What should Cross Country realistically do?

[Greenback]

The policy on XC fares is designed to discourage local travel, so that the long distance passengers have priority and are not disturbed as much
Personally, the franchise should be adjusted so that there is a minimum distance between stations, and this would prevent the services being used as "commuter gap fillers"

I'm not sure how the fares policy is meant to discourage local travel - if so it doesn't appear to be working! If XC don't price the flow between A and B, they can't control the fares can they? Unless they inroduce cheaper tickets which will then gain them more local passengers, in theory at least. Or am I missing something?

The second suggestion ties in with Cuccir's idea. although XC does provide most of the services at a few stations.

 

[tbtc]

a 3 car 170 still has more seats than a 4 car Voyager

I hadn't realised that - that's a very interesting stat
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That idea actually harks back to the old BR days
"Officially" I worked for InterCity East Coast
However, I quite often worked on the Aberdeen - Plymouth and Plymouth - Aberdeen services
Equally, I worked a few Edinburgh - Carlisle duties, while spare at Edinburgh (which then meant travelling back pass to Aberdeen)

A simillar situation existed with the Inverness - Kings Cross, Kings Cross - Inverness, Inverness - Euston, and Euston - Inverness
These had ScotRail staff between Inverness and Edinburgh, as a result we never worked on these, even though it was an INTERCITY train!

That would make sense on the "domestic" Scottish leg of East Coast/ Cross Country services - get them crewed by ScotRail. Since there's normally a full change of staff at Edinburgh anyway, it should be okay to roster?

 

[cuccir]

The policy on XC fares is designed to discourage local travel, so that the long distance passengers have priority and are not disturbed as much
Personally, the franchise should be adjusted so that there is a minimum distance between stations, and this would prevent the services being used as "commuter gap fillers"

Firstly, is this universally the case? Where I am (Durham) Cross-Country undercut the other operators with their XC-only fare, meaning local journeys are more likely to be with XC to Newcastle than Transpennine or East Coast.

Secondly, as Greenback says, in a number of locations XC operate the only trains that it is reasonable to get. Burton-upon-Trent is only served by XC trains; it is also the most common operator at Chester-le-Street, and the only option for commuters to Bristol/Birmingham from Cheltenham. Passengers at these three stations - Burton, Cheltenham and Chester - will use XC for local journeys because they have to.

I think your idea about a minimum distance is nice, but wouldn't work for a lot of stations; as I said previously, I think reducing the number of long distance services AND reducing the number of stations that these stop at, with the resulting spare trains/staff/capacity redistributed to an increased number of more reliable (commuters in Cheltenham at the moment can be impacted by flooding in Berwickshire...) shorter distance services might help alleviate some of the problems.

 

[rail-britain]

I'm not sure how the fares policy is meant to discourage local travel - if so it doesn't appear to be working! If XC don't price the flow between A and B, they can't control the fares can they?

XC have control over the proportion of advance fares on their services, and they weigh these heavily in favour of longer journeys
If you look at the loadings you will see that they reduce or in some cases have nil proportion for advance bookings, compared to other operators on the same routes
Where this doesn't work is where the typical journey time is under 60 minutes or where an advance fare is not practical
The XC service then effectively turns into a commuter service, and until these short stops are removed the problem will persist

 

[Ivo]

One problem they have is that they advertise specific parts of the route as having x trains an hour, say Cheltenham to Brum with 3tph. But short stretches like this aren't particularly important. An operator like XC will always face more competition from EasyJet and the like than they will from other operators. They need to concentrate on the longer-distance routes more than the shorter ones. If a train is going to get held up at Bristol TM because a new driver is late [referring to my problem with the NWM Challenge here] then why should the average customer choose to go from there to Newcastle by train, not plane?

So, in essence, I am disagreeing with the above idea of "no local travel" - they promote it too much.

And maybe DafT should consider permitting occasional diversons again, e.g. Brighton(!), Blackpool, Swansea and Portsmouth, and even some new ones such as Middlesbrough?

 

[Greenback]

I know it's difficult to get Advance fares for XC, as well as the fares being higher when you can get them. Are we talking about Advance fares for journeys wholly made on XC, such as Plymouth - Newcastle? Many journeys do require travel on XC for short distances, but as part of a longer overall journey. Any of the stations where XC provides a large part of the service, have no choice as pointed out by cuccir. Also, with ticket splitting now popular, people will travel on XC for short distances using relatively cheap day returns, which XC cannot control at all. Again, these journeys are part of longer distance travel.

Basically, and Advance fares notwithstanding, XC have got their fares policy wrong. They have tried to price people off their services and increase revenue, having introduced restrictions and fare increases that are just plain unworkable, but customers have worked out ways to get around these, and so revenue is down against forecasts. There we have the simple explanation for busy trains and a company moaning about its revenue!

 

[starrymarkb]

I've noticed advance fares on XC are few and far between and where they exist they are high. XC Advance return to Bristol from Exeter is £19 - the Flexible Off Peak Return is £22

 

[Greenback]

You're right. That's understandable if they want to reduce overcrowding. I'm sure Exeter to bristol is the sort of flow that rail britain was talking about when mentioning short distance travellers.

 

[rail-britain]

Yes, those are the kinds of fares which XC does have control over
The advance fare will either be available in :
relatively large numbers or
low numbers and high fare

I have also noticed that in some parts of routes the number of advance seats is set to nil
An examples is 0:0 Newcastle - York, yet there are 3:18 for Edinburgh - Derby
Therefore the only way to split this ticket would be to change trains at Newcastle or York and travel on FTPE or EC for part of that journey (assuming you using advance fares throughout)

First ScotRail have brought in a similar policy for their sleepers now, due to the recent increases in demand
The First Advance has been reduced to nil and the Standard Advance has been reduced from the typical 38 to just 6, there has been no change to the seats
This means the sleeper can carry more passengers with Standard tickets

 

[mindfeeder]

I use XC's Leamington to Coventry service regularly and the simple reason it's overcrowded is because there is only one train an hour. Leaving Leamington at xx:12 (or 13, changes here and there) and xx:25 from Coventry. It is regularly a four car Voyager.

 

[yorksrob]

I use XC's Leamington to Coventry service regularly and the simple reason it's overcrowded is because there is only one train an hour. Leaving Leamington at xx:12 (or 13, changes here and there) and xx:25 from Coventry. It is regularly a four car Voyager.

Yes, I remember travelling between Leeds and Reading quite regularly even in Mk 2 days and it was often pandemonium. I think just local services between New Street and Oxford would have improved the situation. Admittedly they may have had trains from Snow Hill, but it may have been a case of people joining the train from feeder routes.

 

[starrymarkb]

You're right. That's understandable if they want to reduce overcrowding. I'm sure Exeter to bristol is the sort of flow that rail britain was talking about when mentioning short distance travellers.

It was Edinburgh to Exeter I was trying to find, I've only seen via London advance fares and as its not me travelling I'd rather have direct.

 

[sheff1]

Punctuality is now good and much better than when Virgin ran it.

Only because of the amount of slack in the timetable. Yesterday travelling from Sheffield to York the train stood in Sheffield for 10 mins, outside Doncaster for 7/8mins and finally outside York for 3 mins but still arrived one minute early. So could easily have left Chesterfield over 15 down and been on time at York.

As to what they could do, my idea is similar to others. Save sets by running fewer 'long distance' services (timed for leisure travellers) from/to the NE & NW and Plymouth/Penzance/Bournemouth and use these sets to enhance the service on the Leeds/York/Manchester to Bristol/Reading section.

For a more radical idea. Transfer the regular Birmingham-Manchester flow to an 'electric' (Virgin/LM) operator leaving just a handful of longer distance Manchester services to XC. My assumption here is that the Manchester-Bristol flow is much less than the Manchester-Bham & Bham-Bristol flows. May even be feasible for Virgin to run Euston-Bham-Manchester rather than just Euston-Wolverhampton?

 

[lm321412]

I am still not very convinced that Cross Countrys new large luggage/bike racks are heavily used as they originally thought they were. 9/10 times i've seen at least one of them empty and of course there is still luggage scattered all over the aisle making it a nightmare to walk through.

They idea of a trolley service on it makes the "Intercity" feel of the route even more downgrading now, with it offering very poor choices and half of the time doesn't ever seem to get down the train if it is full. The failure to use the HSTs properley also is a let down, and the ones they currently use always seem to be on the wrong diagrams which means there HST's usually run around empty!

I would like to see Virgin/LM have some takeover of the Birmingham - Manchester duties and then free up the Voyagers over to strengthen their services between the South East/West and the North. However this would require new rolling stock built and with the new government just getting in charge I think they'd much prefer an overcrowded Voyager than spend money on new rolling stock!

 

[rail-britain]

Yes, I remember travelling between Leeds and Reading quite regularly even in Mk 2 days and it was often pandemonium. I think just local services between New Street and Oxford would have improved the situation

In summer last year that was the first time I had travelled on that route
In my original plan I would only have travelled along the route once, but due to last minuet changes I ended up on the route three times
I was very surprised how busy it was
I suspect the main issue is capacity and paths between Birmingham and Reading, with no local TOC actually operating on the route

 

[222007]

I would like to see Virgin/LM have some takeover of the Birmingham - Manchester duties and then free up the Voyagers over to strengthen their services between the South East/West and the North.

The thing with that is XC would not get to keep those voyagers freed up they would go to VT or LM. Remember the voyagers XC had to hand back to virgin?

 

[Bittern]

A service from Wick to Shanklin. XD

Granted, it's not very realistic, but is certainly Cross Country.

 

[jamesontheroad]

The policy on XC fares is designed to discourage local travel, so that the long distance passengers have priority and are not disturbed as much

One exception!

Glasgow Central - Edinburgh Waverley: Anytime (XC-only) £1.90 single, £3.00 return (£2.70 / £5.00 first class) Valid on the handful of XC services that serve GLC: weekdays it's 06.01 and 09.00 ex-GLC and ex-EDB they're 07.26, 19.07 and 21.14.

 

[Greenback]

I am still not very convinced that Cross Countrys new large luggage/bike racks are heavily used as they originally thought they were. 9/10 times i've seen at least one of them empty and of course there is still luggage scattered all over the aisle making it a nightmare to walk through.

They idea of a trolley service on it makes the "Intercity" feel of the route even more downgrading now, with it offering very poor choices and half of the time doesn't ever seem to get down the train if it is full. The failure to use the HSTs properley also is a let down, and the ones they currently use always seem to be on the wrong diagrams which means there HST's usually run around empty!

I would like to see Virgin/LM have some takeover of the Birmingham - Manchester duties and then free up the Voyagers over to strengthen their services between the South East/West and the North. However this would require new rolling stock built and with the new government just getting in charge I think they'd much prefer an overcrowded Voyager than spend money on new rolling stock!

I've notcied that people seem less inclined to use luggage racks on trains these days and this is particularly the case on XC. I can think of two reasons for this. People might be so used to larger bags not fitting on overhead racks that they don't even bother trying to put things up there any more. Secondly, on one journey with XC, the train manager tried to rearrange the luggage in the luggage stack and went up and down the carriage asking everyoen to identify their bages so they could be moved. If this is a regular occurrence (I don't usually travel with large items of luggage, so rarely use the stacks), then I can't blame people for giving up on the luggage facilities altogether!

One exception!

Glasgow Central - Edinburgh Waverley: Anytime (XC-only) £1.90 single, £3.00 return (£2.70 / £5.00 first class) Valid on the handful of XC services that serve GLC: weekdays it's 06.01 and 09.00 ex-GLC and ex-EDB they're 07.26, 19.07 and 21.14.

At the end of routes the trains aren;t overcrowded, so I think XC can probably get away with those fares!

 

[Dreadnought]

I've notcied that people seem less inclined to use luggage racks on trains these days and this is particularly the case on XC. I can think of two reasons for this. People might be so used to larger bags not fitting on overhead racks that they don't even bother trying to put things up there any more. Secondly, on one journey with XC, the train manager tried to rearrange the luggage in the luggage stack and went up and down the carriage asking everyoen to identify their bages so they could be moved. If this is a regular occurrence (I don't usually travel with large items of luggage, so rarely use the stacks), then I can't blame people for giving up on the luggage facilities altogether!

Also, as part of the current security environment

1. A lot of people like to keep their luggage where they can see it
2. I have heard and seen announcements that ask you to keep your luggage close to where you can see it, but then fail to provide adequate space for you to be able to do this. :roll:

What do you do if you're on a full train and a seat is taken by a large suitcase. Do you ask to sit there as is your right or just walk on by and end up standing if no other seats are available. Problem becomes where does the person put their case especially if the end luggage racks are already full without blocking the aisle.

 

[Greenback]

Also, as part of the current security environment

1. A lot of people like to keep their luggage where they can see it
2. I have heard and seen announcements that ask you to keep your luggage close to where you can see it, but then fail to provide adequate space for you to be able to do this. :roll:

What do you do if you're on a full train and a seat is taken by a large suitcase. Do you ask to sit there as is your right or just walk on by and end up standing if no other seats are available. Problem becomes where does the person put their case especially if the end luggage racks are already full without blocking the aisle.

Correct, the current security paranoia has also had an effect! I'm convinced it has given some people the idea that they MUST keep their items on the seat next to them rather than in an adjacent stack or overhead rack.

Personally, I'll only ask if I can sit down if there are no, or very few other seats left. I also offer to help them to move the item up to the rack if it will fit, or to the stacks if space is available. Usually though they decline and force the bag on to the floor at their feet, which must soemtimes end up being very uncomfortable for them!

 

[gordonthemoron]

the trouble with voyagers is that the overhead rack is so small that only the smallest luggage will fit

 

[Greenback]

Exactly, about as useful in the rel world as a chocolate teapot. I wonder how many people used to Voyagers just assume that it's the same on all other trains!

 

[Geezertronic]

Exactly, about as useful in the rel world as a chocolate teapot. I wonder how many people used to Voyagers just assume that it's the same on all other trains!

It seems to be the same on the Pendolinos as well but it does depend on what carriage you sit in

 

[Train wasp]

Bring back HST's to the Pool services and with more coaches in the sets.

 

[rail-britain]

One exception!

Glasgow Central - Edinburgh Waverley: Anytime (XC-only) £1.90 single, £3.00 return (£2.70 / £5.00 first class) Valid on the handful of XC services that serve GLC: weekdays it's 06.01 and 09.00 ex-GLC and ex-EDB they're 07.26, 19.07 and 21.14.

There is loads of over-capacity and competition between Glasgow and Edinburgh
Equally, these XC options are relatively off-peak
Last summer I used their late evening (still showing as 20:48) Glasgow - Edinburgh service and on each journey there were no more than 3 passengers (including myself)

One major issue in Scotland was the reduction of the Aberdeen - Plymouth from a HST to a Voyager
A simple solution would have been to run it as pick-up only after Dundee through to Edinburgh

 

[Lampshade]

The overhead luggage racks on a lot of the newer stock are simply inadequate, the 180s spring to mind here, saved only by the fact that there are spaces behind the seats for suitcases and luggage racks at the end of the carriages. The Pendolinos aren't too bad, they're on a par with the 185s in that you can put large items of luggage in the overhead racks, but not all of them as there's a lip in the ceiling near the middle of the carriage.

 

[Greenback]

The overhead luggage racks on a lot of the newer stock are simply inadequate, the 180s spring to mind here, saved only by the fact that there are spaces behind the seats for suitcases and luggage racks at the end of the carriages. The Pendolinos aren't too bad, they're on a par with the 185s in that you can put large items of luggage in the overhead racks, but not all of them as there's a lip in the ceiling near the middle of the carriage.

It's the shape of many of the newer racks that's the problem. You cna get large items in many of them as long as they are relatively flat and not too bulky. Like an old fashioned suitcase, for instance!

 

[WillPS]

Didn't Virgins original idea behind this include plans to lengthen the Voyagers upto 6 vehicles once they had seen how the new timetables worked and increased passenger flows, hence the coaches being lettered upto F.

Just a small thing, but I don't get why they'd need to do that; surely the coach letter is just a software thing??

 

[tbtc]

One major issue in Scotland was the reduction of the Aberdeen - Plymouth from a HST to a Voyager
A simple solution would have been to run it as pick-up only after Dundee through to Edinburgh

This is partly 1980s Realpolitic coming back to bite the railways

Back in the (initial) ScotRail days, they were very good at getting "spare" stock pressed into action on Scottish services (like InterCity running in the paths of a ScotRail service from Aberdeen/ Dundee to Edinburgh).

Fine for a while, and allowed services to be maintained. However, nowadays, the route is busier, and (since the local service isn't there at that time) there's additional pressure on the Cross Country service
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's the shape of many of the newer racks that's the problem. You cna get large items in many of them as long as they are relatively flat and not too bulky. Like an old fashioned suitcase, for instance!

To be Devil's Advocate for a moment, it doesn't help that a lot of the luggage these days is in MASSIVE bags (with solid corners) that don't squash down so easily, so little scope to squeeze them into their surroundings

I'm sure I don't remember that much luggage a decade ago