Cross Country should abolish first class until capacity issues are addressed

[800Travel]

That really shouldn't need to be a long term consideration.

I hope not - but I only recently started needing to frequently travel by train and it's often been a consideration I've had to make so is at the forefront of my mind with any timetable changes. I do hope it gets sorted and these strikes can be a thing of the past, but from what I've gathered the government is refusing to meet with Aslef. I'll not say any more on the matter so as to not derail the thread but;

TLDR, I hope strikes don't need to be a long term consideration.

(For Mods - TLDR = Too Long Didn't Read)

 

[AlastairFraser]

ECML upper half for sure

Edit - for mods - ECML = East Coast Mainline

Why would people take XC as opposed to TPE (should they run!) or LNER though?

 

[357]

we can’t magic trains out of anywhere soon

There are four ex EMR 180s available

 

[800Travel]

Why would people take XC as opposed to TPE (should they run!) or LNER though?

It’s a timings thing. Train delays may make the XC service sooner than the intended LNER/TPE. Or the XC time may be more convenient to people than the TPE or LNER time. While personally I avoid XC where possible, others don’t and I’ve often had to catch XC when my intended train was disrupted or I was late.

 

[TrainBoy98]

There are four ex EMR 180s available

Great solution - then the service will be cancelled instead of being overcrowded

 

[Egg Centric]

I think realistically most people would prefer to put up with the bouncing and swaying ride of a coach plus the minor annoyance of a seatbelt rather than not being able to board the train on CrossCountry because there are simply too many people standing. @dk1 just has a strong personal dislike of coaches!

Not so sure. Most (I appreciate not all) people outside of London have cars. A train has many blatant advantages over a car. I can't think of a single non contrived one a coach has except for the ability to carry you around if you're pissed. If my only feasible public transport option is a coach I will drive.

Can't prove it but I think people who think like @dk1 and I about coaches are probably the majority. Would be good to get actual stats though.

 

[Killingworth]

Not so sure. Most (I appreciate not all) people outside of London have cars. A train has many blatant advantages over a car. I can't think of a single non contrived one a coach has except for the ability to carry you around if you're pissed. If my only feasible public transport option is a coach I will drive.

Can't prove it but I think people who think like @dk1 and I about coaches are probably the majority. Would be good to get actual stats though.

I'm very clear both where I can catch a train and where it will drop me. I'm not with bus/coaches.

 

[Starmill]

I can't think of a single non contrived one a coach has except for the ability to carry you around if you're pissed.

Is this not obvious? They're usually cheaper than the marginal cost of using a car. They connect towns which lack a convenient nearby railway station to railhead to. They offer direct services to the Airports which rail doesn't. They can more easily offer late evening and night time services than the railway as any road closures are so much easier to divert around.

 

[Egg Centric]

Is this not obvious? They're usually cheaper than the marginal cost of using a car. They connect towns which lack a convenient nearby railway station to railhead to. They offer direct services to the Airports which rail doesn't. They can more easily offer late evening and night time services than the railway as any road closures are so much easier to divert around.

Only one of those is a car/coach comparison and I'm not sure it's true. Certainly not for multiple passengers.

 

[AdamWW]

Only one of those is a car/coach comparison and I'm not sure it's true. Certainly not for multiple passengers.

Coaches neatly combine disadvantages of trains (fixed schedule and route, price per passenger not per carload etc.) with those of cars (congestion, lower speeds, have to wear a seatbelt etc.).

You don't have to drive them though.

I didn't mind too much my hour moving at (literally!) walking pace through congestion in Birmingham recently on a coach as I could just get on with stuff on my laptop. Having to drive a car through it would I think have been a bit less pleasant.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Is this not obvious? They're usually cheaper than the marginal cost of using a car. They connect towns which lack a convenient nearby railway station to railhead to. They offer direct services to the Airports which rail doesn't. They can more easily offer late evening and night time services than the railway as any road closures are so much easier to divert around.

Cheaper depending on which firm. National Express can be steep even in advance.
I agree with the unsocial hours services point, but they are a significantly less desirable experience than the experience on most TOCs.
Cross Country's current state being the exception, since a good chunk of their network compensates for the lack of investment in intercity cross country options on many routes.

 

[Egg Centric]

I didn't mind too much my hour moving at (literally!) walking pace through congestion in Birmingham recently on a coach as I could just get on with stuff on my laptop. Having to drive a car through it would I think have been a bit less pleasant.

I like driving though. I'd drive the train too if they'd let me!

Still I accept that is one small advantage they have over cars.

 

[AdamWW]

I like driving though. I'd drive the train too if they'd let me!

If you'd enjoy a hour of crawling along in barely moving traffic I think that makes you quite unusual.

Still I accept that is one small advantage they have over cars.

Of course for those who don't or can't drive, it's a bigger advantage!

 

[Starmill]

Cheaper depending on which firm. National Express can be steep even in advance.
I agree with the unsocial hours services point, but they are a significantly less desirable experience than the experience on most TOCs.
Cross Country's current state being the exception, since a good chunk of their network compensates for the lack of investment in intercity cross country options on many routes.

NX can be costly of course, but only where one of the other criteria apply. For example their dedicated Festival services are almost always more expensive than a car share or train + car share. Glastonbury Festival services usually cost more than the train to Castle Cary plus festival bus etc. Same for Airports, Birmingham - Heathrow Airport or Gatwick Airport often costs more than to London Victoria. NX are very costly on rail strike days or if you try to pay onboard also, and sometimes they cost more than trains for short hops lile Birmingham - Coventry because they don't really want people booking that (sometimes they split up their schedules to prohibit short hops).

Only one of those is a car/coach comparison and I'm not sure it's true. Certainly not for multiple passengers.

Yes but nobody else said anything about a car v coach comparison did they? That's just what you want to talk about.

 

[Topological]

Of course should anyone be massively inconvenienced by CrossCountry being split to have EMU operation under the wires Birmingham-Manchester and York-Newcastle-Edinburgh-Glasgow then they could of course use a coach. I suspect that such splits would not put people off.

Nor would I imagine the fact that the likely spare EMU are 350/2 would put many off.

If the use of EMUs made it possible to run double Voyager on the rest of the network then that would surely be a good thing?

 

[800Travel]

Of course should anyone be massively inconvenienced by CrossCountry being split to have EMU operation under the wires Birmingham-Manchester and York-Newcastle-Edinburgh-Glasgow then they could of course use a coach. I suspect that such splits would not put people off.

Nor would I imagine the fact that the likely spare EMU are 350/2 would put many off.

If the use of EMUs made it possible to run double Voyager on the rest of the network then that would surely be a good thing?

Don’t like the idea of 3 + 2 seating tbh

 

[TrainBoy98]

Don’t like the idea of 3 + 2 seating tbh

Rather 3+2 seats than no seat imo

 

[Starmill]

Of course should anyone be massively inconvenienced by CrossCountry being split to have EMU operation under the wires Birmingham-Manchester and York-Newcastle-Edinburgh-Glasgow then they could of course use a coach. I suspect that such splits would not put people off.

Nor would I imagine the fact that the likely spare EMU are 350/2 would put many off.

If the use of EMUs made it possible to run double Voyager on the rest of the network then that would surely be a good thing?

As ever the difficulty is finding an appropriate place for an eight car EMU the service from Manchester to layover at Birmingham New Street / Birmingham International / Coventry. If TfW had gone ahead with their move to Coventry maybe it would've been easier to find space at Birmingham International.

 

[Egg Centric]

Yes but nobody else said anything about a car v coach comparison did they? That's just what you want to talk about.

But you were replying to me so what matters is what I said

The car v coach comparison is relevant when you compare train to coach, because in reality most people are comparing train to car to coach (and perhaps to plane/ship as well) on the majority of journeys. Some theoretical journey where a coach is better for me than the train it's almost certain a car will be better for me than the coach. And I think but cannot be sure (hence would like data) that applies to most others.

 

[Topological]

As ever the difficulty is finding an appropriate place for an eight car EMU the service from Manchester to layover at Birmingham New Street / Birmingham International / Coventry. If TfW had gone ahead with their move to Coventry maybe it would've been easier to find space at Birmingham International.

True, whilst New Street has coped with having platforms closed for work the gaps were created at a cost of some local services so we cannot just assume that when the work finishes there must be 2 spare platforms available. Whether 1 could be found though...

There have been threads where it has been worked out whether there are ways to diagram things so this could work. It is tight because it also relies on the newly doubled voyagers having platforms. Particularly those that used to go to Manchester from Bristol / Bournemouth.

I think the York swap is easier to work out.

 

[azOOOOOma]

Would it not make better sense to get rid of couple of accessible toilets and just have one for first and one for the far end of standard so they’re close to wheelchair spaces? Better still could the standard wheelchair space be moved to the read of coach B so only one accessible toilet is needed for wheelchair users in both classes of travel and then convert the rest to small airplane style bogs and sticking a few extra seats in the spare space? It would cost a bit and cause a bit of downtime for the refit but we all know they’ll be around for at least a decade so it would pay for itself.

First class is needed on such a long haul train service IMHO.

Laura x

 

[Starmill]

But you were replying to me so what matters is what I said

No, it doesn't. This thread is about XC, and I was drawing a comparison with someone's experience with a coach vs an XC train.

Your desire to be a reply guy (i.e. trying to make yourself sound good by going "but actually" and adding something that's not related) doesn't change that.

True, whilst New Street has coped with having platforms closed for work the gaps were created at a cost of some local services so we cannot just assume that when the work finishes there must be 2 spare platforms available. Whether 1 could be found though...

There have been threads where it has been worked out whether there are ways to diagram things so this could work. It is tight because it also relies on the newly doubled voyagers having platforms. Particularly those that used to go to Manchester from Bristol / Bournemouth.

I think the York swap is easier to work out.

You'd need two platforms if you still wanted to run the service from Bournemouth through to Birmingham, unless you wanted to cut turnaround time to the bone (5 minutes after a journey over 3 hours isn't ideal).

 

[Egg Centric]

You'd need two platforms if you still wanted to run the service from Bournemouth through to Birmingham, unless you wanted to cut turnaround time to the bone (5 minutes after a journey over 3 hours isn't ideal).

You forgot to prefix this with "But actually"

 

[AlastairFraser]

NX can be costly of course, but only where one of the other criteria apply. For example their dedicated Festival services are almost always more expensive than a car share or train + car share. Glastonbury Festival services usually cost more than the train to Castle Cary plus festival bus etc. Same for Airports, Birmingham - Heathrow Airport or Gatwick Airport often costs more than to London Victoria. NX are very costly on rail strike days or if you try to pay onboard also, and sometimes they cost more than trains for short hops lile Birmingham - Coventry because they don't really want people booking that (sometimes they split up their schedules to prohibit short hops).

Hmm, it depends.
Their night services often aren't cheap (I think I paid £35 each way Preston to Edinburgh booking weeks in advance, while the train fare can be way, way less with advances).
You only get a certain amount of free luggage, before they make you pay (although I've never seen this happen before).

 

[Starmill]

You forgot to prefix this with "But actually"

Go find a different thread to bother people on.

Hmm, it depends.
Their night services often aren't cheap (I think I paid £35 each way Preston to Edinburgh booking weeks in advance, while the train fare can be way, way less with advances).
You only get a certain amount of free luggage, before they make you pay (although I've never seen this happen before).

Yes, the overnights are usually not cheap because they have arrival times which a train cannot achieve.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Yes, the overnights are usually not cheap because they have arrival times which a train cannot achieve.

It's poor value for money compared to the train though.

 

[Starmill]

It's poor value for money compared to the train though.

It is if there's a train which fits your timings yes. But that's the point.

 

[AlastairFraser]

It is if there's a train which fits your timings yes. But that's the point.

Time to bring back cheap all seated night trains, perhaps.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Time to bring back cheap all seated night trains, perhaps.

There's not really the demand. Even all the London-Scotland overnight coaches together would barely fill a Pacer, and it's a rock bottom budget market only, as Stagecoach discovered with the sleeper Megabuses.

 

[AlastairFraser]

There's not really the demand. Even all the London-Scotland overnight coaches together would barely fill a Pacer, and it's a rock bottom budget market only, as Stagecoach discovered with the sleeper Megabuses.

Not neccesarily. As I said, it's around £20 to £30 for a journey of under 100 miles on National Express.
A rake of 5 MK4s from the SW - Birmingham - Sheffield - ECML - Edinburgh - Glasgow would encompass a lot of NatEx overnight routes, and you've usually got 50 to 60 people per coach.