Cross country new traction

[RobShipway]

Much of that looks like change purely for the sake of it. Why propose taking two routes off XC and then propose giving it another, which goes nowhere near XC's Birmingham hub?

I suspect that the Voyagers, and very possibly other 22xs, will be with XC until at least 2030.

The reason for the change is that what I have suggested fits better to what is currently in place. For instance let's take the Norwich to Liverpool Lime Street. The service is run by East Midland railway, yet Liverpool if my geography is correct is more to the west of the UK in Merseyside and if it was to be served by a Midlands Railway, then I would have thought that it would be better served by West Midlands Trains than by East Midland Railway. Okay, the service goes through it's hub of Nottingham, but that is where the EMR service should stop with another operator taking over such as WMT or better still Northern if they have the units to be able to cover the service.

The reason why I suggested XC, is as I have stated before they run Inter-City services. If we work on your basis then there would be no Cross Country trains from the West Country or Bournemouth/Southampton as they are not anywhere near their hub of Birmingham. But what you are forgetting is that TOC's like XC have stabling points in areas, such as they previously had a stabling depot at Three Bridges, so that they could be running their services both from Brighton and Gatwick. You also have to remember that even though Birmingham New Street maybe their main interchange hub, there is other places where connections are made to other TOC's as 'The Ham' has mentioned in his post above. There are many of the XC services that stop at for instance Sheffield, which is one of the places where the Norwich - Liverpool Lime Street. The services that anyone travelling on the Norwich - Liverpool Lime Street would not be able to get would be the Manchester Piccadilly - Bournemouth/Bristol Temple Meads/Exeter services, which would be quicker for them to go via London to travel.

 

[The Planner]

XC will still be there in 2023.

 

[JonathanH]

The reason for the change is that what I have suggested fits better to what is currently in place. For instance let's take the Norwich to Liverpool Lime Street. The service is run by East Midland railway, yet Liverpool if my geography is correct is more to the west of the UK in Merseyside and if it was to be served by a Midlands Railway, then I would have thought that it would be better served by West Midlands Trains than by East Midland Railway.

West Midlands Railway don't operate any diesel units anywhere near Liverpool. The fact that Liverpool is in the west of the country has absolutely no bearing on whether a company called West Midlands Railway should operate the service to Nottingham.

The reason why I suggested XC, is as I have stated before they run Inter-City services. If we work on your basis then there would be no Cross Country trains from the West Country or Bournemouth/Southampton as they are not anywhere near their hub of Birmingham.

Their services operate to and through Birmingham from those places.

But what you are forgetting is that TOC's like XC have stabling points in areas, such as they previously had a stabling depot at Three Bridges, so that they could be running their services both from Brighton and Gatwick.

XC stabling points are all contracted out to third parties. However, the services need to interwork to ensure that the stock gets back to primary depot.

There are many of the XC services that stop at for instance Sheffield, which is one of the places where the Norwich - Liverpool Lime Street. The services that anyone travelling on the Norwich - Liverpool Lime Street would not be able to get would be the Manchester Piccadilly - Bournemouth/Bristol Temple Meads/Exeter services, which would be quicker for them to go via London to travel.

I don't think there are many network benefits from any part of Liverpool Lime Street to Norwich being part of the XC network, even with a common station at Sheffield.

 

[skyhigh]

The reason for the change is that what I have suggested fits better to what is currently in place. For instance let's take the Norwich to Liverpool Lime Street. The service is run by East Midland railway, yet Liverpool if my geography is correct is more to the west of the UK in Merseyside and if it was to be served by a Midlands Railway, then I would have thought that it would be better served by West Midlands Trains than by East Midland Railway. Okay, the service goes through it's hub of Nottingham, but that is where the EMR service should stop with another operator taking over such as WMT or better still Northern if they have the units to be able to cover the service.

You're falling into the trap of suggesting what looks nice and tidy on a map, without considering the operational reality.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You're falling into the trap of suggesting what looks nice and tidy on a map, without considering the operational reality.

If you were going to move it anywhere TPE would make sense, as it has a lot of commonality with south TPE, however it's staying where it is for now at least. Stock wise I'd expect to see ex-TfW 3-car 170s on it, I imagine.

 

[DB]

Given how much money the country has wasted over the past year, more new trains aren't likely to be high on the shopping list - especially as the Voyagers have no other likely home but are not yet reaching expected end of life. It seems very, very likely that XC will get all the remaining 221s, plus probably the 222s as well.

There was a mention in last month's Modern Railways that XC and the DfT are actively looking at new Leeds-Glasgow services over the S&C, using the HSTs - which would make sense if they are surplus given that a fair amount of money was spent on them recently.

 

[RobShipway]

Given how much money the country has wasted over the past year, more new trains aren't likely to be high on the shopping list - especially as the Voyagers have no other likely home but are not yet reaching expected end of life. It seems very, very likely that XC will get all the remaining 221s, plus probably the 222s as well.

There was a mention in last month's Modern Railways that XC and the DfT are actively looking at new Leeds-Glasgow services over the S&C, using the HSTs - which would make sense if they are surplus given that a fair amount of money was spent on them recently.

Given what others have said about Birmingham being XC's hub, I cannot understand why XC would run Leeds - Glasgow services as it goes nowhere near their hub?

 

[DB]

Given what others have said about Birmingham being XC's hub, I cannot understand why XC would run Leeds - Glasgow services as it goes nowhere near their hub?

If DfT want to do it, then it would be up to them! There's nothing to say that franchise maps have to stay fixed forever, and Leeds-Glasgow crosses the areas of two local operators (Northern anfd Scotrail) so neither of them would be a clear choice anyway. There is a depot in Leeds with very extensive HST experience, so potentially an obvious base for them.

 

[RobShipway]

Much of that looks like change purely for the sake of it. Why propose taking two routes off XC and then propose giving it another, which goes nowhere near XC's Birmingham hub?

I suspect that the Voyagers, and very possibly other 22xs, will be with XC until at least 2030.

Can the poster of the above comment tell me please how does XC possibly services between Leeds - Glasgow go through the hub of Birmingham?

My stating that the Norwich - Liverpool Lime Street service being passed to XC at least comes close to their hub with stopping at Nottingham.

 

[greatvoyager]

Can the poster of the above comment tell me please how does XC possibly services between Leeds - Glasgow go through the hub of Birmingham?

My stating that the Norwich - Liverpool Lime Street service being passed to XC at least comes close to their hub with stopping at Nottingham.

Might also help that both Leeds and Glasgow are already on the XC map. Maybe could be used as a diversionary route during engineering works as well?
In terms of the rolling stock going forward for XC, I’m not sure anymore, I can see the merit in most suggestions.

 

[Wolfie]

West Midlands Railway don't operate any diesel units anywhere near Liverpool. The fact that Liverpool is in the west of the country has absolutely no bearing on whether a company called West Midlands Railway should operate the service to Nottingham.


Their services operate to and through Birmingham from those places.


XC stabling points are all contracted out to third parties. However, the services need to interwork to ensure that the stock gets back to primary depot.


I don't think there are many network benefits from any part of Liverpool Lime Street to Norwich being part of the XC network, even with a common station at Sheffield.

TY for addressing in an informed manner before l could.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jun 2021 ==

Might also help that both Leeds and Glasgow are already on the XC map. Maybe could be used as a diversionary route during engineering works as well?
In terms of the rolling stock going forward for XC, I’m not sure anymore, I can see the merit in most suggestions.

Your first para, together with access to rolling stock potentially becoming available, would be my best guess. The truth is that service is somewhat of an outlier for XC but logic and DfT are not always synonymous.

 

[swt_passenger]

I also think that the EMR Liverpool Lime Street to Norwich will either be handed over to XC to run or will be curtailed such that EMR operates Sheffield - Norwich and either XC or WMT operate Liverpool Lime Street to Sheffield.

But why do you make this stuff up? We already know that the present service is to be split in two at Nottingham, but EMR will run both parts. They are recruiting staff for Liverpool.

The ECML 2022 timetable consultation explains everything on the basis that the EMR route will already have been split.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jun 2021 ==

Not sure where WMT comes into this? Most people have suggested that, if the Liverpool-Norwich is split (which has been postponed indefinitely), that the Liverpool-Nottingham would be handed to TransPennine or Northern. Either way round, nothing to do with CrossCountry, who only share tracks between Sheffield/Chesterfield and Peterborough/Ely.

It is only the transfer to a different TOC that is “postponed”. The service split at Nottingham is required prior to the 2022 ECML timetable commencement. Agree it will almost certainly remain nothing to do with XC.

 

[O L Leigh]

crosscountry must operate at least 70% of their mileage under wires already so would make sense.

I recommend that you have another look at the XC route map and do that calculation again.

As to the 170 routes, Nottingham to Cardiff does permit 100mph and even 125mph running so could be suitable for going over to Cl22X operation. Stansted (please note the spelling) not so much because there are too many SP speed differentials along the route which Voyagers cannot use. But in both cases there are stations with 3 car platforms (Stansted is 4 car) that will require SDO which the Voyager fleet currently does not have.

 

[greatvoyager]

Your first para, together with access to rolling stock potentially becoming available, would be my best guess. The truth is that service is somewhat of an outlier for XC but logic and DfT are not always synonymous.

Absolutely, I hope DfT make a logical call about XC routes and rolling stock at some point, but won’t hold my breath.

 

[YorksLad12]

The current franchise extension runs to October 2023. GB Railways should be somewhat established by then and whatever the replacement for the franchises should also have emerged.
It would seem an obvious point in time to examine the current franchise map to see if it still meets requirements. We know GB Railways will be split into regions, potentially the concessions may be mapped closer to those. Though of course CrossCountry ends up crossing all the boundaries by definition.

Thanks @JamesT. I'd assumed everyone had heard of the Late Great British Railways proposition. My bad.

XC will still be there in 2023.

I mostly agree, but we don't know in what form. It might lose the regional services, gain others, be downgraded to just a brand name. Agree also with previous comments about depot locations and avoiding dead/ECS running. Although on that basis you'd think there's be more 80x sets running around Scotland

 

[The Planner]

Thanks @JamesT. I'd assumed everyone had heard of the Late Great British Railways proposition. My bad.


I mostly agree, but we don't know in what form. It might lose the regional services, gain others, be downgraded to just a brand name. Agree also with previous comments about depot locations and avoiding dead/ECS running. Although on that basis you'd think there's be more 80x sets running around Scotland

I would be surprised if there was even any tinkering at the edges.

 

[quantinghome]

I suspect GBR will be following a "simplest pictures are best" approach to XC and opt for the least disturbance possible. Hence EMR and Avanti 221s and 222s all go to XC. There may be some benefit in rejigging the fleet into 2x4-car and 7-car formations, which would give a uniform capacity.

The interesting thing will be what comes next and when. Assuming a rolling programme of electrification the 810s could cascade by 2030, followed by other Hitachi hybrids as the main lines become electric-only. The 22Xs will be over 30 years old by that point and ready for the chop. Once XC is electrified the diesel power trains could be removed from the 8XXs to save maintenance and lighten up the units.

 

[DB]

I suspect GBR will be following a "simplest pictures are best" approach to XC and opt for the least disturbance possible. Hence EMR and Avanti 221s and 222s all go to XC. There may be some benefit in rejigging the fleet into 2x4-car and 7-car formations, which would give a uniform capacity.

The interesting thing will be what comes next and when. Assuming a rolling programme of electrification the 810s could cascade by 2030, followed by other Hitachi hybrids as the main lines become electric-only. The 22Xs will be over 30 years old by that point and ready for the chop. Once XC is electrified the diesel power trains could be removed from the 8XXs to save maintenance and lighten up the units.

Why will the 80x need to be cascaded? The engine rafts can just be removed if no longer needed.

 

[swt_passenger]

Why will the 80x need to be cascaded? The engine rafts can just be removed if no longer needed.

I suspect the thinking is that it will be easier to buy pure electric replacements for routes such as the MML as they become fully wired, and move the bi-mode existing trains (such as 810s) onto the XC network, which will still need bi-modes at that time.

 

[Meerkat]

When the Hitachi factory runs out of work is when XC might get bimodes.
Much talk about how old the Voyagers are - are they still expected to last 30+ years considering the huge mileages they must be racking up?

 

[py_megapixel]

When the Hitachi factory runs out of work is when XC might get bimodes.
Much talk about how old the Voyagers are - are they still expected to last 30+ years considering the huge mileages they must be racking up?

Their mileages can't be that much huge-er than was planned when they were order, surely?

Though judging by how poorly Arriva seems to have them maintained compared to Avanti (and previously Virgin), I can't imagine they're doing all that well.

 

[RobShipway]

Their mileages can't be that much huge-er than was planned when they were order, surely?

Though judging by how poorly Arriva seems to have them maintained compared to Avanti (and previously Virgin), I can't imagine they're doing all that well.

I thought routine maintenance was done by Alstom (Bombardier) at Central Rivers TMD near Burton-on-Trent?

 

[JonathanH]

I thought routine maintenance was done by Alstom (Bombardier) at Central Rivers TMD near Burton-on-Trent?

Yes, although despite being based at the same location, it has been speculated in the past that the Avanti units and the CrossCountry units have different maintenance regimes.

I'm not sure how often they get back there and how many nights they spend at Long Rock, Laira, Bristol Barton Hill, Eastleigh, Crofton, Longsight, Tyne Yard and Craigentinny where they also spend nights in between visits to Central Rivers.

 

[tbtc]

There seems to be a lot of confusion on this thread.

Firstly, the ex-Central Trains bit of XC is essentially nothing to do with the main bit of the franchise. It was probably more about "these two sets of routes don't neatly fit into other franchise boundaries" than anything else (especially as the "old" XC franchise lost the Birmingham/ Manchester - Carlisle - Edinburgh/ Glasgow services to the WCML franchise, part of which was then moved to the TPE franchise). Just because they are part of the same franchise doesn't mean that they need the same stock - they are the kind of routes that 170s are pretty well suited for (middle distance) - they don't need anything more than 100mph DMUs (there's a little running under wires but probably not enough to warrant them being a priority for bi-modes)

Secondly, cascading stock down the food chain isn't always a great idea - 220/221/222s are great at what they do (or would be if they had sufficient coaches etc), but they'd struggle to do the job of a 170 (as discussed before, a four coach Voyager has fewer seats than a three coach Turbostar - the door arrangement really isn't going to be great for services with more regular stops, the 125mph capabilities would be wasted, the fuel use would be far too thirsty, they are too heavy to take advantage of differentials... it'd be a real waste. But we keep having threads where people try to suggest these kind of "food chain" ideas. Similarly, Northern have found out that (surprise surprise!) 100mph 170s are great at doing middle distance routes but can't be cascaded so readily onto stoppers (where the 170 struggles to accelerate/ break as well as a basic Sprinter). Similarly, a football manager might do brilliantly in the Champions League but they couldn't do the business in the Conference - an expensive fast train is great at being an expensive fast train but something cheaper and cheerfuller might be more appropriate for a middle distance route (and that middle distance train might struggle to run a local service. 313s are fine at Southern because they can meet the niche of services like the Hove shuttle (which doesn't require an all-singing-all-dancing high speed unit). Not everything is a flagship route that needs to be operated by flagship trains.

Lastly, line speed isn't necessarily a bearing on the speed that a trainees to do - just because you can do 125mph on stretches of line between Birmingham and Derby doesn't mean that the Nottingham services (which stop at local stations on the line) would ever need to get above 100mph.

WMT operate Liverpool Lime Street to Sheffield

Given what others have said about Birmingham being XC's hub, I cannot understand why XC would run Leeds - Glasgow services as it goes nowhere near their hub?

Yeah, I mean surely WMT are the logical operator for Leeds - Glasgow?

 

[RobShipway]

Yeah, I mean surely WMT are the logical operator for Leeds - Glasgow?

No, Trans Pennine Express is more appropriate.

313s are fine at Southern because they can meet the niche of services like the Hove shuttle (which doesn't require an all-singing-all-dancing high speed unit). Not everything is a flagship route that needs to be operated by flagship trains.

Have you been on one of the class 313's lately? May I remind you that the class 313's are about 10 years older than any of the pacer units that have recently been scrapped. I am not saying that routes like Seaford - Brighton which is local to me should be a flagship train, but at least have trains that sound like they can make it to the next station without the passengers feeling like they need to get out and push start the train! The route previously had three class 377 units, which where ideal for the route and at least included a toilet and proper disabled area on the train, which the class 313 units do not come close in having.

 

[Aictos]

No, Trans Pennine Express is more appropriate.

Have you been on one of the class 313's lately? May I remind you that the class 313's are about 10 years older than any of the pacer units that have recently been scrapped. I am not saying that routes like Seaford - Brighton which is local to me should be a flagship train, but at least have trains that sound like they can make it to the next station without the passengers feeling like they need to get out and push start the train! The route previously had three class 377 units, which where ideal for the route and at least included a toilet and proper disabled area on the train, which the class 313 units do not come close in having.

Which were cascaded to London to enable 10 car operation, to fill the gap left on the South Coast the option of surplus Class 313s were picked which have had a much nicer interior then the former Great Northern ones.

The Class 313s may be basic but they do the job.

 

[RobShipway]

Which were cascaded to London to enable 10 car operation, to fill the gap left on the South Coast the option of surplus Class 313s were picked which have had a much nicer interior then the former Great Northern ones.

The Class 313s may be basic but they do the job.

You just have to make sure you are wearing headphones when travelling on the class 313's, especially when they are coming to a stop in Lewes station.

 

[D365]

No, Trans Pennine Express is more appropriate.

The comment that you are replying to was very much a joke.

 

[RobShipway]

The comment that you are replying to was very much a joke.

So was my other comment from the note that you got that comment from, which was as follows:

passengers feeling like they need to get out and push start the train! The route previously had three class 377 units, which where ideal for the route and at least included a toilet and proper disabled area on the train, which the class 313 units do not come close in having.

 

[Stephen Lee]

There seems to be a lot of confusion on this thread.

Firstly, the ex-Central Trains bit of XC is essentially nothing to do with the main bit of the franchise. It was probably more about "these two sets of routes don't neatly fit into other franchise boundaries" than anything else (especially as the "old" XC franchise lost the Birmingham/ Manchester - Carlisle - Edinburgh/ Glasgow services to the WCML franchise, part of which was then moved to the TPE franchise). Just because they are part of the same franchise doesn't mean that they need the same stock - they are the kind of routes that 170s are pretty well suited for (middle distance) - they don't need anything more than 100mph DMUs (there's a little running under wires but probably not enough to warrant them being a priority for bi-modes)

Secondly, cascading stock down the food chain isn't always a great idea - 220/221/222s are great at what they do (or would be if they had sufficient coaches etc), but they'd struggle to do the job of a 170 (as discussed before, a four coach Voyager has fewer seats than a three coach Turbostar - the door arrangement really isn't going to be great for services with more regular stops, the 125mph capabilities would be wasted, the fuel use would be far too thirsty, they are too heavy to take advantage of differentials... it'd be a real waste. But we keep having threads where people try to suggest these kind of "food chain" ideas. Similarly, Northern have found out that (surprise surprise!) 100mph 170s are great at doing middle distance routes but can't be cascaded so readily onto stoppers (where the 170 struggles to accelerate/ break as well as a basic Sprinter). Similarly, a football manager might do brilliantly in the Champions League but they couldn't do the business in the Conference - an expensive fast train is great at being an expensive fast train but something cheaper and cheerfuller might be more appropriate for a middle distance route (and that middle distance train might struggle to run a local service. 313s are fine at Southern because they can meet the niche of services like the Hove shuttle (which doesn't require an all-singing-all-dancing high speed unit). Not everything is a flagship route that needs to be operated by flagship trains.

Lastly, line speed isn't necessarily a bearing on the speed that a trainees to do - just because you can do 125mph on stretches of line between Birmingham and Derby doesn't mean that the Nottingham services (which stop at local stations on the line) would ever need to get above 100mph.





Yeah, I mean surely WMT are the logical operator for Leeds - Glasgow?

Nottingham-Birmingham(-Cardiff), Birmingham-Leicester-(Stansted Airport) used to have Sprinters too during Central Trains.