Various consultations on the May 2022 East Coast Mainline timetable

[Crisps]

Darlington appears to be one of the stations missing out, as the fastest LNER services are reverting back to missing out Darlington (currently only one LNER train per day doesn’t call, and Darlington’s fastest trains to London only call at York), so many journey times to London are increasing. I do get why LNER are making the service from Darlington and Durham more equal, their consultation is correct in saying that Durham has fewer LNER trains but more passengers using them. Some LNER services are going to be non-stop York-Durham, which is something I’ve not seen before? (Currently, at least pre-Covid, there were some TPE services that were non-stop York-Durham but were routed through Darlington platform 4 instead of the avoiding line!) Also swingeing cuts on services to Edinburgh, again due to the return of LNER non-stoppers but also the loss of the TPE Edinburgh’s. It would have made sense for Darlington to be well-served by fast trains to London given the increasing numbers of civil servants that are going to be based there with the new Treasury North campus.

 

[mikeg]

Ah I completely didn't think to look at the XC consultation! If so, despite my dislike for the TOC (we all know it's the TOC whose second syllable is pronounced most strongly) that's actually not bad news at all.

I just wonder where that leaves all the passengers with TPE only seasons? I've created a thread in the fares section regarding this.

 

[Darandio]

(Currently, at least pre-Covid, there were some TPE services that were non-stop York-Durham but were routed through Darlington platform 4 instead of the avoiding line!)

A minor point in the whole scheme of things but some were routed on the fast lines.

 

[Ianno87]

Even the flow between Newark and Grantham is only served every two hours and that is the largest of the flows between the stations between Peterborough and Doncaster according to the charts showing the demand (interestingly it seems the flow between Newark and Grantham is marginally bigger than the flows from either station to Peterborough or Doncaster where hourly trains are retained!)

I don't think providing, say, an hourly stopping path is too much to ask? Aside from the obvious benefit of allowing faster journey times to the likes of Leeds/Newcastle and Edinburgh by not having Inverness trains calling at Newark.

Clearly all moot points as the timetable is obviously already at an advanced stage of development, this is merely another justification for decisions already taken dressed up as a consultation.

Newark-Grantham (scaling off the graph) appears to be somewhere around 100 journeys per day, or around 3.5-4% of demand at each station.

And gets a train every 2 hours, which is surely more than adequate for these numbers (which, presumably, have some level of distribution across the day).



The problem is that the ECML is two track for most of the way north of Stoke Tunnel; so as frequency increases, spreading calls on this section to equalise journey times starts to make the most sense to fit all the required trains in.

 

[swt_passenger]

I wonder if the planned new Darlington platform loops on the up side will allow calls to be reinstated in future as presumably they’ll be much easier to path without conflicts?

 

[Failed Unit]

Newark-Grantham (scaling off the graph) appears to be somewhere around 100 journeys per day, or around 3.5-4% of demand at each station.

And gets a train every 2 hours, which is surely more than adequate for these numbers (which, presumably, have some level of distribution across the day).



The problem is that the ECML is two track for most of the way north of Stoke Tunnel; so as frequency increases, spreading calls on this section to equalise journey times starts to make the most sense to fit all the required trains in.

I thinks this gets covered from time to time,

But Doncaster - Peterborough all stops on a Azuma takes about 1 hour now.
Typically leaving Peterborough on the top of the hour, it is chased typically around 18 minutes past the hour by at service that stops once and takes about 50 minutes.

The x08 and the x30 services out of Kings Cross respectively. The stopping service just seems very difficult to path without major works.

West Coast has an EMU stopping service? But it also has more places the expresses and pass. We are 4 track, no problem to Grantham. But then both Grantham and Newark can't used to pass easily. Good example is the Hull - London service getting passed by the "flying Scotsman" it gets looped just outside Grantham which impacts its end to end journey. Retford is a good place to pass. But trying to get all these pieces of the puzzle together for low demand is impossible to justify (if you were reopening a station the business case would be weak).

I suspect the EMU Peterborough - Doncaster shuttle would be the best chance of solving the problem, but at what cost? Would LNER need to stop at Retford at all now? Hull trains cover it? I don't think 2tph is good enough to get people out their cars, but then the other side of this coin is that the Grantham - Lincoln demand is happening.

I can't see them building a dynamic loop between Grantham and Newark.

Although I don't really like it - Sadly I think the current comprise is the best option The EMU has got investigated and binned many times, in the same way as the Newcastle - Edinburgh one has (and probably will again). I think my favorite on in the past was Stansted- Leeds

 

[AllensWest]

Wow swingeing cutbacks to my home station (Northallerton). I knew it was overprovisioned, but now is going to drastically underprovisioned? Especially given the popularity of TPE services for travelling to Darlington and Newcastle and the poor provision of other tranpsort in the area this seems like a perverse decision. Relying on LNER is not the answer unless compulsory reservations are scrapped. In fact they seem to be intent on killing the commuting market from Northallerton. This always seems popular and there are always a good number of passengers waiting for NCL services in the morning as well as YRK ones. It seems TPE want to scrap a key part of their business in these parts in return for vanity projects like serving Saltburn, which will mean a lot of fresh air being carried from MBR-SLB.

Unfair to call the TPE extension to Saltburn a "Vanity Project" it's about time Teesside and East Cleveland had the service it deserves. The extension to Saltburn won't just serve the town itself it will serve the majority of East Cleveland (Brotton, Skelton, Loftus, Guisborough) baring in mind Guisborough alone has a larger population than Northallerton on its own. IMO Northallerton is still over provisioned and has more than an adequate service under these proposals.

 

[mikeg]

I stand corrected, especially when the xc calls are taken into account. Actually I'm changing my mind completely and think this isn't a bad thing all round, more connectivity overall, less duplication etc.

 

[TheBigD]

I thinks this gets covered from time to time,

But Doncaster - Peterborough all stops on a Azuma takes about 1 hour now.
Typically leaving Peterborough on the top of the hour, it is chased typically around 18 minutes past the hour by at service that stops once and takes about 50 minutes.

The x08 and the x30 services out of Kings Cross respectively. The stopping service just seems very difficult to path without major works.

West Coast has an EMU stopping service? But it also has more places the expresses and pass. We are 4 track, no problem to Grantham. But then both Grantham and Newark can't used to pass easily. Good example is the Hull - London service getting passed by the "flying Scotsman" it gets looped just outside Grantham which impacts its end to end journey. Retford is a good place to pass. But trying to get all these pieces of the puzzle together for low demand is impossible to justify (if you were reopening a station the business case would be weak).

I suspect the EMU Peterborough - Doncaster shuttle would be the best chance of solving the problem, but at what cost? Would LNER need to stop at Retford at all now? Hull trains cover it? I don't think 2tph is good enough to get people out their cars, but then the other side of this coin is that the Grantham - Lincoln demand is happening.

I can't see them building a dynamic loop between Grantham and Newark.

Although I don't really like it - Sadly I think the current comprise is the best option The EMU has got investigated and binned many times, in the same way as the Newcastle - Edinburgh one has (and probably will again). I think my favorite on in the past was Stansted- Leeds

To add to the above...

Back in the late 1990s/early 2000s WAGN proposed to run an hourly EMU service Kings Cross to Doncaster.
At peak times it was the (then) current Peterborough commuter services extended, off peak it was generally xx36 from Kings Cross.
Some of the paths were crap, eg: the 1536 ex Kings Cross took just over 3 hours to get to Doncaster, and taking around 1hr 45 to do Peterborough to Doncaster with it being looped multiple times north of Peterborough.
At the time ECML services were generally 3 an hour plus an extra Leeds some hours.

The services never actually ran though as Hull Trains got allocated paths instead.

 

[cle]

On the EMU topic, ironically, the Newcastle-Edinburgh EMU seems to be more needed than ever.

Dunbar losing out even as it finally got the second platform and that move was removed. Might it be pathed now? The Scotrail services have improved, so eventually these might evolve to Berwick and maybe even down to Newcastle. It has a lot more smaller places, vs the Grantham/Newark/Retford flows which I agree are better served in skip stop, sporadic and Hull Trains ways.

 

[Failed Unit]

On the EMU topic, ironically, the Newcastle-Edinburgh EMU seems to be more needed than ever.

Dunbar losing out even as it finally got the second platform and that move was removed. Might it be pathed now? The Scotrail services have improved, so eventually these might evolve to Berwick and maybe even down to Newcastle. It has a lot more smaller places, vs the Grantham/Newark/Retford flows which I agree are better served in skip stop, sporadic and Hull Trains ways.

It is the same problem however of the balance of long distance services and the local eating paths (along with where do they pass each other)

What we have proposed - London - Edinburgh (x2) and Birmingham - Edinburgh (x1) taking around 1h20 - 1h30. (along with some extras that don't run every hour such as first east coast)

The local service would probably call:
Cramlington, Morpeth, Alnmouth, Berwick, Reeston, Dunbar, Mussleborough. (maybe even Chathill)

I suspect if it followed right up the rear of a set of flighted Edinburgh service I suspect the next hours would be up the rear of it.

The solution is not simple, 4 platform of say Berwick would help but not easy to construct. Straighten out the ECML at Morpeth (with Bypass) etc. But that is one for a speculative idea thread. But mixed traffic service on a 2 track railway for 125mile is a challenge.

 

[InOban]

It would help this discussion if there was a chart, like the one above for Grantham etc, which showed the flows along XC routes. I know, for example that quite a few people use their trains between Edinburgh and Glasgow either because they're heading for trains from GLC, or because XC have cheap advance single tickets, I think. But how many are travelling from Glasgow to Newcastle and beyond? Where are the Edinburgh passengers headed? Otherwise we're just riding our own fantasies.

 

[mikeg]

The other thing that would help is if there were a master timetable rather than ones for each toc so overall level of service can be compared. This would be particularly useful at stations like mine where we gain a route operated by XC in return for losing a TPE one

 

[CaptainBen]

I've only read the Great Northern consultation, but that looks like it is almost exactly the same as the May 2019 timetable. Quite why there's a need for a consultation 12 months in advance about a timetable that's supposed to have been running for two years already is a bit mysterious! Mind you, that timetable had only just got up and running properly when Covid hit and everything got cut back.

The two main questions that are prompted by that fact are:
1. When will the service improvements from the 717 and the signalling upgrades that were promised actually materialise?
2. Given how well the May 19 timetable rollout went, what is being done to ensure that the timetable is actually delivered this time?

 

[YorksLad12]

The other thing that would help is if there were a master timetable rather than ones for each toc so overall level of service can be compared. This would be particularly useful at stations like mine where we gain a route operated by XC in return for losing a TPE one

This is where a single consultation and document would have helped...

Or even if they managed to give us the specimen timetables in a format we could easily manipulate, we could do it ourselves then.

 

[800001]

Im shocked at Darlington and Durham to Edinburgh going from 2 trains per hour, to one train every 2 hours.

 

[Failed Unit]

Im shocked at Darlington and Durham to Edinburgh going from 2 trains per hour, to one train every 2 hours.

Not trying to be pedantic but will it still be more frequent then that.
Hourly XC
Bi-Hourly LNER

I know TPE were also in the mix, but that was so close to the LNER I doubt anyone chose rail because of its time (just the price)

 

[800001]

Not trying to be pedantic but will it still be more frequent then that.
Hourly XC
Bi-Hourly LNER

I know TPE were also in the mix, but that was so close to the LNER I doubt anyone chose rail because of its time (just the price)

Apologies, lner going 1 every 2 hours, yes, XC still remain hourly

 

[Failed Unit]

It is a pity as others have said that we can’t have total timetables. Even if it was by segment. I would love to see how York - Newcastle fits together.

 

[36270k]

It is a pity as others have said that we can’t have total timetables. Even if it was by segment. I would love to see how York - Newcastle fits together.

There is a master timetable at Network Rail

 

[SuperNova]

It seems TPE want to scrap a key part of their business in these parts in return for vanity projects like serving Saltburn, which will mean a lot of fresh air being carried from MBR-SLB.

This has nothing to do with a TPE vanity project at all. Plenty in TPE not at all happy with this and at a high level it seems.

 

[JonathanH]

Plenty in TPE not at all happy with this and at a high level it seems.

Does that really matter in the context of bringing all the railway together? TPE is just a delivery company for the railway as a whole and isn't there to 'compete' against other operators. In the future, where it runs is up to the overall guiding force for the railway and whoever can run that service at the lowest cost gets the contract.

 

[AverageTD]

It is the same problem however of the balance of long distance services and the local eating paths (along with where do they pass each other)

What we have proposed - London - Edinburgh (x2) and Birmingham - Edinburgh (x1) taking around 1h20 - 1h30. (along with some extras that don't run every hour such as first east coast)

The local service would probably call:
Cramlington, Morpeth, Alnmouth, Berwick, Reeston, Dunbar, Mussleborough. (maybe even Chathill)

I suspect if it followed right up the rear of a set of flighted Edinburgh service I suspect the next hours would be up the rear of it.

The solution is not simple, 4 platform of say Berwick would help but not easy to construct. Straighten out the ECML at Morpeth (with Bypass) etc. But that is one for a speculative idea thread. But mixed traffic service on a 2 track railway for 125mile is a challenge.

Would stopping services be able to use the many loops on this section of track? I know it's far from ideal but some form of service is better than none, especially for some of the smaller stations with limited services. Also I think it would be better to drag a 331 for this sort of service, incredibly awkward for maintenance but the acceleration would be a great hand in this.

 

[Failed Unit]

This has nothing to do with a TPE vanity project at all. Plenty in TPE not at all happy with this and at a high level it seems.

surprised by this, they are a management contract now and their ORCATs raiding is not needed. even without COVID they were heading for a default. i would think they would be happy the pressure is off.

 

[MontyP]

Leeds seems to have done less well out of this than expected:
- services not sped up in the way that was promised
- still 2tph rather than the expected 5tp2h
- lost at least one peak extra northbound (1748 in pre-covid timetable i think, and was there also an additional one between 1830 and 1900?)
- departure times from Kings Cross do not fit the standard xx10/xx40 pattern from 1600 onwards, usually only by a minute or two but some a few minutes more (1603, 1803). Couldn't the Cleethorpes service take the 1603 path as it stops at Newark rather than Grantham, then the 1610 could have gone to Leeds

In compensation there look to be later weekday evening trains in both directions. A personal desire for the last 30 years has been a later southbound on a Saturday night to get me home after a football match but i guess this is never going to happen due to the need to allow for weekend engineering possessions.

 

[hibtastic]

It is the same problem however of the balance of long distance services and the local eating paths (along with where do they pass each other)

What we have proposed - London - Edinburgh (x2) and Birmingham - Edinburgh (x1) taking around 1h20 - 1h30. (along with some extras that don't run every hour such as first east coast)

The local service would probably call:
Cramlington, Morpeth, Alnmouth, Berwick, Reeston, Dunbar, Mussleborough. (maybe even Chathill)

I suspect if it followed right up the rear of a set of flighted Edinburgh service I suspect the next hours would be up the rear of it.

The solution is not simple, 4 platform of say Berwick would help but not easy to construct. Straighten out the ECML at Morpeth (with Bypass) etc. But that is one for a speculative idea thread. But mixed traffic service on a 2 track railway for 125mile is a challenge.

Suspect an East Linton call would be added into the local service once the station is built.

 

[Watershed]

Does that really matter in the context of bringing all the railway together? TPE is just a delivery company for the railway as a whole and isn't there to 'compete' against other operators. In the future, where it runs is up to the overall guiding force for the railway and whoever can run that service at the lowest cost gets the contract.

It's still there to represent the interests of those who live in the areas it serves. On any mixed-use line there will always be different service groups competing to run the most/best services.

 

[YorksLad12]

Leeds seems to have done less well out of this than expected:
- services not sped up in the way that was promised
- still 2tph rather than the expected 5tp2h
- lost at least one peak extra northbound (1748 in pre-covid timetable i think, and was there also an additional one between 1830 and 1900?)
- departure times from Kings Cross do not fit the standard xx10/xx40 pattern from 1600 onwards, usually only by a minute or two but some a few minutes more (1603, 1803). Couldn't the Cleethorpes service take the 1603 path as it stops at Newark rather than Grantham, then the 1610 could have gone to Leeds

In compensation there look to be later weekday evening trains in both directions. A personal desire for the last 30 years has been a later southbound on a Saturday night to get me home after a football match but i guess this is never going to happen due to the need to allow for weekend engineering possessions.

Thinking about it, I'm sure the 1748 formed a service back to London from Leeds whereas the 1803 went to Skipton (or Bradford, or Harrogate) and returned to base afterwards. Harrogate would have been an HST, so that journey would be done by an 800 or 800/801 combination. It's understandable, if the departures either side ate 10 cars not 9. The 1748 also didn't do dinner in First (not that I'm obsessed with the food offering in First...).

From 1803 there were departures at 1833, 1903, 1933, 2003, 2033, 2133 and 2330. The big positive is that we now have a 2240 departure northwards, filling that late-night gap. Everything else is a bit of tinkering, and it might be if what they "aspire" to, the extra two-hourly service to Harrogate via Leeds happens, that the other two services are speeded up. That might have a knock-on effect elsewhere, of course, and it might not be positive, and might have an effect on turnaround and departure times, etc.

 

[Failed Unit]

Leeds seems to have done less well out of this than expected:
- services not sped up in the way that was promised
- still 2tph rather than the expected 5tp2h
- lost at least one peak extra northbound (1748 in pre-covid timetable i think, and was there also an additional one between 1830 and 1900?)
- departure times from Kings Cross do not fit the standard xx10/xx40 pattern from 1600 onwards, usually only by a minute or two but some a few minutes more (1603, 1803). Couldn't the Cleethorpes service take the 1603 path as it stops at Newark rather than Grantham, then the 1610 could have gone to Leeds

In compensation there look to be later weekday evening trains in both directions. A personal desire for the last 30 years has been a later southbound on a Saturday night to get me home after a football match but i guess this is never going to happen due to the need to allow for weekend engineering possessions.

I suspect that they didn’t want the Cleethorpes service following the Aberdeen with the same stops 3 mins afterwards.

I would have preferred the Cleethorpes to stick with 1647 to keep the 2 hour frequency throughout the day. I wonder if GC retains this slot.

 

[Deerfold]

Leeds seems to have done less well out of this than expected:
- services not sped up in the way that was promised
- still 2tph rather than the expected 5tp2h
- lost at least one peak extra northbound (1748 in pre-covid timetable i think, and was there also an additional one between 1830 and 1900?)
- departure times from Kings Cross do not fit the standard xx10/xx40 pattern from 1600 onwards, usually only by a minute or two but some a few minutes more (1603, 1803). Couldn't the Cleethorpes service take the 1603 path as it stops at Newark rather than Grantham, then the 1610 could have gone to Leeds

In compensation there look to be later weekday evening trains in both directions. A personal desire for the last 30 years has been a later southbound on a Saturday night to get me home after a football match but i guess this is never going to happen due to the need to allow for weekend engineering possessions.

The peak Leeds services have always varied the times a little. Leeds does gain two extra late services from London, and 1 later service to London (25 minutes later than now, though still rather earlier than the last York service and a couple of hours earlier than trains in many other directions). There was only 1 extra peak service.

Bradford, on the other hand loses its extra service that was gained last year, supposedly as the first step towards a two-hourly service, which has been put on long-term hold.