CrossCountry post-Arriva

[AlastairFraser]

From what I was always told much of this route ‘floats’ so is always going to be an issue.

Fair enough, maybe those who worked to increase speeds on the Chat Moss line can help.

 

[dk1]

Fair enough, maybe those who worked to increase speeds on the Chat Moss line can help.

I doubt it as there’s no desire to raise the line speeds on this route from resignalling which took place 13 years ago this year. Restrictions for signal sighting even still exist that were removed then, such as 90-80-90 for no reason whatsoever and a basic line speed of 75 even though resignalled for 90. Nice idea though.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I doubt it as there’s no desire to raise the line speeds on this route from resignalling which took place 13 years ago this year. Restrictions for signal sighting even still exist that were removed then, such as 90-80-90 for no reason whatsoever and a basic line speed of 75 even though resignalled for 90. Nice idea though.

Shame

 

[TheGuy77]

I feel like mandating reservations on intercity routes could help with overcrowding.

 

[Halish Railway]

I feel like mandating reservations on intercity routes could help with overcrowding.

It would… and prevent people from travelling at short notice.

 

[Trainbike46]

I feel like mandating reservations on intercity routes could help with overcrowding.

There's a range of problems this would introduce, discussed in threads like this one many a time:
- Many XC IC routes serve local flows, sometimes as the only operator -> noone is going to reserve for a 20-mile short journey
- It would prevent short-notice travel due to tickets selling out
- enforceability is doubtful in any case

Overall, I think mandatory reservations make the railway less attractive, and given we should be working towards more passengers, undesirable.

XC's overcrowding problems should be resolved with longer trains - in the short term, taking all the ex-avanti 221s would be sensible. Of course, some of these are already coming

 

[The Ham]

New rolling stock could be a political thing, if there's a risk of a factory closing an order for XC could be a useful way of giving them work.

If this was a bimodal 7 coach order, that would create a lot of positive press around decarbonisation and a lot of extra capacity (even if they were the same capacity as the 220's a 7 coach train would have the same capacity as a pair of 4 coach units, whilst an 8 coach unit would be the same as a 4+5 pairing - of course if there was an increase in capacity, like the 80x's, an 8 coach train would be broadly the same as a 5+5 pairing).

Obviously there'd be a need for more investment in depots to cater for the extra length of the units (unless the units could split for maintenance purposes).

In terms of ongoing costs, being a single unit would mean less staff needed (as is the case for pairs of units), potential lower fuel costs, extra seats would mean the potential for extra ticket sales, being able to run 7 coach units rather than a pair of 4 coaches would be fewer coaches to lease to provide the same capacity and so if there's extra costs these could be offset by the above.

 

[Halish Railway]

New rolling stock could be a political thing, if there's a risk of a factory closing an order for XC could be a useful way of giving them work.

If this was a bimodal 7 coach order, that would create a lot of positive press around decarbonisation and a lot of extra capacity

In that circumstance I can a new build of EMUs displacing bi-modes to XC, most likely the 810s once the MML is wired up and 802s from TPE as new build bi-mode long distance high speed trains will come as a price.

 

[superalbs]

I feel like mandating reservations on intercity routes could help with overcrowding.

It wouldn't "help", it would just cause people to be unable to travel.

 

[The Ham]

It wouldn't "help", it would just cause people to be unable to travel.

It would also drive passengers to other modes as the frequency of local travel would appear to reduce.

 

[Peterthegreat]

I travelled from Sheffield to Birmingham today. The train was formed of a single unit, as were all trains from Sheffield this morning, and was absolutely rammed. No catering was provided although the train manager did his best to supply first class passengers with water.
Talking to him it was absolutely clear he and his colleagues are extremely disheartened by having to put up with this day in and day out.
He was not very impressed with his managers.

 

[Grecian 1998]

Compulsory reservations sound great until your train is cancelled, and then you discover the next few are already fully reserved, so you're going to be sitting there for a while. I'm sure those in favour would accept this with equanimity and definitely not grumble about their luck.

Talk of compulsory reservations on XC is a favourite on this board, but it isn't going to happen. It would only be enforceable by employing more staff, otherwise people would simply ignore it. Since XC loses money as it is, they aren't going to employ more staff to enforce a policy which doesn't net them any more income and increases the risk of staff - passenger conflict.

In any case, XC already reserve as much of their trains as they can. The 220s / XC legacy 221s / ex-AWC 221s all work interchangeably, meaning that they can't offer reservations in coach B, which doesn't exist in the 220s, or around 20 seats in coach D, which don't exist on the ex-AWC 221s which have lower density seating. Everything else is interchangeable and reservations are offered.

 

[Harpo]

Compulsory reservations would mean the end of a walk-up railway. How does anyone suggesting them propose that commuters/season ticket holders in particular are dealt with?

 

[A S Leib]

Compulsory reservations would mean the end of a walk-up railway. How does anyone suggesting them propose that commuters/season ticket holders in particular are dealt with?

TGV and some Intercités services have mandatory booking fees of €1.50 each for season ticket holders. I don't know how frequently season ticket holders end up without being able to get a seat, or why the cost of season tickets couldn't be increased by €15 per week and reservation fees removed.

Either way, that isn't a model I'd like to see in the UK (and it isn't a brilliant comparison as most longer-distance UK services have more frequent stops and more frequent services than a lot of TGV routes).

 

[Trainman40083]

There's a range of problems this would introduce, discussed in threads like this one many a time:
- Many XC IC routes serve local flows, sometimes as the only operator -> noone is going to reserve for a 20-mile short journey
- It would prevent short-notice travel due to tickets selling out
- enforceability is doubtful in any case

Overall, I think mandatory reservations make the railway less attractive, and given we should be working towards more passengers, undesirable.

XC's overcrowding problems should be resolved with longer trains - in the short term, taking all the ex-avanti 221s would be sensible. Of course, some of these are already coming

Just imagine if XC were to take the remaining ex Avanti 5 car units, and replace an equal number of 4 car units. Possibly a 25% increase in standard class seats on some trains straight away

 

[Peterthegreat]

Just imagine if XC were to take the remaining ex Avanti 5 car units, and replace an equal number of 4 car units. Possibly a 25% increase in standard class seats on some trains straight away

Er no. Going from 4 to 5 cars would increase the number of standard class seats by 33%.

 

[Trainman40083]

Er no. Going from 4 to 5 cars would increase the number of standard class seats by 33%.

Just testing.....either that or dreaming of a six car

 

[The Ham]

Er no. Going from 4 to 5 cars would increase the number of standard class seats by 33%.

Not only that, but by getting an extra 5 coach unit you can also:
Replace a 4 coach unit with an existing 5 coach unit
Then use the pair of 4 coach units to run the service which would have been that existing 5 coach unit

That means that you see
133% capacity from the new unit
133% capacity from the existing unit swapping for a 4 coach unit
150% capacity from the pair of 4 coach units replacing the existing 5 coach unit

From just one extra 5 coach unit you would see 3 diagrams with extra capacity.

 

[Trainman40083]

Not only that, but by getting an extra 5 coach unit you can also:
Replace a 4 coach unit with an existing 5 coach unit
Then use the pair of 4 coach units to run the service which would have been that existing 5 coach unit

That means that you see
133% capacity from the new unit
133% capacity from the existing unit swapping for a 4 coach unit
150% capacity from the pair of 4 coach units replacing the existing 5 coach unit

From just one extra 5 coach unit you would see 3 diagrams with extra capacity.

If they have the staff..... I guess pairs of four car units are not ideal, well especially if everybody gets on in one section. Then they can't spread out through the train.

 

[The Ham]

If they have the staff..... I guess pairs of four car units are not ideal, well especially if everybody gets on in one section. Then they can't spread out through the train.

Indeed, however even if one diagram is impacted there's still extra capacity on the other two.

Also, staying issues may not impact all the services being run by that diagram.

However, as I understand it, XC allow catering staff to be the staff in the unit to allow passengers to use it. If that's the case they are likely to be easier to get to being on trains than other staff (such as guards), so the issue should be a slightly easier thing to resolve than trying to get new trains.

Sometimes I feel there's too much focus on the perfect, when something like this would generally be an improvement and with scope to improve the issues (such as staffing numbers) over a shortish period.