When will someone do something about CrossCountry

[yorksrob]

What a load of rubbish! Cost has nothing to do with the HSTs not having a uplift in diagrams.

The fact is they do not keep to Voyager timings hence they use HST timings.

And as I have said previously, the most sensible solution would be to have more Cross Country diagrams timed for HST's. Have these at the same time each hour, so that they fit in with all the other hourly services.

Rail nerds on here may be concerned about Voyagers running to Voyager timings. Normal passengers are far more interested in getting a seat at a reasonable price.

 

[Aictos]

And as I have said previously, the most sensible solution would be to have more Cross Country diagrams timed for HST's. Have these at the same time each hour, so that they fit in with all the other hourly services.

Rail nerds on here may be concerned about Voyagers running to Voyager timings. Normal passengers are far more interested in getting a seat at a reasonable price.

Really?

HSTs are slow and don’t keep to time easily hence why they’re kept to specific workings much like why on the Midland Mainline they’re used more on the semi fast Nottingham’s instead of the fast Sheffield’s.

The fact is that HSTs are only a stop gap for Cross Country and should be retired having been replaced by rolling stock that is more suitable for the 21st Century.

Yes passengers want a seat but it’s been explained to you and others here by people who’s job it is to diagram trains across the network why HSTs don’t keep to Voyager timings.

 

[JonathanH]

And as I have said previously, the most sensible solution would be to have more Cross Country diagrams timed for HST's. Have these at the same time each hour, so that they fit in with all the other hourly services.

Rail nerds on here may be concerned about Voyagers running to Voyager timings. Normal passengers are far more interested in getting a seat at a reasonable price.

I'm not sure they are concerned about Voyagers running to Voyager timings. They know that more HSTs on Cross Country is simply not going to happen.

On the timing point, the 1327 Plymouth to Edinburgh is a service which is timed for a HST on Thursday and Voyager the rest of the week. The two links show the difference in timings. The Voyager recovers four minutes of delay twice, the HST three minutes of delay once.

Thursday 30 January - High Speed Train
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C74577/2020-01-30/detailed

Wednesday 5 February - Voyager
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C74578/2020-02-05/detailed

The Voyager schedule has extra pathing allowance at Worle Junction, Five Ways, Derby, Tapton Junction, Dore Station Junction, Nunnery Main Line Junction, South Kirkby Junction, Leeds, Neville Hill West Junction, Northallerton, Darlington, Tursdale Junction which all adds up.

 

[JonathanH]

HSTs are slow and don’t keep to time easily hence why they’re kept to specific workings much like why on the Midland Mainline they’re used more on the semi fast Nottingham’s instead of the fast Sheffield’s.

To be pedantic, the HSTs are kept on the fast Nottingham's rather than the semi-fast Nottingham services (admittedly to allow faster stock to work the fast Sheffield services where it counts most). The Midland is a bit different though isn't it as the HSTs are only timed at 110mph, compared to 125mph for a Meridian.

The fact is that HSTs are only a stop gap for Cross Country and should be retired having been replaced by rolling stock that is more suitable for the 21st Century.

A fairly long term stop gap for the last ten years or so and a few more years to come (but the point you are trying to make is that they haven't got a long future ahead of them).

 

[yorksrob]

Really?

HSTs are slow and don’t keep to time easily hence why they’re kept to specific workings much like why on the Midland Mainline they’re used more on the semi fast Nottingham’s instead of the fast Sheffield’s.

The fact is that HSTs are only a stop gap for Cross Country and should be retired having been replaced by rolling stock that is more suitable for the 21st Century.

Yes passengers want a seat but it’s been explained to you and others here by people who’s job it is to diagram trains across the network why HSTs don’t keep to Voyager timings.

Yes, and what is noticable about those specific workings on the Midland Mainline ?

I'll answer that for you. They are hourly workings so that they fit into an the hourly timetable. Replace Voyager timings with HST timings once an hour.

The HST's might well be stopgaps, but until someone magics up some replacement trains, they aren't going anywhere.

I'm not sure they are concerned about Voyagers running to Voyager timings. They know that more HSTs on Cross Country is simply not going to happen.

On the timing point, the 1327 Plymouth to Edinburgh is a service which is timed for a HST on Thursday and Voyager the rest of the week. The two links show the difference in timings. The Voyager recovers four minutes of delay twice, the HST three minutes of delay once.

Thursday 30 January - High Speed Train
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C74577/2020-01-30/detailed

Wednesday 5 February - Voyager
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C74578/2020-02-05/detailed

The Voyager schedule has extra pathing allowance at Worle Junction, Five Ways, Derby, Tapton Junction, Dore Station Junction, Nunnery Main Line Junction, South Kirkby Junction, Leeds, Neville Hill West Junction, Northallerton, Darlington, Tursdale Junction which all adds up.

I'm sure it's a lot more difficult having one diagram on one day and a different one on the other days. Go with the slower one that all train types can keep up with.

 

[Anonymous10]

What a load of rubbish! Cost has nothing to do with the HSTs not having a uplift in diagrams.

The fact is they do not keep to Voyager timings hence they use HST timings.

Better a slower journey than a standing journey

 

[Aictos]

To be pedantic, the HSTs are kept on the fast Nottingham's rather than the semi-fast Nottingham services (admittedly to allow faster stock to work the fast Sheffield services where it counts most). The Midland is a bit different though isn't it as the HSTs are only timed at 110mph, compared to 125mph for a Meridian.



A fairly long term stop gap for the last ten years or so and a few more years to come (but the point you are trying to make is that they haven't got a long future ahead of them).

Apologies but you’ve understood my point I was trying to make.

 

[duffield]

A couple of observations:
PRM HSTs with sliding doors should keep better time than the previous slam-door sets.
Six-coach HSTs with the composite first/standard coach removed should be able to keep to near-voyager timings while only losing 8(?) standard class seats compared to the seven coach sets and would still have an entire MK3 1st class coach.

 

[Wtloild]

But people won't stop using XC and this is the problem.

My job takes me from the NW to a wide range of provincial towns and cities around England.
I should be a natural regular XC customer (& was until a few years ago).
Now I avoid them like the plague, as do my colleagues.

I'll be traveling down to Exeter tomorrow & returning on Friday, by car - because the car is faster, cheaper, more reliable, more comfortable, with has better food (Gloucester Services are very good).

I also regularly drive to Scotland to avoid similar issues with TPE.

That 80s idea of "let the train take the strain" seems as dated now as Jimmy Savile having been the deemed the best spokesperson to deliver it.

 

[Mogz]

I think this has turned into a Voyager vs HST thread, somehow.

I’m sure most of us on XC wouldn’t mind which stock was used providing it was longer and had better leg-room.

 

[Aictos]

I think this has turned into a Voyager vs HST thread, somehow.

I’m sure most of us on XC wouldn’t mind which stock was used providing it was longer and had better leg-room.

The only reason why more stock hasn’t been made available is simply down to the DfT not having a long term plan for the franchise and thus no incentive for Cross Country to invest in more trains.

 

[gg1]

I think this has turned into a Voyager vs HST thread, somehow.

I’m sure most of us on XC wouldn’t mind which stock was used providing it was longer and had better leg-room.

It's not a Voyager vs HST thread, rather a maintain the status quo vs acquire additional stock thread, it just so happens that HSTs are one of the more viable options for the latter.

 

[TheWalrus]

I think this has turned into a Voyager vs HST thread, somehow.

I’m sure most of us on XC wouldn’t mind which stock was used providing it was longer and had better leg-room.

I think most of us would prefer a HST

 

[yorksrob]

I think this has turned into a Voyager vs HST thread, somehow.

I’m sure most of us on XC wouldn’t mind which stock was used providing it was longer and had better leg-room.

For the first part no, as by using more HST's they could double up more Voyagers.

Second part, I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Meerkat]

XC loses money doesn’t it?
So blaming DfT is simplistic - you need a business case for increasing subsidy to pay for more trains.
Has the research been done to see who is travelling and how much they are paying? eg if it’s students and old folk on railcards or discretionary leisure travel then you are left with possibly reducing pollution/congestion. Could go BR and raise the fares to reduce overcrowding.....
If the problem is commuters then you need to look at possible suburban network Improvements and whether they would be better value.

Personally I think it will come down to green credentials and an empty factory leading to a political bi-mode order, or just hanging in for spare 22x - which still have a cost and need justifying.

 

[Master29]

My job takes me from the NW to a wide range of provincial towns and cities around England.
I should be a natural regular XC customer (& was until a few years ago).
Now I avoid them like the plague, as do my colleagues.

I'll be traveling down to Exeter tomorrow & returning on Friday, by car - because the car is faster, cheaper, more reliable, more comfortable, with has better food (Gloucester Services are very good).

I also regularly drive to Scotland to avoid similar issues with TPE.

That 80s idea of "let the train take the strain" seems as dated now as Jimmy Savile having been the deemed the best spokesperson to deliver it.

And if you didn't the problem would be even worse as you are one of many but it shouldn't have to be this way.

 

[xotGD]

I'm not sure they are concerned about Voyagers running to Voyager timings. They know that more HSTs on Cross Country is simply not going to happen.

On the timing point, the 1327 Plymouth to Edinburgh is a service which is timed for a HST on Thursday and Voyager the rest of the week. The two links show the difference in timings. The Voyager recovers four minutes of delay twice, the HST three minutes of delay once.

Thursday 30 January - High Speed Train
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C74577/2020-01-30/detailed

Wednesday 5 February - Voyager
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C74578/2020-02-05/detailed

The Voyager schedule has extra pathing allowance at Worle Junction, Five Ways, Derby, Tapton Junction, Dore Station Junction, Nunnery Main Line Junction, South Kirkby Junction, Leeds, Neville Hill West Junction, Northallerton, Darlington, Tursdale Junction which all adds up.

So the Voyager and HST take exactly the same time to get from Plymouth to Edinburgh. Isn't that precisely the opposite of the point you were trying to prove?

 

[JonathanH]

So the Voyager and HST take exactly the same time to get from Plymouth to Edinburgh. Isn't that precisely the opposite of the point you were trying to prove?

Yes, they do, but there is less opportunity to make up time if the train is delayed. Each one of the pathing allowances is an opportunity for a Voyager that a HST can't take advantage of.

 

[class 9]

XC loses money doesn’t it?
So blaming DfT is simplistic - you need a business case for increasing subsidy to pay for more trains.
Has the research been done to see who is travelling and how much they are paying? eg if it’s students and old folk on railcards or discretionary leisure travel then you are left with possibly reducing pollution/congestion. Could go BR and raise the fares to reduce overcrowding.....
If the problem is commuters then you need to look at possible suburban network Improvements and whether they would be better value.

Personally I think it will come down to green credentials and an empty factory leading to a political bi-mode order, or just hanging in for spare 22x - which still have a cost and need justifying.

No, it’s profitable. The first 3 year direct award(after the original franchise should have ended) payed a £165 million premium to the treasury and in the last couple of years Arriva have taken 2 £20 million dividend payments.

 

[yorksrob]

The question is, are passengers so concerned that Voyagers take advantage of those pathing allowances, that they would forgo longer trains with extra seats. I suspect not.

 

[43096]

To be pedantic, the HSTs are kept on the fast Nottingham's rather than the semi-fast Nottingham services (admittedly to allow faster stock to work the fast Sheffield services where it counts most). The Midland is a bit different though isn't it as the HSTs are only timed at 110mph, compared to 125mph for a Meridian.

That’s not correct. Whilst the timing load on the NR data feed says HST110, in reality HST sets have to use the full 125mph to keep time on the MML and timings were tightened when the 125mph upgrade took place.

 

[Ianno87]

No, it’s profitable. The first 3 year direct award(after the original franchise should have ended) payed a £165 million premium to the treasury and in the last couple of years Arriva have taken 2 £20 million dividend payments.

Arriva have turned XC from net subsidy to net premium since 2007. Which seems to be a combination of razor sharp control on costs (i.e. not carting 10 car Voyagers up and down the country for the dake of it), and a very clever (but unintelligible to the layman) fares strategy.

The question is, are passengers so concerned that Voyagers take advantage of those pathing allowances, that they would forgo longer trains with extra seats. I suspect not.

The Voyagers basically give train planners a bit of extra timing flexibility with what they can do in those hours. In terms of actual performance difference intelligible to the average passenger, virtually nil. But the path is basically designed as an HST schedule.

Although I'd wager HST performance wouldn't cut the pathing mustard between Birmingham and Manchester, or between Coventry and Birmingham, or on the new 'accelerated' schedules via Doncaster. Here, Voyager performance is more critical to the timetable.

 

[The Ham]

XC loses money doesn’t it?
So blaming DfT is simplistic - you need a business case for increasing subsidy to pay for more trains.
Has the research been done to see who is travelling and how much they are paying? eg if it’s students and old folk on railcards or discretionary leisure travel then you are left with possibly reducing pollution/congestion. Could go BR and raise the fares to reduce overcrowding.....
If the problem is commuters then you need to look at possible suburban network Improvements and whether they would be better value.

Personally I think it will come down to green credentials and an empty factory leading to a political bi-mode order, or just hanging in for spare 22x - which still have a cost and need justifying.

As others have pointed out XC is making a profit, however even if it was making a loss the arrival of extra trains may not significantly increase costs but could generate enough extra income to pay for this extra costs.

As an example what's the cost difference between running a 4 coach 220 and a 5 coach 221?

Whilst there'll be extra fuel costs (as it's heavier, and not just because it's longer) and quite a bit higher track access charges the only "big" cost which does up is your leasing and servicing costs.

As your staff costs stay the same.

That means that each extra ticket sold doesn't have to cover much in extra costs but with space for over 50 more people seated per service there's plenty of scope to sell more tickets.

If XC were to get the 20 class 221's from Avanti (formally Virgin), that's likely to cost them somewhere in the region of £150 million a year in extra lease costs.

Personally I'd be tempted to investigate the cost savings from changing the 4 coach units to be all 5 coach units (i.e. reducing the number of end coaches which are being leased without increasing capacity by very much) following the introduction of the Avanti 221's.

That would mean a 5 coach fleet, making running the services easier as well as reducing the need for as much overnight storage.

In terms of net increase in the number of units or would mean that it dropped from 20 to 9, however every service would be 5 or 10 coaches long. Which for a lot of the services would be an instant increase in capacity.

Now whilst 9 extra units doesn't sound a lot it would mean that about 1/6 of all services could be (in addition to any editing pairings) run in pairs. If these were focused on the core it could be much higher than that.

Having not really increased my other costs other than fuel, leasing and servicing I probably wouldn't need to sell many extra tickets per train. However over some core route services I'll have added 300 seats, with 2/3 of the fleet having an extra 50 seats.

 

[JonathanH]

Personally I'd be tempted to investigate the cost savings from changing the 4 coach units to be all 5 coach units (i.e. reducing the number of end coaches which are being leased without increasing capacity by very much) following the introduction of the Avanti 221's.

Do you think that if they were to do this, the lease costs for the additional coaches might be as much as if they wanted to lease the whole units (given they would be rendering the rest of the lease company's assets practically worthless)? Isn't it better to go 8-car and 5-car by doubling up the 220s and replacing them by 221s?

 

[Meerkat]

Didn’t realise XC made a profit!
Making money out of adding capacity depends on there being significant demand that is currently put off. I am not saying there isn’t but you lose money if you add a coach and only carry the same people (but they all get a seat). There is also the issue of providing the extra capacity for the whole diagram but it might only be crowded for a small part in the middle.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

I think this has turned into a Voyager vs HST thread, somehow.

I’m sure most of us on XC wouldn’t mind which stock was used providing it was longer and had better leg-room.

Exactly. As regards the Voyagers, they can be loved, hated or whatever. If I was the person in charge of what trains were to come to XC then I'd bring the 20 Voyagers from Avanti. Far better than to wait for potentially delayed entry of new trains in say 2024!

 

[Mogz]

Exactly. As regards the Voyagers, they can be loved, hated or whatever. If I was the person in charge of what trains were to come to XC then I'd bring the 20 Voyagers from Avanti. Far better than to wait for potentially delayed entry of new trains in say 2024!

Agreed! I’d also leave their superior interior layout well alone, but that’s probably one for another day

 

[yorksrob]

Exactly. As regards the Voyagers, they can be loved, hated or whatever. If I was the person in charge of what trains were to come to XC then I'd bring the 20 Voyagers from Avanti. Far better than to wait for potentially delayed entry of new trains in say 2024!

Aren't they spoken for, for another few years at least ?

 

[Wtloild]

Would it be feasible to write something into the franchise that forced the TOC to pay compensation for not providing seats?
Some standing on short-distance commuter trains is sort of understandable, but on the distances the likes of XC cover, it's not - last time I travelled on XC, I had to stand all the way from Bristol to Brum.
Before anyone utters 'seat reservations' - I get them on the outbound journey, but return trip is always an (expensive) open return because I never know what time I'm going to finish

 

[The Ham]

Do you think that if they were to do this, the lease costs for the additional coaches might be as much as if they wanted to lease the whole units (given they would be rendering the rest of the lease company's assets practically worthless)? Isn't it better to go 8-car and 5-car by doubling up the 220s and replacing them by 221s?

Whilst it wouldn't increase lease costs doubling of units then increases staff costs and extra track access charges costs.