How would YOU solve CrossCountry ?

[whole diary]

[REVUpminster]

London Buses had this problem 40 years ago of late running and traffic congestion. Their solution was to shorten the routes. Not liked but inevitable.

GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have done it with the the Cardiff-Penzance services; although with the 175s I thought they might come back but the train is so unreliable and the stock has had no effect on increasing capacity in Devon and Cornwall or elsewhere by releasing the 158s to Bristol.

[broadgage]

Buy or lease a limited number of FULL  LENGTH trains, fixed formation 9 or 10 vehicles. Use these on the most popular services, thereby freeing up existing short units to double up and relieve overcrowding.

Avoid "flexible train length" as flexible means shorter.
Include ample luggage space, with provision for cycles and surfboards.
A full buffet.
Selective door opening.
Avoid anything made by Hitachi, as that has become a toxic brand.

[Richard Fairhurst]

In the absence of a replacement for the Voyagers, I'd increase regional services on the CrossCountry routes where there's overcrowding.

So more GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) services on Oxford–Banbury. More Chiltern services on Banbury–Birmingham (and that's happening!). More regional services on Cheltenham–Birmingham – perhaps by extending the TfW^▸ (Transport for Wales) service from Cardiff. An EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) shuttle from Birmingham to Manchester using the spare 350s.

I know each of these have their own challenges. But generally I think expecting long-distance CrossCountry services to be the main provider for local journeys is a fool's errand.

[a-driver]

Avoid anything made by Hitachi, as that has become a toxic brand.

I’d tend to agree…. but with nationalisation round the corner it would make more sense to go with Hitachi IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train - replacement for HSTs (manufactured by Hitachi in Kobe, Japan)).  Current GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) crews could then easily cover current XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) work.

[paul7575]

Can’t really see nationalisation causing the Voyagers to be replaced 10-15 years before their due date, as has already been said.

[lbraine]

The top 10 biggest cities and urban areas in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) by built-up area (BUA) and metropolitan population are:
London: ~10.4 million
Birmingham: ~2.6 million
Manchester: ~2.5 million
Liverpool: ~1.2 million
Leeds: ~1.06 million
Glasgow: ~970,000
Newcastle upon Tyne: ~760,000
Nottingham: ~649,000
Bristol: ~615,000
Sheffield: ~549,000

Interesting data. If (re)designing the cross country network I’d start here and select station pairs that didn’t have a ‘natural’ alternative service. For example, no need for a cross country service between Glasgow and Edinburgh or between Manchester and Liverpool, where other providers cover these off.

I don’t think one change of train is too much to ask for passengers venturing cross country, although it maybe two if there is a change required at each end. So the cross country network becomes a true ‘inter-city’ network.

What I can’t rationalise is whether the general travelling public will see the one/two changes and too many and then bolt for the car alternative ? I suspect this might be case.

[eightonedee]

There's an immediate problem with this approach Ibraine.

If you look at the destinations currently covered by Cross Country,  you'll see that thre are " strings" of urban areas that together have larger populations, like Southampton and Bournemouth/Christchurch/Poole, or Banbury/Oxford/Reading/Basingstoke, or Taunton/Exeter/Plymouth. Many of the conurbations you mention already are connected by the main line network radiating out of London or lie close together with reasonable existing links.

I think that the current Cross Country network is just about right, possibly only needing a few trains to Liverpool, Plymouth or Brighton to be better,  but I perfectly understand that line capacity constraints and the relatively modest additional fare revenue might not justify this or make it possible.

All it needs is some longer trains (it borders on the criminal that after nearly two years of a new government with a minister from the rail industry they have Voyager units stored out of use)
and some work on pathing of trains and timetabling to eliminate as many conflicts that usually seem resolved at the expense of Cross Country trains, notwithstanding the generous lay over periods at stops like Reading, and you should have something really useful. I am heartened to read some positive comments in this thread to support this view.

And no, I don't see limits on access to services for shorter distance travellers or increasing other parallel services (for which there's probably not the line capacity) as necessary.  If there's more seats on lengthened trains that should address the issue.  The occasional full and standing evening rush hour train between New Street and Leamington is a price we should be happy to pay for the convenience of through trains between the South Coast/Thames Valley and Birmingham and the North and we shouldn't begrudge some West Midlands commuters using them to get home a little earlier.  Sit back, relax and look forward to enjoying the countryside down to Oxford once they have got off.

[REVUpminster]

You can't get a Cross Country train from Plymouth to Essex and East Anglia. You are expected to change in London (Crossrail has made that easier); so for Plymouth trains, why go further than Birmingham which could be the hub for the north. Maybe on a Saturday there is a justification for Penzance-Scotland but I doubt it.

[NickB]

HS3

 

[rogerw]

You can't get a Cross Country train from Plymouth to Essex and East Anglia. You are expected to change in London (Crossrail has made that easier); so for Plymouth trains, why go further than Birmingham which could be the hub for the north. Maybe on a Saturday there is a justification for Penzance-Scotland but I doubt it.

Not everybody starts from Plymouth. There are a significant number of journeys from the southwest to Derby and north thereof which cross Birmingham. A change at Birmingham is not easy and passengers prefer through trains. My last 2 journeys on Cross Country were Bristol Parkway to York and Edinburgh to Bristol Parkway. I would not have welcomed a change at Birmingham

[grahame]

You can't get a Cross Country train from Plymouth to Essex and East Anglia. You are expected to change in London (Crossrail has made that easier); so for Plymouth trains, why go further than Birmingham which could be the hub for the north. Maybe on a Saturday there is a justification for Penzance-Scotland but I doubt it.

Not everybody starts from Plymouth. There are a significant number of journeys from the southwest to Derby and north thereof which cross Birmingham. A change at Birmingham is not easy and passengers prefer through trains. My last 2 journeys on Cross Country were Bristol Parkway to York and Edinburgh to Bristol Parkway. I would not have welcomed a change at Birmingham

Indeed.

My personal preference for a long distance journey where it cannot me made direct is for the change of trains to be earlier or later in the journey so I can be settle most of the time.   Home to Edinburgh - rather change at Cheltenham Spa ...

[John D]

Cross country serves a weird shaped network,
apologies for the map with graphics, but it's only one on their site that is roughly to scale rather than diagram form.

https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/sites/default/files/basic_page_docs/12058264_illustrated_route_map_q4_2023_a4_-1.pdf

Now if compare that to UK^▸ (United Kingdom) population hubs then it's obvious that cross country network serves something operationally convenient rather than geographically sensible.

As an aside, and as someone aged 61 and retired (but not yet 67 and getting state pension), came across this map whilst checking (known as silver cities, or where us oldies tend to be based)

https://www.centreforcities.org/blog/silver-cities-ageing-population-changing-urban-britain/

Fairly obvious that XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) doesn't really serve some areas with higher than average retired very well either.   It doesn't serve lots of university cities either, so isn't that useful for those who don't (or chose not to) drive, but need to make longer journeys

Using my senior railcard, could visit places by train, but XC is rather slow and uncomfortable to reach some of them.   My last trip on XC was Bristol-Durham, but we came back via Kings Cross as got cheap First class advance (and LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) provides food and drink), both routes took about same time between Durham and BoA^▸ (Bradford-on-Avon station)

Should XC run routes that are clearly key secondary linking routes, which don't currently, instead of duplicating fast electric services such as York-Scotland.  

I would be merging XC and the longer routes of Transpennine (TP local routes should be northern or metro mayor routes) and adding in key routes like Cardiff-Portsmouth to give a national network that isn't London destination.  

At the moment XC acts more like a Birmingham based outer suburban network, rather than a UK network bypassing London.   London is important but not everyone needs to be routed to change trains there.  Even the French run TGVs^▸ (Train a Grande Vitesse) bypassing Paris to connect different parts of the country.

[eightonedee]

Cross country serves a weird shaped network,
apologies for the map with graphics, but it's only one on their site that is roughly to scale rather than diagram form.

https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/sites/default/files/basic_page_docs/12058264_illustrated_route_map_q4_2023_a4_-1.pdf

Now if compare that to UK^▸ (United Kingdom) population hubs then it's obvious that cross country network serves something operationally convenient rather than geographically sensible.

and

You can't get a Cross Country train from Plymouth to Essex and East Anglia

That's simply because (with the exception of the Stanstead line, added later) it reflects where the available lines for express routes avoiding London are, namely Bristol or Cardiff to Basingstoke, Basingstoke to Reading, Oxford to Birmingham, Birmingham to Derby and Sheffield to Leeds or York.

If we'd had East/West via an Oxford-Cambridge link we might have had (and might still get) direct links between the South West and East Anglia.

Cross Country is far more than an enhanced Birmingham suburban service. Choosing to go via London is at least a matter of choice (I've been grateful to avoid a TfL^» (Transport for London - about) cross-London transfer on more than one occasion), and one of the things that has become clear to me, both from being a member of this forum and speaking to friends who do not use the railways as much as I do, is that changing trains is something many don't like doing or acts as a disincentive to using the train. And, having worked much of my career in Reading and Guildford, I've had a number of colleagues delighted to find that they can get to meetings in Manchester or Birmingham without the hassle of travelling across London.

I would mostly use the car for travel to Cambridge, Essex or East Anglia, but part of that was quite a bit of what I did involved clients based out of town centres or attending site visits in rural or suburban locations. But outside East Anglia, their network provides a number of links between the main commercial service centres which avoid London. There's also no shortage of either students or tourists on their trains. It ain't broke, but could do with another shot of investment like it got just after the turn of the century, when in consequence the Reading-Birmingham corridor was reported to have had the greatest increase in traffic of any UK rail route.   

[grahame]

That's simply because (with the exception of the Stanstead line, added later) it reflects where the available lines for express routes avoiding London are, namely Bristol or Cardiff to Basingstoke, Basingstoke to Reading, Oxford to Birmingham, Birmingham to Derby and Sheffield to Leeds or York.

If we'd had East/West via an Oxford-Cambridge link we might have had (and might still get) direct links between the South West and East Anglia.

You may also call the Swansea -> Portsmouth and Brighton service (as it was) Cross County, and Liverpool - Newcastle ... under GBR^▸ (Great British Railways) there is some logic to move things between logical divisions for today rather than for the last 30 years.  Might add the Marches line too.

[LiskeardRich]

You can't get a Cross Country train from Plymouth to Essex and East Anglia. You are expected to change in London (Crossrail has made that easier); so for Plymouth trains, why go further than Birmingham which could be the hub for the north. Maybe on a Saturday there is a justification for Penzance-Scotland but I doubt it.

National Express coaches have gone down this route. From the Plymouth and Cornwall we used to have through coaches to the north. Now we have services to Birmingham with various connections to different locutions in the north.