Cardiff-Manchester & 17:05 return Voyagers that operate via Bristol Temple Meads?

 

[swt_passenger]

What about the 07:00 Cardiff-Manchester & 17:05 return Voyagers that operate via Bristol Temple Meads?

I think nowadays they’d be probably be considered outside the normal long distance service pattern, running in marginal time as they do. Bit like Guildford really. If they weren’t already happening would they get introduced?

 

[dk1]

I think nowadays they’d be probably be considered outside the normal long distance service pattern, running in marginal time as they do. Bit like Guildford really. If they weren’t already happening would they get introduced?

Very much doubt it. Looks more like it doubles up as a Bristol commuter in the morning anyway. Apart from offering a direct one-off service to Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stoke & Macclesfield it's a bit of a non event that has perfectly adequate alternatives.

 

[6Gman]

If I was in charge, XC would have a load of 110mph 350s with a proper layout running from Birmingham International to Manchester and Liverpool (replacing the half-hourly London Mid Liverpool from New Street and relegating LM’s Euston to New Street trains to more stops via Stechford).

The 8 car 350s to Piccadilly would stop at places like Sandwell and Coseley, Stone, Congleton and even Cheadle; and the Voyagers would go to Liverpool or Manchester (e.g. the fast LM Birmingham to Liverpool becoming Voyagers and an XC Voyager fast via Stoke to Manchester; so you might end up with a Bournemouth to Manchester and a Bristol to Liverpool. Connections at Wolves with the 350s running right behind the Voyagers to ‘alternative destinations’ (like an XX30 Voyager to Picc and and XX33 350 to Liverpool off New Street and vice versa) to keep competitive journey times.

Are you any good at renegotiating franchise agreements?

 

[HowardGWR]

Another way of expressing the OP's question is 'do provincial cities deserve an HS service between them?'

HS2 has been mentioned, when it arrives. Taunton (a town though) to Bristol, 45 miles in half an hour, isn't bad going but of course it's something of an exception, on a Brunelian stretch.

 

[Ianno87]

Mea culpa, I tend to forget the Nottingham-Cardiff 170 oddity. In BR days Cardiff services went further afield.

Voyagers got to Swansea with Virgin Cross Country under Operation Princess once per day - curtailed as part of the 2003 retrenchment of the service.

 

[whhistle]

Whether Voyagers go to Cardiff on a token service per day or not, is it really that hard to see what the poster was trying to get at?

Or are people more concerned with calling others out, when the theme of the thread isn't really about those particular services?

Why it takes 3 people to point out XC do operate in Wales is beyond me.

 

[cuccir]

To return to the original theme: on the 'core' of their Scotland-South route (that is, Newcastle - Birmingham - Bristol or Reading), XC's services are quite express anyway, and already have somewhat of a distinction between fasts and slows.

The Newcastle-Reading services are essentially the fasts: 1 morning service calls at Chesterfield, 1 evening service at Chester-le-Street, both in commuting hours, but other than that the least used station on this route is Leamington Spa at 2.5 million a year!

Even on the 'stoppers' (Scotland - South West services) they only really have 2 stops per train that you might consider removing: Chesterfield (1.8 million) and each service stops at either Burton or Tamworth.

On the periphery these services do start to rack up the stops and in particular a local Newcastle-Edinburgh service would be great to avoid the Northumberland stations, but other than that I can't see the scope for really reducing calls without passing very busy stations.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Are you any good at renegotiating franchise agreements?

I could probably do better than the clowns and graduate managers at DfT...

 

[Wirewiper]

Perhaps it is time to look at Cross Country differently. Rather than being a stand-alone Train Operating Company (TOC), it could be run by a Joint Board which would co-ordinate longer-distance services across different TOCs, these would then be jointly operated by the relevant Franchises and shown in their timetables with tickets fully inter-available. The Joint Board would also have representatives from the Department of Transport, Network Rail, Transport Focus (to represent service users) and relevant local Groups/Associations and Local Authorities with an interest in a particular route/area. This would give individual TOCs more scope to integrate these joint services with their own and decide how best to achieve that.

Obviously there would need to be a lot of negotiation to decide which routes come under the scope of the new Joint Board (especially as routes currently operated by other TOCs could potentially transfer to the new Board's jurisdiction) and which routes be transferred to another TOC as sole operator. However I don't think it is an impossible task.

 

[route:oxford]

Perhaps it is time to look at Cross Country differently. Rather than being a stand-alone Train Operating Company (TOC), it could be run by a Joint Board which would co-ordinate longer-distance services across different TOCs, these would then be jointly operated by the relevant Franchises and shown in their timetables with tickets fully inter-available. The Joint Board would also have representatives from the Department of Transport, Network Rail, Transport Focus (to represent service users) and relevant local Groups/Associations and Local Authorities with an interest in a particular route/area. This would give individual TOCs more scope to integrate these joint services with their own and decide how best to achieve that.

Obviously there would need to be a lot of negotiation to decide which routes come under the scope of the new Joint Board (especially as routes currently operated by other TOCs could potentially transfer to the new Board's jurisdiction) and which routes be transferred to another TOC as sole operator. However I don't think it is an impossible task.

I don't have an issue with Cross-County being operated as a joint franchise by the Inter-City operators + Scotrail. I'm not so sure about your "relevant local groups" though. Count up the number of City, District, Country, Unitary, Town & Parish Councils that lie alongside the Cross Country Network, not to mention all the other self-worthies, and you could probably fill a football stadium with people all trying to highlight how important they are.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Perhaps it is time to look at Cross Country differently. Rather than being a stand-alone Train Operating Company (TOC), it could be run by a Joint Board which would co-ordinate longer-distance services across different TOCs, these would then be jointly operated by the relevant Franchises and shown in their timetables with tickets fully inter-available. The Joint Board would also have representatives from the Department of Transport, Network Rail, Transport Focus (to represent service users) and relevant local Groups/Associations and Local Authorities with an interest in a particular route/area. This would give individual TOCs more scope to integrate these joint services with their own and decide how best to achieve that.

Obviously there would need to be a lot of negotiation to decide which routes come under the scope of the new Joint Board (especially as routes currently operated by other TOCs could potentially transfer to the new Board's jurisdiction) and which routes be transferred to another TOC as sole operator. However I don't think it is an impossible task.

Sounds a lot like nationalisation. So the chances of that happening during the current government seem slim to none. Also sounds like a good way of increasing bureaucracy. The only reason I feel opposed to the current situation is that XC is financially not very sustainable compared to the other Intercity operations (it requires several times more subsidy per passenger mile/km), despite the eyewatering walk-up fares they set. Clearly, something has to change.

 

[james60059]

In that vein, XC doesn't go to Wales

I remember in the early days of Virgin XC "Operation Princess", I was on a Voyager to Swansea from Birmingham New Street, it was an 08:42 departure from BHM, the Voyager was Marco Polo .

Nowadays Wales have the hourly service to Cardiff and a Manchester - Bristol service via Cardiff Central

 

[MarkyT]

One of the old BR Intercity divisions was Midland Cross Country. Something similar could be created today. For long distance services EMT and XC share a similar fleet and there might be economies of scale possible in the Midlands. I like the idea of joint operations, but without all the bureaucracy suggested upthread. It could be as simple as manning agreements so that GWR crews take over from Midland staff at Birmingham, Cheltenham or Bristol as appropriate for instance, and maybe a WC operator could man north of Birmingham on that axis. Train servicing and some maintenance is already carried out in GWR depots in the west country, and of course XC operate no stations, so this would be merely be an extension of what happens today. GWR will soon have experience of operating another TOC's services in the shape of HEX, so there's precedent. As with HEX, pricing, branding could remain with a rump commercial organisation that also manages delivery by the contracted regional TOCs at the network extremities.

 

[DavidGrain]

These stops, which I will call 'outer-suburban' relative to the big cities are there mainly because in the past it was convenient for older versions of what we now call Parkway stations to pick up passengers who would otherwise have to travel into the big city centre stations. I am old enough to remember when every Birmingham New Street to London Euston train stopped at Hampton in Arden, a little village in Warwickshire, because it had a long platform and a large car park. Birmingham International has now replaced this. Similarly my late father who used to travel regularly from Birmingham Snow Hill to London Paddington used to talk about Dorridge, another Warwickshire village, where trains used to stop for the same reason. A similar reason justifies the stopping of some VTWC trains at Watford Junction. Virgin XC used to stop at Sandwell and Dudley station but that is not in the present franchise.

My local station, Rowley Regis, to the west of Birmingham has the luxury of three morning Chiltern trains to London but the main use of them is to augment the WMR local commuter trains into Birmingham so my chance of a seat before Snow Hill is nil.

Now many of these stations serve areas which have grown up so that they now serve centres of population in their own right and therefore justify the long distance services stopping there more than they perhaps did in past times.

Mention has been made of Leamington Spa but this is a junction station between XC trains and Chiltern trains to London via the High Wycombe line and Chiltern/WMR local trains to stations to Birmingham, to Stratford on Avon and from the end of this month to Kenilworth and Coventry. As far as I am aware no records are available of the numbers of changing passengers at any junction station.

My experience of travelling in Germany is that there might be 1 or 2tph IC or ICE and 1 or 2tph RE or Regio trains. Any denser traffic such as the commuter lines into cities are served by separate S-Bahn trains on separate tracks. OK this might just be my limited experience.

 

[50031]

Regarding XC stopping at small stations, by contrast, they now miss Gloucester (a city) completely, bar 1 train each way, due of course to the reversal required, although I did hear mention not long back, of them reinstating calls on the Manchester services. XC also appear to not want to call voyager/ HST services at Worcester Parkway when it opens. I wonder if there is suppressed demand at Gloucester and indeed Worcester.

 

[pt_mad]

Regarding XC stopping at small stations, by contrast, they now miss Gloucester (a city) completely, bar 1 train each way, due of course to the reversal required, although I did hear mention not long back, of them reinstating calls on the Manchester services. XC also appear to not want to call voyager/ HST services at Worcester Parkway when it opens. I wonder if there is suppressed demand at Gloucester and indeed Worcester.

Doesn't the Cardiff call at Gloucester?

 

[DavidGrain]

Regarding XC stopping at small stations, by contrast, they now miss Gloucester (a city) completely, bar 1 train each way, due of course to the reversal required, although I did hear mention not long back, of them reinstating calls on the Manchester services. XC also appear to not want to call voyager/ HST services at Worcester Parkway when it opens. I wonder if there is suppressed demand at Gloucester and indeed Worcester.

I have always been a bit suspicious about Worcester Parkway and whether any trains would ever call at the platform for the Birmingham Bristol and beyond services. At present these services run through without any stops in Worcestershire at all.

 

[PHILIPE]

Doesn't the Cardiff call at Gloucester?

Do you mean the Cardiff to Nottinghams ? If so, they don't have to reverse

 

[pt_mad]

Do you mean the Cardiff to Nottinghams ? If so, they don't have to reverse

I know but the poster quoted said XC miss out Gloucester completely?

 

[PHILIPE]

I know but the poster quoted said XC miss out Gloucester completely?

Seems the poster is thinking of only those long distance (Voyager/HST) running on the core route, once known as North East to South West.

 

[SteveP29]

The Newcastle-Reading services are essentially the fasts: 1 morning service calls at Chesterfield, 1 evening service at Chester-le-Street, both in commuting hours,

Cross Country doesn't stop at Chester le Street and hasn't for at least 9 years AFAIR

 

[swt_passenger]

As far as I am aware no records are available of the numbers of changing passengers at any junction station.

Calculated records are determined via Orcats rules though, and published as 'interchanges' in the station usage tables. I expect they must have some sort of measure of confidence in them.

 

[DavidGrain]

Cross Country doesn't stop at Chester le Street and hasn't for at least 9 years AFAIR

1740 Newcastle to Southampton

 

[50031]

Seems the poster is thinking of only those long distance (Voyager/HST) running on the core route, once known as North East to South West.

Yes, that was what I was referring to.

I remember in BR days thinking that the gap in Northbound HSTs at Gloucester of nothing between 1002 and 1549 (I think) being excessive! Was probably because of 47 hauled services and the Cornishman to Glasgow Queen Street being between those times