solutions for XC overcrowding in short, medium and long term

[S-Bahn]

Short Term Fix - send X-Country some HST's to help mitigate overcrowding on the busiest services, or use a diesel to haul some Mk4 coaches like TFW are planning.

Mid term fix - Order more IET's and cascade all the Voyagers and Meridians to X-Country as the IET's are delivered to EMR and West Coast Rail.

Long term - Bi-modes for the X-Country routes. Probably an evolution of the 802 by then. And electrify the core X-country route

 

[angryskipfan]

The only option is using a few spare mk IV’s perhaps on the core route as crowd busters with suitable traction sourced. There is also a lot of staff training to consider with different stock and geographic area could be limited to minimise this.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Short Term Fix - send X-Country some HST's to help mitigate overcrowding on the busiest services, or use a diesel to haul some Mk4 coaches like TFW are planning.

Mid term fix - Order more IET's and cascade all the Voyagers and Meridians to X-Country as the IET's are delivered to EMR and West Coast Rail.

Long term - Bi-modes for the X-Country routes. Probably an evolution of the 802 by then. And electrify the core X-country route

agreed with what you said

 

[Bletchleyite]

agreed with what you said

Yes, this seems an overall good plan and fits with the idea of ridding the network of pure DMUs by about 2030.

 

[MontyP]

Could the core trunk Edinburgh-Leeds-Bristol-Plymouth services be run as self-contained diagrams using either full-length HSTs or Mk4+diesel? This would limit the staff training required. Platform lengths shouldn’t be an issue as these services only stop at traditional “inter city” stations

 

[Harpers Tate]

It seems to me, since we now have a number of spare HSTs, that these could be an immediate short-term solution. For every HST thus used, there would be TWO XC diagrams that would benefit; one from the HST directly, and the other by joining the now released "short" train to another short train to make it longer.

 

[Rhydgaled]

A good solution for both the short and medium term would be mark 4s if suitable traction was available but sadly there aren't enough wires on XC to use 91s and there's no suitable 125mph diesel loco unless IC125 power cars could be adapted which means it is no longer a short term solution.

I would therefore suggest:

Short Term:

1. diagram at least 3 of the 5 PRM XC125 sets for service every day as soon as the PRM mods are complete on all 5 sets
2. lease a few extra non-PRM IC125 sets​

Medium Term (perhaps 2022 - 2027):

1. cascade all 221s from ICWC and refurb all 44 class 221s so that:

coaches B and D have the same window-aligned all-tables layout as coach D on the Virgin units
coach C has four tables and one row of seats removed to improve legroom and align seats with windows

the same would apply to the standard class driving vehicle​

coach B (rather than C) would be the missing coach on 4-car units
the 4-car 221s are only used in multiple with another or a 5-car unit to make an 8-car or 9-car train
once the refurbs are complete, 5-car 221s can replace Turbostars on Cardiff-Nottingham, with the released units used to strengthen Birmingham-Nottingham/Leicester/Stansted services as required​

2. cascade in all class 222s, replacing some 220s and the non-PRM IC125s - any displaced 220s would donate their centre cars to lengthen some of the 222s with a small (non-wheelchair-accessible) toilet added in the shop space on the donated cars and a similar refurb done to that done for 221s above
3. introduce new regional express bi-mode units (think a bi-mode 444/175) capable of Sprinter differentials for Birmingham - Stansted​

Medium Term (perhaps 2027 - 2035)

1. extend Great Western electrification to Bristol and Oxford, and cascade 14x 8-car class 800 to XC

the 14x 8-car class 800s would use all the intermediate cars from 28x 5-car class 800s
the orphaned class 800 driving vehicles this would leave behind would have new-build vehicles added to create 9-car electric-only units for GWR​

2. use the 14x 8-car class 800s to displace the remaining 220s, again using the centre cars (with toilet added and refurb done as above) to lengthen Meridians so that XC ends up with long Meridians and 800s alongside the shorter 221s which can run in pairs when needed
3. electrify the Midland Main Line and cascade the 33 new AT300 bi-modes to XC, allowing replacement of the 5 PRM fitted IC125s and perhaps some of the class 221s (again I would advocate any remaining units being lengthened using centre cars from withdrawn units with one shop area retained and the other replaced by a small toilet)​

Long Term (perhaps 2035-2050)

electrification of the whole XC network except perhaps Plymouth-Penzance with new electric trains ordered for most services and a hydrogen/battery (not diesel) bi-mode solution for services to Penzance. My opinion is that even Penzance should get wires eventually but I doubt it'll be done before 2060 simply because of the amount of time needed to actually implement a wiring project an the number of other routes which need wires sooner.

​

 

[quantinghome]

A cascade of 221s and 222s seems the most sensible option in the short/medium term to give decent train lengths. I think Leeds services are a particular problem as it's the only major city on the core routes with one train per hour. I would consider running a fast service immediately followed by a semi-fast relief to/from Leeds in the peaks.

Medium term, cascaded bi-mode stock will make use of spreading electrification, followed in the long term by a fully electric service, with the specification dependent on how HS2 turns out.

 

[Mikey C]

The regional CC routes using Turbostars are just as overcrowded, cascaded Voyagers would seem overkill on these routes with their weight and wasted space at the ends for 125mph running.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The regional CC routes using Turbostars are just as overcrowded, cascaded Voyagers would seem overkill on these routes with their weight and wasted space at the ends for 125mph running.

In my view those routes would be best split between TfW and EMR - they are a very poor fit for XC as they are really local services, and formerly were operated by Central Trains. Let XC concentrate on the big trains (!) on the "big X" centred on New St.

 

[swt_passenger]

Re post #7’s “short term” proposal, I thought XC were already known to be expected to run four out of five sets all week once they’re all in service?

 

[deltic08]

Could the core trunk Edinburgh-Leeds-Bristol-Plymouth services be run as self-contained diagrams using either full-length HSTs or Mk4+diesel? This would limit the staff training required. Platform lengths shouldn’t be an issue as these services only stop at traditional “inter city” stations

Don't forget TPE are duplicating Leeds-Edinburgh route using 5-coach 802s hourly which should mop up a lot of XCs passengers north of Leeds as XC fares are usually higher on the ECML.
I would like to see 9-car bimodes on this axis where electric can partly be used cascading the Voyagers elsewhere replacing 170s or doubling up the 220s.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Re post #7’s “short term” proposal, I thought XC were already known to be expected to run four out of five sets all week once they’re all in service?

Sorry, I didn't know that. I was just going from memory of the last time I looked at XC's IC125 diagrams and as far as I recall only two were in use on at least two days a week. That may, as you say, be planned to change when the PRM mods are complete but I wasn't aware of it when I wrote that post. Four PRM modified IC125s in service on XC every day would be good.

 

[swt_passenger]

Sorry, I didn't know that. I was just going from memory of the last time I looked at XC's IC125 diagrams and as far as I recall only two were in use on at least two days a week. That may, as you say, be planned to change when the PRM mods are complete but I wasn't aware of it when I wrote that post. Four PRM modified IC125s in service on XC every day would be good.

To be fair it was first announced around about 2016 for the proposed Dec 2017 improvements, so isn’t actually a current thing. Illustrates how late everything is...

 

[tbtc]

Worth considering some trimming of the network.

For example, if TPE ordered one more 802 from the never-ending Hitatchi production line then they could provide a bi-hourly extension of their ECML service to Glasgow Central (thus a bi-hourly train from Glasgow/ Edinburgh to Newcastle/ York/ Leeds), which could replace seven Voyagers north of Leeds - i.e. terminate the current Plymouth - Birmingham - Glasgow at Leeds, extend some of the Reading - Birmingham - Newcastle services to Edinburgh - that would still free up a lot of Voyagers to beef up services through Birmingham.

As I've suggested before, we could replace a lot of Birmingham - Manchester services with EMUs to free up more Voyagers elsewhere - not *every* service but if you treat it as a four hour round trip then you could have a four-hourly Manchester - Bournemouth (hourly from Birmingham to Bournemouth) and a four-hourly Manchester - Bristol (hourly from Birmingham to Bristol) to maintain some through trains per day but permitting the majority of services on the half hourly Birmingham - Manchester corridor to be eight/ten coaches long. It'd mean some alterations at New Street, but given that XC already occupy a platform with their "hot spare", you could rejig things a bit. I'm not saying it'd be easy but this is a Forum where people like to suggest eight coach HSTs without accessibility modifications in the path of the current Voyager diagrams, so I'm not the only one.

Use the Voyagers spared from the above ideas to double up more/most Voyagers on the main Reading/Bristol - Birmingham - Leeds/York/ Manchester sections.

We don't have to maintain all of these long distance hourly services- we would benefit a lot more people by focussing resources on the busiest sections (e.g. by removing the Glasgow/ Edinburgh/ Newcastle/ York passengers from the current XC Leeds services, you'd free up a lot of space - and move those passengers onto the quieter Doncaster services).

The regional CC routes using Turbostars are just as overcrowded, cascaded Voyagers would seem overkill on these routes with their weight and wasted space at the ends for 125mph running.

Agreed - 125mph trains with large "crumple zones" inaccessible to passengers (that are going to be quite heavy for running through Ely etc) are not the answer to the current XC Turbostar routes (esp given that a four car Voyager isn't going to be much of a boost compared to a three coach 170).