Cross-country overcrowding: what could be done?

[Mgameing123]

Isn't one of the problems that longer trains can't fit in stations? Is so then just announce which carriages to use for any particular stop?

Yeah that just sounds like a terrible excuse to why they can’t buy longer trains for CrossCountry!

 

[HSTEd]

Current Euston services terminate at xx.48 and xx.27. The xx.48 would have to be the xx.01, the xx.27 could form the xx.30, but that is the absolute minimum dwell at New St and would be incredibly unreliable. Southbound the starters are xx.47 and xx.21. The Bristol arrives at xx.33 so potentially fits with the xx.47. Bournemouth is xx.56 and would have to fit the xx.21, far from ideal. That is ignoring the platform implications.

Could you swap the Manchester segment of the Bournemouth onto the LNWR Euston service, it seems to leave a few minutes later?

You could then use 350/2s or similar couldn't you?

Although I doubt the return leg would align nicely come to think of it!

 

[edwin_m]

They have a monopoly Derby to Birmingham which is why I really hope an open access competitor gets approved. There is currently a Cardiff York application in from Lumo

Leicester to Birmingham too. However, I don't think duplicating operators on every route is a good solution, especially as all will be part of GBR before too long (bar a handful of open access services). Derby/Leicester to Birmingham does need more services, but that's to provide an alternative for short distance journeys - these are the only routes out of Birmingham with no "local" service, and overcrowding between New Street and Tamworth or Burton crowds out longer-distance passengers.

 

[JonathanH]

Derby/Leicester to Birmingham does need more services, but that's to provide an alternative for short distance journeys - these are the only routes out of Birmingham with no "local" service, and overcrowding between New Street and Tamworth or Burton crowds out longer-distance passengers.

They are the routes with no "local" service because there are no local stations to serve within the West Midlands.

I suspect that one of the reasons the Water Orton routes ended up with CrossCountry was for reliability and better integration on the timetable. A contributing factor in the failure of the Operation Princess timetable was the fifth train on the Birmingham to Derby corridor that Central Trains put in.

 

[cle]

A few targeted (start w peak usage - could be weekends) extensions to other services could help.

For example, extend some Paddington - Bristol services to/from Taunton and even Exeter. Add frequency to alleviate local hops, or cut XC calls in some cases.

Extend the new Leeds-Sheffield fast to Derby or Nottingham, calling Chesterfield.

The Oxford - Moor St idea would be helpful too on that corridor. As would Chiltern returning to pre-pandy service.

Crewe-Preston stopper. Extend Manc-Stoke to Curzon once built

Etc etc - all the chestnuts.

Plus: new longer core bi-mode stock.

 

[edwin_m]

They are the routes with no "local" service because there are no local stations to serve within the West Midlands.

I suspect that one of the reasons the Water Orton routes ended up with CrossCountry was for reliability and better integration on the timetable. A contributing factor in the failure of the Operation Princess timetable was the fifth train on the Birmingham to Derby corridor that Central Trains put in.

Indeed. But has been talk for many years of a local service via Coleshill then via Kingsbury to Tamworth and beyond, possibly also serving some new stations. This might happen as a result of Midlands Hub creating a route for it into Moor Street.

 

[LittleRedTrain]

A few targeted (start w peak usage - could be weekends) extensions to other services could help.
...

The Oxford - Moor St idea would be helpful too on that corridor. As would Chiltern returning to pre-pandy service.

Just (re-)extending some of the Paddington-Oxford trains through to Banbury would certainly help fill in one of the 'missing links' in the XC network and keep commuters separated from the Intercity traffic on XC.
There's currently only a paltry single service each way, only in the evening peak, compared to (if I recall correctly) 2 in each peak pre-Covid, and it often seems to be the first service to get cancelled if there are problems in GWR-land.

 

[edwin_m]

I was trying to work out if those Bristol-Worcester services could be linked to make a useful Bristol-Birmingham, but it's complicated by the multiple stations in Worcester, and the only fast service between Birmingham and central Worcester being the Hereford. So unless another hourly path could be found over the Lickey, it would have to miss Foregate Street and go via Kidderminster.

 

[takno]

I was trying to work out if those Bristol-Worcester services could be linked to make a useful Bristol-Birmingham, but it's complicated by the multiple stations in Worcester, and the only fast service between Birmingham and central Worcester being the Hereford. So unless another hourly path could be found over the Lickey, it would have to miss Foregate Street and go via Kidderminster.

Realistically you probably need to run something via Worcestershire Parkway anyway. The Bristol-Worcester trains are useful, but doing dog-legs at Gloucester and Worcester, and then taking the slightly-slower route into Birmingham isn't going to make a good inter-regional service

 

[edwin_m]

Realistically you probably need to run something via Worcestershire Parkway anyway. The Bristol-Worcester trains are useful, but doing dog-legs at Gloucester and Worcester, and then taking the slightly-slower route into Birmingham isn't going to make a good inter-regional service

Then you're back into adding an extra service with the complication of finding stock and paths for it - or removing the Bristol service from the stations in central Worcester.

 

[takno]

Then you're back into adding an extra service with the complication of finding stock and paths for it - or removing the Bristol service from the stations in central Worcester.

I don't regard Worcestershire Parkway and Worcester as serving the same place at all, so I'm definitely not advocating for getting rid of the Bristol-Worcester service. I think having an hourly Nottingham-Cardiff and and hourly Nottingham-Bristol, both formed of adequately long 17x stock, and getting rid of the stops on the Voyagers is probably the best solution to the whole Derby-Bristol corridor.

 

[thenorthern]

CrossCountry has always been in a unqiue position as it's end to end journey times are relatively long meaning the same train that is the morning commute to work in Glasgow is also the evening commute home in Plymouth. Also for an intercity service there are a relatively large number of

The only real options I could see are:

1. Increasing the number of services at peak times within areas that are overcrowded, i.e have some that run Stoke-on-Trent to Birmingham New Street only during peak times.
2. Attaching/removing coaches en route in areas which are the most congested. The problem is this adds a lot of journey time.
3. Discouraging use for short distances. Several stations which are relatively short distance apart only have CrossCountry intercity services between them or have CrossCountry as their main operator. Examples include Stoke-on-Trent to Birmingham New Street, Banbury to Oxford, Stoke-on-Trent to Stafford, Coventry to Leamington Spa and several others. It's difficult to see how this could work but short-distance congestion has in my view always been a major problem.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is there anything new to say about XC overcrowding? A glance through this thread suggests it’s a repeat of all the earlier XC suggestions. It’s just a bit early for this year though…

 

[JonathanH]

Is there anything new to say about XC overcrowding? A glance through this thread suggests it’s a repeat of all the earlier XC suggestions. It’s just a bit early for this year though…

I'd love to know if anyone in an official position thinks as much about CrossCountry's future as this forum. The nature of most threads about it is that it is only a matter of time before something is done, rather than it potentially being a decision for the 2030s.

I suspect that there will be an element of those in control wanting to see how the addition of the 12 Avanti Voyagers has changed revenue and passenger experience.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Discouraging use for short distances. Several stations which are relatively short distance apart only have CrossCountry intercity services between them or have CrossCountry as their main operator. Examples include Stoke-on-Trent to Birmingham New Street, Banbury to Oxford, Stoke-on-Trent to Stafford, Coventry to Leamington Spa and several others. It's difficult to see how this could work but short-distance congestion has in my view always been a major problem.

They are doing this. It is subtle stuff like tweaking the timetable to break certain connections and adding pick up/set down restrictions. They could use fake compulsory reservations but the trouble is that they are so overcrowded that only selling the seats would cause a significant revenue drop.

 

[jayah]

The Liverpools are fine, its anything over and above that falls under congested infrastructure. There is little spare stock.

Thats a chunky timetable problem.

WCML South fast lines were deemed congested infrastructure in 2020.

ORR quoted NR evidence in their 3rd July determination, when Wrexham / Lumo / Virgin applications were all rejected, and before many of these new Liverpool trains have been added, that south of Rugby from 11am on a typical day there is 3mins of lateness in the system feeding right through to the evening peak.

You say there is little spare stock. But here you are being asked to choose between adding new capacity to a line that is not particularly overcrowded and had many of its 9 car trains extended 10-12yrs ago, or adding stock to a franchise that has been chronically underprovided for a good 20yrs now.

 

[jayah]

They are doing this. It is subtle stuff like tweaking the timetable to break certain connections and adding pick up/set down restrictions. They could use fake compulsory reservations but the trouble is that they are so overcrowded that only selling the seats would cause a significant revenue drop.

It's largely performative.

Most people doing journeys like Wolverhampton to Birmingham are already avoiding them, other like Stoke to Birmingham don't have much choice and most people in Leamington are going to Birmingham rather than Coventry.

If nothing else, it is a terrible waste of traincrew to run a train from Coventry to Birmingham and then another train to mop up all the people that couldn't get on it.

 

[thenorthern]

They are doing this. It is subtle stuff like tweaking the timetable to break certain connections and adding pick up/set down restrictions. They could use fake compulsory reservations but the trouble is that they are so overcrowded that only selling the seats would cause a significant revenue drop.

Having more "London North Western Railway Only" or similar tickets would also help. From Stafford to Wolverhampton or Birmingham there is no incentive not to use Avanti or CrossCountry as the only walk up tickets available are "any permitted".

 

[Mgameing123]

They are doing this. It is subtle stuff like tweaking the timetable to break certain connections and adding pick up/set down restrictions. They could use fake compulsory reservations but the trouble is that they are so overcrowded that only selling the seats would cause a significant revenue drop.

Why not just make the trains longer instead of these fancy solutions that never work?

We deep down all know the real way to solve the issue but the government will do anything but to solve the issue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why not just make the trains longer instead of these fancy solutions that never work?

Because the Treasury does not want to pay. Giving them the remaining Avanti 221s is the way this could be achieved.

 

[Mgameing123]

Because the Treasury does not want to pay. Giving them the remaining Avanti 221s is the way this could be achieved.

Now finally a solution I’d like to hear!

 

[Farnborough]

There are enough spare class 350/2 emus to...

Bingo!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bingo!

A better thing to do would be to send them to Northern, replacing the single 323 diagrams, for a bit of added capacity. They do have slow door cycles but the timetable could be adjusted to accommodate them.

I have proposed them for XC before, but that was when Avanti needed the remaining Voyagers. There are now enough Voyagers to fix the XC problem (largely), they just need to be allocated to XC. The extra ones they already got have helped significantly, they just need the other 6 (and the 2 presently with Grand Central once done with there).

 

[takno]

Why not just make the trains longer instead of these fancy solutions that never work?

We deep down all know the real way to solve the issue but the government will do anything but to solve the issue.

They have already made a lot of the trains longer, and I'd fully support them at least using the rest of the voyagers to go further with that.

The trouble is that on several of these sections, the local traffic will just expand to fill the longer trains, often with the local travellers booking seats for a short journey which prevents the seat being used for a longer journey. You need to get reasonably balanced traffic across more of the route so that you can let long distance passengers book through tickets, give them a reasonable InterCity experience, and have a sensible running-cost structure.

Ideally you also need the large crowds of people who are only on for 20-30 minutes to be able to pile in and out through wider doors, without having to negotiate their way around people with piles of luggage. That way you can tighten up station dwell times.

 

[Mgameing123]

They have already made a lot of the trains longer, and I'd fully support them at least using the rest of the voyagers to go further with that.

The trouble is that on several of these sections, the local traffic will just expand to fill the longer trains, often with the local travellers booking seats for a short journey which prevents the seat being used for a longer journey. You need to get reasonably balanced traffic across more of the route so that you can let long distance passengers book through tickets, give them a reasonable InterCity experience, and have a sensible running-cost structure.

Ideally you also need the large crowds of people who are only on for 20-30 minutes to be able to pile in and out through wider doors, without having to negotiate their way around people with piles of luggage. That way you can tighten up station dwell times.

Yeah I mean it’s normal that people would use intercity trains as local trains if the option is there.

 

[thenorthern]

Why not just make the trains longer instead of these fancy solutions that never work?

We deep down all know the real way to solve the issue but the government will do anything but to solve the issue.

Given that under British Rail the CrossCountry network was very different to what it is today, probably one of the most "changed" in terms of how services are run since privatisation, it will be be interesting to see how it operates under Great British Rail.

Back in the days of British Rail and early days of Virgin Cross Country the trains were obviously much less frequent on the core services that we have today. I don't know if it's true but it always felt that the Mark 2 coaches used by BR/VCX had more capacity than what a Voyager coach offers. It could be due to the cramped design of the Class 221 and due to the fact that people are a lot more fatter nowadays making it feel like a Mark 2 coach offered better capacity.

 

[Magdalia]

The trouble is that on several of these sections, the local traffic will just expand to fill the longer trains, often with the local travellers booking seats for a short journey which prevents the seat being used for a longer journey. You need to get reasonably balanced traffic across more of the route so that you can let long distance passengers book through tickets, give them a reasonable InterCity experience, and have a sensible running-cost structure.

Ideally you also need the large crowds of people who are only on for 20-30 minutes to be able to pile in and out through wider doors, without having to negotiate their way around people with piles of luggage. That way you can tighten up station dwell times.

Which is why class 350s are the solution for Manchester-Birmingham.

Given that under British Rail the CrossCountry network was very different to what it is today, probably one of the most "changed" in terms of how services are run since privatisation, it will be be interesting to see how it operates under Great British Rail.

Back in the days of British Rail and early days of Virgin Cross Country the trains were obviously much less frequent on the core services that we have today. I don't know if it's true but it always felt that the Mark 2 coaches used by BR/VCX had more capacity than what a Voyager coach offers. It could be due to the cramped design of the Class 221 and due to the fact that people are a lot more fatter nowadays making it feel like a Mark 2 coach offered better capacity.

In the days of British Rail and early days of Virgin Cross Country there weren't the big short distance flows into cities like Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds, both for commuting and leisure, that there are now. But Cross Country is still stuck with a watered down version of what Virgin tried to deliver 20 years ago.

The large numbers of people making the 20-60 minute journeys into Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds need to be the priority now, both for the railway and the UK economy more generally.

 

[cactustwirly]

A better thing to do would be to send them to Northern, replacing the single 323 diagrams, for a bit of added capacity. They do have slow door cycles but the timetable could be adjusted to accommodate them.

I have proposed them for XC before, but that was when Avanti needed the remaining Voyagers. There are now enough Voyagers to fix the XC problem (largely), they just need to be allocated to XC. The extra ones they already got have helped significantly, they just need the other 6 (and the 2 presently with Grand Central once done with there).

I disagree because the extra 221s are a drop in the ocean in terms of what is needed

Ideally 810s would be ordered and all the voyagers scrapped

 

[Mgameing123]

I disagree because the extra 221s are a drop in the ocean in terms of what is needed

Ideally 810s would be ordered and all the voyagers scrapped

Okay okay okay. We shouldn’t be scrapping trains that still have a good amount of years left in them. I’d rather say we move them to the 170 routes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I disagree because the extra 221s are a drop in the ocean in terms of what is needed

Ideally 810s would be ordered and all the voyagers scrapped

A mixed fleet of 7 and 9 car standard 80x with a low floor coach would be better*. But aren't we being just a bit realistic in this thread?

* Actually if we were being completely pie in the sky a bi mode fleet based on the Class 730/0 - but...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2026 ==

The large numbers of people making the 20-60 minute journeys into Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds need to be the priority now, both for the railway and the UK economy more generally.

Such as the very large numbers doing so on the twice an hour WMT Euston-New St service you propose to destroy?

I'm not opposed to recasting XC to an hourly Manchester-Birmingham that splits to both southern legs with the other half hour getting a 12 car 350/2 formation, or indeed just having one proper XC an hour as a double length set going just to Bristol (more use than Reading for which going via London is easier). But a Manchester to Northampton service destroying established flows is absolute madness. Either find somewhere else for it to go (could it work the Wolves-Intl stopper, for instance?) or terminate it at New St.