Crewe to Derby line skeleton services.

[Qwerty133]

It'd be a start though, at least you could have a doubled up dogbox going the other way then, and have twice as much lack of legroom!

I'm sure EMT are very much looking forward to July 26th as it is school holiday so the Matlock line needs extra coaches summer so the Skegness line needs extra coaches and ladies day at uttoxer races so the Crewe line needs extra coaches, it is also a weekday so coaches cannot be taken from other services so EMT will likekly need to provide at least one bus in addition to trains to get everyone to their destination in CT days units could have come over to Birmingham to help strengthen services but now there are no units available on days such as this where lines are in need of short-term additional capacity

 

[MCR247]

Maybe they could ask LM if they have a 153 spare on the day, and maybe the same for Northern. Oh wait, everywheres short of stock... :roll:

 

[ATW Alex 101]

Cutting back to Stoke I am sure would further reduce the number of passengers using this once busy route.
Nottingham passengers are already being inconvenienced by the the change at Derby, without another one at Stoke. When travelling from Nottingham to Lancs, Cumbria and Scotland this used to be the main route that most people used with just one change at Crewe. It is now quicker to change at Manchester perhaps one of the reasons why the Norwich-Liverpool service has been so overcrowded betweeen Nottingham and Manchester.

Following the withdrawal of through Nottingham-Glasgow trains in the 1980's it used to be so easy to travel from Nottingham to Glasgow with one change at Crewe but now no route is easy or particularly easy or quick. Listed below are some of the many alternatives from Nottingham. Change at Derby and Crewe
Change at Manchester and often additionally at Preston
Change at Leeds and Carlisle (if only som faster trains would use that route!)
Change at Sheffield (then long way round via East Coast and Edinburgh).
Change at Grantham and Edinburgh

I must admit that I now tend to change at Leeds and Carlisle as that does sometimes have the cheapest prices and if you can get good connections does not take as long as you might expect. Also I never tire of travelling the Settle to Carlisle line.

Like you say there is no fast fast way, its going to take you a few hours whichever way you go. You could also change at Manchester Picc for TPE or you can change at Derby or Chesterfield for the direct XC service

 

[Qwerty133]

Maybe they could ask LM if they have a 153 spare on the day, and maybe the same for Northern. Oh wait, everywheres short of stock... :roll:

Yes everywhere is short of stock but with such a big DMU fleet in CT days they could normally manage to at least 2 coaches on all services for 1 day without many issues ( can remember travelling on a white with purple doors 170 to uttoxeter)

 

[MCR247]

Yes everywhere is short of stock but with such a big DMU fleet in CT days they could normally manage to at least 2 coaches on all services for 1 day without many issues ( can remember travelling on a white with purple doors 170 to uttoxeter)

Sorry my post wasn't aimed at you, i was just saying that it's a pathetic situation that were in that we have no chance of catering for short term demand when we can't even cope with long term demand.

But ah, CT, I loved their random allocations with 170s everywhere etc!

 

[Mutant Lemming]

What do you achieve by splitting the service at Stoke? In the EM RUS the suggestion was to actually extend the Derby to Crewe service to Manchester Airport, providing a direct service from the East Midlands and Stoke, it seems eminently more sensible to do that than reduce the service currently offered, when there is little chance of a like for like replacement.

The point is there is a lack of rolling stock and curtailing the current service will allow an improved frequency over the stretch not covered by other services. The problems pointed out by other with regards to reversing trains at Stoke make it unlikely to happen though.

 

[Lewisham2221]

The current service requires 3 units. To run an hourly SOT-DBY you would need to units. To improve the frequency to half hourly you would thus need 4 units. That's another unit you've got to find from somewhere. Plus something else to cover the SOT-CRE section. You then also potentially risk making the more frequent SOT-DBY section much more popular and, as a result, busier. Assuming it would still be 153's running the service, you're then not actually solving anything by doubling the frequency.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Platforming at Stoke - IIRC only p1 (the main southbound) is bi-di (though that could have changed when the track was remodelled a few years ago) - getting the Derby train out and back between the current 5tph (?) that use the platform I can imagine would leave a tiny margin for error - if the Derby service is late I can only imagine it would get later awaiting a suitable path.

Platform 2 is also bi-di. If it wasn't before, it was probably made so when the centre road was taken out. Regarding reversing and pathing, most trains seem to arrive/depart Stoke in a bit of a cluster around the xx00 and xx30 mark. There tends to be a quiet spell around xx15 and xx45. There's also sidings just to the North of the station that could be used to shunt out, reverse and come back if required. It would probably lead to problems when there's disruption though. Not that I'm trying to justify turning the services at Stoke, as I said above, you'd end up with a net disadvantage overall by doing so, IMO.

 

[DDB]

What do you achieve by splitting the service at Stoke? In the EM RUS the suggestion was to actually extend the Derby to Crewe service to Manchester Airport, providing a direct service from the East Midlands and Stoke, it seems eminently more sensible to do that than reduce the service currently offered, when there is little chance of a like for like replacement.

There was also a suggestion in the RUS (admittedly rejected) to free up a path to extend the Crewe service to Nottingham by diverting the Cardiff to Nottingham service around Derby, speeding it up and eliminating the need for the reversal at Derby.

One (expensive) solution to the lack of DMU rolling stock would be to design and build some bimodes and replace much of EMTs 153/156 stock with them. They could do Nottingham-Matlock (Nottingham-Ambergate on wires) Lincoln-Leicester (Leicester-Nottingham on wires) and Nottingham-Manchester Airport (Nottingham-Derby and Stoke-Manchester Airport on wires).

Sadly, given that 3 cars seem to be the practical lower limit for bimodes, funding an increase from 2 car trains on all these routes is unlikely

DDB

 

[bunnahabhain]

The point is there is a lack of rolling stock and curtailing the current service will allow an improved frequency over the stretch not covered by other services. The problems pointed out by other with regards to reversing trains at Stoke make it unlikely to happen though.

You won't achieve anything other than cutting off your nose to spite your face if you cut the service back to Stoke, its a useful connection. Just because the service duplicates another service between Stoke and Crewe doesn't mean that an equal number of people will continue to travel between those two stations if they have to change trains.

 

[Wath Yard]

There also isn't a lack of available rolling stock. There may be no available units but the problem is with the way the railway is structured rolling stock isn't efficiently allocated. Nobody can convince me that Motherwell - Cumbernauld requires a 2-car DMU.

 

[Qwerty133]

There was also a suggestion in the RUS (admittedly rejected) to free up a path to extend the Crewe service to Nottingham by diverting the Cardiff to Nottingham service around Derby, speeding it up and eliminating the need for the reversal at Derby
DDB

This makes no sense for more than one reason because a) because XC are able to provide 2/3 car trains on this service providing more capacity between derby and Nottingham than the dogbox that EMT would have to use b) it increases the amount of diagrams that are required leading to services currently formed by 2x153 to have to be formed of a lone dogbox c) while Crewe gains a direct service to Nottingham you are taking away direct services to Cardiff from derby.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There also isn't a lack of available rolling stock. There may be no available units but the problem is with the way the railway is structured rolling stock isn't efficiently allocated. Nobody can convince me that Motherwell - Cumbernauld requires a 2-car DMU.

No one can convince me that a 6 mile branch line requires a 158 but then it is in the south (south of Bedford ) so it will always ge better rolling stock than the midlands or north

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Where do you have in mind?

 

[Qwerty133]

Where do you have in mind?

Lymington pier line

 

[Old Yard Dog]

I can't believe that people are suggesting cutting back the Crewe - Derby line to Stoke. This service used to run from Crewe to Skegness and was very useful.

I often travel from Ellesmere Port to Nottingham changing at Hooton, Chester, Crewe and Derby (much cheaper than going via Liverpool). Now somebody wants to put an extra change in.

If it wasn't for the difficulty in units crossing the WCML at Crewe, there would be a case for linking up all the disconnected services between North Wales and Lincolnshire.

Services should be planned for the benefit of passngers and passengers don't like changing trains.

At the very least, the service should run Crewe - Nottingham like it did until relatively recently.

 

[TheGrew]

Lymington pier line

Admittedly the 158 is used due to a lack of 450s, I think when that SWT should put a 456 down there when they receive them as it seems silly using diesel traction on an entirely electric branch.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

You won't achieve anything other than cutting off your nose to spite your face if you cut the service back to Stoke, its a useful connection. Just because the service duplicates another service between Stoke and Crewe doesn't mean that an equal number of people will continue to travel between those two stations if they have to change trains.

It's only useful if you can actually get on the thing. Passengers off the WCML for Derby are more inclined now to go via New Street or Tamworth where you have 2 or 3 proper trains an hour as opposed to an hourly single carriage.

 

[Qwerty133]

I can't believe that people are suggesting cutting back the Crewe - Derby line to Stoke. This service used to run from Crewe to Skegness and was very useful.

I often travel from Ellesmere Port to Nottingham changing at Hooton, Chester, Crewe and Derby (much cheaper than going via Liverpool). Now somebody wants to put an extra change in.

If it wasn't for the difficulty in units crossing the WCML at Crewe, there would be a case for linking up all the disconnected services between North Wales and Lincolnshire.

Services should be planned for the benefit of passngers and passengers don't like changing trains.

At the very least, the service should run Crewe - Nottingham like it did until relatively recently.

I don't think it should it should be extended as any longer without being able to move your legs a single Centimetre could be dangerous

 

[Wath Yard]

I think the main reason people would choose to change at Birmingham is the timetable, not the capacity. I'm not a conspiracy theorist but I'm very suspicious about interchanges at Crewe. They appear to be deliberately timed to avoid official connections, therefore if you are travelling on the hourly service from Scotland and the North West you have over 1 hour's wait at Crewe when connecting to the Derby service as the official connection time is 10 mins and the Derby service departs 9 minutes after the Voyager arrives. And it is just as bad at the Derby end for connections to certain East Midlands towns.

I've just had a look at the EastCoast website and for most hours a change a Crewe isn't even listed as an option for Preston - Derby due to it taking so long, it directs people to travel via Manchester and Sheffield.

 

[sd0733]

Apparantly one of the reasons that departure moved from xx:40 to xx:42 from Derby was to arrive 2 mins later at Crewe to stop booking engines sending people wanting the Edinburgh/Glasgow services on the EMT route but to still stay within the maximum journey time from Derby to Crewe specified in the franchise.

 

[ATW Alex 101]

I can't believe that people are suggesting cutting back the Crewe - Derby line to Stoke. This service used to run from Crewe to Skegness and was very useful.

I often travel from Ellesmere Port to Nottingham changing at Hooton, Chester, Crewe and Derby (much cheaper than going via Liverpool). Now somebody wants to put an extra change in.

That's what I do if I go to my Grandmas who lives in Sutton-in-Ash except I enter at Capenhurst and change at Nottingham for a Roin hood line serivce, much easier if I'm going via Derby. I mean why do you want to cut it short at Stoke? It's better for those in Alsager and Longport and also provides an extra service for those pax that are going from Crewe to Stafford where they can change at Stoke coming in from Crewe.

 

[Qwerty133]

Apparantly one of the reasons that departure moved from xx:40 to xx:42 from Derby was to arrive 2 mins later at Crewe to stop booking engines sending people wanting the Edinburgh/Glasgow services on the EMT route but to still stay within the maximum journey time from Derby to Crewe specified in the franchise.

Yeah of course it's that and not the xx:40 from derby to notts? Which always delayed its departure to xx:42 anyway

 

[bunnahabhain]

It's only useful if you can actually get on the thing. Passengers off the WCML for Derby are more inclined now to go via New Street or Tamworth where you have 2 or 3 proper trains an hour as opposed to an hourly single carriage.

So the problem is capacity, which would have been easily solved had Central Trains not buggered up the passenger counts for the last few years of their franchise. This is why EMT were shafted with too few units after splitting from Central.

 

[Lewisham2221]

The 2 other diagrams today were also running with 2x153 as well.

Are you sure? Only asking as one of the 2 (due to engineering works a Crewe-Longton service was running) diagrams today (Sunday) was a single.

Also, out of interest, how busy (or not) was the 222?

 

[sd0733]

The 2 we passed on the meridian were both double units, could be they left one in derby for the return to crewe. The 20:42 derby-crewe would have been formed a different unit aswell as the meridian went back on depot so this one could well have been a single aswell.
The meridian had a few standinf in the vestibules until blythe bridge but after that there were plenty of seats in the coaches I saw.

 

[tbtc]

why can't EMT do this when there's something on at Uttoxeter?

Because that is common sense which is something EMT don't know about

Be fair to EMT here - they are making an effort - HST to Skegness in the summer, HST to Lincoln for the Christmas Market, Meridian to Lincoln each day, Meridian for the Grand National, now a Meridian for the Tranmere supporters... did every other TOC put on extra carriages for the FA Cup this weekend? Yet people are using this as an excuse to bash EMT again.

So the problem is capacity, which would have been easily solved had Central Trains not buggered up the passenger counts for the last few years of their franchise. This is why EMT were shafted with too few units after splitting from Central.

That's the version I've heard too - hence LM getting three coach 170s for the Chase Line whilst the Liverpool - Norwich service was downgraded to two coaches.

 

[bunnahabhain]

Be fair to EMT here - they are making an effort - HST to Skegness in the summer, HST to Lincoln for the Christmas Market, Meridian to Lincoln each day, Meridian for the Grand National, now a Meridian for the Tranmere supporters... did every other TOC put on extra carriages for the FA Cup this weekend? Yet people are using this as an excuse to bash EMT again.



That's the version I've heard too - hence LM getting three coach 170s for the Chase Line whilst the Liverpool - Norwich service was downgraded to two coaches.

Indeed, I recall EMT had to send the 158 centre cars they were given back to Northern as well, despite them at the time suffering chronic overcrowding on the Manchester route for the majority of the day.

 

[Lewisham2221]

The 2 we passed on the meridian were both double units, could be they left one in derby for the return to crewe. The 20:42 derby-crewe would have been formed a different unit aswell as the meridian went back on depot so this one could well have been a single aswell.
The meridian had a few standinf in the vestibules until blythe bridge but after that there were plenty of seats in the coaches I saw.

Yeah, that makes sense now. The unit off the 2042 stables at Crewe overnight, so the 222 would've been swapped for a single 153, the other unit used on Sunday (the other one that stabled at Crewe on Saturday night was a double, so the other double would've been on the diagram that finishes at Derby.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

The 2 we passed on the meridian were both double units, could be they left one in derby for the return to crewe. The 20:42 derby-crewe would have been formed a different unit aswell as the meridian went back on depot so this one could well have been a single aswell.
The meridian had a few standinf in the vestibules until blythe bridge but after that there were plenty of seats in the coaches I saw.

The 20:42 was 153311

 

[ashworth]

I can't believe that people are suggesting cutting back the Crewe - Derby line to Stoke. This service used to run from Crewe to Skegness and was very useful.

At the very least, the service should run Crewe - Nottingham like it did until relatively recently.

In the late 1970's when I was at college in Derby it used to be an hourly service from Crewe to Lincoln - even more useful, especially for the people of Lincoln, I would imagine than Skegness.
Restoring this service would provide Lincoln with links to Derby for connections to the SW and would also restore Nottingham's direct trains to Crewe for connections with the WCML.
Certainly the Crewe to Lincoln service was running between 1975 and 1978. Does anyone know how long this service lasted and when it began?

 

[Welshman]

Certainly the Crewe to Lincoln service was running between 1975 and 1978. Does anyone know how long this service lasted and when it began?

Didn't it run into the ex-Midland station of Lincoln St Mark's?
Perhaps it ceased when that station closed in May 1985?