Cross Country overcrowding - shortage of rolling stock

[Doctor Fegg]

Seven for XC isn’t it?

A further five are reputedly under discussion.

 

[infobleep]

Passenger assistance, in case of an emergency, revenue protection, catering, etc.

On the GWR intercity trains, I'm not aware of two sets of catering staff, one for each set of 5-car trains, when running as 10 cars.

I think the GWR Paddington to Oxford service should be extended to Banbury.

At least then, there is the option of transferring to Chiltern for the onward journey to Birmingham.

Although GWR do operate to Banbury, it is only a two hourly service that starts at Didcot Parkway.

It also does not help on a Sunday when the service north in the Oxford direction is now only once an hour, from Reading - on both GWR and XC.

Both service leave the same time, or a minute apart in the hour, which is absurd.

They should be half an hour apart, in the hour.

An example for the 31st March, is in the attached image.

That's mad. I assume they need to depart at the same time due to needing to be clear of platforms or junctions so that other trains are not impacted. They can't both arrive at Oxford at the same time as its one platform.

Except as we keep pointing out, that’s not planned to happen until June 2025, which will certainly help with the situation between Reading and Birmingham. However, even with them coming back alternate trains won’t go beyond York.

What are the chances of them having enough staff by June 2025?

 

[YorksLad12]

However, on the rare occasions you do encounter a 8/10 carriage train, even that can be overcrowded.

Some parts of their network need more than the once an hour service currently offered.

Not helped by all of the (standard) reservations being in C & D, with generally fewer in H-L. If you're a regular, like me, you know you've a chance of a seat in the higher letters... then the consist that turns up is the wrong way round, as during today's Barrow Hill diversion, so I ended up standing in the vestibule of C from Sheffield to Leeds. Screens and RTT agreed with other, but the situation on the ground (track) was different.

A consistent five-car minimum would help, as there would be an unreserved coach (B or F) whichever end you stood. If they were 802s (or even 810s) there would be more seats too compared with a five-car 221. With more legroom. Pity XC is unlikely to get any.

 

[dk1]

A further five are reputedly under discussion.

That would be excellent. Why the DfT dithers totally escapes me.

 

[Killingworth]

Not helped by all of the (standard) reservations being in C & D, with generally fewer in H-L. If you're a regular, like me, you know you've a chance of a seat in the higher letters... then the consist that turns up is the wrong way round, as during today's Barrow Hill diversion, so I ended up standing in the vestibule of C from Sheffield to Leeds. Screens and RTT agreed with other, but the situation on the ground (track) was different.

A consistent five-car minimum would help, as there would be an unreserved coach (B or F) whichever end you stood. If they were 802s (or even 810s) there would be more seats too compared with a five-car 221. With more legroom. Pity XC is unlikely to get any.

We used that rationale on a trip from Cheltenham to Chesterfield in January. It had worked well on our outbound journey and was fine up to Birmingham on the way back. There even the rear 5 car unit filled up well. That was as nothing when the 5 car unit was detached at Derby so we all had to cram into the continuing 4. It was then announced as terminating at York!

 

[Krokodil]

The rest are going in June and apparently XC are having some.

Better late than never, I suppose

Seven for XC isn’t it?

Enough to compensate for the loss of the HSTs perhaps, not enough to grow capacity.

 

[12LDA28C]

lots of trains operate DOO and in this case there is still a member of staff who could move between units. An example of passengers coming last again?

What's the relevance of what other Operators do? Crosscountry don't operate DOO so comparing them to a TOC that does is pointless.

Enough to compensate for the loss of the HSTs perhaps, not enough to grow capacity.

What evidence do you have that the DfT is interested in growing capacity?

 

[Krokodil]

What evidence do you have that the DfT is interested in growing capacity?

What made you think that I thought that they were? I was lamenting the meagre allocation.

 

[dk1]

Better late than never, I suppose


Enough to compensate for the loss of the HSTs perhaps, not enough to grow capacity.

This government doesn’t seem overly interested in growing rail.

 

[Djgr]

This government doesn’t seem overly interested in growing rail.

Nor does it have the competence

 

[yorksrob]

We refurbished the entire 100 plus mk3 fleet at GA to a high spec Inc CET and power sockets throughout only to announce replacement of the entire lot less than 3 years later.

They would have been very good for additional Cross country services.

 

[dk1]

They would have been very good for additional Cross country services.

Probably so but they didn’t want them. Suppose it was the traction contract that would have been the headache.

And they where not converted to power doors.

 

[yorksrob]

Probably so but they didn’t want them. Suppose it was the traction contract that would have been the headache.

And they where not converted to power doors.

It just goes to show that if the powers that be want a decent railway system, it can be parsimonious about coughing up for enough rolling stock, or have everything state of the art and modern, but they can't do both.

 

[Snow1964]

With the new quarterly (Oct-Dec) figures due to be published by ORR tomorrow, thought I would go back 5 years (pre pandemic) and 10 years (as its a round number) so a comparison can be made

Cross Country (Oct-Dec)
Passenger journeys (table 1223) million 2014 :9.432m 2019 : 10.760m
Passenger km distance travelled (table 1233) 2014 : 870.6m : 2019 : 961.7m
Passenger Train km (table 1243) million 2014 : 8.124m 2019 : 8.126m
Passenger vehicle km (table 1253) million 2014 : 35.289m 2019 : 35.164m

Obviously can divide journey km by vehicle km to see if busier
and can look at average journey length changes etc

ORR tend to only compare to last year, so this should provide basis for meaningful discussion on if busier per vehicle etc compared to 5 years ago and 10 years ago (and 5 years is more than enough time to order and put into service new stock (unless you are SWR)

 

[YorkRailFan]

lots of trains operate DOO and in this case there is still a member of staff who could move between units. An example of passengers coming last again?

How could a member of staff move between sets of Voyagers? They aren't walk through.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Except as we keep pointing out, that’s not planned to happen until June 2025, which will certainly help with the situation between Reading and Birmingham. However even with them coming back alternate trains won’t go beyond York.

I’d missed that, I knew it had been pushed back from June 2024 but I thought it was now December 2024.

To be honest, terminating those trains at York isn’t so bad, IME they were always relatively quiet north of York anyway. The capacity is really only needed Reading-Birmingham-Sheffield, but with Sheffield being a really awkward place to transfer for trains further north.

If they require double crewing with guards (i.e. the driver can't count as a member of staff in the second unit, nor can the trolley person as they can on GWR) they could just change their stupid rule

I think (but might be wrong) that the catering manager can be the second member of staff when it’s a double unit. But catering staff availability can be hit and miss on XC even at the best of times.

 

[Killingworth]

To be honest, terminating those trains at York isn’t so bad, IME they were always relatively quiet north of York anyway. The capacity is really only needed Reading-Birmingham-Sheffield, but with Sheffield being a really awkward place to transfer for trains further north.

I beg to differ. Capacity is absolutely needed from Sheffield to Leeds and to Newcastle on many trains, like that experienced by my grandson on Sunday that lead to me starting this thread, Post 1.

In December I squeezed into a seat from Sheffield to York and found myself next to a traveller from near Paignton to visit his father near Oban, a mammoth all day journey mostly on XC from Newton Abbot. In summer he said he'd always drive. No trolley on the train although there was an announced suggestion that it would be provided from Newcastle. He was prepared with a well loaded rucksack of food! Many were standing.

 

[Starmill]

Enough to compensate for the loss of the HSTs perhaps, not enough to grow capacity.

Four 2+7 HST diagrams is roughly compensated for by six or seven 5 car Voyager diagrams. The difference is that seven Voyager trains can produce six to seven diagrams without breaking a sweat. The five HST sets and six pairs of power cars hardly ever worked with more than two simultaneous diagrams. So from the point of view of actual utilisation it's a (very marginal) increase.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I beg to differ. Capacity is absolutely needed from Sheffield to Leeds and to Newcastle on many trains, like that experienced by my grandson on Sunday

The trains via Leeds are very busy and always have been. These are the ones from the south west which go through to Edinburgh.

The trains via Doncaster, which are the ones from Reading, were generally much quieter north of York as they terminate at Newcastle. So terminating them at York is no big deal.

 

[12LDA28C]

What made you think that I thought that they were? I was lamenting the meagre allocation.

The very fact that you mentioned it at all suggested you may have thought it was an option, however remote.

 

[deltic]

How could a member of staff move between sets of Voyagers? They aren't walk through.

At stations - they stop often enough

 

[A0wen]

The issue with XC is there are two or three flows which they are very busy on, but that doesn't justify huge increases in rolling stock or even more services.

A number of posters have commented that from York to Newcastle, XC can be overcrowded but LNER seems not to be - so the actual answer is to identify the worst overcrowding and address those flows, not to increase set length or order new stock only to cart around fresh air for more than 50% of the time - and if that means putting in place pick up only / set down only restrictions at certain points unless on a pre-booked ticket, then so be it.

 

[Killingworth]

The trains via Leeds are very busy and always have been. These are the ones from the south west which go through to Edinburgh.

The trains via Doncaster, which are the ones from Reading, were generally much quieter north of York as they terminate at Newcastle. So terminating them at York is no big deal.

It is if you, like me, want a quick journey from Sheffield to Newcastle or Edinburgh, adds 20 minutes to the journey. Send the Reading trains to Edinburgh and beyond and terminate the longer distance ones at York!

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I'm sure it's been suggested before but converting the first class coach to standard class would increase capacity on 4 car Voyagers by 25% for minimal cost!

 

[Bikeman78]

XC rips a massive hole in the railways green credentials. Running gas guzzling voyagers 100s of miles under the wires is just daft. Get a few bimodes for Edinburgh - Exeter, and EMUs fror Brum - Manchester (cl 350?) so Voyager workings can be 8 car.
And spark the fast lines Kings Norton - Longbridge.

Agreed. I know IETs are not generally liked on here but they are light years ahead of voyagers.

 

[Killingworth]

I'm sure it's been suggested before but converting the first class coach to standard class would increase capacity on 4 car Voyagers by 25% for minimal cost!

But they'd lose my extra revenue when I book 1st to get a seat!

 

[Trainbike46]

XC rips a massive hole in the railways green credentials. Running gas guzzling voyagers 100s of miles under the wires is just daft. Get a few bimodes for Edinburgh - Exeter, and EMUs fror Brum - Manchester (cl 350?) so Voyager workings can be 8 car.
And spark the fast lines Kings Norton - Longbridge.

Agreed. I know IETs are not generally liked on here but they are light years ahead of voyagers.

I agree voyagers aren't good trains, and XC definitely needs something better in the long term. In the short term though, XC should get all the voyagers freed up from XC to attract more passengers onto the railway, which will still reduce emissions in comparison to them going by car or plane.

In the long term, it needs bimodes or BEMUs. Me and others in previous XC threads have proposed things like new trains for LNER & GWR, with the 5-car 80x bimodes moving to XC (staying at their current depots).

Some relevant posts in older threads:

IETs on XC

Would IETs make sense as a suitable replacement to the ageing HST stock on Cross Country ?

www.railforums.co.uk

Longer (400m?) trains on the ECML - what work would be needed?

For example you could hire a Northern unit to work Leeds - Doncaster shuttles and flip some of the London - Leeds services to Edinburgh. I’m not sure you could, unless some cross country or TPE servcies didn‘t make it to York from the south. And it would (obviously) be deeply unpopular in...

www.railforums.co.uk

And I'm sure I somewhere suggested something along the lines of GWR ordering new 125mph EMUs at maximum length (260m or longer), and use those on the Oxford, Bristol, Cardiff and Swansea services after the relevant lines have been electrified. Then the spare 5-car 80x would be used by XC instead, and the 9-cars would all be used for Southwest services (and Carmarthen services if they continue)

Similarly, I remember suggesting on another thread for LNER to order more of their new CAF units (possibly in longer layouts of approximately 280-285m long), and passing all their 5-car 800 bimodes on to XC. Once again can't find the thread though.

 

[Class 317]

Hopefully they make the case successfully for the additional 5 voyagers.

In the meantime I think the effect of the extra 7 is under estimated. If 6 per day are used that's got the potential to lengthen 18 diagrams via a cascade within the fleet.

6 * 5 car sets replace 6 * 4 car sets. Extra 62 seats.
Frees up 6 * 4 car to formed 8 car sets with another 4 car diagram.
Use 8 car sets to replace 6 existing 5 car diagrams. Extra 132 seats.
6 additional 4 car diagrams become 5 cars. Extra 62 seats.

18 diagrams is around a third of services.

 

[irish_rail]

Hopefully they make the case successfully for the additional 5 voyagers.

In the meantime I think the effect of the extra 7 is under estimated. If 6 per day are used that's got the potential to lengthen 18 diagrams via a cascade within the fleet.

6 * 5 car sets replace 6 * 4 car sets. Extra 62 seats.
Frees up 6 * 4 car to formed 8 car sets with another 4 car diagram.
Use 8 car sets to replace 6 existing 5 car diagrams. Extra 132 seats.
6 additional 4 car diagrams become 5 cars. Extra 62 seats.

18 diagrams is around a third of services.

But when the service from Reading to York cones back does that then put us back to square one?

 

[Energy]

But when the service from Reading to York cones back does that then put us back to square one?

Reading - York/Newcastle has already returned at 5tpd.