Where should XC serve?

[yorksrob]

Not exactly.

Thameslink can get you to St Pancras. Once there, you can go to Kent, Sheffield, the East Midlands, and even Europe. You can also walk to Euston or King's Cross, for the North East and North West, Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham or Scotland.

Just taking the tube opens up a lot more places too.

So why waste a path on a service that could easily be done if you changed at London? What's the point of an indirect service that takes a longer time than it would to change at London?

By that logic, why have a cross country network at all ?

You could probably get away with having one intensively operated route from York to Exeter with everyone else changing to London services and it would probably be as quick with only one or two changes.

Except that lots of people prefer not to chance, which is the whole point of this thread in the first place. It's hard to think of any other hubs that would be suitable for a long distance ctoss country service, except perhaps a North East/South West service via the East, rather than the West Midlands.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Where do the units you use for the extension in the off-peak come from? If you look at the present extension of XC to Guildford as an example, it only works because it is done at either end of the day, very early and very late, and the unit runs ECS from or back to the depot. In the middle of the day you would have to feed extra units from somewhere into the normal peak clock face timetable OR you'd have to reduce frequency on a core route to provide the stock.

I just can't see XC's fleet size being arranged so that there are sufficient spare units to run mid-day extensions.

The OP merely asks "where should XC serve" I'm merely saying where I think XC should serve in the event that adequate stock becomes available.

 

[backontrack]

By that logic, why have a cross country network at all ?

You could probably get away with having one intensively operated route from York to Exeter with everyone else changing to London services and it would probably be as quick with only one or two changes.

Except that lots of people prefer not to chance, which is the whole point of this thread in the first place. It's hard to think of any other hubs that would be suitable for a long distance ctoss country service, except perhaps a North East/South West service via the East, rather than the West Midlands.

That's not the point. The point is that Brighton, a railhead for Sussex, is considerably closer to London then any other major railhead. It also has a very high frequency of trains to the capital. When you arrive there, there are a plethora of towns and cities accessible by one change.

Are you really suggesting that, rather than change at London and get the more direct ECML train, you would use a service running via Guildford, Oxford, Birmingham and Derby to get to Leeds?

 

[fowler9]

Based on what I have read on this thread I think Cross Country is largely pointless in some peoples opinions. Why can't people just go via London? It is the way the country is set up. Can't the other companies just pick up the slack providing links to trains to London?

 

[GatwickDepress]

Based on what I have read on this thread I think Cross Country is largely pointless in some peoples opinions. Why can't people just go via London? It is the way the country is set up. Can't the other companies just pick up the slack providing links to trains to London?

CrossCountry is pointless in the South East, not in the other regions. The current services are dense and frequent, with Brighton being no more than one or two changes from most destinations. CrossCountry is incredibly useful elsewhere, and that unit that would trundle along to Brighton would be suited running elsewhere.

Brighton - St Pancras - walk to KGX - Leeds.
Brighton - Clapham Junction - Watford Junction - Birmingham New Street
Brighton - Clapham Junction - Milton Keynes Central - Manchester Piccadilly
Brighton - Fratton - Bristol Temple Meads
Brighton - Gatwick Airport - Reading

 

[rgoodall111]

I think (if any paths exist) that 2 or 3 times a day the Manchester-Bournemouth should run to Brighton via Chichester instead of the congested Gatwick route.

 

[yorksrob]

That's not the point. The point is that Brighton, a railhead for Sussex, is considerably closer to London then any other major railhead. It also has a very high frequency of trains to the capital. When you arrive there, there are a plethora of towns and cities accessible by one change.

Are you really suggesting that, rather than change at London and get the more direct ECML train, you would use a service running via Guildford, Oxford, Birmingham and Derby to get to Leeds?

Perhaps not, but places such as Manchester and Liverpool require two changes. I could well imagine some people would be happy not to have to traipse onto the underground and off again.

Goodness. Anyone would have thought I'd suggested Doleham Halt and Three Oaks should get a Cross Country service the way some people are carrying on.

 

[backontrack]

Perhaps not, but places such as Manchester and Liverpool require two changes. I could well imagine some people would be happy not to have to traipse onto the underground and off again.

Goodness. Anyone would have thought I'd suggested Doleham Halt and Three Oaks should get a Cross Country service the way some people are carrying on.

Still, I can't fathom how you'd prefer that to a couple of changes at London and a ride on a Pendolino.

And, by the way, it's not 'carrying on', it's simply disagreeing with you. People will always have their reasons.

 

[yorksrob]

Still, I can't fathom how you'd prefer that to a couple of changes at London and a ride on a Pendolino.

And, by the way, it's not 'carrying on', it's simply disagreeing with you. People will always have their reasons.

Well, there's a lot of things I can't fathom. Someone on here once told me they preferred travelling on a pacer to an EPB.

Some people don't like changing trains.
Some people don't like negotiating the tube.
Some people don't even like pendolino's.

For those that do, there are lots trains to London. For those that don't, Brighton (and ideally Gatwick) would be an ideal destination for a few XC services.

 

[backontrack]

Well, there's a lot of things I can't fathom. Someone on here once told me they preferred travelling on a pacer to an EPB.

Some people don't like changing trains.
Some people don't like negotiating the tube.
Some people don't even like pendolino's.

For those that do, there are lots trains to London. For those that don't, Brighton (and ideally Gatwick) would be an ideal destination for a few XC services.

Well, um, if you say so.

All the same, I think an hourly service would be a bit much. Maybe two-hourly, allowing another two-hourly path (which Southern would snap up, and which would provide a good connection for those who do like Pendolinos) would be better.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, um, if you say so.

I do.

 

[backontrack]

I do.

I know.

Somebody change the subject...

 

[JamesRowden]

The Western Route specifications expects a 3tph Cross Country service between Oxford and Reading in 2019. The extra one is thought to be an electric service via Milton Keynes. The question is: what do you think would be the best services to run using these paths?

I have seen sources that state Reading to Manchester via East West Rail will be about 30 mintes faster than the present route.

I'm going to start by suggesting the following hourly services:

• Manchester-Birmingham-Reading-Gatwick
  • Voyager
• Liverpool-MiltonKeynes-Reading-Bournemouth
  • Electric Dual Voltage
• Newcastle-Birmingham-Reading(-Southampton[1tp2h])
  • Voyager

 

[Senex]

I could well imagine some people would be happy not to have to traipse onto the underground and off again.

Indeed, and especially if you have any more than a briefcase to carry. Quite apart from some very long and inconvenient accesses, the Underground is n ot suited to luggage -- says he with memories of travel to and from Heathrow in the peaks.

 

[FQ]

[*]Newcastle-Birmingham-Reading(-Southampton[1tp2h])

• Voyager
  

That one already exists.

 

[JamesRowden]

That one already exists.

I was suggesting what three services could take the place of the current two, and I thought that one could stay as it is (except for the fact that it would run via Coventry).

 

[telstarbox]

There are some admirable 'crayonista' efforts on this thread.

While airports should have good rail connections, such as Crossrail for Heathrow and Thameslink for Gatwick, this doesn't mean that every airport needs connections to everywhere else - Manchester and Birmingham don't need a direct rail link to Gatwick.

For short haul flights, many Gatwick destinations are also served by flights from Birmingham and Manchester (or even Luton which is on the north side of London).

For long haul, most London long-haul flights go from Heathrow rather than Gatwick, and Manchester is picking up more eg Emirates. Factor in the connecting Manchester-Gatwick flights and there just aren't sufficient passenger numbers to justify a direct link.

 

[JamesRowden]

There are some admirable 'crayonista' efforts on this thread.

While airports should have good rail connections, such as Crossrail for Heathrow and Thameslink for Gatwick, this doesn't mean that every airport needs connections to everywhere else - Manchester and Birmingham don't need a direct rail link to Gatwick.

Providing through services between Birmingham and Glasgow via York isn't neccessary either, but these Cross Country services are provided for the journeys to/from the intermdiate stations rather than for passengers travelling all the way on the train.

 

[davyp]

Factor in the connecting Manchester-Gatwick flights and there just aren't sufficient passenger numbers to justify a direct link.[/QUOTE]

What Manchester to Gatwick flights are these? There are no direct Manchester to Gatwick flights - ended in 2013.
Davyp

 

[telstarbox]

Sorry, I meant the Virgin 'Little Red' flights which go to Heathrow to provide connections to Virgin Atlantic long-haul services.

 

[2030720310]

I still do think that every two hours, one of the Cardiff-Nottingham services ought to be diverted to go via Worcester.

*goes off and hides*

Agree with that fully! And preferably one of the voyagers as well....

 

[Iskra]

I'd like to see a Glasgow-Norwich via Carlisle, Leeds and Nottingham. It very much crosses the country and there's some important flows in there. Even if just provided with a Voyager it would attract custom away from the existing services across most of the route. I even think an Open Access operator could make make a go of it.

Glasgow
Motherwell
Lockerbie
Carlisle
Appleby*
Kirkby Stephen*
Settle
Skipton
Keighley
Bingley*
Leeds
Wakefield Westgate
Doncaster
Sheffield
Chesterfield
Nottingham
Peterborough
Ely
Norwich

*could be deleted if necessary.

 

[FQ]

I'd like to see a Glasgow-Norwich via Carlisle, Leeds and Nottingham. It very much crosses the country and there's some important flows in there. Even if just provided with a Voyager it would attract custom away from the existing services across most of the route. I even think an Open Access operator could make make a go of it.

Glasgow
Motherwell
Lockerbie
Carlisle
Appleby*
Kirkby Stephen*
Settle
Skipton
Keighley
Bingley*
Leeds
Wakefield Westgate
Doncaster
Sheffield
Chesterfield
Nottingham
Peterborough
Ely
Norwich

*could be deleted if necessary.

No Grantham or Thetford?

 

[Iskra]

No Grantham or Thetford?

Sorry, my railway geography of that area is poor.

Grantham should be a definite stop. I'd include Thetford with an '*', purely based on its population.

 

[adrock1976]

I'd like to see a Glasgow-Norwich via Carlisle, Leeds and Nottingham. It very much crosses the country and there's some important flows in there. Even if just provided with a Voyager it would attract custom away from the existing services across most of the route. I even think an Open Access operator could make make a go of it.

Glasgow
Motherwell
Lockerbie
Carlisle
Appleby*
Kirkby Stephen*
Settle
Skipton
Keighley
Bingley*
Leeds
Wakefield Westgate
Doncaster
Sheffield
Chesterfield
Nottingham
Peterborough
Ely
Norwich

*could be deleted if necessary.

No Grantham or Thetford?

Sorry, my railway geography of that area is poor.

Grantham should be a definite stop. I'd include Thetford with an '*', purely based on its population.

I agree mostly with this with the exception of Wakefield Westgate and Doncaster.

I would suggest after Leeds that it would call at Wakefield Kirkgate, Sheffield, Chesterfield, (additionally the future Toton when HS2 eventually arrives), Nottingham, Grantham, Peterborough, March (connections for Cambridge and West Anglia main line), maybe Thetford, and Norwich Thorpe.

The modification that I have proposed would eliminate the service from meeting the Great Northern Railway twice (at Doncaster and further on a short distance at Grantham), and would also eliminate the second reversal at Ely.

In peace

Adam

 

[DarloRich]

I'd like to see a Glasgow-Norwich via Carlisle, Leeds and Nottingham. It very much crosses the country and there's some important flows in there. Even if just provided with a Voyager it would attract custom away from the existing services across most of the route. I even think an Open Access operator could make make a go of it.

Glasgow
Motherwell
Lockerbie
Carlisle
Appleby*
Kirkby Stephen*
Settle
Skipton
Keighley
Bingley*
Leeds
Wakefield Westgate
Doncaster
Sheffield
Chesterfield
Nottingham
Peterborough
Ely
Norwich

*could be deleted if necessary.

I give up :roll:

Which existing services shall XC stop ( bearing in mind the core services are already rammed) to offer this route?

 

[Iskra]

I give up :roll:

Which existing services shall XC stop ( bearing in mind the core services are already rammed) to offer this route?

None. I also specifically mention that it doesn't have to be XC...

Or it could be done by XC in the future when there will be surplus stock.

It's a light-hearted suggestion-thread, I think you're taking things a little too seriously.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree mostly with this with the exception of Wakefield Westgate and Doncaster.

I would suggest after Leeds that it would call at Wakefield Kirkgate, Sheffield, Chesterfield, (additionally the future Toton when HS2 eventually arrives), Nottingham, Grantham, Peterborough, March (connections for Cambridge and West Anglia main line), maybe Thetford, and Norwich Thorpe.

The modification that I have proposed would eliminate the service from meeting the Great Northern Railway twice (at Doncaster and further on a short distance at Grantham), and would also eliminate the second reversal at Ely.

In peace

Adam

That would be a better route

I was in two minds about which way to send it through Wakey.

 

[D6975]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Class172
I still do think that every two hours, one of the Cardiff-Nottingham services ought to be diverted to go via Worcester.

*goes off and hides*

Agree with that fully! And preferably one of the voyagers as well....


Take a look at the Worcester Parkway thread. WS may yet get XC services.

 

[Martin_1981]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Class172
I still do think that every two hours, one of the Cardiff-Nottingham services ought to be diverted to go via Worcester.

*goes off and hides*

Agree with that fully! And preferably one of the voyagers as well....


Take a look at the Worcester Parkway thread. WS may yet get XC services.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think some of these services did go via Worcester back in the early-mid 1990's if I remember correctly. Diverting via Worcester would add no more than 12-15 mins onto the journey.

Similarly, I think running these services via Leicester, instead of Derby, on alternate hours should also be considered. If they called only at Beeston and Leicester it would add virtually no time on at all as no reversal is required at Leicester. Derby already has 4 services an hour to and from Birmingham, Leicester, which is larger than Derby, only has two.

 

[dannypye9999]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think some of these services did go via Worcester back in the early-mid 1990's if I remember correctly. Diverting via Worcester would add no more than 12-15 mins onto the journey.

Similarly, I think running these services via Leicester, instead of Derby, on alternate hours should also be considered. If they called only at Beeston and Leicester it would add virtually no time on at all as no reversal is required at Leicester. Derby already has 4 services an hour to and from Birmingham, Leicester, which is larger than Derby, only has two.

It would be useful having one of the Leicester services extended to Nottingham and then one of the Derby/Nottingham services re-routed from derby to Leeds via Chesterfield, Sheffield and Barnsley. Gives Barnsley something long distance.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Diverting a service via Leicester vice Derby would also half the service at Tamworth HL and Burton, and reduce Derby-Nottingham, with a combined population probably pushing on half a million, and only a handful of miles apart, by 50% to just 2tph...