How can Cross country overcrowding be alleviated?

[cactustwirly]

X, however, is the leisure/business traveller, and not the commuter. X is the future of the railway, because the commuter flows are drying up. When will the railway realise and accept this?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2022 ==



Or it might be time to get the wires up to Oxford (long overdue) and extend the Didcot stoppers back up. Then that's two 8-car EMU formations per hour, aka "all the capacity you will ever need", and shove a u/s on the XC services.

Very rarely is cramming local passengers on IC trains the right approach. Sometimes it's unavoidable (see Reading commuters) but it almost never works particularly well, and most countries seem to realise that except us.

The Didcot/Oxford stoppers will never be a solution for Reading to Oxford passengers.
They are very slow and used to have long dwells at Didcot because of freight traffic.

On Sundays the GWR Paddington to Oxford service is only hourly, and leaves 2 minutes after the XC, and calls at Didcot so it isn't an option that most people use.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2022 ==

I think we're thinking about it totally the wrong way. There is absolutely a benefit of direct Birmingham to Penzance - it's a great holiday option, and with a family you won't want lots of changes. If it's hard to path, link it to the Exeter stopper.

"X* may change, but he/she/they won't change trains" was the last publicity campaign for ICXC before Virgin took it over. It summed up the network and its purpose absolutely spot-on.

* I can't remember them all, but there were a few different ones like this (made up rather than definitely from memory but they were very much like this):
"Sarah loves shopping, but she can't quite decide what look she wants. Her tastes may change, but she won't change trains. InterCity CrossCountry." (with a load of pictures of the same girl dressed in hugely different ways)
"Bob seems to get a new job every couple of weeks. His work may change, but he won't change trains. InterCity CrossCountry." (with a bloke dressed in lots of diffferent types of work clothes)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2022 ==



That depends where this overcrowding is happening. If it's on the likes of the Cov-Brum-Wolves corridor, there should be (and I believe is) an adequate local service at least half hourly along that line using high capacity EMUs. People might cram onto XC to save 2 minutes but they don't need to.



One option is compulsory reservations and simply not offering any reservations for short journeys on those trains so you can't. That's how PKP IC do it.

Another option is that the majority ticketing in urban areas where this is a problem and there are alternatives moves to being PTE ticketing, with a considerable price premium to travel on non-local services except where there's no parallel local service. That's how Germany does it. You can go from say Hamburg to Harburg on an ICE (a bit like going from Manchester to Stockport) but it'll cost you.

Where is this magical fast EMU service from Coventry to Wolverhampton?
There is only the slow stopping LNR services to Birmingham New Street. That isn't a viable alternative to XC or Avanti services

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2022 ==

In terms of service pattern I'd keep it broadly as is, truncate the odd extensions, and move the Newcastle service to terminate at Leeds, it's useless going via Doncaster.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Didcot/Oxford stoppers will never be a solution for Reading to Oxford passengers.
They are very slow and used to have long dwells at Didcot because of freight traffic.

On Sundays the GWR Paddington to Oxford service is only hourly, and leaves 2 minutes after the XC, and calls at Didcot so it isn't an option that most people use.

All that would make me think the right approach would be to allow "GWR Only" tickets to be sold at a lower price than the Any Permitted. TOCs who set the fare for a flow are generally prevented from doing this other than Advances, but this seems a case where an exception would be VERY sensible. That or put a u/s on the XC so no fares from Oxford to Reading are valid.

People all over the country accept slower service to save money, e.g. the LNR WCML services.

Personally I'd not use XC for Oxford<->Reading if it was free, as it's such a grim experience, but most people need influencing via journey planners.

There is only the slow stopping LNR services to Birmingham New Street. That isn't a viable alternative to XC or Avanti services

In most countries, local journeys are made using local trains, and as can be seen from Merseyrail frequent, quality, very simple stopping services are valued. 4tph Wolves-Cov after HS2 clears a couple of fast paths, perhaps?

Hardly anyone is going from Cov to Wolves anyway, most are going to Birmingham from one side or the other.

 

[Starmill]

That or put a u/s on the XC so no fares from Oxford to Reading are valid.

How would that work? If a train to Bournemouth calls at Oxford to set down only that means that, er, nobody can travel from Oxford to Southampton any more?

 

[Bletchleyite]

How would that work? If a train to Bournemouth calls at Oxford to set down only that means that, er, nobody can travel from Oxford to Southampton any more?

Ah, I was under the impression that they all terminated at Reading these days. If they go further, then that indeed wouldn't work.

Edit: it appears roughly half terminate at Reading.

 

[gc4946]

All that would make me think the right approach would be to allow "GWR Only" tickets to be sold at a lower price than the Any Permitted. TOCs who set the fare for a flow are generally prevented from doing this other than Advances, but this seems a case where an exception would be VERY sensible. That or put a u/s on the XC so no fares from Oxford to Reading are valid.

Other routes where such a similar rule could be introduced that I can think of off my head:
Leeds-Sheffield (Northern only), Leeds-Wakefield Westgate (Northern, LNER only)
Leeds-York, also Doncaster-Sheffield (Northern, TPE only)
Stafford-Wolverhampton-Birmingham New Street-Coventry (LNR or WMR only)
Cheltenham-Bristol Temple Meads (GWR only)
Reading-Basingstoke (GWR only)
Basingstoke-Bournemouth (SWR only)

 

[class397tpe]

I think that XC services did cater for these flows in BR days - it is just that (after the frequency improvements of Operation Princess particularly) more and more people have started commuting longer and longer distances [in the provinces this generally was limited to the affluent, and railway staff ], coupled with economies from the 80s to eliminate uneconomic local train service (often peak hours only) to minor and intermediate stations outwith the conurbations, rather than just dispensing with them. Putting on a shed load of peak period locals doesn't sound very cost effective

Not sure how, under the current ticketing system, commuters/ short distance passengers would be discouraged from using (and overcrowding) these proposed luxurious trains aimed at the long distance market ?

An out of the box (and probably crazy unrealistic) suggestion would be to simply have trains with different types of carriages to cater for the different flows. Something similar to the Japanese train in the attached image - some carriages with end doors and more spaced out seating (e.g. lots of tables like TPE's 397s) for long-distance travellers, and some carriages with larger doors and airline style seats to seat short-distance travellers.
It probably would be horrendously complicated to implement, but the long-distance carriages could be reservations only - i.e. can't be in there without a reservation, and reservations would only be given for journeys of an hour or more. The cars designed for short distance travellers could then be unreserved - so short-distance travellers (<1hr) would not get a reservation and have to use these. Probably crazy and would of course require new build units, but it's just an idea. Would definitely require clear announcements at stations etc.
Maybe you could make frankentrain out of half a voyager and half a turbostar

 

[Starmill]

Ah, I was under the impression that they all terminated at Reading these days. If they go further, then that indeed wouldn't work.

Edit: it appears roughly half terminate at Reading.

Indeed. I'd suggest that through services from Southampton to both Reading and Birmingham continues to be a high priority.

 

[gc4946]

An out of the box (and probably crazy unrealistic) suggestion would be to simply have trains with different types of carriages to cater for the different flows. Something similar to the Japanese train in the attached image - some carriages with end doors and more spaced out seating (e.g. lots of tables like TPE's 397s) for long-distance travellers, and some carriages with larger doors and airline style seats to seat short-distance travellers.
It probably would be horrendously complicated to implement, but the long-distance carriages could be reservations only - i.e. can't be in there without a reservation, and reservations would only be given for journeys of an hour or more. The cars designed for short distance travellers could then be unreserved - so short-distance travellers (<1hr) would not get a reservation and have to use these. Probably crazy and would of course require new build units, but it's just an idea. Would definitely require clear announcements at stations etc.
Maybe you could make frankentrain out of half a voyager and half a turbostar

If Voyagers are to be used for this purpose they'll have to be formed as five cars for this solution to work.
Also where would the airline seats be located?
Maybe one of the end coaches gets fitted with airline seats, then the adjoining carriage has a catering facility acting as a divide between the rest of the train having wider spaced seats with generous luggage facilities.

 

[cactustwirly]

All that would make me think the right approach would be to allow "GWR Only" tickets to be sold at a lower price than the Any Permitted. TOCs who set the fare for a flow are generally prevented from doing this other than Advances, but this seems a case where an exception would be VERY sensible. That or put a u/s on the XC so no fares from Oxford to Reading are valid.

People all over the country accept slower service to save money, e.g. the LNR WCML services.

Personally I'd not use XC for Oxford<->Reading if it was free, as it's such a grim experience, but most people need influencing via journey planners.



In most countries, local journeys are made using local trains, and as can be seen from Merseyrail frequent, quality, very simple stopping services are valued. 4tph Wolves-Cov after HS2 clears a couple of fast paths, perhaps?

Hardly anyone is going from Cov to Wolves anyway, most are going to Birmingham from one side or the other.

It's no different to GWR, their trains are just as busy.
Unless you take the detour via Didcot, but that's a good 45 minutes

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's no different to GWR, their trains are just as busy.

I've seen 9 and 10-car trains on the Oxford-Paddington fasts.

 

[Falcon1200]

Really, XC shouldn't (other than XC-Lite*) be dealing with those short-distance passengers other than incidentally - it didn't in BR days.

I think that XC services did cater for these flows in BR days

They certainly did ! I commuted between Oxford and Reading from 1980 to 1984 and depending on shift times, used XC services just as much as any other.

Oxford-Reading often uses 9 or 10-car 80x formations half hourly these days, anyone using XC for that journey is just a fool.

Thanks a lot ! So when my delayed bus to Oxford station just missed the 0902 GWR train to Reading I was a fool for joining the 0916 XC, instead of waiting another 15 minutes for GWR ? And returning from Reading to Oxford I have on occasion used XC too, if that was the next train. BTW, can we please ditch this nonsense that every single XC train is grossly overcrowded and no-one joining en route can ever get a seat, because that was not the case on those journeys I have mentioned. BTW also the majority of GWR Oxford route trains I have travelled on, or observed, recently have been 5-cars, not 9 or 10, and some of those have been overcrowded.

 

[JonathanH]

I've seen 9 and 10-car trains on the Oxford-Paddington fasts.

Yes, it happens quite a lot but a) there were people on this very forum calling for Cotswold trains to be 5-car to allow 9-car units to work to the West Country and b) splitting and joining at Oxford is a performance risk. Passengers don't plan their journeys around the length of trains or neatly only turn up in numbers when GWR provide a 9-car train.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, it happens quite a lot but a) there were people on this very forum calling for Cotswold trains to be 5-car to allow 9-car units to work to the West Country and b) splitting and joining at Oxford is a performance risk. Passengers don't plan their journeys around the length of trains.

It's not an utterly terrible idea to do that if you have any sort of flexibility. I absolutely plan, wherever possible, to avoid 4-car sets on the south WCML, even if that means an extra 15 minutes on the journey. And I'd definitely avoid a 5-car Voyager on the WCML. And I do avoid XC!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2022 ==

Thanks a lot ! So when my delayed bus to Oxford station just missed the 0902 GWR train to Reading I was a fool for joining the 0916 XC, instead of waiting another 15 minutes for GWR ?

If it was busy I'd have waited, yes. If the XC was first you had a chance to see if it was.

 

[JonathanH]

BTW, can we please ditch this nonsense that every single XC train is grossly overcrowded and no-one joining en route can ever get a seat, because that was not the case on those journeys I have mentioned. BTW also the majority of GWR Oxford route trains I have travelled on, or observed, recently have been 5-cars, not 9 or 10, and some of those have been overcrowded.

Yes, well said.

 

[Falcon1200]

If it was busy I'd have waited, yes. If the XC was first you had a chance to see if it was.

Actually, in different circumstances, I have done exactly that; Returning from Warley at the NEC once I planned to join a Pendolino to New St, however on arrival it was already busy, plus hordes more squeezed themselves on. So I simply changed platforms and caught a 323 instead, arriving at New St 10 or so minutes later. But this does raise the question that even if XC services (and Avanti ?) were barred to local passengers in, say, the Wolverhampton/Coventry corridor, how could this possibly be enforced ? There is no means of preventing access to individual platforms, and no time to check tickets en route.

But I still don't regard myself as a fool for using XC between Oxford and Reading !

 

[Jimini]

Actually, in different circumstances, I have done exactly that; Returning from Warley at the NEC once I planned to join a Pendolino to New St, however on arrival it was already busy, plus hordes more squeezed themselves on. So I simply changed platforms and caught a 323 instead, arriving at New St 10 or so minutes later. But this does raise the question that even if XC services (and Avanti ?) were barred to local passengers in, say, the Wolverhampton/Coventry corridor, how could this possibly be enforced ? There is no means of preventing access to individual platforms, and no time to check tickets en route.

But I still don't regard myself as a fool for using XC between Oxford and Reading !

I use XC between Coventry and Reading at least once a week, and you’re right it’s perfectly fine, and only overcrowded very occasionally in times of wider disruption issues. No significant reason to avoid them!

I guess the benefits to catching the GWR service from Oxford to Reading is a) it may well start from there so will be empty upon arrival, and b) they tend to get routed onto the UM at Didcot East which probably shaves a few minutes off the journey time, whereas the XC services tend to be routed on the UR.

 

[gc4946]

Actually, in different circumstances, I have done exactly that; Returning from Warley at the NEC once I planned to join a Pendolino to New St, however on arrival it was already busy, plus hordes more squeezed themselves on. So I simply changed platforms and caught a 323 instead, arriving at New St 10 or so minutes later. But this does raise the question that even if XC services (and Avanti ?) were barred to local passengers in, say, the Wolverhampton/Coventry corridor, how could this possibly be enforced ? There is no means of preventing access to individual platforms, and no time to check tickets en route.

But I still don't regard myself as a fool for using XC between Oxford and Reading !

The difference is that Avanti's service would have terminated either at New St or Wolverhampton, its train crew could have started preparing for their return journey to London and most likely don't bother checking tickets.
Whereas XC probably have more incentive to check tickets because they call at New St en route out of the West Midlands
Short of employing teams of roving inspectors between Wolverhampton and Coventry it's otherwise very difficult to enforce ticket bars on Avanti and XC's services.

 

[RT4038]

An out of the box (and probably crazy unrealistic) suggestion would be to simply have trains with different types of carriages to cater for the different flows. Something similar to the Japanese train in the attached image - some carriages with end doors and more spaced out seating (e.g. lots of tables like TPE's 397s) for long-distance travellers, and some carriages with larger doors and airline style seats to seat short-distance travellers.
It probably would be horrendously complicated to implement, but the long-distance carriages could be reservations only - i.e. can't be in there without a reservation, and reservations would only be given for journeys of an hour or more. The cars designed for short distance travellers could then be unreserved - so short-distance travellers (<1hr) would not get a reservation and have to use these. Probably crazy and would of course require new build units, but it's just an idea. Would definitely require clear announcements at stations etc.
Maybe you could make frankentrain out of half a voyager and half a turbostar

I think in this country its called First Class carriages and Standard Class carriages? But of course these long distance leisure passengers want lots of room for themselves and luggage and pay bargain prices (otherwise we'll go by car etc....)

 

[cactustwirly]

I've seen 9 and 10-car trains on the Oxford-Paddington fasts.

Occasionally yes, but the majority are 5 cars.
Most XCs are double voyagers at the moment

 

[Snow1964]

Occasionally yes, but the majority are 5 cars.
Most XCs are double voyagers at the moment

Double voyagers, or no voyagers

Most of the doubling up is by taking trains off parts of the XC network, so those using parts of XC don’t even get the service they used to

But of course, a train that doesn’t run, is never overcrowded, although passenger can’t get from A to B either

 

[class397tpe]

I think in this country its called First Class carriages and Standard Class carriages? But of course these long distance leisure passengers want lots of room for themselves and luggage and pay bargain prices (otherwise we'll go by car etc....)

Yep that's correct! I was just surprised to see how much physical difference their was between the layouts - its curious to see coaches like that with narrow doors and transverse seating, sandwiched within a train formed of metro cars with longitudinal seating and 4 doors per side.

And that's the exact problem - to get significant long distance flows, crosscountry needs to be price competitive with the car for a group. Short distance trips are needed to supplement the income.
E.g. a recent trip down to devon - for 1 person travelling, the £100 offpeak return (with railcard) is about the same as fuel would cost for the car, wheras for 3 people travelling, crosscountry is 3x the cost of the car. Also, is it just me, or have they been a lot more stingy with advance tickets recently?
Plus when no advances are available, the fare gap between an offpeak return and offpeak 1st return is utterly insane - at about >£400 for the 1st class return. No wonder 1st class is so lightly loaded!

 

[RT4038]

Yep that's correct! I was just surprised to see how much physical difference their was between the layouts - its curious to see coaches like that with narrow doors and transverse seating, sandwiched within a train formed of metro cars with longitudinal seating and 4 doors per side.

And that's the exact problem - to get significant long distance flows, crosscountry needs to be price competitive with the car for a group. Short distance trips are needed to supplement the income.
E.g. a recent trip down to devon - for 1 person travelling, the £100 offpeak return (with railcard) is about the same as fuel would cost for the car, wheras for 3 people travelling, crosscountry is 3x the cost of the car. Also, is it just me, or have they been a lot more stingy with advance tickets recently?
Plus when no advances are available, the fare gap between an offpeak return and offpeak 1st return is utterly insane - at about >£400 for the 1st class return. No wonder 1st class is so lightly loaded!

So is it worth the railway trying to compete for this traffic? I suspect not.

X, however, is the leisure/business traveller, and not the commuter. X is the future of the railway, because the commuter flows are drying up. When will the railway realise and accept this?

But it just might not be economical to tailor the product around all of this market - it may just be more practical to shrink the quantity on offer and only cater for that part of the leisure market that is economically worthwhile.

 

[Some guy]

The worst thing with cross country is almost every single service goes to Birmingham from whereever in the country theres way too many popular cities cross country serve meaning they’re always going to be popular

 

[Starmill]

So is it worth the railway trying to compete for this traffic? I suspect not.

Given the current state of the cost base, particularly with respect to train lease costs and staffing costs, it's not economical for the railway to try to compete for very much traffic at all. It's so expensive to run trains currently that if the government expects to keep its contributions as low as they'd like, the price for all journeys will be many times the cost the average person will consider reasonable. So if that's the standard, then very little traffic is going to be going by rail.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2022 ==

But it just might not be economical to tailor the product around all of this market - it may just be more practical to shrink the quantity on offer and only cater for that part of the leisure market that is economically worthwhile.

There are definitely markets which it would be sensible to exit.

 

[Wolfie]

The worst thing with cross country is almost every single service goes to Birmingham from whereever in the country theres way too many popular cities cross country serve meaning they’re always going to be popular

A network centred on Birmingham was the whole raison d'etre for Cross Country in its privatised incarnation.

 

[dk1]

A network centred on Birmingham was the whole raison d'etre for Cross Country in its privatised incarnation.

Beat me to it. The reason the likes of Liverpool- Norwich where excluded. New Street had to be part of the package.

 

[JonathanH]

A network centred on Birmingham was the whole raison d'etre for Cross Country in its privatised incarnation.

...and its nationalised incarnation.

 

[Wolfie]

...and its nationalised incarnation.

I thought that but wasn't 100% sure, thanks. I was with respect to the reshaped network.

 

[WideRanger]

An out of the box (and probably crazy unrealistic) suggestion would be to simply have trains with different types of carriages to cater for the different flows. Something similar to the Japanese train in the attached image - some carriages with end doors and more spaced out seating (e.g. lots of tables like TPE's 397s) for long-distance travellers, and some carriages with larger doors and airline style seats to seat short-distance travellers.
It probably would be horrendously complicated to implement, but the long-distance carriages could be reservations only - i.e. can't be in there without a reservation, and reservations would only be given for journeys of an hour or more. The cars designed for short distance travellers could then be unreserved - so short-distance travellers (<1hr) would not get a reservation and have to use these. Probably crazy and would of course require new build units, but it's just an idea. Would definitely require clear announcements at stations etc.
Maybe you could make frankentrain out of half a voyager and half a turbostar

In the picture, the double deck cars with end doors are the Green Class carriages. Essentially First Class carriages with compulsory reservations. The seats aren't particularly lovely - standard Japanese reversible transverse seating. But the real benefit is that you get a seat. And no motors under the carriage. The other carriages are generally longitudinal seating - or more accurately a few longitudinal seats and many, many people standing in the peak. Naturally the people who tend to want to guarantee a seat are 1) richer and 2) more likely to be travelling longer distances (i.e. around 30 minutes). So they can get away with small end doors. On the other hand, the other carriages generally have high numbers of people getting on and off at every core station, with stops every 3-5 minutes.

So this is more about class distinction than long-distance vs local.

 

[lammergeier]

A couple of things to address points raised -

Double voyagers only need 3 staff to run in passenger service - leading set Driver + caterer or TM, rear set TM.

Network Rail were always extremely reluctant for anther operator to run trains into New St above the current 4 + occasional charter/freight. Having XC and WMT running the bulk of through services makes sense particularly in terms of dealing with disruption. I'm not sure if this remains the case (it was written somewhere in reference to EMT as it was then taking over the BHM - Notts stoppers). Whether this stance remains I'm not sure, particularly if WMR and LNWR do eventually split fully, but if it does then don't expect to see EMR and GWR running into New St anytime soon.

"How to improve XC" is often an interesting thread as the answer is glaringly obvious to anyone except those with the power to make the right decision, yet in the absence of capacity being made available we have all sorts of other niche ideas to make it less/more attractive.