The new franchise wont see major infrastructure improvements? Well, no, those are down to Network Rail, and any number of two-coach pure-diesel DMUs wont make much difference.
Are people so disingenuous that they are deliberately mixing up the franchise timetable and the Control Periods? This just looks like a desperate attempt to make a complaint.
We could do with separating fast services from slow services? Yes, thats what HS3/ Northern Powerhouse Rail are meant to be solving a long term problem that will require a long term solution. Did XXXXX really expect the Northern franchise to solve this?
Wed be better off with fewer longer services? No argument from me the new franchises are going to cram in even more services on existing busy lines (not just the main Leeds Manchester corridor) and introduce two coach DMUs which boils down to even more short services.
Whilst I think that most people on here agree with the fewer longer services approach (rather than the extra shorter services approach that has given us five three-coach 185s an hour from Manchester to Leeds), the problem is what services you cut.
Try to untangle the messy timetable (so that a better balance is struck between length/ frequency) and you soon face objections from people aghast at some direct link being chopped (with statements of the obvious like people prefer direct services).
In fairness to BR, this was something that they seemed to do more e.g. the Sheffield Cleethorpes service replaced the Doncaster stoppers in the evenings/ on Sunday. Supposedly Intercity services found themselves making stops at local stations (IIRC the old Cross Country services from Newcastle to Birmingham stopped at Crossgates?). Sectorisation (and subsequent privatisation putting different services in different franchises) may be to blame here, so that theres not a unified approach?
So, if you are serious about the fewer longer approach then which existing services would you cut? Which long distance services would you slow down (by adding local stops to)? Which long established links do you sever?
Does the Calder Valley need the increased frequency? Would it be better to forget about long distance connectivity to Liverpool/ Chester/ Southport and focus on two or three long services an hour from Manchester to Bradford and Leeds?
Does Wakefield Westgate to Leeds need to go up from five/hour to seven/hour (with the extra Nottingham Bradford service plus the extension of the Knottingley service to Leeds)? Four/hour would be a perfectly good turn up and go frequency, if the four trains were long enough (especially the XC one!).
Do Newcastle/ York need a direct service to both Liverpool and Manchester Airport each hour? Whilst both may be desirable with different groups of people, trying to provide direct services to all markets is what got us into this mess of so many (short) services.
Does Bradford Interchange need six services an hour to Leeds? Would four/hour be better, if they were all at least four coaches long? Is it worth putting Bradford on the map by giving it a fast inter-regional service (the hourly Nottingham service will presumably be a two/three coach DMU) if it means yet another short service from Leeds to the Interchange?
Does Manchester Airport need nine/ ten/ twelve services an hour to Piccadilly? Theres only thirtysomething passengers on each train departing from the Airport (on average), so the current nine/hour seems excessive, but if you dare suggest reducing the frequency then people get their undergarments in a twist at the idea of Cleethorpes/ Cleveland not having a direct train to the Airport every hour.
Does Preston need five services an hour to Manchester (four via Bolton, one via Wigan)? It seems excessive, but which do you cut? Given the fuss about Barrow getting extra services to Manchester Airport, itd be hard to now reduce that, so do you take Blackpool Manchester down to one an hour? Fewer Scottish services seems counter-intuitive, given the popularity of them (theyve gone from bi-hourly Voyagers/ 185s to hourly 350s). Do you slow down the longer distance ones (Scotland/ Cumbria) to serve the local stations?
Would four/hour from York to Leeds be better, if they were all at least six coaches long? Do you replace the current stopper by employing the skip stopping approach that stations like Marsden Greenfield will see? Slowing down longer distance passengers so that their Newcastle train now also serves Crossgates?
Would six/hour from Bolton to Manchester be better, if they were all at least six coaches long (instead of up to ten short services per hour)? Three from Preston, two from Wigan, one from Blackburn? On paper, yes, but how do you balance the claims for increases (e.g. half hourly to Blackburn)?
Would four/hour from Wigan to Manchester be better, if they were all at least four coaches long? Two via Bolton and two via Atherton? Sounds good, until people at stations realise that the frequency at their local station will drop down to just one an hour.
Three/hour from Leeds to Newcastle seems excessive, an hourly service would be okay, but which links do you cut? Curtail the XC service at Leeds? Thered still be an hourly service from Birmingham to Newcastle (via Doncaster).
Eight/hour from Liverpool to Manchester looks like a lot, but since a number of them serve different markets (Warrington/ St Helens, Piccadilly/Victoria, Yorkshire/ Airport etc), which do you cut? People complain that the modern service is slower than it was in steam days, but do we forget about headline times between the cities and focus on three/hour semi-fast via Warrington and three/hour semi-fast via St Helens (so that all local stations get one or two an hour)?
Oddly one of the biggest complaints on threads about northern England tends to be the nine/eleven coach 390s to Manchester meaning fewer paths for two/four coach DMUs over Stockport Viaduct. If we are serious about longer trains being better then more Pendolini, fewer Pacers seems the way forward on the Stockport Manchester corridor?
The increased frequencies on Northern services to Knutsford/ Macclesfield/ Hazel Grove etc will see the off peak service over Stockport Viaduct increased from something like thirteen/hour to seventeen/hour (if my maths is correct?). Twelve/hour seems a fair turn up and go frequency to Stockport (if every service were all at least four coaches long), but what do you cut? Do you slow down the Hope Valley services by stopping them all at Hazel Grove? Does the south Wales service pick up the local stations served by the Crewe stopper?
Weve certainly seen complaints on here before about the inequities of passengers on the Mid Cheshire line having to change at Stockport (because there arent enough paths into Manchester), but if we are serious about fewer longer then some places are going to lose their current frequency to the nearest big city (and this is a bigger problem than just the TPE line from Manchester to Leeds).
To give an example local to me, the service from Sheffield to Barnsley could go back to three/hour instead of the current four. Cut the current Castleford stopper south of Wakefield (i.e. Kirkgate Castleford Leeds), stop some of the 158-operated semi-fasts at Chapletown/ Darton etc to compensate, use the carriages spared to lengthen the remaining services. That would free up paths through Meadowhall (currently nine/hour to Sheffield plus two/hour which dont stop, so eleven paths per hour which is quite busy for a two-track line).
You could slow down the services from Sheffield to Cleethorpes/ Hull by stopping them at Rotherham/ Swinton/ Mexborough/ Conisbrough so that the half hourly Pacer run stoppers can be withdrawn. That would give fewer longer services. But youll then see people in Cleethorpes/ Hull complaining about slower journeys, or arguments that the carriages freed up by this wont be sufficient to enhance the busier remaining services.
The above ideas would mean one fewer service from Sheffield to Barnsley (down from four to three), two fewer services from Sheffield to Doncaster (down from five to three) and therefore three fewer services from Sheffield to Meadowhall (down from nine to six), which would still be fairly frequent and allow the remaining services to be beefed up with extra carriages. You could always stop the via Doncaster XC services at Meadowhall, if you wanted to retain a fast Meadowhall Doncaster service.
Cut the Cleethorpes Manchester Airport service at Piccadilly to save a unit, forget about extending the Hull Sheffield service through to Chesterfield (Chessie already gets five/hour to Sheffield)?
Do you chop some Morecambe/ Lancaster Leeds services at Skipton (with passengers connecting on Aire Valley EMUs)? Do you forget about increased frequencies to Horsforth and Harrogate (as long as all Harrogate services are longer)? That might not go down well, politically. Do you forget about some places having direct services to Manchester (e.g. Brighouse)?
Basically, you cant win. Which is why weve see the piecemeal increases to frequencies, because its been easier to find a path for an additional service than it has been to cut some existing services.
Is anyone else serious about proposing frequency cuts (and therefore slowing down some long distance services by stopping them at more local stations)? Or is this going to be another thread where people say that too many short trains are a bad idea and wed be better off with fewer longer trains but nobody wants so suggest meaningful cuts to established direct services? Any solution needs to go further than just the Manchester Huddersfield - Leeds corridor.
(Id love to believe that the network was robust enough to allow regular splitting/ joining and convoluted services that gain and lose portions along the way, but I dont think that would be reliable, so have ruled that out)
Currently there are two 'fast' trains an hour in each direction that go straight through. One is Leeds - Sheffield and the other Leeds - Nottingham. The only largish town between Leeds and Sheffield that these trains serve is Barnsley.
When the new timetable changes come into effect these will both become Leeds - Sheffield, so there is plenty of scope to stop one of these to provide a half hourly service.
Not quite - one of them will remain a Leeds - Sheffield service, the other one will run through to Lincoln (instead of Nottingham).
