• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Crewe to Derby line skeleton services.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kneedown

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Messages
1,768
Location
Nottinghamshire
If cross country ran it the could do it Using the existing 170s making 1tph nottingham and the other current notts being diverted to crewe instead of notts.

Extra stock can then come from a electrified Worcester?

And then the one Notts service left would be horrendously overcrowded. What you suggest just robs Peter to pay Paul.
It makes not a jot of difference who runs the service, it more capacity thats needed not a new paint job.

Keep it with EMT which is the natural operator, and find extra stock from somewhere.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

12CSVT

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2010
Messages
2,612
Nothing is really wrong with the EMT's class 153's on the crewe - derby route.

If 153s on Crewe - Derby get so wedged that people are being left behind at stations (as mentioned by numerous posters in this thread), then there is a lot wrong with using 153s on this route.
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
9,596
And then the one Notts service left would be horrendously overcrowded. What you suggest just robs Peter to pay Paul.

It's not even robbing Peter to pay Paul though! It's robbing Peter so you can lend it to Paul! As in there isn't even a need for it, it's just doing it for the sake of it.
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
Did the acquisition of the units to bolster the Norwich-Liverpool service release any lesser-quality stock....or were these just used to supplement the existing stock on that service in respect of 4-car rather than 2-car train provision ?

Interesting, but nothing was released.

The sad thing here IMO is that EMT have done pretty well to date but with only 2+ years left on the franchise just what is their incentive to invest or develop anything?
 

Kneedown

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Messages
1,768
Location
Nottinghamshire
Interesting, but nothing was released.

The sad thing here IMO is that EMT have done pretty well to date but with only 2+ years left on the franchise just what is their incentive to invest or develop anything?

Correct. The extra units merely enabled more Liverpools to run as 4 car services, and there are still some services which run as only 2 cars that need to be strengthend.
The Crewe services certainly do need an extra coach on them, as well as the extra power to climb the bank from Uttoxeter to Caverswall.
It's certainly too late in the franchise to see any change. We'll have to see what the next one brings. My preference would be for Derby-Stoke (and Ambergate -Matlock) electrification in CP6. Short and simple schemes that would bring a lot of benefit.
 

WCML

Member
Joined
25 Nov 2011
Messages
100
This route could do with either 158s, 170s or doubled up 153s. In fact, the ex London Midland 150s that have been distributed around Northern and Great Western couldve been used to strengthen these services.

Could CrossCountry take over the route and extend Derby-Nottingham to Nottingham to Crewe and use 170s and 153s in either a half hourly service or an hourly service with 170s and 153s coupled up like London Midland do?

Could Arriva Trains Wales utilise their 158s and make a Holyhead to Nottingham service instead of Holyhead to Birmingham New Street? The path out of BHM could be used for an extension of the Northern Service between Manchester Piccadilly and Stoke. With 2+2 seating that would be a reasonable service on a 323 with an additional calling point at Stone which would give what is quite an affluent commuter town a direct service to Stoke, Manchester, Birmingham, Wolverhampton and a connection at Stafford to London. It would also add extra capacity to the overcrowded Manchester - Birmingham XC route.
The London Midland Crewe - Euston service could be pathed straight to Stafford to free up some pathing space at Stoke.


OR could a few more 172s be added to the London Midland production run?
That could free up the 170s/153s/150s on the BHM - Hereford or Rugeley - BHM routes, be used on the Crewe - Derby route or used to replace LMs remaining 150 and 153 fleet. Then LM could have a standard 170 and 172 fleet, with the Crewe - Derby line strengthened with 7 more 153s and 3 150s which would be compatible with EMTs current fleet.
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
Correct. The extra units merely enabled more Liverpools to run as 4 car services, and there are still some services which run as only 2 cars that need to be strengthend.
The Crewe services certainly do need an extra coach on them, as well as the extra power to climb the bank from Uttoxeter to Caverswall.
It's certainly too late in the franchise to see any change. We'll have to see what the next one brings. My preference would be for Derby-Stoke (and Ambergate -Matlock) electrification in CP6. Short and simple schemes that would bring a lot of benefit.

An extra coach would give the capacity, but not the significant extra power. A cascaded 185 unit would but we are still quite a lot of years away from that.

'Short and simple' electification schemes are not commensurately economic.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,400
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Of course, to forum members of advanced years such as I, the memories of both Crewe and Derby being great centres of railway history with locomotive works and large engine shed provision facilities, is one that makes the current rail link a sign of just how much times have changed since the demise of steam.
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
Of course, to forum members of advanced years such as I, the memories of both Crewe and Derby being great centres of railway history with locomotive works and large engine shed provision facilities, is one that makes the current rail link a sign of just how much times have changed since the demise of steam.

Ha Ha. Yes I wish that I had been a little older then and at the same time a lot younger now!

Pocket money got me to London and to Hitchin (from Ipswich) but I could only ever read about the great centres of Derby, Crewe (and Doncaster).

I was lucky enough to visit Swindon works in 1958/9, Evening Star, Warships and all.
 

Eagle

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Messages
7,106
Location
Leamingrad / Blanfrancisco
Could CrossCountry take over the route and extend Derby-Nottingham to Nottingham to Crewe and use 170s and 153s in either a half hourly service or an hourly service with 170s and 153s coupled up like London Midland do?

No, because all XC's Derby to Nottingham trains start from Birmingham, and removing them from Birmingham would be a bad idea considering how well-used they are.
 

Kneedown

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Messages
1,768
Location
Nottinghamshire
An extra coach would give the capacity, but not the significant extra power. A cascaded 185 unit would but we are still quite a lot of years away from that.

'Short and simple' electification schemes are not commensurately economic.

Compared to a single 153 yes it would. Doubled up dogboxes have far more oomph to them.
Why would electrification not be economic? It's a logical infill.
 

krisk

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2011
Messages
347
I bet this gets electrified

How about a Northern Manchester - Stoke - Derby train at peak times

Alongside a Northern Manchester - Airport - Crewe - Stoke - Derby
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,670
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Derby (Stenson Jn)-Stoke is planned to be upgraded to allow W10-gauge freight to reach Crewe from Syston as part of the Felixstowe-WCML upgrades.
So the line is not totally forgotten.
I can assure you a Chester-Lincoln journey is currently a tedious affair with 3 changes. There is only so long you can stand passing time in cafes at Derby and Nottingham.
Mind you when CT last ran a through train - via Shrewsbury and Birmingham - it still took 4 hours.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Was there not some specific TfGM funding towards the cost of the service extension from Macclesfield to Stoke in recent years ? Can someone give further information on this matter ?

Unlikely it was funding from TfGM, more likely if funding was provided that it was from a Staffordshire council.

One morning weekday peak time Macclesfield-Manchester service used to appear on TfGM's list of services getting funding but I'm not sure if it still does.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
I think a mistake by the government was to merge the Midland Mainline and local services into one franchise as the connect and local services are entirely different.

It seems to work pretty well - allowing 222s to be used on Grand National services (and a peak Lincoln - Nottingham service)/ HSTs on Summer Sunday trips to Skegness etc.

Having "local" and "longer distance" seems to work pretty well for Scotrail, FGW, SWT etc - I don't think that this is the problem here.

The programme of electrification that we have before us now is sufficiently ambitious, many secondary routes will rightly need to wait

That's the way I see it - the CP5 announcement was a lot more ambitious than I expected, so I can't criticise them for not doing various extras (Sheffield to Leeds!) - many of which may happen in CP6, or at least have an improved cost/benefit ratio of doing so.

Keep it with EMT which is the natural operator, and find extra stock from somewhere.

Agreed - the lack of stock isn't EMTs fault (if people want a scapegoat then maybe the poor split of Central Trains (where London Midland got 100mph 170s for stopping services like the Chase Line whilst services in the East Midlands were downgraded from 170s to 158s etc) is worth a mention, but none of this is EMT/ Stagecoach's fault and would have been the same whoever won the franchise.

My preference would be for Derby-Stoke (and Ambergate -Matlock) electrification in CP6. Short and simple schemes that would bring a lot of benefit.

I'm all for self contained electrification schemes, which are much better at replacing DMUs than some "main line" ones. Hopefully CP6 will bring us this (once the main parts of the MML as far as Sheffield are done in CP5).
 

Whistler40145

Established Member
Joined
30 Apr 2010
Messages
5,918
Location
Lancashire
I remember in BR days that the service mostly ran between Crewe & Derby, possibly several trains continuing to Nottingham.

Would it work to route several Liverpool to Norwich's via Stoke & Uttoxeter, not calling at Derby, but routed via Nottingham & then either via Grantham or Melton Mowbray.
 

185

Established Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
4,997
Not really sure why? ECS moves from tylesley would be a bit pointless?

Would make no sense to had it to Northern as they do not have any depots along the route, and dead mileage from Manchester Piccadilly, Sheffield would be totally wasteful.

Idea of passing it to LM would be based on 1) They have a traincrew depot (Crewe) on the route and 2) They are mildly better at running local services, ie they actually seem to care.
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
9,596
Where is this depot on the route that signs and looks after 153s?
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
I can assure you a Chester-Lincoln journey is currently a tedious affair with 3 changes.

It's possible with two changes, the problem is journey planners tell you to change an additional time (either at Crewe or Newark) to save between 5 and 20 minutes off the total journey time. While a missed connection could add a lot more than 20 minutes to your journey time.

Eastbound:
Chester-Stockport
Stockport-Doncaster
Doncaster-Lincoln

Westbound:
Lincoln-Nottingham
Nottingham-Stockport
Stockport-Chester
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
Idea of passing it to LM would be based on 1) They have a traincrew depot (Crewe) on the route and 2) They are mildly better at running local services, ie they actually seem to care.

LM have no experience of DMUs at Crewe and there have been a lot of comments about them cutting their "local" trains due to lack of available staff (etc) at the same time that they are focussing their resources on competing on the London - Trent Valley - Staffordshire market - which maybe says something about their priorities?
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Would make no sense to had it to Northern as they do not have any depots along the route, and dead mileage from Manchester Piccadilly, Sheffield would be totally wasteful.

If Northern start running services on the Middlewich branch then they would have diesels at Crewe. So they could run a through Altrincham-Crewe-Derby service with connections at Altrincham to Metrolink services for Old Trafford football and cricket grounds.

Alternatively, extend the Southport-Airport service to Derby and give Crewe an additional Airport train as proposed by a Network Rail RUS.
 

Old Yard Dog

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2011
Messages
1,482
I had the misfortune to travel on the Crewe - Derby line yesterday on my way from Little Sutton, near Ellesmere Port, to Carlton, near Nottingham. In both directions, the rolling stock provided was a single car class 153.

This was seriously overcrowded as two dozen Tranmere supporters decided to travel to Notts County this way, presumably to take advantage of the Chester - Nottingham CDR which is much, much cheaper that the fare on the direct route from Liverpool. The journey was not pleasant for other passengers and the cramped conditions probably contributed to a minor kerfuffle on the way back.

Serious overcrowding happens on the Crewe - Derby line almost every weekend. It is a major cross country route, not a quiet branch line, and is totally unsuited to 153 operation. The Crewe - Stoke - Derby - Nottingham - Southwell corridor serves six major football grounds, three racecourses, two cricket grounds and a rugby union ground directly - and is useful for getting to many others. It is also used by families travelling to Alton Towers.

A few years ago, there was a very useful through service from Crewe to Skegness operated by class 158s. East Midland have now split this into three.

From a distance, East Midland strike me as the worst TOC in the country. They force people onto cramped cattle trucks with less legroom than RyanAir, when you can get a seat, just to save a few quid in leasing fees. They don't respond to letters of complaint - I'm still waiting for a reply to one I sent over a month ago. And they terminate trains on this line, and also between Norwich and Liverpool, ridiculously early in the evening, so they can get their units back to Nottingham.

The sooner they go the better.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,400
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Alternatively, extend the Southport-Airport service to Derby and give Crewe an additional Airport train as proposed by a Network Rail RUS.

I really hate to mention this, but have you seen some of the units that Northern put on this service. Southport-Manchester Airport-Derby using one certain type that Northern are so fond of, would be something akin to what Dante (if he was around these days) would use as a good example in a modern version of Paradise Lost.

No bonus points for guessing the unit type to which I refer.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
East Midland strike me as the worst TOC in the country. They force people onto cramped cattle trucks with less legroom than RyanAir, when you can get a seat, just to save a few quid in leasing fees

They got a rough deal from the split up of Central Trains. Simple as that. Not Stagecoach's fault.
 

Tomnick

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
5,840
And they terminate trains on this line ... ridiculously early in the evening, so they can get their units back to Nottingham.
Not wishing to defend the use of 153s on this line, which I agree are largely unsuitable, but two units stable overnight at Crewe and the third goes onto Etches Park after working the last one from Crewe. I don't see how LM could do a better job of running the service; after all, it's not really EMT's fault that they've got nothing more suitable to run it with - it does at least seem to be a reliable and usually fairly punctual service.
 

knight2004

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2009
Messages
101
it really isn't their fault EMT have always been short of stock, for local trains but have plenty for the mainline route but of course hst aren't really suitable for other routes (nor are meridians) they need some more 156s, but till cascades happen they're stuck with what they have. yes 1 car sin't suitable even in the days of 3 cars they could be rammed! (Central trains era), maybe they will source something but the dft should have really ordered a few 172s for them its typical that some tocs are allowed new build stock and florish but others suffer (like emt)
 

John55

Member
Joined
24 Jun 2011
Messages
800
Location
South East
Of course, to forum members of advanced years such as I, the memories of both Crewe and Derby being great centres of railway history with locomotive works and large engine shed provision facilities, is one that makes the current rail link a sign of just how much times have changed since the demise of steam.

The North Staffordshire Railway which built the railway under discussion was based and largely financed in the Potteries and was specifically intended to serve that area independently of the big companies (LNWR & MR). So it is the fate of Stoke Works which might be relevant but not Crewe or Derby.

When I look at my steam era timetables (1948/54) I find the service from Derby to Crewe was 7 or 8 trains per day with more from Stoke to Crewe and some from Uttoxeter towards Congleton. As might be expected the focus of each service was clearly to serve Stoke and the Potteries not end to end journeys.

With the introduction of DMUs from 1960 as with most railways the service was improved and has been roughly hourly from Derby to Crewe ever since. As far as I can tell the 15/16 trains from end to end on this route is the best there has ever been.

The only deterioration (apart from train length) seems to be a reduction of through services from Uttoxeter towards Congleton & Stockport but that is more than made up by the vast increase in services to major destinations available by changing at Stoke on Trent.

On the odd occasion I travel this line the noticeable feature to me is the evidence of the disappearance of the goods traffic and not anything about the passenger traffic.

The short time when trains ran from Crewe to beyond Derby or Nottingham seems to have been a very unusual time for this line and I suspect a cause of the least reliable service in the history of the line.

They got a rough deal from the split up of Central Trains. Simple as that. Not Stagecoach's fault.

it really isn't their fault EMT have always been short of stock, for local trains but have plenty for the mainline route but of course hst aren't really suitable for other routes (nor are meridians) they need some more 156s, but till cascades happen they're stuck with what they have. yes 1 car sin't suitable even in the days of 3 cars they could be rammed! (Central trains era), maybe they will source something but the dft should have really ordered a few 172s for them its typical that some tocs are allowed new build stock and florish but others suffer (like emt)


On a Saturday I doubt if EMT has a DMU shortage so on this day at least longer trains would seem to be easily possible if EMT wanted to. The Liverpool - Nottingham trains don't seem to be 4 cars on Saturdays and there are clearly spare Meridians & HSTs they could use to allow stock redeployment if they had the desire to do so. Clearly they don't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top