Liverpool to Newcastle May 2014

[SeanG]

Also the despatch staff are here 24 hours a day with 2 on nights so stopping (and they sometimes have in the past) is not an issue.

Why are they, when Victoria doesn not have trains 24hrs?

 

[transmanche]

And also there may end up being new services from Bank Quay that compensate if the additional Chester to Manchester Victoria service is introduced and it continues somewhere to the east (such as the Calder Valley, as is often mentioned).

Has a Chester (CTR) to Manchester Victoria (MCV) service been featured in any (semi-) official plans? Or it is just a RailUK 'wish'?

As much as I welcome the new Newcastle-Liverpool via MCV service; because it runs non-stop west of MCV it makes getting to CTR that little bit harder (requiring an additional change at York/Leeds/Huddersfield).

Long-term, it would be great to see CTR added to the Transpennine Express route map.

 

[northwichcat]

Has a Chester (CTR) to Manchester Victoria (MCV) service been featured in any (semi-) official plans? Or it is just a RailUK 'wish'?

From the original Network Rail Northern Hub document:

Chester:
- doubled frequency to two trains per hour
- direct service across Manchester to destinations such as Manchester Airport, Bradford, Sheffield and Leeds
- incremental journey time improvements as a result of works on the Chat Moss route.

Manchester Airport:
- provide opportunity for new direct connections such as to Bradford, Halifax, Chester, Stoke-on-Trent and Warrington

Note that pre-dates North TPE electrification so some of the suggested destinations for trains may not tie in with that.

 

[Aictos]

Just a sec, what route is the proposed Blackpool to Scarborough via York service going to take? What's going to happen to the existing Blackpool to York via Bradford Interchange service?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Has a Chester (CTR) to Manchester Victoria (MCV) service been featured in any (semi-) official plans? Or it is just a RailUK 'wish'?

As much as I welcome the new Newcastle-Liverpool via MCV service; because it runs non-stop west of MCV it makes getting to CTR that little bit harder (requiring an additional change at York/Leeds/Huddersfield).

Long-term, it would be great to see CTR added to the Transpennine Express route map.

It figures in various RUS and Northern Hub documents, as somewhere between an aspiration and an illustration of possible future services.
WAG also say they want trans-Pennine links.
But ATW don't want to move from Piccadilly (they want to extend to the Airport).
Chester-Bradford-Leeds gets mentioned (diesel throughout), but if they wire Warrington to Chester that would change.
Of course, electric Warrington BQ-Leeds will be possible with TP electrification, but it's unlikely they would start/terminate trains at WBQ.

 

[northwichcat]

Just a sec, what route is the proposed Blackpool to Scarborough via York service going to take? What's going to happen to the existing Blackpool to York via Bradford Interchange service?

I think you're not understanding something here. They're won't be a new Blackpool-Scarborough service, the existing Blackpool-Burnley-Bradford-York (hourly) service will be extended to Scarborough to give one hourly Blackpool-Burnley-Bradford-York-Scarborough service. This will happen the day after TransPennine Express services stop serving Scarborough, so they'll still be the same frequency of trains between York and Scarborough as well.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Just to add to jcollins, it will only be stopping Garforth between Leeds and York, with a new electric stopping service introduced Leeds-York (potentially to Bradford FS).

 

[northwichcat]

Just to add to jcollins, it will only be stopping Garforth between Leeds and York, with a new electric stopping service introduced Leeds-York (potentially to Bradford FS).

Yes there are set to be calling pattern changes. Also Bamber Bridge is set to be added as a calling point - Network Rail are to lengthen it's platforms to be able to take 3 car 158s. I'm not sure entirely why though, maybe there's a lot of houses being built there or something?

 

[Dunc108]

Took this pic last year during Sunday diversions; it gives a taste of what's to come, although i'm sure ECS route familiarisation trips are pretty much ongoing... 185136 making an appearance here.

 

[ianhr]

But ATW don't want to move from Piccadilly (they want to extend to the Airport).
Chester-Bradford-Leeds gets mentioned (diesel throughout), but if they wire Warrington to Chester that would change.
Of course, electric Warrington BQ-Leeds will be possible with TP electrification, but it's unlikely they would start/terminate trains at WBQ.

I can't see why ATW favour Piccadilly rather than ManVic as that will inhibit connections to destinations farther north. North Wales trains historically ran from Victoria or Exchange and the transfer to Piccadilly made sense for connections when most Trans-Pennine services moved to Piccadilly. With the pending switch back to the more appropriate Victoria route would it not be a good idea to re-route ATW North Wales trains too? However, there may now be a lack of terminal capacity for reversing trains from the west.

 

[Dunc108]

I can't see why ATW favour Piccadilly rather than ManVic as that will inhibit connections to destinations farther north. North Wales trains historically ran from Victoria or Exchange and the transfer to Piccadilly made sense for connections when most Trans-Pennine services moved to Piccadilly. With the pending switch back to the more appropriate Victoria route would it not be a good idea to re-route ATW North Wales trains too? However, there may now be a lack of terminal capacity for reversing trains from the west.

I thought of the possibility of a Manchester Victoria - Ellesmere Port service (connecting with Merseyrail EMUs) but guess it might be better serving Chester!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I can't see why ATW favour Piccadilly rather than ManVic as that will inhibit connections to destinations farther north. North Wales trains historically ran from Victoria or Exchange and the transfer to Piccadilly made sense for connections when most Trans-Pennine services moved to Piccadilly. With the pending switch back to the more appropriate Victoria route would it not be a good idea to re-route ATW North Wales trains too? However, there may now be a lack of terminal capacity for reversing trains from the west.

It's not really relevant what ATW think because by the time Northern Hub exists there will be a new W&B franchise in place (or successor).
So it's what the WAG and Cheshire West want that really matters.
If there is only one service from Chester/North Wales I think they would want to terminate at Piccadilly as now, as it will still be the principal Manchester hub with the best passenger environment.
Oxford Road is also a very important target.
The Ordsall Chord means that Yorkshire destinations will be available from MCO/MAN as well as MCV.
If additional services are introduced, that would bring Victoria into play, probably with a through service.

 

[northwichcat]

I can't see why ATW favour Piccadilly rather than ManVic as that will inhibit connections to destinations farther north. North Wales trains historically ran from Victoria or Exchange and the transfer to Piccadilly made sense for connections when most Trans-Pennine services moved to Piccadilly. With the pending switch back to the more appropriate Victoria route would it not be a good idea to re-route ATW North Wales trains too? However, there may now be a lack of terminal capacity for reversing trains from the west.

I think it was more the WAG who wanted to keep North Wales trains going to Piccadilly as it had more fast connections available than Victoria. For instance, currently Victoria has no fast Huddersfield/Leeds services, no direct Sheffield services, no direct Airport services etc. That opinion may change once the Ordsall Chord has been built.

 

[Philip]

If Chester and North Wales services are extended over the Pennines, what would the traction be if still a diesel route? I seem to remember reading on here that 175s were banned east of Stalybridge and Hazel Grove because they were too wide for the platform edges.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If Chester and North Wales services are extended over the Pennines, what would the traction be if still a diesel route? I seem to remember reading on here that 175s were banned east of Stalybridge and Hazel Grove because they were too wide for the platform edges.

I doubt it would be 175s as there aren't enough for current routes - maybe if they get cut back to Cardiff after electrification to Swansea.
"Banned" is probably a bit strong.
They have just never needed to work east of current routes.
If 185s work there should not be much problem for 175s.
In fact it might well become a TP 185 route after electrification, at least to Chester.

 

[YorkshireBear]

185s are not passed for Dawlish sea wall, doesn't mean they are banned. I cannot imagine the 175s are that different to 158s so they will be fine IMHO.

 

[Philip]

185s are not passed for Dawlish sea wall, doesn't mean they are banned. I cannot imagine the 175s are that different to 158s so they will be fine IMHO.

I heard one was tested going east at least some of the way a good few years ago and it failed the clearance test, I think because of width. When first rolled out quite a few stations needed their platforms 'shaving' to accommodate them.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I heard one was tested going east at least some of the way a good few years ago and it failed the clearance test, I think because of width. When first rolled out quite a few stations needed their platforms 'shaving' to accommodate them.

Fair enough i don't mind being proven wrong.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I heard one was tested going east at least some of the way a good few years ago and it failed the clearance test, I think because of width. When first rolled out quite a few stations needed their platforms 'shaving' to accommodate them.

It's usually the door step plate which causes the trouble, not the basic body.
But 185s have them as well (though nearer the middle of the body; 175/180s have end doors).

 

[northwichcat]

If Chester and North Wales services are extended over the Pennines, what would the traction be if still a diesel route? I seem to remember reading on here that 175s were banned east of Stalybridge and Hazel Grove because they were too wide for the platform edges.

185s are not passed for Dawlish sea wall, doesn't mean they are banned. I cannot imagine the 175s are that different to 158s so they will be fine IMHO.

175s haven't been cleared for any Yorkshire route there's never been any intention for them to go in to Yorkshire. 175s carriages are up to 0.5m longer than 158 carriages as well as being slightly wider and there was an issue with the step hitting some platforms when the 175s were introduced but FNW asked for an alteration so they were cleared for the following routes:
Holyhead-Chester
Llandudno-Llandudno Junction
Chester-Birmingham
Chester-Warrington-Manchester
Chester-Altrincham-Manchester
Windermere-Manchester Airport
Blackpool North-Preston
Barrow-Lancaster
Salford-Manchester Victoria

ATW have obviously added further routes to the 'cleared' list - I'm not sure how easily clearance was obtained though.

The likelihood is the Wales service would terminate at Manchester Airport and Yorkshire services would continue to Chester only. (Manchester-Earlestown is cleared for 185s already.)

 

[47802]

I think you're not understanding something here. They're won't be a new Blackpool-Scarborough service, the existing Blackpool-Burnley-Bradford-York (hourly) service will be extended to Scarborough to give one hourly Blackpool-Burnley-Bradford-York-Scarborough service. This will happen the day after TransPennine Express services stop serving Scarborough, so they'll still be the same frequency of trains between York and Scarborough as well.

While it might be the logical choice is it actually set in stone somewhere? Is it not perhaps dependent on exactly what happens re Northern and TPX, could not Scarborough services end up as a shuttle or perhaps be linked to Calder Valley services to Manchester rather than Blackpool.

 

[tbtc]

While it might be the logical choice is it actually set in stone somewhere? Is it not perhaps dependent on exactly what happens re Northern and TPX, could not Scarborough services end up as a shuttle or perhaps be linked to Calder Valley services to Manchester rather than Blackpool.

Who knows.

I think that, as long as Scarborough retains a regular direct service to Leeds then that's the main thing (certainly every couple of hours, ideally hourly, but alternate Scarborough services could be bi-mode IEP to London for example).

There probably needs to be a direct link from Bradford to the ECML at York, but that could come from Manchester or Blackpool (it could even be an EMU from Forster Square to York, with the Scarborough services linked on to the Settle & Carlisle service for an enthusiast-tastic service...)

 

[YorkshireBear]

It is in all the RUS' and listed in the illustrative options document for CP5. Which from my discussions with Network Rail basically means this is happening unless the TOCs oppose. The current ones (FTPE and Northern) do not so will depend on the new ones.

 

[northwichcat]

While it might be the logical choice is it actually set in stone somewhere? Is it not perhaps dependent on exactly what happens re Northern and TPX, could not Scarborough services end up as a shuttle or perhaps be linked to Calder Valley services to Manchester rather than Blackpool.

It's not set in stone but it is part of the HLOS for CP5. So for something else to go ahead instead of it then it'll need to have greater economic value.

I'd question the business case of your Victoria-Bradford-Scarborough service though. What advantages would that have over Blackpool-Scarborough? The only one I can think of is an additional York-Leeds service. However, if sufficient demand hasn't been identified for that to happen then it's probable the Blackpool-York service would be cut back to Leeds instead.

 

[47802]

It's not set in stone but it is part of the HLOS for CP5. So for something else to go ahead instead of it then it'll need to have greater economic value.

I'd question the business case of your Victoria-Bradford-Scarborough service though. What advantages would that have over Blackpool-Scarborough? The only one I can think of is an additional York-Leeds service. However, if sufficient demand hasn't been identified for that to happen then it's probable the Blackpool-York service would be cut back to Leeds instead.

Well yes in that case the Blackpool services would probably terminate at Leeds. Business case wise I doubt it makes much odds either way, I suspect through journeys beyond West York's to Scarborough are probably fairly low, although it would still give Scarborough a through if somewhat slower service to Manchester, I say its still more likely to be dependent what happens re the Northern and TPX franchises.

 

[Dunc108]

Well yes in that case the Blackpool services would probably terminate at Leeds. Business case wise I doubt it makes much odds either way, I suspect through journeys beyond West York's to Scarborough are probably fairly low, although it would still give Scarborough a through if somewhat slower service to Manchester, I say its still more likely to be dependent what happens re the Northern and TPX franchises.

I can't imagine why anyone in Blackpool would want to go to Scarborough, its a end to end service that feels more a positioning move or for operational convenience, I can see more demand for Blackpool - Leeds as attracting more end to end customers, although the majority of passengers I see getting on the Yorks at Preston seem to be shoppers living in Blackburn, Accrington & Burnley opting for a quicker journey home, not wanting to stomach the usual all stations 142 to Colne! If it came via Caldervale & Manchester it'd be better using the semi fast 158 than a 155 or 144, although 155s do give a good ride.

 

[northwichcat]

I can't imagine why anyone in Blackpool would want to go to Scarborough, its a end to end service that feels more a positioning move or for operational convenience, I can see more demand for Blackpool - Leeds as attracting more end to end customers, although the majority of passengers I see getting on the Yorks at Preston seem to be shoppers living in Blackburn, Accrington & Burnley opting for a quicker journey home than the usual all stations 142 to Colne. If it came via Caldervale & Manchester it'd be better using the semi fast 158 than a 155 or 144, although 155s do give a good ride.

A through service allows all of the following journeys without changing:
* Blackpool-Leeds
* Halifax-York
* Leeds-Scarborough

From Network Rail's platform lengthening proposals I imagine the intention is to use 3 car 158s on Blackpool-Scarborough and to include an additional call at Bamber Bridge.

 

[transmanche]

I can't imagine why anyone in Blackpool would want to go to Scarborough

But (like most services) it isn't planned solely for end-to-end passengers. What it'll offer is the opportunity for people to make journeys without having to change at Leeds or York.

 

[IanXC]

The other advantage it would give is that summer strengthening would be appropriate at both ends of the route as peak demand for both destinations is likely to be very strongly correlated.

 

[Hardcastle]

About a decade or so ago there was a 2 hourly Scarborough-Blackpool & alternate 2 hourly Scarborough-Liverpool service giving the Scarborough-Leeds axis a hourly service so going back to that might be a good idea.