LNR new WCML timetable, May 2019 (in open data feeds)

[gazzaa2]

If that was wanted, then extending the Trent Valley service would be the way to do it - that would actually achieve something useful, wouldn't cause much of a timetabling issue (provided the path could be found), and would actually give VT a very heavy kicking in competition terms too (as many on here like).

That would have made sense, yeah. Really bad idea to change that route up and then throw on what's already a busy train linking two big cities and then extending it to London. It's not like it's an 9 or 11 car Pendolino either, it's the same clapped out rolling stock.

 

[pt_mad]

Possible for a second tph to crewe just need a second bit of track between alsager and crewe

Are their any 8 car trains on the chase line at the moment? both services split, is their enough demand for 8 cars? Unnecessary in my view. South WCML seem to need them more

The poster I think was proposing 8 cars run on two of the hourly London to Birminghams, extended out to Walsall to turn around a. To free up platforms at New St and b. To provide Walsall and Tame Bridge with their necessary number of calls. The fact the poster was proposing 8 cars I think was a mere consequence of 8 cars having to run Euston to Birmingham and not having to divide and couple every hour. The poster can probably clarify what they were saying properly.

I don't know about the other LNR routes because I don't use them but I use the Lime Street-Birmingham service and although the old service wasn't perfect I found it fairly reliable and could usually always get a seat. Now the rolling stock is totally inadequate for the new service and there's always problems, usually between Northampton and Euston, and usually delays as a result, if there's a train at all.

I'm often using the New Street-Crewe or New Street-Bank Quay route instead now and then changing to Liverpool from there.

If this was a backhanded way of giving more London trains to Liverpool then it's not the solution, it's only succeeded in ruining the Liverpool service to Birmingham. Other than people buying very cheap tickets you'd stick with the Virgin or just change at Crewe or Chester etc for other services, than sit on a horribly cramped train for the best part of 5 hours (and then all the way back again) in a grossly unreliably service. You'd want to be pretty much travelling for free to do that. There's no need to extend Lime Street-New Street past Birmingham International or possibly Coventry or Northampton.

Or was it about being able to run through New St in limited through slots available, now that they bay platforms are used by WMR services, and the useful by product of linking Birmingham Airport/NEC and Coventry corridor to the North West and Liverpool South Parkway/Airport?

 

[gazzaa2]

Or was it about being able to run through New St in limited through slots available, now that they bay platforms are used by WMR services, and the useful by product of linking Birmingham Airport/NEC and Coventry corridor to the North West and Liverpool South Parkway/Airport?

Could be but if that's the case then does it need to go south of Coventry or the airport? It really doesn't need to go all the way to Euston, they should have left the Trent Valley line alone.

 

[pt_mad]

It is not appropriate to "fix" the fares system by breaking the timetable. In any case, there is no reason why that should be the case. The fares are simply cheaper because LNR wanted to market the new through services.

The West Coast is one of the only places where competition exists though right? The industry and the franchising system in general really need to decide whether competition is desired, as was originally floated as a positive of privatisation, and the effects accepted. Or whether it's not needed or desired and loadings for long distance should always be directed first onto the fastest intercity operator?

If that was wanted, then extending the Trent Valley service would be the way to do it - that would actually achieve something useful, wouldn't cause much of a timetabling issue (provided the path could be found), and would actually give VT a very heavy kicking in competition terms too (as many on here like).

Was that ever an option though? Minimum two trains per hour in each direction between Birmingham and Liverpool and maximum two semi fast West Mids franchise services allowed north of Crewe to run only via Weaver Junction. Isn't that what posters claimed at the time of re-franchising?

 

[Bletchleyite]

That would have made sense, yeah. Really bad idea to change that route up and then throw on what's already a busy train linking two big cities and then extending it to London. It's not like it's an 9 or 11 car Pendolino either, it's the same clapped out rolling stock.

I think it's a bit unfair to call 350s clapped out, though the /1s are in dire need of (and are getting) new foams and covers. But with the extra demand they really could do with being 8 car.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Was that ever an option though? Minimum two trains per hour in each direction between Birmingham and Liverpool and maximum two semi fast West Mids franchise services allowed north of Crewe to run only via Weaver Junction. Isn't that what posters claimed at the time of re-franchising?

I was thinking more on a macro "DfT decides" level rather than a micro level. The franchise does indeed prohibit it, but the franchise can be changed.

 

[gazzaa2]

I think it's a bit unfair to call 350s clapped out, though the /1s are in dire need of (and are getting) new foams and covers. But with the extra demand they really could do with being 8 car.

Inadequate would be fairer given the amount of people using them. A lot of the rolling stock has no tables and poor legroom. When it's a row of three seats on either side, it's a real squeeze with all 6 seats taken up. With the Airport added in you've got a lot of people with bags and suitcases as well.

This service is a nightmare now with 4 cars. It ran okay previously.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This service is a nightmare now with 4 cars. It ran okay previously.

Yes, the additional passengers have made things rather busy south of Northampton too. While the new stock will give a significant capacity uplift it's still years off - I think they need to snap up any spare 25kV EMUs they can.

 

[gazzaa2]

Yes, the additional passengers have made things rather busy south of Northampton too. While the new stock will give a significant capacity uplift it's still years off - I think they need to snap up any spare 25kV EMUs they can.

If you're going to double the amount of passengers (or a significant increase) then you need to double the amount of carriages (or a significant increase in capacity). Ridiculous to extend this to Euston without having the extra capacity ready to go.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you're going to double the amount of passengers (or a significant increase) then you need to double the amount of carriages (or a significant increase in capacity). Ridiculous to extend this to Euston without having the extra capacity ready to go.

Well, that's one more thing to add to the list of incompetence. There really is very little that the new franchise seems to have done right so far when compared with LM - the only ones I can think of are a willingness to pay to get the 350/2s out to play on the weekends meaning fewer 4-car sets, and more Sunday through Euston-Brum services.

 

[RealTrains07]

If that was wanted, then extending the Trent Valley service would be the way to do it - that would actually achieve something useful, wouldn't cause much of a timetabling issue (provided the path could be found), and would actually give VT a very heavy kicking in competition terms too (as many on here like).

Is manchester airport the way to go for an extension though?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is manchester airport the way to go for an extension though?

No, I think it'll be a total waste of time and nobody will use it, just like last time. It's not even a good Parkway option due to the high cost of accessing the airport by car for pick up/drop off or parking (and I don't *think*, though correct me if I'm wrong, it's like Brum where the station is separate and does allow free drop-off and vaguely non-rip-off parking).

If they could get into Piccadilly...then they'd make a packet! I reckon at the present fares levels they would have an hourly 8-car to Piccadilly full and standing, easily.

 

[RealTrains07]

Inadequate would be fairer given the amount of people using them. A lot of the rolling stock has no tables and poor legroom. When it's a row of three seats on either side, it's a real squeeze with all 6 seats taken up. With the Airport added in you've got a lot of people with bags and suitcases as well.

This service is a nightmare now with 4 cars. It ran okay previously.

Liverpool service only runs as 4 car beyond birmingham (or up until depending which direction your travelling from) right?

The only days when its 8 car beyond new street is sunday as that timetable has yet to be modified

That is 1 benefit 350/2s being removed, table seats

I cant see 730s making a life changing amount of difference considering it will still have the same layout pretty much as its a commuter train

 

[Jamesrob637]

No, I think it'll be a total waste of time and nobody will use it, just like last time. It's not even a good Parkway option due to the high cost of accessing the airport by car for pick up/drop off or parking (and I don't *think*, though correct me if I'm wrong, it's like Brum where the station is separate and does allow free drop-off and vaguely non-rip-off parking).

If they could get into Piccadilly...then they'd make a packet! I reckon at the present fares levels they would have an hourly 8-car to Piccadilly full and standing, easily.

Yes! Get them into Manchester! Speculative maybe but it'd make a killing at £40-50 walk-up fare (plus cheaper Advances) rather than Virgin's closer to £90.

I was on WMR in late-May after the timetable change and the only reason I was able to fulfill most of my commitments in the area was thanks to late-running services. I think the frequencies are high enough on many routes; maybe to the extent that they could drop a service now and again, in order to provide more slack. It's a pity that they can't have a self-contained Hednesford to Rugeley shuttle for contingency though, as this line seems to have suffered more than most post-May TT change.

 

[RealTrains07]

No, I think it'll be a total waste of time and nobody will use it, just like last time. It's not even a good Parkway option due to the high cost of accessing the airport by car for pick up/drop off or parking (and I don't *think*, though correct me if I'm wrong, it's like Brum where the station is separate and does allow free drop-off and vaguely non-rip-off parking).

If they could get into Piccadilly...then they'd make a packet! I reckon at the present fares levels they would have an hourly 8-car to Piccadilly full and standing, easily.

The only advantage i see and this applies to all Manchester airport trains in general is just the convenience of where the station is cause like gatwick you can just walk into the airport unlike liverpool or birmingham.

Correct me but i don’t understand the need for a car to get to the airport when you could just get a train back since its in the same place near enough

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only advantage i see and this applies to all Manchester airport trains in general is just the convenience of where the station is cause like gatwick you can just walk into the airport unlike liverpool or birmingham.

Correct me but i don’t understand the need for a car to get to the airport when you could just get a train back since its in the same place near enough

Why would anyone want to go from London to Manchester Airport when London has a stack of airports with more flights, cheaper flights and far better service? It's a rubbish airport (e.g. lots of reports of bad security delays) with hardly any flights compared with the cluster of airports around London.

I suppose you might get the odd one from the Trent Valley (but why not go the other way or taxi to Brum?) but the main purpose of this is not going to Manchester Airport but to get a service into the Manchester area to pick up Manchester to London traffic from VT. That's what I meant by using it as a Parkway.

By the way, Birmingham is basically the same site near enough, the little shuttle train thing doesn't take long at all. Luton will be the same once that opens (the bus is presently dire).

 

[RealTrains07]

Yes! Get them into Manchester! Speculative maybe but it'd make a killing at £40-50 walk-up fare (plus cheaper Advances) rather than Virgin's closer to £90.

I was on WMR in late-May after the timetable change and the only reason I was able to fulfill most of my commitments in the area was thanks to late-running services. I think the frequencies are high enough on many routes; maybe to the extent that they could drop a service now and again, in order to provide more slack. It's a pity that they can't have a self-contained Hednesford to Rugeley shuttle for contingency though, as this line seems to have suffered more than most post-May TT change.

Agreed manchester pic would be great shame i wouldn’t be able to take advantage of the cheap fares though
Problem is though, picc is further than the airport and it depends on time added to the trent valley whether its feasible?

Not everywhere has late night running services yet, getting to birmingham after 22:00 compared to crewe is a nightmare except sunday which apparently are when trains run later than any other day of the week

 

[Bletchleyite]

maybe to the extent that they could drop a service now and again, in order to provide more slack

No, don't break the "Takt", as without it being consistent it has no value whatsoever.

Resource it properly or don't do it. The present timetable (or something like it, possbily involving longer layovers along the way e.g. Northampton) can definitely be made reliable, it just requires more staff and units which LNR are too cheap to pay for, including standbys so you can feed a train in on time and cancel the previous one short if there's a problem (as SBB do).

 

[RealTrains07]

Why would anyone want to go from London to Manchester Airport when London has a stack of airports with more flights, cheaper flights and far better service? It's a rubbish airport (e.g. lots of reports of bad security delays) with hardly any flights compared with the cluster of airports around London.

I suppose you might get the odd one from the Trent Valley (but why not go the other way or taxi to Brum?) but the main purpose of this is not going to Manchester Airport but to get a service into the Manchester area to pick up Manchester to London traffic from VT.

Reason being is price, in general advances to Manchester (airport or not) would be cheaper compared with london and i guess it depends on paths??

 

[Bletchleyite]

Reason being is price, in general advances to Manchester (airport or not) would be cheaper compared with london and i guess it depends on paths??

When you choose an airport you choose it based on the flight offering, and Manchester Airport has an inferior flight offering in every possible way compared with the combination of Luton, Stansted, Heathrow and Gatwick (all of which are reasonably accessible if you live in London or the South East). You want cheaper? Stansted/Luton. You want more destinations? All 4. You want direct to far flung places? Heathrow/Gatwick. Manchester is a regional airport serving the North West and to an extent North East. There is no point whatsoever in going there if you live in the SE.

I genuinely think these will run near-empty (though a few people might get the tram down from places like Wythenshawe for a day trip to London, so maybe not *quite* as empty as FNW's 1990s attempt), but I would expect there to be basically no passengers at all going to the airport for a flight, other than possibly from Crewe (which already has a service there anyway). Maybe also the odd student as I think there's still a direct Wilmslow Road corridor-Airport bus?

 

[RealTrains07]

When you choose an airport you choose it based on the flight offering, and Manchester Airport has an inferior flight offering in every possible way compared with the combination of Luton, Stansted, Heathrow and Gatwick (all of which are reasonably accessible if you live in London or the South East). You want cheaper? Stansted/Luton. You want more destinations? All 4. You want direct to far flung places? Heathrow/Gatwick. Manchester is a regional airport serving the North West and to an extent North East. There is no point whatsoever in going there if you live in the SE.

I genuinely think these will run near-empty (though a few people might get the tram down from places like Wythenshawe for a day trip to London, so maybe not *quite* as empty as FNW's 1990s attempt), but I would expect there to be basically no passengers at all going to the airport for a flight, other than possibly from Crewe (which already has a service there anyway). Maybe also the odd student as I think there's still a direct Wilmslow Road corridor-Airport bus?

What iam trying to say is it would be cheaper journeying to Manchester airport as Journeying through london is as expensive as it is (going to an airport or not)

plus couldn’t you argue its more convenient since no direct train to a london airport on WCML?? Plus we arent talking about people on SEML or SWML are we? WCML wise i agree with your point about crewe however it would be faster getting into manchester than the existing slow northern service?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What iam trying to say is it would be cheaper journeying to Manchester airport as Journeying through london is as expensive as it is (going to an airport or not)

LNR to Euston then the Tube to Heathrow paid using contactless is not expensive.

plus couldn’t you argue its more convenient since no direct train to a london airport on WCML?? Plus we arent talking about people on SEML or SWML are we? WCML wise i agree with your point about crewe however it would be faster getting into manchester than the existing slow northern service?

You could have a train every 30 seconds to the airport and someone there to carry your bags for free and it would still have an inferior flying programme and as such not be an airport of choice for anyone who can get to the "big 4" in the SE easily.

I would bet that the number of people who fly from Manchester Airport living in the South East is rather close to being a very round number - 0, that is. Probably a very small number who are e.g. travelling with family who live up there.

 

[si404]

Access to Manchester Airport station from the south has two possible uses

1) en route to central Manchester (via reverse) to give more airport-centre service
2) to link places like Cheshire, N Staffs, etc to the airport - perhaps via a change at Crewe or Wilmslow.

Really, if you want further access of the airport via that curve, it would either be extending a service that terminates at the Airport to Alderley Edge or something to boost frequency, or extending the Liverpool-Crewe long way round stopper to Stoke.

 

[centraltrains]

Manchester is a regional airport serving the North West and to an extent North East.

Quite a lot of people form Birmingham/The Midlands go to London/Manchester Airports. I'm sure a Birmingham to Manchester Airport service would be somewhat popular, but I don't think that's the plan being discussed anyway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite a lot of people form Birmingham/The Midlands go to London/Manchester Airports. I'm sure a Birmingham to Manchester Airport service would be somewhat popular, but I don't think that's the plan being discussed anyway.

Indeed it isn't, it's an extension of the Trent Valley service.

 

[6026KingJohn]

Possible for a second tph to crewe just need a second bit of track between alsager and crewe

Are their any 8 car trains on the chase line at the moment? both services split, is their enough demand for 8 cars? Unnecessary in my view. South WCML seem to need them more

There shouldn't be, most platforms only allow for 4 car sets, as do Stone, Kidsgrove and Alsager on the Stoke loop. Hence my suggestion of joining those services together.

VT 390 spotted a problem in that by changing Rugeley - Birmingham to all stations instead of running fast from Walsall, all passengers would be on the two services with four car sets instead of, as at present, Rugeley-Walsall-fast-Birmingham on a four car and Walsall all stations on a different train (usually 3 car 323)

Regarding the second train on the Stoke loop, I did suggest that if a path was not available the second Rugeley train could just work Rugeley-New Street-Wolverhampton.

 

[RealTrains07]

There shouldn't be, most platforms only allow for 4 car sets, as do Stone, Kidsgrove and Alsager on the Stoke loop. Hence my suggestion of joining those services together.

VT 390 spotted a problem in that by changing Rugeley - Birmingham to all stations instead of running fast from Walsall, all passengers would be on the two services with four car sets instead of, as at present, Rugeley-Walsall-fast-Birmingham on a four car and Walsall all stations on a different train (usually 3 car 323)

Regarding the second train on the Stoke loop, I did suggest that if a path was not available the second Rugeley train could just work Rugeley-New Street-Wolverhampton.

Alsager technically has the space for longer trains, it just doesn’t get used

Iam sure a second stoke loop train is possible you just might need to miss out kidsgrove or alsager?

 

[sd0733]

Alsager technically has the space for longer trains, it just doesn’t get used

Iam sure a second stoke loop train is possible you just might need to miss out kidsgrove or alsager?

Theres no point at all missing Kidsgrove as its 15mph max anyway so adds very little time. The Crewe to Kidsgrove isnt the problem really it's getting a path on the mainline from Kidsgrove to Stone, personally if a path could be found I think the best use of the path would be then to go via Hixon and have Stoke a not via Birmingham train.

 

[davehsug]

Access to Manchester Airport station from the south has two possible uses

1) en route to central Manchester (via reverse) to give more airport-centre service
2) to link places like Cheshire, N Staffs, etc to the airport - perhaps via a change at Crewe or Wilmslow.

Really, if you want further access of the airport via that curve, it would either be extending a service that terminates at the Airport to Alderley Edge or something to boost frequency, or extending the Liverpool-Crewe long way round stopper to Stoke.

Yes, it really is ridiculous that Stoke doesn't have a direct link to Manchester airport. It is very much our local airport and yet we're ignored. Another of the disadvantages of straddling 2 geographical areas, but not really belonging to either.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, it really is ridiculous that Stoke doesn't have a direct link to Manchester airport. It is very much our local airport and yet we're ignored. Another of the disadvantages of straddling 2 geographical areas, but not really belonging to either.

NatEx do it, I'm really not convinced the demand is adequate for a new railway line to be built to do it.