Cross Country HST withdrawals?

[CBlue]

I’m not sure I remember any government in recent times giving rolling stock policy for public discussion!

Quite. Then again some of the posters on here do seem to love a good conspiracy theory.

The suggestion appears to be that there is a moustache twirling villain somewhere in a DfT office, cackling to himself in a manical manner about how much withdrawing HST's from service will upset rail enthusiasts. The reality of course is far more boring - someone has decided that the numbers don't stack up, and with increasing age (which if you combine with obsolete parts, will cost more in maintenance terms) the withdrawal of service is a quick win to reduce costs.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I believe the plan is to get all the 9 cars onto Bristol etc route to limit the short forms to the Wofe service by making it fully 10 car again , though I might be wrong. But I can see Laira looking after predominantly 5 car sets so it will inevitably lead to a return of 10s instead of 9s to the far south west , freeing up the more popular 9 car sets for where the directors etc actually travel (to and from Swindon on the Swansea and Bristol routes). Its funny that whenever you get into conversation with staff / management about the fleet make up, no one ever says they prefer the 10 car set up over a 9 car set

You believe totally wrong, there are no plans to remove the current allocations of 9 car sets from the West of England route. There will be the same number of 9 car workings in May 23 as in May 22. You appear to have a real chip on your shoulder, why would GWR focus short forms in the summer on its Seasonally Busy Leisure route.

Once you’ve got over your chip, here’s some facts, there are 19 class 802 5 cars diagrammed for traffic, of this 19 diagrams 13 are needed to replace HST, leaving 6 which effectively cover the workings to Newquay on weekdays which split at Plymouth.

Where do you think all the other 5 car 802s are going to miraculously appear from?

On the route through Swindon the 9 car 800s will be focussed on the Bristol and Weston services with 5 car working the Swansea services as 10 car formations allowing the 5 cars to portion work to Carmarthen. The cl800 5 cars will be covering those South Wales workings and North and South Cotswolds, they do not have booked work beyond Exeter.

For reference on a Weekday in the May 23 timetable this is what the system shows for departures from Paddington to beyond Exeter.

06.00 PNZ 9
07.04 PGN 9
08.04 PNZ 9
09.04 NQY 10 (splits PLY)
09.37 PGN 9
10.04 PNZ 9
11.04 PLY 9
12.04 PNZ 9
13.04 PLY 10
14.04 PNZ 9
14.37 PGN 9
15.04 PNZ 9
16.04 PNZ 9
16.36 PLY 10 (splits EXD)
17.04 PNZ 10 (splits PLY)
17.36 PLY 5
18.04 PNZ 9
18.36 PLY 9
19.04 PLY 9
20.04 PLY 9
21.04 PLY 10

This hardly makes the West of Englands all 10 cars.

But the shed roads where power car maintenance is done will be too short to fit even a 5 car 802 won't they? Admittedly I'm going off memory, but I reckon the power car maintenance shed roads can only hold about 5 power cars each, so those roads will just be redundant now. There is space to maintain a smallish fleet of HSTs at Laira in my view IF there was a will to do so. Which sadly there isn't. There is in Scotland, which proves spare parts etc must be available, its just you are only allowed them if you are Scottish and not English. Its all way too political for my liking.


I believe the plan is to get all the 9 cars onto Bristol etc route to limit the short forms to the Wofe service by making it fully 10 car again , though I might be wrong. But I can see Laira looking after predominantly 5 car sets so it will inevitably lead to a return of 10s instead of 9s to the far south west , freeing up the more popular 9 car sets for where the directors etc actually travel (to and from Swindon on the Swansea and Bristol routes). Its funny that whenever you get into conversation with staff / management about the fleet make up, no one ever says they prefer the 10 car set up over a 9 car set
....


Interesting, in what way? No one and I mean no one at any depot I'm aware of has "signed off" HSTs yet. So drivers and guards all still competent. Similarly on XC side they continue to train drivers on HSTs as we speak!!! There is currently Plymouth drivers on a course.

Nobody has ‘signed off’ HSTs yet but at Bristol no new people have started learning HSTs instead learning 80x. That means there are now some drivers booked for Cardiff - Penzance workings especially at the Cardiff end who sign 80x but not HST.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

You believe totally wrong, there are no plans to remove the current allocations of 9 car sets from the West of England route. There will be the same number of 9 car workings in May 23 as in May 22. You appear to have a real chip on your shoulder, why would GWR focus short forms in the summer on its Seasonally Busy Leisure route.

Once you’ve got over your chip, here’s some facts, there are 19 class 802 5 cars diagrammed for traffic, of this 19 diagrams 13 are needed to replace HST, leaving 6 which effectively cover the workings to Newquay on weekdays which split at Plymouth.

Where do you think all the other 5 car 802s are going to miraculously appear from?

On the route through Swindon the 9 car 800s will be focussed on the Bristol and Weston services with 5 car working the Swansea services as 10 car formations allowing the 5 cars to portion work to Carmarthen. The cl800 5 cars will be covering those South Wales workings and North and South Cotswolds, they do not have booked work beyond Exeter.

For reference on a Weekday in the May 23 timetable this is what the system shows for departures from Paddington to beyond Exeter.

06.00 PNZ 9
07.04 PGN 9
08.04 PNZ 9
09.04 NQY 10 (splits PLY)
09.37 PGN 9
10.04 PNZ 9
11.04 PLY 9
12.04 PNZ 9
13.04 PLY 10
14.04 PNZ 9
14.37 PGN 9
15.04 PNZ 9
16.04 PNZ 9
16.36 PLY 10 (splits EXD)
17.04 PNZ 10 (splits PLY)
17.36 PLY 5
18.04 PNZ 9
18.36 PLY 9
19.04 PLY 9
20.04 PLY 9
21.04 PLY 10

Where can I find the booked number of coaches for future allocations?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Where can I find the booked number of coaches for future allocations?

I’m afraid it’s internal industry systems.

 

[spotify95]

See the comments about restarting a supply chain.

Then add in training for engineering staff at a depot which will have lapsed competency as it’s been some time since they were maintained - you’d be surprised how quickly with staff turn over knowledge goes.

Then retrain traincrew at GC on HSTs and you’ll see how complex it is. If GC wants some extra stock they’d do better taking on the ex EMR 180s.

HSTs have served the railway very well but the industry as a whole now accepts their time is up.



OK here’s the real reason, 802 maintenance wasn’t previously done at Laira it now will be! I explained this in a post above, it’s quite simple. By increasing the amount of 802 exams at Laira the fleet availability can be changed to reduce the current amount of downtime of 802s at North Pole

I thought that EMR were keeping the five 180s to run alongside their 810s, in case there weren't enough 810s.
The 222s are definitely going.
IMO Crosscountry should get EMRs 222s at the end of this year when we get 810s, which would help CrossCountry's capacity issues and allow them to scrap the HSTs. But - having said that - why the hell did CrossCountry modify the HSTs to be PRM compliant if their plan was to scrap them?!

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I thought that EMR were keeping the five 180s to run alongside their 810s, in case there weren't enough 810s.
The 222s are definitely going.
IMO Crosscountry should get EMRs 222s at the end of this year when we get 810s, which would help CrossCountry's capacity issues and allow them to scrap the HSTs. But - having said that - why the hell did CrossCountry modify the HSTs to be PRM compliant if their plan was to scrap them?!

The 180s finish in May 23 on EMR - see posts on this forum. There are some service reductions to facilitate this.

The PRM works were done on the HSTs prior to covid so have been running in that modified form for now. The HSTs were always going to be scrapped at some point anyway!

 

[AndrewE]

Really??? So why is there a lot of overcrowding reports? Sorry but I don't think they're gonna manage - they should have kept them going till a suitable replacement can be found!

Perhaps the ridership figures are massaged down in a similar way to the "cancellation" statistics? I can't believe that there is any justification for the fleet reductions - other than cost savings regardless of overcrowding. Typical accountant-driven retrenchment, if you ask me.

Anyone care to ask their MP how this capacity reduction squares with their carbon reduction commitments?

 

[lammergeier]

The 180s finish in May 23 on EMR - see posts on this forum. There are some service reductions to facilitate this.

The PRM works were done on the HSTs prior to covid so have been running in that modified form for now. The HSTs were always going to be scrapped at some point anyway!

I think the confusion lies in the fact that until very recently the rakes were going through C6 to give them a few more years service, in fact a couple have been done already. This has now stopped I believe.

Quite. Then again some of the posters on here do seem to love a good conspiracy theory.

The suggestion appears to be that there is a moustache twirling villain somewhere in a DfT office, cackling to himself in a manical manner about how much withdrawing HST's from service will upset rail enthusiasts. The reality of course is far more boring - someone has decided that the numbers don't stack up, and with increasing age (which if you combine with obsolete parts, will cost more in maintenance terms) the withdrawal of service is a quick win to reduce costs.

We don't need to concern ourselves with how upset enthusiasts are, and I actually think that's a straw man argument. The real concern surrounds passengers who will now have to put up with even more overcrowding (and in some cases who will be unable to board) and the staff who will have to deal with it.

And until very recently the numbers did stack up - see my post about the current C6 program. It's only because cuts come first now that we have found ourselves in this position.

 

[Annetts key]

Are you mad? The Voyagers are just over 20 years old and have 15-20 years of working life left, whereas the HSTs are only fit for the scrapyard. The UK is one of the poorest countries in Western Europe (bar Portugal) and can't afford to discard usable assets.

In what way is the the fifth or sixth (depending on the way it’s counted) wealthiest country in the world one of the poorest countries in Western Europe?

I made no comment on what to do with the HSTs. As the the Voyagers, they could continue in service elsewhere after a proper refit. Maybe some of the panels that vibrate can be fixed, a better internal layout, and better seats.

To me, it’s more than just the age that matters. Other things should be taken into account as well.

Oh, and for the record, obviously I am mad…

Because, it maybe a case that on that service GWR have analysed that all is required is the 326 seat class 800/0 when it comes to passenger numbers. But it also depends where you are travelling from as well.

Not always the same time train. And it was obviously supposed to be a longer train, as the guard/train manager keeps saying sorry that there are no seat reservations due to a different train being used.

 

[irish_rail]

You believe totally wrong, there are no plans to remove the current allocations of 9 car sets from the West of England route. There will be the same number of 9 car workings in May 23 as in May 22. You appear to have a real chip on your shoulder, why would GWR focus short forms in the summer on its Seasonally Busy Leisure route.

Once you’ve got over your chip, here’s some facts, there are 19 class 802 5 cars diagrammed for traffic, of this 19 diagrams 13 are needed to replace HST, leaving 6 which effectively cover the workings to Newquay on weekdays which split at Plymouth.

Where do you think all the other 5 car 802s are going to miraculously appear from?

On the route through Swindon the 9 car 800s will be focussed on the Bristol and Weston services with 5 car working the Swansea services as 10 car formations allowing the 5 cars to portion work to Carmarthen. The cl800 5 cars will be covering those South Wales workings and North and South Cotswolds, they do not have booked work beyond Exeter.

For reference on a Weekday in the May 23 timetable this is what the system shows for departures from Paddington to beyond Exeter.

06.00 PNZ 9
07.04 PGN 9
08.04 PNZ 9
09.04 NQY 10 (splits PLY)
09.37 PGN 9
10.04 PNZ 9
11.04 PLY 9
12.04 PNZ 9
13.04 PLY 10
14.04 PNZ 9
14.37 PGN 9
15.04 PNZ 9
16.04 PNZ 9
16.36 PLY 10 (splits EXD)
17.04 PNZ 10 (splits PLY)
17.36 PLY 5
18.04 PNZ 9
18.36 PLY 9
19.04 PLY 9
20.04 PLY 9
21.04 PLY 10

This hardly makes the West of Englands all 10 cars.



Nobody has ‘signed off’ HSTs yet but at Bristol no new people have started learning HSTs instead learning 80x. That means there are now some drivers booked for Cardiff - Penzance workings especially at the Cardiff end who sign 80x but not HST.

Firstly, thanks for the breakdown of may 2023 services. It seems a slight increase in 9 car workings to the south west compared with now. Thats good news. For the record, I don't have a "chip" on my shoulder, I just care passionately about the services I work and without wanting to sound too cringingly "company" , I do care about the customers who pay my wages. Maybe I care too much.

 

[Trainbike46]

It has been explained numerous times that GWR have spare 5-car 80x which are sufficient to replace the HSTs once staff training is complete.

It appears that there are more issues than the forum appreciates about how easy it is for CrossCountry to increase its fleet of 22x units.

From all I have read about it the issue can be summarised as: "the DfT/Treasury/government is not willing to pay for XC to take on the ex-avanti class 221s", there are some things that would need handling (including but not limited to bringing software in line with XC 221s, and removing tilt from the ex-avanti ones), however, from the more informed members on the forum it sounds like all those are fixable, and relatively cheaply. But if the DfT won't allow XC to agree a lease, then that won't be happening.

I do actually agree that withdrawing the HSTs from XC (and GWR) is a sensible decision, and I think the decision to use IETs instead on GWR makes perfect sense. Just removing the capacity from XC without replacement, expecially when alternative units that would still save money are available, is not something I support

 

[Doctor Fegg]

For instance, times when I have travelled both too and from Hereford or Great Malvern, when in the past these have been HST service especially of a Saturday morning before 9am, you would be lucky if the first four coaches where full of passengers of an 8 coach train. Likewise the same was true travelling in the afternoon from Great Malvern to Reading.

The above was back in 2017, so was pre - covid. I would expect the numbers even though it is now almost 3 years since Covid struck, still to be lower than 2017 where an HST was used, you could have used just a three car class 166 plus a two car 165 on the services mentioned above with still enough seats for all passengers on the train.

My experience as someone who lives and regularly travels on the Cotswold Line is that leisure travel is significantly up on pre-Covid times.

 

[Peterthegreat]

Although additional (to the current service) trains are shown in RTT is there any confirmation these will actually run?

 

[bramling]

My experience as someone who lives and regularly travels on the Cotswold Line is that leisure travel is significantly up on pre-Covid times.

The Cotswold line certainly can be quiet at times. In HST days it wasn’t difficult to have a carriage to yourself for the whole journey west of Oxford at certain times, and I even had this on 180s as well. Same on some Cheltenham services. Not across the board by any means, but definitely possible at certain off-peak times especially on weekdays. Whether patterns have changed since 2019 I couldn’t comment. What did always seem to happen was the train would be packed between Oxford and London, indeed surprising just how much demand there is for that journey pretty much at any time.

I do struggle to think of any occasion I’ve had a carriage to myself west of Plymouth though. No doubt certain services at the extremes of the day may offer this, but I’ve never seen it during the day.

 

[Rhydgaled]

In an ideal world(*) [snip]

(*Excluding XC ordering 9 coach bimodal stock)

In an ideal world, the only new bi-modal stock XC would be ordering would be regional express units for the Birmingham-Stansted route (and possibly Cardiff-Nottingham). Bristol-York and Basingstoke-Birminghm (at least) would be being electrified, as would the GWML to Swansea and Bristol (with class 800s releasedfrom these to cascade to XC once those wires are up) and XC would have pure EMUs (with both 3rd rail and OHLE capability) on-order for Manchester-Bournemouth. Nobody should be building 125mph bi-modes after the 810s/805s since most of the routes the 80x fleets currently work should be being wired which would make plenty of bi-modes available for cascade elsewhere.

The IC125 trains are now 40+ years old and well past their sell-by date; they are ready for the scrapyard.

My own view, FWIW, is that withdrawing the HSTs is defensible, however they should certainly be being replaced with something else.

Yes, the IC125s are old - however they have recently had a large amount spent on them fitting power doors and (at least in XC's case) there is no 'something else' available right now to replace them. If there had been a rational plan in the noughties and 2010s for electrification, cascades and PRM compliance (and it had been implemented smoothly and successfully) then withdrawing the XC IC125s (before hacking them about to fit power doors) alongside those out of Paddington and Kings Cross would have been defensible, even sensible.

Of course, we didn't have the necessary electrification etc. in the 2010s, but withdrawing the XC IC125s might be defensible again once the following 3 criteria are met:

1. the Avanti class 805 and class 807 trains have been fully introduced and all Avanti's class 221s have been made available to XC,
2. the EMR class 810 fleet has been fully introduced and all the class 222s have been made available to XC and
3. a satisfactory period of use has been had from the power doors on the mark 3 coaches

I don't expect these critera to be met in full before 2025, but I may be mistaken.

It is preferable to concentrate on enhancing and developing services to/from London, which as the capital city generates the most demand for rail services, as distinct from secondary cross-country routes.

I disagree. One of the arguments for improved transport links (like HS2) is that they encourage businesses to locate in well-served cities. However, this increases demand meaning more capacity is needed - this isn't too much of a problem on secondary routes where you can increase capacity through upgraded signalling etc. but once you need parallel routes (such as HS2) we would be better off encouraging businesses to locate elsewhere rather than making these corridors even busier. London is plenty big enough - so let's encourage businesses to locate in regional cities by linking them to each other better (eg. upgrading Bristol-Birmingham) rather than to London.

That isn’t the issue, the issue is there’s 35 coaches being withdrawn without replacement from a route that already suffers from chronic overcrowding. If 35 replacement carriages were arriving at the same time there wouldn’t be an issue with the HSTs going.

Yes and no - the 35 replacement carriages also need to be fit for purpose (if they were comprised entirely of the toiletless cars of class 150 units that would not be suitable to fabricate an extreme example). Also, even if they were to be replaced by a larger fleet of luxury Pullman coaches, the timing of the withdrawal of the IC125s (so soon after the expense of fitting power doors) would leave an unpleasant smell in the air.

 

[Annetts key]

In an ideal world, the only new bi-modal stock XC would be ordering would be regional express units for the Birmingham-Stansted route (and possibly Cardiff-Nottingham). Bristol-York and Basingstoke-Birminghm (at least) would be being electrified, as would the GWML to Swansea and Bristol (with class 800s releasedfrom these to cascade to XC once those wires are up) and XC would have pure EMUs (with both 3rd rail and OHLE capability) on-order for Manchester-Bournemouth. Nobody should be building 125mph bi-modes after the 810s/805s since most of the routes the 80x fleets currently work should be being wired which would make plenty of bi-modes available for cascade elsewhere.

I would go slightly further with OHL electrification. For the GWML, in a currently practical ideal world (where there are limits to how much can be done), the OHL should extend from the current western limit of just west of Chippenham to just south west of Taunton station. The reason being that a reasonable number of both services to/from London Paddington originate or terminate here. Plus the Taunton to Cardiff Central services also obviously originate or terminate here. In addition, “local” services to Bristol and beyond also originate or terminate here.

That allows a very large proportion of trains using the GWML between Taunton and Bristol / Cardiff / London to be electric types.

Then the next step would be to extend the OHL from B.T.M. along the Filton lines to Stoke Gifford Junction (Bristol Parkway) and Patchway Junction. Followed by extending the OHL from Westerleigh junction towards Birmingham.

That would now make it worthwhile for XC to use cascaded 80X bi-modes. As they would be under the wires for at least a reasonable amount of time/distance. If the programme can include some other infrastructure improvements and changes, an increase in line speed between Yate and Birmingham should be possible.

The above would also significantly reduce the amount of diesel fumes in B.T.M. station. Which hopefully would extend the amount of time before the glass/polycarbonate (I’m not sure what they are fitting) roof would need cleaning or replacing. As well as greatly improving the passenger experience at B.T.M. (as well as other stations on the OHL routes), by reducing noise levels.

Next, the idea would be to further extend the OHL to Exeter St. Davids. As well as the remainder of the passenger branch lines around Bristol.

But then, I woke up and realised that as a pro-railway person, and a pro-public transport person, and someone who thinks we should take climate change seriously, this is far too logical, and never going to happen while we have such useless politicians in government.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

That isn’t the issue, the issue is there’s 35 coaches being withdrawn without replacement from a route that already suffers from chronic overcrowding. If 35 replacement carriages were arriving at the same time there wouldn’t be an issue with the HSTs going.

I’m not sure where 35 coaches come from? The XC HST fleet is actually 40 coaches (and 12 power cars). However since covid only 14 coaches have actually been diagrammed on a a daily basis so it’s a much lower number of vehicles that actually need replacing. Even pre covid the most that was actually diagrammed for traffic was 28 from 40 coaches (4 x 7 car sets).

 

[Mikey C]

The Cotswold line certainly can be quiet at times. In HST days it wasn’t difficult to have a carriage to yourself for the whole journey west of Oxford at certain times, and I even had this on 180s as well. Same on some Cheltenham services. Not across the board by any means, but definitely possible at certain off-peak times especially on weekdays. Whether patterns have changed since 2019 I couldn’t comment. What did always seem to happen was the train would be packed between Oxford and London, indeed surprising just how much demand there is for that journey pretty much at any time.

I do struggle to think of any occasion I’ve had a carriage to myself west of Plymouth though. No doubt certain services at the extremes of the day may offer this, but I’ve never seen it during the day.

The current farce of the EMUs to Oxford stopping short at Didcot does rather encourage people to use the Cotswold Line trains.

 

[Rhydgaled]

I would go slightly further with OHL electrification. For the GWML, in a currently practical ideal world (where there are limits to how much can be done), the OHL should extend from the current western limit of just west of Chippenham to just south west of Taunton station.

Good point - if it were truly an ideal world we could go even further so I guess it all comes down to how we define 'currently practical'. Right at this moment, the practical extent of GWML OHLE in December this year, when the XC IC125 fleet is expected to go, is exactly the same extent of OHLE as now. However, if we look back 50 years or so we can see that, had the right decisions been made at the relevant times, we could have had wires to Penzance (for example) by now. See the map near the end of this report from 1981 to see where the wires should have reached by 2010 (potential completion dates can be found on page 11 aka page 15 of that document).

We are, sadly, where we are - but I still think completing GWML electrification to the extent planned in GWEP (Oxford, Bristol (via Bath and via Parkway) and Swansea) by 2030 is 'currently practical' - which together with the planned MML and ScotRail electrification would result in many bi-modes running under the wires all day - plenty for a cascade to XC and no need to order anything new for 125mph services that is not a pure EMU.

That would now make it worthwhile for XC to use cascaded 80X bi-modes. As they would be under the wires for at least a reasonable amount of time/distance. If the programme can include some other infrastructure improvements and changes, an increase in line speed between Yate and Birmingham should be possible.

Even based on current plans, cascading bi-modes to XC's Voyager routes (but NOT building new ones) would be worthwhile. The following sections are either already wired (blue) or in progress/promissed (red):

• Aberdeen - Edinburgh
• Glasgow - Edinburgh - York - Doncaster
• York - Leeds
• Sheffield - Derby
• Manchester - Birmingham
• Birmingham - Coventry
• Didcot - Reading

Fill the Didcot-Coventry/Birmingham and Reading-Basingstoke gaps and they could even use pure EMUs (with 3rd rail capability) on the Manchester-Bournemouth axis. The issue is that we don't have the GWML wiring progressing to reduce GWR's requirement for them to help provide units for the cascade to XC.

 

[Annetts key]

Good point - if it were truly an ideal world we could go even further so I guess it all comes down to how we define 'currently practical'.

I know that Network Rail were doing some planning for OHL between Taunton and Bristol, back while the GWML OHL scheme was in the process of being built before it was paused. Although the Taunton to Bristol was not funded, if the GWML OHL had gone a whole lot better, then this may have been an option that may have been funded.

 

[JonathanH]

The current farce of the EMUs to Oxford stopping short at Didcot does rather encourage people to use the Cotswold Line trains.

People travelling from London or Reading to Oxford would use the Cotswold Line trains regardless. Who uses the local service to travel from London to Reading or Didcot, rather than a fast line train?

 

[DanNCL]

Yes and no - the 35 replacement carriages also need to be fit for purpose (if they were comprised entirely of the toiletless cars of class 150 units that would not be suitable to fabricate an extreme example). Also, even if they were to be replaced by a larger fleet of luxury Pullman coaches, the timing of the withdrawal of the IC125s (so soon after the expense of fitting power doors) would leave an unpleasant smell in the air.

Absolutely, no doubt that any replacements have to be suitable. I don’t know what the financial period is to make the power doors economically worth doing - the first set rolled out of Wabtec nearly 5 years ago.

I can’t help thinking a better option for PRM compliance, especially with only a few years left in service, would have been to fit internal door handles on the slam doors and seal the droplights. I seem to recall that the droplights were the issue with the slam doors and not the door handles.

I’m not sure where 35 coaches come from? The XC HST fleet is actually 40 coaches (and 12 power cars). However since covid only 14 coaches have actually been diagrammed on a a daily basis so it’s a much lower number of vehicles that actually need replacing. Even pre covid the most that was actually diagrammed for traffic was 28 from 40 coaches (4 x 7 car sets).

35 comes from 5 x 7 as there are 5 x 7 car sets. The 5 spare Mark 3s are little use on their own which is why I didn’t count them.
Any replacements for the HSTs will still need a level of spare coverage otherwise short forms would be inevitable still, logically makes sense to swap 5 x 7 car HSTs for equivalent number of vehicles, likely either 5 x 7 car 222s or 7 x 5 car 221s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The current farce of the EMUs to Oxford stopping short at Didcot does rather encourage people to use the Cotswold Line trains.

Worse than that - GWR price people *onto* the already busy Cotswold service with cheap Advances to Oxford!

 

[GoneSouth]

Worse than that - GWR price people *onto* the already busy Cotswold service with cheap Advances to Oxford!

Us XC plebs can dream of such luxury.

 

[Brubulus]

That is, unfortunately, pretty much the reality of things. One does wonder how history might have played out had May won a reasonable majority in 2017, but we are where we are.

My own view, FWIW, is that withdrawing the HSTs is defensible, however they should certainly be being replaced with something else. For GWR replacing with ex TFW 158s would be fine, and for XC either the spare 221s or 222s.

XC should consolidate the 22x fleet into units of a reasonable length, therefore delivering increased capacity and increased cost efficency for said capacity. The 222 fleet can be consolidated into 22 6 coach units. While the 221 and 220 fleet can be consolidated into 22 5 coach and 26 7 coach units. After some frequency improvements and the operation of Cardiff-Nottingham with said units, the fleet is effectively utilised providing a large increase in capacity while scrapping 70 driving cars, reducing the amount of money on the least space efficent coaches. GWR has a huge number of spare units, with improved maintenance/diagramming practises on 80x freeing up large numbers of units. However a large number of these spares are used up by the unreliability of Turbos since their westward moves. A new fleet should be ordered to replace them and the 150s imminently instead of relying on knackered 158s, especially as Thames Valley units could be BEMUs.

 

[Richard Scott]

Are you mad? The Voyagers are just over 20 years old and have 15-20 years of working life left, whereas the HSTs are only fit for the scrapyard. The UK is one of the poorest countries in Western Europe (bar Portugal) and can't afford to discard usable assets.

UK one of the poorest countries in Western Europe? Don't think so, you obviously have little experience of Western Europe.
Can we afford the fuel for Voyagers? They must cost a fortune to run. Sooner they're consigned to scrapyard the better; afraid they're a relic of a time when diesel power was seen as the easy option.

 

[jimm]

For instance, times when I have travelled both too and from Hereford or Great Malvern, when in the past these have been HST service especially of a Saturday morning before 9am, you would be lucky if the first four coaches where full of passengers of an 8 coach train. Likewise the same was true travelling in the afternoon from Great Malvern to Reading.

The above was back in 2017, so was pre - covid. I would expect the numbers even though it is now almost 3 years since Covid struck, still to be lower than 2017 where an HST was used, you could have used just a three car class 166 plus a two car 165 on the services mentioned above with still enough seats for all passengers on the train.

I've no idea when and how often you made such journeys, but you would have been lucky if you found a Saturday morning Cotswold Line HST to London before 9am that was half-empty west of Oxford. They weren't. Nine-car IETs currently operate pretty much all the early Saturday morning trains starting from Hereford or Worcester, for a reason.

Who would have though that a mid-afternoon train heading towards London would be on the quiet side until it reached the Thames Valley - those being the stops for which the long formation allocated to such services was/and still are provided - and so it could then form a peak departure back out of London.

The current farce of the EMUs to Oxford stopping short at Didcot does rather encourage people to use the Cotswold Line trains.

I hate to break it to you, but for many years the departure boards at Paddington displayed Radley as the destination of the semi-fasts, to avoid tourists and other occasional passengers taking forever to get to Oxford. In the other direction, Ealing Broadway was the destination displayed on the departure boards at Oxford for the semi-fasts.

Passengers between London and Oxford have been directed to the fast trains for many years, whether they terminate at Oxford or continue to the Cotswold Line, and vice versa.

 

[Ayman Ilham]

I hate to break it to you, but for many years the departure boards at Paddington displayed Radley as the destination of the semi-fasts, to avoid tourists and other occasional passengers taking forever to get to Oxford. In the other direction, Ealing Broadway was the destination displayed on the departure boards at Oxford for the semi-fasts.

Similar to how Harrogate trains always have the penultimate stop as the destination at terminus stations (i.e. Burley Park at York and Poppleton at Leeds) so passengers travelling between Leeds and York don't end up wasting an extra hour going the long way round, which could be a whole topic in and of itself.

 

[RobShipway]

I've no idea when and how often you made such journeys, but you would have been lucky if you found a Saturday morning Cotswold Line HST to London before 9am that was half-empty west of Oxford. They weren't. Nine-car IETs currently operate pretty much all the early Saturday morning trains starting from Hereford or Worcester, for a reason.

Who would have though that a mid-afternoon train heading towards London would be on the quiet side until it reached the Thames Valley - those being the stops for which the long formation allocated to such services was/and still are provided - and so it could then form a peak departure back out of London.


I hate to break it to you, but for many years the departure boards at Paddington displayed Radley as the destination of the semi-fasts, to avoid tourists and other occasional passengers taking forever to get to Oxford. In the other direction, Ealing Broadway was the destination displayed on the departure boards at Oxford for the semi-fasts.

Passengers between London and Oxford have been directed to the fast trains for many years, whether they terminate at Oxford or continue to the Cotswold Line, and vice versa.

The service was West of Reading to the Cotswolds on a a Saturday morning, I believe back in 2012.

 

[py_megapixel]

Copied from this thread - replying here as this is getting speculative.

Would a sensible strategy from May not be to not pair up the 5s at all but instead make as many pairs as possible out of the 4s? They really ought to do everything possible to avoid sending 4s out on their own.

Also, if they could consistently decide which services would be doubles rather than singles, they could sort of manage the crowding by varying the prices of Advances to persuade people to use the doubles rather than the singles. This sort of thing is supposed to be an advantage of so-called "yield management", but CrossCountry seem to be entirely ignoring it. On flows where Advances are available (I tried York to Birmingham and Oxford to Manchester for example), look a few weeks from now and they're the same price every hour.

XC don't have enough Voyagers to make everything either 5 car or 4+4car sothere will be plenty of 4 car running.

From May (assuming all the services planned run) will require...

Hourly Edinburgh-Plymouth = 19
Hourly Manchester-Bournemouth = 11
Hourly Manchester-Bristol (+2xPaignton) = 8
The handfull of Reading to Newcastle services that run = 4
(Full hourly service would require 11)

That will require a minimum of 42 sets (less 2 that the HSTs currently cover).
I think 220019 is still long term out of service (damaged at Kenilworth quite a while back).

So a very rough calculation, of the 58 voayagers, a max of 51 sets avaliable for use daily, 1 is normally hot spare at New Street, so the most that can be 4+4 is around 10 diagrams, assuming XC fully diagram all the Voyagers. Obviously that will be less when the HSTs retire, and when Newcastle to Reading is restored to hourly.

Yes, you're right now I look at it in more detail.

If we assume the ratio of 4s to 5s available is approximately the same as the ratio of 4s to 5s in total, that means approximately 33 4s and 18 5s available. Leave one of the 4s spare at New Street on its own. That leaves 16 4+4 sets and 18 5s which gives a total of 34 - so to make up the shortfall of 8 (assuming your calculation of 42 is correct), 8 of the 4+4s would have to be split.

The best that could therefore realistically be achieved would be 8 8-car sets, 18 5-car sets and 8 4-car sets.

Of course, the 20 Avanti voyagers could cover the extra 2 required for HST withdrawal, the extra 7 for the full Reading-Newcastle service and the extra 8 to eliminate all the single 4-cars with 3 to spare.