Cross Country

[Zoe]

They have increased the advance fare price on the journey I used to undertake regularly (Bristol to the Westcountry) by about 1/3

No need to book this in advance, just use Day Returns and split at Taunton.

 

[junglejames]

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.

Actually, its the faster journey times on the WCML and the increased frequency on the X Country services that have given the services a boost. Not forgetting the usual increase we see anyway.
The public have voted, and the pendys came out worse than the Mk3s. All people like about Pendys is the speed.
Id also highly doubt voyagers have much to do with increased passengers on XC. Yes a few people will say its better now because trains look more modern, but are we sure everybody loves the voyagers?

Also, why is it that certain people always say the same thing when others say how bad voyagers are? Its always down to the fact that they replaced the older stock apparently. Absolute rubbish. So when my bag cant fit in the overhead rack, thats because voyagers replaced HSTs is it? When my backside complains because of the hard seats, thats because voyagers replaced HSTs is it? When i get annoyed on long journeys because of the extra noise and vibrations thats because voyagers replaced HSTs is it? So going by your prognosis, if voyagers had not replaced anything, them am i right in assuming my bag would have fitted in the overhead rack? Also, would the seats have automatically been more comfortable? Plus, i assume the underfloor engines would have been quiter if they never replaced HSTs? Sounds slightly daft to me, but i will believe you of course. I also realise the trains wouldnt smell of sh*t had they not replaced HSTs.
Hey, we've just solved all of the voyagers problems. Bring the HSTs back, so the voyagers havent actually replaced them, and all of a sudden, apparently everything on the voyagers will magically become a lot better. Why dont we tell Arriva we have solved the problem of the smelly toilets.

Oxted, your a star, youve worked out how to solve the voyagers' problems.

 

[The Planner]

Actually, its the faster journey times on the WCML and the increased frequency on the X Country services that have given the services a boost. Not forgetting the usual increase we see anyway.

Which neither would be possible without the Pendos and Voyagers.

 

[Zoe]

Remember also that the introduction of the Voyagers was very successful. It was so successful that the increase in passengers was much more than Virgin expected and as a result the Voyagers were overcrowded. If the introduction was not popular then I doubt the number of passengers would have increased at the time.

 

[route:oxford]

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.

In your imagination, perhaps.

But I rather like the 3h59m between Birmingham and Glasgow or Edinburgh.

Although I do yearn for the days when a 101 would get you from Stirling to Edinburgh in around 6 minutes less than it does at the moment in a 170.

 

[OxtedL]

Oxted, your a star, youve worked out how to solve the voyagers' problems.

You sarcastic expletive. :cry:

As has already been pointed out, the network improvements couldn't have happened without the voyagers.

You are delusional if you think that a new build HST could ever happen.

And you will find that the general public would prefer the look of a voyager to the look of the old stock. And the reliability. Oh yes, and the service improvements already mentioned. These are the things that the public notice. Yes, lack of luggage space, toilets etc are noticeable problems, but matter less than you would have us believe. Speed (up to a certain point) and reliability, as written on paper, are what all but the most regular travellers care about. And commuters get the same rubbish experience whatever the stock, so that isn't an issue here either.


Leave sarcasm to those who can handle it.

 

[tbtc]

Not just faster and more frequent, but significantly more reliable than the old loco hauled stock

 

[Zoe]

You are delusional if you think that a new build HST could ever happen.

Exactly, steam engines had their day and so has loco hauled stock. The HSTs have been given a lifeline until 2035 but after that all trains will most likely be multiple units.

 

[Failed Unit]

Remember also that the introduction of the Voyagers was very successful. It was so successful that the increase in passengers was much more than Virgin expected and as a result the Voyagers were overcrowded. If the introduction was not popular then I doubt the number of passengers would have increased at the time.

Open question but how does this compare to other flows. Many pacer flows into Leeds and Manchester have also had high % increases. Would XC have increased numbers irrespective of the stock used?

 

[Zoe]

Open question but how does this compare to other flows. Many pacer flows into Leeds and Manchester have also had high % increases. Would XC have increased numbers irrespective of the stock used?

There may well have been an increase over time but that doesn't explain the sudden increase in late 2002.

 

[WestCoast]

Exactly, steam engines had their day and so has loco hauled stock. The HSTs have been given a lifeline until 2035 but after that all trains will most likely be multiple units.

Loco-hauled stock has not "had its day", certain operators in mainland Europe would reject that completely...

I reckon push-pull has a future, not here as the UK is obsessed with MUs. I recognise that an MU offers benefits, but Push-pull can also offer flexibility that an MU can't.

 

[Zoe]

Push-pull can also offer flexibility that an MU can't.

How can push-pull be more flexible than an MU? If the locomotive fails then you are stuck. Not the case with an MU.

 

[WestCoast]

How can push-pull be more flexible than an MU? If the locomotive fails then you are stuck. Not the case with an MU.

To say push-pull doesn't offer certain benefits (and that it will be wiped out) is very naive, it's an extremely simplistic view to hold. Removal of all loco-hauled stock may well happen in the UK (wrongly) but other countries find their push-pull rakes very useful.

Failure of a multiple unit may require a whole new train and time-consuming switching activities.

A push-pull offers great flexibility in terms of formation of sets - gangways on MUs operating above 100mph are not permitted, so Voyagers are poor when they are coupled together. Double the number of staff needed. Inflexible in terms of on-train facilities.

Push-pull can be tailored to demand - formations can be adjusted in terms of length and can be pulled by a diesel or electric loco, no need for bi-mode complications weighing the train down. More powerful locomotives can be substituted for lesser locomotives when more power is needed.

DB sees their immense flexibility on Double-Decker Regional-Express services which are semi-fast longer distance trains (and soon to be present on some InterCity services in addition to the current older push-pull stock) and has continually pursued a policy of push-pull on these services (with the very latest stock being push-pull) - in order to meet varying demand.

In a wider context, different types of passenger cars ( sleepers, restaurant cars, buffet cars, etc.) can be easily added to or removed from a locomotive-hauled train. Not easily possible with a MU. Don't expect sleepers in Europe to turn into MUs any time soon!

The passenger environment of a multiple unit is often noticeably noisier than that of a locomotive-hauled train, due to the presence of underfloor machinery. The same applies to vibration. This is a particular problem with DMUs.

 

[Failed Unit]

There may well have been an increase over time but that doesn't explain the sudden increase in late 2002.

Increased frequency?

 

[Zoe]

I remember Virgin making a big thing about the introduction of the Voyagers shortly before Operation Princess started. There were quite a few ads and I think that this must have at least in part have resulted in the increased demand combined with the increase in frequency as you say. I don't think Virgin were not expecting it to be quite so successful though.

 

[Failed Unit]

I remember Virgin making a big thing about the introduction of the Voyagers shortly before Operation Princess started. There were quite a few ads and I think that this must have at least in part have resulted in the increased demand combined with the increase in frequency as you say. I don't think Virgin were not expecting it to be quite so successful though.

I suspect we will never know as they both happened so close together. The Mk4s on London - Leeds show old trains can increase volumes as well.

 

[Blindtraveler]

ok you all asked for it! I havent broused the entire thread so appologies for rehashing some doubtless already made points. I'm an anti XC man because, in no particular order:

they are not, no matter how hard they pretend an intercity opperater - there slogan should be long distance journeys, short distance service.

Staff - many of the x virgin gang have left and the new ones in the main CBA!

Voyagers - if virgin can keep theres clean, respectible and refresh them in the midst of introducing vhf, as wel as rolling out wifi and enganced phone signal, why cant ariva! If the same depot can largely remove toilet smells from one companies fleat, why can I smell the others a mile off? If 1 company can offer propper food, drink and first class on its busyest runs why is it so hard for the other to manage the loadings and feel its essential to remove the shop?

We all know staff moral is low, why? As a person who hates his job, i know from experience that the only way to improve the above is to listen and support staff and XC are clearly not doing so.

If they get even offered a sniff at a franchise renewal, i'll be writing to my MP! These guys are quite capable of delivering, look at some of there europian opperations. If enough people complain then you never know, something may yet be done!

 

[YorkshireBear]

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

i agree with some but some of the dawlish coast stops are really needed in the summer. but summer only.

So basically to improve XC were looking at operation princess 2 with major timetable recasts new stock etc etc

to me XC is going to be screwed for a long time! i reckon we'll be stuck with it till next franchise which lets face it arriva/DB wont win

 

[Zoe]

next franchise which lets face it arriva/DB wont win

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Arriva could only use what they had available in this franchise so the overcrowding was not their fault. If they put in the best bid for the next franchise then they deserve to win.

 

[Masbroughlad]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Arriva could only use what they had available in this franchise so the overcrowding was not their fault. If they put in the best bid for the next franchise then they deserve to win.

Sorry to say that I have to disagree. Overcrowding is not the only problem on XC. There are many other aspects of the franchise that have deteriorated/not improved under Arriva. Catering, ticket prices and availability, train interiors, standards of some staff, morale (apparently), etc. etc. etc. There is so much scope to improve things back to at least Virgin XC standard and beyond.

 

[Gmac]

Originally the Voyagers arrived as 4 and 6 car sets, would this have been a better idea in the end

 

[Zoe]

Sorry to say that I have to disagree. Overcrowding is not the only problem on XC. There are many other aspects of the franchise that have deteriorated/not improved under Arriva. Catering, ticket prices and availability, train interiors, standards of some staff, morale (apparently), etc. etc. etc. There is so much scope to improve things back to at least Virgin XC standard and beyond.

You are assuming that the winner will be decided on quality and not just who has the highest bid though. Arriva were able to provide extra seats by closing the shop, I seem to remember fare increases were always part of the plan also. The dft accepted the bid and Arriva did what they said they were going to. Remember also that the dft don't know which company each bid is from until they select the winner so they can't actively exclude Arriva.

 

[Masbroughlad]

I HOPE quality will play a bigger part going forwards.......

 

[Failed Unit]

The fare increases are simple supply and demand. If the trains are full and overcrowded you can charge more. If it is cheaper to travel via London (and the journey is better quality for catering, wifi etc so be it. Cross country don't care their train are still full.

 

[ainsworth74]

Originally the Voyagers arrived as 4 and 6 car sets, would this have been a better idea in the end

Which Voyagers were delivered in 6 car formation and when were they changed to 5/4 car formations because this is the first I'm hearing of it...

 

[Zoe]

If the current franchise had been decided on quality then Virgin may well have won. Virgin decided not to overbid and as a result lost out as Arriva had a higher bid. It's like with ITV in 1991 Thames had a very good track record in providing a TV service to London but Carlton put in a higher bid and Thames lost.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Which Voyagers were delivered in 6 car formation and when were they changed to 5/4 car formations because this is the first I'm hearing of it...

4/5 car Voyagers were planned long before the trains actually arrived. The 220s were only ever 4 cars.

 

[tbtc]

Talking of the next XC franchise, I wonder whether there'll be scope for electrification to be costed into it?

If the next West Coast franchise allows bidders to scope for the cost of electrifying from Crewe to Chester then there are some sections on XC that would free up a lot of diesels:

York/Doncaster - Sheffield - Derby - Birmingham
Coventry - Oxford
Reading - Basingstoke

...would be nice to see the next franchise holder looking at wiring these lines to free up Voyagers for the "extremities"

 

[Zoe]

...would be nice to see the next franchise holder looking at wiring these lines to free up Voyagers for the "extremities"

That assumes the Voyagers will be made available to XC and not sent to other operators to allows earlier than planned HST replacement.

 

[Failed Unit]

That assumes the Voyagers will be made available to XC and not sent to other operators to allows earlier than planned HST replacement.

They are going to East Coast on the London - Lincoln route. The sets used on Newark - London will be used to make the stopping service hourly. Lol.

 

[tbtc]

That assumes the Voyagers will be made available to XC and not sent to other operators to allows earlier than planned HST replacement.

Serious question: Who else would take Voyagers?

125 mph trains, where a four car set has fewer seats than a three car Turbostar? Apart from XC who will need DMUs that are *that* fast?