Where should XC serve?

[s'land]

In regards to the OP, I would think Poole, Bradford, Hull, Lincoln, Swansea, Sunderland, possibly Middlesbrough, Inverness and North Wales. Personally I would like to see them serve London Paddington again!

It's a disgrace that Middlesbrough or Sunderland do not have better service's.

 

[TheWalrus]

It's a disgrace that Middlesbrough or Sunderland do not have better service's.

Agreed.

 

[fowler9]

Of course Liverpool does get some cross-country services (operated by TPE and EMT) just none operated by XC.

Is it likely that Liverpool might get a service to Scotland at some point; e.g. portion working with the TPE service from Manchester Airport. But what XC service do you think is required?

I would love to see direct services to the south coast again. That said we already have very good connections thanks to London Midland. It was more of a wish list kind of thing for me rather than something that is desperately required.

 

[transmanche]

The South and East could do with being connected to the XC network, but connections via London probably put pay to that.

Indeed. The world has moved on.

• Passengers from parts of Kent now have access to HS1; which gives easier and faster connections to the Midlands, the North and Scotland from St Pancras, King's Cross and Euston.
  
• Passengers from the BML have similar connections via Thameslink; which gives much faster journey opportunities than the old XC journeys via Kensington Olympia. And Crossrail will give one-change access to Liverpool St and Paddington.

If it were possible to extend Southern's WCML service down to Brighton (but I understand the paths aren't available), then connections into WCML services at Watford Junction might also be a viable option.

Would also be good to see overnight holidaymaker trains to the SW etc.

Do families going on holiday nowadays really want to travel like that?

 

[34D]

Do families going on holiday nowadays really want to travel like that?

Arguably yes, given the willingness of many families to catch a 6am flight/11pm arrival.

At least on a train it's one seat for 6 hours where the child can sleep etc

 

[transmanche]

Arguably yes, given the willingness of many families to catch a 6am flight/11pm arrival.

Is that by choice, or merely when the charter flights are scheduled?

 

[The Planner]

Whereas on a plane it is only 2½ hours to the warmer climes of Spain etc?? I know what I would choose....

 

[CheshireCrusty]

I'm wondering where XC should serve? OC?

My vote is for a reinstatement of a WCML (North of Stafford) to Bristol and South West England service (this time preferably avoiding Birmingham New Street).

Before the [Virgin] XC service was axed it appeared that about 2/3rds of the passengers joining north of Stafford did not leave the train until well South of Birmingham and the trains were no less busy than the other XC routes. I was also a regular traveller to Bristol and Bath on the old Alphaline Manchester to Waterloo and Portsmouth services via the Severn tunnel and which if my memory serves me correctly were not significantly slower than the present XC service through BHM.

What about Liverpool to Southampton or Brighton (via Shrewsbury and Hereford)?

 

[Class172]

Why not extend the Nottingham to Brimingham service instead - can then be hourly. But probably have to go to Shrub Hill rather than Foregate Street unless a path could be found towards Hereford to hide trains between trips. Perhaps takeover the LM service between New Street and Hereford?

As soon as we start talking about transferring routes between TOCs, then a can of worms is opened, since we could start speculating many scenarios for that area...

 

[swt_passenger]

As soon as we start talking about transferring routes between TOCs, then a can of worms is opened, since we could start speculating many scenarios for that area...

Concur - the proposal in the previous post to yours is veering completely away from DfT's view of what the XC TOC is for, i.e. intercity and interregional flows based on Birmingham New St...

The other problem with threads like these is they seem to assume unlimited rolling stock, paths and terminal capacity...

 

[IanXC]

All trains should go via Leeds and none go fast from Doncaster to York although i understand this is due to pathing issues.

I'd also like to see the Newcastle to Reading services possibly start from Edinburgh and the infrastructure construction needed to make them electric services accelerated so by not much after 2020 new stock can be brought online to operate them.

I agree that demand for XC service would be better addressed by both current services being routed via Leeds in all hours. If capacity through Leeds can be found, I'd like to see East Coast run the York stopper hourly (potentially after IEP introduction - to keep an hourly service between York and Doncaster), then a 3rd hourly 'intercity' XC to run north from Birmingham as far as Sheffield, then calling Doncaster, Goole, Brough and Hull. This would have the advantage of bringing a host of destinations into Hull (which has few for a city its size),and would make for acceptable connections if the Bridlington-Hull-Sheffield services were to be broken post electrification. In addition it would maintain the current north and southbound connections available at Doncaster.

 

[BantamMenace]

I agree that demand for XC service would be better addressed by both current services being routed via Leeds in all hours. If capacity through Leeds can be found, I'd like to see East Coast run the York stopper hourly (potentially after IEP introduction - to keep an hourly service between York and Doncaster), then a 3rd hourly 'intercity' XC to run north from Birmingham as far as Sheffield, then calling Doncaster, Goole, Brough and Hull. This would have the advantage of bringing a host of destinations into Hull (which has few for a city its size),and would make for acceptable connections if the Bridlington-Hull-Sheffield services were to be broken post electrification. In addition it would maintain the current north and southbound connections available at Doncaster.

Portion working to split at Sheffield with the other half to serve Bradford via Barnsley and Huddersfield if Penistone line capacity can be found?

 

[Class172]

Concur - the proposal in the previous post to yours is veering completely away from DfT's view of what the XC TOC is for, i.e. intercity and interregional flows based on Birmingham New St...

The other problem with threads like these is they seem to assume unlimited rolling stock, paths and terminal capacity...

The latter problem could be avoided if full arguments were given with each proposal, with more detailed plans on what would work, but then it seems that is often too much effort...

 

[Kite159]

Having the service which terminates at Southampton go via Salisbury (and reversing at Salisbury) before heading down via Romsey to Southampton.

*wishing on a dream*

 

[DarloRich]

Wherever the DfT specify....

This - plus they could do with some more trains!

 

[swt_passenger]

Having the service which terminates at Southampton go via Salisbury (and reversing at Salisbury) before heading down via Romsey to Southampton.

To which the obvious question is what happens to all those people who can't now get to Winchester or Southampton Parkway, or have to spend an extra half hour getting to Southampton. Apart from the extra running time meaning extra stock is needed.

Exactly the same question arises when people suggest the service should be diverted from Reading to Heathrow or wherever - the reason it runs where it runs now is because that is where the demand for it is highest...

 

[Kneedown]

Norwich to Liverpool should also be on XC and not EMT.

Why? Would a repaint of 158's really improve the service?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How about Norwich and Manchester?.

Manchester to Norwich, and vice versea, would bust a Drivers continuous driving hours. It can only just be done Sheffield to Norwich.

XC also have a depot at Derby.

Hardly productive having Drivers travel passenger from Derby to Notts, and back again. This would also impact on diagram length and break timings

I disagree with the comment about Nottingham in the sense that yes it is the mid-point of the route BUT it leaves the west end of the route difficult to cover. There are earlier trains from Norwich and Nottingham than there are from Liverpool on the EMT network.

We can cover any time you like out of Liverpool. If the Dft said they wanted an 05:00 departure we would create a diagram to cover this.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

EMT are arguably equally unproductive though: there is a lengthy Nottingham to Liverpool ECS move for the first trains of the day from there.

It's not unproductive at all. That service is routed via Romiley and Newton-Le-Willows, and therefore enables the traincrew to keep their diversionary route knowledge up to date without having to be detached from duty for 2 days to retain this.
The fact the service doesn't carry passengers doesn't mean it's unproductive.

 

[transmanche]

It's not unproductive at all. That service is routed via Romiley and Newton-Le-Willows, and therefore enables the traincrew to keep their diversionary route knowledge up to date without having to be detached from duty for 2 days to retain this.
The fact the service doesn't carry passengers doesn't mean it's unproductive.

Would it add much time to the journey if it ran in public service?

 

[Kneedown]

Would it add much time to the journey if it ran in public service?

Not a great deal, but it would be unable to call at Stockport, Warrington, Widnes and Liv Sth P'way.
If there are people who are up for a 04:00 service to Sheffield, Manchester, Newton-Le-Willows or Liverpool then perhaps representations might be made?

 

[Oswyntail]

Why? Would a repaint of 158's really improve the service?....
Manchester to Norwich, and vice versea, would bust a Drivers continuous driving hours. It can only just be done Sheffield to Norwich.......
We can cover any time you like out of Liverpool. If the Dft said they wanted an 05:00 departure we would create a diagram to cover this....
It's not unproductive at all. That service is routed via Romiley and Newton-Le-Willows, and therefore enables the traincrew to keep their diversionary route knowledge up to date without having to be detached from duty for 2 days to retain this.
The fact the service doesn't carry passengers doesn't mean it's unproductive.

Interesting post, that raise points about a number of issues. While, from the point of view of overall marketing and service co-ordination, the Liverpool-Norwich should be an XC service, should it actually matter who provides the service. The problem arises when a current provider of a service that extends outside its natural remit decides that it is unprofitable, or of lower priority than its native services, and so downgrades it.
Is there any scope for flexibility in driver provision between TOCs? If a long-distance service is provided using stock that is common to all the TOCs whose boundaries it crosses, does it have to use staff from only one TOC? If there were a demand for a non-express cross-country service from Swansea to Scarborough, why should it only be driven by, say, TPE drivers?
And then, what is the balance between DfT planning and commercial opportunity? If a provider thinks of the service that they are only doing it because the DfT instructs, there might well be a tendency to downgrade that service. Perhaps more reason to give the service to its "natural" TOC. Every service (even one at 05:00) is a commercial opportunity and should be handled as such.
Finally, while I appreciate the point about different types of productivity, is there not some scope for running otherwise ECS as public services, or is the extra cost too great?

 

[Kneedown]

Interesting post, that raise points about a number of issues. While, from the point of view of overall marketing and service co-ordination, the Liverpool-Norwich should be an XC service, should it actually matter who provides the service. The problem arises when a current provider of a service that extends outside its natural remit decides that it is unprofitable, or of lower priority than its native services, and so downgrades it.
Is there any scope for flexibility in driver provision between TOCs? If a long-distance service is provided using stock that is common to all the TOCs whose boundaries it crosses, does it have to use staff from only one TOC? If there were a demand for a non-express cross-country service from Swansea to Scarborough, why should it only be driven by, say, TPE drivers?
And then, what is the balance between DfT planning and commercial opportunity? If a provider thinks of the service that they are only doing it because the DfT instructs, there might well be a tendency to downgrade that service. Perhaps more reason to give the service to its "natural" TOC. Every service (even one at 05:00) is a commercial opportunity and should be handled as such.
Finally, while I appreciate the point about different types of productivity, is there not some scope for running otherwise ECS as public services, or is the extra cost too great?

Many of the questions you raise should perhaps be answered by someone with more knowledge of commercial and marketing matters.

Just a couple of points though, not directed at you I hasten to add.....

Why do some people think that the Liverpool - Norwich route is not naturally in EMT's remit? I don't remember seeing anything official that states that EMT should work London and Local services only?
I can see how it would fall within XC's "usual remit" but then again so could most TPE services.
I also don't hear many people complaining about XC running the Birmingham - Nottingham services despite them falling more naturally within EMT or London Midland's line of work?
What would happen if XC took over the Liv-Nor route then? I would imagine the same 158's would be repainted into Burgundy/Silver, the traincrew's would have a new uniform, and fares would probably rise a lot seeing as XC crews are on a much bigger whack than EMT's. I can't think of any actual service improvements for the passenger!

To get back to Oswyntails question of traincrew's working other TOC's services or stock, it does and has happened, but is normally only a short term or occasional occurrence in my experience. Us Central lads used to work MML 170's to Coventry with an MML Steward(ess) on the trolley. I believe Anglia crews also work EMT 158's to Yarmouth? We also had a couple of Anglia 170's for a week or two in Central days. More recently SWT 158's appeared on EMT services.
It could happen more, but there is a lot of politics and red tape and other bumph between Management, TOC's and Unions to negotiate. Training/Briefing may also be necessary as one TOC's units may have subtle differences to another TOC's units, even if they are of the same class. I remember the first time a Central Driver jumped on an MML 170 on one of the aforementioned Coventry's..... He nearly missed Loughborough as no one realised that the brakes were adjusted differently to the Central 170's.

I agree about the ECS movements though. I see no reason myself why a scheduled daily ECS move with full crew on board should not operate as a passenger service, albeit with an anomalous stopping pattern if routed via diversionary routes. I suppose some movements across the country may have to be turned onto permissive Goods lines for operational reasons. This would negate their use as passenger trains. There may be other reasons too.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Arguably yes, given the willingness of many families to catch a 6am flight/11pm arrival.

At least on a train it's one seat for 6 hours where the child can sleep etc

Yes but those families are heading for a holiday of guaranteed sunshine! In which case a 06.00 flight is a price worth paying!

 

[Oswyntail]

...Why do some people think that the Liverpool - Norwich route is not naturally in EMT's remit? ...

Simply because it is a long distance route that, well, crosses the country. Most English TOCs have a structure of "Main Line to London and Hinterland", and XC generally picks up the "Main Line not to London, and hinterland". The anomaly is the TPE/Northern conundrum.
Thanks for the informative answers.

 

[43106]

Having studied XC (be it VXC or AXC), I've seen a lot of changes. I've a few ideas...
1) Birmingham - Crewe - Preston - Carlisle - Motherwell - Coatbridge - Stirling - Perth, with 1 train a day extensions to/from Inverness and Dundee & Aberdeen,
2) re-introducing extensions from Reading to i) Paddington, ii) Brighton and iii) Portsmouth. Dover is an option.
3) Bringing back Liverpool - Birmingham - beyond services,
4) extend Birmingham - Manchester services to Preston, Carlisle and beyond, which will kick those idiotic 185s off the Manchester - Scotland services,
5) improving the InterCity service to/from Cardiff from its current 1-a-day to something like a train every 2 hours. Extending some/all to Swansea is an option. This also improves the service to Gloucester,
6) divert a few more services via Weston-Super-Mud,
7) stop all services via Solihull AT Solihull. It has a helluva catchment area. There is a possible case to send ALL Birmingham - Reading services via Solihull,
8) somehow include Worcester into the XC network, but I'm not sure how best to do this.

Any further suggestions from me would require some major infrastructure changes, but I'll leave that for another thread!

 

[transmanche]

Having studied XC (be it VXC or AXC), I've seen a lot of changes. I've a few ideas...
1) Birmingham - Crewe - Preston - Carlisle - Motherwell - Coatbridge - Stirling - Perth, with 1 train a day extensions to/from Inverness and Dundee & Aberdeen

Why not the West Coast franchise?

2) re-introducing extensions from Reading to i) Paddington, ii) Brighton and iii) Portsmouth. Dover is an option.

Why Paddington? Every station on XC's Newcastle-Reading service already has an alternative (and faster) route to London. Passengers from Dover are invariably going to find it faster to travel via HS1 and make onward connections at St Pancras, King's Cross or Euston. Similarly Brighton passengers can use Thameslink to make the same connections.

So other than nostalgia, what would be the purpose of these services?

 

[SprinterMan]

I do think that XC should extend their Guildford service to Portsmouth Harbour. It would be very easy to do as the Voyager runs ECS to Eastleigh via Havant after working the afternoon service and vice versa in the mornings. It could call at Haslemere, Petersfield, Havant, Fratton, Portsmouth & Southsea and Portsmouth Harbour, before returning to Eastleigh from there.

Adam

 

[Cherry_Picker]

7) stop all services via Solihull AT Solihull. It has a helluva catchment area. There is a possible case to send ALL Birmingham - Reading services via Solihull

That happened immediately after Operation Princess, the biggest effect was overcrowding between Solihull & Birmingham as people just used it as an additional shuttle to New Street. Birmingham International is the railhead for that area and there is (almost certainly) a bigger demand for services which call at Coventry and Birmingham International than ones which omit them.

 

[swt_passenger]

That happened immediately after Operation Princess, the biggest effect was overcrowding between Solihull & Birmingham as people just used it as an additional shuttle to New Street. Birmingham International is the railhead for that area and there is (almost certainly) a bigger demand for services which call at Coventry and Birmingham International than ones which omit them.

Indeed don't NR and XC want to run their entire service through Coventry and Birmingham International, once the Kenilworth redoubling is done, because that's what 'stakeholders' in the Yorkshire area have repeatedly asked for?

That was the stated policy in the West Midlands and Chiltern RUS (2011) IIRC, but then what would they know...

 

[LowLevel]

Simply because it is a long distance route that, well, crosses the country. Most English TOCs have a structure of "Main Line to London and Hinterland", and XC generally picks up the "Main Line not to London, and hinterland". The anomaly is the TPE/Northern conundrum.
Thanks for the informative answers.

Yees, but it doesn't preclude the route being operated from it's central point, and there's a depot at Norwich anyway. EMT are a long distance operator anyway.

If you were to transfer it to Cross Country they'd still have to crew the trains from Liverpool (the nearest '170' train crew depot is in Birmingham/Leicester) which means recruiting more crews to cover it and still having long ECS moves, while trying to find work for the Nottingham crews you displace because if they just move to XC you gain nothing - there aren't any EMT crews at that end to TUPE to XC.

Then there's the business of the Norwich end, again you could TUPE the crews at Norwich over, but they also work local services in the Nottingham/Mansfield/Leicester area between return trips so you'd have to sort all that out, and be stuck with a less economical depot because their jobs will all be too short for their weekly hours as XC don't have any suitable work, really, for them to cover in the mean time and still have a break. You'd also have to cover their local work in the Notts/Leics area which wouldn't be enough to provide for all the displaced Nottingham crews.

Basically all you'd gain is a moved around problem and different stickers on the trains. It actually works quite well as it is.

Of course in 'the good old days', Liverpool crews worked to Nottingham and so on. But as someone saw fit to split it all into different companies, it's not that simple anymore.

 

[The Planner]

7) stop all services via Solihull AT Solihull. It has a helluva catchment area. There is a possible case to send ALL Birmingham - Reading services via Solihull,

Never going to happen, XC want them both via Coventry and we are looking at what infrastructure is required to enable it.