Ex Virgin Trains Voyagers, where could they go next?

[tbtc]

There will still be a few DMU diagrams, particularly between Aberdeen and Inverness. Also, when everything is sorted with the HSTs, ScotRail are going to impliment new regular hourly semi-fast services between Glasgow and Arbroath and Dundee, which will all be DMU operated.

Cheers for confirming.

Are there still any 170s due to cascade south, or are ScotRail keeping everything they currently have (for the additional services)?

If the 222s were kept on the current 170 routes (as they can't couple with the 220/221 and it's TMS), reforming into 8 x 6-car units and 19 x 5-car units should give a capacity increase on virtually every diagram. It'd be 27 222s replacing 29 170s, but I'm sure there are some 2 x 2-car 170 diagrams that could be operated by a 6-car 222 instead

And they could replace the 170s on Cardiff - Nottingham, where extra capacity is urgently needed.

If the issues with Stansted (and other areas?) were solved, re-gear the 4-car Voyagers to 100mph (worth it?), they *could* do fairly well on the Birmingham - Stansted route.
220: 174 standard class, 26 first class
170 (3-car): up to 200 seats

With a bit of jiggery pokery, taking out First Class (maybe have a small section), I'd bet the 4-coach units would provide more seats than the current 3-coach units and many Stansted services use just 2-car units.

The shame about Turbostars is they're really slow off the mark.
If this can be solved, some of the 22x fleet may go for scrap.

Sorry, I just can't see "Voyagers replacing Turbostars" as the answer.

• There are going to be a number of 100mph DMUs spare in the next few years (175s/185s etc)
• There are production lines of 100mph DMUs over the next few years (195/196/755s etc)
• There's nothing fundamentally wrong with Turbostars on the Turbostar routes as things are, other than length/seating (so I'd be looking at other TOCs where we could loosen some additional 170s, as a simpler way of doing things - e.g. some additional three coach 195s for Northern to free up their ex-ScotRail 170s)
• The current Turbostar routes don't need 125mph running
• The configuration of Voyagers isn't ideal for shorter distance routes.
• (and that's ignoring the Stansted issue)

Meridians would be fine too. They can't work with Voyagers but they wouldn't need to

I'm not worried about the fact that Voyagers and Meridians cannot work in multiple - Voyagers and HSTs cannot work in multiple either but that doesn't seem to have stopped XC from running both trains.

It feels like the kind of insurmountable excuse not to do something that people come up with when they don't like an idea - e.g. people seem perfectly happy on here with the fact that 22xs would need to be doubled up on a large number of XC - but are aghast at the idea of doubled up AT300s (with no corridor connection) on LNER/ EMR/ GWR.

Plenty of other TOCs have trains that can't work in multiple - it's regrettable - maybe in an ideal world we'd have retained the kind of common standards that BR had (not that *everything* could work in multiple, but there were are least larger fleets of compatible trains), but it's certainly no deal-breaker here.

Wales surely - Manchester to West Wales and the Holyhead to Cardiff route. Overcrowding solved at a financial stroke. Use Chester and Landore depots.

Any surplus could be retained for the inevitable re-opening of Carmarthen to Aberystwyth provided they could accomodate the tail traffic of 6 wheel milk tanks.

 

[whhistle]

Sorry, I just can't see "Voyagers replacing Turbostars" as the answer.

• There are going to be a number of 100mph DMUs spare in the next few years (175s/185s etc)
• There are production lines of 100mph DMUs over the next few years (195/196/755s etc)
• There's nothing fundamentally wrong with Turbostars on the Turbostar routes as things are, other than length/seating (so I'd be looking at other TOCs where we could loosen some additional 170s, as a simpler way of doing things - e.g. some additional three coach 195s for Northern to free up their ex-ScotRail 170s)
• The current Turbostar routes don't need 125mph running
• The configuration of Voyagers isn't ideal for shorter distance routes.
• (and that's ignoring the Stansted issue)

I agree.
However, if EMR are going to have only 170s regionally, then people are thinking of a way to make this happen using XC 170s.
As things stand at the moment there won't be enough spare 170s to go to EMR.

Not sure if XC would take on the 175s and release 170s as there's not much incentive for them to do so. Same with 185s (which are very heavy and thus expensive). EMR won't be buying new DMUs.

It's a puzzle of which I have made my prediction many times.
No doubt I'll be wrong, but it's at least half credible.

 

[quantinghome]

XC seems the obvious home for the WC 221s and also the EM 222s (the lack of compatibility is not a big deal as others have pointed out). Clearly there would be a cost, but as the stock is approaching 20 years old I'd guess they would now be heavily depreciated. And where else are the TOCs going to lease them?

With these additional sets you could get 8-car trains on most services. But more could be done...

Faster trains: The latest timetable appears to allow for a significant speeding up of services from Birmingham to Sheffield. These services are planned to go via Doncaster. If that's possible then the journey time on the more heavily used Birmingham-Leeds route should drop to around 1h40.

Longer trains: With additional units available, how about running some 12-car 'peak-busters'? Obviously they could only stop at major stations.

New destinations: Some major conurbations have no direct services between them. South Wales to Yorkshire and the north-east sticks out as a particular gap. Network congestion may require these to split/join south-west services at Cheltenham.

All-in-all though, it seems a no-brainer to move all the 125mph Bombardier stock over to XC. They have another 15-20 years of service left, by which point they could be replaced by cascaded hybrid units, helped by a rolling programme of infill electrification on the ECML, MML and GWML (hey, we can hope...)

 

[Clansman]

Cheers for confirming.

Are there still any 170s due to cascade south, or are ScotRail keeping everything they currently have (for the additional services)?

170416-420 are in limbo in terms of a future at the moment given they were orinally set for 171 conversion for Southern - which has since been cancelled. Still running around ScotRail at the moment while ScotRail can hold on to them, and are rumoured to be heading to EMR in the coming months.

 

[option]

I would agree with most of the above - XC is the ideal home for displaced 221s. But will XC be willing to pay to hire more 221s?

221s share a problem with 185s - for many routes they are too powerful, and would consume too much fuel. I can see some of them finding their way into storage - wasteful, but parts of the "money industry" probably do not care too much about that -- anything that might make XC lose more money would be their main concern.

Hire costs are only one part of the overall running cost.
The XC don't have the tilt mechanism, so if they did the same done to the Virgin ones, that would reduce maintenance costs.
Hire charges would likely be less than what Virgin are currently paying.
XC may see savings in staff costs by having a common fleet, & it may be better financially to have a 'spare' than cancelling services or hiring in something else.

Do they use more fuel than a HST? Surely cheaper to maintain as well?
They are coming up to 20years of age, there may be ways of getting some more fuel efficiency out of the engines, & driving style.

 

[greatvoyager]

Hire costs are only one part of the overall running cost.
The XC don't have the tilt mechanism, so if they did the same done to the Virgin ones, that would reduce maintenance costs.
Hire charges would likely be less than what Virgin are currently paying.
XC may see savings in staff costs by having a common fleet, & it may be better financially to have a 'spare' than cancelling services or hiring in something else.

Do they use more fuel than a HST? Surely cheaper to maintain as well?
They are coming up to 20years of age, there may be ways of getting some more fuel efficiency out of the engines, & driving style.

It makes sense for CrossCountry to take the 221s, if anything it would be the easiest way to increase capacity without anyone having to learn anything new.

 

[option]

Make it Birmingham to Peterborough and leave Stanstead to electrified Greater Anglia services. Birmingham-Peterborough and Cardiff-Nottingham would flourish with Voyagers and maybe allow for services increases with quicker turnarounds.

I've never understood the weird Birmingham-Stansted service.
The airports that the midlands uses are Birmingham, Manchester & Heathrow. I've never been to Stansted, & can't think of anyone that has.
A cross-country service eastwards from Birmingham makes more sense if it continues to Norwich or Kings Lynn or Ipswich etc.

Even the Nottingham services could be extended up to Lincoln.
There's the weird, once daily each way, Guildford service. That going to Portsmouth, & more frequently, would make Midlands-South Coast easier.
Then there's the north-west gap.

 

[quantinghome]

I've never understood the weird Birmingham-Stansted service.
The airports that the midlands uses are Birmingham, Manchester & Heathrow. I've never been to Stansted, & can't think of anyone that has.
A cross-country service eastwards from Birmingham makes more sense if it continues to Norwich or Kings Lynn or Ipswich etc.

It's not particularly weird. The extension from Cambridge to Stansted is not intended to benefit the Midlands, but rather East Anglia, supplementing the existing service from Cambridge and providing direct services from Ely and Peterborough.

Current direct services from the Midlands and North to East Anglia are Birmingham-Stansted and Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich. This could be swapped round to create Birmingham-Norwich and Liverpool-Nottingham-Stansted, but it's not immediately obvious why this would be any better overall.

 

[option]

It's not particularly weird. The extension from Cambridge to Stansted is not intended to benefit the Midlands, but rather East Anglia, supplementing the existing service from Cambridge and providing direct services from Ely and Peterborough.

Current direct services from the Midlands and North to East Anglia are Birmingham-Stansted and Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich. This could be swapped round to create Birmingham-Norwich and Liverpool-Nottingham-Stansted, but it's not immediately obvious why this would be any better overall.

Which means that XC goes from being a long-distance operation to a local operation.
A service from Kings Lynn south to Stansted & then onwards could better serve the area, operated by GN or GA.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which means that XC goes from being a long-distance operation to a local operation.

That's all it is anyway, it's long been a very poor fit with XC.

 

[sprinterguy]

I've never understood the weird Birmingham-Stansted service.
The airports that the midlands uses are Birmingham, Manchester & Heathrow. I've never been to Stansted, & can't think of anyone that has.

I used to live in Birmingham and have flown into Stansted as it was cheapest. The train journey back to Birmingham took significantly longer than the flight!

Personally, I've never flown to or from Heathrow.

Which means that XC goes from being a long-distance operation to a local operation.

I can't see how Birmingham - Norwich is any more "local" than Birmingham - Stansted. Not that I see any reason to alter the existing services.

That's all it is anyway, it's long been a very poor fit with XC.

One thing I can't understand is why the Crosscountry franchise seems to be unique in being considered unsuitable for a mix of inter-city and regional services. GWR and East Midlands, for example, don't seem to attract the same criticism.

 

[ainsworth74]

One thing I can't understand is why the Crosscountry franchise seems to be unique in being considered unsuitable for a mix of inter-city and regional services. GWR and East Midlands, for example, don't seem to attract the same criticism.

Because it gets in the way of running proper services like Brighton or Ramsgate!

 

[adamedwards]

Perhaps there's a plan from several years ago showing how XC could serve more locations. It could be called Operation Princess..

 

[Clansman]

Perhaps there's a plan from several years ago showing how XC could serve more locations. It could be called Operation Princess..

I'd be careful tossing the XC fishing line out on here if I were you!

 

[Harbornite]

There is no doubt about it that the 221’s should go to Cross Country

They need to get rid of their HST’s

There would be an uproar from CrossCountry travellers if they didn’t.

Why...?

 

[The Ham]

Why...?

Indeed, given that there's been a money spent on improving the Mark 3 coaches I'd envisage that they'll be around for at least 5 years.

Even with the introduction of the Virgin trains 221's there's still going to be a need for them, as without then that's only an increase of 10 units (as the other 10 would be doing the duties of the HST's) which isn't really very much.

 

[GoneSouth]

One thing I can't understand is why the Crosscountry franchise seems to be unique in being considered unsuitable for a mix of inter-city and regional services. GWR and East Midlands, for example, don't seem to attract the same criticism.

Well if it works for GWR and EMR, any chance e we can split northern down the middle and give the East to LNER and the west to the new WCML operator...

Only a suggestion folks, I’m sure I’ll be Bombardiered (silly attempt to keep to the 221topic!) with good reasons why this shouldn’t happen. Is there another thread on the subject? I suspect there almost certainly is

 

[greatvoyager]

Are First/Trenitalia going to refurbish any of the 221 units before they are replaced?

 

[swt_passenger]

Are First/Trenitalia going to refurbish any of the 221 units before they are replaced?

I’d suggest a resounding “no chance whatsoever” to that one...

 

[greatvoyager]

I’d suggest a resounding “no chance whatsoever” to that one...

That's what I thought too. In that case it makes even more sense for them to join CrossCountry.

 

[greatvoyager]

Would pairs of voyagers be better at accelerating than a 7-car 125? If so, could they reduce journey times on XC High Speed Train diagrams.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Would pairs of voyagers be better at accelerating than a 7-car 125? If so, could they reduce journey times on XC High Speed Train diagrams.

It pains me to admit it but yes they would be - 750hp x 8 = 6,000hp, 750hp x 9 = 6,750hp and 750hp x 10 = 7500hp. The HST power cars have 2,250hp engines.

 

[greatvoyager]

It pains me to admit it but yes they would be - 750hp x 8 = 6,000hp, 750hp x 9 = 6,750hp and 750hp x 10 = 7500hp. The HST power cars have 2,250hp engines.

Thank you. I'd be sad to see High Speed Trains go, but I like voyagers. As a regular traveller on them I have no complaints.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Personally, I can't see extra Voyagers going down well with passengers who've complained about them for years. I'm glad this isn't say 2003 (I would have been 10 / 11 years old) as more Voyagers replacing HST's I'd have not been at all happy. I say this as I couldn't cope for more than like 30 minutes on them.

Also the seating layout in the HST's are far more suitable for long-distance passengers than the layout of the Voyagers. I'll explain why...

On the XC HST's, all table seats on the XC HST's have Window Views, they have a Quiet Coach with a table seat nearest the train managers door. And First Class (when I caught the 11:17 from Birmingham New Street to Bristol Temple Meads on the 18/02/19) was a lot more roomier than First Class on the Voyagers which still have plenty of room in this section!

Plus all ends of the coaches in Standard Class there's airline seats - the HST's have a table seat opposite the luggage rack.

There's 70 First Class seats in the XC HST's - 52 in a double Voyager.

At Birmingham New Street, with the HST power cars at either ends of the platform with 7 Mark 3 coaches sandwiched between, you've not got the fumes constantly coming at you compared to DMU's or DEMU's such as Voyagers. The HST's mean you can hear what staff are saying too.

Campaign for Rail said that Voyagers are not suitable for use within Birmingham New Street station on health grounds. With the HST's, nope - thanks to the MTU engines!

However, XC were supposed to be introducing new services from the December 2017 timetable too. So if Voyagers mean these extra services then I'm happy - replacing HST's, nope.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Thank you. I'd be sad to see High Speed Trains go, but I like voyagers. As a regular traveller on them I have no complaints.

Despite my comment below and that I'd be also sad to see the HST's go, XC, realistically, simply can't go on with an HST not being available then using a 4 or 5-car Voyager to run in its place!

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Slightly off topic here but as Voyagers have operated services to and from Cardiff and Nottingham before, perhaps more could also be used here and release 170's to strengthen the Leicester and Stansted Airport routes. Hopefully investment will be made to lengthen platforms on this line. Saves relying on 170's from WMR!

 

[greatvoyager]

Personally, I can't see extra Voyagers going down well with passengers who've complained about them for years. I'm glad this isn't say 2003 (I would have been 10 / 11 years old) as more Voyagers replacing HST's I'd have not been at all happy. I say this as I couldn't cope for more than like 30 minutes on them.

Also the seating layout in the HST's are far more suitable for long-distance passengers than the layout of the Voyagers. I'll explain why...

On the XC HST's, all table seats on the XC HST's have Window Views, they have a Quiet Coach with a table seat nearest the train managers door. And First Class (when I caught the 11:17 from Birmingham New Street to Bristol Temple Meads on the 18/02/19) was a lot more roomier than First Class on the Voyagers which still have plenty of room in this section!

Plus all ends of the coaches in Standard Class there's airline seats - the HST's have a table seat opposite the luggage rack.

There's 70 First Class seats in the XC HST's - 52 in a double Voyager.

At Birmingham New Street, with the HST power cars at either ends of the platform with 7 Mark 3 coaches sandwiched between, you've not got the fumes constantly coming at you compared to DMU's or DEMU's such as Voyagers. The HST's mean you can hear what staff are saying too.

Campaign for Rail said that Voyagers are not suitable for use within Birmingham New Street station on health grounds. With the HST's, nope - thanks to the MTU engines!

However, XC were supposed to be introducing new services from the December 2017 timetable too. So if Voyagers mean these extra services then I'm happy - replacing HST's, nope.

I remember the voyagers being introduced, I was 7 in 2001 when I first saw one. I thought they looked great and I still do. A little too short, as 5 cars should be the minimum, 4 cars simply is not enough, but they are better trains than they are given credit. I guess it's one of those things where you either like them or you don't.
Either way, if it means an increase in capacity and more double formations, that should be fine. It's about time they were refurbished though.

 

[greatvoyager]

Would cascaded Voyagers from West Coast to CrossCountry be better suited to strengthening existing services, introducing new routes or giving additional frequency on current routes?

 

[ScottGallagher]

Would they be any good for Waterloo - Exeter to replace 159's?

 

[tiptoptaff]

Would they be any good for Waterloo - Exeter to replace 159's?

Not really, nowhere the linespeed warrants a 125mph unit. XC is the best place for them.

I don't think the complaints about XC voyagers are about voyagers themselves. Rarely see the same comments made by the travelling public about the VT ones. It was always about capacity. Something the WC 221s will certainly alleviate.

The full voyager fleet could do with an internal refurb. They're very space inefficient inside