East Coast Eureka clockface timetable May 2011

[MCR247]

Why not have a
xx00 Edinburgh fast
xx10 Leeds
xx20 Lincoln/York
xx30 Edinburgh slow
xx40 leeds
xx50 Open access

 

[dk1]

Why not have a
xx00 Edinburgh fast
xx10 Leeds
xx20 Lincoln/York
xx30 Edinburgh slow
xx40 leeds
xx50 Open access

Sounds fine but will that fit in with FCC services particually through Welwyn & make best use of available paths?

 

[OMGitsDAVE]

xx20-Sunderland (Peterborough, York, Thirsk, Northallerton, Middlesbrough, Hartlepool)

Thats the only problem, a reversal at Middlesbrough. It's because everything splits between after Eaglescliffe, you either go onwards to Stockton & Hartlepool or right to Thornaby, Middlesbrough & Saltburn.

 

[Waverley125]

the ECML should be able to deal with a better headway than 10 minutes. After all, VT run 8 long distance hourly services on the WCML per hour.

Ideally I'd like to see

3tph London-Leeds (slow, medium, fast)
1tph London-Hull (slow)
1tph London-Bradford (fast)
1tph London-Lincoln (slow)
3tph London-Newcastle (slow, medium, fast)
2tph London-Edinburgh (slow, fast)
1tph London-Harrogate (medium)

 

[tbtc]

the ECML should be able to deal with a better headway than 10 minutes. After all, VT run 8 long distance hourly services on the WCML per hour

Maybe, but the ECML has to share paths with other TOCs (FCC over Welwyn, EMT from Peterborough to Grantham, flat crossing at Newark etc), whereas AFAIK Virgin have it pretty much their own way as far as Stafford (bar a couple of LM "fast" trains to Northampton sharing the "fast" tracks)

 

[dk1]

Maybe, but the ECML has to share paths with other TOCs (FCC over Welwyn, EMT from Peterborough to Grantham, flat crossing at Newark etc), whereas AFAIK Virgin have it pretty much their own way as far as Stafford (bar a couple of LM "fast" trains to Northampton sharing the "fast" tracks)

Quite agree. VT has almost sole rights to the fast lines & constant four-tracking for miles. If down trains are using the 3-minute headway & the first stops Rugby then the following stops Milton Keynes & most stop at neither so disapear at their intended junction before the next Pendo comes close. So much longer distance non-stop running. For example the prime 'up' business trains from Manchester, Liverpool & Glasgow all run fast from Stockport, Runcorn & Bank Quay respectivley & run south from Colwich 3 mins apart arriving Euston 08.58, 09.01 & 09.04 with nothing apart from late runners to heed their progress.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

the ECML should be able to deal with a better headway than 10 minutes.

Yes, it does.
eg 13:30 KGX-EDB, followed by 13:33 KGX-HUL, then 13:35 KGX-LDS

Sure, that couldn't be maintained throughout the day and paths are required, particularly in the south, for FCC and others, but between London and Doncaster, with varying stopping patterns, it can be done and is done.

 

[royaloak]

I see that yet again the Wakefield stop will be missed out on the last train from London to Leeds. A clockface timetable is all very well but of little use if you can't get back from a day out at a reasonable time

Two possibilities-
1/ It isnt routed through Wakefield (unlikely).
2/ Tactical move to take into account possible engineering inspections which closes the line on an evening and diverts the train to another route (is it a HST by any chance), if the train is not scheduled to call there you dont need to get buses for the paxs. Similar to the 00.42 Waterloo to Strawberry Hill which doesnt call at Earlsfield as it is booked over the east putney line although it rarely goes that way.

 

[deltic]

the ECML should be able to deal with a better headway than 10 minutes. After all, VT run 8 long distance hourly services on the WCML per hour.

Ideally I'd like to see

3tph London-Leeds (slow, medium, fast)
1tph London-Hull (slow)
1tph London-Bradford (fast)
1tph London-Lincoln (slow)
3tph London-Newcastle (slow, medium, fast)
2tph London-Edinburgh (slow, fast)
1tph London-Harrogate (medium)

5tph via Leeds and 5tph via Newcastle is way over the top - the present 3tph to Birmingham and Manchester are both way in excess of demand except during the peak

 

[yorksrob]

Two possibilities-
1/ It isnt routed through Wakefield (unlikely).
2/ Tactical move to take into account possible engineering inspections which closes the line on an evening and diverts the train to another route (is it a HST by any chance), if the train is not scheduled to call there you dont need to get buses for the paxs. Similar to the 00.42 Waterloo to Strawberry Hill which doesnt call at Earlsfield as it is booked over the east putney line although it rarely goes that way.

Hi Royaloak, in a way it's both.

Basically NR told me that the train was permanently diverted through Knottingley and Methley Junction to:

* Allow more time for maintenance on the Doncaster - Leeds route.
* Provide driver route knowledge in case of diversions.

It still dosen't help those of us in our part of Yorkshire. Ultimately Wakefield is the main inter-city railhead for a very large area of Yorkshire so whether passenger loadings are small is beside the point - It puts the whole area at a disadvantage. Even if they provided some sort of a connection to Wakefield Kirkgate, it would at least give us a way to get home - perhaps they could reverse into Kirkgate between Knottingley and Methley

 

[Waverley125]

sorry, that's been misunderstood

the Bradford/Harrogate trains would make up the Leeds' compliment, while the Scottish trains would make up the Newcastle compliment. Basically I envisage 1tph to both Leeds and Newcastle running as a stopper (Stevenage, Peterborough, Grantham, Newark, Retford, Doncaster, York, Thirsk, Northallerton, Darlington, Durham, Chester le Street) with longer-distance destinations providing the fast.

E.g. the Bradford F Square service gives Leeds a London service with a single stop, at Doncaster. The Aberdeen service gives newcastle a two-stop service to London, at York & Peterborough.

 

[142094]

Thats the only problem, a reversal at Middlesbrough. It's because everything splits between after Eaglescliffe, you either go onwards to Stockton & Hartlepool or right to Thornaby, Middlesbrough & Saltburn.

Quite correct, plus there this would add at least 20 minutes on a journey and there isn't the room at Middlesbrough for a GC service, pathing wise. Much easier for those at Middlesbrough to join at Eaglescliffe, or if they really wanted a direct service, get a 180 to leave from Sunderland and one from Middlesbrough and join at Eaglescliffe. But non of this will happen.

 

[GNERman]

the ECML should be able to deal with a better headway than 10 minutes. After all, VT run 8 long distance hourly services on the WCML per hour.

Ideally I'd like to see

3tph London-Leeds (slow, medium, fast)
1tph London-Hull (slow)
1tph London-Bradford (fast)
1tph London-Lincoln (slow)
3tph London-Newcastle (slow, medium, fast)
2tph London-Edinburgh (slow, fast)
1tph London-Harrogate (medium)

but that's 12 per hour leaving kgx, that's one every 5 minutes, plus arrivals...

 

[Deerfold]

but that's 12 per hour leaving kgx, that's one every 5 minutes, plus arrivals...

See post #41 - he's explained that he's double counted Leeds and York services - so 8tph out of KGX.

 

[Mojo]

The most efficient way to do it though is to have "flights" leaving the terminal, like at Euston which then means you can insert fast slow services [sic] in between and make greater use of the capacity.

 

[Tomnick]

Indeed, Waverley's original plan would probably down when the xx:50 (first stop Donny) caught up the xx:40 (all stations to Donny). The only likely solutions to that would be for the latter to either run slow line north of Peterborough, or (probably pushing it a bit) go 'inside' at Grantham. Either way, it'd have a good 5 or 10 minutes added onto the journey time. A combination of flighting and a sensible distribution of intermediate stops between the slower trains should help to avoid one catching another up, avoid having a much longer journey time on the "stopper" and make much more efficient use of the capacity - as far as the outer suburbans are concerned - south of Hitchin/Stevenage.

 

[Munchenstein]

Having just joined the RailUKforum group may I add my 6 bobs worth to the discussion. I will ignore all the proposals to increase the service as I view that as extremely unlikely ever to happen in my lifetime. However looking at the base proposals a number of concerns have occurred to me.
I believe the the XX.00 from Kings Cross would be better served calling at Peterborough vice Darlington. The time loss in doing this would be negligable. This would improve the connectional flow from East Anglia to North of York.( proposals mean 50 mins wait for ex Norwich passengers and 25 mins wait for Cambridge line pax). (Darlington is served by 4 other services every hour on the York - Newcastle part of the line). It is interesting to remember that with with fewer trains to Peterborough from London and VV East Coast revenue share will drop as more passengers travel on FCC.
Proposals for the shuttles to Newark intrigue me in that with the East Coast set in the back platform it must be very difficult for East Midlands Trains to get the connecting unit into the station!. (It may a better idea to remove these services from the timeable and to run more York shuttles.)
Turning now to Retford. The difficulty here is that calling at Retford has a high time penalty due to the position of the crossover coupled with poor passenger uptake. However there is a regular daily flow of school children to Wakefield (!!!!!) and this flow is not catered for as yet.
Doncaster to York section is however to be hit very badly. Rumours persit that not only are we going to loose a number of East Coast services but also that cross country would like to come out of Doncaster. If this turns out to be true then I believe the reamining services will be unable to cope with demand at certain times of the day and this should be addressed as a matter of urgency.
North of York to Edinburgh there will little real change.
Between Glasgow and Edinburgh the changes are indeed signifigant as we all know that cross country are to pick the baton from East Coast. This will give Leeds a better service to Glasgow - but these services already load well and I think there are reasons to be concerned about loadings. The withdrawl of East Coast services to Glasgow saves one 91/IV set.for use elsewhere in the new timetable. It is interesting to remember that whilst the best servcie between Glasgow and Edinburgh is from Queen Street the heavier population spread on Clydeside in on the south bank of the river. Indeed quite a few people do in fact use the East Coast services between these points as a more convenient route.
Finally - Have East Coast worked out much revenue they will lose in the revenue share breakdown by the reduction in services between London and Peterborough and coming off the Glasgow - Edinburgh route?, Are their set utilisation porposals porposals such that they can deliver the timetable in a reliable punctual way?
Finally may I apologise for any spelling and grammar mistakes and if anyone reads to the end of this input may I say thankyou

 

[jopsuk]

It is interesting to remember that whilst the best servcie between Glasgow and Edinburgh is from Queen Street the heavier population spread on Clydeside in on the south bank of the river. Indeed quite a few people do in fact use the East Coast services between these points as a more convenient route.

Ah, but the Airdrie Bathgate link will have opned by the time "Eureka" comes into force (if it does). Four more trains per hour from Central

 

[tbtc]

Ah, but the Airdrie Bathgate link will have opned by the time "Eureka" comes into force (if it does). Four more trains per hour from Central

The Airdrie line goes through Glasgow Queen Street (low level)

However, the improved Shotts line service means there is now a "semi fast" service from Glasgow Central to Edinburgh each hour.

Plus the potential for more services via Falkirk High if the lines is wired up... there just aren't enough ways of getting from Glasgow to Edinburgh!

 

[Stephen_H]

The Airdrie line goes through Glasgow Queen Street (low level)

However, the improved Shotts line service means there is now a "semi fast" service from Glasgow Central to Edinburgh each hour.

Plus the potential for more services via Falkirk High if the lines is wired up... there just aren't enough ways of getting from Glasgow to Edinburgh!

As another new member I'd just like to add my own thoughts. The problem has never been getting from Glasgow to Edinburgh, it's getting from the bits in between to Edinburgh/Glasgow.

The improved "semi fast" service is neither improved, nor "semi fast" most of the time. Although a welcome addition for getting to Edinburgh it has serious short comings. The main one I would suggest is stopping at Bellshill with its 20 space car park, rather than at Uddingston with its 200+ spaces. I have used this service on a number of occasions and it's deadly quiet until after Shotts heading to Edinburgh. There is a convenient connection from Uddingston via Bellshill to Edinburgh in the morning, but in the evening a wait of 25-30 minutes for a 4 minute trip from Bellshill to Uddingston is not unknown. I have even seen it where the service has stopped at Holytown to let a service from Motherwell through first, even though it was timetabled to be in Bellshill after the Edinburgh service was.

So this leaves the Motherwell to Edinburgh services as the only viable "fast" ways to get from the area south east of Glasgow to Edinburgh. This service as I'm sure you may know is highly infrequent in its running. However the service itself is very busy from Motherwell to Edinburgh on the 7:04 and 8:04 trains, and the 17:40 from Edinburgh back to Motherwell is also very well used. But it offers no flexibility - you either come back on the 15:20 (which is always late), or you come back at 17:40.

The reason I stumbled across this thread is because I was looking to see if there was any more info on the "Eureka" timetable. It all seems to have been swept under the carpet for the minute with no updates from East coast in months.

 

[jay jay]

Excuse my ignorance but what exactly is meant by the term "clockface timetable?"

 

[TheBigD]

Excuse my ignorance but what exactly is meant by the term "clockface timetable?"

The same minutes each hour.
Eg : 0910, 1010, 1110, 1210 etc.

 

[jay jay]

The same minutes each hour.
Eg : 0910, 1010, 1110, 1210 etc.

I see! Thanks for that!

 

[ainsworth74]

A departure pattern based on the clock face so trains departing at xx:10, xx:20, xx:30 and so on. But also that departures to the same destinations happen at the same minutes past each hour so for example on the ECML from Kings Cross you could have departures like this xx:00 to Edinburgh, xx:10 to Leeds, xx:20 to Newcastle, xx:30 to Glasgow and so on with the same sequence every hour. It makes it easier for passengers to memorise a timetable and work out when the next train to their destination will be.

 

[bluenoxid]

Oh right. Erm, just remember that we need to squeeze these trains through the Welwyn double track bottleneck, over Hitchin and the bottlenecks south of Peebo. It might seem great on paper but reality will not work. The current programme works as it flights trains together. Two Intercities are followed by a fast train to Cambridge. Slow trains fill in the gap left behind before the next Intercity eats up the space,

 

[LE Greys]

The Airdrie line goes through Glasgow Queen Street (low level)

However, the improved Shotts line service means there is now a "semi fast" service from Glasgow Central to Edinburgh each hour.

Plus the potential for more services via Falkirk High if the lines is wired up... there just aren't enough ways of getting from Glasgow to Edinburgh!

As another new member I'd just like to add my own thoughts. The problem has never been getting from Glasgow to Edinburgh, it's getting from the bits in between to Edinburgh/Glasgow.

The improved "semi fast" service is neither improved, nor "semi fast" most of the time. Although a welcome addition for getting to Edinburgh it has serious short comings. The main one I would suggest is stopping at Bellshill with its 20 space car park, rather than at Uddingston with its 200+ spaces. I have used this service on a number of occasions and it's deadly quiet until after Shotts heading to Edinburgh. There is a convenient connection from Uddingston via Bellshill to Edinburgh in the morning, but in the evening a wait of 25-30 minutes for a 4 minute trip from Bellshill to Uddingston is not unknown. I have even seen it where the service has stopped at Holytown to let a service from Motherwell through first, even though it was timetabled to be in Bellshill after the Edinburgh service was.

So this leaves the Motherwell to Edinburgh services as the only viable "fast" ways to get from the area south east of Glasgow to Edinburgh. This service as I'm sure you may know is highly infrequent in its running. However the service itself is very busy from Motherwell to Edinburgh on the 7:04 and 8:04 trains, and the 17:40 from Edinburgh back to Motherwell is also very well used. But it offers no flexibility - you either come back on the 15:20 (which is always late), or you come back at 17:40.

The reason I stumbled across this thread is because I was looking to see if there was any more info on the "Eureka" timetable. It all seems to have been swept under the carpet for the minute with no updates from East coast in months.

I'm not sure if it's still going ahead, but Glasgow Crossrail may provide an answer. Running two trains an hour from Waverley via Bathgate onto the link, one to Kilmornock (assuming they electrify it) and one to Paisley or Ayr might work. I also reckon that some form of triangular Glasgow-Carlisle-Edinburgh service ought to exist, linking all three with Carstairs and providing a regular Lockerbie-Carstairs-Motherwell link.

Also, I was considering a possible service from King's Cross into Queen Street. How long are the platforms at Queen Street? Can a full-length Electra fit into them?

 

[MCR247]

I'm not sure if it's still going ahead, but Glasgow Crossrail may provide an answer. Running two trains an hour from Waverley via Bathgate onto the link, one to Kilmornock (assuming they electrify it) and one to Paisley or Ayr might work. I also reckon that some form of triangular Glasgow-Carlisle-Edinburgh service ought to exist, linking all three with Carstairs and providing a regular Lockerbie-Carstairs-Motherwell link.

Also, I was considering a possible service from King's Cross into Queen Street. How long are the platforms at Queen Street? Can a full-length Electra fit into them?

No a 225 set could not fit into it if it was electrified

 

[Stephen_H]

I'm not sure if it's still going ahead, but Glasgow Crossrail may provide an answer. Running two trains an hour from Waverley via Bathgate onto the link, one to Kilmornock (assuming they electrify it) and one to Paisley or Ayr might work. I also reckon that some form of triangular Glasgow-Carlisle-Edinburgh service ought to exist, linking all three with Carstairs and providing a regular Lockerbie-Carstairs-Motherwell link.

Also, I was considering a possible service from King's Cross into Queen Street. How long are the platforms at Queen Street? Can a full-length Electra fit into them?

Airdrie-Bathgate line, whether it gets full Glasgow-Edinburgh trains or not, is a good addition for linking up the two cities, but as I said earlier - linking the two cities has never been the problem - it's what's in between.

Connecting Airdrie and Bathgate allows people from North Lanarkshire to connect to Edinburgh, but ultimately there was easy access to the roads to get to Bathgate anyway for some of these people. More importantly it's going to allow West Lothian to connect to Glasgow much better.

The problem is that the larger communities to the South East of Glasgow will still be very poorly served when it comes to getting to Edinburgh in a time that "beats the car".

There will always be the Shotts line and the painfully slow journey on it, but the Motherwell-Carstairs-Edinburgh line is begging for either a "clock face" timetable, or at least proper commuter options. At the moment it's commuters using what is often a quiet mainline service. Quiet until it gets to Edinburgh that is.

 

[swt_passenger]

A departure pattern based on the clock face so trains departing at xx:10, xx:20, xx:30 and so on. But also that departures to the same destinations happen at the same minutes past each hour so for example on the ECML from Kings Cross you could have departures like this xx:00 to Edinburgh, xx:10 to Leeds, xx:20 to Newcastle, xx:30 to Glasgow and so on with the same sequence every hour. It makes it easier for passengers to memorise a timetable and work out when the next train to their destination will be.

They don't actually have to be equally spaced AFAICS. With flighted trains it would still be considered 'clock face' by the timetablers, as long as the order of trains was consistent across the day, so xx00/xx30 Leeds, xx03/xx33 Edinburgh, xx06/xx36 York/OAA would still be considered a clockface timetable - eg Newcastle pax would only have to remember 06/36 as their times. [Those are hypothetical times before anyone says they're wrong BTW.]

Departures from Waterloo are still considered 'clockface' offpeak, even though there are trains nearly every minute...

 

[Aictos]

No a 225 set could not fit into it if it was electrified

Is it not possible for Platform 7 to be extended then seeing as it should be able to take a 9 car, it shouldn't be hard to be done?