Avanti Class 221s to Cross Country

[Clarence Yard]

“The people” at XC would have liked them but they had to fight hard with the DfT to get what they have got.

Nobody at XC or any other DfT contracted TOC can alter their fleet without DfT say so and you have to go through a whole process with them to get additional rolling stock. Cost is a big barrier.

 

[Killingworth]

“The people” at XC would have liked them but they had to fight hard with the DfT to get what they have got.

Nobody at XC or any other DfT contracted TOC can alter their fleet without DfT say so and you have to go through a whole process with them to get additional rolling stock. Cost is a big barrier.

I have no way of knowing what a leasing company would charge for a particular unit, not least because it would depend on type, length of lease, number involved and other potential lessors down to scrap value.

Essentially the DfT will want to see the extra leasing and servicing costs covered by additional income. Any extra crewing costs may come into the equation. Clutching a figure out of the air that would probably be over £0.5m pa and possibly a lot more. That's a lot of extra income to gain otherwise it's more subsidy. DfT doesn't like handing out more money.

XC has a very difficult business to manage!

 

[357]

“The people” at XC would have liked them but they had to fight hard with the DfT to get what they have got.

And that is why my post said the people "controlling" XC

 

[John R]

I have no way of knowing what a leasing company would charge for a particular unit, not least because it would depend on type, length of lease, number involved and other potential lessors down to scrap value.

Essentially the DfT will want to see the extra leasing and servicing costs covered by additional income. Any extra crewing costs may come into the equation. Clutching a figure out of the air that would probably be over £0.5m pa and possibly a lot more. That's a lot of extra income to gain otherwise it's more subsidy. DfT doesn't like handing out more money.

XC has a very difficult business to manage!

The conundrum is essentially this:-

“Our trains are overcrowded, can we have some more please?”

“Only if you generate enough income to cover the additional costs.”

“But to cover those costs we will have to generate so much additional traffic that means they will still be overcrowded.”

 

[Bletchleyite]

The conundrum is essentially this:-

“Our trains are overcrowded, can we have some more please?”

“Only if you generate enough income to cover the additional costs.”

“But to cover those costs we will have to generate so much additional traffic that means they will still be overcrowded.”

Why is that standard being applied to XC when it hasn't been applied to:
1. Northern
2. TPE
3. Avanti West Coast
4. Greater Anglia
5. West Midlands Trains

...all of which have or will have significant capacity increases which will or have mostly reduce(d) overcrowding and not increase(d) passenger numbers to the point of causing overcrowding again under normal circumstances?

TPE stands out most as being a TOC that has had its rolling stock fleet near-doubled, thus removing a serious overcrowding problem that was similar to that of XC on routes that are very similar to those XC operate, and was wholly caused by a fleet of excessively short (3-car 185) trains which now mostly operate in pairs, solving the problem on routes that retain them.

 

[Killingworth]

Why is that standard being applied to XC when it hasn't been applied to:
1. Northern
2. TPE
3. Avanti West Coast
4. Greater Anglia
5. West Midlands Trains

...all of which have or will have significant capacity increases which will or have mostly reduce(d) overcrowding and not increase(d) passenger numbers to the point of causing overcrowding again under normal circumstances?

TPE stands out most as being a TOC that has had its rolling stock fleet near-doubled, thus removing a serious overcrowding problem that was similar to that of XC on routes that are very similar to those XC operate, and was wholly caused by a fleet of excessively short (3-car 185) trains which now mostly operate in pairs, solving the problem on routes that retain them.

Because they're essentialy regional operators whereas XC operate right across the country!

 

[John R]

Why is that standard being applied to XC when it hasn't been applied to:
1. Northern
2. TPE
3. Avanti West Coast
4. Greater Anglia
5. West Midlands Trains

That's a good question! I wonder is it something to do with the Voyagers being very inefficient in terms of seats per unit, and thus the lease and operating costs are eyewateringly high. Also, in many instances (but by no means all) the overcrowding is only on a short section of journeys, so it's a high cost for a perceived small benefit, with the trains carting empty space around for much of the journey.

I suspect there are multiple factors with the others that influence the decision, coming down to things such as political (giving the North a good deal after all the complaints about clapped out Pacers are only good enough for the North). Also mainly commuter routes have different cost benefit drivers than long distance operators, and have a higher social benefit attached to them.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Because they're essentialy regional operators whereas XC operate right across the country!

Calling Avanti a regional operator is nuts.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Why is that standard being applied to XC when it hasn't been applied to:
1. Northern
2. TPE
3. Avanti West Coast
4. Greater Anglia
5. West Midlands Trains

...all of which have or will have significant capacity increases which will or have mostly reduce(d) overcrowding and not increase(d) passenger numbers to the point of causing overcrowding again under normal circumstances?

TPE stands out most as being a TOC that has had its rolling stock fleet near-doubled, thus removing a serious overcrowding problem that was similar to that of XC on routes that are very similar to those XC operate, and was wholly caused by a fleet of excessively short (3-car 185) trains which now mostly operate in pairs, solving the problem on routes that retain them.

That was authorised pre-COVID. Since then the financial squeeze has been on so what hadn’t already been committed suddenly became very hard to justify.

 

[occone]

in many instances (but by no means all) the overcrowding is only on a short section of journeys,

I've noticed this too and wonder if it's a flaw with XC's very long routes.

I don't have the data, but I suspect most people on XC do 1-3h journeys as opposed to doing the entire route e.g. Edinburgh - Penzance route in which case it would maybe be better for XC to have more, shorter routes that with more appropriate trains staying in the busier sections.

I'm sure they've already thought of this though and have good reasons why they aren't, it's just baffling as a customer to see such a dysfunctional setup when any other operator is almost always a better experience.

 

[John R]

I've noticed this too and wonder if it's a flaw with XC's very long routes.

I don't have the data, but I suspect most people on XC do 1-3h journeys as opposed to doing the entire route e.g. Edinburgh - Penzance route in which case it would maybe be better for XC to have more, shorter routes that with more appropriate trains staying in the busier sections.

I'm sure they've already thought of this though and have good reasons why they aren't, it's just baffling as a customer to see such a dysfunctional setup when any other operator is almost always a better experience.

It's not really a surprise that on a journey such as Edinburgh to the South West most journeys are much shorter, so I don't regard that as a flaw. Some of the problem is that these services will often be attractive to shorter distance commutes, which could be covered by other services. eg Cheltenham to Bristol, or Bristol to Taunton.

 

[A S Leib]

I don't have the data, but I suspect most people on XC do 1-3h journeys as opposed to doing the entire route

Looking at some examples, Bristol to Exeter is 106,000 passengers per year, to Birmingham 66,000, to Manchester and Plymouth each 37,000 and to Leeds 14,000. From Sheffield, Leeds is 321,000 passengers, York 120,000, Birmingham 81,000, Newcastle 33,000 and Edinburgh 19,000. The shorter ones have more alternatives and there's the normal issues with e.g. split ticketing statistics, but that would suggest that between major CrossCountry stations at least three hours apart, there's only around a carriage per day of passengers.

 

[Jamesrob637]

Also 221110 failed at Darlington this afternoon whilst working 14:35 Newcastle to Reading. Two engines out (both driving cars). I believe it had engine issues last Saturday whilst working 13:08 Edinburgh to Plymouth, but it was able to complete it's journey on Saturday.

Highlighting once again the advantages of booked doubles. That could've continued as a single set had it been formed of a double. Delay, yes, cosy, possibly, but far less inconvenience.

 

[800Travel]

Highlighting once again the advantages of booked doubles. That could've continued as a single set had it been formed of a double. Delay, yes, cosy, possibly, but far less inconvenience.

Looks like it is now back at Barton depot (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:83418/2025-05-28/detailed#allox_id=0). Hopefully it isn't out for too long. Anyone know when ex-Avanti 107 is due back after its 'thermal event'? Can't be great for XC having units unable to enter service.

 

[Killingworth]

Calling Avanti a regional operator is nuts.

Whilst not regional it has the advantage of serving London, Birmingham and Glasgow so gets noticed.

 

[simonmpoulton]

Are 221101 to 106 stored at Central Rivers or somewhere else?

I know that 221104 and 221105 are stored at Derby Litchurch Lane works. Unsure about any other units there!

 

[47444]

I know that 221104 and 221105 are stored at Derby Litchurch Lane works. Unsure about any other units there!

Thanks

 

[Xavi]

Looking at some examples, Bristol to Exeter is 106,000 passengers per year, to Birmingham 66,000

Birmingham will be higher - most passengers split tickets at Cheltenham.

 

[Grecian 1998]

XC's problem is basically politics. Any 'London to...' operator' will have MPs pushing for plenty of capacity on the basis plenty of them and their staff will use it. Any 'local' operator can get local politicians championing more capacity. TPE may cover a wide area, but being northern, centred on Manchester and providing some decidedly local services will get the Greater Manchester 'establishment' behind it.

XC on the other hand doesn't serve London and isn't a local operator to anywhere. It is a vital part of commuter operations into Birmingham in particular, as well as other cities such as Bristol and Leeds, but isn't perceived to be 'their' operator by anyone.

“The people” at XC would have liked them but they had to fight hard with the DfT to get what they have got.

I seem to recall that within the XC consultation document around 2016 or 2017 proposing to cut services at the periphery so that capacity could be increased through the core, the then head of XC did state that most of their capacity problems could be resolved with a handful of additional units. The tone was sheer exasperation that they couldn't fix this issue.

The conviction that XC management are perfectly happy with the status quo doesn't add up. Their staff must be fed up with working packed out trains and receiving abuse from customers as if it's their fault, when nearly all of XC's problems would fall away with improved capacity. It must be a major morale issue. Assuming this is fed back to management, they'd surely want to do something about it.

Anyway, it's good that XC have acquired some additional capacity, even if it's not as much as it could be. I do hope that they stop running 221s in multiple though - it seems ridiculous running a 9 coach formation one hour and a 4 coach formation the next on the same route. Even dafter when the 4 coach formation offers better advance fares (something I've noticed comparing the usually 9 coach 1645 southbound out of Bristol with the frequently 4 coach 1745). 8 and 5 would clearly be a better spread of capacity.

 

[Cowley]

Ok, we’re feeling like this is a good place to wrap this thread up for the time being.

Thanks everyone