Cross-Country Train Lengths

[The Stationmaster]

They already did! When I last travelled from here to Manchester, I was surprised to find that XC via Reading cost me more than going via London.

 

For many years now, there has been a plan to build a new station near the football stadium in Reading where there are a lot of offices. If that does happen, it would be quite reasonable for the XC services not to reverse at Reading General.

 

Western access to Heathrow is another factor in this equation as that would almost certainly lead to the Basingstoke - Reading service being extended into Heathrow as a replacement for the two RailAir coach services.

 

With the shortage of stock that XC has, the only real solution in the short term would be to reduce the service to its "core" and make passengers change trains to other operators' services.

 

Reading Green Park station was given the final go-ahead by Reading Council in September although there seems to be nothing in the local press as yet to indicate that work has started.  As it is intended to be mainly a local transport hub to relieve local roads and serve new housing estates I suspect that stopping XC services there is more likely to add to overcrowding on them rather than relieve it!

 

The specific point about XC using Reading (General - as it once was) is that it is a major interchange with a number of other routes hence there is not only a considerable volume and joining and alighting long distance passengers but it can also handle those XC trains which terminate and stand for a while.  With only two platform faces Green Park definitely won't offer the latter facility and the only interchange it will offer is with Reading Basingstoke stoppers thus adding an extra change for most people who currently join at Reading.  

 

Apart from electrification (if it happens) extending Reading - Basingstoke trains to Heathrow is really a very open book with Oxford being mentioned far more frequently in that context thus far although things could change.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Yes, but there seems already to be concern that Reading capacity post-Crossrail may be a bit limited for terminating/reversing XC services.

 

True that Oxford is more often mentioned as the other end of a western access Heathrow service but it seems to me more likely that it would be both Oxford and Basingstoke, alternating.

[royaloak]

For many years now, there has been a plan to build a new station near the football stadium in Reading where there are a lot of offices. If that does happen, it would be quite reasonable for the XC services not to reverse at Reading General.

Eh?

How do you work that out?

Just because some a new station is being built near some offices doesnt mean XC will be calling at it, they dont call at any of the other small stations, plus what about all the people who want to interchange at Reading?

 

I dont understand the reasoning for your supposition that a small new station opening means XC will withdraw from calling at Reading!

[D854_Tiger]

e The post he was quoting was on about XC Voyagers so it is fair to assume that he was referring to XC Voyagers.

 

 

Not all of the 4 coach 221s went to West Coast, one of the 4 coach 221s (221141) went to XC.

 

The reason XC disabled the tilt on their 221s was because the track access charges are lower for a non tilt 221 than they are for a tilting one so they save quite a bit of money bearing in mind the limited amount of tilt enabled track they run on.

 

 

The only XC section, nowadays, that would benefit from tilt is between Stoke and Manchester as most of XCs other 125 mph operation doesn't require it.

 

Birmingham all the way through to Edinburgh, via York and Newcastle, has substantial amounts of 125 mph running but none of it requiring tilt.

 

The only other bits cleared for 125 mph are Reading - Didcot and Wolverhampton - Stafford again neither requiring tilt.

 

Then, if the DfT were serious about reducing the timings between Birmingham and Manchester some limited stop services would be the best way to achieve that and that prospect does get raised from time to time, indeed, I believe it may well happen depending on the outcome of the new WCML franchise discussions.

[D854_Tiger]

Eh?

How do you work that out?

Just because some a new station is being built near some offices doesnt mean XC will be calling at it, they dont call at any of the other small stations, plus what about all the people who want to interchange at Reading?

 

I dont understand the reasoning for your supposition that a small new station opening means XC will withdraw from calling at Reading!

 

Back in the day, Midlands - South Coast services (originating from either Snow Hill or via the GC) used to call at Reading West to avoid the reversal at General.

 

But I would certainly not like that as Reading is my preferred route for both Heathrow (via Paddington - sod the coach) and Gatwick, best way to do it when lugging bags around and, let's face it, you're never in a rush nowadays when flying, the amount of check-in time they insist upon.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Eh?

How do you work that out?

Just because some a new station is being built near some offices doesnt mean XC will be calling at it, they dont call at any of the other small stations, plus what about all the people who want to interchange at Reading?

 

I dont understand the reasoning for your supposition that a small new station opening means XC will withdraw from calling at Reading!

 

I wonder how many people interchange off an XC service at Reading. Where would they go to that they could not reach as easily via another route?

 

I have not seen recent plans for Green Park. When I was involved with Thames Valley CoC (about 10  years ago), the plans were for a station that could certainly accommodate the XC services and with adjoining infrastructure to support that.

[D854_Tiger]

I wonder how many people interchange off an XC service at Reading. Where would they go to that they could not reach as easily via another route?

 

I have not seen recent plans for Green Park. When I was involved with Thames Valley CoC (about 10  years ago), the plans were for a station that could certainly accommodate the XC services and with adjoining infrastructure to support that.

 

Swindon and the Airports mostly.

 

Swindon is quite a popular booking from the north, out of XC via Reading, so much so, that the routing guide always used to have a specific easement, making fares valid, as XC doesn't stop at Didcot the obvious changing point.

[D854_Tiger]

Swindon and the Airports mostly.

 

Swindon is quite a popular booking from the north, out of XC via Reading, so much so, that the routing guide always used to have a specific easement, making fares valid, as XC doesn't stop at Didcot the obvious changing point.

 

P.S. I believe Chippenham tickets are valid that way as well.

[D854_Tiger]

P.S. I believe Chippenham tickets are valid that way as well.

P.P.S. Maidenhead and Slough as well.

 

Also Southall has considerable ties with Brum, within the Asian community.

 

A colleague claims to have to go down there on an almost fortnightly basis for the weddings.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Swindon and the Airports mostly.

 

Swindon is quite a popular booking from the north, out of XC via Reading, so much so, that the routing guide always used to have a specific easement, making fares valid, as XC doesn't stop at Didcot the obvious changing point.

 

I find it a bit strange that XC does not call at Didcot.

 

As to the airports, an Oxford - Gatwick is now a sensible option with the new (old) underpass at Reading.

[royaloak]

The only other bits cleared for 125 mph are Reading - Didcot <snipped> not requiring tilt.

But it does require ATP to run above 100mph and Voyagers are not ATP fitted so its 100mph for them.

[royaloak]

Back in the day, Midlands - South Coast services (originating from either Snow Hill or via the GC) used to call at Reading West to avoid the reversal at General.

Probably because of the aggro of the 47 running around in the much more restricted old Reading station.

[Edwin_m]

Swindon and the Airports mostly.

 

Swindon is quite a popular booking from the north, out of XC via Reading, so much so, that the routing guide always used to have a specific easement, making fares valid, as XC doesn't stop at Didcot the obvious changing point.

Plus presumably journeys like Bracknell-Birmingham. 

 

Heathrow-Reading trains would be unlikely to continue to Basingstoke if there was a southern as well as a western link into Heathrow, as the southern link would be a better option for Heathrow to most South Western stations. 

[andy stroud]

In this day and age, I find it hard to accept that there are so many long distance busy services  formed of such short trains. It would seem to me that lessons are not being learned.  I am concerned that the new Great Western fleet will have so many five coach trains, despite being aware of  all logic behind it. All well and good to increase service frequency, but that in itself will attract more customers through promotional compaigns, and then it's back to square one.- overcrowding.

Edited December 9, 2017 by andy stroud

[royaloak]

In this day and age, I find it hard to accept that there are so many long distance busy services  formed of such short trains. It would seem to me that lessons are not being learned.  I am concerned that the new Great Western fleet will have so many five coach trains, despite being aware of  all logic behind it. All well and good to increase service frequency, but that in itself will attract more customers through promotional compaigns, and then it's back to square one.- overcrowding.

But we have been assured the 5 coach GWR will form some 5 coach sets off peak but only on limited services, they will only ever run as double sets at peak times. 

 

And a partridge in a pear tree.

[andy stroud]

But we have been assured the 5 coach GWR will form some 5 coach sets off peak but only on limited services, they will only ever run as double sets at peak times. 

 

And a partridge in a pear tree.

we will see.

[royaloak]

we will see.

We already have!

 

A couple of weeks ago the 2 sets wouldnt couple at Stoke Gifford so one of the diagrams was 5 vice 10.

Edited December 9, 2017 by royaloak

[Robert Shrives]

I know and I never said they were.  The post I replied to said that 4 car units never had tilt.  Some did when they were new. 

 

Hi Sorry for that if I misunderstood  your post.

Robert  

[The Stationmaster]

I wonder how many people interchange off an XC service at Reading. Where would they go to that they could not reach as easily via another route?

 

I have not seen recent plans for Green Park. When I was involved with Thames Valley CoC (about 10  years ago), the plans were for a station that could certainly accommodate the XC services and with adjoining infrastructure to support that.

 

Having recently watched quite a number of weekday XC services at Reading (while waiting for other trains, I'll discount my Warley trip as that was exceptional Saturday loadings) I reckon Reading joiners are rarely fewer than a couple of dozen - thirty and can amount to as much as around half a train load.  My impression is that far more join northbound trains than join southbound.  Detrainers tend to be similar sort of numbers although again  my usual impression is that there are more people coming from 'the north' rather than the south.

 

By way of comparison the number of people I see alighting from Cross Country trains from the south is considerably less than those coming off the Basinsgstoke stoppers.

 

Dealing with the XC trains at reading West would pose considerable problems apart from the obvious one of passengers having to get to & from that station.  It has minimal facilities and platform width can't be far off the legal minimum plus it would probably require staffing to deal with the sort of passenger numbers that use XC trains.  In fact in many respects a far better alternative would be to use Tilehurst which has undercover waiting space and wider platforms but would of course be just as much an awkward extra change of trains as Reading West would be.

 

And yes, with Crossrail's latest aspirations./announced intention to run 4 trains per hour through to Reading I do seriously wonder about future platform capacity at Reading with what are currently at least a couple of through trains per hour on the Relief side becoming two separate trains from opposite directions and in the case of Crossrail trains occupying both the A and B section of a platform face.  The previous (early 1990s) iteration of Crossrail ran out of platform space at Reading and running double the number of terminating trains to double the number of potential platform faces seems to me like a similar sort of maths (and that's before terminators from the west are taken into account).

[D854_Tiger]

In this day and age, I find it hard to accept that there are so many long distance busy services  formed of such short trains. It would seem to me that lessons are not being learned.  I am concerned that the new Great Western fleet will have so many five coach trains, despite being aware of  all logic behind it. All well and good to increase service frequency, but that in itself will attract more customers through promotional compaigns, and then it's back to square one.- overcrowding.

 

I believe the plan is for the five car sets to eventually gravitate to the Oxford and Cotswold line and the Cheltenham line and will only turn up on one (two sets) train per hour (out of four) on the far busier core routes to South Wales and Bristol so that they can divide en-route.

 

Apparently, they will be doubled up or replaced by a nine car set at peak times on those routes as well.

 

At quieter times of the day they may well turn up anywhere but the class 180s seemed to cope on that same basis.

 

Having said all that, it will happen, sods law says it will happen, at the worst possible time and after a preceding train (or trains) has been cancelled, then we get to see how many people can fit into a Mini.

[Andrew Young]

The post he was quoting was on about XC Voyagers so it is fair to assume that he was referring to XC Voyagers.

 

 

Not all of the 4 coach 221s went to West Coast, one of the 4 coach 221s (221141) went to XC.

 

The reason XC disabled the tilt on their 221s was because the track access charges are lower for a non tilt 221 than they are for a tilting one so they save quite a bit of money bearing in mind the limited amount of tilt enabled track they run on.

Not strictly true....

 

221 Voyagers were fitted with tilt so as to fit in amongst the Pendolinos on the WCML, specifically when working Euston to Holyhead services for WC and XC services from New St to Glasgow via WCML.

 

When the franchises were split in 2007, all those services that required tilt came under the West Coast franchise. The one exception was the tilt down towards Aynho Jn and essentially Wolverhampton to Stafford with the number of stops XC services make on the NEw St to Manchester corridor. Tilt on Voyagers was particularly unreliable and even on the routes where the sets didn't tilt we had no end of tilt failures resulting in trains cancelled and a return to Central Rivers at 40mph max. The furthest I drove one was back from York, a mind numbing exercise! Therefore, with most routes benefitting from tilt falling under the WC franchise, it didn't take an expert to realise that removing the unreliable tilt mechanism would go a long way to improving reliability. Whilst you also pay lower track access charges, the amount of route miles XC services could benefit from this were very small.

 

There are different timings for 220 and 221 services units on all routes. There was tilt on the 221 on some routes, but their additional weight makes them slower on others as 220s have superior acceleration. A decision was made very early on in the AXC franchise to provide flexibility with sets and prevent incurring delay when substituting a 221 for a 220 that all Voyager services are timed for 221 timings, whatever the booked traction.

 

Now if only the money that was spent on tilt had been spent on building longer sets....

 

My colleagues in train planning do as far as I'm aware attempt to diagram five car 221 units on the busier services as far as possible, namely Bournemouth to Manchester and the Plymouth to Scotland services. There are also a few that run as eight cars for part or all of their journeys.

 

The DfT decides on how much stock XC (and all other franchises) gets to run, their extension of the current XC franchise only achieved the continuation of the status quo rather than doing something about overcrowding!

 

What happens next depends on what shape the next XC franchise forms, I'm pretty confident that the DfT will make some changes. As for solving the overcrowding, without electric string going up along the MML, can't see us getting any 222's. suspect that the most cost effective solution would be for WC to replace their 221's with IEP bi-modal trains or some such traction and have all the 221's transfer to XC. But, logic and the DfT rarely go together....

 

Andrew

Edited December 11, 2017 by Andrew Young

[dmustu]

But it does require ATP to run above 100mph and Voyagers are not ATP fitted so its 100mph for them.

 

Except for Didcot to Reading, where 125mph is allowed without ATP. (For XC, don't know about other operators).

Edited December 11, 2017 by dmustu