Yes! I don't see how the government can get people to leave cars when many long distance operations such as TPE and XC are so unpleasant.
The franchising system doesn't seem to be responding to changes in passenger numbers in any reasonable time frame...
Whilst I agree, the XC franchise is one of those which hasn't been relet for quite a long time. In fact it started in 2007, which puts it closer to things like the zero growth franchis of Northern (2004) and that ethos, than the WCML franchise problems (2012) or the CP5 High Level Output Specification (2012). The latter of which was quite forward thinking with what it proposed (given what's transpired, some may joke several Control Periods to far forward thinking).
XC could have been relet as early as 2014, meaning that if that happened we could be looking forward to what was being proposed by the following franchise early in the 2020's rather than just the next.
As I've pointed out on other subjects, rail growth has seen over 70% growth in a shorter period than the XC franchise has been running for. As such, it there had been a new franchise it would have increased capacity and we'd probably be looking at a doubling of capacity from what we've already got (some may think my suggestion of scraping end units is boring, but based on the above and the potential communication issues between the 222 fleet and the 220/221's and the stupidly short formations of 4 coach units, which increases staff and leading costs without providing much extra capacity, there could be a case for doing so).
Given that there's few locations which could be suitable for 22x's, especially if XC replace them with bimodal trains, their current owners would likely be looking to offer them on a good deal to anyone who is likely to be interested.
Basically you're looking at:
- XC (most likely, as posted above, possibly with the 5 coach 222's & 158's replacing the 170's and the other 222's strengthening the current Voyager fleet)
- Chiltern (but given the length of their current Mainline loco hauled services they would only be interested if the unit length was the same length and not pairs of units due to the loss of capacity)
- SWR (as a fixed length formation of 22x's with 10 coaches could provide broadly the same capacity as a 9 coach train formed of 159's, of these were used on the Exeter services they could provide some journey time improvements, given they wouldn't be so heavily used a lot of their current problems would appear to go away)
(Of the three two would only be interested in longer unit types for capacity reasons, mostly as the 4 coach units have so few seats in them).
Pretty much any other franchise which could have used them had either ruled them out (ScotRail) or has new stock (TPE, GWR, EMT, Wales, etc.).
Yes you could find an open access operator who may be interested in them, but again they're not going to be interested in them in their 4 coach configuration.
The two most likely way that we're not going to see them scrapped, either in their entirety, part of the 22x fleet or the scraping of some end coaches, would be then all going to XC or their owners doing Project Thor.
Project Thor would likely result in the lengthening of all 4 coach units to 5 coach units with all 5 coach units either having a coach replaced with a new pantograph coach or having 2 pantograph coaches added and the using up of the extra coaches to form either 9+ coach units.
Given how powerful the 22x fleet is, if they weren't required to run at over 100mph on diesel (or at least not very much) there could even be a case made for a trailer coach being added of they were 10 coaches long (i.e. 7 diesel coaches, 2 pantograph coaches and 1 trailer coach).
However even without any trailers the fleet could be:
- 34*5 coach 220's
- 15*5 coach 221's
- 5*10 coach 221's
- 17*5 coach 222's
- 10*9 coach 222's (actually 1 could be 10 coaches long)
You would gain more capacity, especially given that you could also design the new pantograph coaches without the need for an accessible loo, with those 106 new pantograph coaches.
The big question is, would you bother given the risk? I wouldn't have thought so. Which would probably mean, unless someone can give a good reason why not, that the scraping of some of the 22x fleet within the next 10 years (subject to XC getting a new franchise within that timeframe), even if that's just end coaches.
Especially given that when comparing a 4+4 train with a 7 coach unit, or an 4+5/8 or 5.5/9, you'd see broadly the same capacity but save on the lease costs of 1 coach (which always used to be £110,000/ year) as well as the need for an extra member of catering staff (without the benefit of extra, or much extra, income by them being provided compared with them not being provided). Such cost savings are going to be significant as to if XC make a premium payment or not to the DfT, which under the current system would be quite significant. (Whether that's true going forwards is another matter, however I would be surprised if it wasn't still a significant factor).
Yes there's still a case for being able to strengthen services over the core. However on certain routes (Reading/Southampton and the North East) there's not much route beyond the core, so there's not much saving from splitting and using one unit for the next return leg. Even then the potential for extra revenue would likely be able to cover most of those costs (even if that's mostly getting a bigger share of the any train ticket sales over that route).
