Cross Country

[tbtc]

That Voyagers are horrible, tacky, plasticy pices of crap that arent fir for the XC service. oh and they often smell of pooh. How is that?

Eloquantly put, Sir

 

[Daimler]

I agree that HSTs are more comfortable, but there's no easy way to drop stops on XC services to allow HSTs to work better on them (who would pick up all of these stops if XC ceased serving them?)

Like I said, I'd rather have a (slightly) slower journey, in that case - and I suspect that others travelling for several hours on XC would agree.

Effectively though, you do of course have a point - there's no easy way out, even if I believe it's better to compromise a little on speed than on comfort. But what really needs changing is the 'style' of the Cross Country franchise, to allow for comfortable long distance travel.

Thinking aloud here, I wonder if (and this is heading vaguely into the realm of fantasy) XC could perhaps operate two main service levels - say running inter-regional services with their Voyagers and longer distance services with HSTs - perhaps displaced following GWML electrification.

This would seem to offer a solution to both issues, though I may well be overlooking certain obstacles!

 

[Zoe]

You would need to show there would be a business case for running two different speeds of XC services though. Arriva said that most journeys were less than 3 hours when they decided to remove the shop (as customers would prefer not to leave their seats) so I'm not sure there would be the business case for running faster long distance services.

 

[Daimler]

You would need to show there would be a business case for running two different speeds of XC services though. Arriva said that most journeys were less than 3 hours when they decided to remove the shop (as customers would prefer not to leave their seats) so I'm not sure there would be the business case for running faster long distance services.

The faster longer distance services would still be used by people travelling for less than three hours, though - it would provide additional comfort for those travelling between, say, Exeter and Birmingham, or York and Birmingham - just two of the many genuine 'intercity' flows on XC services which currently have a less than 'intercity' service. I'm suggesting running two types of service - one which calls only at the major stations (and therefore will be useful to the vast majority of passengers, especially if advertised as a superior service) and one which fills in the 'gaps' at smaller stations.

 

[tbtc]

Like I said, I'd rather have a (slightly) slower journey, in that case - and I suspect that others travelling for several hours on XC would agree.

Effectively though, you do of course have a point - there's no easy way out, even if I believe it's better to compromise a little on speed than on comfort. But what really needs changing is the 'style' of the Cross Country franchise, to allow for comfortable long distance travel.

Thinking aloud here, I wonder if (and this is heading vaguely into the realm of fantasy) XC could perhaps operate two main service levels - say running inter-regional services with their Voyagers and longer distance services with HSTs - perhaps displaced following GWML electrification.

This would seem to offer a solution to both issues, though I may well be overlooking certain obstacles!

One of the problems with XC is that a 500 mile service carries few passengers 500 miles (probably most of the passengers are doing journeys of under 100 miles). Compared to a "London" Intercity service, where you expect a significant number of journeys will be to/from the capital (hence services running non-stop from London to York/ Warrington etc).

If the paths/ stock were there then I like your idea - maybe have four "local" XC services (Manchester - Birmingham, Bournemouth/Brighton - Birmingham, Edinburgh - York - Birmingham and Cornwall - Birmingham) with a "true" XC franchise running long distance services between bigger cities that are truly cross country (Edinburgh - Plymouth with maybe only six/eight/ten intermediate stops), providing hot meals etc to the longer distance traveller?

Unfortunately XC has evolved to be "all things to all people". We either tolerate this (and accept that a 200 mile journey on XC won't be as fast as an equivalent distance on the ECML/WCML), or it needs radical surgery (in which case we need to decide how we deal with some of the smaller places that XC currently serves).

 

[Daimler]

One of the problems with XC is that a 500 mile service carries few passengers 500 miles (probably most of the passengers are doing journeys of under 100 miles). Compared to a "London" Intercity service, where you expect a significant number of journeys will be to/from the capital (hence services running non-stop from London to York/ Warrington etc).

Indeed - it would be nice to have some figures for passenger flows on XC. Zoe, I note, mentioned that XC claimed that getting rid of the shop was a good idea as 'most journeys were less than three hours'. I don't know about other people, but I consider a journey of two hours to be 'proper intercity', let alone three. I would be very surprised, though, if there weren't good numbers of people travelling fairly long distances to and from Birmingham on XC. I find the notion of 'reducing' the service quality to the level of the shortest journeys people make somewhat dubious, especially if repeat custom is desired.

If the paths/ stock were there then I like your idea - maybe have four "local" XC services (Manchester - Birmingham, Bournemouth/Brighton - Birmingham, Edinburgh - York - Birmingham and Cornwall - Birmingham) with a "true" XC franchise running long distance services between bigger cities that are truly cross country (Edinburgh - Plymouth with maybe only six/eight/ten intermediate stops), providing hot meals etc to the longer distance traveller?

That sounds like a logical 'grand plan'.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I don't know about other people, but I consider a journey of two hours to be 'proper intercity', let alone three.

Indeed.
Infact, many of FGW's intercity services provided by HST's are under 3 hours in length (Cardiff to London, Bristol to London, Worcester to London, etc etc).

 

[Zoe]

Indeed.
Infact, many of FGW's intercity services provided by HST's are under 3 hours in length (Cardiff to London, Bristol to London, Worcester to London, etc etc).

As I said above, don't forget that FGW use HSTs on semi-fast outer suburban commuter services. It shows that it can be done.

 

[TomJ93]

In my view, each area should have a regional 'hub'. So Penzance, Plymouth, Bristol, Crewe, Manchester Pic, Birmingham New Street, York, Brighton, Oxford to name but a few. Crosscountry should do hub to hub, with operators like London Midland offering Tamworth to Birmingham for your onwards connection to York with the Intercity XC service, ofcourse, this would require a scarce resource, more trains!

 

[ainsworth74]

As I said above, don't forget that FGW use HSTs on semi-fast outer suburban commuter services. It shows that it can be done.

It can be done but if there were other stock available I doubt FGW would be using HSTs on services like that, but as there isn't anything else they have no choice to run HSTs on services they were never intended or designed to operate.

 

[The Planner]

Crosscountry should do hub to hub, with operators like London Midland offering Tamworth to Birmingham for your onwards connection to York with the Intercity XC service, ofcourse, this would require a scarce resource, more trains!

And a shed load more paths to fill in the gaps with local services, unlikely in the main.

 

[LemonGrove]

CrossCountry let you pick your seat online. I LOVE stuff like that.

 

[WestCoast]

CrossCountry let you pick your seat online. I LOVE stuff like that.

Great when they show the right train (i.e a FIVE car Voyager becomes a FOUR car or a Voyager deputises for a HST!).

XC pessimism aside, it's a very good idea, one that East Coast have copied. I do wish Virgin would do the same!

 

[Zoe]

If Voyagers are as unpopular as some people seem to think they are then it's very surpising that they are often full. I've had some conversations with people that just see trains as a form of transport and nothing more and most of them quite like the Voyagers. Certainly some of the comments I've heard suggest that they are preferred to worn out old Mark 2 coaches.

 

[WestCoast]

If Voyagers are as unpopular as some people seem to think they are then it's very surpising that they are often full. I've had some conversations with people that just see trains as a form of transport and nothing more and most of them quite like the Voyagers. Certainly some of the comments I've heard suggest that they are preferred to worn out old Mark 2 coaches.

To be honest, I have not heard much bad feedback about the Pendolinos either, 'normals' seem to like them (or at least have no feeling either way) on the whole.

The Voyagers get slated by 'normals' because of their chronic overcrowding, it doesn't go unnoticed.

Overall, often the thought is new = good. I've had very confused people asking me about East Coast's HST - "the train looked really modern but it had manual doors (shock horror!)".

 

[Masbroughlad]

If the paths/ stock were there then I like your idea - maybe have four "local" XC services (Manchester - Birmingham, Bournemouth/Brighton - Birmingham, Edinburgh - York - Birmingham and Cornwall - Birmingham) with a "true" XC franchise running long distance services between bigger cities that are truly cross country (Edinburgh - Plymouth with maybe only six/eight/ten intermediate stops), providing hot meals etc to the longer distance traveller?

Unfortunately XC has evolved to be "all things to all people". We either tolerate this (and accept that a 200 mile journey on XC won't be as fast as an equivalent distance on the ECML/WCML), or it needs radical surgery (in which case we need to decide how we deal with some of the smaller places that XC currently serves).

Radical surgery is the way forwards! I like this thinking.

 

[tbtc]

Radical surgery is the way forwards! I like this thinking.

I'd like to see someone have a serious attempt at surgery, otherwise XC will get progressively slower and more complex, picking up flows from other TOCs (at the cost of slowing journeys down further).

It'd cause a lot of arguments though. Imagine if you decided to restrict Edinburgh - Plymouth to just a handful of direct trains a day but ran them properly limited stop (with other trains running no further than say Birmingham):

• Edinburgh
• Newcastle
• York
• Sheffield
• Birmingham
• Bristol
• Exeter
• Plymouth

Designed to cater for longer distance travel, hot food etc. It may not be much faster than now (given the slow trains in the way), but it'd be more suited to long distance travellers (one stop an hour, roughly)...

...but then you'd need to find a way of serving Durham/ Derby/ Cheltenham (etc) with other trains (look at the criticism I got for proposing cutting Leeds - Newcastle/ Edinburgh).

No easy way round it, to improve the longer distance stuff means cutting some of the other journeys (unless you suddenly find twice the stock/ paths). Do we go for complicated surgery?

 

[dfishw]

There should be two types of service as others have mentioned but i think they have it backwards. you effecitvly have two types of user. The leisure user that wants a direct train to some long distance destination. The important things for these will be a seat and a direct train: speed is less improtant since any alternative (except flying) will probably be slower. These users will be those that either dont have cars, or the distance is too large for car use. For these, stopping at large towns and cities is essential, and possibly even routing into cities (with a time penatly) as opposed to bypassing them.
The other type will want a very quick journey and these are the business users. These will be primarily around birmingham since this is i think where most of the business passnegers are travelling to and from. Obviously it will be so in other areas but less so and this could be picked up by the local TOC.
So you would have: Fast services around the core network for business users (with the stopping services perhaps being transfered to local TOCs) and long distance services that call at most stations and travel possibly slower then existing services. These would cater for the leisure user though if there is lack of deman, they could always run with reduced frequency.

 

[The Planner]

I'd like to see someone have a serious attempt at surgery, otherwise XC will get progressively slower and more complex, picking up flows from other TOCs (at the cost of slowing journeys down further).

Im not sure it will, XC are utterly obsessed with journey time and will try everything to shave minutes off journeys.

 

[Mojo]

I think one of the first things that could be done is abolition of Tamworth and Burton upon Trent stops from the Voyager/HST services, at least during the day, both of which are served by halfhourly "local" Turbostar services.

 

[tbtc]

Im not sure it will, XC are utterly obsessed with journey time and will try everything to shave minutes off journeys.

I'm just thinking of the way that DFT (etc) have moved the goalposts which has ended up with XC services stopping at Dunbar, Chester le Street, Dronfield etc in place of other services (this was obviously changed later with the Northern service to Nottingham picking up the Dronfield stops and with TPE now serving Chester le Street), not necessarily XC wanting to add these stops.

Similarly, look at how XC services in Devon/Cornwall/ Fife/ Angus are "in place of" local FGW/FSR services, meaning stops at smaller places like Cupar.

 

[Masbroughlad]

I think one of the first things that could be done is abolition of Tamworth and Burton upon Trent stops from the Voyager/HST services, at least during the day, both of which are served by halfhourly "local" Turbostar services.

Agreed. Also remove Darlington, Chesterfield, Burton, Tamworth, Tiverton, Totnes, Dawlish coast stops, secondary Cornish stops. Similarly Macclesfield, Stafford (?) on Manchester XC services.

 

[Failed Unit]

If Voyagers are as unpopular as some people seem to think they are then it's very surpising that they are often full. I've had some conversations with people that just see trains as a form of transport and nothing more and most of them quite like the Voyagers. Certainly some of the comments I've heard suggest that they are preferred to worn out old Mark 2 coaches.

Because for many it is the only practical way to get from A-B? You choices is train or drive whatever your stock is. Where the choice exists like Edinburgh - York people avoid XC. However is that the train or better facalities on East Coast such as catering (not trolley) and wi-fi.

Leeds - Birmingham would not see much loss in passengers if it was a 170, 156 or even a 3 car 144!

 

[junglejames]

Since XC aren't able to run 100 miles without stopping (which HSTs can do on other TOCs), then the Voyager is more suited to XC services.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
QUOTE]

What again? You do realise the answer im about to put down here dont you?
Since my car is unable to run 100 miles without stopping when i head down the shops, an F1 car is more suited to this journey.

Sorry, doesnt make sense.

Anyway, sorry, the Railways on the whole have made Xcrountry a poor slow service which HSTs are slightly less suited to, but still more suitable than voyagers.

So, with HSTs having slightly slow accelration, and voyagers just being cr*p, we obviously need a new build HST. One with better acceleration.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The faster longer distance services would still be used by people travelling for less than three hours, though - it would provide additional comfort for those travelling between, say, Exeter and Birmingham, or York and Birmingham - just two of the many genuine 'intercity' flows on XC services which currently have a less than 'intercity' service. I'm suggesting running two types of service - one which calls only at the major stations (and therefore will be useful to the vast majority of passengers, especially if advertised as a superior service) and one which fills in the 'gaps' at smaller stations.

Exactly the sort of thing ive often thought about. Except instead of the current HSTs, there would be a newbuild HST, with better acceleration and power etc.
Plus instead of voyagers, some of the slow crosscountry services would be operated by Meridians, displaced from fast Sheffields on the Midland Mainline by more of these newbuild HSTs.
Any extra voyagers needed would be rebuilt to Meridian standards, and the rest. Well, left to rot somewhere!!!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You would need to show there would be a business case for running two different speeds of XC services though. Arriva said that most journeys were less than 3 hours when they decided to remove the shop (as customers would prefer not to leave their seats) so I'm not sure there would be the business case for running faster long distance services.

I expect partly the reason for the lack of long distance journeys at that time was a- because of the voyagers, and b- because of the slowing down of the service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If Voyagers are as unpopular as some people seem to think they are then it's very surpising that they are often full. I've had some conversations with people that just see trains as a form of transport and nothing more and most of them quite like the Voyagers. Certainly some of the comments I've heard suggest that they are preferred to worn out old Mark 2 coaches.

Thats because the voyager looked more modern. Its amazing how fickle some people are. However, yes, some people do prefer voyagers. But if people were actually asked, and got to travel in both types, then what would the answer be?

I heard some survey or something along those lines was done once, and the overall opinion was that Mk3s were a more pleasant atmosphere than Pendys. That was what 'normals' were saying.
Not sure if voyagers were mentioned.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Because for many it is the only practical way to get from A-B? You choices is train or drive whatever your stock is. Where the choice exists like Edinburgh - York people avoid XC. However is that the train or better facalities on East Coast such as catering (not trolley) and wi-fi.

Leeds - Birmingham would not see much loss in passengers if it was a 170, 156 or even a 3 car 144!

Ah yes, id forgotten about that.

 

[sprinterguy]

The "ex Central Trains" part of XC seem to get ignored in enthusiast discussions, with people only ever talking about the "ex Virgin" part of XC

I agree; despite now being grouped under the same banner as a single operator, there is still a very clear divide between the former Central Trains and former Virgin operation.

One of the reasons that the ex-Central Trains routes aren’t derided in the same way as the ex-Virgin routes and largely ignored in discussions about Crosscountry is that under Central Trains, I hear that the experiences on these routes could be a very mixed bag in terms of train cleanliness, service provision, punctuality, etc, and one thing that Arriva Crosscountry have done well is offer a standard, reliable level of service, even if it is rather mundane, across the board, so this can be viewed as a step up from the previous franchise holders’ offering.

Also, the Turbostar trains are generally fit for purpose and well suited to the routes they operate, and although overcrowding is still prevalent, it is not to the same extent as that seen on the long distance Crosscountry network.

Finally, I think many, including myself, have difficulty moving away from the idea of the Crosscountry network consisting of the long distance routes spanning the pennines in the “X” format as it has been since British Rail days, with the former Central Trains routes just being “tagged” on to the franchise as it is currently.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What again? You do realise the answer im about to put down here dont you?
Since my car is unable to run 100 miles without stopping when i head down the shops, an F1 car is more suited to this journey.

Sorry, doesnt make sense.

Anyway, sorry, the Railways on the whole have made Xcrountry a poor slow service which HSTs are slightly less suited to, but still more suitable than voyagers.

So, with HSTs having slightly slow accelration, and voyagers just being cr*p, we obviously need a new build HST. One with better acceleration.

It makes perfect sense. The fastest point to point timing between regular stops are desired in order to keep the already lengthy journey times on Crosscountry to a minimum. As such, Voyagers are much better suited to this type of operation than HSTs. Granted HSTs offer much more that is in keeping with an Intercity service regarding luggage space, on board ambience and facilities, but the majority of people are interested in getting to their destination reliably and as quickly as possible. The Voyagers are much better suited to the stopping pattern of the Crosscountry network as it stands. They are lousy for coping with the long distance journeys that passengers make, but without a radical rethink of the Crosscountry network that removes intermediate station stops and allows for a more “Intercity” way of thinking then Voyagers are one of the best options in terms of keeping journey times to a minimum.

And the Crosscountry network has always been slow, as well as being much less frequent in Intercity and early Virgin days and exceptionally poor on the reliability front. The 47s were only capable of 95mph and had much slower acceleration away from station stops than Voyagers.

 

[OxtedL]

Many railway enthusiasts, along with the more romantic minority of the general public, dislike Pendolinos and Voyagers. Maybe because they are different, but more likely because they displaced some of the stock they had a liking for. I tend to disregard this, as that is the "fickleness", not the general public.

That's not to say that Voyagers don't have their faults, and are perhaps not as comfortable to travel in, but they are exactly what the modern, travelling public seems to want. (Well, better shop would be good etc, but you see what I mean).

Both Pendolinos and Voyagers have given their routes a serious, serious face-lift in the eyes of the general public, and passenger usage has increased as a result. I don't think this is fickleness, I think it is recognition of an improved service with modern facilities, as opposed to a sporadic service with run down facilities.

 

[M60lad]

Not to sure whether this has ever been covered as I'm new to this forum but are Cross Country drivers permitted to drive their Class 220/221s Voyagers with the drivers door open, I've seen this a few times whenever I've been in Stockport or Manchester Piccadilly on warm Sunny Days and was wondering what the official ruling on it is

 

[WelshBluebird]

but the majority of people are interested in getting to their destination reliably and as quickly as possible.

I wouldn't be so sure.
I'd imagine many people would gladly put up with an extra 15 minutes on a long journey if it meant the journey was more comfortable.

 

[Zoe]

Exactly the sort of thing ive often thought about. Except instead of the current HSTs, there would be a newbuild HST, with better acceleration and power etc.

Sorry but if there is any new stick it will be DMUs. As much as many of us here like HSTs and loco hauled stock unfortunately once the current HSTs are retired the idea will most likely be consigned to the history books.

 

[Bristol Rover]

Agree with many of the points already made.

Their first class service is dreadful. They have increased the advance fare price on the journey I used to undertake regularly (Bristol to the Westcountry) by about 1/3, and the service is worse than the old Virgin one (which is quite something). The trolley is invariably in the last coach and never arrives in First Class on the HST services, so I'm quite often deprived of any catering for a 90+ minute journey.

Best advice is to walk up to the intersection between first/standard and just help yourself to the food in the fridge! Even then it's putrid - processed mechanically recovered ham salad sarnies - yuk.

Usually get catering on the voyagers, but again, it's usually vile and served with plastic cutlery. Most of the time they are reluctant to give you any hot food too, pretending the 'menu' ends after Bristol (which isn't true).