Cross-Country: suggestions to improve things in the short term

[yorksrob]

Whilst buses and trains may be very different they both come under the same accessibility laws and regulations.



Whilst something like 67 and mk4s would require a lot of training and some electrical conversion etc, in terms of regulatory approval they would satisfy all the necessary regulatory requirements.

With the amount of time it’s taking to overhaul the XC HST sets (I don’t think anyone anticipated the amount of corrosion on mk3s) you do wonder would this have actually been a better option instead!

I agree regarding mk4's. It might be worth just biting the bullet and getting on with it, assuming the locos can be found.

In terms of buses, the ones around here still don't have any sort of public information system, even though that would be quite useful.

 

[Speed43125]

I agree regarding mk4's. It might be worth just biting the bullet and getting on with it, assuming the locos can be found.

In terms of buses, the ones around here still don't have any sort of public information system, even though that would be quite useful.

or Class 442 intermediate cars (with traction equipment removed)?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

or Class 442 intermediate cars (with traction equipment removed)?

Hardly any left as 18 units back in traffic and the remaining six units are very badly corroded and being stripped for spares.

 

[Speed43125]

Hardly any left as 18 units back in traffic and the remaining six units are very badly corroded and being stripped for spares.

ah well. if only BR had retrofitted those doors on to their mk3s ...

 

[HamworthyGoods]

ah well. if only BR had retrofitted those doors on to their mk3s ...

It was down to cost at the time sadly.

 

[JonathanH]

Hardly any left as 18 units back in traffic and the remaining six units are very badly corroded and being stripped for spares.

If the remaining six are very badly corroded, are the eighteen going into service similarly affected or did someone identify the best eighteen for future use and the worst six for scrap?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

If the remaining six are very badly corroded, are the eighteen going into service similarly affected or did someone identify the best eighteen for future use and the worst six for scrap?

The best 18 were identified

 

[duffield]

Mass PRM conversion of redundant HST sets is probably not possible, appropriate or useful, but surely doing the PRM conversion on (say) just *two* additional redundant HST sets would be helpful?
The two extra HST sets could replace the most overcrowded single Voyagers and the released Voyagers could double up on other services, or whatever would help most. Surely it would be possible to PRM 2 more HST sets within a year?

I know there is the pathing issue, but if that proves too difficult maybe 6 coach HST sets could be used (1x1st and 5x std)? This would be a significant increase in standard class over a 5 coach Voyager and should be able to just about keep voyager timings.

To summarize: I agree HSTs are not 'the solution' but a couple more sets as a short term measure might help the most intolerable services until a better solution is available.

 

[greatvoyager]

Mass PRM conversion of redundant HST sets is probably not possible, appropriate or useful, but surely doing the PRM conversion on (say) just *two* additional redundant HST sets would be helpful?
The two extra HST sets could replace the most overcrowded single Voyagers and the released Voyagers could double up on other services, or whatever would help most. Surely it would be possible to PRM 2 more HST sets within a year?

I know there is the pathing issue, but if that proves too difficult maybe 6 coach HST sets could be used (1x1st and 5x std)? This would be a significant increase in standard class over a 5 coach Voyager and should be able to just about keep voyager timings.

To summarize: I agree HSTs are not 'the solution' but a couple more sets as a short term measure might help the most intolerable services until a better solution is available.

It's a nice idea, but how long and costly is it going to be to do? When Voyagers were first introduced, didn't Virgin shorten a few sets in the short term in order to keep up with Voyager timings before the HSTs were withdrawn?

 

[greatvoyager]

It was down to cost at the time sadly.

It is a shame, could've prevented a lot of these problems.

 

[Jozhua]

So looking at diesel locos for the MK 4 idea, TFW is using four class 67's.

I reckon after that there's another two locos free that are currently in storage that cross country could make use of. So with maybe 6 cars and a DVT per train that could offer a reasonable amount extra capacity for the services they would run on and free at least two more Voyagers. Would be nice to say run them between Bristol and Manchester (Basically coz I hate Voyagers lol)

Perhaps doing some move arounds of freight and dragging some older locos back into service, say 37's on freight routes the 67's currently run so we could get a good four sets or so for XC would be ideal.

 

[greatvoyager]

So looking at diesel locos for the MK 4 idea, TFW is using four class 67's.

I reckon after that there's another two locos free that are currently in storage that cross country could make use of. So with maybe 6 cars and a DVT per train that could offer a reasonable amount extra capacity for the services they would run on and free at least two more Voyagers. Would be nice to say run them between Bristol and Manchester (Basically coz I hate Voyagers lol)

Perhaps doing some move arounds of freight and dragging some older locos back into service, say 37's on freight routes the 67's currently run so we could get a good four sets or so for XC would be ideal.

Out of interest, would Mark 4s need to be route cleared before they are allowed to travel outside of Wales or the ECML?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Out of interest, would Mark 4s need to be route cleared before they are allowed to travel outside of Wales or the ECML?

Yes they would need a lot of route clearance; there’s a lot of work still to be done on the Welsh Marches to get them cleared that way, that’s what’s delaying the Welsh entry to Traffic.

 

[greatvoyager]

Yes they would need a lot of route clearance; there’s a lot of work still to be done on the Welsh Marches to get them cleared that way, that’s what’s delaying the Welsh entry to Traffic.

Makes sense.

 

[JonathanH]

Would be nice to say run them between Bristol and Manchester (Basically coz I hate Voyagers lol)

...but the timetable currently has trains arriving from Bristol at Manchester going back to Bournemouth and no spare capacity for longer turnarounds at Piccadilly. Also, most of the Bristol trains continue further south to Exeter. Finally, there isn't a locomotive available that can maintain Voyager timings so Mark IVs on that route are a complete non-starter.

 

[elliotjelliot]

Couldn't they transfer Cardiff-Nottingham to EMR (or at least the Birmingham-Nottingham hourly service), and then have it run through to Norwich, replacing the Liverpool service?
I see what you mean, but at the same time I don't think it would be implausible.

I think the transfer of the shorter routes could work, I'm not sure current attitudes on the railway would allow a Cardiff to Norwich train in fear of poor performance, but I think the travelling public would definitely appreciate such a service.

 

[43096]

Mass PRM conversion of redundant HST sets is probably not possible, appropriate or useful, but surely doing the PRM conversion on (say) just *two* additional redundant HST sets would be helpful?
The two extra HST sets could replace the most overcrowded single Voyagers and the released Voyagers could double up on other services, or whatever would help most. Surely it would be possible to PRM 2 more HST sets within a year?

I know there is the pathing issue, but if that proves too difficult maybe 6 coach HST sets could be used (1x1st and 5x std)? This would be a significant increase in standard class over a 5 coach Voyager and should be able to just about keep voyager timings.

To summarize: I agree HSTs are not 'the solution' but a couple more sets as a short term measure might help the most intolerable services until a better solution is available.

If you did anything with HST sets, then taking EC54-56 out of Ely and converting them with power doors (anyone suggesting keeping slam doors is in la-la land) would give three extra sets. With the 220/221 units displaced you can make quite a difference:
- 3 x HST in place of 5-car 221
- 3 x 5-car 221 in place of 4-car 220/221
- 3 x 4-car 220/221 can be doubled up with another 4-car

That's nine diagrams with improved capacity as a result.

As for Mark 4s and Class 67s - have a look at the acceleration of a 67, even if you can overcome the issue of getting them cleared for unrestricted 125mph operation.

 

[greatvoyager]

I think the transfer of the shorter routes could work, I'm not sure current attitudes on the railway would allow a Cardiff to Norwich train in fear of poor performance, but I think the travelling public would definitely appreciate such a service.

And also, as EMR is going towards an all 170 fleet anyway, it makes sense to me to transfer 170 operated routes to them. XC needs to be refined in some way.

 

[greatvoyager]

If you did anything with HST sets, then taking EC54-56 out of Ely and converting them with power doors (anyone suggesting keeping slam doors is in la-la land) would give three extra sets. With the 220/221 units displaced you can make quite a difference:
- 3 x HST in place of 5-car 221
- 3 x 5-car 221 in place of 4-car 220/221
- 3 x 4-car 220/221 can be doubled up with another 4-car

That's nine diagrams with improved capacity as a result.

As for Mark 4s and Class 67s - have a look at the acceleration of a 67, even if you can overcome the issue of getting them cleared for unrestricted 125mph operation.

Would the converted HSTs be in service before the direct award runs out (and possibly new franchise awarded?)

 

[JonathanH]

I'm not sure current attitudes on the railway would allow a Cardiff to Norwich train in fear of poor performance, but I think the travelling public would definitely appreciate such a service.

Would they? It would be half an hour slower to go via Nottingham between Birmingham and Peterborough than the two hours it already takes via Oakham (and that itself is slow).

And also, as EMR is going towards an all 170 fleet anyway, it makes sense to me to transfer 170 operated routes to them. XC needs to be refined in some way.

No, it really wouldn't. East Midlands do not need an offshoot which goes to Cardiff. Transport for Wales do not need to be operating trains to Nottingham Passing this route to either WMR or TFW does not make sense as the other end of the Cardiff to Nottingham route is so far away from their operating base. At least Nottingham is in the middle of the Norwich to Liverpool route.

Cardiff to Nottingham is predominately on the same route as Bristol to Sheffield. The traincrew for the Nottingham end at least in part come from Leicester so fit well with the Birmingham to Stansted operation. I really don't see the problem with XC operating these routes just because they have 170s on them at the moment.

 

[greatvoyager]

Would they? It would be half an hour slower to go via Nottingham between Birmingham and Peterborough than the two hours it already takes via Oakham (and that itself is slow).



No, it really wouldn't. East Midlands do not need an offshoot which goes to Cardiff. Transport for Wales do not need to be operating trains to Nottingham Passing this route to either WMR or TFW does not make sense as the other end of the Cardiff to Nottingham route is so far away from their operating base. At least Nottingham is in the middle of the Norwich to Liverpool route.

Cardiff to Nottingham is predominately on the same route as Bristol to Sheffield. The traincrew for the Nottingham end at least in part come from Leicester so fit well with the Birmingham to Stansted operation. I really don't see the problem with XC operating these routes just because they have 170s on them at the moment.

I was suggesting it as a potential replacement for the lost Liverpool service, I knew it was probably not going to be a popular suggestion, but I'm not sure having shorter distance routes such as the Birmingham-Nottingham or Birmingham Stansted has really been run as well as it could've.

 

[JonathanH]

I'm not sure having shorter distance routes such as the Birmingham-Nottingham or Birmingham Stansted has really been run as well as it could've.

What could have been better, noting that you can't have more rolling stock than they were allocated in 2007 and the location of the traincrew depot? Prior to 2007, Central Trains had tried to run 3tph on the Birmingham to Derby route - one to Matlock, two to Nottingham. It was a reaction to that which probably resulted in all the services between Birmingham and Derby passing to Cross Country. Thought about in that way, it did kind of make sense to pass Birmingham to Stansted to Cross Country as well to provide the right sort of fleet and staff size for the '170' operation.

 

[greatvoyager]

What could have been better, noting that you can't have more rolling stock than they were allocated in 2007 and the location of the traincrew depot? Prior to 2007, Central Trains had tried to run 3tph on the Birmingham to Derby route - one to Matlock, two to Nottingham. It was a reaction to that which probably resulted in all the services between Birmingham and Derby passing to Cross Country. Thought about in that way, it did kind of make sense to pass Birmingham to Stansted to Cross Country as well to provide the right sort of fleet and staff size for the '170' operation.

And yet we there are complaints about XC refusing to serve Manea with more trains. Surely if there is a demand for it, they would do wouldn't they? Yet they didn't.

 

[JonathanH]

And yet we there are complaints about XC refusing to serve Manea with more trains. Surely if there is a demand for it, they would do wouldn't they? Yet they didn't.

...and another operator would?

 

[greatvoyager]

...and another operator would?

I would argue that if there was demand, surely any operator would.

 

[greatvoyager]

Also, what happened to the idea suggested a couple of years ago with every Bristol-Manchester train extending to Exeter, and the alternative services to Aberdeen?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Also, what happened to the idea suggested a couple of years ago with every Bristol-Manchester train extending to Exeter, and the alternative services to Aberdeen?

They don't have the stock for what they are operating now, let alone adding to it.

 

[greatvoyager]

They don't have the stock for what they are operating now, let alone adding to it.

I remember they suggested cutting the Paignton service and the other limited services they had, such as Bath Spa and Guildford, in order to free up stock.
I imagine if they had done, it would've removed any prospect of double formation running.

 

[JonathanH]

I would argue that if there was demand, surely any operator would.

Depends on a) whether there is room on their trains, b) whether it affects the path they operate in and missing a slot at a key junction and c) whether their other passengers demands for a quicker journey outweigh those people wanting an additional stop. These things all have to be balanced up.

 

[greatvoyager]

Depends on a) whether there is room on their trains, b) whether it affects the path they operate in and missing a slot at a key junction and c) whether their other passengers demands for a quicker journey outweigh those people wanting an additional stop. These things all have to be balanced up.

I get that, but as there is already a limited service at that station and the service takes the same time regardless of whether or not it stops there, I guess it's down to capacity.