• 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!

Cross-country overcrowding: what could be done?

Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

C

Class 317

Member
Joined
7 Jul 2020
Messages
556
Location
Cotswolds
The Ham said:
Like most things it's not a clear cut answer.

Whilst Virgin ordered the trains the number of coaches ordered was set by the SRA and as such was a political decision rather than commercial.

Could he have pushed back, or got some agreement for a follow on order subject to passenger growth, could other franchises have increased the number n if trains in service (maybe replacing the HST fleet as part of it to save costs), could governments have made different choices to have changed things, could have Project Thor worked with 5 and 9 coach sets rather than 5 and 6 coach sets?

Basically the answer to the above is yes, so there's not really one person who is solely to blame, even if one person was the person who ordered the trains in the first place.

As an aside:
- To replace the HST's, an iron could have been to get a new fleet of 30 × 5 coach sets to replace the 220's, then reform the 220's into 9 × 9 coach sets (with the spare coaches left over to lengthen the 4 coach 221's to 5 coaches) total number of coaches increases by a limited amount but there's now a single fleet capacity (5+5 coach trains = 9 coach sets)

- Project Thor appears to have had issues due to 5 coach sets needing 2 pantograph added (6 coach trains are too long for a single pantograph coach) whist if they lost one existing coach to maintain 5 coach length and then every few trains a 9 coach train was created (2 pantograph coaches and 2 coaches from the other sets, giving VWC the at that time current 20 × 5 coach sets and XC 48 × 5 coach sets and 10 × 9 coach sets - which might have also allowed the retirement of HST's at that time)
Click to expand...
I don't believe this is correct The number of coaches were set by Virgin in their franchise bid, the SRA would not sanction more when the franchise went into a management contract.

Both Virgin and SRA share some blame.
 
brad465

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,433
Location
Taunton or Kent
How easily could a follow-on order of Class 897s be made once the LNER ones are built? I imagine XC would not go for 10-car ones, but a mixture of 5 and 9-cars might do the trick, while also not being stuck in the queue behind OAOs and HS2 fleet that Hitachi have ahead.
 
Bayum

Bayum

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2008
Messages
3,279
Location
Leeds
Do a Lumo and make 7-car trains. Reduce the timetable to allow for it to happen.
 
K

Krokodil

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2023
Messages
6,538
Location
Wales
Bayum said:
Do a Lumo and make 7-car trains. Reduce the timetable to allow for it to happen.
Click to expand...
Why reduce the timetable when there's enough demand to fill a full service of seven car trains, given more appropriate pricing.
 
HSTEd

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,293
brad465 said:
How easily could a follow-on order of Class 897s be made once the LNER ones are built? I imagine XC would not go for 10-car ones, but a mixture of 5 and 9-cars might do the trick, while also not being stuck in the queue behind OAOs and HS2 fleet that Hitachi have ahead.
Click to expand...
I doubt there is much of a hurry to actually deliver the HS2 fleet, given the delays in completion of the line, whilst the open access orders are all for very small numbers of vehicles.

A Class 897 order would probably require a procurement from scratch, just as with IEPs, given the lack of options (so far as I am aware).
 
I

InTheEastMids

Established Member
Joined
31 Jan 2016
Messages
1,388
HSTEd said:
A Class 897 order would probably require a procurement from scratch, just as with IEPs, given the lack of options (so far as I am aware).
Click to expand...

Agree, might've been mentioned in the previous 36 pages but the TPE procurement of 29 firm + 26 options for a total of 330 carriages feels like the best medium term chance to get XC something beyond the ex-Avanti 221s. Either directly to XC or perhaps a cascade of the 802s.

I'm sure we'll see when DfT publish their promised Rolling Stock and Infrastructure Strategy, which is due "Summer 2026" (we still have 19 more days of *Astronomical Summer*). I am assuming the change of PM will be used to justify a few months more of what Sir Topham Hatt might describe as "confusion and delay".
 
H

Harpo

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2024
Messages
3,794
Location
Newport
InTheEastMids said:
I'm sure we'll see when DfT publish their promised Rolling Stock and Infrastructure Strategy, which is due "Summer 2026" (we still have 19 more days of *Astronomical Summer*).
Click to expand...
I’ve mentioned that ‘strategy’ before, finding it incredible that its production is a government task and not GBR’s. My natural cynicism of all things DfT persuades me to think its intended as a straitjacket for GBR.
 
R

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
5,455
Harpo said:
I’ve mentioned that ‘strategy’ before, finding it incredible that its production is a government task and not GBR’s. My natural cynicism of all things DfT persuades me to think its intended as a straitjacket for GBR.
Click to expand...

I guess the ultimate straight jacket will be financial, but there will also be a desire to prevent the GBR from spending in such a way that exposes the DfT to excess expenditure later (such as spending the rolling stock money on fewer but more expensive kit, and then having to come back for more when there is no money left to replace 50 year old stock later subject to public complaint)
 
T

The Ham

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
12,036
RT4038 said:
I guess the ultimate straight jacket will be financial, but there will also be a desire to prevent the GBR from spending in such a way that exposes the DfT to excess expenditure later (such as spending the rolling stock money on fewer but more expensive kit, and then having to come back for more when there is no money left to replace 50 year old stock later subject to public complaint)
Click to expand...

New trains would likely be significantly cheaper to run than the current 22x fleet (lower diesel costs, likely lower track access charges, fewer trains formed of pairs of units, etc.).
 
R

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
5,455
The Ham said:
New trains would likely be significantly cheaper to run than the current 22x fleet (lower diesel costs, likely lower track access charges, fewer trains formed of pairs of units, etc.).
Click to expand...

I am sure that GBR will be able to make all the necessary financial case, and if it stacks up then they can buy new trains. (not sure that lower track access charges is not wooden dollars though).
 
Tetragon213

Tetragon213

Member
Joined
14 Oct 2024
Messages
686
Location
West Midlands
dk1 said:
Then you end up with driving cars stored with no use thus a reduction in overall capacity. Makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Perhaps Newton Aycliffe can be contracted to make a few extra coaches?

Imo, either you need more IETs, or to convince Stadler to produce a British-loading-gauge version of the Norwegian FLIRTs which can hit 125mph. If it's going to be IETs (to keep British production), imo the 4 coach Voyagers should be replaced with 5 coach IETs, and the 5 coach Voyagers replaced with 7 coach IETs.
 
dk1

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
19,838
Location
East Anglia
Tetragon213 said:
Perhaps Newton Aycliffe can be contracted to make a few extra coaches?

Imo, either you need more IETs, or to convince Stadler to produce a British-loading-gauge version of the Norwegian FLIRTs which can hit 125mph. If it's going to be IETs (to keep British production), imo the 4 coach Voyagers should be replaced with 5 coach IETs, and the 5 coach Voyagers replaced with 7 coach IETs.
Click to expand...
What would Newton Aycliffe have to do with Voyagers which I thought was the question? Also even if it did isn’t it just an assembly plant?
 
M

Mike Machin

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2017
Messages
378
Tetragon213 said:
Perhaps Newton Aycliffe can be contracted to make a few extra coaches?

Imo, either you need more IETs, or to convince Stadler to produce a British-loading-gauge version of the Norwegian FLIRTs which can hit 125mph. If it's going to be IETs (to keep British production), imo the 4 coach Voyagers should be replaced with 5 coach IETs, and the 5 coach Voyagers replaced with 7 coach IETs.
Click to expand...
As a regular user of the Norwegian FLIRTs I have to say that a UK compatible version would pretty much be the ideal standard medium and longish distance train.
 
B

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,157
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Mike Machin said:
As a regular user of the Norwegian FLIRTs I have to say that a UK compatible version would pretty much be the ideal standard medium and longish distance train.
Click to expand...

Of course Norway has a very large loading gauge, bigger than the standard UIC gauges, so small wonder those are comfortable. The UK FLIRTs are much more of a compromise.
 
T

The Ham

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
12,036
Tetragon213 said:
Perhaps Newton Aycliffe can be contracted to make a few extra coaches?

Imo, either you need more IETs, or to convince Stadler to produce a British-loading-gauge version of the Norwegian FLIRTs which can hit 125mph. If it's going to be IETs (to keep British production), imo the 4 coach Voyagers should be replaced with 5 coach IETs, and the 5 coach Voyagers replaced with 7 coach IETs.
Click to expand...

The problem with a 7 coach set is that is a much higher capacity train (464 seats assuming 48 first class seats) which puts it bigger than a 4+5 train formed of 22x's units (446 seats with 52 first class seats).

Whilst that may not sound like a problem, it doesn't give those services already run by 4+5 sets much room for growth.

The other issue is that there a chance of significant overcrowding if a 5 coach has to run in place of it, unless there's an over supply of units to allow for running some in pairs.

Conversely building 9 coach sets means a pair of 5 coach sets have the same capacity and so either could substitute for each other without limited issues (such as seat reservations).
 
A

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
7,325
The Ham said:
The problem with a 7 coach set is that is a much higher capacity train (464 seats assuming 48 first class seats) which puts it bigger than a 4+5 train formed of 22x's units (446 seats with 52 first class seats).

Whilst that may not sound like a problem, it doesn't give those services already run by 4+5 sets much room for growth.

The other issue is that there a chance of significant overcrowding if a 5 coach has to run in place of it, unless there's an over supply of units to allow for running some in pairs.

Conversely building 9 coach sets means a pair of 5 coach sets have the same capacity and so either could substitute for each other without limited issues (such as seat reservations).
Click to expand...
but only if XC get a grip of their staffing and HR policy...
 
Russel

Russel

Established Member
Joined
30 Jun 2022
Messages
5,425
Location
Lichfield
dk1 said:
What would Newton Aycliffe have to do with Voyagers which I thought was the question? Also even if it did isn’t it just an assembly plant?
Click to expand...

Indeed and even if the Voyagers were a Hitachi product, it would be extremely unlikely they would be willing to make extra carriages for units over 25 years old.
 
dk1

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
19,838
Location
East Anglia
Russel said:
Indeed and even if the Voyagers were a Hitachi product, it would be extremely unlikely they would be willing to make extra carriages for units over 25 years old.
Click to expand...
Precisely. That jig at the Belgium factory has long since been dismantled never to see use again.
 
Russel

Russel

Established Member
Joined
30 Jun 2022
Messages
5,425
Location
Lichfield
dk1 said:
Precisely. That jig at the Belgium factory has long since been dismantled never to see use again.
Click to expand...

It's a real shame Project Thor (I think it was called) in the early 2000s, to build pantograph vehicles for the Voyagers never got off the ground, that would have solved a lot of problems.
 
T

The Ham

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
12,036
Russel said:
It's a real shame Project Thor (I think it was called) in the early 2000s, to build pantograph vehicles for the Voyagers never got off the ground, that would have solved a lot of problems.
Click to expand...

Indeed, (and yes itwas Project Thor) as I've said before wee could have seen:
IWC 20×5 coach 221 sets
XC 34×5 coach 220 sets
XC 7×5 coach 221 sets
XC 13x9 coach 221 sets

As that's 87 new vehicles and typically prices reduce at around 100 vehicles it might have been better to do this:

ICWC 13 × 10 coach 221 sets
XC 9 × 9 coach 220 sets
XC 25 × 5 coach 220 sets
XC 27 × 5 coach 221 sets

That would have given Virgin a fleet of 10 coach sets (a small increase over a 5+5 in terms of seating).

It would have allowed XC to run 12 services as 5+5 or 9 coaches (with a fleet utilisation of 85%, and potentially focused on the core) or around 1 in 4 trains, although it's worth noting that whilst this would have also meant the end of the HST's the overall capacity would have been higher.

It could also have meant those 10 coach sets now at XC.
 
Russel

Russel

Established Member
Joined
30 Jun 2022
Messages
5,425
Location
Lichfield
The Ham said:
Indeed, (and yes itwas Project Thor) as I've said before wee could have seen:
IWC 20×5 coach 221 sets
XC 34×5 coach 220 sets
XC 7×5 coach 221 sets
XC 13x9 coach 221 sets

As that's 87 new vehicles and typically prices reduce at around 100 vehicles it might have been better to do this:

ICWC 13 × 10 coach 221 sets
XC 9 × 9 coach 220 sets
XC 25 × 5 coach 220 sets
XC 27 × 5 coach 221 sets

That would have given Virgin a fleet of 10 coach sets (a small increase over a 5+5 in terms of seating).

It would have allowed XC to run 12 services as 5+5 or 9 coaches (with a fleet utilisation of 85%, and potentially focused on the core) or around 1 in 4 trains, although it's worth noting that whilst this would have also meant the end of the HST's the overall capacity would have been higher.

It could also have meant those 10 coach sets now at XC.
Click to expand...

Looking at those figures and knowing what a difference it would be making today, it's madderning to think it never went ahead and that's before you even take into consideration the benefits of being able to run them as EMU's under the wires.
 
M

Mitchell Hurd

On Moderation
Joined
28 Oct 2017
Messages
1,758
Tetragon213 said:
Perhaps Newton Aycliffe can be contracted to make a few extra coaches?

Imo, either you need more IETs, or to convince Stadler to produce a British-loading-gauge version of the Norwegian FLIRTs which can hit 125mph. If it's going to be IETs (to keep British production), imo the 4 coach Voyagers should be replaced with 5 coach IETs, and the 5 coach Voyagers replaced with 7 coach IETs.
Click to expand...
Spot on with 5-car and 7-car new trains. Exactly how I'd do it but with tri-mode IET's. Less services is not the answer - we've not had the full timetable since early 2020.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top