Could the Cross Country franchise be improved?

[anti-pacer]

For example, frequencies, routes, new destinations, taking routes off the franchise, adding new ones on.

How would you change it or do you think it's fine as it is.

 

[Bletchleyite]

For example, frequencies, routes, new destinations, taking routes off the franchise, adding new ones on.

How would you change it or do you think it's fine as it is.

The main thing it needs is capacity - all trains at least 7x23m I think would be about right.

 

[Bantamzen]

The main thing it needs is capacity - all trains at least 7x23m I think would be about right.

Oooh, oooh this!! You would probably struggle to get additional XC paths shoehorned into the current network, but consistantly longer units would solve a lot of the problems.

 

[HowardGWR]

See the last posts on the Infrastructure and Stations thread about East-West from TheHam and me.

Also, as written above, the voyagers are hopelessly short on capacity on the main route (Bristol to Manchester or Leeds /Newcastle). Just having a train that doesn't stink of sewage would be a bonus, especially if you have to stand in the vestibule.

 

[najaB]

Just having a train that doesn't stink of sewage would be a bonus, especially if you have to stand in the vestibule.

Four posts, that must be a record.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Manchester-South/South West should be made double 4 coach voyagers, with one section starting at Liverpool and calling at Runcorn+Crewe+Stafford where it would join with the ex-Manchester section

 

[The Planner]

Four posts, that must be a record.

Stafford is going to get busy with all this splitting and joining everyone wants to do there. Love to know where all the trains are going when one half of the schedule has a nightmare.

 

[anti-pacer]

Four posts, that must be a record.

I don't get that? Explain please.

 

[RepTCTC]

The main thing it needs is capacity.

This, in huge neon letters. Definitely this. Single Voyagers are nowhere near big enough for the job, and are about as much fun to stand on as cow pats. Other than the capacity ... a bit cheaper would be nice, and the bogs need sorting out. Frequency and journey times strike me as fine given that rail capacity isn't an infinite resource. Couldn't give a stuff about catering personally. Voyager seats aren't to my taste comfortwise, but then again, others like them, so can't moan there.

Oh, and change the Guildford-Newcastle service on a Fridays to one that leaves Guildford at 5pm and goes via Coventry. This is clearly the obvious thing to do, and I really can't understand why whoever plans this stuff hasn't thought of it before. It should also be free for 6ft+, dark haired, 40something blokes, and it should fly.

 

[LexyBoy]

I don't get that? Explain please.

A comment on the speed at which any thread concerning XC is derailed by comments about the foetid stench which fills their trains.

On topic, I would say that extending the routes to less well-served destinations (Liverpool, Wales, parts of the SE...) would be beneficial especially where it could divert journeys which would otherwise go via London. Obviously I'm interpreting "improve" from a passenger's perspective, and of course this would require extra stock.

 

[anti-pacer]

A comment on the speed at which any thread concerning XC is derailed by comments about the foetid stench which fills their trains.

On topic, I would say that extending the routes to less well-served destinations (Liverpool, Wales, parts of the SE...) would be beneficial especially where it could divert journeys which would otherwise go via London. Obviously I'm interpreting "improve" from a passenger's perspective, and of course this would require extra stock.

Aaaaaaaah right!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm not sure how feasible this would be but I'd like to see some South Wales trains from Scotland/North East/Yorkshire.

I would also like to see Hull linked up to the network.

 

[DarloRich]

but the stench is an issue that could be rectified and improve passenger perception of the service. THAT is within the control of the TOC. The length of their trains is not, easily, controllable by the TOC.

Anyone who says this isn't an issue should stand, on a Friday evening, wedged in the vestibule next to the toilet, face a delay an breathe anothers pooh fumes for 4 hours.

 

[tbtc]

A few thoughts on this well-trod subject:

• Splitting services works on relatively self-contained bits of the network like the old Southern Region. I'm not convinced by the idea of splitting XC services, given the reliability problems that they already have (and the problems that they could knock-on to other areas).
  
• XC splitting would only work well if you were talking about portion working beyond the core (e.g. single units beyond Bristol/ Reading, with the second unit waiting there to be attached to the next northbound service).
  
• You can probably forget about new paths through the New Street "core", so any exotic far flung destinations (Liverpool, Hull etc) would come at the expense of existing ones.
  
• I think that the pre-Arriva timetable worked a little better (i.e. 3tp2h from Yorkshire to Bristol, 3tp2h from Manchester to Reading, 1tp2h from Yorkshire to Reading, 1tp2h from Manchester to Bristol), since there are more journeys across Birmingham (anyone going from Newcastle/ Doncaster to Reading/ Southampton would be much faster going via London).
  
• That would also encourage more services to go over to bi-mode/EMU operation once the line through Oxford is wired up.
  
• If it were up to me, I'd go the whole hog and split the "X" into two, with one franchise running the Yorkshire to Bristol corridor and another running the Manchester to Reading - no services reversing at Birmingham. Otherwise, XC will continue to be a mess, with little hope of unpicking bits to improve them because the whole timetable is knotted together into one big muddle.
  
• Focus on the electrification map - if you want to get more Voyagers then the best way would be to remove some current Voyagers under the wires on routes like Manchester - Birmingham. Manchester had no direct Bristol services for a few years under Virgin (when the green "VT2" was all that served Manchester - the blue "VT1" services from Bristol ran up the WCML through Warrington) - that'd free up maybe four Voyagers for strengthening other services (Voyagers are scarce - 100mph EMUs seem to be easier to procure).
  
• If TPE are going to run Leeds - Newcastle - Edinburgh every hour then there's a lot less need for XC to do so - if you terminated the current "Via Leeds" XC service at Leeds (with TPE taking up the slack north of there) then you'd free up a number of Voyagers (Newcastle to Birmingham would still be served by the faster "via Doncaster" route).
  
• If all else fails, pray for 222s (or for "via Milton Keynes and EW" services to take some of the passengers current travelling via Birmingham).

Four posts, that must be a record.

Still no mention of any seaside destinations in Sussex though... give it time...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Still no mention of any seaside destinations in Sussex though... give it time...

442s?

See, there, somebody had to say it.

 

[DarloRich]

get more hst

 

[The Ham]

For example, frequencies, routes, new destinations, taking routes off the franchise, adding new ones on.

How would you change it or do you think it's fine as it is.

Over what time frame?

Up to start of the next franchise - probably just more usage of HST's and slightly more doubled up Voyagers

During the next franchise - All of the ICWC 221's joining XC to replace the HST's. Either new bimodal units (7 coaches - which would likely have broadly the same capacity as a pair of 220's) to run services like the Manchester to South Coast and/or Newcastle to Reading/Southampton services which would be predominantly under the wires or the 222's brought over from EMT (given the delay in the MML electrification bimodal would be my bet). Maybe a few new routes, extensions of existing routes and/or increase in frequencies towards the edges of the network (i.e. services which are occasional extensions to the core routes become more frequent).

Post HS2 Phase 1/during the following franchise - more services/routes along the southern WCML/Through Birmingham, all trains bi-modal or EMU's.

Post HS2 Phase 2 (final) - total recast of services.

 

[cuccir]

Capacity, capacity, capacity.

 

[The Ham]

get more hst

I'm not sure that they will need to or even want to (bearing in mind the works that Scotrail are doing to keep theirs going).

Their current HST's could be replaced by ICWC's 221's (although with splitting of units that could still provide for some extra capacity over the core).

There's a fair chance that by 2023 that there could be 222's available to strengthen services, however at some point Manchester to the South Coast would be able to be run by dual voltage EMU's and probably not much later Newcastle to Reading/Southampton would probably also be able to be run by EMU. Although give the possible issues with power draw from third rail and the possibility of gaps in the wires (at least when diversions are required) bimodal may be the prefered option.

 

[DarloRich]

I want rid of the horrible voyagers and would be more happy with HST I detest voyagers. Seriously more capacity is the key.

 

[The Ham]

A few thoughts on this well-trod subject:

• Splitting services works on relatively self-contained bits of the network like the old Southern Region. I'm not convinced by the idea of splitting XC services, given the reliability problems that they already have (and the problems that they could knock-on to other areas).
  
• XC splitting would only work well if you were talking about portion working beyond the core (e.g. single units beyond Bristol/ Reading, with the second unit waiting there to be attached to the next northbound service).
  
• You can probably forget about new paths through the New Street "core", so any exotic far flung destinations (Liverpool, Hull etc) would come at the expense of existing ones.
  
• I think that the pre-Arriva timetable worked a little better (i.e. 3tp2h from Yorkshire to Bristol, 3tp2h from Manchester to Reading, 1tp2h from Yorkshire to Reading, 1tp2h from Manchester to Bristol), since there are more journeys across Birmingham (anyone going from Newcastle/ Doncaster to Reading/ Southampton would be much faster going via London).
  
• That would also encourage more services to go over to bi-mode/EMU operation once the line through Oxford is wired up.
  
• If it were up to me, I'd go the whole hog and split the "X" into two, with one franchise running the Yorkshire to Bristol corridor and another running the Manchester to Reading - no services reversing at Birmingham. Otherwise, XC will continue to be a mess, with little hope of unpicking bits to improve them because the whole timetable is knotted together into one big muddle.
  
• Focus on the electrification map - if you want to get more Voyagers then the best way would be to remove some current Voyagers under the wires on routes like Manchester - Birmingham. Manchester had no direct Bristol services for a few years under Virgin (when the green "VT2" was all that served Manchester - the blue "VT1" services from Bristol ran up the WCML through Warrington) - that'd free up maybe four Voyagers for strengthening other services (Voyagers are scarce - 100mph EMUs seem to be easier to procure).
  
• If TPE are going to run Leeds - Newcastle - Edinburgh every hour then there's a lot less need for XC to do so - if you terminated the current "Via Leeds" XC service at Leeds (with TPE taking up the slack north of there) then you'd free up a number of Voyagers (Newcastle to Birmingham would still be served by the faster "via Doncaster" route).
  
• If all else fails, pray for 222s (or for "via Milton Keynes and EW" services to take some of the passengers current travelling via Birmingham).

If you are going for reconfiguring to enable EMU usage I would suggest swapping the Poole Manchester and Southampton Newcastle services about a bit so that they are EMU's Manchester to Reading with a single Voyager running a shuttle between Reading and Southampton and then run Poole to Newcastle with voyagers.

That would free up about 7 Voyagers which could then be used elsewhere.

Still no mention of any seaside destinations in Sussex though... give it time...

OK I'll bite, a service to Littlehampton could be well used!

 

[HowardGWR]

Still no mention of any seaside destinations in Sussex though... give it time...

Well, I invite XC to consider competing with bus 315 from Eastbourne to Helston. Now that's what I call 'Cross Country'.

Here's the link (small pdf).

http://www.nationalexpress.com/assets/uploads/pdf/timetables/R315.pdf

I think the on board toilet could be a bit iffy but not as bad as a voyager.

 

[anti-pacer]

Well, I invite XC to consider competing with bus 315 from Eastbourne to Helston. Now that's what I call 'Cross Country'.

Here's the link (small pdf).

http://www.nationalexpress.com/assets/uploads/pdf/timetables/R315.pdf

I think the on board toilet could be a bit iffy but not as bad as a voyager.

I nearly did that route when I worked for National Express (as a passenger). I guess it would have been rather interesting.

 

[Blindtraveler]

I like The Ham's idea for route configuration to allow Voyagers and EMUs to be used better.

I'd also take the proposed Scotrail ECML Berwick or Newcastle stoppers idea and give it to XC, Joining it up with the current XC 1TP2hrs Edinburgh Glasgow Via Motherwell. Terminating the core XC Service at Newcastle and taking away the IMO under used Fife, Tayside and Aberdeen Services would admittedly see a reduction in some XC Stuff at Edinburgh but by running an hourly Glasgow Newcastle would mean a consistant clockface service at many destinations.

This would also allow XC to use extensively refurbished 319s with 2 plus 2, half a coach of FC, Plugs etc on a Newcastle Glasgow hourly All Stops freeing voyagers for the core. The Scotrail services that run through to Ayr from Edinburgh could go back to starting at GLC. Further south,give the Birmingham Leicester locals and the Midlands Stansted to EMT.

 

[Minilad]

I love these threads.
I have one suggestion to improve XC. Pay their drivers more

 

[anti-pacer]

If nothing at all was an issue such as line capacity, tracks, stock, etc, I'd like to see this;

Glasgow-Manchester-Birmingham-Bristol-Plymouth-Penzance 1tp2h
Edinburgh-Leeds-Birmingham-Bristol-Plymouth 1tp2h
Glasgow-Manchester-Birmingham-Reading-Bournemouth 1tp2h
Edinburgh-Leeds-Birmingham-Reading-Bournemouth 1tp2h

Newcastle-Doncaster-Birmingham-Bristol 1tp2h
Newcastle-Doncaster-Birmingham-Reading 1tp2h

Manchester-Birmingham-Bristol 1tp2h
Manchester-Birmingham-Reading 1tp2h

Blackpool/Liverpool-Crewe-Birmingham-Cardiff 1tph (split/join at Crewe)

Cardiff-Birmingham-Leicester-Stansted/Derby-Nottingham 1tph (split/join at Birmingham New Street)
Birmingham-Leicester-Stansted 1tp2h
Birmingham-Leicester-Nottingham-Lincoln 1tph
Birmingham-Derby-Leeds 1tph

 

[Blindtraveler]

I love these threads.
I have one suggestion to improve XC. Pay their drivers more

You deserve it so why not? Given how universaly unpopular XC are, no matter how hard all you guys try, it must take a lot to work for them.

 

[hello]

Am I right in thinking that the XC franchise is due to finish soon?

 

[Darandio]

am i write in thinking that the xc franchise is due to finish soon?

Depends what you define as soon.

October 2019, although it was originally due to end next month.

 

[Minilad]

You deserve it so why not? Given how universaly unpopular XC are, no matter how hard all you guys try, it must take a lot to work for them.

I just do my job to the best of my ability. Thats all I can do. I would do that whoever I was working for. I must admit some of the things I read on this forum do make me chuckle at times though!

 

[najaB]

If nothing at all was an issue such as line capacity, tracks, stock, etc, I'd like to see this...

What? No love for north of Edinburgh?