Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Have to say I’m a little surprised we’ve not seen an open access operator a la Lumo dip their toe into cross-country territory yet to compete with XC (and as has already been mentioned, domestic air travel) and tap into the unmet demand. Either with the 180s or preferably ordering some new 7/8/9 car 800x bimodes with interiors properly set up for intercity travel. It’s worked wonders for the ECML, and would be the kick up the DfTs backside that they need when it comes to managing the XC franchise.
Have to say I’m a little surprised we’ve not seen an open access operator a la Lumo dip their toe into cross-country territory yet to compete with XC (and as has already been mentioned, domestic air travel) and tap into the unmet demand. Either with the 180s or preferably ordering some new 7/8/9 car 800x bimodes with interiors properly set up for intercity travel. It’s worked wonders for the ECML, and would be the kick up the DfTs backside that they need when it comes to managing the XC franchise.
I've thought the same, though I think there just isn't enough demand for journeys not involving London to make it pay. The coaches also have a fair bit of the non-London intercity market.
The one bit of it that I think could pay is Manchester to Birmingham, but before XC cut to hourly there weren't paths.
Throughout the various IA threads we’ve been told that we need to make changes in order to cut costs. Well, welcome to the reality that this approach results in. Withdrawal of the HST fleet will realise savings over and above those incurred simply by their operation.
Throughout the various IA threads we’ve been told that we need to make changes in order to cut costs. Well, welcome to the reality that this approach results in. Withdrawal of the HST fleet will realise savings over and above those incurred simply by their operation.
Have to say I’m a little surprised we’ve not seen an open access operator a la Lumo dip their toe into cross-country territory yet to compete with XC (and as has already been mentioned, domestic air travel) and tap into the unmet demand. Either with the 180s or preferably ordering some new 7/8/9 car 800x bimodes with interiors properly set up for intercity travel. It’s worked wonders for the ECML, and would be the kick up the DfTs backside that they need when it comes to managing the XC franchise.
XC doesn’t make money so why would an OAO think they could?
To meet the abstraction rules they would need to do Something different AIUI - either new destinations or missing stops. Both are presumably rather hard to path.
The government doesn’t care about profitability, or even about reducing losses. It’s only about reducing costs, and doing so regardless of the impact that it might have. This can be traced at least as far back as McNulty.
As things stand, it is extremely unlikely that any of the suggestions made in this thread will see the light of day. It’s not because they aren’t practical or sensible, but because no-one is prepared to pay for them.
A number of members have compared travel on the railways with travel by road. Specifically by private car.
At least a proportion of passengers on the railway either can’t drive, or don’t have access to a private car. Now, this may be a small proportion, or it may be significantly larger. It’s hard to tell.
The government doesn’t care about profitability, or even about reducing losses. It’s only about reducing costs, and doing so regardless of the impact that it might have. This can be traced at least as far back as McNulty.
As things stand, it is extremely unlikely that any of the suggestions made in this thread will see the light of day. It’s not because they aren’t practical or sensible, but because no-one is prepared to pay for them.
It's also because they also don't give a toss about any of their climate change / CO2 emission reduction commitments. Given that roughly 40% of our emissions come from transport then modal shift from road to rail (and private vehicle to public transport) has got to be an important part of this.
Scrapping functional rolling stock when we need all the capacity (train length / seats) we can find to make best use of the existing network seems crazy. I am afraid that until the treasury are made responsible for the carbon budget we shall continue to see this silly penny-pinching blinkered approach to our infrastructure.
But they’ll never have enough to double up anyway if they run the timetable they’re supposed to run. I’d say a permanent 6 or 7 coaches is preferable to a randomly selected 8 coach lottery
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Have to say I’m a little surprised we’ve not seen an open access operator a la Lumo dip their toe into cross-country territory yet to compete with XC (and as has already been mentioned, domestic air travel) and tap into the unmet demand. Either with the 180s or preferably ordering some new 7/8/9 car 800x bimodes with interiors properly set up for intercity travel. It’s worked wonders for the ECML, and would be the kick up the DfTs backside that they need when it comes to managing the XC franchise.
I don't doubt it's been considered, but evidently there's just not enough demand; you might also run into issues with route capacity on some of the more congested parts. The routes over which XC operate are generally quite slow (especially when compared to the ECML, which is 125mph for much of its length) and so any such service will inherently be uncompetitive with flying.
The poor journey time increases the capital and operational cost of running - Lumo can run 5tpd with a fleet of 5 units, but you'd need far more units than that to run 5tpd between Bristol and Newcastle, for instance. It also has a concomitant impact on traincrew resources.
Realistically speaking I think it's unlikely we'll ever see any open access operators running on routes other than to/from London.
voyagers have relatively low numbers of seats. a refit or new stock would offer way more capacity for the same unit length - and depending on how much the voyagers cost in lease may not actually be more expensive, so would drop the per seat cost. I do really think increasing capacity at a reduced per seat operating cost is the way forward for XC.
For comparison, a 5-car 802 has 326 seats (GWR) or 342 seats (TPE), a 5 car voyager has ~250 seats. That is a lot of extra seat within the same number of coaches, so same staffing costs, lower fuel costs (as bimode). So it would really come down to how much of a difference the leasing costs make.
and if new stock is ordered, it should include an option to add extra coaches within the existing trains when the demand increases - as I think is highly likely
Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't the Class 802 carriages longer than those used in say a class 221?
Not sure if it is correct, but Wikipedia page for Class 802 has the following: Intermediate vehicles 26 m (85 ft 4 in)[1]
Class 221: 22.82 m (74 ft 10 in) other cars
Given the above, I suspect that you are likely to get more seats in a class 802 carriage than a 5 car voyager carriage.
But they’ll never have enough to double up anyway if they run the timetable they’re supposed to run. I’d say a permanent 6 or 7 coaches is preferable to a randomly selected 8 coach lottery
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Only if you count Monday as the weekend which is when I used it to head to Disney
Problem with that is, there are some services where 4 or 5 coaches is enough for the demand of the train even if it is travelling down from Edingburgh to Penzance. So why should XC have to pay the extra cost in fuel to be using a 7-car say class 222, when the passengers are only filling say three out of the seven cars. I don't disagree, that for services where there is high demand a 7 to 10 car train is needed. Problem that you have is that services through the lunchtime period and after 6pm, depending where you are travelling do not need the full seven coaches.
So for example, GWR used to run 8 coach HST trains to Worcester Shrub Hill, now they only run 5 car class 8xx trains, which probaly for the most part holds the same number of passengers if required as the HST and also is probably correct for the number of people travelling on the service, especially leaving London Paddington at 19:28 this evening. Whereas the services that left Worcester Shrub Hill this morning at 05:14 which I believe was 800311, was a nine car train. Which would be correct, as by the time it got to both Reading and Maidenhead it would be rush hour period time. I am a little surprised that this service does not stop at Slough though.
I don't doubt it's been considered, but evidently there's just not enough demand; you might also run into issues with route capacity on some of the more congested parts. The routes over which XC operate are generally quite slow (especially when compared to the ECML, which is 125mph for much of its length) and so any such service will inherently be uncompetitive with flying.
The poor journey time increases the capital and operational cost of running - Lumo can run 5tpd with a fleet of 5 units, but you'd need far more units than that to run 5tpd between Bristol and Newcastle, for instance. It also has a concomitant impact on traincrew resources.
Realistically speaking I think it's unlikely we'll ever see any open access operators running on routes other than to/from London.
125 on XC Birmingham-Bristol would not be especially hard, but it would be quite expensive as it would require an LC closure/upgrade programme but it's one of the few places left where a linespeed increase would provide an actual journey time benefit. OA Manchester - Bristol would probably the only real market.
The general problem with XC ordering new units is that it will lead to scrapping units that are still in midlife, however leasing fees may be lower for 802s compared to Voyagers and Meridians but an order of around 30 5 coach 802s and 30 7 coach units would most likely be sufficent given a 7 coach unit would be equivalent to a 9 coach double voyager setup with a 5 car 802 being equivalent to 6.5 voyager coaches providing a huge increase in capacity. It really depends on cost but I don't want to see ROSCOS pricing in scrappage at half life in future, possibly a clause could be inserted that units must be leased in some form for at least 30 years to prevent this.
125 on XC Birmingham-Bristol would not be especially hard, but it would be quite expensive as it would require an LC closure/upgrade programme but it's one of the few places left where a linespeed increase would provide an actual journey time benefit. OA Manchester - Bristol would probably the only real market.
It really depends on cost but I don't want to see ROSCOS pricing in scrappage at half life in future, possibly a clause could be inserted that units must be leased in some form for at least 30 years to prevent this.
Heard elsewhere that 43301 finishes service with cross Country today, anyone on here able to confirm?
It finishes today on 1V50 0606 Edinburgh to Plymouth.
Heard elsewhere that 43301 finishes service with cross Country today, anyone on here able to confirm?
It finishes today on 1V50 0606 Edinburgh to Plymouth.
Heard elsewhere that 43301 finishes service with cross Country today, anyone on here able to confirm?
It finishes today on 1V50 0606 Edinburgh to Plymouth.
On the 09:48 GWR Taunton-Paddington via Temple Meads right now and a full 10 coach IET is rammed to bursting, borderline dangerously full and has been standing room only from Exeter by all accounts.
The Exeter-Bristol-Birmingham corridor has a lot of demand, with the HSTs going from both GWR and XC, I expect this sort of overcrowding to become the norm.
Particularly bitter about it today as I’m a disabled crutch user and no-one offered me a seat! Currently typing this in quite a lot of pain standing just outside the toilet, next time I’ll just take the car!
No they don’t going forward. The contact for XC HST maintenance ends in October 23 and from December 23 Laira ceases HST maintainable to focus on cl802 exams.
No they don’t going forward. The contact for XC HST maintenance ends in October 23 and from December 23 Laira ceases HST maintainable to focus on cl802 exams.
The trouble is Labour are in an awkward position. They wanted more, deeper and longer Covid restrictions, so it’s very hard for them to oppose cuts without being shot down.
It’s one for Conservative backbenchers really, but how many of them care about rail services? Many of the said backbenchers know they’re going be out of a job in two years anyway.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
