London Northwestern Railway services merge into West Coast Franchise

[James Kevill]

I was thinking about the idea of London Northwestern Railway services could be merge into West Coast franchise, after West Midlands Trains franchise is expired in 20 September 2026. After that, West Coast franchise is due to be expired in 18 October 2026 or there is an option to extend the franchise for longer years. West Coast franchise would expand all the stations, services and the West Coast Main Line.

 

[185]

From an operational, performance point of view - yes, it's a no-brainer having it as one franchise to add more connection options for customers and for during disruption.

From a fares point of view a very bad thing, as the DfT will likely hike prices to remove the excellent value Trent Valley & Birmingham stopper fares.

Thus, if done, the fares for passengers choosing the slower trains should be protected.

 

[LLivery]

Unless the Tories somehow pull off the most baffling general election win, there won't really be franchises to merge. If GBR is to be done as regional operations, then that'll basically happen anyway. If it's sectoral, it won't.

 

[ScottGallagher]

I suspect had Virgin not had a long contract until 2012, this would have been done at the time London Midland came about. No doubt Virgin would have lobbied against it as they wouldn't have wanted their brand to be running trains between Bedford and Bletchley, nor the Birmingham Suburbs!!

 

[Meerkat]

From an operational, performance point of view - yes, it's a no-brainer having it as one franchise to add more connection options for customers and for during disruption.

From a fares point of view a very bad thing, as the DfT will likely hike prices to remove the excellent value Trent Valley & Birmingham stopper fares.

Thus, if done, the fares for passengers choosing the slower trains should be protected.

Its a no brainer to keep it as two operations as they target different markets. Best kept privatised too so they compete on price rather than price gouging as will happen under nationalisation (see LNER).
If combined it wouldn't be long before the treasury started with the "just stop the AWC a bit more and we dont need LNWR", or "If the 350s go there why do we need fast trains?"

 

[185]

Its a no brainer to keep it as two operations as they target different markets.

DfT eliminating another duplicate set of operations, bills and management functions costing >£45-£50m a year is the no-brainer.

It's how they do it that's important.

 

[JonathanH]

DfT eliminating another duplicate set of operations, bills and management functions costing >£45-£50m a year is the no-brainer.

It's how they do it that's important.

In addition, the LNR operation will be smaller if it is split off from a devolved West Midlands Railway in the West Midlands area, and therefore make some sense to be combined with the West Coast operator for critical mass.

 

[172007]

The WM franchise was setup with the stipulation that the business could be split up into WM and LNWR as separate entities. So it's already been thought if and readied.

 

[JonathanH]

Yes, that is what I was noting. It potentially makes sense to combine the residual LNR with West Coast at that point.

 

[Meerkat]

DfT eliminating another duplicate set of operations, bills and management functions costing >£45-£50m a year is the no-brainer.

It's how they do it that's important.

Where does that number come from?

In addition, the LNR operation will be smaller if it is split off from a devolved West Midlands Railway in the West Midlands area, and therefore make some sense to be combined with the West Coast operator for critical mass.

How small? Passengers of the LNWR will suffer if they are merged, as all the attention will be on the fast stuff, particularly if they are running the HS2 operation too.

 

[185]

Where does that number come from?

So, they do it for free? OMGZ

 

[Meerkat]

So, they do it for free? OMGZ

You realise there are numbers between £50m and zero?

 

[swt_passenger]

Old news. The whole point of splitting the franchise into two “separable business units” was to allow the future merger of the two WCML operators, it was all explained at the time the franchise was tendered, around 2015/16.

Unfortunate that the thread title is written as a statement, not a question.

 

[Meerkat]

Old news. The whole point of splitting the franchise into two “separable business units” was to allow the future merger of the two WCML operators, it was all explained at the time the franchise was tendered, around 2015/16.

Unfortunate that the thread title is written as a statement, not a question.

Was that a planned post big HS2 thing, where most express services were off the classic route?

 

[swt_passenger]

Was that a planned post big HS2 thing, where most express services were off the classic route?

I think so, it’s definitely been mentioned in numerous franchise and strategy documents, the 2016 stakeholder brief was the first I quickly found that explained it, although without directly mentioning HS2. It’s quite amazing that the OP seems to be presenting this as his own idea.

 

[Energy]

Was that a planned post big HS2 thing, where most express services were off the classic route?

Yes, post HS2 the fast WCML operator would have had something like:

1tph London - Manchester via Stoke
1tph London - Wolverhampton via Birmingham
1tph London - Edinburgh / Glasgow via Birmingham
1tph London - North Wales via Trent Valley

Post Labour renationalisation I think the operators could look very different. If we assume HS2 gets built up to 2a (no 2b or NPR for a while) then something like this could make sense:

HS2 Drivers
London - Crewe (via HS2)
Crewe - Manchester
Crewe - Scotland

LNWR Drivers
London - Crewe via Trent Valley
Birmingham - Crewe
Crewe - Liverpool

With the London - Birmingham stopper being handled by Coventry and Northampton

TfW Drivers
Crewe - North Wales

You could potentially end up with some funky staff arrangements like the Liverpool HS2 service being LNWR drivers from Liverpool - Crewe and HS2 drivers from Crewe - London while the classic Manchester service would be LNWR drivers from London - Crewe and HS2 drivers from Crewe - Manchester.

I reckon under Labour we'll see a focus on one driver group per route.

 

[fandroid]

It wouldn't be impossible to charge different fares for the different services even under a unified management. That already happened with Gatwick Express within BR and with hi-speed in Southeastern.

 

[Meerkat]

You could potentially end up with some funky staff arrangements like the Liverpool HS2 service being LNWR drivers from Liverpool - Crewe and HS2 drivers from Crewe - London while the classic Manchester service would be LNWR drivers from London - Crewe and HS2 drivers from Crewe - Manchester.

I reckon under Labour we'll see a focus on one driver group per route.

This sounds like a nightmare to manage and a recipe for performance chaos!

 

[JonathanH]

It wouldn't be impossible to charge different fares for the different services even under a unified management. That already happened with Gatwick Express within BR and with hi-speed in Southeastern.

Doesn't that depend on the outcome of the GTR court case?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where does that number come from?

How small? Passengers of the LNWR will suffer if they are merged, as all the attention will be on the fast stuff, particularly if they are running the HS2 operation too.

Merging GWR IC and the Thames Valley, Cornwall and Devon locals seems to have gone fairly well, with good attention to connections and the likes. I don't think it would be disastrous bar likely fare rises.

Doesn't that depend on the outcome of the GTR court case

The law isn't immutable. But it could also be done Northern style by way of Advances sold in basically unlimited numbers right up to departure.

 

[james_the_xv]

In the example of Euston - Brum services, surely the easiest way to price discriminate your open tickets for a unified operator is to make a 'via Northampton Only' restriction. That way you could preserve the cheap fares, and in the rare case of disruption/planned engineering work when they divert the 1Ys via Weedon rather than cancel them just waive the restriction.

 

[JonathanH]

to make a 'via Northampton Only' restriction

It would still allow passengers to use the 'Avanti' services south of Milton Keynes and north of Rugby, while preventing use of what are currently the LNR Trent Valley services.

 

[Meerkat]

Merging GWR IC and the Thames Valley, Cornwall and Devon locals seems to have gone fairly well, with good attention to connections and the likes. I don't think it would be disastrous bar likely fare rises.

I don’t feel they are the same as the locals and expresses become pretty much the same thing at the ends of the GWR, particularly since inner suburban became Lizzie line.
Not the same overlap between fasts to the North and Scotland and the busy outer suburban service on WCML south.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

If you're going to do this wouldn't it make sense to lump in Northern's Windermere and Barrow services and TPEX's Manchester to Scotland trains too?

But IF you did that, wouldn't it then make sense to continue the integration with freight and infrastructure too to have a fully vertically integrated West Coast railway?

And what on Earth is price gouging?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you're going to do this wouldn't it make sense to lump in Northern's Windermere and Barrow services and TPEX's Manchester to Scotland trains too?

TPE Manchester-Scotland should go to Avanti; it's a long distance WCML fast service and is a poor fit for both the rest of TPE and for WMT. The 7 car 807s they can't send to Liverpool would be ideal to work it, adding some valuable extra capacity.

Barrow/Windermere should probably stay as a Northern regional express service which is what it's been for a long time. It's not really InterCity - a lot of people - probably most - are making overlapping local journeys on it and it's a key part of the Preston-Bolton-Manchester local/commuter service now. And it's a long way from WMT's base, and not electrified so they'd be adding some random DMUs to their fleet.

And what on Earth is price gouging?

Taking advantage of market position to charge grossly excessive fares. LNER's Edinburgh/Newcastle/Berwick fares "trial" is a good example of price gouging, as indeed are most long distance Anytime fares.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

The 7 car 807s they can't send to Liverpool would be ideal to work it, adding some valuable extra capacity.

Why can't they send them to Liverpool? I had a feeling you don't see the 807s out as much as your should.

TPE Manchester-Scotland should go to Avanti; it's a long distance WCML fast service and is a poor fit for both the rest of TPE and for WMT. The 7 car 807s they can't send to Liverpool would be ideal to work it, adding some valuable extra capacity.

Barrow/Windermere should probably stay as a Northern regional express service which is what it's been for a long time. It's not really InterCity - a lot of people - probably most - are making overlapping local journeys on it and it's a key part of the Preston-Bolton-Manchester local/commuter service now. And it's a long way from WMT's base, and not electrified so they'd be adding some random DMUs to their fleet.



Taking advantage of market position to charge grossly excessive fares. LNER's Edinburgh/Newcastle/Berwick fares "trial" is a good example of price gouging, as indeed are most long distance Anytime fares.

Exactly why I think you need an "Intercity Regional" type operator to shadow intercity routes to add competition. Or reinstate pre-Breeching secondary routes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why can't they send them to Liverpool? I had a feeling you don't see the 807s out as much as your should.

Power supply issues - see the Avanti 805/807 thread for more discussion of that issue.

Exactly why I think you need an "Intercity Regional" type operator to shadow intercity routes to add competition. Or reinstate pre-Breeching secondary routes.

On-rail competition is dead, and rightly so, aside from Open Access operations. The car is the competitor (and air for very long distance). The railway just needs to take that seriously and stop internal spatting - one railway is a stronger railway.

 

[renegademaster]

"Via West Coast Local ONLY"
Gatwick express manages to keep different fare levels under same TOC

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Gatwick express manages to keep different fare levels under same TOC

I'm not sure that's a shining example to hold up... as I'm sure @yorkie would agree...?

 

[renegademaster]

I'm not sure that's a shining example to hold up... as I'm sure @yorkie would agree...?

Gatwick express is a rip off , but it just shows its technically pretty easy