dk1
Veteran Member
You'd have the hourly via West Mids service.
-
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!
Virgin Plans Extra Liverpool Lime Street Services from 10 June 2019
- Thread starter Jorge Da Silva
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Ah yes, sorry.
dk1
Veteran Member
I'm not sure how much local traffic there is between the two towns but the pair of Virgin services each hour are fairly close to one another.
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 15,963
The 2 track timetable stops them doing that any earlier. I expect the maintenance time will get eroded back at some point.
smtglasgow
Member
I don’t doubt Liverpool’s claim for extra services (although maybe not at the times Virgin are proposing), but the real need is to boost Preston-Euston. 2 tph from Preston should be the priority. From my own regular use of the Glasgow trains I can’t see much need for extra capacity on the northern part of the WCML – although a scheduled ‘relief’ southbound on Sundays would be nice! But it’s far too common to be on a Glasgow-Euston train which leaves Preston with standing passengers – Wigan, Warrington punters have no chance. How it would be resourced is another question, but a regular hourly Preston, Wigan, Warrington, Euston (starting back from Blackpool and Lancaster in alternate hours?) seems like the most pressing need on the WCML atm.
As others have said there’s probably not a lot that can be done without a completely new WCML timetable, but with HS2 slipping out of sight something needs to be done or we’ll be facing a lost decade.
As others have said there’s probably not a lot that can be done without a completely new WCML timetable, but with HS2 slipping out of sight something needs to be done or we’ll be facing a lost decade.
Mutant Lemming
Established Member
Preston already has two trains per hour to Euston. Running the additional Liverpool via Warrington would mean that the fast Euston-Glasgow could omit Warrington creating more space on those trains and a slightly faster journey time. A stop at either St.Helens Junction or Lea Green on the Liverpool via Warrington service would also provide the metropolitan borough of St.Helens (which, at 179'000 has a much greater population than Preston's 122'000) with a service to London.
Have Virgin got these slots yet? What will be the Crewe timings? What platform at Crewe will they stop?
I think the services will get to Crewe at 1009, 1109, 1309, 1509 and 1609 northbound; and 0942, 1142, 1342, 1542 and 1742 southbound. Therefore, I would suggest northbound services would use Platform 12 whilst southbound would use Platform 5
I also with the additional London-Blackpool routes would stop at Crewe - give better connectivity north of Crewe
I think the services will get to Crewe at 1009, 1109, 1309, 1509 and 1609 northbound; and 0942, 1142, 1342, 1542 and 1742 southbound. Therefore, I would suggest northbound services would use Platform 12 whilst southbound would use Platform 5
I also with the additional London-Blackpool routes would stop at Crewe - give better connectivity north of Crewe
Last edited:
as I said before:
What do you mean by "packed"?
Genuine question - different people use it in different ways.
The population fallacy again...
Preston is a railhead/connectional for a huge area of Central/East/West Lancashire.
St Helens Junction isn't really a railhead for anywhere.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
GNWR is intending to use 110mph non-tilt IC225 sets (still no confirmation), and the 125mph tilt timetable won't work if they make more stops.
You are also into the "not primarily abstractive" test which ORR makes, and it would undermine the ICWC TOC.
It's also not GNWR's job to provide "connectivity", that's the job of the franchise operators.
If VT calls at more stations, LNR will object.
Keeping the same stations as the existing service avoids these sorts of complications.
Yet more reasons for dumping the ludicrous structure of franchising as it is currently set up. To get best use (i.e. capacity and reliablity) out of our rail network we need to be able to adapt the services - and cascade rolling stock - in the most sensible way, rather than being ham-strung by all these wretched quibbles!
Mutant Lemming
Established Member
Ah...the 'major' junction fallacy - basically you mean Blackpool and Blackburn. Blackpool will be getting it's own Euston services, Blackburn would be difficult to serve whereas the infrastructure is virtually there now to serve the much neglected metropolitan boroughs of Knowsley and St.Helens - all it takes is to re-route the services which will help take some of the strain off Lime Street.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
Not without major platform extensions (same at Liverpool South Parkway).
No, I mean everywhere between Southport and Clitheroe/Pendle Valley, plus the Fylde and connections from as far away as the Lakes.
St Helens might not be a railhead, but Bank Quay is certainly busy enough to justify extras. Anyway, as said, it's going via Runcorn. So it doesn't matter.
To those others questioning the need for 2 an hour. The similarly sized city of Leeds has 2 an hour. So why not Liverpool? I work them, they can be rammed, for a work point of view, it's more work for my depot, certainly am not complaining about that.
To those others questioning the need for 2 an hour. The similarly sized city of Leeds has 2 an hour. So why not Liverpool? I work them, they can be rammed, for a work point of view, it's more work for my depot, certainly am not complaining about that.
jamesst
Member
Fully agree, it's only 5 extra trains a day and already people on here are trying to get them sent everywhere else!!!
Not Central, only a single through line. Bank Quay is. Junction would be a railhead for St Helens itself if the old Runcorn Gap line reopened. But little chance of that ever happening seeing as it's not in Merseytravel interests to provide a service that doesn't benefit Liverpool. Anyway, let's not go there. Already had a thread on that elsewhere.
It would have to overtake the LNWR service otherwise it would potentially be stuck behind it all the way to Stafford otherwise. The 04 services used to be booked Slow Line anyway to avoid a clash with an inbound EM to Lime St..
Iskra
Established Member
I thought they turned round at Carnforth currently? In the loops just south of the station?
VT 390
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 1,366
Why not introduce Crewe stops on the Glasgow to Euston services as pick up only northbound and set down only southbound, yes this would mean a slightly increased journey time but would increase connectivity at Crewe. If this would not be possible then they could at least call the new Blackpool services at Crewe as these services are usually quiet compared to Glasgow trains south of Preston, also I am not sure but more passengers would probably use the service at Crewe than the current Rugby stop.
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 15,963
You would have two northbound trains to Glasgow within 10 minutes of each other then and nothing for 50. The southbound one would then clash with a Birmingham Euston at Rugby. Which Blackpool services are you talking about, VT or GNWR? The southbound VT cannot stop as it would clash with the Liverpool following it,
VT 390
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 1,366
Both of them
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 15,963
VT I have just described, I can't remember the GNWR times but Im pretty sure they don't work with Crewe stops either.
dk1
Veteran Member
Used to love that expression in BR days. Almost bought a house in Donny on that premis back in 1989.
I think any of the newer Lancs services should all call at Crewe, to provide those WCML connections. The fast London-Glasgow does not need to stop there - this competes with the train and is for the London - Preston, Cumbria and Scotland market. And speed matters.
Other trains service connections and other markets just fine.
A second Liverpool running via Warrington is a great idea. This too should call at Crewe and MK/Nuneaton - to provide some of the missing connections. Runcorn isn't that important a market to need 2tph - and it is gaining a Liverpool frequency with the new Halton services.
Other trains service connections and other markets just fine.
A second Liverpool running via Warrington is a great idea. This too should call at Crewe and MK/Nuneaton - to provide some of the missing connections. Runcorn isn't that important a market to need 2tph - and it is gaining a Liverpool frequency with the new Halton services.
Noting the departure times of some of these proposed new services, I was on a "middle of the day" Liverpool - Euston service today and it was half empty in both classes.
- Status