What Is InterCity?

[ryan125hst]

I've only skimmed through some of this thread, so I apologise if I am repeating things that have already been said.

In my opinion, for a service to be branded as InterCity, it needs to:

• Travel at speeds 100mph or more for large sections of the journey.
• Have at least one carriage of first class accommodation.
• Have first class accommodation with 2+1 seating.
• Have at least a trolley service, but preferably have a buffet car as well (in an ideal world, a restaurant service, but they have more or less gone now).
• Have end doors.
• Have roughly one toilet per carriage.
• Have table seats distributed throughout the carriage.
• Be at least five coaches long.

While loco hauled used to be the way for InterCity trains, it doesn't need to be the case these days. On Saturday, I travelled on a Class 158 from Sheffield to Liverpool and back, a total time of almost four hours on the 158. I was quite impressed with how quite and comfortable it was considering that I was effectively on a 2-car DMU (it was actually 2 units coupled, but the comfort levels wouldn't have changed if there was only one unit.

Looking at the above list, the HST's and 225's on the EMCL would qualify, as would the Pendolino's and Voyagers on the WCML. Class 180's would also qualify, and it also covers the GWML and the loco hauled services on the GEML. Because I have included the bit about a trolley service is fine, the Midland Mainline also qualifies. It is certainly an InterCity route and, in my opinion, should have a buffet car open. The Waterloo to Weymouth route would also qualify, and the Gatwick Express might still just about qualify given the stock used (442's).

I think the line between InterCity and Regional trains (such as the Norwich to Liverpool and Manchester to Newcastle) is being reduced as a result of InterCity type trains being used on shorter journeys (Kings Cross to Newark for example), as well as trains that are really for slightly shorter, more frequent stop journeys (Class 185's) being used on longer, InterCity style journeys (Manchester to Scotland). The fact that catering is being reduced on many routes, wrongly in my opinion, and the fact that trains with a non InterCity layout are being used on long journeys also makes it difficult to distinguish.

In my opinion, the government should be stricter when it comes to franchise commitments and operating certain routes. They should request that appropriate rolling stock is used and allow the TOC's to source new stock if they don't have it. They should also ensure that the levels of catering is appropriate (CrossCountry especially!).

Does anyone agree with me on this?

 

[Deerfold]

I've only skimmed through some of this thread, so I apologise if I am repeating things that have already been said.

Yep.

Apology accepted.

 

[krus_aragon]

OK, I've revised the scoring system a little:

Speed:
0 for <100mph
1 for 100-110mph
2 for 125mph+
Accommodation:
0 for Standard accommodation only
1 for First Class accommodation as well
2 if it's 2+1 seating
Catering:
0 for no catering
1 for a trolley service
2 for a shop/buffet
Length:
0 for 1-3 carriages
1 for 4-6 carriages
2 for 7+ carriages
Other:
1 for standard class seating in 2+2 configuration
1 for vestibules separating passenger saloon from exterior doors

By those standards:

• Cardiff - Nottingham -- 5 (3-car 170, 6 if it's a double-unit)
• Cardiff - Holyhead ("WAG Express"/ "Gerald" service) -- 8
• Cardiff - Holyhead (normal 175s) -- 3

 

[southern442]

I think its a great idea for a benchmark - now I need to start calculating some services to work out how "InterCity" some services are in practice.

There is one thing that could be added to prevent the Met from scoring a 3:

Seating:
1 point if it includes one of the following things:
armrests
tables
2 points for both, 0 points for none.

 

[Manchester77]

Think we're forgetting to add on 50 points if the service is operated by virgin

On a less tongue and cheek note; perhaps for additional points we could include things like wifi and plug sockets too? One point for each?

 

[southern442]

Think we're forgetting to add on 50 points if the service is operated by virgin

On a less tongue and cheek note; perhaps for additional points we could include things like wifi and plug sockets too? One point for each?

wifi:
0 for none
1 for paid
2 for free in 1st class

plug sockets:
0 for none
1 for only 1st class
2 for throughout.

 

[3141]

Like so many things, Intercity starts as an idea which is easily understood and quite well defined, but then gets extended and the definition becomes less and less clear.

A similar case exists over the question of which services should be run by which TOC. What is Cross Country? Should it include Stansted Airport to Birmingham? Why doesn’t it include Norwich to Liverpool, which is about as cross country as you can get?

I think the attempts to build up a list of criteria for Intercity on this thread are ingenious and entertaining. But when the criteria are eventually applied it’s practically certain that there will be some anomalies. For example, as has been pointed out, some services which are undoubtedly Intercity when they start become quite local as they get near their final destination. Is Plymouth to Penzance an Intercity service just because it’s operated by an HST? Should Liverpool to Norwich be considered Intercity because it connects seven (at least) cities? Would it become Intercity if East Midlands operated it with Meridians?

Now we’ve got the provision of wi fi in the debate. I think wi fi is irrelevant. My guess is that wi fi began to be provided by some long-distance TOCs, initially in first class, because they wanted to attract and retain business passengers who want to work on the journey and who are prepared to pay high fares. Gradually its provision trickles down to other services and to standard class. One day it will probably be available on most trains.

My own view is that the most important criterion for a service to be classed as Intercity is its average speed. Probably 75 mph or higher, though that’s just a stab at it. That has major implications for the type of rolling stock that’s required. The rolling stock itself wouldn’t make a service Intercity. Not many routes would qualify to be called Intercity on this basis. Even some of those, which had started out as Intercity, would no longer qualify towards the end of their journey with more stops and slower average speeds. Most of Cross Country would not be Intercity. (Even with an HST I don’t see Leamington Spa – Coventry – Birmingham – Wolverhampton – Stafford – Stoke – Macclesfield – Stockport – Manchester as being able to qualify.)

 

[Class83]

OK, I've revised the scoring system a little:

Other:
1 for standard class seating in 2+2 configuration
1 for vestibules separating passenger saloon from exterior doors

I'd view 3+2 seating as instant disqualification from being IC.

 

[AndyLandy]

I'd view 3+2 seating as instant disqualification from being IC.

A few people have suggested that although I'm not actually sure it needs to be stated explicitly. Anything with 3+2 seating is automatically going to fall down on other categories, too.

On the other hand, if you boarded a hypothetical 125mph-capable, 10-carriage train with end doors, a buffet car and first class, but it had 3+2 seating, what would that be? (Apart from incredibly unlikely!)

 

[Rhydgaled]

Intercity is really more than one thing. There's the brand (INTERCITY), and there are 'Intercity'-type services which should (but aren't always) be operated by 'Intercity'-type rolling stock. Similarly, there are regional express services and regional express rolling stock which, frustratingly, don't always go together.

Are Voyagers true InterCity trains?

Yes, but they are badly designed ones that aren't really suitable because of lack of comfort (including legroom and number of seats, both probably down to insufficent train length).

444s?

Borderline. A 10-car formation with a decent buffet probably.

What about 185s? Is a 350/1 InterCity but not a 350/2?

No, no and no. All three types are not even regional express stock. The door layout instantly makes them 'outer suburban' rolling stock, regardless of whether they are inappropriately used on regional express or intercity services.

Are "end doors" necessary

Most definately.

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

Most Intercity services will require >115mph running, which rules out corridor connections. Also, many Intercity services will require a long train throughout, meaning you don't really need corridor connections because you won't be doing any attaching/detaching of units. However, in my opinon corridor connections are acceptable in principal on intercity rolling stock.

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?

Intercity rolling stock should feature a buffet car to serve hot morning and evening meals, whether 'restaurant'-style or 'takeaway'-style. Trolley is only any good if it can provide such meals, which none I am aware of do (and you'd still need a food preperation&storage area somewhere on the train).

Can you have an InterCity train with underfloor engines?

Yes, but it isn't ideal for long distances.

I would suggest that it is more to do with the frequency of the stops

Ah, now we're moving onto Intercity services, rather than Intercity stock. I'd agree with that: an Intercity one should run between major settlements (not necessarily only cities, large towns will do) with few intermediate stops compared to other services on the route. There are odd cases (eg. Carmarthen - Cardiff) where an Intercity service has more stops than some others, but in this case the Intercity service links the major places (Swansea, Cardiff, London) and the faster trains (Swansea District Line services) terminate at Cardiff, so serves only one sufficiently major settlement so isn't Intercity. Distance also has a part to play, if the service is only linking two major settlements that are not far apart then it might not be an Intercity service.

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

That's quite a good breif definition of an Intercity service.

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)

I agree, the standard class seating on SWT 159s (assuming their seats are the same on all their 158s and 159s) is very comfortable. The short length of units and lack of a buffet (perhaps also 90mph top speed, rather than 100mph+) however means they are 'regional express' stock, not intercity stock. Either way they need more legroom though.

Attempts to categorise our trains like "Alphaline" didn't work out as they were largely incomprehensible to the public.

Alphaline was just a brand for class 158s, and it probably only disappeared because the new TOCs wanted to apply their own brand image. Wales & West / Wessex trains made quite a point of Alphaline.

But then compare with Continental Europe. Denmark's Intercity trains are 3 car 180 km/h (112 mph) Bombardier DMU'S.

Not too dissimilar from a 3 car 185!

I disagree, a class 185 has more doors and they are in the wrong place. A 185 doesn't have corridor connections either.

Birmingham-Aberystwyth. The 158s are intercity units but the stops are too frequent; it's a rural route fundamentally.

Stops are actually quite nicely spaced out. However, there are quite a few of them, it slows down west of Machynlleth and it doesn't have the critical mass necessary to sustain a buffet car (or 4 coaches west of Machynlleth, most of the time). This all points to it being a 'regional express' service not an 'intercity' one. Which means, for once, the rolling stock used as actually of an ideally suited type.

So, I think that rolling stock is part of the bigger picture. If you were to run LHCS with buffet cars on a Liverpool Street stopper, you couldn't call it InterCity. (You'd call it inappropriate allocation of resources

Nice to see somebody has already made a similar point to one of mine

Indeed, 3 car 158s that have been given a mild refresh would be ideal if you ask me. I'm not sure whether the units on the diagram stay on the Plymouth - Penzance runs all day - you wouldn't send one up to Gunnislake for example, if one diagram also involves a turn on that branch.

To be fair, '158s would be ideal for these services' is often said of many routes, we should have built more

Yes, we should have more 158s (quite a few routes worked by class 170s should be 158s also, maybe building some of the 170s as 158s (with corridor connections and end doors) would have been a good idea, ditto 185s). I think the Cardiff - Portsmouth route should keep it's 158s, so sadly there probably won't be enough spare for Plymouth - Penzance.

The end doors really do matter to some people as they enhance the internal ambience.

They also take up less space, leaving more furnishable space for legroom, tables or extra seats. All features which are important for comfortable travel over long distances, which is why the 1/3, 2/3 suburban door layout is not appropriate for regional express, long-distance-rural or intercity services.

Cardiff - Holyhead ("WAG Express"/ "Gerald" service)

I'd call the original service an intercity serivce, given the slim calling pattern. However, I'm not so sure now they've added a few stops, and if it becomes the 17:21 stopper from December then definately not. The rolling stock is of Intercity standard. Actually, given the size of many of the places served even the fast service could equally well be classified as regional express. Swansea/Cardiff - Manchester however would be an Intercity service in my opinion and hence should have Intercity standard rolling stock as Gerald does. The problem with that is it currently has Carmarthen/Milford - Swansea services tagged onto it, which would make intercity stock unjustifablly expensive and hence reduces it to regional express status.

trains that are really for slightly shorter, more frequent stop journeys (Class 185's) being used on longer, InterCity style journeys (Manchester to Scotland). The fact that catering is being reduced on many routes, wrongly in my opinion, and the fact that trains with a non InterCity layout are being used on long journeys also makes it difficult to distinguish.

In my opinion, the government should be stricter when it comes to franchise commitments and operating certain routes. They should request that appropriate rolling stock is used and allow the TOC's to source new stock if they don't have it. They should also ensure that the levels of catering is appropriate (CrossCountry especially!).

Does anyone agree with me on this?

Yes, I agree with that. Sadly, as discussed above, not enough 158s were built and too many suburban-style units (170s, 185s etc.) though that is more an argument for regional express rather than intercity services. The latter has largely kept trains with an intercity layout (though with too few coaches in the case of Voyagers and 180s and, in future, IEPs if DaFT aren't stopped).

 

[southern442]

No, no and no. All three types are not even regional express stock. The door layout instantly makes them 'outer suburban' rolling stock, regardless of whether they are inappropriately used on regional express or intercity services.

What is the problem with the doors? Why does it have to be end ones?

 

[Rhydgaled]

What is the problem with the doors? Why does it have to be end ones?

See:

They also take up less space, leaving more furnishable space for legroom, tables or extra seats. All features which are important for comfortable travel over long distances, which is why the 1/3, 2/3 suburban door layout is not appropriate for regional express, long-distance-rural or intercity services.

Also the saloon temperture is effected in certain weather conditions if the external doors open straight into the saloon, as on most suburban-door stock.

 

[southern442]

See:


Also the saloon temperture is effected in certain weather conditions if the external doors open straight into the saloon, as on most suburban-door stock.

I suppose so but that is being a little picky, especially on TPE where it would otherwise count as intercity. I think that having doors in the suburban layout is a minimal reduction in comfort.

 

[3141]

I suppose so but that is being a little picky, especially on TPE where it would otherwise count as intercity. I think that having doors in the suburban layout is a minimal reduction in comfort.

I agree with that. You could have internal doors separating the vestibule from the seating areas, and that would much reduce the heat loss at those times of the year when it's an issue. There usually are such doors already when one of the seating areas adjacent to a vestibule is first class.

The wider doors would speed up alighting and boarding, and the large vestibules would enable more passengers to move close to the doors as the train was arriving at a station and get off more quickly, whereas on a train with end doors they have to queue in the saloon.

 

[Rhydgaled]

I suppose so but that is being a little picky, especially on TPE where it would otherwise count as intercity. I think that having doors in the suburban layout is a minimal reduction in comfort.

I agree with that. You could have internal doors separating the vestibule from the seating areas, and that would much reduce the heat loss at those times of the year when it's an issue. There usually are such doors already when one of the seating areas adjacent to a vestibule is first class.

The wider doors would speed up alighting and boarding, and the large vestibules would enable more passengers to move close to the doors as the train was arriving at a station and get off more quickly, whereas on a train with end doors they have to queue in the saloon.

The weather issue isn't my main one though. The wide doors and large vestibules come at the cost of furnishable space, reducing comfort features. That is the killer.

 

[43074]

OK, I've revised the scoring system a little:

Speed:
0 for <100mph
1 for 100-110mph
2 for 125mph+
Accommodation:
0 for Standard accommodation only
1 for First Class accommodation as well
2 if it's 2+1 seating
Catering:
0 for no catering
1 for a trolley service
2 for a shop/buffet
Length:
0 for 1-3 carriages
1 for 4-6 carriages
2 for 7+ carriages
Other:
1 for standard class seating in 2+2 configuration
1 for vestibules separating passenger saloon from exterior doors

That, rather nicely gives you a score out of ten

I like that!

But, I don't think length or the vestibule postition are suitable indicators - HEx units weigh in at 4/5 cars and are IMO more comfortable than many I/C trains. So, I would replace the 'Other' category with 'Seating Density' - worked out by total train length (metres - furnishable and unfurnishable space)/Total capacity (seats - 1st and Standard) - with scoring as:
0 for >3
1 for 2.5 - 3
2 for < 2.5 -
so by these Standards an FGW HST would score 2, a 3-car XC Turbostar would score 1 and a Class 350/2 would score 0. Anything like 3+2 configuration or 1/3 2/3 vestibules would affect the score by default. I would also follow the average speed suggestion posted above.

I would also add frequency:
0 for less than 1tph
1 for 1tph
2 for 2tph+
but that's subjective, my definition of InterCity was:

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.

Any scoring system will contain anomalies, though.

 

[E-Rail]

It's simple. If Branson bids for it, it must be an InterCity route.