Alliance Blackpool service to be run by Grand Central and start in 2021

[a_c_skinner]

Another hourly service north of Crewe to at least Preston would be enough. I don't think 'everything' needs to stop there,

For Preston to Crewe an extra one an hour is pretty much everything, isn't it? Either way we agree on a few more! I agree it is about connections, not sampling the delights of Crewe.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

For Preston to Crewe an extra one an hour is pretty much everything, isn't it? Either way we agree on a few more! I agree it is about connections, not sampling the delights of Crewe.

Crewe is a significant railhead for the many well-heeled villages within 10 miles or so with no/poor services - Tarporley, Congleton, Alsager, Nantwich, Audlem etc.
It's also a major distribution centre, more thanks to the M6 than the railway, as well as having the Bentley factory (VW).
I used to live in Leek (north Staffs), and Crewe was the best railhead for trips to Scotland.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Yes, it needs more trains on the main line going north. I agree. However there are not that many, hence it is not convenient, hence the demand will be assessed as low, hence there won't be any more. It is the civil service way of doing things.

 

[route101]

Crewe is a significant railhead for the many well-heeled villages within 10 miles or so with no/poor services - Tarporley, Congleton, Alsager, Nantwich, Audlem etc.
It's also a major distribution centre, more thanks to the M6 than the railway, as well as having the Bentley factory (VW).
I used to live in Leek (north Staffs), and Crewe was the best railhead for trips to Scotland.

Was speaking to a couple last week who live in Shrewsbury and they drove to Crewe for VT to Glasgow

 

[ainsworth74]

A reminder that this thread is for discussion of prospective GNWR services to Blackpool not for discussion of the service between Crewe and Preston in general. That needs to be carried out in a new thread. Any further posts not related to the topic will be deleted.

 

[pt_mad]

What would the next stage be now with regards announcements from GNWR? Are they likely to agree a lease on the four 225 sets next and then make an announcement on that? When does a final timetable have to be submitted and approved for all of the paths with Network Rail?
Could it go quiet literally until the timetable is finalised?

 

[Aictos]

The only thing I hope to see is for the service to be marketed as Grand Central instead of GNWR for two reasons:

1.

GNWR and LNWR sound too similar when announced which could lead to confusion.

2.

As Grand Central is already a well established brand on the East Coast Mainline and as behind the scenes they are all the same company more or less, it makes sense to take advantage of a well known brand name to start with.

 

[Class 170101]

The VT will overtake the GNWR while it sits at Milton Keynes Central platform 5.

There must be some retimings to other services then as that path doesn't appear to be rules compliant at MK.

 

[The Planner]

When does a final timetable have to be submitted and approved for all of the paths with Network Rail?
Could it go quiet literally until the timetable is finalised?

If they still reckon they can start in September (unlikely in my opinion) then they sit in the May 19 timetable which gets offered back to operators next month.

 

[hexagon789]

Only for young 'uns. I remember GNER 91+Mk4 combos running every hour between Carstairs and Glasgow Central, most definitely on the WCML!

I think that was every two hours only. Certainly in GNER days it was every second fast to Edinburgh extended to Glasgow via Motherwell, until the Pendolinos and EPS were introduced it was faster than going to Glasgow via Preston IIRC.

 

[38Cto15E]

With a Nuneaton stop then fast to Preston I can see many people from Coventry/Leicestershire using the new service in the summer for Blackpool/The Lakes etc.

 

[pt_mad]

With a Nuneaton stop then fast to Preston I can see many people from Coventry/Leicestershire using the new service in the summer for Blackpool/The Lakes etc.

It may possibly beat a journey from Coventry to Scotland on the existing direct service (via the West Mids), by changing at Nuneaton and Preston (onto a Glasgow or Edinburgh). Not sure but it could be a possibility?

 

[pt_mad]

If they still reckon they can start in September (unlikely in my opinion) then they sit in the May 19 timetable which gets offered back to operators next month.

Ah right. No possibility they could submit for September only and not May, and submit for a deadline which makes it out to the public 12 weeks before September?

If that makes sense?

 

[The_Engineer]

Ah right. No possibility they could submit for September only and not May, and submit for a deadline which makes it out to the public 12 weeks before September?

If that makes sense?

The limiting factor is entry of Class 800/801s into service on the ECML, to release Mk.IVs and 91s to GNWR and Wales. Given the well documented problems with the 800s on GWR and ECML, any programme for this is pure conjecture at the moment.

 

[pt_mad]

The limiting factor is entry of Class 800/801s into service on the ECML, to release Mk.IVs and 91s to GNWR and Wales. Given the well documented problems with the 800s on GWR and ECML, any programme for this is pure conjecture at the moment.

Unless a lease is, at some point, or has already, been agreed for four 225 sets to go to GNWR on X date regardless? In which case I'm assuming LNER would have to let them go anyway, even if IEPs were delayed?

 

[The_Engineer]

Unless a lease is, at some point, or has already, been agreed for four 225 sets to go to GNWR on X date regardless? In which case I'm assuming LNER would have to let them go anyway, even if IEPs were delayed?

Politically unacceptable. If that is the case, the DfT/ORR will intervene as the ECML is more important than a new service...……

[My computer knows more than I give it credit for - it keeps wanting to correct DfT to daft.....]

 

[pt_mad]

Politically unacceptable. If that is the case, the DfT/ORR will intervene as the ECML is more important than a new service...……

[My computer knows more than I give it credit for - it keeps wanting to correct DfT to daft.....]

But didn't the leasing company agree the 172s would go to WMR even though the goblin was delayed? Or is that not agreed?

 

[takno]

But didn't the leasing company agree the 172s would go to WMR even though the goblin was delayed? Or is that not agreed?

Different situation entirely. For a kick-off the 172s are going to WMR to service a clear and present need rather than a barely dressed-up orcats raid, and secondly the Goblin has just gone through a couple of prolonged periods of not running, which kind of prove people can work around it.

Possibly more importantly though, only regular users on that specific line would be angry they had nothing to run on goblin, and it would be TfL that would cop the blame, which would suit the government very well indeed. If there aren't any services to Leeds because the government's precious new trains aren't available for the government-owned operator to run, then it's a national disgrace that they don't care about Yorkshire They might as well kiss goodbye to half a dozen seats they already hold, and half a dozen more they hope to gain at the next election.

 

[The Planner]

Ah right. No possibility they could submit for September only and not May, and submit for a deadline which makes it out to the public 12 weeks before September?

If that makes sense?

It would be a bit pointless to bid STP from September onwards as they would need to confirm and be 100% ready 18 weeks out to bid correctly which is the beginning of May 19.

 

[pt_mad]

It would be a bit pointless to bid STP from September onwards as they would need to confirm and be 100% ready 18 weeks out to bid correctly which is the beginning of May 19.

That being said, and thinking realistically about it, is there really any chance they can get this service running in September 19 now?

Timetable to be confirmed; rolling stock to lease and physically acquire; clearing the 91s and MK4s on the route; train control to set up (would they situate this in XC's offices like Grand Central? Full recruitment programme for the (was it 90?) jobs, staff training, driver route and traction training; submit timetable 18 weeks before public release; station access agreements and dispatch arrangements agreed with station operators; some sort of press launch so they can actually sell tickets?

It all sounds a lot to do in 11 months.

Could we guess they may be lucky to even get this in service for December 19 timetable?

 

[Ianno87]

There must be some retimings to other services then as that path doesn't appear to be rules compliant at MK.

The xx40 from Euston passes MK at xx/08h. So 90 seconds headway before the xx10 GNWR pulls out behind. Easily doable on a 125mph railway with 4 aspect signalling (plenty of precedents across the network for that).

 

[pt_mad]

The xx40 from Euston passes MK at xx/08h. So 90 seconds headway before the xx10 GNWR pulls out behind. Easily doable on a 125mph railway with 4 aspect signalling (plenty of precedents across the network for that).

Bear in mind the GNWR from what has been presumed, is likely to pull out behind from a slow line platform. So there's also the headway created by the time it takes to cross back over to the fast line, by which time the train in front, on the fast line, will have made even more progress and will be getting away.

 

[Aictos]

That being said, and thinking realistically about it, is there really any chance they can get this service running in September 19 now?

Timetable to be confirmed; rolling stock to lease and physically acquire; clearing the 91s and MK4s on the route; train control to set up (would they situate this in XC's offices like Grand Central? Full recruitment programme for the (was it 90?) jobs, staff training, driver route and traction training; submit timetable 18 weeks before public release; station access agreements and dispatch arrangements agreed with station operators; some sort of press launch so they can actually sell tickets?

It all sounds a lot to do in 11 months.

Could we guess they may be lucky to even get this in service for December 19 timetable?

They could self dispatch at stations they call at along the route like at Milton Keynes, Nuneaton etc if they wanted to do so as it depends on the dispatch matrix for that station so I can't see why they would have to have other station operators dispatch their services.

Ideally the best thing for them is to merge operations with the existing Grand Central operation so that takes care of train control, recruitment etc which gives them some breathing space but also from a passenger point of view gives a more established brand to trust.

It just makes sense!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bear in mind the GNWR from what has been presumed, is likely to pull out behind from a slow line platform. So there's also the headway created by the time it takes to cross back over to the fast line, by which time the train in front, on the fast line, will have made even more progress and will be getting away.

It doesn't work like that at MKC, Platform 5 is a fast line platform.

 

[pt_mad]

They could self dispatch at stations they call at along the route like at Milton Keynes, Nuneaton etc if they wanted to do so as it depends on the dispatch matrix for that station so I can't see why they would have to have other station operators dispatch their services.

Ideally the best thing for them is to merge operations with the existing Grand Central operation so that takes care of train control, recruitment etc which gives them some breathing space but also from a passenger point of view gives a more established brand to trust.

It just makes sense!

Their original application afaik does actually state services self dispatch at all stations, to reduce dwell times.

How realistic this is for Euston I don't know? Are Network Rail actually likely to agree to that? Did they even mean including Euston in their application?

As things stand, I believe Preston and Nuneaton currently dispatch all services. If it happens to be on their local dispatch plans that all services should be dispatched then will GNWR just be able to say we'll self dispatch?

 

[LOL The Irony]

GNWR and LNWR sound too similar when announced which could lead to confusion.

LNWR should change it's name because an hourly service to Preston that hasn't even started yet doesn't count as a valid reason to include NW. But that's for another thread...

 

[pt_mad]

It doesn't work like that at MKC, Platform 5 is a fast line platform.

Surely thought the xx40 (off Euston) Manchester service is going to overtake at Milton Keynes. So the GNWR will be platformed ajacent. The Manchester passes at 125mph, 90 seconds later the GNWR gets one, maybe two yellows. On two yellows you could probably proceed at a fair rate of acceleration given you will need to take the points ahead anyway and get back behind the Manchester.

Will it not occur like that?

 

[Ianno87]

It doesn't work like that at MKC, Platform 5 is a fast line platform.

Correct - what I described is exactly what Platform 5 was designed to do - allow a Down train to pull in and be overtaken by a non-stopping train having been 3 minutes in front at Bletchley, and re-settle 3 minutes behind going north, with clean fast line acceleration away straight out of the platform.

 

[Ianno87]

Surely thought the xx40 (off Euston) Manchester service is going to overtake at Milton Keynes. So the GNWR will be platformed ajacent. The Manchester passes at 125mph, 90 seconds later the GNWR gets one, maybe two yellows. On two yellows you could probably proceed at a fair rate of acceleration given you will need to take the points ahead anyway and get back behind the Manchester.

Will it not occur like that?

Easily on double yellows after 90 seconds - so no impediment from a standing start. The P5 merge back onto the Down Fast is a decent speed turnout just off the end of the platform so is no real impediment.

 

[Bletchleyite]

LNWR should change it's name because an hourly service to Preston that hasn't even started yet doesn't count as a valid reason to include NW. But that's for another thread...

Last time I checked Liverpool Lime St was in the North West.