What Is InterCity?

[tbtc]

Rather than derail another thread further, I thought I'd set up a specific one to try to determine what people think InterCity (or INTERCITY/ Inter-City/ Inter City/ Intercity etc) meant in 2013.

There's been a lot of debate about whether certain services qualify for this "gold standard" (e.g. "you can't put EMUs on London - Norwich as this is an InterCity route"), but where do you draw the line?

Are Voyagers true InterCity trains? 444s? What about 185s? Is a 350/1 InterCity but not a 350/2?

Since the simple days of BR (when there was a clear division between InterCity and Provincial/ Regional/ NSE), there are a lot of grey areas nowadays.

Does it need to be loco hauled to qualify as InterCity? (that'd rule a 390 out)

Are "end doors" necessary or can you have an InterCity train with "middle" doors?

I've seen claim on here that units with corridor connections cannot qualify as "InterCity".

Presumably an InterCity service requires some First Class, but can that be with 2+2 seats, or are 2+1 required for InterCity? If it has sufficient First Class then can it have some 3+2 seating in Standard and still qualify? Can you have an InterCity train that splits a coach between First and Standard (like the EMT 222s)?

Do InterCity trains need to have tables throughout? Or a certain number of tables per coach?

I imagine that one determinant is going to be the food - anything with a Restaurant is InterCity, but is a buffet sufficient to qualify? Are services with (just) a trolley not actual IC ones?

Can you have an InterCity train with underfloor engines? What about bi-mode IEP (will this be InterCity from London to Edinburgh but not InterCity from Edinburgh to Aberdeen)?

What about vestibules/ luggage racks?

(am focussing this on the actual physical trains and not aiming for an argument about whether a link between two certain cities justifies InterCity status as there are always going to be contradictions and exceptions to any such debate - e.g. Diss vs Salford)

 

[gord]

I've always felt that Intercity stands for the quickest route between 2 cities. So the Virgin service from Birmingham to London I see as Intercity...but the London Midland service I don't. However, I'm not sure about Chiltern! It wasn't an intercity line during British Rail days but has seen improvements since

So there are a lot of grey areas...and even though the route may be classed as Intercity...the rolling stock isn't always. For the general public...I think the term 'Intercity' has faded away. These days, around the West Midlands, people I know refer going to London on the Virgin Train. But that's just based on what I hear in converstaion!

 

[The Ham]

I would suggest that it is more to do with the frequency of the stops, in that a class 444 train could be seen as being a IC service when it's running fairly fast between Weymouth and London (even though there are sections where it does call at all the stations), but not if it calling at nearly all the stops between Portsmouth and London via Basingstoke.

I would almost certainly say that end doors were a fairly good indicator of if a service could be classed as IC (assuming other factors came into play) as having doors towards the middle of the train could lead to it being uncomfortable when the doors are opened, but not a deal breaker by any stretch.

Having refreshments available (or at least they should be) is a clear indicator, although how that is delivered is open to debate.

If the speed of the journey (i.e. due to limited line speeds) and comfort level can be maintained then there should be no reason why 170's, 172's or even 158's/159's couldn't be used to provide IC services.

 

[Chrisgr31]

As a fare paying passenger the term Intercity suggests to me a train service between cities.

I would expect it to be a fast service on comfortable trains (which rather excludes Virgins Pendlinos (in my opinion they arte damened uncomfortable)) and thats it.

I don't care about the class of stock or what connections it has, I would expect some form of catering facility on board.

I am not sure I count Norwich as a city, but that may be because I have had no reason to go there! I am normally going Lond to Leeds, or Birmingham, or Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Bristol.

 

[HST Power]

As a fare paying passenger the term Intercity suggests to me a train service between cities.

I would expect it to be a fast service on comfortable trains (which rather excludes Virgins Pendlinos (in my opinion they arte damened uncomfortable)) and thats it.

I don't care about the class of stock or what connections it has, I would expect some form of catering facility on board.

I would say this more or less fits with my definition of intercity.

In terms of First Class layout, 2+1 is more desirable, but I can do 2+2.

I would say the buffet is an important part, and more recently, at an seat service in First Class.

 

[WatcherZero]

Would you define the long distance EMT routes as Intercity because they are planning 125mph EMU stock for 2019/20 which by your definition discounts it from being Intercity?
(word is also that they may lose a couple of commuter routes to the North West and North East to Rail North).

 

[David Barrett]

So there are a lot of grey areas...and even though the route may be classed as Intercity...the rolling stock isn't always. For the general public...I think the term 'Intercity' has faded away. These days, around the West Midlands, people I know refer going to London on the Virgin Train. But that's just based on what I hear in converstaion!

I think that you have raised a good point here. Inter City was more of a brand than anything else and although there was an Inter City Sector in later B.R. Years with its' own management, for much of the time this was not the case.

As you say about Virgin in the West Midlands, some hereabout still refer to G.N.E.R. although East Coast has started to be spoken of more often.

Inter City seems to be a fading memory in 2013; even the Network Rail Timetable Map no longer identifies I/C or Principal Services as was once the case.

 

[AlexS]

I've always felt that Intercity stands for the quickest route between 2 cities. So the Virgin service from Birmingham to London I see as Intercity...but the London Midland service I don't. However, I'm not sure about Chiltern! It wasn't an intercity line during British Rail days but has seen improvements since

So there are a lot of grey areas...and even though the route may be classed as Intercity...the rolling stock isn't always. For the general public...I think the term 'Intercity' has faded away. These days, around the West Midlands, people I know refer going to London on the Virgin Train. But that's just based on what I hear in converstaion!

Although of course the Chiltern line (or parts of it!) was where 'InterCity' began with the 0900 Paddington to Wolverhampton - 'The Inter-City' named express train! Somewhat ironic that Chiltern are now making it a mainline again after BR ran it right down.

 

[1e10]

For me an InterCity service will stop at principle stations on a long distance journey between multiple cities.

 

[jon0844]

For me, it will be a train that skips most stops on a 'major' line for most of the way, joining major cities together - and possibly stopping at major interchanges to connect to local, or even other Intercity, services.

The train will be set up in an Intercity/long distance style, most likely have a buffet (or perhaps vending machines in the future) and/or trolley, power points, Wi-Fi (sure, future trains will have this even on commuter all-stopper services) and much more room in first class - with free tea/coffee/water and maybe some food.

It will probably be a lot faster too, and more expensive.

Other services will be cheaper and offer a more affordable alternative.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

For me an InterCity service will stop at principle stations on a long distance journey between multiple cities.

That makes Norwich-Liverpool, Manchester-Newcastle, Manchester-Cardiff and Glasgow-Aberdeen InterCity.
One criterion not mentioned that I would use is a long non-stop leg somewhere, which changes the character of the service (ie pick-up/pick-up/cruise/set-down/set-down).
WC and EC clearly qualify on this basis, GW, XC and EMT seem marginal and nothing much else comes near.
Inter-regional seems a better label for services with more frequent stops.

Sheer speed can't come into it as HS1 domestic services are definitely not InterCity despite reaching 140mph.

 

[WatcherZero]

How about as opposed to inter-regional which link neighbouring regions an Intercity service links distant parts of the country.

 

[Deerfold]

How about as opposed to inter-regional which link neighbouring regions an Intercity service links distant parts of the country.

Like Liverpool and Norwich or Crewe and London (LM)?

 

[yorksrob]

I think that for me, the term InterCity nowadays would encompass two things:

Long distance express services.

A certain level of facilities in terms of first class and buffet provision.

Of course, it‘s not always clear cut. Even in BR days, certain NSE express services felt more "InterCity" than the Gatwick Express, which didn't go very far, even though it had modern Mk2 rolling stock and was part of the InterCity sector.

That said, when I see long distance express trains today without a buffet car, it seems like a decline from InterCity standards.

 

[tbtc]

Gatwick Express

That's an interesting example - there was nothing particularly "InterCity" about the 73s and Mk2s (?) or about the 460s IIRC - but the route that they operated on was an "InterCity" one (arguments about the size of Gatwick and its lack of "city" status notwithstanding!).

So, is it more about the type of service than the type of stock? Would a 100mph 170 on a long distance route with few stops (i.e. London to Hull/ Norwich) be InterCity whilst a 125mph 222 on a shorter route with regular stops (i.e. London to Corby) not be InterCity?

 

[cle]

Well if using the old brand (with the arrows through the station dot on the map, or Swan) then Corby would be. And I remember Gatwick Express was too. Perhaps because of the loco stock.

But then plenty of SWML routes were loco-hauled but in Network Southeast colours.

London - Norwich being intercity is mainly due to using old stock. It doesn't need to be at all, and in future won't be. Norwich is hardly a huge place, even though it serves a huge area. The Weymouth mainline qualifies more I'd say in terms of places served, but yes as someone mentioned the stopping patterns on the coast get a bit 'local'.

Norwich - Liverpool is not intercity either. I think the XC Voyager routes are the only ones which could be described so. Manchester - Scotland on TPE isn't, and I don't think 350s will change that. If so, then many other routes could be. I think we have to accept that Manchester-Scotland has become a regional route.

Therefore, an intercity route serves either a London terminal, or Birmingham New St? Discuss...

 

[yorksrob]

That's an interesting example - there was nothing particularly "InterCity" about the 73s and Mk2s (?) or about the 460s IIRC - but the route that they operated on was an "InterCity" one (arguments about the size of Gatwick and its lack of "city" status notwithstanding!).

So, is it more about the type of service than the type of stock? Would a 100mph 170 on a long distance route with few stops (i.e. London to Hull/ Norwich) be InterCity whilst a 125mph 222 on a shorter route with regular stops (i.e. London to Corby) not be InterCity?

Well to me, both of those would fit the InterCity criteria. They both count as long distance expresses (I'm assuming the 222 is off to either Sheffield or Nottingham) and both are built to have the requisite services. The only spanner in the works would be EMT's policy of replacing buffet car's with trolley's, which would detract from the InterCity standard.

 

[harz99]

For me an InterCity service will stop at principle stations on a long distance journey between multiple cities.

If I may add a few words and alter one of your opinion.

For me an InterCity service will stop at principal stations on a long distance main line journey between major cities.

In essence any working for the most part completed on ECML, WCML, GWML or MML.

 

[Deerfold]

I'm hoping they'd call at principal stations.

 

[bnm]

InterCity to me means, from London:

GWML to South/West Wales and West/South West England.
ECML to Leeds, York, Newcastle and Scotland.
WCML to Birmingham, North Wales, Manchester, Liverpool and Scotland.
MML to Nottingham and Sheffield.

Long distance CrossCountry routes from South/South West to North East/North West/Scotland.

And at a push:

SWML to Weymouth.
WoEML to Exeter.
GEML to Norwich.

 

[yorksrob]

London - Norwich being intercity is mainly due to using old stock. It doesn't need to be at all, and in future won't be. Norwich is hardly a huge place, even though it serves a huge area. The Weymouth mainline qualifies more I'd say in terms of places served, but yes as someone mentioned the stopping patterns on the coast get a bit 'local'.

I'm inclined to think that London - Norwich should be considered InterCity. It‘s a long distance express linking the main regional centres, and the combination of commuters and long distance travellers justifies an InterCity provision of first class and catering.

Of course, I see your point regarding the SWML, and whilst I‘m NSE born and bred, and therefore wouldn‘t have liked the idea of handing it‘s flagship service over to another sector, I can see the logic of the route being considered worthy of an InterCity level of service.

 

[ATW Alex 101]

Well you would have thought the term "Intercity" or however you want to say it, means between two or more cities. But in railway terms you think of those big trains and TOC's like Virgin and Cross-Country as they go long distance, but look at certain routes like Manchester-Leeds, Leeds-York via Poppleton, Liverpool-Norwich via cities Manchester, Sheffield, Nottingham, Peterborough and Ely. They are not long distance trains and the companies that run them (Northern, East Midlands), they are not really Intercity operators, although EMT is dubious for their London runs.

To conclude, for me an intercity train is well...any train running between two or more cities (of course you are allowed to disagree) so regardless of what rolling stock is diagrammed to run it be it a pacer, HST, 220/1/2, 158, 150, all which run on what I define as an "Intercity" service. So yes, a pacer running from Manchester Victoria to Leeds is an "Intercity" service, as is a HST running from London to Bristol.

 

[43074]

I think InterCity trains are express passenger trains that link major towns and cities using rolling stock of a certain quality to provide fast and frequent services between them.

So with this in mind, operators such as Cross Country, Virgin Trains, First Transpennine Express and East Coast are InterCity TOCs. I would also extend InterCity importance to Greater Anglia's London to Norwich, East Midlands Trains' London to Nottingham and Sheffield services and most of First Great Western's High Speed services.

 

[Goatboy]

Express passenger trains linking large population centres and covering large distances.

This means that yes, no matter how much we dislike them, Voyagers are Intercity trains (Which is probably why people dislike them).

 

[Qwerty133]

in my opinion to be inter city;
trains should have sockets and wifi, be capable of at least 110mph and not have corridor connections. Standard class should be in 2+2 (or 2+1) and first in 2+1. seats should either be at tables or have seat back tables. a passenger info system should be fitted that include internal and external screens to display all messages and announcements should be preceded by a Loud bell or chime. seats should be high backed and have movable arm rests and internal and external doors should be opened with a button.
services should have gaps of at least 50-60 between some stops and should be at least 90mins in length with periods of 100mph+ running and have some catering, preferably but not nescasserily static. there should be complementary refreshments in first class.

 

[starrymarkb]

Intercity certainly isn't local hauled. I mean after all DEMUs have been operating on flagship intercity routes for almost 40 years.

Looking abroad NS use the same ropy deckers (I can't remember the designation - they are now being done up though) on services advertised as intercity and regional. And then you have DB's ICE EMUs (both with Powerheads and Distributed Traction)

[puts the can of worms down with the tin opener]

 

[Deerfold]

Intercity certainly isn't local hauled.

No, they're long distance hauled

 

[starrymarkb]

No, they're long distance hauled

I can't even blame that one on the mead!

 

[1e10]

For me an InterCity service will stop at principle stations on a long distance journey between multiple cities.

Would like to add that I wouldn't regard any pacer or sprinter service as an InterCity service regardless of how many cities it passed through

 

[starrymarkb]

Would like to add that I wouldn't regard any pacer or sprinter service as an InterCity service regardless of how many cities it passed through

I'd say something like a 159 is up to Intercity standard. They were built to a fairly high comfort standard and in the case of SWT their refurbs have kept them decent. For example a 159 has the same seating in First as EC and FGW, standard is comfortable if a little tight on legroom (then so are XC and EC standard seats)