Whither XC after HS2?

[Purple Orange]

The fact that they're even using XC? Using other TOCs with a change of train is mostly quicker than using their services at all (which is good, as I will do more or less anything to avoid using them as they're rubbish), but some people value a direct journey, either due to simplicity, or because they have a lot of luggage, or because they are elderly or infirm.

In particular a change across London is a right faff. People on here are I suspect likely to enjoy it, but "normal" people won't.

But in the case of HS2 and XC there are not many journeys that require a change across London that don’t today. The only difference will be that the journey via London to Basingstoke, Southampton & Bournemouth will be significantly faster than XC. I’d say the reason people don’t make the change is because London is a hassle, but not worth the minuscule time difference compared to the direct train.

However a change of trains in Birmingham or at OOC is a completely different situation because nobody will be needing to do much of a transfer. Northern destinations to the south west can change with a 5 min walk to the Moor Street platforms. People travelling from northern cities to Oxford & Reading will just need to switch platforms at OOC.

To my mind, sitting longer on the train is very much an enthusiast thing to do. Personally the least time I am on the train, the better and I’d argue more people value their time in getting from A go B than they do trundling on a Voyager at snails pace through York then Leeds, then Doncaster then Sheffield....

 

[JonathanH]

Or, in compensation for a lack of direct service on HS2, the XC service frequency could be increased to that seen on TPE: a train every 15 minutes from Birmingham to Sheffield. A turn up and go service along this corridor with a semi-fast stopping pattern would be a great improvement. This after all is one of the purposes of HS2 - freeing up 'classic' lines to run more trains closer together.

I think that a service every 15 minutes between Birmingham and Sheffield is a valid proposition, perhaps with only one MML service north of Derby and Tamworth and Burton connected to Nottingham via the Castle Donington line avoiding Derby.

There are, of course, already four trains an hour on both sides of Derby but with the services somewhat flighted.

 

[Purple Orange]

Or, in compensation for a lack of direct service on HS2, the XC service frequency could be increased to that seen on TPE: a train every 15 minutes from Birmingham to Sheffield. A turn up and go service along this corridor with a semi-fast stopping pattern would be a great improvement. This after all is one of the purposes of HS2 - freeing up 'classic' lines to run more trains closer together.

Exactly! The TPE service between Leeds & Manchester is very good for frequency (just not speed). This is what should happen on certain stretches.

 

[Bald Rick]

To my mind, sitting longer on the train is very much an enthusiast thing to do.

It really isn’t. It is a specific requirement for many passengers travelling long distance, particularly for passengers who travel infrequently and are unfamiliar with the ‘system’. Not coincidentally, Cross Coutnry has a higher proportion of this type of passenger than any other TOC IIRC.

 

[greatvoyager]

It really isn’t. It is a specific requirement for many passengers travelling long distance, particularly for passengers who travel infrequently and are unfamiliar with the ‘system’. Not coincidentally, Cross Coutnry has a higher proportion of this type of passenger than any other TOC IIRC.

I think direct trains are good in many ways, particularly as on XC the most useful interchange is New Street, which can be daunting.

 

[Purple Orange]

It really isn’t. It is a specific requirement for many passengers travelling long distance, particularly for passengers who travel infrequently and are unfamiliar with the ‘system’. Not coincidentally, Cross Coutnry has a higher proportion of this type of passenger than any other TOC IIRC.

I’d say my comment is as valid a claim as it is the other way to say mainly enthusiasts would prefer to change trains. I think it is a discredit to the general public - many of whom know how to navigate the railway network - to say that they’d rather waste an additional 1-2 hours each way, than change at OOC, Piccadilly or Curzon Street. How many millions nip around London Underground without problem?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’d say my comment is as valid a claim as it is the other way to say mainly enthusiasts would prefer to change trains. I think it is a discredit to the general public - many of whom know how to navigate the railway network - to say that they’d rather waste an additional 1-2 hours each way, than change at OOC, Piccadilly or Curzon Street. How many millions nip around London Underground without problem?

And how many use the car because they don't want to faff about crossing London with bags. (London is the main problem; same station changes are much less of one). Some even fear London generally.

It's public transport and it takes all sorts.

 

[Glenn1969]

Don't forget at the moment 92% of all journeys are still made by car. Ease of access to the vehicle is one reason for that.

 

[JonathanH]

Don't forget at the moment 92% of all journeys are still made by car. Ease of access to the vehicle is one reason for that.

I don't think that is 92% of all relevant journeys though. Someone who lives nowhere near a station isn't going to make their weekly trip to a supermarket by train.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think that is 92% of all relevant journeys though. Someone who lives nowhere near a station isn't going to make their weekly trip to a supermarket by train.

Indeed not, but even if you only consider relevant journeys the car is hugely dominant (arguing about whether it's 92% or 80% is missing the point). Only on very long journeys like London to Scotland might its appeal wane a bit, but then air kicks in.

 

[Purple Orange]

And how many use the car because they don't want to faff about crossing London with bags. (London is the main problem; same station changes are much less of one). Some even fear London generally.

It's public transport and it takes all sorts.

I’d say it is primarily journey times. Manchester to Southampton is 4 hours 16 mins on the train direct and 4 hours 10 mins with a change in London. The difference is too small, so there is no incentive to go through London really. It take 4 and a half hours to drive in one go, but let’s say 5 hours with a stop. With HS2, that journey time would drop to 3 hours via Euston & Waterloo.

Manchester to Reading is even better with a journey of roughly 90 mins and a change at OOC, compared to 3 hours 15 mins direct on XC or driving (no stop).

People need to do that journey twice of course, so the time savings are double.

 

[Bald Rick]

I’d say my comment is as valid a claim as it is the other way to say mainly enthusiasts would prefer to change trains. I think it is a discredit to the general public - many of whom know how to navigate the railway network - to say that they’d rather waste an additional 1-2 hours each way, than change at OOC, Piccadilly or Curzon Street. How many millions nip around London Underground without problem?

I’m not arguing that enthusiasts don’t prefer to change trains.

I’m arguing that there is a market segment that prefers not to. And that market segment is one which Cross Country has a large number of passengers in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

People need to do that journey twice of course, so the time savings are double.

You are making the assumption that peoples' time has a high value. It clearly doesn't in every case, because if it did nobody would ever travel by coach, for example.

Old Granny Smith is simply not even going to countenance going via London with her luggage. It simply isn't happening.

A young family with small children in tow might, but would prefer a direct journey.

You clearly can't have direct trains from everywhere to everywhere, but major places to other major places make sense. Which is what XC does.

Journeys where you can change at OOC (which will be well designed for the purpose and all in one complex excepted), but you simply can't expect people like that to be willing to trail across London on the Tube, because they won't - they'll drive.

The Southern WLL service is an example of something set up specifically to avoid changing in London that does quite well. Indeed, the one change at Clapham Jn you tend to need to/from it is likely to be a bit like OOC, though OOC will be nicer and designed better for the numbers using it.

 

[Purple Orange]

I’m not arguing that enthusiasts don’t prefer to change trains.

I’m arguing that there is a market segment that prefers not to. And that market segment is one which Cross Country has a large number of passengers in.

Yes I think we’re in agreement on there being a market segment, but perhaps it is the size of that segment and where it needs to serve that is up in the air.

Let’s say South West to Birmingham and South Coast to Birmingham sticks with 2 tph each, the questions whether 2 tph should continue to Manchester, should 1 tph continue to Leeds then Newcastle and should there be 1 tph to Newcastle via Doncaster?

I certainly see a need for a service via Doncaster, but whether 2 tph continue to the north east is another issue. Midlands connect seem to imply that the Manchester leg will be cut, therefore perhaps XC should focus on it’s traditional SW-NE corridor and SC-NE corridor.

You are making the assumption that peoples' time has a high value. It clearly doesn't in every case, because if it did nobody would ever travel by coach, for example.

Old Granny Smith is simply not even going to countenance going via London with her luggage. It simply isn't happening.

A young family with small children in tow might, but would prefer a direct journey.

Journeys where you can change at OOC (which will be well designed for the purpose and all in one complex excepted), but you simply can't expect people like that to be willing to trail across London on the Tube, because they won't - they'll drive.

The Southern WLL service is an example of something set up specifically to avoid changing in London that does quite well. Indeed, the one change at Clapham Jn you tend to need to/from it is likely to be a bit like OOC, though OOC will be nicer and designed better for the numbers using it.

Is old Granny Smith and a young family of 4 the best demographic to give valuable paths to on the Birmingham-Manchester leg travelling to Bournemouth? Or should those paths be used to focus on the towns & cities that are on the route but either see a very poor frequency therefore pushing people in to their car?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is old Granny Smith and a young family of 4 the best demographic to give valuable paths to on the Birmingham-Manchester leg travelling to Bournemouth? Or should those paths be used to focus on the towns & cities that are on the route but either see a very poor frequency therefore pushing people in to their car?

The railway may well decide to give up trying to serve certain market segments, and indeed old Granny Smith might be better served by a National Express coach and the family might be better off driving their electric car (which if full makes good use of road space), but it needs to be honest about what it's doing in that case; suggesting that these people will trek across London with their suitcases just shows a lack of understanding of the customer base.

There's a reasonably-sized customer segment that if you require them to go via London (OOC isn't quite the same, actual London involving the Tube or a longish walk, even Euston-St Pancras) or to a lesser extent Birmingham (walking Curzon St-New St) they simply won't use the train.

 

[Glenn1969]

I think the market segment is quite big, especially if people live a fair way from the station in the first place. EG I live in an area that hasn't got a direct train to Manchester Airport. We have used the train and been driven to Huddersfield station but when my sister is with us we always go from her house in a taxi. It may be more expensive for the 3 of us but it is also a lot more convenient. I think a large number of others will do the same including many would be XC passengers

 

[JamesT]

I’d say it is primarily journey times. Manchester to Southampton is 4 hours 16 mins on the train direct and 4 hours 10 mins with a change in London. The difference is too small, so there is no incentive to go through London really. It take 4 and a half hours to drive in one go, but let’s say 5 hours with a stop. With HS2, that journey time would drop to 3 hours via Euston & Waterloo.

Manchester to Reading is even better with a journey of roughly 90 mins and a change at OOC, compared to 3 hours 15 mins direct on XC or driving (no stop).

People need to do that journey twice of course, so the time savings are double.

If OOC is going to be promoted as the way for those from the South to get to the North on HS2, I'd wonder if there's a better way of integrating it into services from South of Reading. I assume the route into Paddington is pretty much stuffed full, so you couldn't send say a Southampton train that would normally reverse at Reading further in to give a single change at OOC to get to Manchester, rather than having to change from XC at Reading onto GWR and then again at OOC.

From Oxford (and points North), I'm likely to be looking towards changing at either International/Interchange or doing the New Street/Curzon Street shuffle. My last few trips to Scotland have involved changing from XC to Avanti at New Street so it's seems the obvious replacement. Going via OOC seems like far too much of a dogleg in the wrong direction.

 

[tetudo boy]

It may be a long time until things settle down on the WCML, but Liverpool definitely deserves XC services again, and more direct services. XC's service pattern state has been argued for a long time, and I don't see any problem with a Post-HS2 Liverpool to Oxford/Bournemouth service.

I must say, I'm liking what's stirring up here.

 

[Gareth]

It just brings home to my mind how royally ****ed Liverpool is if HS2 is fully realised. Notably slower journeys times to London and massively slower journey times to Birmingham compared to the titular capitals of Granadaland and Calendarland.

We might get some direct services south of Birmingham, big whoop. Even then, there's been no promise of such things outside of this thread.

 

[The Planner]

It just brings home to my mind how royally ****ed Liverpool is if HS2 is fully realised. Notably slower journeys times to London and massively slower journey times to Birmingham compared to the titular capitals of Granadaland and Calendarland.

We might get some direct services south of Birmingham, big whoop. Even then, there's been no promise of such things outside of this thread.

Errr, Liverpool gets 2tph HS2 to London?

 

[Gareth]

Wow.

 

[Purple Orange]

If OOC is going to be promoted as the way for those from the South to get to the North on HS2, I'd wonder if there's a better way of integrating it into services from South of Reading. I assume the route into Paddington is pretty much stuffed full, so you couldn't send say a Southampton train that would normally reverse at Reading further in to give a single change at OOC to get to Manchester, rather than having to change from XC at Reading onto GWR and then again at OOC.

From Oxford (and points North), I'm likely to be looking towards changing at either International/Interchange or doing the New Street/Curzon Street shuffle. My last few trips to Scotland have involved changing from XC to Avanti at New Street so it's seems the obvious replacement. Going via OOC seems like far too much of a dogleg in the wrong direction.

If journey times are favourable, does it matter that it looks like a dog leg route? In truth both routes will be advertised depending on when you want to travel. To OOC there will be more services therefore if you need to arrive by a certain time that might be the best option.

The railway may well decide to give up trying to serve certain market segments, and indeed old Granny Smith might be better served by a National Express coach and the family might be better off driving their electric car (which if full makes good use of road space), but it needs to be honest about what it's doing in that case; suggesting that these people will trek across London with their suitcases just shows a lack of understanding of the customer base.

There's a reasonably-sized customer segment that if you require them to go via London (OOC isn't quite the same, actual London involving the Tube or a longish walk, even Euston-St Pancras) or to a lesser extent Birmingham (walking Curzon St-New St) they simply won't use the train.

We’re talking a small flow of people here. How many really make the journey from the south coast all the way to Leeds or Manchester? We’re also not saying no direct trains. Do they need more than 1 tph beyond Birmingham? Otherwise it will be carrying fresh air. People going to/from Brighton seem to cope.

My other counter question is: is that customer segment that are put off by cross London flows from Southampton & Bournemouth bigger or smaller than the number of people who live on the commuter routes in to Birmingham & Manchester, who have 1 or 2 stoppers each hour, who then just drive in to the city centre every week rather than get the train?

Is it not better to have 1 XC in to Manchester each hour (like Leeds), with the other path given over to a Northern Stopper from Stoke or Macclesfield? Same on the journey from Stoke to Birmingham New Street.

As an aside, it has been good to see 8-car XC services in to Piccadilly.

 

[Ianno87]

I’m not arguing that enthusiasts don’t prefer to change trains.

I’m arguing that there is a market segment that prefers not to. And that market segment is one which Cross Country has a large number of passengers in.

I'd love to get some data on, for a typical XC service departing (say) Manchester, how many passengers on that train are still on by the time the train reaches Stoke/Brum/Bristol/Oxford/Reading/wherever, to see where the "tail off" in volume of passengers occurs starting from each stop.

Taking New Street as an example, I've been on XC services where practically the entire load of passengers changed over there, whereas on others have only a relatively low proportion of people get off/on.

 

[Purple Orange]

I'd love to get some data on, for a typical XC service departing (say) Manchester, how many passengers on that train are still on by the time the train reaches Stoke/Brum/Bristol/Oxford/Reading/wherever, to see where the "tail off" in volume of passengers occurs starting from each stop.

Taking New Street as an example, I've been on XC services where practically the entire load of passengers changed over there, whereas on others have only a relatively low proportion of people get off/on.

The countless times I’ve been on a XC departing Piccadilly and the vast majority of reservations are for New Street. Manchester-Birmingham is the main flow north of Brum and it really is a case of 3 services stitched together to make 1. Take away the main flow north of Brum on to HS2 and the case for continuing 2 XC each hour from Piccadilly on the WCML sinks like brick.

Perhaps future south coast and south west services from Manchester & Sheffield should operate like the TPE services to Scotland on the WCML.

• 1tp2h Manchester - Birmingham - Plymouth
• 1tp2h Manchester - Birmingham - Bournemouth
• 1tp2h Newcastle - Leeds - Birmingham - Plymouth
• 1tp2h Newcastle - Leeds - Birmingham - Bournemouth
• 1tp2h Liverpool - Birmingham - Plymouth
• 1tp2h Liverpool - Birmingham - Bournemouth
• 1tp2h Hull - Doncaster - Birmingham - Plymouth
• 1tp2h Hull - Doncaster - Birmingham - Bournemouth

 

[Gareth]

It's fairly standard for any service that has a large city as an intermediate destination to have a good proportion of passengers to board and alight there. I doubt XC is exceptional in that regard.

 

[The Planner]

Wow.

How many should it get then?

 

[Metrolink]

What is it about XC passengers that they are seen as less capable of changing trains than anyone else? If someone lives east or south of London and wants to go North they have to change trains in London. They know this is going to give the quickest service offering.

I don’t see many holidayers travelling from Maidstone to Manchester. That’s difference. North to Devon/ Cornwall on the other hand actually has some sort of demand for services.

I’m not saying that leads to 3tph Birmingham - Plymouth/ Reading but some service pattern needs to be worked out for the passengers needs. For example some XC services use Cornwall branch lines during the summer period. Two seperate timetables (off - season and summer) should be worked out to provide the needs of the regular and summer passengers flow, such as including Hull and Liverpool to the XC network and adding additional trains per hour on Birmingham - Plymouth (that’s services originating in the North btw). I think that’s the best change to services that could happen in my opinion - except getting rid of those voyagers .

 

[London Trains]

Couldnt the XC services between Birmingham and Manchester just be directly replaced by a semi fast (similar to the Birmingham to Liverpool service) probably run by LNWR, since a fast service would no longer be needed:

Birmingham New St to Manchester Piccadilly 2tph (Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stone, Stoke, Kidsgrove, Congleton, Macclesfield, Cheadle Hulme, Stockport)

The Northern stopper could terminate at Macclesfield since all of the stops have been replaced with this service. Congleton would now have a half decent service, especially on Sundays.

The Birmingham to Crewe service would cease to exist as it would be pointless. Alsager would only be served by the EMR service in this situation but nowhere else would lose out.

The XC services between Birmingham and the south coast could be similarly removed and replaced with a semi fast service between Birmingham and Oxford, run by either LNWR or Chiltern, as a service further south wouldnt be required anymore due to much faster journey times via OOC:

Birmingham New St to Oxford 2tph (Bham Intl, Coventry, Kenilworth, Leamington Spa, Banbury)

The Leamington to Nuneaton service can be reverted to Coventry to Nuneaton.

XC paths south of Oxford could be used to provide more services into London on the GWML and SWML (providing there are paths further in), also making it even easier to get to HS2.

These services could be linked but would probably be better separate at least until Coventry to Oxford electrification as electric 350s/Aventras could be used on the Birmingham to Manchester service.

Services from Bristol and the southwest could terminate at New St or be diverted to Moor St (for easier changes from HS2 services) as some are planned to.

 

[Gareth]

How many should it get then?

Ten.

 

[adrock1976]

Couldnt the XC services between Birmingham and Manchester just be directly replaced by a semi fast (similar to the Birmingham to Liverpool service) probably run by LNWR, since a fast service would no longer be needed:

Birmingham New St to Manchester Piccadilly 2tph (Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stone, Stoke, Kidsgrove, Congleton, Macclesfield, Cheadle Hulme, Stockport)

The Northern stopper could terminate at Macclesfield since all of the stops have been replaced with this service. Congleton would now have a half decent service, especially on Sundays.

The Birmingham to Crewe service would cease to exist as it would be pointless. Alsager would only be served by the EMR service in this situation but nowhere else would lose out.

The XC services between Birmingham and the south coast could be similarly removed and replaced with a semi fast service between Birmingham and Oxford, run by either LNWR or Chiltern, as a service further south wouldnt be required anymore due to much faster journey times via OOC:

Birmingham New St to Oxford 2tph (Bham Intl, Coventry, Kenilworth, Leamington Spa, Banbury)

The Leamington to Nuneaton service can be reverted to Coventry to Nuneaton.

XC paths south of Oxford could be used to provide more services into London on the GWML and SWML (providing there are paths further in), also making it even easier to get to HS2.

These services could be linked but would probably be better separate at least until Coventry to Oxford electrification as electric 350s/Aventras could be used on the Birmingham to Manchester service.

Services from Bristol and the southwest could terminate at New St or be diverted to Moor St (for easier changes from HS2 services) as some are planned to.

There has been a long campaign in Warwickshire to reopen Kenilworth station and run trains between Leamington Spa and Nuneaton, so as to provide one change journey at Nuneaton for Leamington - East Midlands Region passengers (mainly Leicester). Also, see the NUCKLE website (Nuneaton - Coventry - Leamington Spa).

I believe there are plans to reinstate the former dive under at Nuneaton (maybe a curve to/from Platform 1 for trains to reverse direction?) as Coventry had its direct trains to Leicester curtailed at Nuneaton when the track works back in 2004 severed the connection.

Also,(using pre 1974 local government boundaries), the only part of Warwickshire that will have HS2 trains calling will be Birmingham. With the exception of Interchange near the airport and M42, the rest of Warwickshire does not have any HS2 services at all, hence how Warwickshire County Council are opposed to any reductions in frequency at Coventry and have campaigned for the present day Newcastle - Reading/Southampton via Doncaster to run via International and Coventry instead of Solihull.

Ten.

Ten HS2 trains Liverpool Lime Street - London?