How to fix Britain's Railways (Part 2): Intercity and Regional

In this second part of my series on transforming Britain's rail network for the better, we'll cover the two main sectors that should make up British Railways: Intercity and Regional.
Discord: / discord
Music:
Josef Suk, Serenade, Op 6 - performed by A Far Cry
Photography:
kitmasterbloke, Gillett's Crossing from Bristol, The Basingstoker, Tom and Nanda Sluijsmans from Den Haag, Nederland, CC BY 2.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
Txllxt TxllxT, Albinfo, Samuel George Baugh, Geof Sheppard, Wanfried-Dublin, Hhwheat, AlejandroLinaresGarcia and Kaviyadharshini Selvakumar, CC BY-SA 4.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
CrossCountry
GWR
TheFrog001, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

[@lukeherring8275]

Your description of XC as a sort of plague which spreads its main symptom of delay to other unsuspecting services is both accurate and very funny.

[@GWVillager]

It happens all too often! I’ve had the displeasure of experiencing it many times…

[@lyramsr]

I see that immunity profile picture! incredible album

[@nathanw9770]

GWR is like this as well funnily enough spreading their delays to XC and their own regional services. Exeter St David's for example is a station heavily affected by this.

[@HesterClapp]

Also we need integrated timetables between intercity and regional trains

[@pedromorgan99]

and buses ;-)

[@The_New_IKB]

A clock face timetable would be best, have trains at the top of the hour and then every 15 mins or closer.

[@kevinrichard100]

In other words, organise as per the European Standard: HSR InterCity Regional SBahn/RER.

[@alfredlamowen]

Had a proper "remember what they took from you" moment when I saw a 323 in regional railways livery in service

[@GWVillager]

Ah yes, the Centro branding. That shouldn't really be regional in my view, but it was better than what it is now.

[@pleaseinsertfunnyname]

I would really appreciate More of a focus when it comes to making the railway more accessible to disabled passengers not just on the trains but making automated announcements a absolute must for people with seeings difficulties maby even reinstating staff at more stations

[@kritterz3889]

I gotta say man, your channel is too underrated. Keep the work up with the uploads, its always so entertaining to even re-watch your railway overview videos.

[@stepheng7586]

I would bring back Network South East and of course Intercity.......both very recognisable brands. I would also have Regional Express and Regional Local as brands. As an Example the Ilkley to Leeds route would be Regional Local and the York to Blackpool route would be Regional Express. So at major station like Leeds there would be 3 types of services working together instead of the present 4 fragmented TOCs who only look after themselves.

[@robshipway2269]

The problem with the name Network South East, is that it covered more than the South East area from London, hence why I think the name 'Southern' would be better, that way it could be used along the south coast from East to West up as far as the likes of Bedford and Milton Keynes.

[@jimbo6059]

Network Southeast was a very profitable area, when they decided to sell off the railways, Network Southeast was fragmented, until recently we still had trains in Network Southeast colours. My section became Network Southcentral, which is the core London to Brighton line and then east and west out of Brighton, the Arun valley line which splits from the London to Brighton at three bridges, and a Redhill to Tonbridge line, we also have commuter routes in London too. Multiple private franchisees later, I think it's been a bit of a disaster but the company that run it are in the governments back pocket as they got Thameslink and the Gatwick express too and made a bitofa mockery out of it. Great video.

[@ergotot45]

Great videos......Far too many sensible ideas here to ever be adopted by any government of the UK unfortunately......too many aspects of the UK rail industry are broken, the majority since privatisation. The railway,s like the NHS, are destined to be a "political football" forever. But we, like you, can dream I suppose!

[@GWVillager]

It is indeed a shame, but the railways do always seem to be the 15th or so priority, and thus never get the attention they deserve. However (hopefully) we can try and influence public opinion just a little bit.

[@tomwatts703]

Sorry in advance for the long comment but you make a lot of good points. Firstly, absolutely agreed on Cross Country, and I'm extremely disappointed that the very recent contract renewal didn't address some of those points. It would've been the perfect time to begin procuring new bi-mode trains to coincide with MML electrification (sure the IETs aren't the best but other operators are already running/will run bi-mode variants so they're virtually off-the-shelf by now). Instead we're getting a refurbishment that doesn't even fix the biggest passenger complaints like luggage space. Re regional trains also carrying parcels/some goods: this is something that I also thought about recently and it really feels like a no-brainer, even though it wouldn't completely replace parcel transport by road it would still greatly reduce long-distance van/truck# journeys. One potential issue I can see is the extra time it would take to load/unload the goods compartment at a station (especially as many regional stops can be less than a minute) but I'm sure it's not impossible to work around. Personally I'm not sure first class could be justified on most regional services, definitely on intercity and long-distance trains, but in my personal experience there's not really enough demand to warrant removing capacity on every train for the possibility of first-class passengers. Some operators have already abolished it completely in recent years anyway. Also interesting that you used Birmingham New Street when talking about bottlenecks (3:04) as iirc the Midlands Rail Hub is actually attempting to tackle that somewhat by expanding Moor Street, so it's good to see that _some_ people do recognise the issues and are trying to fix them.

[@GWVillager]

The new XC contract is a feast of disappointment, they didn’t even say there would be a transfer of the off-lease 222s. Parcels on trains would be handled by station staff, possibly ticket office workers, but at unstaffed stations the customer would have to give them to the guard in person. This could take some time, you’re right, but I don’t think it’s a big enough drawback to prevent an otherwise fantastic service.

[@thetrainspotter43]

Fantastic video once again, a fascinating insight into what needs to be done. We need you as transport secretary.

[@philipdouglas5911]

Totally agree about Cross Country as since Ariva took it over it has become a Cinderella again. The intention with the Voyagers was to transform it into a princess. But as in Cinderella midnight came and the idea unravelled. 7 into 4 cars never went and the trains suffered from overcrowding, smelly toilets and inadequate luggage storage. A total disaster that is not up to the job they are used for. Should be replaced by 9 car trains as you say as that is the only way to cope with ridership on the core sections. Ideally should be trimode to work off the various electric routes. 5 car voyagers are really only suitable for secondary routes such as Nottingham to Cardiff. Its routing should be electric but as it does not serve London its unlikely to happen. Would love to see the back end of the voyagers but this will depend on the Treasury funding.

[@tomwatts703]

Unfortunately the Voyagers are being refurbished under the new contract. Would've been the perfect opportunity to replace them with new bi-mode trains to take advantage of the upcoming MML electrification (and the already-electrified sections of the CrossCountry routes), but as we know by now the Treasury - and the government as a whole - are completely averse to the idea of actually investing in railways as part of any environmental strategy.

[@AlexanderBrassington]

@@tomwatts703 I suspect they opted to refurb the voyagers now since the MML electrification seems like it won't be going up to Derby and Nottingham anyway thus why EMR are getting bi-mode trains although a fair amount of the route does run on the ECML so bi-mode trains wouldn't be a terrible idea. Guess we'll have to see how a refurbed voyager is

[@cjmillsnun]

The Voyagers were never allowed to make it a princess. They were too small and it was at the insistance of the DfT.

[@philipdouglas5911]

@@cjmillsnun Branson boasted about how the Voyagers turned a Cinderella into a princess but we all know what happened at midnight. Need I say any more.

[@missgfaulkner]

as somebody who books the quiet coach regularly, i wonder why i bother when the noisy passengers use it anyway!!! i book it to get away from those passengers! i love your suggestion for making the decor more soothing and different from the rest, interior design can potentially make all the difference for behaviour

[@damienbalbriggan]

This video was hilarious. Thanks for the entertainment! :)

[@ravenmusic6392]

5:23 On the servern beach line we either have the 165's or (sometimes) vastly supeior 158's, so it just feels like pot luck. We even had the 150s rotating in sometimes as well with 3 different types of rolling stock on one branch line

[@GWVillager]

It really shouldn’t be that inconsistent. Frequent 165s would probably be ideal (even thought the 158s are comfier).

[@AymanTravelTransport]

​@@GWVillager yeah and then save the 158s for the longer journeys like Cardiff to Portsmouth

[@mrcogginsgarage7062]

The 158 was never suited for branch line work ,it's an inter region unit and does that very well,agree that it's decidedly more comfortable than A165/166.

[@lnerb1class3172]

This is the earliest I've ever seen a video

[@monoonyx]

One thing I see as an upside to privatisation has been the regionalisation of branding. Of course this applies to the regional and local services, but after LNER's 225 repaint with the oxblood Swallow livery it made me think it could be really good idea to have a general livery, but with slight alterations for the routes the stock run on. Though having the downside that if the WCML needed more stock taking XC stock to run the services that dont have an allocation of stock, it could be confusing to passengers, particularly in stations like New Street.

[@GWVillager]

I agree, a standard base livery but with regional flares or colours is a great idea. I doubt it would be too confusing if digital destination screens were provided on the outside of trains.

[@monoonyx]

@@GWVillager Digital screen will have to be far better than they are now, the dot matrices (matrixes?) on current stock simply arent good enough I dont think. Also I think introducing the general passenger to headcodes as opposed to just the 0906 to Leeds could help remove confusion somewhat, and reduce the amount of information needed to be conveyed, but I am saying this as someone who is already very familiar with them.

[@GWVillager]

@@monoonyx A revival of passenger facing headcodes may well be a good idea, but I do quite like the station dot matrixes. The newer LCD ones are far less clear, in my opinion.

[@AndrewG1989]

British Rail used to operate good train services in the UK with Regional Railways, Network Southeast and other rail companies that operated better rail services in the Midlands, North of England, London & Southeast and Southwest England. As well as Wales & West, Scotrail and of course Intercity. Now we look forward to seeing more new trains and new train operators and of course HS2 which is due to be completed by 2030. And older diesel trains being replaced by new greener trains to help reduce pollution and to increase better efficiency in the UK. As our railways are going greener for the environment.

[@Arghans]

The last point reminded me of stories I’d heard of goods being taken on branch line passenger services. Plenty of station buildings on routes could have parcel lockers and allow local couriers to avoid urban areas. Most people already collect from lockers at supermarkets or on their way home. Would also provide a presence at lesser used stations that might be handy collection points.

[@GWVillager]

Indeed, there's no question of the demand for it, it's just a case of setting it up properly.

[@wisehat_yt]

can you fix my marriage please?

[@michaeljohndennis2231]

More direct services from Manchester (preferably Manchester Victoria) to Holyhead, without the need to change trains at Chester or Crewe, a real pain - this would make travelling on SailRail to Ireland via Holyhead a more attractive option than flying, especially if Mk 4 coaches were used

[@peterjeremymckenzie8444]

When the ferries went to Dún Laoghaire and you could hop on the DART that would have made sense but Dublin Port is a different experience especially if there are too many passengers for the bus.

[@AymanTravelTransport]

I normally change at Llandudno Junction as it's generally much easier

[@bearr3096]

Why the random Norwich shade? It's a medium-sized city with a lot of tourism and a big student population. It's also a destination for trains to go to while serving other similarly-sized places such as Colchester and Ipswich. That said, there's a case for dropping Stowmarket and Diss from the regular 'fast' service to make it even faster.

[@Sancarn]

Would love to see a video on the long term benefits, detriments and challenges of automation of train driving. I know it's a controversial topic, but it really would be great to know what the challenges etc. are - especially for future research in the topic for people who are uninformed (like myself). I imagine for some trains it makes more sense than others... Would be cool to know whether anywhere has implemented this and what problems were faced.

[@GWVillager]

It has been used on many new build lines around the world, including in Britain (the DLR). However, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to implement on existing infrastructure, as it would require huge infrastructure modifications to clear lines of variables (like level crossings, or even poor weather), and this would be far more expensive than the potential benefits - which may not be desirable anyway. When things go wrong, the immense skillset and knowledge of train drivers is invaluable, and essential for managing a bad situation safely for passengers.

[@thomasgray4188]

i would have intercity, regional and local maybe have a band for different levels of service (intercity red, blue, green?) also id name the routes or the services maybe both as a nice touch it also might help with using the system with liveries im torn between a new ic livery like lner have or keeping regional ones but adding ic branding maybe a band on each cab end with the double arrow and swallow? e.g GW IC

[@dobbinism]

It would be a great idea if the people in the UK who run our railways learned from our European neighbours on how to do the job properly, And don't get me started on those wastrel politicians who haven't got a clue what they're doing. And who comes up with the garish lighting? There are so many issues requiring attention that it's quite daunting.

[@tinyfluffs]

British rail could take a page out of the Swedish intercity rail network book. Look at the MTR Express and Mälartåg for great examples. MTR in general are leaps and bounds ahead of the UKs X Country services. Just make sure the loos are functional haha

[@GWVillager]

Those MTR Expresses look great, I am tempted by the prospect of nationwide FLIRTs.

[@sprinterofficial8457]

nooooo id much rather ride a 221 than any 80x, cross country better not get IETs

[@GWVillager]

The Voyagers are good trains, but a well-specified 80X would be far better for the routes. It would mean shorter journey times, fewer delays, extra capacity and reduced emissions.

[@topumpire1]

Increasing frequency of "regional" service would be impossible in most cases due to track capacity. reducing the "block" length between signals could be an answer, with trains now having better breaking systems but would reduce actual speeds. Many double tracked lines need at least a third track for emergency use, but that in most cases is impossible - a broken down train BLOCKS the track FULL STOP & nothing can more around it. Most trains are no longer compatible so, if one ahead breaks down there no way that a following service can be contacted, requested to proceed past a red light AT CAUTION, approach the stranded strain & push it to safety, to the next station where it can have an engineer waiting. I was on a following service that had to be held whilst it's platform became clear, but was then diverted off of the northbound line onto the southbound, into the southbound platform, to stop, then returned to the northbound line north of the station with a stricken train blocking the north platform, whilst this looked a regular occurrence at that station (Dual signalled platforms) NOT all stations can! If that stricken train could not be fixed, surely the rail operators should have "tow truck" engines on standby along the routes, but they need clear passage through & not be stuck behind following services

[@A-Trainspotter-From-Berkshire]

Reading to Weymouth should be electrified with OLE.

[@rafchris]

Quality is one thing but it doesnt matter if the cost of driving is less than half the cost of the train. For instance, my trip from Milton Keynes to Oxenholme. Family of 4 in the car, goes door to door, 4 hours, 40 quids worth of petrol plus costs so less than 60. Train for 4 booked a month in advance, 384 quid, drivers strike meant coach half the distance, 10 hour trip..... Being green is one thing but it also has to be cost effective and the biggest challenges to rail still exist in the form of car in short to medium and air in medium to long range.

[@GWVillager]

I would completely agree - I have a video on fares coming up.

[@wewillrockyou1986]

I think starting at the "branding" of what are intercity and what aren't is the wrong choice. The starting point should be the timetabling. Like in Switzerland ans the Netherlands, there should be a national clock face timetable that gets developed based on demand and traffic patterns, first with one that is operable on current infrastructure, and a second "target" timetable which serves as a guide for infrastructure upgrades. The basic principle should be that the timetable is efficient with its transfers rather than focusing on point to point services and that the basic design should use two or at most 3 stopping patterns along each route.

[@GWVillager]

Yes, you’re right. I might talk about this one day.

[@manomaylr]

Any return of the InterCity brand should include Swallow livery!

[@Elizabeth-vh6il]

Also luggage space sucks on some services like CrossCountry (unless you're fortuitous enough to hop onto the carriage with the bike storage and extra luggage space. I've not analyzed this in detail but I think probably the racks above the seats are not utilized enough for small and medium sized bags and I don't know if the loading gauge permits this without tall people banging their heads but making that space a bit bigger and making it more visible as something that's available for passengers to use and also turning it into something that's safer in the event of an accident by using designs with airline style closable overhead storage bins would be pretty cool I think.

[@GWVillager]

The CrossCountry Voyagers were designed with a tilt-profile body, which gives them a far narrower shape than they would otherwise need, restricting space for overhead racks. Unfortunately, the tilt system has been removed from all CrossCountry trains that had it, leaving an awkwardly small profile with no benefits.

[@f.g.9466]

I agree with most of these ideas, including that regional rail should be utilitarian. First class is not really a mandatory need for regional, and complimentary drinks on regional rail is definitely a no. I'm not completely opposed to a first class section on certain routes that have longer distances and many passengers often travel the longer distance. But just make seats minimally decent in the whole train, first class is unnecessary for journeys averaging one hour. Also the light freight, unlikely to be efficient at a large scale, probably can work on some specific cases. Better to have a network of dedicated trains transporting mail/parcels and other light freight, scheduled to stop at determined stops and terminals. We definitely need more capacity for freight, heavy and light.

[@GWVillager]

The issue with dedicated freight trains is that they tend to be slow, and a more intensively used railway probably wouldn't be able to accommodate them. We definitely should have more rail freight, yes, but it does feel like a pragmatic idea to carry goods on existing services wherever possible.

[@f.g.9466]

@@GWVillager they don't necessarily have to be slow, it's all down to what rolling stock is used. For the sake of clearance I'm referring to trains along the veins of the Royal Mail Class 325 for light freight rather than the classic heavy freight trains. I know the class 325 isn't exactly fast, but if running on routes operated mainly by regional rail even that is probably enough. But my point is that new rolling stock allocated for parcels could be faster. I understand what you mean with the practically of using existing services but my first concern would be taking away capacity from the rolling stock. My secondary concern would be if delivering these goods on a passenger platform is really the ideal destination, how will the logistics work favourably in this case, what resources (man power) are we allocating for this operation (at departure point, transport, and collection), and importantly, how does it affect dwelling times. Personally I think British regional rail still needs to improve a lot at doing the basics - serving the passengers appropriately - before considering any multitasking operation.

[@f.g.9466]

@@GWVillager that said, I remember seeing Swiss EMUs that operate regional services up the mountain coupled with a fridge car from Migos (local supermarket) to drop at one of the stops, with a slightly longer dwell time only at that particular stop to decouple the freight car. It's a country that knows what they're doing when it comes to rail. This to say I accept these micro-solutions can work exceptionally well in some cases, but you still don't see the general Swiss passenger trains carrying freight cars or lockers for mail or parcels.

[@Azophyte.]

i cant belive that norwich to liverpool limestreet is classed as regional doing that on a 158 is painful

[@GWVillager]

Oh indeed, it should definitely be split at Nottingham or use more comfortable rolling stock.

[@MervynPartin]

Cross Country joins cities, so of course it should be part of the InterCity network AND brought up to IC standards. By IC standards, I mean what they should be, but are not at present- comfortable. Trains used to be very comfortable. A previous comment mentioned Network South East. Under that branding, my local train services were greatly improved with clean stations, electrification and doubling of service. I also agree with Regional as a business sector. There are some services which would benefit from purpose built stock to travel on scenic routes, as in Switzerland for example, and these would probably be in Regional. Sleepers should be Intercity.

[@CEBRU07]

As in Redstar. In Birmingham where I worked.

[@martineyles]

Variable speeds can cause problems as gaps between trains need to be maintained. Planning for 125mph running but with the capcity for 140mph running might not fix as many issues as you might hope for.

[@GWVillager]

This is why I suggested it for the XC line. Much of it is relatively segregated, with few non-XC services, meaning you could almost turn sections into high speed line.

[@joshuaritchie3836]

It would be better to use a fleet of five coach trains instead of nine or ten coach trains because then you can split and join services to service more places with two five coach units coupled together to form a ten coach service in the busiest bits and five coach services for the quiter routes. Also go for 802s. Reading to Weymouth should be electrified with OLE.

[@tomwatts703]

Isn't Weymouth to Basingstoke already third rail? I get that OLE has advantages but I'm not sure what the rationale would be for conversion, especially when there's plenty of major lines still to be electrified at all.

[@Mgameing123]

@@tomwatts703 I agree. Diesel lines need to be the priority before third rail. As south of London already has alot of good electric train service.

[@GWVillager]

I agree with the above comments that re-electrifying third rail routes shouldn't be a priority: diesel, battery or even third rail running there is fine for XC at the moment. As for the 5 coach bit, I really don't think that this is a great idea to pursue on most long-distance Intercity trains. Most XC routes would require the capacity of 9 or 10 coach trains along virtually all of their service, and I see no point in employing the extra crew, making operations less convenient and reducing capacity-per-metre just for a few select cases of better optimisation.

[@joshuaritchie3836]

Nope, it is diesel only.

[@GWVillager]

@@joshuaritchie3836 I'm well aware. I meant that they would be fine running battery electric or third rail trains if they had them.

[@railquest]

With respect, I do disagree with the general mentality with regards to such a centralised system, particularly surrounding InterCity. To me, the reason Cross Country is in such a state is because its forgotten about and if they were combined with all of the other IC franchises/routes - this could very easily exacerbate the problem as now one governing body has total control over all of the routes, allowing for said body to completely forget about XC everytime there's an issue on the WCML/ECML/GWML etc. We need a system that emphasises equal and meaningful investment across all regions and having a single body that can pick and choose based on personal preferences or pressures from higher up isn't going to solve that (IMO this is one of the reasons BR struggled as much as it did).

[@GWVillager]

I would be inclined to agree, but experience suggests otherwise. When XC was under Intercity in the 1980s and 90s, it received a similar standard of treatment to other mainlines, with HSTs, sleepers and (for the time) good timetables. It is worth noting that the centralisation is mainly from the passenger’s perspective. Obviously, routes would be split between departments for operational purposes.

[@railquest]

@@GWVillager Ahh Okay. I suppose the XC investment at the time might have been done to save BR a bit of money by standardising all the fleets they have to operate under each brand. It would be interesting to hear how the departments might work across different routes or regions. I suppose despite having the intercity/regional brands - one could segment the management of these into departments of similar size to the franchises.

[@holnrew]

Can't agree enough about cross country needing more attention

[@Tata22334]

Link to p1 plz?

[@GWVillager]

You can find it on my channel page - it’s the video before this one.

[@STJukes]

Are you from Cardiff?

[@topumpire1]

9 min. This is the ROYAL MAIL - who must be forced BACK onto the railways to reduce their large gas guzzling 30+ ton lorries running down mile of motorway - return mail to guards vans if necessary

[@sglenny001]

When you say metro do you mean the WYPTE or Tyne and Wear

[@GWVillager]

Neither, just the general concept of metro-style "turn up and go" service.

[@sglenny001]

@@GWVillager oh ok What's your thoughts on The Tyne and Wear metro Ⓜ

[@GWVillager]

@@sglenny001 I think the Tyne and Wear Metro is fantastic, and it's such a shame that many of its benefits were lessened by the stripping of buses from the Authority.

[@sglenny001]

@@GWVillager completely agree

[@martineyles]

Glad you want to electrify more of Cross Country. Do you think Chiltern should be Intercity or Regional?

[@GWVillager]

Regional, certainly. It could be argued that some of the old (if they were reinstated) Kidderminster - London expresses should be Intercity, but most of the other semi-long distance services are basically duplicating the WCML.

[@martineyles]

@@GWVillager Well, living along the XC/Chiltern shared bit, I like any improvements that can be made to it, and actually have no idea where Kidderminster is, though I assume it's some tiny place on the way to North Wales

[@martineyles]

Ah, it's on the line to Worcester. I probably understand a Worcester to London express more than a Kidderminster one, given their relative sizes, but living in a place that's a similar size to Kidderminster, I could definitely appreciate fast trains to lots of places.

[@GWVillager]

@@martineyles Worcester has its own trains via Oxford and the GWML. The Kidderminster extensions of Chiltern services were good while they lasted, but I'm not sure if they're worth re-instating. Ultimately, I can't consider Chiltern to be Intercity, though it should definitely be a higher status regional line.

[@martineyles]

@@GWVillager I assume people in Kidderminster just change at Worcester now then.

[@adodgygeeza]

I think you need to check passenger miles by mode stats, there isn't a hope of rail being a default without 5-10x more track miles.

[@GWVillager]

Then build the track miles. There will eventually be a video on the lines I would prioritise for reopening. However, what I really meant was along the corridors that the respective lines serve.

[@adodgygeeza]

@@GWVillager my point was/is that rail might help but it is unlikely to be transformational. Even if you look at countries which have good public transport and lots of cycling they still have mode shares for cars in the 70-80% and often still drive more miles per person than the UK. To put this in context if we doubled rails capacity we'd get 7% more passenger miles and it would cost in the region of trillions at HS2 like prices as we'd need lots of new terminals in city centres. Whereas if through automation/sharing and demand pricing we got 2.2 people in each car we'd get 85% more passenger miles out of our existing roads for essentially negligible investment.

[@hy8076]

I do like your programs but as a guard working the west of England line. Which I suppose is a regional railway. I honestly wish we did not have first class. West of Basingstoke we can count on little support and west of Salisbury none. If some drunk people sit in first class I can ask them to move or offer to charge them an exess. Then they tel me to sod off. Same with quite coach. On intercity it works because by definition they only stop at city stations which usually have BTP. Crewkern I am afraid does not.

[@GWVillager]

That is a good point, but I do think that part of the issue with the SWR 159 first class is that there is no physical separation from standard. If they had to open a door or something, perhaps they wouldn’t be as likely to go in. As for demand, what was it like when the line still had a trolley? With reduced fares and light refreshments, I can certainly see plenty taking the offer up.

[@chrisgooding4395]

enjoyed this.. thank you.. cross country should be part of an inter-city revival. metro should be locally run .. HS2 should free up more space if it ever gets built .. Once NPH and east west rail is completed cross country and intercity should become 1.. i hate travelling on the GWR 801's they are so uncomfortable. you are on my wave length with everything you said.

[@ernestthesmallholder559]

The problem on the 801s are the misshapen and hard seating and not enough leg room. otherwise OK.

[@ernestthesmallholder559]

I agree with most that is said. However, the UK governance at present is very centralised thus to move to a system of national and regional state governments in a federal system would be a position to best proceed. That means TfW being owned and accountable to the Welsh government as at present. Regional Transport networks owned and controlled by the states/regions. With intercity/ Inter regions networks being a Federal Railways controlled by the federal government.

[@ernestthesmallholder559]

While the Transport for Wales rail network at present operated as 3 separate systems: South Wales, Cambrian and North Wales, only linked by leaving Wales for Shrewsbury. There could be a new main lines linking Carmarthen & Aberystwyth with a branch to Aberaeron. A central main line from Cardiff Street through Brecon linking the Cambrian railway and then a direct link to Wrexham. The other problem is many of the South Wales TfW main line services consist of only 2 coaches. ...And the noise and slow moving of the diesel traction used on TfW network is not good.

[@wolvertoncentresidings5676]

So basically you're saying the railways should go back to past working practices. I can still remember the days where parcels/ bikes/oversize luggage went in the guards van or compartment lol😂

[@GWVillager]

In this regard, yes. The loss of guards vans has been quite unfortunate.

[@williamhuang8309]

So bring back sectorisation?

[@jorisvanhandenhove5865]

why did you show a belgian intercity while talking about the regional brand?

[@GWVillager]

It was an extremely long train (and probably one I’d class as regional if it were in the UK), and thus demonstrated excess capacity.

[@Elizabeth-vh6il]

So when can we have you present evidence to the parliamentary Transport Select Committee? Just one more thing. Can we please have some more quiet carriages (including on every local or regional train) and phone call cubicles like on Finnish trains so that quiet carriages are properly quiet? Not sure I can agree with you about the 1st class thing though. The lefty in me wants to prioritize everybody having access to great train travel for a cheap price without wasting space on 1st class. The only thing that might tempt me to pay for 1st class would be if I was either celebrating a special occasion or I was on an extremely long journey (e.g. international or to/from Scotland) and 1st class offered proper stomach filling, nutritious and hot meals of comparably good quality as I could make at home or enjoy at a restaurant. The sort of thing that a packed lunch or a hot pasty grabbed from the station couldn't even hope to compete with. But even meals could be done as a bolt on add-on that was served to seats in standard class for a supplementary fee.

[@KerbalRocketry]

I think i disagree on the regional, regional first class, and the packages concepts. regional should be split up into regions regional first class shouldn't be mandatory but should be up to the regions to decide if its suitable, example of the south east the regional network is commuter-lite and barely suits it light freight and mail is also a Eh Maybe, the required dwell time limits where it can be used and the transshipment cost is high compared to use of just end to end trucking goods,

[@robshipway2269]

I don't believe that services down to Weymouth and Bournemouth currently provided by SWR should be part of any Inter-City Group. But I do agree that there should be smaller sectors, with Inter-City, Regional, Metro and Suburban sectors. The likes of Gatwick and Heathrow express services should come under Regional services, as should services between London - Brighton, Portsmouth, Southampton and Bournemouth. Any services going between one county to another county should be counted s Suburban and any services staying within a county should be counted as being Metro services such as Brighton to Seaford, Eastbourne and Hastings. Uckfield to London and Eastbourne to Ashford International would be Regional Services. All Cross Country(XC) services accept the services operated using class 170 units would be Inter-City services. Services within the Midlands run by XC, should be given to West Midlands Railway to run as either suburban services. Services such as the Cross City service in the West Midlands would come under the Metro service sector.

[@stevieinselby]

I'm not convinced about XCountry provincial services going full intercity - when you've got trains with regular calls at small towns like Ely, March, Oakham and Melton Mowbray, it's hard to justify them being anything more than regional trains. Apart from that, not much to disagree with! Regional trains are one of the areas where it feels like the UK network is weakest, but in terms of frequency and consistency/quality of provision.

[@tinyfluffs]

In all fairness, Ely is a pretty big interchange for Cambs and Norwich. Just so happens to be that March is on the route I suppose

[@GWVillager]

I would personally not include the Eastern leg of CrossCountry's 170 services into Intercity. Birmingham/Nottingham to Cardiff should definitely get the Intercity treatment, but you're right, in the East it's essentially a regional service and should be treated as such.

[@justsamoo3480]

The best way to solve that would be the Italian model with Regional, Regional Express and Intercity, plus high speed Frecciarossa brand, but this is UK we’re talking about

[@NuckerIThink]

as someone who lives in exeter, PLEASE ELECTRIFY THIS FAR WEST D: (preferably as far as truro really)

[@Elizabeth-vh6il]

Oh and it's 2023 and instant heat hot water using electric heat is a thing which exists in offices and we've lived through a pandemic so we ought to have good hygiene on trains and never be left with toilets which lack hot water to wash your hands with, or indeed no toilet facilities at all (looking at you Crossrail and GWR Didcot to Banbury I think). Even on short-ish journeys having access to good quality toilets is essential especially for disabled people who can't always hold it in for as long as other people. Oh and please get rid of the trolley service and reinstate the shop area. Having the interruption, noise and distraction of the trolley service is super aggravating for me as a neurodivergent person and getting stuck and not being able to get past to get to the toilet is annoying, as is getting anxious because I'm worried that I won't be able to get from my seat to my luggage and out through the door when the train arrives at my station. One of the pleasures of travelling by train is that there's a bit more space than on a bus or a plane and so you're free to get up and take a stroll around every once in a while and prevent yourself from getting deep vein thrombosis in the process as a nice bonus.

[@Only_TransportUK]

Hi GWVillager, I have my own transport channel and with your permission of course, I would like to make my own series with my own ideas.

[@GWVillager]

Of course, I don't own the rights to improving transport.

[@Only_TransportUK]

Thank you so much!@@GWVillager

[@stevem-h3562]

Bit of a wishlist in need of a magic money tree unfortunately.

[@GWVillager]

As I clarified in my previous video, we need to spend far more on infrastructure in this country. Investing in rail isn’t just money poured down the drain, it’s money saved in other areas, money used to get the economy working, and money spent shaping society for the better. Even still, though, the proposals I outlined in this video would cost very little (apart from the XC upgrades, but they are vital anyway), and may even save money. A streamlined organisation that can better adapt to local needs would be far less wasteful than the current needlessly complicated mess, and Red Star is likely to be profitable. This is not to mention the potential increase in revenue that passenger growth would bring.

[@stevem-h3562]

Dont get me wrong, I didnt say that it wouldnt be money well spent,@@GWVillager certainly conceptually anyway. The problems are mainly around where teh hell we find the money from and its very easy to sign off cheques when you think the purse is bottomless and secondly, the public sector's complete in ability to be able to run any kind of project is also one that does not fill you full of confidence.. Its not a bad idea, but unless it was ruled with an iron fist, the chances of it seeing fruition, especially if the Unions figure theres more in it for them, the chances of it bearing fruit would probably take 15-20 years.

[@GWVillager]

@@stevem-h3562 Then so be it. I'm perfectly willing to work hard for 15-20 years if it means we'll get a great transport system at the end of it.

[@stevem-h3562]

@@GWVillager which is fair enough.... but I dont think you're going to get a choice on time, cost or quality. Just dont build your hopes up is what I'm saying, otherwise, 20 years down the line, you'll end up still producing more "Coulda-woulda-shoulda" videos aboutthe transport network. You might even find by that point that HS2 might finally get from Old Oak Common to Euston successfully, something we've been paying for already for the thick end of 20 years.... and that project and Time, Cost & Quaility are definitely mutually exclusive, LOLZ

[@andrewlong6438]

Great video. All IC trains should have announcements in multiple languages. They do it in Poland and Hungary but not in UK. It’s a must for trains serving major cities and historical places. Agree about your XC comments about motive power. Scrap voyagers and have bi/tri-mode with extra luggage space. So for services from say Bournemouth to Manchester, service should be able switch from 3rd rail to diesel to electric. For regional services make sure there is integrated ticketing between trains and buses. Not sure about newspapers or letters on trains - but certaintly moving parcels about would be a good idea. Decent seats are a must with air con and wifi/charging. I have just come back from Budapest and they have very modern double decker trains on regional lines.

[@GWVillager]

Integrated ticketing is a great idea, I think we could take a page out of Germany's book and allow local transport in the destination with a regional/intercity ticket.

[@Likasense]

I think double deckers are very problematic so I think they should use only single deckers RM transit has made a great video talking about double coaches

[@VladimirPutinIsGood]

One Has To Be Done and That Is FGW Remove The IETS and The 387s As They're Disgusting As Hell

[@magictoffee7066]

Hi.

[@sam2131]

London - Norwich is definitely intercity

[@Matthewscrimbly]

Make trains go faster 👍

[@railwaymechanicalengineer4587]

WHAT HAPPENED WHEN THE BRB WAS ABOLISHED ???? The reason the railways in Britain have not functioned properly since the BR Board was abolished is quite simple. The then Ministry of Transport deliberately & intentionally thought that by abolishing "VERTICAL INTEGRATION" they could rent bits (they called "Franchises"), and Lease bits (what were the BR Freight Sectors), and effectively turn railway tracks into roads. But at the same time still continue to own the actual network, (the stations, land & tracks etc) So ensuring the Government remain the biggest landowner ! If it hadn't been for the annual EU grants, it would of course have fallen flat on its face immediately. Now of course BREXIT means no more EU funding !!! So the current Department for Transport, quickly realised Britain can no longer afford this highly convoluted, fragmented and inefficient method of trying to run a rail network. As it literally has more (unqualified) Chiefs than Indians. Which has taken British Railways from the Worlds second most efficient network, to the current method which drops it into the likes of the Third World, or around 47th place. So the Civil Servants have since BREXIT been quietly taking back "Franchises" in what one Rail Industry publication calls "Re-nationalisation by Stealth" !!! BR in its last full financial year required £854 Million pounds of subsidy. That was for Everything. In the first year of the "Franchised" system JUST THE COST OF TRACK RENEWALS & MAINTENANCE cost the TAXPAYER over £3 BILLION !!!!! And costs have only increased year on year. Further BR required just 93,000 workers to run everything including the "Casey Jones" Burger bars (a BR wholly owned subsiduary). Today they need over 500,000 personnel, and of course staff have to be paid. The BR Board of 12 directors cost roughly £12 Million Annually (or £1 Million per head). But having chopped the network up into over 100 "Franchises", (includes train OPERATING Franchises; Train OWNING Franchises; Area track maintenance Franchises; Regional track REPLACEMENT Franchises; The ex BR Staff College Franchise etc) each one of these organisations having an average of 10 Directors at an average £1 Million salary each. So just the cost of Directors sky rocketed to over £1 BILLION annually from Day 1 of this Mish-mash !!! Further a number of Train OPERATING Franchises & one or two LEASED Freight companies, are in reality owned and run by other European Nationalised Railways. So the profits they make go straight back into their countries pockets, reducing the TAX burden to their Citiizens at the BRITISH TAXPAYERS EXPENSE. The biggest offender being "DB" (Deutsch Bundesbahn) the German State Rail network, who's bright red locomotives labelled "DB" can be seen all over Britain ! FIXING THE RAILWAYS So obviously the cheapest way to run a railway is to VERTICALLY INTEGRATE it. As railways need to function in a Quasi-military fashion because of the necessity of having a TRUE SAFETY CASE !! NOT I should add the current Politically & financially motivated pseudo safety mechanism, which has been the cause of numerous crashes & deaths. Which would NEVER have occurred under the British Railways Board. The EVIDENCE being that His Majesties Railway Inspectorate (HMRI), which utilised senior officers of the Army's Royal Engineers, with over 100 years of continuous crash investigation experience. Were simply swept aside & replaced by the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) Civil Servants, who had absolutely no experience or qualifications in Railways !!! Indeed the CAA (Civil Aviation Authority) were so ALARMED by this move that they, the CAA, demanded a written assurance that the Government had NO plans to do something similar to the Airlines. JUST TWO RATIONAL SOLUTIONS What all this means is that you can run the railway in two ways. Either the Government runs the whole thing as a Nationalised Industry with a Board of properly qualified Railway Professionals as Directors. Or you use Private industry to run the whole thing, as one, or possibly FOUR or FIVE Regionalised Private "Railway Companies Plc". As the Japanese did back in 1987, and their "Properly Privatised system" (of six area railway companies) runs extremely well, at a MUCH LOWER COST than their previous Nationalised method ! Whatever, each "railway" must have control over the tracks, stations, trains, & everything else in its "area", including writing their own timetables. They should also decide whether they build their own trains or buy them in from outside industry !! Both Nationalised or "Private Plc" methods of course require VERTICAL INTEGRATION to function efficiently.

[@gordonprentice7090]

One of the thing I would like to see is a strict policy intercity trains to be pre-booked seats only. or at least no standing passenger allowed. if your train is cancelled that you were booked on bus replacement service should be used to get those passenger home.

[@GWVillager]

I definitely disagree, one of the main benefits of rail travel is the flexibility it affords you, and many people are perfectly fine standing if it means they get where they need to go.

[@gordonprentice7090]

On short journeys yes but not on long journeys. several years ago returning from holiday change trains at Birmingham and the train had standing passengers when I got to my seat someone was sitting in it who did nt have a booked seat, asked them to move and they refused and Guard refused to move them. ended up having to stand all the way to Lancaster before I was able to find a seat which I shouldn't have had to do. Put a complaint in to Virgin as it was at the time. Got a reply saying that the reason the guard hadn't move them was because the train was busy the crew had removed seat reservations. On the bright side they gave me a voucher for a free upgrade on my next trip. @@GWVillager

[@andyallthings]

think rail network shoed be one system whit goods trains being secend sector name being one brand goods Sam adding extra letter being goods in order get things by passenger train you need loco hold coaches sow coach at the back of the set caring all goods maybe it cued be split from the set when passenger services are done it put on the back goods train having mist goods a gain is good i DEA sow them nay things can be handled with sorting places for it no setpreated compony onley 2 working to gether

[@devon896]

Sorry but I disagree. The railways should go back to a semi 1930s state. GWR/LMS/LNER/Southern but possibly keeping XC, HEX, GEX independent.

[@SirKenchalot]

When was the last time you genuinely staggered at the sight of 3+2 seating or no at-seat-power? Hyperbole much? 140mph services with ETCS is long overdue but some regional operators like c2c don't exceed 75 and I can't help but feel that a speed increase there would also lead to greater capacity so it's not just about cross-country routes.

[@GWVillager]

I never said I literally *staggered* but I am always very disappointed to find a train with 2+3 seating, and a lack of chargers is especially annoying if you’re phone is near death. ETCS should be eventually rolled out nationwide, I agree there.

[@SirKenchalot]

@@GWVillagerGod help you if you ever have really shocking news like a health-scare or worse; seriously, preyer is about the only thing that'll get you up off the floor if you're so fragile that potentially brushing your elbows against a fellow passenger robs you of your ability to walk. Also, just get a power bank for your phone so you can recharge even when modern rolling stock is nowhere to be found i.e. most places that aren't train stations.

[@poppyland74]

​@@SirKenchalotnot sure what you are expecting from a piece about train improvements? maybe find something else to watch

[@SirKenchalot]

@@poppyland74 Good idea.

[@cultivationape6946]

Just nationalise and vote labour that’s the best that we can hope for

[@tomwatts703]

I think Starmer would be hesitant to nationalise the railways, if not completely against it. If (god willing) Labour gets in there'll need to be a lot of external pressure to get them to do so.

[@wclifton968gameplaystutorials]

Telling people to vote Labour is the stupidest thing I have heard in a while, at that rate you may as well vote for the Communist Party of Britain as its not like they disagree on many things. Its also worth noting that Reform UK have not yet said that they will oppose railway property theft by the state (renationalisation) and have actually said that they support the creation of new government railway property theft ("Great British Railways" that is) last I checked unlike say UKIP that continue to oppose any and all property theft by the state (nationalisation).

[@cultivationape6946]

@@tomwatts703 you’re probably right it’s likely going to be decades before we see the destruction caused by thatcher’s self interested decisions finally get undone.

[@u26fo]

I can't watch this because it just makes me sad and annoyed that its not real

[@taipizzalord4463]

Get rid of first class sections. Why do you need them for a train. Makes no sense.

[@VTS1337]

you've spent 45 seconds talking about quiet coaches and none talking about hs2 - this is a dissappointing video. 140mph trains on the *existing* network is a terrible idea that destroys freight, regional and local capacity while barely making a dent in avarage speeds unless done to the rediculous extent that it's far more cost effective to build a high speed network.

[@GWVillager]

HS2 goes without saying. I am a vocal advocate for it, and have spoken about it in other videos.

[@VTS1337]

@@GWVillager the ideal intercity network needs to be built around a hsr network. It just doesn't make sense to me to make a whole video about a one's fantasy rail network, an opportunity to be as ambitious as you like - and you've basically said 'bring back british rail and turn back the clock to 1993'. Even full hs2 (let alone a transpennine and crosscountry high speed routes) allows and almost necessitates a reorganising of classic line intercity routes - considering that the main ways from london to get to edinburgh, glasgow, manchester, liverpool, birmingham, leeds, nottingham, sheffield, york and newcastle is now via hs2 leaving new possibilities for wcml, mml, ecml. IF you are in support of building a hsr network (and somehow deciding not to mention that in your "how i would design the intercity network video" - seems kinda weird), it what way is the intercity and regional network of 1993 remotely appropriate. All this talk of 140mph on the existing network (it's a terrible idea) sounds like APT or intercity 225 nostalgia, you need to have some imagination man.

[@GWVillager]

​@@VTS1337 Sorry, have you ever watched any other of my videos? I very much know all of this, and advocate for it, both on the channel and in real life. I will make a video on the need for HSR at some point, but this one (which, I will admit, is not my strongest video) is about what services should be like, not the routes they should run on. As for 140mph running, I explicitly said this would be on the Cross Country line. This is, in large parts, effectively already intercity segregated. An increase to 125mph (with 140mph when running late) would be relatively easily achievable - it has been done many times in the past. I think the APT was a waste of time and money - you're not getting anything more out of the West Coast - but this isn't IC225 nostalgia, such a suggestion is ludicrous. If something worked, we should consider further application, as with high speed rail.

[@imjusthereeatingpopcorn5234]

No to Bi-modes I say. The Siemens Mireo H products seem very promising for European trains. We should Hydrogenate the Regional fleet with just one good reliable product to keep maintenance costs down instead of buying new already obsolete diesel multiple units. Shame the Mk5s are not good enough to be reused. A few rakes of those would make for good use on the XC routes. Those 220/221s need to be melted down into scrap metal.

[@tomwatts703]

Why no to bi-modes? They're proven and readily available, meanwhile hydrogen is still unproven on a large scale and would require new infrastructure to implement.

[@imjusthereeatingpopcorn5234]

@@tomwatts703 you have a very good point. It would cost a lot in the sense of refuelling points. And the development of them is tricky. Bi modes are good if the wires are there in some places. But it just seems that electrification is going to take a very long time to fill in more gaps. Would be nice to get diesel trains off the network real soon

[@lukero5502]

Too much money and controversial:(

[@wclifton968gameplaystutorials]

I think it might just be better if there were 4 railway brands; an "Intercity" brand, a "Rural connector" brand, a "Commuter" brand and a "Sleeper" Brand (keep the existing names, e.g. Caledonian Sleeper) but definately NOT under a single (or multiple) nationalised organisations, instead I think it might be better if we either keep the existing franchises for passenger trains but deregulate the industry and close down Network Rail by having train operators own (and maintain) the infrastructure they use instead of the government (this would also mean getting rid of the franchising system altogether) and then rent track usage rights to competitors & freight companies (e.g. LNER would own the ECML, lease out to Lumo (FirstGroup) as a competitor and lease out to any freight company wanting to use their tracks) OR we get rid of the entire current system and replace it all with a new set of companies operating passenger & freight services; 1 company for South East, South, South West, West, Wales, North West, North, Scotland, North East and East of England with the SW, S & W regional companies jointly owning the GWR Mainline, the Wales & NW companies jointly owning the WCML, Scotland, N & NE companies jointly owning the ECML, East owning the routes in East Anglia, SE owning the services, infra. in Kent, Sussex region (e.g. Brighton Mainline) & South company owning the Portsmouth Mainline and network in neighbouring counties that connect to the PML (e.g. South Coast line from Brighton - Portsmouth would be owned by the SE company not the S company); This second proposal does maybe sound confusing but is very similar to the old' Big Four companies or the group of JR companies...

[@GWVillager]

I really don't think this is the way to go in the modern age. We need to have an over-arching plan, and such a fragmented system would be incompatible with delivering one, if it would even work well.

[@wclifton968gameplaystutorials]

@GWVillager I think it's much better to let individuals to choose to work together than to force that work with the boot from above, therefore I think that smaller, regional companies would work best rather than some huge national organisation which probably won't have a sustainable business model besides stealing money from the working man (subsidies funded through taxation)

[@josephturner7569]

Sectorisation was tried. It was so successful the government privatised it. After 35 years on the railway, I came to the conclusion, the population of GB doesn't deserve a railway and Beeching and Marsh should have just finished the job.

[@tomwatts703]

Pessimism helps nobody, there are clearly people willing to fight for a better railway so why undermine that?

[@probablyidiot9915]

First view!