How can Cross country overcrowding be alleviated?

[Jozhua]

An out of the box (and probably crazy unrealistic) suggestion would be to simply have trains with different types of carriages to cater for the different flows. Something similar to the Japanese train in the attached image - some carriages with end doors and more spaced out seating (e.g. lots of tables like TPE's 397s) for long-distance travellers, and some carriages with larger doors and airline style seats to seat short-distance travellers.
It probably would be horrendously complicated to implement, but the long-distance carriages could be reservations only - i.e. can't be in there without a reservation, and reservations would only be given for journeys of an hour or more. The cars designed for short distance travellers could then be unreserved - so short-distance travellers (<1hr) would not get a reservation and have to use these. Probably crazy and would of course require new build units, but it's just an idea. Would definitely require clear announcements at stations etc.
Maybe you could make frankentrain out of half a voyager and half a turbostar

Honestly, class 755's pretty much fill this niche!

Bi-Mode Units, single wider doors and significantly better in terms of level boarding than other trains on the network. If Stadler could qualify them with a few modifications for 125mph running, then they'd be perfect for the job!

A couple of things to address points raised -

Double voyagers only need 3 staff to run in passenger service - leading set Driver + caterer or TM, rear set TM.

Network Rail were always extremely reluctant for anther operator to run trains into New St above the current 4 + occasional charter/freight. Having XC and WMT running the bulk of through services makes sense particularly in terms of dealing with disruption. I'm not sure if this remains the case (it was written somewhere in reference to EMT as it was then taking over the BHM - Notts stoppers). Whether this stance remains I'm not sure, particularly if WMR and LNWR do eventually split fully, but if it does then don't expect to see EMR and GWR running into New St anytime soon.

"How to improve XC" is often an interesting thread as the answer is glaringly obvious to anyone except those with the power to make the right decision, yet in the absence of capacity being made available we have all sorts of other niche ideas to make it less/more attractive.

More capacity is essentially the answer, yes! Plus, with new Hitachi units on the WCML replacing Voyagers, then more double units running on the same timetable as prior seems likely.

XC also has the challenge of figuring out what its services will look like post-HS2. For example, will services run directly from Manchester to Bristol via Birmingham, or will passengers take a 5 minute walk over to New St where they will change on to an XC service?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Double voyagers only need 3 staff to run in passenger service - leading set Driver + caterer or TM, rear set TM.

Though if you want to serve your passengers properly you shouldn't have half the train with no catering. This is why i've suggested taking all the 22x and forming them into longer trains (say some 7s and some 9s) because any length can then be operated with three staff with everyone receiving service.

Network Rail were always extremely reluctant for anther operator to run trains into New St above the current 4 + occasional charter/freight. Having XC and WMT running the bulk of through services makes sense particularly in terms of dealing with disruption. I'm not sure if this remains the case (it was written somewhere in reference to EMT as it was then taking over the BHM - Notts stoppers). Whether this stance remains I'm not sure, particularly if WMR and LNWR do eventually split fully, but if it does then don't expect to see EMR and GWR running into New St anytime soon.

To be fair XC-lite would sit just as well all with WMT (services to the east) or TfW (services to the west), thus not adding a TOC. It just doesn't fit XC.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 May 2022 ==

XC also has the challenge of figuring out what its services will look like post-HS2. For example, will services run directly from Manchester to Bristol via Birmingham, or will passengers take a 5 minute walk over to New St where they will change on to an XC service?

True. There might for instance be a case, if HS2 offers Manchester-Brum, sending XC to Liverpool instead, and leaving Manchester-Brum as a 2tph stopping EMU service more like what Liverpool has now, because HS2 will provide the IC service. Or abandon the North West entirely, and make XC more of an upside down Y, i.e. Newcastle-Plymouth hourly and Newcastle-Bournemouth hourly, all using long single unit 22x formations.

 

[The Ham]

recent trip down to devon - for 1 person travelling, the £100 offpeak return (with railcard) is about the same as fuel would cost for the car, wheras for 3 people travelling, crosscountry is 3x the cost of the car.

The thing is you're only comparing the fuel cost of using the car, even if you own the car there's other costs (although fairly small, for such a trip, such as the wear on tyres, loss of value etc.).

However that assumes that you have a car already, if you owned a car almost entirely for doing such a trip 6 times a year then using the train would almost certainly work out cheaper. Not least because you're is the car at other times increasing your costs over what worked otherwise be the case.

Also is worth noting that sometimes splitting a ticket can make the tickets cheaper. Rail planners have my this evening at £170 (with first class being just £25 more), price I paid (using off peak/super off peak tickets only with no Railcard) £70. As by splitting at Newbury (where the train stops) it allows the use of a super off peak tickets from there whilst East of there on that train it has to be an any time ticket if going long distance.

If I had more time and booked a little in advance I could have gone via Salisbury and got it for £45 (possibly a little less) and more easily had access to a Railcard to give a discount for more of the journey.

Likewise on XC there's times when splitting will give you a discount (for instance almost always at Didcot, or if you're traveling and the rail planners only offer any time tickets but you're arriving somewhere after about 10am). Sometimes splitting a ticket will get you 1st class tickets for standard prices, for example this is sometimes the case between Exeter and Plymouth if you are on XC.

Anyway, there's plenty who use XC, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion about how to deal with overcrowding and there certainly wouldn't be people saying that they'd never use it unless they have to.

 

[Snow1964]

The thing is you're only comparing the fuel cost of using the car, even if you own the car there's other costs (although fairly small, for such a trip, such as the wear on tyres, loss of value etc.).

However that assumes that you have a car already, if you owned a car almost entirely for doing such a trip 6 times a year then using the train would almost certainly work out cheaper. Not least because you're is the car at other times increasing your costs over what worked otherwise be the case.

Also is worth noting that sometimes splitting a ticket can make the tickets cheaper. Rail planners have my this evening at £170 (with first class being just £25 more), price I paid (using off peak/super off peak tickets only with no Railcard) £70. As by splitting at Newbury (where the train stops) it allows the use of a super off peak tickets from there whilst East of there on that train it has to be an any time ticket if going long distance.

If I had more time and booked a little in advance I could have gone via Salisbury and got it for £45 (possibly a little less) and more easily had access to a Railcard to give a discount for more of the journey.

Likewise on XC there's times when splitting will give you a discount (for instance almost always at Didcot, or if you're traveling and the rail planners only offer any time tickets but you're arriving somewhere after about 10am). Sometimes splitting a ticket will get you 1st class tickets for standard prices, for example this is sometimes the case between Exeter and Plymouth if you are on XC.

Anyway, there's plenty who use XC, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion about how to deal with overcrowding and there certainly wouldn't be people saying that they'd never use it unless they have to.

Whilst I agree with your reasoning, if you already have a car you will have factored in insurance and annual servicing, and depreciation already, so will only realistically consider the fuel cost of the journey.

Similarly if you want to compare costs of a rail ticket, then many people will simply look it up, and see what is cheapest.

The idea that a car user will go and hunt out fancy websites like ticket split is fantasy. It is like people hunting out cheapest petrol station in advance, not likely to happen.

If the railway wants to hide its bonkers pricing scheme from occasional travellers they won’t know about the loopholes so just won’t travel by train. No one is going to go to local station and ask for 8 tickets for instalments of their journey because it shouldn’t be cheaper than asking for cheapest ticket.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the railway wants to hide its bonkers pricing scheme from occasional travellers they won’t know about the loopholes so just won’t travel by train. No one is going to go to local station and ask for 8 tickets for instalments of their journey because it shouldn’t be cheaper than asking for cheapest ticket.

That was true until a year or so ago - then Trainline introduced their splitting facility. It's not as good as Trainsplit's, but it has brought the most obvious splits* firmly into the mainstream. As I've said before you can debate to the hilt why people use Trainline, but the fact is they do. They'd be better off using Trainsplit but it would be easier to get a full and standing 3-car 170 up the Lickey with two engines out than do that.

* You can save a good few quid with "clever" splits, but the most obvious ones that people don't think of but Trainline does is where you've got a local connection to an InterCity journey where there either aren't any through Advances at all or they're overpriced, or where a TOC specific discount exists on the "trunk" part but not on the through journey. Going from Merseyrail stations to London using LNR is a very good example of this.

 

[Ken H]

That was true until a year or so ago - then Trainline introduced their splitting facility. It's not as good as Trainsplit's, but it has brought the most obvious splits* firmly into the mainstream. As I've said before you can debate to the hilt why people use Trainline, but the fact is they do. They'd be better off using Trainsplit but it would be easier to get a full and standing 3-car 170 up the Lickey with two engines out than do that.

* You can save a good few quid with "clever" splits, but the most obvious ones that people don't think of but Trainline does is where you've got a local connection to an InterCity journey where there either aren't any through Advances at all or they're overpriced, or where a TOC specific discount exists on the "trunk" part but not on the through journey. Going from Merseyrail stations to London using LNR is a very good example of this.

It comes out top of the results on search engines cos they pay loads of money to the search engine people to achieve that. Most people take the first result and go with that.

 

[43096]

The thing is you're only comparing the fuel cost of using the car, even if you own the car there's other costs (although fairly small, for such a trip, such as the wear on tyres, loss of value etc.).

This keeps being brought up on here but it’s only really public transport nerds who believe it. No-one thinks like this. Depreciation, insurance, servicing, tyres etc is basically a fixed cost of ownership (sunk cost if you want to be specific about it). People will only look at the fuel cost (and possibly parking costs, if any) for that journey as a comparison.

 

[class397tpe]

The thing is you're only comparing the fuel cost of using the car, even if you own the car there's other costs (although fairly small, for such a trip, such as the wear on tyres, loss of value etc.).

However that assumes that you have a car already, if you owned a car almost entirely for doing such a trip 6 times a year then using the train would almost certainly work out cheaper. Not least because you're is the car at other times increasing your costs over what worked otherwise be the case.

Also is worth noting that sometimes splitting a ticket can make the tickets cheaper. Rail planners have my this evening at £170 (with first class being just £25 more), price I paid (using off peak/super off peak tickets only with no Railcard) £70. As by splitting at Newbury (where the train stops) it allows the use of a super off peak tickets from there whilst East of there on that train it has to be an any time ticket if going long distance.

If I had more time and booked a little in advance I could have gone via Salisbury and got it for £45 (possibly a little less) and more easily had access to a Railcard to give a discount for more of the journey.

Likewise on XC there's times when splitting will give you a discount (for instance almost always at Didcot, or if you're traveling and the rail planners only offer any time tickets but you're arriving somewhere after about 10am). Sometimes splitting a ticket will get you 1st class tickets for standard prices, for example this is sometimes the case between Exeter and Plymouth if you are on XC.

Anyway, there's plenty who use XC, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion about how to deal with overcrowding and there certainly wouldn't be people saying that they'd never use it unless they have to.

That is true - I've seem the issue been gone over lots of times on the forums, but people that already have a car for commuting etc., the fuel cost is the only thing they are gonna think about for the trip. Even if that "technically" isn't the only cost.

True, there are plenty who use XC, and more capacity is desperately needed, I think the conversation was more if we were to tempt a significant proportion of long-distance travellers, they would want lots of space and want cheap tickets, and would that be economical? Tbh if crosscountry went for quantity with cheaper advances they could probably fill a 9-car IET.

Yess the splitting is brilliant - sadly it would have only saved a tenner this time, but before I've managed to get first class for only a few quid more than standard. That was a couple of years ago though - not seen comparable prices since - definitely think crosscountry is being a lot more stingy with advances.

If the government really wants to commit to shifting people out of cars for long distance journeys, XC would be the perfect franchise to revamp with bigger trains and cheap advance fares. Connects the country up and can't be accused of being "london-centric" investment either. Perhaps next time boris needs to distract the media from his latest scandal...

 

[JonathanH]

If the government really wants to commit to shifting people out of cars for long distance journeys, XC would be the perfect franchise to revamp with bigger trains and cheap advance fares.

It would be easier and cheaper to just make motoring more difficult.

 

[class397tpe]

It would be easier and cheaper to just make motoring more difficult.

And pretty unpopular and probably get them voted out if it were too drastic

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would be easier and cheaper to just make motoring more difficult.

Not happening.

 

[JonathanH]

Not happening.

Maybe not, but neither are cheaper fares on the CrossCountry network happening.

A higher cost of motoring is currently happening in any case, given petrol prices approaching £1.80 a litre. The reduction in duty of 5p a litre has been consumed by higher prices of fuel.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Maybe not, but neither are cheaper fares on the CrossCountry network happening.

Then the stalemate remains. I utterly despair of XC, to be honest. It's literally throwing custom away by being unsuited for anything it does - it's a bad short distance operator (lack of capacity) and it's a bad long distance operator (high, inflexible pricing and lack of comfort). It literally does nothing at all well.

There needs to be a decision. Is it primarily for short distance? If so, bin it off entirely and replace with a load of shorter "Birmingham to X" services with higher capacity, e.g. Manchester-Brum half hourly regional express using 8 car 350/2 formations a bit like the Liverpools with hourly skip stops at the quieter stations, operated by either LNR or Northern. Is it primarily for long distance? If so, make it more like Deutsche Bahn's IC services in concept with higher comfort and reduced frequency and add local services to replace its use where it's busy e.g. around Birmingham.

 

[John Luxton]

This. The north west and south west desperately need better connections. Not everyone wants to go to London and there are big tourism links between the two areas plus lots of ex pats from the north west living in the south west. I hate that all XC stuff from Plymouth goes the wrong side of the pennines!

Liverpool needs a direct service at least one round trip a day to at least Plymouth if not Penzance. I could be tempted back onto the train if there was a through service for my regular trips down there. Until I passed my test in 1982 used the service quite regularly and it was popular. However, I am not prepared to put up with having to change at New Street with baggage and thus the car will continue to be used.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Liverpool needs a direct service at least one round trip a day to at least Plymouth if not Penzance.

It really doesn't.

I could be tempted back onto the train if there was a through service for my regular trips down there. Until I passed my test in 1982 used the service quite regularly and it was popular. However, I am not prepared to put up with having to change at New Street with baggage and thus the car will continue to be used.

With suitable luggage, i.e. a large wheeled case, this is not the hassle it once was. If anything breaking up a very long trip like that can be pleasant.

 

[Falcon1200]

XC would be the perfect franchise to revamp with bigger trains and cheap advance fares.

Everyone wants longer trains and cheaper fares, however bigger trains = more expenditure while cheaper fares = less income. Not sure now the two can be reconciled.

 

[Trainbike46]

Everyone wants longer trains and cheaper fares, however bigger trains = more expenditure while cheaper fares = less income. Not sure now the two can be reconciled.

This isn't universally true though, is it? Sometimes longer trains are not necessarily more expensive (for example, if moving from an expensive train like the voyagers to a cheaper type of rolling stock, longer trains could actually be cheaper), in addition, something like replacing the current 4/5car fleet with a 7/9 car fleet could bring operational savings, as less staff needed. XC currently has an overcrowding problem, so it isn't unbelievable to say that more/longer trains would lead to higher fares revenue, which could pay for slightly higher operational costs.

 

[Ken H]

This isn't universally true though, is it? Sometimes longer trains are not necessarily more expensive (for example, if moving from an expensive train like the voyagers to a cheaper type of rolling stock, longer trains could actually be cheaper), in addition, something like replacing the current 4/5car fleet with a 7/9 car fleet could bring operational savings, as less staff needed. XC currently has an overcrowding problem, so it isn't unbelievable to say that more/longer trains would lead to higher fares revenue, which could pay for slightly higher operational costs.

Not sure the idea of running DMUs was sensible. Very difficult to change train lengths easily and cheaply. Adding in an additional coach on loco hauled stock is easier.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This isn't universally true though, is it? Sometimes longer trains are not necessarily more expensive (for example, if moving from an expensive train like the voyagers to a cheaper type of rolling stock, longer trains could actually be cheaper), in addition, something like replacing the current 4/5car fleet with a 7/9 car fleet could bring operational savings, as less staff needed. XC currently has an overcrowding problem, so it isn't unbelievable to say that more/longer trains would lead to higher fares revenue, which could pay for slightly higher operational costs.

One option to up capacity while only having to order a few more 80x for an existing operator of them rather than a whole fleet of them would be to reduce XC to being a Newcastle to Plymouth via Birmingham service using re-formed long Voyagers, with Manchester to Birmingham as 2tph of 8-car EMUs (plenty of capacity), and tweaking with existing services a bit to serve Birmingham to Reading by extending GWR Oxford terminators back to New St as 9-car sets and running Reading-Bournemouth as a standalone hourly (an improvement on today) GWR DMU.

 

[Falcon1200]

XC currently has an overcrowding problem, so it isn't unbelievable to say that more/longer trains would lead to higher fares revenue

But if the longer trains are merely to solve the overcrowding issue the fares revenue remains the same ! (or less, if fares are reduced, so is revenue). And if they generate extra traffic..... we are back to overcrowding again.

 

[JohnRegular]

But if the longer trains are merely to solve the overcrowding issue the fares revenue remains the same ! (or less, if fares are reduced, so is revenue). And if they generate extra traffic..... we are back to overcrowding again.

There is surely a lot of supressed demand for XC, if even many members of this forum avoid using them.

I don't think it's as black and white as you make out. Maybe if longer trains are introduced, they will carry more passengers than they do currently, but without being overcrowded as often. Seems entirely plausible to me!

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is surely a lot of supressed demand for XC, if even many members of this forum avoid using them.

I'm absolutely certain there is. There's just nothing good whatsoever about XC, it's a real distress purchase. And if I as a rail advocate think that, Mr BMW simply isn't going to consider it for his business trip - or at least he won't more than once.

Perhaps part of the reason it mostly carries commuters at present (despite having rolling stock grossly unsuitable for that purpose) is because commuting itself is a distress purchase - people expect it to be grim, whether they drive or take the train.

 

[John Luxton]

It really doesn't.



With suitable luggage, i.e. a large wheeled case, this is not the hassle it once was. If anything breaking up a very long trip like that can be pleasant.

Tell me why it doesn't need a Liverpool - Plymouth or Penzance service?

One can travel direct from the north east to the south west and from Manchester too.

I have no problems changing trains without baggage but I am not messing around with cases - straight there or back or I stay in the car. - CrossCountry's loss.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tell me why it doesn't need a Liverpool - Plymouth or Penzance service?

Because demand for that through journey is infinitessimally tiny, and you can't have direct trains from everywhere to everywhere.

One can travel direct from the north east to the south west and from Manchester too.

I don't think those are needed either. I would split off Manchester and give it a 2tph 8-car EMU service to Birmingham instead of what it has. This would provide far better for the actual demand if done using Class 350s or similar - much better for the high commuter loadings and far more capacity to Birmingham which is what a lot of people are actually doing.

I have no problems changing trains without baggage but I am not messing around with cases - straight there or back or I stay in the car. - CrossCountry's loss.

I think you need some more suitable luggage. With a good quality large 4-wheeled case (or two smaller ones if you prefer, or one and a rucksack) it's fine.

 

[John Luxton]

Because demand for that through journey is infinitessimally tiny, and you can't have direct trains from everywhere to everywhere.



I don't think those are needed either. I would split off Manchester and give it a 2tph 8-car EMU service to Birmingham instead of what it has. This would provide far better for the actual demand if done using Class 350s or similar - much better for the high commuter loadings and far more capacity to Birmingham which is what a lot of people are actually doing.



I think you need some more suitable luggage. With a good quality large 4-wheeled case (or two smaller ones if you prefer, or one and a rucksack) it's fine.

I actually have soft two wheeled cases why I would need a four wheeled one I don't know. During recent railroving around Wales I have noticed a number of people struggling with those rigid 4 wheel cases. - Don't seem to fit the racks and the rigidity does not help.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I actually have soft two wheeled cases why I would need a four wheeled one I don't know. During recent railroving around Wales I have noticed a number of people struggling with those rigid 4 wheel cases. - Don't seem to fit the racks and the rigidity does not help.

Either way, one off "long, thin" trips like that are the job of coach tour operators, not the railway (even National Express struggles to make them even vaguely pay). The railway needs to provide a reasonably frequent, consistent, regular interval timetable with good quality connections so people can make a wide range of journeys using it as a system, not a collection of individual routes, not least "bucket and spade" routes that are only really needed for about 2 months of the year if that.

It is much, much better to be able to connect from Liverpool to Plymouth/Penzance once an hour all day than it is to have one direct round trip.

 

[John Luxton]

Either way, one off "long, thin" trips like that are the job of coach tour operators, not the railway (even National Express struggles to make them even vaguely pay). The railway needs to provide a reasonably frequent, consistent, regular interval timetable with good quality connections so people can make a wide range of journeys using it as a system, not a collection of individual routes, not least "bucket and spade" routes that are only really needed for about 2 months of the year if that.

It is much, much better to be able to connect from Liverpool to Plymouth/Penzance once an hour all day than it is to have one direct round trip.

There is nothing wrong with a once an hour connecting service hour service - but on certain key and historic routes one through train a day could be justified. As I recall when I used the Liverpool to Penzance service between 78 and 82 it was far from being the "bucket and spade" route as I always seemed to encounter quite a lot of squaddies drinking copious amounts of Newcastle Brown in the buffet car. The bucket and spade route was the seasonal relief train which operated just before or after the Penzance service and after Crewe went via Shrewsbury and Severn Tunnel - terminating at Paignton.

 

[HSTEd]

What about running Bromsgrove-Manchester trains that can be operated using some of the surfeit of flat front EMUs, and avoid terminating a train in Birmingham New Street?

 

[gc4946]

Because demand for that through journey is infinitessimally tiny, and you can't have direct trains from everywhere to everywhere.



I don't think those are needed either. I would split off Manchester and give it a 2tph 8-car EMU service to Birmingham instead of what it has. This would provide far better for the actual demand if done using Class 350s or similar - much better for the high commuter loadings and far more capacity to Birmingham which is what a lot of people are actually doing.



I think you need some more suitable luggage. With a good quality large 4-wheeled case (or two smaller ones if you prefer, or one and a rucksack) it's fine.

My experience suggests a standalone Birmingham-Manchester service like LNR's Liverpool trains would be much better because of the demand between both cities in their own right.
People travelling beyond Birmingham New Street and vice versa on XC's Manchester trains were a relative minority.
Those travelling to the south and south west from the north west could be separately catered for with a combined hourly service with alternate trains serving Bournemouth and destinations in the South West.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My experience suggests a standalone Birmingham-Manchester service like LNR's Liverpool trains would be much better because of the demand between both cities in their own right.
People travelling beyond Birmingham New Street and vice versa on XC's Manchester trains were a relative minority.
Those travelling to the south and south west from the north west could be separately catered for with a combined hourly service with alternate trains serving Bournemouth and destinations in the South West.

I forget what the service used to be, but half hourly Newcastle-Birmingham with half going to Plymouth/Penzance and half going to Bournemouth would work well. Manchester-Brum would become a half hourly LNR service using 8-car EMU formations; they could perhaps keep the 350/2s to operate it.