Could the Cross Country franchise be improved?

[The Ham]

I think that terminating all Cross Country services at Reading would be a non-starter since it would require people to make two additional train changes.

It costs far less for SWT to operate additional EMUs south of Basingstoke than for Cross Country to operate Voyagers beyond Basingstoke.

Perhaps a compromise would be for Cross Country to operate 1tph to Southampton and 1tph to Basingstoke.

The assumption was that a new service from Reading to the south coast could be provided so it was only 1 change at Reading.

 

[JamesRowden]

The assumption was that a new service from Reading to the south coast could be provided so it was only 1 change at Reading.

I posted that idea a couple of years ago with the services continuing to Paddington to connect with HS2 at Old Oak Common. I didn't get any positive responses from this forum back then. The recent route studies suggest the service running in addition to the Cross Country services rather than instead of and also route the service via Heathrow. That service pattern requires a grade seperated junction at Basingstoke.

 

[ScotTrains]

Catering needs to be greatly improved. There isn't any trolley service on the Edinburgh to Aberdeen trains and I believe only one train from Edinburgh to Glasgow has catering. I think all XC trains from Aberdeen and Glasgow should have catering facilities as soon as the train leaves. These trains are often well loaded. I've seen people having to stand from Glasgow at the weekend. For a long distance operator it seems strange there is no catering whatsoever until Edinburgh, over 2hrs away from Aberdeen. I would also like to see the catering quality match that of Virgin, with a proper complimentary offer in First class, giving real competition between operators.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Surprised no one has not actually suggested that XC gets binned entirely and it gets divvied up in some other way, unless of course Ive missed it.

I nearly did.
The NE-SW axis could be merged with EMT (BR once ran it like that, it's the Midland Railway after all).
Include Stansted/Nottingham-Birmingham in that.
A regional West Midlands franchise (sans Centro stuff) could run the Reading-Birmingham-Manchester axis.
Or maybe the Reading-Birmingham axis could merge with Chiltern.
There are several ways of carving it up.
But you will lose "connectivity" between (say) Dundee and Winchester, and many other city pairs.
But there aren't many through trains between (say) Milton Keynes and Worcester, or Colchester and Sheffield, so I'm not sure why the XC set is so sacred.
I suspect DfT doesn't know what to do with it either.
For sure, the more time passes HS2 will impact plans for XC.
I'm sure DfT will not allow current services to operate once HS2 is built - the business case will force services onto HS2 (else why build it?).

 

[najaB]

For a long distance operator it seems strange there is no catering whatsoever until Edinburgh, over 2hrs away from Aberdeen.

The issue is that they don't have a base in Aberdeen and haven't any interest in setting one up.

 

[Jonfun]

That's not an issue in the slightest. The issue is that catering isn't seen by train companies these days as adding value, and increasing the staff presence, customer service etc, it's seen as a way to try and make money (or at least recoup losses) and therefore only the most "profitable" bits of the network get catering services.

 

[najaB]

The issue is that catering isn't seen by train companies these days as adding value, and increasing the staff presence, customer service etc, it's seen as a way to try and make money (or at least recoup losses) and therefore only the most "profitable" bits of the network get catering services.

Well imagine that, a business that tries to make money, rather than **** it out of the window - what a surprise.

 

[Jonfun]

Well, quite. It's why railways shouldn't be run as a business, because then it all becomes about the money. So you cut catering. An unnecessary expense. Then, let's cut the Guard, they just sit around drinking tea all day anyway. We'll take out First Class and pack in loads more standard class seats, that'll bring in a bit more money. And if we raise the fares a bit more, it's all paying for itself now! Well, itself, and the shareholder bonuses, of course.

 

[Haydn1971]

I it

For sure, the more time passes HS2 will impact plans for XC. I'm sure DfT will not allow current services to operate once HS2 is built - the business case will force services onto HS2 (else why build it?).

Thinking well ahead, will XC need to exist at all ? ECML, MML, CML & WCML will also be in a similar boat, where much of the money making routes will get sucked into HS2 High Speed and Classic Compatible services. TransPennine and Great Western would seem to be larger express franchises that will survive, I can imagine a Midlands version of TransPennine offering express services on the classic network, but could we see franchising on HS2 ? 2-3 operators giving different levels of service along the same lines ? HS2, CC, Regional Express and Local Services all in one franchise ? Hmm... When ? 13-16 years from now ? That's just another franchise away.

 

[najaB]

Well, quite. It's why railways shouldn't be run as a business, because then it all becomes about the money.

That's a whole different discussion for a different thread, but given the choice between run as a business or paid for out of taxation - I'll go for the former. And if my tax is used to pay for the railway, I'd prefer for it to subsidise trains that provide lifeline services than subsidise loss making catering on two services a day on a route that has 20 other services a day.

 

[Class 170101]

I can't see the effect of HS2 on North West Crosscountry services being that catastrophic. As mentioned above there'll still be intermediate markets to serve that are not covered by HS2, many passengers prefer direct trains and assuming that there is little to no chance of the Crosscountry franchise being disbanded entirely post-HS2 then the operator is still going to want to attract revenue from key end-to-end markets such as Manchester to Bristol.

HS2 will not call at stations between Manchester and Birmingham, so there will be a need for services between those stations.

If we assume that HS2 between Manchester and Birmingham in 2033 that's 18 years of growth 56% to 140% more passengers based on 2.5% to 5% growth poet year).

If we assume that passenger numbers fall by 50% upon opening that gets us to 77% and 120% of where we are now. If it falls by 70% them we could be looking at 47% and 66% of where we are now. Either way it would mean that the existing trains would probably be a reasonable capacity for most of those options.

I doubt that it would fall by much more than 70%, as although there wouldn't be the long distance journeys there would be a number of people using XC services to get to HS2 services which would inflate numbers a bit.

That assumes 2.5 to 5% growth can be accommodated in the first place given the crowding levels of some of their trains I consider that unlikely - which means there is likely to be pent up demand. However I do agree demand is unlikely to be significantly affected by HS2 opening assuming, as was noted above, serving intermediate stations. This will not chnage with HS2 - indeed it may grow if some demand between major cities is diverted to HS2.

In my experience, 5 cars is normally fine for the Bournemouth end of the route, but these really get busy from Reading or sometimes Basingstoke.

In the long term, running 2 x 5 units together in the core section of the route, such as Birmingham to Reading would be great, and perhaps splitting the service somewhere so only one of the 5 car units goes on to serve Bournemouth.

This would allow you to use more units in the intense core, and possibly serve more destinations too.

Splitting trains is unlikely enmasse as it causes a performance risk if one portion doesn't arrive on time, however much I like the idea of serving different destinations beyond the core route with one train. As I said above I would like to see a third path per hour between Birmingham and Leeds / York.

The return of:

-Through trains from Scotland, down the West coast to the South East and South West England
- Sleeper services
- Services via Brum to London Paddington
- Hull, Liverpool, Blackpool, Swansea, Portsmouth, Poole etc to the long distance network
- Proper trains!

Agree with West Coast being served by Cross Country once again - all the way to Glasgow and Edinburgh but sadly probably a pipe dream.
Sleeper services very unlikely bordering on no chance due to high costs - another pipe dream unless Serco could run it without subsidy.
Paddington - no, however Heathrow via Western access maybe. I would prefer to see Gatwick Airport on the XC network ahead of Paddington.
Swansea might happen if the Welsh Assembly gets its way with a Welsh only franchise. Divert Cheltenham - Maestag services to Swansea and extend from Cheltenham to New Street and perhaps join to either New Street Nottingham (maybe Lincoln) or New Street to Leicester (maybe Cambridge) service.
Poole yes if they can be viably extended from Bournemouth.
Hull maybe as part of a 3rd path though the core routes (see above).
I cannot see any other destinations being viable (but see below)
Hourly service via Crewe rather than twice per hour via Macclesfield

Hmm - in my experience, changing in London for going from Bournemouth to the NE is not easy, as it means a trek across London between termini It's easier to change at Birmingham New Street.

Perhaps when East - West rail is open, this could be used to run through trains from Bournemouth to the NE.

Surprised you consider New Street an easy place to change.
This might warrant a 3rd Path from Reading to Stafford via East West Rail and Nuneaton so as not to reduce XC capacity at New Street. Perhaps this service (or a re-organisation of XC Reading services) could serve Blackpool / Liverpool and Portsmouth.

Are you sure there is much spare capacity on the SWT services south of Basingstoke???????????

I think that terminating all Cross Country services at Reading would be a non-starter since it would require people to make two additional train changes.

It costs far less for SWT to operate additional EMUs south of Basingstoke than for Cross Country to operate Voyagers beyond Basingstoke.

But now I've thought about the LSWML to West London or Wokingham etc. passengers. This seems like a strong argument for Cross Country to continue to serve Bournemouth hourly so that it's still a single change a Reading.

Terminating all XC services at Reading or Basingstoke would probably not be viable because you would need extra terminating capacity at Reading and / or Basingstoke. It would require additional changes for certain journeys and it is likely a train service would still be needed between Basingstoke and Bournemouth that could could not then operate through to London as that route is near to or at capacity at certain times of the day.

It might not be what was intended but I assumed that's what SpacePhoenix meant, running them, as Kettledrum says, in pairs and splitting somewhere en route.

If the London-centric operators, with focused peak periods into the capital, are going for 9-car trains, then I can't see Crosscountry warranting longer than 7-car AT-300 units.

I know that some XC services operate in pairs are these pairs 2x 221s, 2x 220s or one of each? I would certainly order a train capable of being extended in future or operating in pairs like the 220s with new trains being ordered to cover gaps in diagrams eg two single Voyager diagrams beome a pair with a new train covering the other diagram.

I posted that idea a couple of years ago with the services continuing to Paddington to connect with HS2 at Old Oak Common. I didn't get any positive responses from this forum back then. The recent route studies suggest the service running in addition to the Cross Country services rather than instead of and also route the service via Heathrow. That service pattern requires a grade seperated junction at Basingstoke.

I can see a grade separated junction happening at both Basingstoke and Woking (as discussed in the recent SW RUS), but I can't see XC serving Paddington never mind Old Oak Common. Any demand between Basingstoke and Old Oak Common for HS2 destinations is more likely to be covered by Great Western providing capacity into Paddington. Oxford northwards I would say its quicker to reach HS2 at Birmingham than at Old Oak Common via Reading.

That's not an issue in the slightest. The issue is that catering isn't seen by train companies these days as adding value, and increasing the staff presence, customer service etc, it's seen as a way to try and make money (or at least recoup losses) and therefore only the most "profitable" bits of the network get catering services.

XC might do it if they could guarantee to make money and take money off station outlets - remember XC don't run any stations but I very much doubt the numbers stack up.

 

[najaB]

And if we raise the fares a bit more, it's all paying for itself now! Well, itself, and the shareholder bonuses, of course.

Also, as an aside, XC doesn't pay any shareholder bonuses.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Thinking well ahead, will XC need to exist at all ? ECML, MML, CML & WCML will also be in a similar boat, where much of the money making routes will get sucked into HS2 High Speed and Classic Compatible services. TransPennine and Great Western would seem to be larger express franchises that will survive, I can imagine a Midlands version of TransPennine offering express services on the classic network, but could we see franchising on HS2 ? 2-3 operators giving different levels of service along the same lines ? HS2, CC, Regional Express and Local Services all in one franchise ? Hmm... When ? 13-16 years from now ? That's just another franchise away.

Good point, when the full Y rote opens in 2033 journies from Birmingham to Manchester via the western branch and Leeds/Newcastle via the eastern branch will be much quicker than via the existing services on the XC core. At that point services will be able to call at more intermediate stations like Stoke on Trent and Burton on Trent but that could be done by regional operators like West Midlands or East Midland franchises.

 

[Class 170101]

Good point, when the full Y rote opens in 2033 journies from Birmingham to Manchester via the western branch and Leeds/Newcastle via the eastern branch will be much quicker than via the existing services on the XC core. At that point services will be able to call at more intermediate stations like Stoke on Trent and Burton on Trent but that could be done by regional operators like West Midlands or East Midland franchises.

I think you may need both. XC to operate via HS2 to serve main stations and using the existing route to serve local stations. For example if you was to split XC at Sheffield how would Derby to Leeds / York flows be served?

 

[JamesRowden]

170101, no-one had mentioned XC serving Old Oak Common until you just did (in response to my earlier post).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Good point, when the full Y rote opens in 2033 journies from Birmingham to Manchester via the western branch and Leeds/Newcastle via the eastern branch will be much quicker than via the existing services on the XC core. At that point services will be able to call at more intermediate stations like Stoke on Trent and Burton on Trent but that could be done by regional operators like West Midlands or East Midland franchises.

Birmingham-(HS2)-Crewe-Manchester will be working by 2027, operating via Wilmslow in c30 minutes less than current times.
No need for existing XC services then (you might need a local via Wolves to Stafford/Stoke).
And all electric, which (by then) could be extended beyond Manchester.
That assumes classic-compatible stock is bought for the purpose.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

I think you may need both. XC to operate via HS2 to serve main stations and using the existing route to serve local stations. For example if you was to split XC at Sheffield how would Derby to Leeds / York flows be served?

Sorry I wasn't clear enough. I agree that the HS2 franchise should run a XC type operation for example Bristol - Birmingham NS - (HS2 Toton, Meadowhall) Leeds - (reverse) York - Newcastle. All that would be needed for such a service to operate is a couple of junctions linking the existing line to HS2 in the Washwood Heath area plus electrification of Bristol - Birmingham line by 2033. The East Midlands franchise can then run a Birmingham - Tamworth - Burton - Derby - Chesterfield - Sheffield - Wakefield - Leeds service on what would have been the XC core so serve the intermediate flows.

Birmingham-(HS2)-Crewe-Manchester will be working by 2027, operating via Wilmslow in c30 minutes less than current times.
No need for existing XC services then (you might need a local via Wolves to Stafford/Stoke).
And all electric, which (by then) could be extended beyond Manchester.
That assumes classic-compatible stock is bought for the purpose.

Good points

 

[Kettledrum]

Surprised you consider New Street an easy place to change.
This might warrant a 3rd Path from Reading to Stafford via East West Rail and Nuneaton so as not to reduce XC capacity at New Street. Perhaps this service (or a re-organisation of XC Reading services) could serve Blackpool / Liverpool and Portsmouth.

.

Thanks for your really detailed responses to so many of the earlier posts on the thread - the majority of which I fully agree with. Just 2 small comments to add:

1. Birmingham New Street never used to be a very easy place to change, but the new Grand Central development makes it much better.

2. XC serving Blackpool/Liverpool to Portsmouth sounds really interesting - but raises lots of questions about capacity on the routes and timing If this didn't go through Birmingham New Street, then would is still be attractive to the TOC?

 

[The Planner]

Birmingham-(HS2)-Crewe-Manchester will be working by 2027, operating via Wilmslow in c30 minutes less than current times.
No need for existing XC services then (you might need a local via Wolves to Stafford/Stoke).
And all electric, which (by then) could be extended beyond Manchester.
That assumes classic-compatible stock is bought for the purpose.

I would still expect a Birmingham - Manchester services of sorts that stops at places like Galton Bridge, Stone, Congleton and Macc in every schedule. It won't go completely.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Sorry I wasn't clear enough. I agree that the HS2 franchise should run a XC type operation for example Bristol - Birmingham NS - (HS2 Toton, Meadowhall) Leeds - (reverse) York - Newcastle. All that would be needed for such a service to operate is a couple of junctions linking the existing line to HS2 in the Washwood Heath area plus electrification of Bristol - Birmingham line by 2033.

Very unlikely IMO, I doubt we will see any classic connection in the West Mids area.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

2. XC serving Blackpool/Liverpool to Portsmouth sounds really interesting - but raises lots of questions about capacity on the routes and timing If this didn't go through Birmingham New Street, then would is still be attractive to the TOC?

That is just bringing back an old XC route though, it isn't a new service as you had the old Blackpool Birmingham Internationals and the Pompey Liverpools.

 

[hulabaloo]

How about merging all the franchises together to make one big national operator?

It could even be controlled by central government instead of shareholders.

I'll get my coat...

 

[455driver]

You do realise it was Virgin that foisted Voyagers upon us don't you?

Defending Virmin here-

Virgin XC wanted 5 and 6 coach trains but the SRA decided on 4s and 5s.

 

[sprinterguy]

Defending Virmin here-

Virgin XC wanted 5 and 6 coach trains but the SRA decided on 4s and 5s.

Virgin Crosscountry publicly announced in March 1998 (Modern Railways "Informed Sources") that they would be ordering an all 4-car fleet of new trains (loco-hauled and tilting DMUs). Even the shadow Strategic Rail Authority didn't come into being until 1999, and the SRA proper not until 2001.

 

[Class 170101]

Sorry I wasn't clear enough. I agree that the HS2 franchise should run a XC type operation for example Bristol - Birmingham NS - (HS2 Toton, Meadowhall) Leeds - (reverse) York - Newcastle. All that would be needed for such a service to operate is a couple of junctions linking the existing line to HS2 in the Washwood Heath area plus electrification of Bristol - Birmingham line by 2033. The East Midlands franchise can then run a Birmingham - Tamworth - Burton - Derby - Chesterfield - Sheffield - Wakefield - Leeds service on what would have been the XC core so serve the intermediate flows.

But you could still end up with un-served flows in this scenario.
eg Tamworth to Bristol - a change being required at New Street.

I also don't think there is a triangle being built at Leeds (area) unlike for Manchester services so I don't think you run directly between Leeds New Lane and York.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

170101, no-one had mentioned XC serving Old Oak Common until you just did (in response to my earlier post).

No but Paddington was mentioned. Next Stoop after Paddington in future for most fast services will be Old Oak Common.

 

[sprinterguy]

I know that some XC services operate in pairs are these pairs 2x 221s, 2x 220s or one of each?

A small number of North East - South West services operate as 2 x 220s over the "core" section between Newcastle and Bristol.

 

[The Ham]

That assumes 2.5 to 5% growth can be accommodated in the first place given the crowding levels of some of their trains I consider that unlikely - which means there is likely to be pent up demand. However I do agree demand is unlikely to be significantly affected by HS2 opening assuming, as was noted above, serving intermediate stations. This will not chnage with HS2 - indeed it may grow if some demand between major cities is diverted to HS2.

Unless you are proposing a zero growth franchise for XC, then the next franchise will want to provide extra capacity to allow for extra growth. Even the new Northern franchise is betting on passenger growth to fund its new trains.

 

[Haydn1971]

A small number of North East - South West services operate as 2 x 220s over the "core" section between Newcastle and Bristol.

I seem to recall its two in one direction and one in the other per day - and not at times useful for passengers, more to suit stock moves

 

[Class 170101]

2. XC serving Blackpool/Liverpool to Portsmouth sounds really interesting - but raises lots of questions about capacity on the routes and timing If this didn't go through Birmingham New Street, then would is still be attractive to the TOC?

Either Portsmouth runs via East West Rail (as the 3rd Path) then Nuneaton, Stafford, Crewe to Blackpool / Liverpool or the Bournemouth services are diverted via East West Rail and thence to Nuneaton, Stafford, Crewe and Blackpool / Liverpool with the Portsmouth services to Manchester via Reading and New Street.

Potentially if the WCML is served again to Scotland the Bournemouth service should go to Scotland via New Street instead of Manchester with an additional Manchester to Birmingham service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Unless you are proposing a zero growth franchise for XC, then the next franchise will want to provide extra capacity to allow for extra growth. Even the new Northern franchise is betting on passenger growth to fund its new trains.

I wasn't proposing a zero growth franchise but unless capacity is increased then physically the growth cannot get on the existing train service with the current capacity as provided.

 

[Haydn1971]

Unless you are proposing a zero growth franchise for XC, then the next franchise will want to provide extra capacity to allow for extra growth.

The next CrossCountry franchise starts in early 2019, a year after the EMT and WCML franchises... Given MML will get progressively electrified between now and 2023, it's highly likely that some new EMU's will start coming into service on MML in 2019 allowing 222's to be cascaded. Similarly, it's highly likely that bi-modes will make an appearance on the non-wired routes, plus some new EMU's to displace the 221's - that's more units for cascades. There's also the question of the Mk4 fleet of 300 carriages that are fit for mainline service well into the late 2020's, if not early 2030's, then onwards in secondary roles. With the coal hauling business gone, there's a lot of diesel locos starting to look attractive for service on passenger roles with Mk4's - CrossCountry won't need a new fleet, but will have lots of options going into 2020 and beyond.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

But you could still end up with un-served flows in this scenario.
eg Tamworth to Bristol - a change being required at New Street.

How significant a flow is that though? I doubt that the number of People making direct Tamworth to Bristol journies is enough to warrant a direct service vs changing at New St (which should have capacity for more local and shorter regional services post HS2).

I also don't think there is a triangle being built at Leeds (area) unlike for Manchester services so I don't think you run directly between Leeds New Lane and York.

Not sure about that, depends on the exact proposals and routing of HS3 I suppose.

The next CrossCountry franchise starts in early 2019, a year after the EMT and WCML franchises... Given MML will get progressively electrified between now and 2023, it's highly likely that some new EMU's will start coming into service on MML in 2019 allowing 222's to be cascaded. Similarly, it's highly likely that bi-modes will make an appearance on the non-wired routes, plus some new EMU's to displace the 221's - that's more units for cascades. There's also the question of the Mk4 fleet of 300 carriages that are fit for mainline service well into the late 2020's, if not early 2030's, then onwards in secondary roles. With the coal hauling business gone, there's a lot of diesel locos starting to look attractive for service on passenger roles with Mk4's - CrossCountry won't need a new fleet, but will have lots of options going into 2020 and beyond.

Agreed , how much of a capacity increase would the 20 West Coast 221's provide if they were released by a new EMU order and cascaded to XC? That plus the 222's from MML electrification should provide plenty of capacity for XC till HS2 comes online.

 

[Sniffingmoose]

As a regular user of Crosscountry for commuting and leisure travel, I can think of many improvements.

Remove first class from the 170's Too much overcrowding at peak times especially on the 2 car sets while first class sits empty.

The 18:49 Birmingham to Nottingham must have more than 2 coaches. Its a crush loaded train every weekday. 2 coaches between Cardiff, Birmingham and Nottingham in unacceptable.

Remove the need to buy a peak time ticket on day returns to travel between 15:30 and 18:15 M-F. This slows the ticket queue down considerably as everyone is asked when are they coming back then they have to stop and think?

Later departures from Nottington to Birmingham, I believe there is one but its an ECS back to Tysley depot via New St.


Earlier Sunday departure from Burton on Trent towards Birmingham. The 1V48 Leeds to Plymouth bound HST goes through Burton at 09:39 without stopping but stops at Tamworth. Why? There is bags of recovery time on Sundays. First southbound train is not untill 10:29 on Sundays. Lots of Burton hospital staff want a service back to Birmingham after coming off night shift. They all have hang around the station untill 10:29.

Dont serve Glasgow at all. East coast should go back to serving Glasgow again with their better stock.

Fix the Aircon on their voyagers and HST's. Do they repair it at all? Its boil in a bag travel every summer. The HST's are really bad in the summer. I have seen the internal doors taped open to try and get some air through from the open windows.

As has been said before, clean up their stinking dirty Voyagers. The state of those trains is unacceptable.

Help passengers out during the Lamington viaduct disruption by relaxing peak time ticket restrictions when travelling to Scotland. Passengers already have a longer journey. Do not charge peak time fares when you have to start earlier in the day and travel on a stinking voyager to get to Glasgow at the same time as before the disruption.