How can CrossCountry realistically be improved?

[Bletchleyite]

Unrelated, but I’d also get rid of Liverpool-Nottingham, Liverpool-Glasgow and Manchester-Glasgow/Edinburgh via WCML.

Why? All of these are well-used, particularly the latter which shows demand by being overcrowded a lot of the time.

 

[Purple Orange]

Why? All of these are well-used, particularly the latter which shows demand by being overcrowded a lot of the time.

I’m framing this in a post HS2/NPR world. We could realistically have a scenario where there are 4 tph leaving Manchester and 6+ tph leaving Liverpool each hour, that could connect at Warrington for 4 tph to Glasgow. It’s essentially a turn up & go service. This is compared to the direct train that 1tp2h (and shorter), and even less frequent from Liverpool. Nottingham will again be faster with a change on HS2.

Rather than continuing running services to Glasgow & Edinburgh on the WCML or Nottingham, send those trains to another destination. I.e. increase Blackpool frequency or from Sheffield head to Cleethorpes or elsewhere on the Midland Mainline.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’m framing this in a post HS2/NPR world. We could realistically have a scenario where there are 4 tph leaving Manchester and 6+ tph leaving Liverpool each hour, that could connect at Warrington for 4 tph to Glasgow

3, not 4 (2 fast from Euston, 1 stopper from Brum). But it is silly not to have direct services from Manchester to Scotland.

People generally book long distance journeys in advance, so turn up and go is not really relevant.

The success of the TPE is such that I would love to see (and I think we will see) a 10 car formation serving both Glasgow and Edinburgh each hour, particularly once NPR makes 80x spare.

 

[HSTEd]

People generally book long distance journeys in advance, so turn up and go is not really relevant.

Ultimately I'd argue that that is the problem.

The paradigm drives people to turn up a long time in advance of their departure time to avoid the risk of missing the train. That defacto extends the journey time.

Ultimately we are competing against cars, which are turn up and go.

You don't arrive an hour late and potentially hundreds of pounds worse off if you are ninety seconds too late at the railway station with a car.

Frequent trains with simple stopping patterns have proven a big winner over and over again and I'd personally like to take this paradigm to the next level

 

[Falcon1200]

But it is silly not to have direct services from Manchester to Scotland.

Indeed; In recent years the Manchester/Scotland service has gone hourly, and from 3-car Class 185 via 4-car Class 350 to 5-car Class 397 !

 

[Purple Orange]

3, not 4 (2 fast from Euston, 1 stopper from Brum). But it is silly not to have direct services from Manchester to Scotland.

People generally book long distance journeys in advance, so turn up and go is not really relevant.

The success of the TPE is such that I would love to see (and I think we will see) a 10 car formation serving both Glasgow and Edinburgh each hour, particularly once NPR makes 80x spare.

I don’t see why it is silly at all. So you’re saying it worth keeping a 5-car (could be 8) train every two hours to Glasgow, when far better connectivity could be achieved with HS2 and NPR? I think it is that sort of situation that will hold the railways back. People may well book in advance, but if you’re going to Glasgow you have to plan your day around the rail timetable, but with HS2 and NPR you can pretty much travel when you want to travel. A change of train is not uncommon.
Yes there will be 3 tph to Glasgow:

• 2 tph HS2 London-Scotland
• 0.5 tph HS2 Birmingham-Glasgow
• 0.5 tph WCML London-Birmingham-Glasgow

 

[py_megapixel]

I don’t see why it is silly at all. So you’re saying it worth keeping a 5-car (could be 8) train every two hours to Glasgow, when far better connectivity could be achieved with HS2 and NPR? I think it is that sort of situation that will hold the railways back. People may well book in advance, but if you’re going to Glasgow you have to plan your day around the rail timetable, but with HS2 and NPR you can pretty much travel when you want to travel. A change of train is not uncommon.
Yes there will be 3 tph to Glasgow:

• 2 tph HS2 London-Scotland
• 0.5 tph HS2 Birmingham-Glasgow
• 0.5 tph WCML London-Birmingham-Glasgow

Sorry, I'm not quite sure I understand your point here. Are you suggesting that people should travel from Manchester to Glasgow via Birmingham?

 

[Purple Orange]

Sorry, I'm not quite sure I understand your point here. Are you suggesting that people should travel from Manchester to Glasgow via Birmingham?

No. I’m saying in a post HS2/NPR world, there could be a scenario where Warrington is the cross roads between the WCML and the NPR line. So, if you’re travelling from Liverpool or Manchester to Glasgow, you have the ability to travel at a time that suits you rather than when the rail time table tells you should.

The same effect will happen on services to Bristol, but with a change in Birmingham, as there are no planned XC services from the north west on Midlands Engine Rail.

The alternative to a higher frequency, higher capacity train route is to wait for the shorter, less frequent service every 2 hours to Glasgow. Unless you make that hourly to Edinburgh and Glasgow each, I expect the route via Warrington (if that is the interchange point) will win.

 

[JamesT]

No. I’m saying in a post HS2/NPR world, there could be a scenario where Warrington is the cross roads between the WCML and the NPR line. So, if you’re travelling from Liverpool or Manchester to Glasgow, you have the ability to travel at a time that suits you rather than when the rail time table tells you should.

The same effect will happen on services to Bristol, but with a change in Birmingham, as there are no planned XC services from the north west on Midlands Engine Rail.

The alternative to a higher frequency, higher capacity train route is to wait for the shorter, less frequent service every 2 hours to Glasgow. Unless you make that hourly to Edinburgh and Glasgow each, I expect the route via Warrington (if that is the interchange point) will win.

Though Warrington is off on the Liverpool leg, so I'm not seeing how it's going to act as an interchange as the HS2 trains will be going up the main North/South line.
Currently all the HS2 services for Scotland are scheduled for Preston, but I wonder if Wigan might work better as being closer to Liverpool and Manchester.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don’t see why it is silly at all. So you’re saying it worth keeping a 5-car (could be 8) train every two hours to Glasgow, when far better connectivity could be achieved with HS2 and NPR? I think it is that sort of situation that will hold the railways back. People may well book in advance, but if you’re going to Glasgow you have to plan your day around the rail timetable, but with HS2 and NPR you can pretty much travel when you want to travel. A change of train is not uncommon.
Yes there will be 3 tph to Glasgow:

• 2 tph HS2 London-Scotland
• 0.5 tph HS2 Birmingham-Glasgow
• 0.5 tph WCML London-Birmingham-Glasgow

WCML London-Brum-Glasgow is not certain to continue, the HS2 business case shows it only running to Preston.

A change of train is not uncommon, but breaking up major flows is silly. Manchester-Scotland is just going to keep growing, it's already close to outgrowing the 397s in my observation.

I'm all for connections - for example highlighting that 1tpd Euston-Blackpool is pretty useless when you can travel via Preston every hour - but not breaking up major flows just because a line on a map offends a purist. This would be about as sensible as the classic bus example of terminating south Tyne buses at Gateshead.

 

[Purple Orange]

WCML London-Brum-Glasgow is not certain to continue, the HS2 business case shows it only running to Preston.

A change of train is not uncommon, but breaking up major flows is silly. Manchester-Scotland is just going to keep growing, it's already close to outgrowing the 397s in my observation.

I'm all for connections - for example highlighting that 1tpd Euston-Blackpool is pretty useless when you can travel via Preston every hour - but not breaking up major flows just because a line on a map offends a purist. This would be about as sensible as the classic bus example of terminating south Tyne buses at Gateshead.

You’re proving my point with the Blackpool example. 4 tpd from Liverpool and 2 train every 2 hours from Manchester is not very good. Make it hourly at least and the case strengthens.

If you’re heading to Glasgow after work, you’ve got a 3pm, 5pm, 7pm service. Yet most people won’t be operating their day along those times. You might be all ready to go at 5:30pm, so why hang about till 7pm? That then begs the question of whether it might be better to run a different service on the Glasgow direct path that is not currently provided for.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You’re proving my point with the Blackpool example. 4 tpd from Liverpool and 2 train every 2 hours from Manchester is not very good. Make it hourly at least and the case strengthens.

Agreed. But there's nowhere near the demand for a 200m train from Blackpool to London hourly, and the demand is quite bitty so there isn't a time of day when you'd fill 1tpd. The present service is marginal (it'd just be sat at Preston) to be fair.

If you’re heading to Glasgow after work, you’ve got a 3pm, 5pm, 7pm service. Yet most people won’t be operating their day along those times. You might be all ready to go at 5:30pm, so why hang about till 7pm? That then begs the question of whether it might be better to run a different service on the Glasgow direct path that is not currently provided for.

If the service continues to grow, particularly the Edinburgh part, then running double units splitting for both destinations each hour is going to be the way to go. Or run a full length train (e.g. a Pendolino) Manchester-Edinburgh-Glasgow.

 

[Purple Orange]

Agreed. But there's nowhere near the demand for a 200m train from Blackpool to London hourly, and the demand is quite bitty so there isn't a time of day when you'd fill 1tpd. The present service is marginal (it'd just be sat at Preston) to be fair.



If the service continues to grow, particularly the Edinburgh part, then running double units splitting for both destinations each hour is going to be the way to go. Or run a full length train (e.g. a Pendolino) Manchester-Edinburgh-Glasgow.

If the services grow, then of course keep them. However to really compete with HS2 & NPR, those particular services need to be 2 tph minimum.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the services grow, then of course keep them. However to really compete with HS2 & NPR, those particular services need to be 2 tph minimum.

The competitor is the car and air. They complement HS2 and NPR.

 

[NoOnesFool]

The Voyager rolling stock is great, very reliable and a pleasant journey. They are due a refresh inside though! The walls could be painted white and the purple ceiling in the vestibules painted over. I'd also change the oak effect on the tables and light chamber strip, as it is very dated now. Other than that, they are comfortable, well equipped, a smooth ride and don't have the awful LED lighting that is now popular. I'd remove some of the table seats to squeeze in more airline style seating, having a maximum of two tables per coach in Standard. Four coaches is enough if everyone keeps their belongings off the adjacent seat to allow others to sit beside them.

I'd have more services heading north from Plymouth/Penzance until later in the evening and I'd also re-introduce the South coast - North East and Manchester to Bristol services.

The catering could be improved. First Class needs a main meal option, even if it's just a large salad, they had good feed back about their chilli when served it.

Hopefully, they will acquire Avanti's Voyagers and use these to retire the HSTs. The Turbostars could do with having First Class extended to more of the coach, guaranteeing that a First Class ticket will be honoured. Again, catering could be improved to salad meals and perhaps a fruit salad/porridge in the morning.

What they need to capitalise on is the fact that most of their trains run right in to two shopping centres, Grand Central & Bullring. It would be good to see this being advertised more on social media. If I recall correctly, there is covered access direct from the station!

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

I've the following few ideas...

1. Bring back the pre-covid timetable but really the extra Avanti Voyagers would make it work.

2. With those transferred, there's enough to significantly reduce overcrowding and prevent scheduled 4-coach Voyagers on InterCity routes unless there's a train fault or emergency. Only the quieter ends at the quieter times would be 4 coaches!

3. Terminate the pre-covid Newcastle's at York and have one going through to and from Edinburgh - let TPE run the remainders to and from York and Newcastle with the second Manchester service and you have extra seats and electric traction! If LNER run the service originally replacing TPE then that's loads more naturally!

4. Run 3 HST diagrams as 9-coach trains. Only downside is you lose 18 First Class seats per set but gain 34 more Standard Class seats per set.

5. If Voyagers are going to run Cardiff to Nottingham and the Nottingham and Leicester short runs transferred to another operator then you need 8 Voyagers. Run 4 x 5-car and 4 x 4-car sets.

6. Run the HST's to and from Leeds and Glasgow via Settle & Carlisle as I believe planned - should attract passengers off overcrowded 158's!

Possibly other suggestions but I can't think of any.

 

[cle]

6. Run the HST's to and from Leeds and Glasgow via Settle & Carlisle as I believe planned - should attract passengers off overcrowded 158's!

Is this actually planned? It's quite a lot of stops (especially at the Leeds end), and quite a low line speed.

 

[Spaceflower]

Whoever decided to order voyagers for the longest express services in the country needs to hang their head in shame. I long for the day they're cascaded to more suitable duties...Scottish intercity routes and Midlands-Wales.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Is this actually planned? It's quite a lot of stops (especially at the Leeds end), and quite a low line speed.

It was reported that CrossCountry wanted to improve journeys for passengers travelling between Leeds and Glasgow and that these routes could be (I guess will be) operated by the HST's.

My thoughts are that they could call at fewer stops like the Rail Charter services HST to and from Leeds and Carlisle then whatever stops to and from Carlisle and Glasgow.

Or displace some Northern 158's to other services which means more capacity.

An all-Voyager fleet on the Manchester, South West - Scotland, Southampton & Reading - North East and Cardiff - Nottingham diagrams would be much better operationally.

It would also mean displaced 170's onto the Stansted routes to increase capacity. Looks like platform lengthening is needed

I can see cameras coming out if XC HST's go to the Settle & Carlisle line!

 

[irish_rail]

The idea of XC HST usage on the S and C sickens me whilst we still have 4 car voyagers leaving Plymouth bound for Edinburgh. XC need to focus on its core purpose not setting up new journey opportunities for enthusiasts.

 

[py_megapixel]

they are comfortable, well equipped,

Now try with long legs!

A Voyager with with more generous spacing between the seats, maybe some additional soundproofing if that is possible, and some kind of hybrid conversion - as was mooted a while ago, to prevent the noise and pollution at indoor stations, especially New Street - would have nothing fundamentally wrong with it, though.

don't have the awful LED lighting that is now popular.

I agree with your sentiment but feel it's important to point out that what makes onboard LED lighting on trains unpleasant is nothing inherent to it using LED technology. It's simply that trains always seem to use extremely cold white and often flickery LEDs. High quality LED lighting would be indistinguishable (or close to it) from the fluorescent lighting used on most other stock.

Four coaches is enough if everyone keeps their belongings off the adjacent seat to allow others to sit beside them.

No it isn't. Don't forget the railway has to compete with the car here. Cramming passengers in like sardines is a terrible idea if you want to convey a good impression.

What they need to capitalise on is the fact that most of their trains run right in to two shopping centres, Grand Central & Bullring. It would be good to see this being advertised more on social media. If I recall correctly, there is covered access direct from the station!

Better idea: demolish GC and Bullring, replace it with an environment that's actually nice to be in, then advertise that on social media!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Now try with long legs!

A Voyager with with more generous spacing between the seats, maybe some additional soundproofing if that is possible, and some kind of hybrid conversion - as was mooted a while ago, to prevent the noise and pollution at indoor stations, especially New Street - would have nothing fundamentally wrong with it, though.

The old Virgin "Coach D" shows how decent one can be.

I agree with your sentiment but feel it's important to point out that what makes onboard LED lighting on trains unpleasant is nothing inherent to it using LED technology. It's simply that trains always seem to use extremely cold white and often flickery LEDs. High quality LED lighting would be indistinguishable (or close to it) from the fluorescent lighting used on most other stock.

Definitely. Premium LED lighting can be used to create really nice atmospheres, such as the tenner a pop Philips ones I bought quite early on and have throughout my house which are indistinguishable from tungsten halogen other than in terms of the electricity bill.

The railway on the other hand buys cheap rubbish, no doubt at an inflated price because it is the railway.

No it isn't. Don't forget the railway has to compete with the car here. Cramming passengers in like sardines is a terrible idea if you want to convey a good impression.

Yes, this.

Better idea: demolish GC and Bullring, replace it with an environment that's actually nice to be in, then advertise that on social media!

I dislike shopping but I love the big atrium and gallery at New St, it feels like something the Germans would do.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is this actually planned? It's quite a lot of stops (especially at the Leeds end), and quite a low line speed.

It was a proposal reported in Modern Railways back in May or so, it was assumed to happen after the West Coast Voyagers were cascaded into the franchise. The same article was also a source of using Voyagers on Nottingham Cardiff, and transferring the shorter routes in the midlands to a different franchise.

So that’s about 3 of the usual “ideas” that people have here, that have their roots in published stories…

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

The idea of XC HST usage on the S and C sickens me whilst we still have 4 car voyagers leaving Plymouth bound for Edinburgh. XC need to focus on its core purpose not setting up new journey opportunities for enthusiasts.

Well my suggestion in post #229 results in the only scheduled 4-coach Voyager diagrams being on 4 of the Cardiff - Nottinghams.

There would be 5 and 8-car (4x2-formed) services plus 3 9-car services on the HST diagrams with 3 x 4-car Voyagers spare and a 5-car spare allowing for maintenance.

As much as we all love the HST's, it's much better for an all-Voyager fleet to run.

One example, if say you have an 8-car Voyager - coaches A C D F + G I J L with a B or H if 9 coaches and not a 7-car HST - from say Penzance to Scotland and it terminates at Bristol Temple Meads, you'd want one to continue (start the service) from Birmingham New Street. A 4-car Voyager still means passengers can still access their seat reservations. That would not be the case with an HST due to the different seating layouts.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The idea of XC HST usage on the S and C sickens me whilst we still have 4 car voyagers leaving Plymouth bound for Edinburgh. XC need to focus on its core purpose not setting up new journey opportunities for enthusiasts.

Agreed - I would very much doubt in the "new world" this kind of idea would ever reach fruition. Absolute waste of money and resources.

(waits for the inevitable comments on how the S+C is a national treasure and we must invest in leisure traffics on it)

 

[py_megapixel]

I dislike shopping but I love the big atrium and gallery at New St, it feels like something the Germans would do.

That bit's nice, but as soon as you get out into any of the surrounding "proper" shopping centre it feels typically dingy.
The outdoor areas around the station are also not well signed or layed out to facilitate pedestrians getting where they need to go.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That bit's nice, but as soon as you get out into any of the surrounding "proper" shopping centre it feels typically dingy.

True, that'll be because they cut a big hole in the old shopping centre to make the atrium, but didn't change the rest of it.

The Bullring is nice if you're into shopping - personally the only things I've patronised in there are Starbucks and the bogs.

 

[Spaceflower]

Agreed - I would very much doubt in the "new world" this kind of idea would ever reach fruition. Absolute waste of money and resources.

(waits for the inevitable comments on how the S+C is a national treasure and we must invest in leisure traffics on it)

It would need international recognition. We mustn't neglect the leisure market for that is now the lines raison d'etre.

 

[leytongabriel]

I don’t see why it is silly at all. So you’re saying it worth keeping a 5-car (could be 8) train every two hours to Glasgow, when far better connectivity could be achieved with HS2 and NPR? I think it is that sort of situation that will hold the railways back. People may well book in advance, but if you’re going to Glasgow you have to plan your day around the rail timetable, but with HS2 and NPR you can pretty much travel when you want to travel. A change of train is not uncommon.
Yes there will be 3 tph to Glasgow:

• 2 tph HS2 London-Scotland
• 0.5 tph HS2 Birmingham-Glasgow
• 0.5 tph WCML London-Birmingham-Glasgow

Connectivity might be a buzzword now, but not having to change is a big plus for a lot of passengers in the real world and is one of the big factors when thinking about car or train for a journey.

 

[irish_rail]

It would need international recognition. We mustn't neglect the leisure market for that is now the lines raison d'etre.

Trouble is XC are very much neglecting its CORE leisure market now, with 4 car voyagers routinely replacing 7 coach HSTs.