North TPE May 2014 proposed timetable

[Xenophon PCDGS]

So what is being proposed is for all XC trains at Leeds (into all of those - someone could perhaps check the sectional appendix)....While we're at it, does every Leeds-Manchester need to call at Hud? How good would journey times be if one an hour was non-stop?

I think that Huddersfield is always viewed as a worthwhile financial place to make a stop and I feel that WY Metro would not be too happy to see that particular proposal come to fruition. I could see similar objections on the other side of the Pennines, if Warrington was viewed in this way.

 

[34D]

I think that Huddersfield is always viewed as a worthwhile financial place to make a stop and I feel that WY Metro would not be too happy to see that particular proposal come to fruition. I could see similar objections on the other side of the Pennines, if Warrington was viewed in this way.

Fair comment, but nowadays WYPTE have very little say in these issues. Surely 1 an hour non stop and the other 4 TPE (plus two Leeds-Man semi fast) is sufficient for Kirklees?

If a train from Darlington (or even Durham) to Manchester called only at York and Leeds, what would this do to the headline Newcastle-Liverpool journey time?

 

[Welshman]

Fair comment, but nowadays WYPTE have very little say in these issues. Surely 1 an hour non stop and the other 4 TPE (plus two Leeds-Man semi fast) is sufficient for Kirklees?

If a train from Darlington (or even Durham) to Manchester called only at York and Leeds, what would this do to the headline Newcastle-Liverpool journey time?

Bearing in mind that speed is restricted to 30/40mph?? through Huddersfield at present, I imagine it would reduce the headline journey time by about 5 minutes.

I remember in the last days of BR, an attempt was made to reduce the timings of one or two Sunday evening trains by running Leeds-Manchester non-stop, but little was gained by having to crawl round the back of Huddersfield station, and I suspect quite a bit of revenue was lost as a result. The experiment did not last long.

 

[tbtc]

Fair comment, but nowadays WYPTE have very little say in these issues. Surely 1 an hour non stop and the other 4 TPE (plus two Leeds-Man semi fast) is sufficient for Kirklees?

If a train from Darlington (or even Durham) to Manchester called only at York and Leeds, what would this do to the headline Newcastle-Liverpool journey time?

Bearing in mind that speed is restricted to 30/40mph?? through Huddersfield at present, I imagine it would reduce the headline journey time by about 5 minutes.

I remember in the last days of BR, an attempt was made to reduce the timings of one or two Sunday evening trains by running Leeds-Manchester non-stop, but little was gained by having to crawl round the back of Huddersfield station, and I suspect quite a bit of revenue was lost as a result. The experiment did not last long.

If the new service pattern is as planned then you are going to have four "fast" services from Leeds (first stop Huddersfield) slotting in between four "slow" services (Dewsbury etc).

Similar pathing appears to be on the cards at the Stalybridge end of the route (with potentially four stoppers there an hour slotting in between four non-stop trains).

So any service running "fast" through Huddersfield is just going to get as long as any train that stopped there, meaning no time saving (but potential confusion to the large number of Huddersfield passengers who currently expect every daytime service to stop there).

Ultimately you'd not get from Newcastle to Liverpool any faster.

 

[northwichcat]

While we're at it, does every Leeds-Manchester need to call at Hud? How good would journey times be if one an hour was non-stop?

Some TPE services get more boarding/alighting at Huddersfield than Manchester Piccadilly.

I think until Huddersfield gets it's own direct Birmingham, London and Scotland services, all TPE services need to call there.

 

[tbtc]

I think until Huddersfield gets it's own direct Birmingham, London and Scotland services, all TPE services need to call there.

That's a very good point - this is the only "long distance" service through Huddersfield (at the moment)

 

[Waverley125]

Ok, so a couple of things to be thinking about on the potential diversion away.

-Sending XC services via Leeds into Middlesbrogh robs Leeds of a regular service to Scotland. Potentially not a problem post Colton wiring, as you could then use 225s for an hourly service to Edinburgh, giving a regular northbound service to all stations on the ECML north of York and an alternating southbound London/Leeds service.

-Sending XC into Middlesbrough requires extra Newcastle services, and, unless you instruct XC to call at Thirsk, a need for an extra train there to maintain current service patterns.

As for better connections from Lincolnshire & Hull, I think the answer is to provide Doncaster with a clockface hourly service to Edinburgh and regular services from Lincolnshire to Leeds (I'd like to see Cleethorpes brought onto North TPE as well as South).

I think this can be managed if you try for

1tph EC LKX-EDB (Peterborough, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Durham, Newcastle, Morpeth/Alnmouth, Berwick, Dunbar)

1tph EC LDS-ABD (York, Darlington, Newcastle, Berwick, Edinburgh, Haymarket, Inverkeithing, Kirkcaldy, Leuchars, Dundee, Arbroath, Montrose, Stonehaven)

 

[tbtc]

Ok, so a couple of things to be thinking about on the potential diversion away.

-Sending XC services via Leeds into Middlesbrogh robs Leeds of a regular service to Scotland. Potentially not a problem post Colton wiring, as you could then use 225s for an hourly service to Edinburgh, giving a regular northbound service to all stations on the ECML north of York and an alternating southbound London/Leeds service.

-Sending XC into Middlesbrough requires extra Newcastle services, and, unless you instruct XC to call at Thirsk, a need for an extra train there to maintain current service patterns.

As for better connections from Lincolnshire & Hull, I think the answer is to provide Doncaster with a clockface hourly service to Edinburgh and regular services from Lincolnshire to Leeds (I'd like to see Cleethorpes brought onto North TPE as well as South).

I think this can be managed if you try for

1tph EC LKX-EDB (Peterborough, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Durham, Newcastle, Morpeth/Alnmouth, Berwick, Dunbar)

1tph EC LDS-ABD (York, Darlington, Newcastle, Berwick, Edinburgh, Haymarket, Inverkeithing, Kirkcaldy, Leuchars, Dundee, Arbroath, Montrose, Stonehaven)

The whole idea of sending XC to Middlesbrough would be a direct swap with TPE, with the Manchester - Newcastle service becoming half hourly (potentially taking the bulk of the Thirsk etc stops too). No extra trains required, just a better allocation of them to minimise diesels under wires.

That would allow TPE to extend some services to Edinburgh (filling the gaps at times when the EC service drops down to hourly?), esp since the TPE service up the WCML from Manchester to Edinburgh is never going to be better than a two hour gap).

Running London - Leeds - Edinburgh is a bit like running London - Manchester - Glasgow... it sounds tempting but it'd be quite a time penalty for longer distance passengers and the loadings would be lop-sided. It may come in handy for late evening services though.

 

[Stats]

If the electric TPE services were to be operated by 125mph EMUs then why not solve the Leeds-Edinburgh problem by extending 1tph from Newcastle to Edinburgh calling at Morpeth, Alnmouth and Berwick with additional Cramlington stops in the peaks? Thereby also providing a much needed local(ish) service.

 

[tbtc]

If the electric TPE services were to be operated by 125mph EMUs then why not solve the Leeds-Edinburgh problem by extending 1tph from Newcastle to Edinburgh calling at Morpeth, Alnmouth and Berwick with additional Cramlington stops in the peaks? Thereby also providing a much needed local(ish) service.

If you can accept the cutting of the Metro Centre service there's certainly something to be said for replacing the daytime Northern Cramlington/ Morpeth stops with stops in (additional) longer distance services.

The problem will be the lack of 125mph trains (without going to the extreme of 390s at Cramlington) - there's not a lot suitable at the moment

 

[markydh]

Frankly the Tyne Valley corridor would be better served by having a clockface 20 minute service with all going as far as Hexham with 1 an hour extending to Carlisle as now. There isn't really a need for 4tph between Newcastle and the MetroCentre (with the Newcastle - MetroCentre shorts often carrying around little more than thin air).

 

[34D]

That's a very good point - this is the only "long distance" service through Huddersfield (at the moment)

Yes, but we're talking a small town near Leeds. 7 trains an hour to Leeds and 5 to Manchester is sufficient. Let the eighth roll through the station at 40mph (plat 2 towards Man, plat 4 towards Leeds I think may have the highest speed) and save 5-10 minutes

 

[Waverley125]

I didn't suggest running London-Edinburgh via Leeds, but London-Edinburgh and Leeds-Edinburgh, which would be a much more sensible solution. I think more productive would be Leeds-Aberdeen, although this would require more HSTs.

 

[wellhouse]

Yes, but we're talking a small town near Leeds. 7 trains an hour to Leeds and 5 to Manchester is sufficient. Let the eighth roll through the station at 40mph (plat 2 towards Man, plat 4 towards Leeds I think may have the highest speed) and save 5-10 minutes

Platform 4 is occupied for much of each hour by the terminating stoppers from both Manchester and Leeds.

There might be an advantage (in terms of through capacity at Huddersfield) in extending each stopper to be semi-fast beyond Huddersfield i.e. all stops Manchester-Huddersfield, Dewsbury, Leeds then Manchester, Stalybridge, Huddersfield, all stops Huddersfield-Leeds. It frees up the through road on Platform 4 for eastbound services, but I'm not sure how it could work westbound (although Platform 4 is, of course, bi-directional).

And another thing... Huddersfield ain't that small, and it is a significant local interchange. It might well not need more than 4 fast services of adequate capacity per hour to Leeds and Manchester, but as long as they are mainly just 2-car 170s and 3-car 185s, it needs the frequency to satisfy the demand, both peak and off-peak.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Yes, but we're talking a small town near Leeds. 7 trains an hour to Leeds and 5 to Manchester is sufficient. Let the eighth roll through the station at 40mph (plat 2 towards Man, plat 4 towards Leeds I think may have the highest speed) and save 5-10 minutes

You are being somewhat mischievous in describing Huddersfield as a "small town"...:roll:....It is the "hub" town of the Kirklees region.

In the 2001 census, Huddersfield was the 10th largest town in the United Kingdom with a resident population of 146,234. It is a University town and has well-known football and rugby league clubs.

It has a Grade I listed railway station with six platforms, that carries a DfT category rating of "B".

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Deletion of duplicate posting caused by "computer glitch"..

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Posting duplicated by a computer with a mind of its own..:roll:

 

[Nym]

Yes, but we're talking a small town near Leeds. 7 trains an hour to Leeds and 5 to Manchester is sufficient. Let the eighth roll through the station at 40mph (plat 2 towards Man, plat 4 towards Leeds I think may have the highest speed) and save 5-10 minutes

Stockport is a small town near Manchester but it gets 14tph...

Remember that Huddesfeild provides quite a large railhead for Manchester and Leeds...

And Platform 4 is used to put slow services in so it would need to be 8.

 

[IanXC]

I didn't suggest running London-Edinburgh via Leeds, but London-Edinburgh and Leeds-Edinburgh, which would be a much more sensible solution. I think more productive would be Leeds-Aberdeen, although this would require more HSTs.

Subject to these HSTs(or IEP bimode) being found maybe it would make sense for this Leeds-Aberdeen service to replace CrossCountry north of Edinburgh?

(oops! Just realised I'm wandering wildly off topic!)

 

[34D]

Stockport is a small town near Manchester but it gets 14tph...

Remember that Huddesfeild provides quite a large railhead for Manchester and Leeds...

And Platform 4 is used to put slow services in so it would need to be 8.

But there won't be any terminating services in hud p4 - the present Man-Hud and Hud-Lds will (if I understand correctly) continue Man-Leeds, and the present Bradford-Brighouse-Wakefield (which will presumably remain diesel) can turn in the east end bays.

Perhaps someone could look at the sectional appendix and tell me whether an eastbound train can go quicker through plat 4 than 8?

And thanks for all the comments defending Huddersfield. While we're on the subject, I don't think Wakefield needs 2 or 3 trains an hour to London (the speed profile here is 35 between the viaduct and the station, then either 25 for the platform 2 line or 75 for the centre road).

 

[Nym]

But there won't be any terminating services in hud p4 - the present Man-Hud and Hud-Lds will (if I understand correctly) continue Man-Leeds, and the present Bradford-Brighouse-Wakefield (which will presumably remain diesel) can turn in the east end bays.

Perhaps someone could look at the sectional appendix and tell me whether an eastbound train can go quicker through plat 4 than 8?

And thanks for all the comments defending Huddersfield. While we're on the subject, I don't think Wakefield needs 2 or 3 trains an hour to London (the speed profile here is 35 between the viaduct and the station, then either 25 for the platform 2 line or 75 for the centre road).

There potentially will because with the kind of timings I've been looking at if we have 2tph semi fast and 4tph fast TPE North with the semi fasts each taking two stops between Stalybridge and Huddersfeild and kindling sodding off into Piccadilly via Guide Bridge when the cord opens, then even with fast through roads at Stalybridge one will need to make use of Platform 4 at Huddersfeild so that the Fast TPE services can overtake the Semi Fast TPE services. Either that or we will end up needing more platforms at Stalybridge, that I don't think is very likely, or we will end up having to overtake somewhere else, and the only other place to do that is Dewsbury or on some of the loops between Marsden and Huddersfeild. Even with four track between Huddersfeild and Marsden, we still hit problems with overtaking at Huddersfeild.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Stockport is a small town near Manchester but it gets 14tph...

As I said in my posting to 34D with regard to his description of Huddersfield, you too are being mischievous in referring to a well-known settlement as a "small town". Stockport, in the 2001 census, had a town population of 136,082 and a borough population of 281,000.

It has a six platform railway station, which has very regular direct services to London and many other long-distance destinations and is a transport hub for local services. Its rail passenger usage is noted in its DfT station category rating of "B".

 

[Nym]

As I said in my posting to 34D with regard to his description of Huddersfield, you too are being mischievous in referring to a well-known settlement as a "small town". Stockport, in the 2001 census, had a town population of 136,082 and a borough population of 281,000.

It has a six platform railway station, which has very regular direct services to London and many other long-distance destinations and is a transport hub for local services. Its rail passenger usage is noted in its DfT station category rating of "B".

I know, I was being delibrately irritating, since 'Stockport Brough' and Kirkless are quite similar demographics, if not Stockport slightly closer to Manchester than Huddersfeild to Leeds.

Huddersfeild serves at the main junction and railhead for all of Kirkless, with other in the area being the likes of Halifax, Brighouse and Bradford Interchange with other smaller stations, similar to Stockport.

Just to add fuel to the whole Stockport thing, not all of this census traffic will use Stockport Railway Station, a large number are not even on this line, they will be useing lines through the likes of Reddish and Marple, or Heald Green and Gatley (Or Manchester Airport).

 

[tbtc]

Yes, but we're talking a small town near Leeds. 7 trains an hour to Leeds and 5 to Manchester is sufficient. Let the eighth roll through the station at 40mph (plat 2 towards Man, plat 4 towards Leeds I think may have the highest speed) and save 5-10 minutes

Regardless of the "small town" jibe, the point I was making is that you wouldn't save *any* time running non stop because of the way that the pathings work at the Leeds end and the Manchester end.

There will be eight trains an hour on the line from Manchester to Stalybridge (four fast slotted in between four slow) and eight trains an hour on the line from Dewsbury to Leeds (four fast slotted in between four slow) - so even if you bulldoze Huddersfield and run at 100mph it won't save any time between Leeds and Manchester (you'll just catch the stopper up faster).

I didn't suggest running London-Edinburgh via Leeds, but London-Edinburgh and Leeds-Edinburgh, which would be a much more sensible solution. I think more productive would be Leeds-Aberdeen, although this would require more HSTs.

Why would you run Leeds - Edinburgh when you could run EMUs from Manchester to Edinburgh via Leeds/ Newcastle?

 

[Waverley125]

Because it'd take about 40 minutes more to go to Edinburgh via Leeds than via Carstairs from Manchester. Also, the east coast needs a regular service not only to Edinburgh but to Aberdeen, certainly in the north, where the change in Edinburgh is often long and unhelpful.

Running EC HSTs Leeds-Aberdeen calling: York, Darlington, Durham, Newcastle, Morpeth/Alnmouth, Berwick, Dunbar, Edinburgh, Haymarket, Inverkeithing, Kirkcaldy, Leuchars, Dundee, Arbroath, Montrose, Stonehaven

will give that service, and allow all XC services north of Newcastle to be cut-given it's also quicker via the west coast from south of Birmingham, this XC service really only caters (under the above service) to Sheffield, Chesterfield, Derby & Burton on Trent-not worth it when you could use those units to improve services from the north of England to the southwest.

So, in conclusion, I'd hope to eventually be looking at

EC: 1tph London-Edinburgh, 1tph Leeds-Aberdeen, 1tp2h London-Aberdeen
ICWC: 1tph Birmingham-Edinburgh, 1tph Manchester-Edinburgh, 1tph Birmingham-Glasgow, 1tph Manchester-Glasgow

 

[tbtc]

Because it'd take about 40 minutes more to go to Edinburgh via Leeds than via Carstairs from Manchester. Also, the east coast needs a regular service not only to Edinburgh but to Aberdeen, certainly in the north, where the change in Edinburgh is often long and unhelpful

If you run a TPE service from (Liverpool or Manchester Airport) - Manchester - Leeds - York - Newcastle - Edinburgh then you are tapping into a lot of markets on the way.

It may be faster to do Manchester - Edinburgh via Carstairs, but there's very little population between Lancaster and Kirknewton that way, which is why the direct Manchester - Edinburgh service has only been every two/three/ four hours (depending on the time of day).

So, in conclusion, I'd hope to eventually be looking at

EC: 1tph London-Edinburgh, 1tph Leeds-Aberdeen, 1tp2h London-Aberdeen
ICWC: 1tph Birmingham-Edinburgh, 1tph Manchester-Edinburgh, 1tph Birmingham-Glasgow, 1tph Manchester-Glasgow

Presuming that you also want London - Glasgow to be roughly hourly up the WCML (?) that's five trains an hour from Lancaster to Carstairs Triangle - quite an increase on what we have nowadays. The service from Lancaster to Carlisle would be better than the service between many big cities.

 

[Nym]

Much as it pains me to agree with someone else sometimes, I'm more for an extension of TPE from Newcastle to Edinbrugh than running an HST from Leeds to Aberdeen or running a 225 through Leeds to Edinbrugh, it's just excessively sized.

If we go for my model of...

XC:
1tph Birmingham - Edinbrugh via Doncaster
1tph Birmingham - Middlesbrough via Leeds
TPE:
2tph Manchester - Newcastle

Then I wouldn't mind seeing the extensions as...

Loose the Northern service to Cathill

1tph TPE runs onwards, pickup up the old Northern to Cathill path and extending up to Berwick upon Tweed to terminate, removing diesel under wires.
1tph TPE runs onwards to Edinbrugh, taking the stops away from a slow(er) service up the ECML taking Berwick stops off of some of the London services potentially.

There is also the possiblity, pathing permitted to just extend one service North of Newcastle up to Edinbrugh taking all stops on the way, and extending the other somewhere else that god forbid gets electrified, although there is little chance of that actually happening.

 

[Waverley125]

so the north of England loses half its through connections to northeastern Scotland, Scotland loses all long-form trains down the east coast and Leeds gets cut off from the XC service to Newcastle and gets a 4-car EMU replacement, and a service through to Scotland acting as a Newcastle suburban train.

NO!!

You have several demands on the northern ECML which are required, so let's consider them

1) Service from Leeds-Scotland. Leeds is a much much bigger railhead than Doncaster, which already has scottish services and should, in any rejig, get an hourly service. It's much better therefore to route XC scottish services away from Doncaster. Currently Leeds service to Scotland is already crowded and under-run.

2) Service north of Edinburgh within Scotland. Currently the 3-car 170s up the east coast are very busy, and in the time I've been using them I've yet to see less than a 70% load, even in the very off peak (2pm on a Wednesday afternoon). Not only do the above suggestions cut all long-form trains, they also cut through connections to England from Fife, Angus and Aberdeenshire, for which there is actually a very good market not currently served by the 1tp2h to London.

3) Service from the midlands to the northeast & Scotland. Currently the midlands need to get to Newcastle, so it would seem sensible to route things that way. Given Birmingham already has a connection to Edinburgh via the WCML, lengthening journey times would seem mad, as it would for Manchester (given that sending trains via Leeds creates an increase between 40 minutes and 1 hour).

So let's think sensibly, and take this from all angles.

1) TransPennine Express

Middlesbrough is going to get wired, this I'm confident of. I'd support additional services to Middlesrough from Manchester, if this wasn't an option, then a fast 158-operated service to Leeds would be. There's no mass market to go to Middlesbrough from the Midlands/South Yorkshire

2) Cross Country

As above, should serve the most popular destinations. This isn't Middlesbrough. It is Newcastle. Doncaster already has frequent services to Newcastle & Scotland, and will get more. The time saving for Sheffield does exist, but the market for Sheffield-Leeds fasts is a lot bigger, and trades off. 2tph via Leeds terminating at Newcastle seems the best idea. It gives extra Sheffield-Leeds connections (our real moneymaker), and more service on Leeds-Newcastle (our other big flow).

3) East Coast

Lots of places in the northeast & Scotland are particularly underserved, especially in terms of through connections, for which the Aberdeen train is inadequate. There's certainly not a market for an hourly service to London given air competition, but there is from Leeds north to Scotland, and from the north of Scotland to Edinburgh & south of it.

Results:

2tph XC Sheffield-Wakefield-Leeds-York-Northallerton-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle

2tph TPE Leeds-Garforth-York-Thirsk-Northallerton-Yarm-Thornaby-Middlesbrough

1tph EC Leeds-York-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle-Scotland

1tph EC London-Doncaster-York-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle-Sunderland

Service results:

Leeds gets an hourly service to Scotland, and quarter-hourly to Newcastle.

Half-hourly Leeds-Sheffield express service.

Scotland gets a regular through service to England.

Aberdeen gets an hourly long-form service to Edinburgh.

Edinburgh gets a half-hourly service to Newcastle.

EDIT:

Also, for newcastle

1tph All stops to Berwick

1tph to Edinburgh calling Cramlington, Morpeth, Alnmouth, Berwick, Ayton, Dunbar, East Linton, Drem, Prestonpans, Musselburgh

 

[Donny Dave]

You have several demands on the northern ECML which are required, so let's consider them

1) Service from Leeds-Scotland. Leeds is a much much bigger railhead than Doncaster, which already has scottish services and should, in any rejig, get an hourly service. It's much better therefore to route XC scottish services away from Doncaster. Currently Leeds service to Scotland is already crowded and under-run.

Debatable. Doncaster is an important interchange station, with quite a large catchment area (Lincolnshire and Humberside, as well as parts of South Yorkshire). Also, while Doncaster does have Scottish services already, these are very infrequent, with only 8tpd continuing beyond Newcastle, and only 3 services between 9am and 5 pm.

Also re-read my earlier post in this topic. In the current timetable, while there is 2tph from Doncaster to Newcastle, they depart within 10 minutes of each other.

2) Service north of Edinburgh within Scotland. Currently the 3-car 170s up the east coast are very busy, and in the time I've been using them I've yet to see less than a 70% load, even in the very off peak (2pm on a Wednesday afternoon). Not only do the above suggestions cut all long-form trains, they also cut through connections to England from Fife, Angus and Aberdeenshire, for which there is actually a very good market not currently served by the 1tp2h to London.

3) Service from the midlands to the northeast & Scotland. Currently the midlands need to get to Newcastle, so it would seem sensible to route things that way. Given Birmingham already has a connection to Edinburgh via the WCML, lengthening journey times would seem mad, as it would for Manchester (given that sending trains via Leeds creates an increase between 40 minutes and 1 hour).

FYI, the time penalty for XC service going via Leeds and not Doncaster is roughly 20 minutes.

I haven't got that much experience of travelling north of Edinburgh, but from the few services I have used, I can agree with your comments.

I'm not sure about your comment that people from the Midlands need to get to Newcastle though. If the North East XC services are swapped round, so the NESW goes via Doncaster instead, for the Sheffield - Leeds - York passengers, there will be a simple same platform, or at worst, cross platform change at York

So let's think sensibly, and take this from all angles.

1) TransPennine Express

Middlesbrough is going to get wired, this I'm confident of. I'd support additional services to Middlesrough from Manchester, if this wasn't an option, then a fast 158-operated service to Leeds would be. There's no mass market to go to Middlesbrough from the Midlands/South Yorkshire

Is there not? As quite a lot of the members on the forum are not railway staff, we don't get access to a detailed breakdown of what tickets are actually sold. All we can go on is anecdotal evidence and personal experiences, as well as the station usage reports.

2) Cross Country

As above, should serve the most popular destinations. This isn't Middlesbrough. It is Newcastle. Doncaster already has frequent services to Newcastle & Scotland, and will get more. The time saving for Sheffield does exist, but the market for Sheffield-Leeds fasts is a lot bigger, and trades off. 2tph via Leeds terminating at Newcastle seems the best idea. It gives extra Sheffield-Leeds connections (our real moneymaker), and more service on Leeds-Newcastle (our other big flow).

Again, re-read my comments about Doncaster - Edinburgh. I do not call 8tpd between the 2 as frequent, especially when there is on 3 services between 9am and 5pm. Also, taking all XC services away from Doncaster is a regressive step, as it will half the number of services from there to Newcastle.

3) East Coast

Lots of places in the northeast & Scotland are particularly underserved, especially in terms of through connections, for which the Aberdeen train is inadequate. There's certainly not a market for an hourly service to London given air competition, but there is from Leeds north to Scotland, and from the north of Scotland to Edinburgh & south of it.

Results:

2tph XC Sheffield-Wakefield-Leeds-York-Northallerton-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle

2tph TPE Leeds-Garforth-York-Thirsk-Northallerton-Yarm-Thornaby-Middlesbrough

1tph EC Leeds-York-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle-Scotland

1tph EC London-Doncaster-York-Darlington-Durham-Newcastle-Sunderland

Service results:

Leeds gets an hourly service to Scotland, and quarter-hourly to Newcastle.

Half-hourly Leeds-Sheffield express service.

Scotland gets a regular through service to England.

Aberdeen gets an hourly long-form service to Edinburgh.

Edinburgh gets a half-hourly service to Newcastle.

That plan is simply daft! Let me pick a lot of holes in your plan ....

London - Newcastle - Scotland. That is a big market for East Coast, you according to your plan, it's not needed, so instead you truncate it at Newcastle and reduce the frequency to 1tph

Leeds - Newcastle - Scotland. 4tph Leeds - Newcastle? Is there really that much demand? With the proposed timetable, it goes to 3tph anyway

XC Birmingham - Newcastle. No demand for passengers to go to Doncaster, and the surrounding catchment area?

Newcastle - Scotland. Only 1 (semi) fast tph? Another reduction in frequency ....

Also, is there the demand for a full length train every hour between Aberdeen and Edinburgh?

What about the Inverness and Scarborough services?

Seeing as you haven't mention them, I'm assuming the KX - Leeds services will stay as they are.

Basically, in your "perfect plan", Only Leeds/York - Newcastle - Edinburgh is worth bothering about, sod everyone else that wants to get anywhere using East Coast ....

 

[34D]

How about extending one MML St Panc to Sheffield every two hours to Aberdeen via Leeds? It wouldn't have any role between London and wakefield (and north thereof) but would give Leicester/Nottingham their first service to North of Sheffield in a long while. The stock is 125mph capable.... Could even do a TOC change at Leeds if this were considered better.