What Is InterCity?

[Gareth Marston]

Birmingham-Aberystwyth. The 158s are intercity units but the stops are too frequent; it's a rural route fundamentally.


Sorry if my standards seem arbitrary, but it's just how I class things.[/QUOTE]

Having come back from Oxford last night (1636 to Piccadilly) on a cross country Voyager I was looking forward to my old ATW 158 we changed at International - it was cleaner the air con worked better and the 4 car unit had more luggage space, tables and standard seats than the voyager.

Birmingham International -Aberystwyth - 14 stations over 132 miles including one of the longest stretches in UK without one Caersws-Machynlleth 22 miles. That's not too bad and one of them is Smethwick Galton Bridge due to Wolves- Brum being too congested for more local trains.

Machynlleth - Pwllheli - 56 miles station every 2 miles or so.

 

[Sidious]

Having come back from Oxford last night (1636 to Piccadilly) on a cross country Voyager I was looking forward to my old ATW 158 we changed at International - it was cleaner the air con worked better and the 4 car unit had more luggage space, tables and standard seats than the voyager.

And presumably the 158 didn't smell like a sewage works on a hot day either?

 

[CC 72100]

Very true. However, 150s aren't appropriate trains for services along the Cornish Main Line - hopefully FGW (or the next franchise holder) will be able to obtain a few 158s for these services, which may happen when the 165s & 166s are cascaded westwards.

Indeed, 3 car 158s that have been given a mild refresh would be ideal if you ask me. I'm not sure whether the units on the diagram stay on the Plymouth - Penzance runs all day - you wouldn't send one up to Gunnislake for example, if one diagram also involves a turn on that branch.

To be fair, '158s would be ideal for these services' is often said of many routes, we should have built more

 

[yorksrob]

And presumably the 158 didn't smell like a sewage works on a hot day either?

Some of the 158's on Northern do smell like a sewage works, unfortunately.

I came across one recently which had had its toilet replaced by a steel toilet bowl and this seems to have cured the situation.

In general though, while I love the 158's dearly (although the 156's share a similar position in my affections) I don't consider them as InterCity trains.

 

[shaun]

Intercity requires:

1) The fastest service on the route it serves
2) End doors rather than middle doors on the rolling stock
3) 2+1 First Class Accomodation, 2+2 in standard
4) Buffet Service with restuarant service if the route demands it.
5) Rolling stock which is capable of over 100mph and provides a smooth, quiet ride.
6) At least 5 coaches per train

That's about it really. The end doors really do matter to some people as they enhance the internal ambience. I would class a 444 as 'Intercity', but not a 450. Chiltern provide IC services now with their 67s, they are aware of this as they call them 'silver sets' so they don't get confused with the more 'regional spec' 168s which don't have the same 'IC Standard' facillities. Unfortunately despite me not liking them, can't deny Voyagers are 'Intercity' trains. Very poor ones IMHO, if they had a lower speed and less First Class seating they could easily be classed as 'regional' like a 158. I actually prefer 158s.


You still hear people ask for the 'Intercity' service in London quite often, not so much outside. I did hear somebody in Birmingham refer to a Chiltern Silver as 'The Intercity to London' recently, although they were most probably an enthusiast.

 

[northwichcat]

Intercity requires:

6) At least 5 coaches per train

On that basis when Virgin had 4 car Voyagers, if a 9 car Voyager combination left Euston for Holyhead it was Intercity. However, if the rear train was 5 car and detached at Chester then the same service stopped being Intercity?

 

[MK Tom]

Intercity requires:

2) End doors rather than middle doors on the rolling stock

395s not intercity stock then? I would've thought 140mph from London to Ashford with only two stops counts as intercity.

5) Rolling stock which is capable of over 100mph and provides a smooth, quiet ride.

I realise we're talking UK here, but that would rule out the vast majority of Amtrak services, trans-continental services in Russia and Australia and countless others.

6) At least 5 coaches per train

Point made above about Voyagers, and Meridians for that matter. When Hull trains were running 222/1s was that not intercity?

Agreed with your other three ones though!

 

[Deerfold]

395s not intercity stock then? I would've thought 140mph from London to Ashford with only two stops counts as intercity.

I wouldn't say so.

A reasonable but not great train. No 1st class. No catering - not even a trolley.

And after Ashford, *slow*.

My wife was most disappointed at not being able to get a tea, which she would have been able to had we not changed to the faster service at Faversham.

 

[HowardGWR]

Intercity requires:

1) The fastest service on the route it serves
2) End doors rather than middle doors on the rolling stock
3) 2+1 First Class Accomodation, 2+2 in standard
4) Buffet Service with restuarant service if the route demands it.
5) Rolling stock which is capable of over 100mph and provides a smooth, quiet ride.
6) At least 5 coaches per train

I travel mostly on 159s (from AXM). Whilst these conform to your 1) they are the *only* service so a cop out really. Also the infrequency Exeter to Salisbury means that SWT cannot operate a normal 'Southern' service of semi-fast between those points and then couple up at Salisbury and 'fast' to London (I mean 'fast' as in non stop).

My point is that it is very difficult to provide a true 'inter-city' service on a line that is singled.

I don't see how your point 6) matters. Travelling on a 159, one has no concept of whether it is 3 or 6 car. The trolley service works very well, and should be employed by more companies.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

So after five pages of debate, the answer is "we're not entirely sure"

 

[Beveridges]

Maybe it could simply be classed as a train that runs long distance between several citys and stops at very little else other than major city stations ?
That should rule out everything else thats non-IC.

 

[tbtc]

Maybe it could simply be classed as a train that runs long distance between several citys and stops at very little else other than major city stations ?
That should rule out everything else thats non-IC.

The problem with that is that some "InterCity" services at the London end become virtually "all stops" services at the far end - like west of Plymouth/ Chester, north of Leuchars/ Perth.

So some HSTs stop at places like Par that are a lot smaller than places that some 158/170/185s stop at.

TPE is the express service from Liverpool/ Manchester Airport to York, but then becomes the "all stops" services from York to Scarborough/ Middlesbrough/ Newcastle (e.g. Thirsk, Chester le Street).

 

[JamesRowden]

Intercity requires:
5) Rolling stock which is capable of over 100mph

I would class a 444 as 'Intercity'

These two statements contradict each other.

 

[HowardGWR]

Maybe it could simply be classed as a train that runs long distance between several citys and stops at very little else other than major city stations ?
That should rule out everything else thats non-IC.

That's right - see HS2. That's (partly) why it is needed.

Actually, a major fault with IEP services is that they may still be stopping too often on the GWML.

 

[43106]

I've been studying ther Inter-City network since about 1985, and my opinion (for what it's worth) is a bit complicated.
An Inter-City service is one that connects PRINCIPAL stations, and uses rolling stock that matches it. My personal definition is based on the PTT, as is reflected by the Tables in it. So...
Table 26 is London to Leeds (& beyond), London to Hull, London to Lincoln and London to Newcastle and beyond. They use appropriate stock (HSTs & 82+91s), so they're all Inter-City. I'd include Hull Trains services, but NOT their stock, and I'd include Grand Central
Table 51 is Birmingham - Manchester, Scotland, Newcastle, Guildford, Southampton (& beyond) and Bristol (& beyond). They predominantly use Voyagers, which were intended to replace HSTs, but were found to be wanting. I don't include Nottingham to Cardiff, as they were inherited from Central AND they use Turborats, which are NOT I/C stock. The Scotland to Manchester TPE services are I/C services, but the 185's are NOT I/C stock.
All St Pancras to Leicester (& beyond) services (Table 53) are I/C. They use HSTs & 222s, but I don't know if they still use 170's, but they aren't I/C
All VWC services to/from Euston (tABLE 65) are I/C as are the 221s and 390s, but the LM services from Euston to Birmingham and Euston to Crewe are NOT I/C and neither are the 350's.
The Table 125 services from Paddington to Bristol (& beyond), Cardiff (& beyond) and Gloucester (& beyond) all qualify as I/C and they all (I think) use HSTs.
Table 126 is PARTLY I/C. I personally only consider the services that use HSTs, irrespective of how far they go.
Table 135 between Paddington and Exeter (& beyond) are I/C.
The Liverpool St - Norwich service is PROBABLY I/C, in all regards, but (from a personal standpoint), I ignore it as it's isolated from the rest of the I/C network.
There are a few services that serve major cities, but the rolling stock is definately NOT I/C, such as Newcastle - Leeds - Manchester - Liverpool, and Liverpool - Manchester - Sheffield - Nottingham - Peterborough - Beyond.
There were at least 2 threads that tried to DEFINE I/C services in terms of what defined a city. Please lets not go there, cos you'll never get an answer. Furthermore, the original Victoria - Gatwick service was made up of a couple of coupled EMUs painted in I/C livery, with "Inter-City" plastered on the side. That's NEVER I/C!!! Also, the Scotrail services between Edinburgh, Glasgow, Perth, Aberdeen and Inverness are NOT I/C as they all use conventional DMUs & EMUs.

 

[HSTEd]

Gatwick Express was not an EMU.....
It was a push pull loco hauled set....

 

[jopsuk]

Quite. that the carriage sets (2 & 3 car sub rakes) were given EMU class numbers was really just a Southern Region quirk, following on from the precedent of the 4TCs (though the 488s had no control equipment).

 

[tbtc]

Table 26 is London to Leeds (& beyond), London to Hull, London to Lincoln and London to Newcastle and beyond. They use appropriate stock (HSTs & 82+91s), so they're all Inter-City. I'd include Hull Trains services, but NOT their stock

This is interesting - AFAICR the once a day EC service to Hull stops at roughly the same number of stations as the (more regular) HT service.

Is InterCity more about the type of stock used (HSTs vs 180s in this case), the quality of service on board or the actual service pattern/ speed/ distance/ stations stopped at?

 

[AndyLandy]

To my mind, Intercity services are a specific, defined set of services, rather than being dictated by some wooly formula. Services that count as Intercity, to my mind are:

Virgin West Coast services
East Coast services
Great Western HST services (Stuff that wasn't Wessex Trains/GW Link etc)
MML services operated with HSTs or Meridians.
CrossCountry services ran with HSTs or Voyagers.
GA London-Norwich
SWT London-Weymouth
SWT London-Exeter
GatEx

I think that's it.

 

[ainsworth74]

Why GatEx?

 

[tbtc]

GatEx

Why GatEx?

...and why not Heathrow Express?

(assuming that Stansted doesn't have good enough EMUs to qualify as InterCity for its Liverpool Street service)

 

[AndyLandy]

Why GatEx?

Not so much the original Gatwick Express service, more the current Southern "Express" branded services that run fast between Brighton/Gatwick/Victoria. I think that probably just about qualifies as Intercity.

 

[yorksrob]

I‘d have thought that the original Gatwick Express with Mk 2‘s qualifies more as InterCity than the current service which seems more like an express commuter service (not necessarily a bad thing, given the strain on BML1.

 

[jopsuk]

Gatwick Express ever being part of InterCity was a weird anomaly. Never really understood that logic. The only other dedicated airport service started under BR (Stansted Express) was operated basically by NSE as far as I can tell (though the 322s had their own livery)

 

[AndyLandy]

I‘d have thought that the original Gatwick Express with Mk 2‘s qualifies more as InterCity than the current service which seems more like an express commuter service (not necessarily a bad thing, given the strain on BML1.

Things like GatEx, Waterloo-Weymouth and possibly Liverpool St-Norwich are all borderline cases.

In fact, the more I think about it, the more I wonder. If Exeter-Waterloo can be considered an Intercity service, what about Cardiff-Portsmouth? What about TransPennine? They're clearly inter-city services, but do they count?

I think I'm going back to the drawing board on this one...

 

[yorksrob]

I agree that Gatwick Express was always an anomoly, but the contrast between the Mk 2's and the slammers was enough to make it stand out in it's day, whereas nowadays you've fairly similar EMU's with a service that itself is more integrated with the rest of the central division with a wider range of destinations.

I wouldn't consider Waterloo - Exeter as close to being InterCity. Seems like a very long stopper to me.

 

[jopsuk]

There was some odd line drawing by BR at sectorisation. Including Weymouth and Exeter (slow route) plus Kings Lynn in NSE, but not Norwich (and technically not Peterborough- it remains outside the Network Card boundary) was very odd. Can't explain it away with "but NSE didn't do loco hauled" given services out of Waterloo and Paddington. Could even have made a case for including all the Cambridgeshire, Norfolk and Sufflok branchline services in NSE rather than (as was done) Regional Railways.

 

[D6975]

Quite. that the carriage sets (2 & 3 car sub rakes) were given EMU class numbers was really just a Southern Region quirk, following on from the precedent of the 4TCs (though the 488s had no control equipment).

The driving coaches at the other end to the 73 though, did retain their power equipment and were therefore a single coach, single ended EMU.

 

[jopsuk]

The GLV (Gatwick Luggage Van) was a convert from an EMU, and had a seperate class number- it was Class 489, whilst the unpowered, no control semi-permanent (they had bar couplings) coach rakes were 488/2 and 488/3.

 

[yorksrob]

There was some odd line drawing by BR at sectorisation. Including Weymouth and Exeter (slow route) plus Kings Lynn in NSE, but not Norwich (and technically not Peterborough- it remains outside the Network Card boundary) was very odd. Can't explain it away with "but NSE didn't do loco hauled" given services out of Waterloo and Paddington. Could even have made a case for including all the Cambridgeshire, Norfolk and Sufflok branchline services in NSE rather than (as was done) Regional Railways.

Norwich stands out as being ideal as an InterCity route. It links two large regional population centres end to end (London and Norwich) it's stops are by and large important towns, and even after Ipswich, it doesn't stop at vast numbers of wayside stations. I don't think this case is even borderline - it has always justified InterCity status.