Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
What are the logistical challenges in running an 8 car 350 somewhere-Stoke then split to Kidsgrove, Alsager, Crewe / Congleton & Macclesfield.
Once again, Stone. You can't call an 8-car there.
What are the logistical challenges in running an 8 car 350 somewhere-Stoke then split to Kidsgrove, Alsager, Crewe / Congleton & Macclesfield.
Once again, Stone. You can't call an 8-car there.
I didn't say you had to call at Stone
Have to call one of the XC services then. No one in Macclesfield asked for the non-stop XC to make calls there last May. Congleton needs 2 tph more than Macclesfield needs 4 tph.
What are the logistical challenges in running an 8 car 350 somewhere-Stoke then split to Kidsgrove, Alsager, Crewe / Congleton & Macclesfield.
Bletchleyite's comments did not appear to be based on whether service increases are possible, but whether they are needed. Regardless of logistics or feasibility, Congleton deserves more services than Stone, Kidsgrove & Alsager.
Approximately a 5 minute dwell time if the split / join at Northampton is any benchmark. Your next challenge is to 'rejoin' them heading south, which means they need to arrive at the same place at the same time.
The solution to Congleton would be to stop on XC an hour there - the timings for the few which do still stop there as opposed to those which don't is no different interestingly.
What is the reason they don't stop? Overcrowding?
They added the call at Macclesfield due to them getting shifted slightly as part of the May timetable change, it was lost time which could be turned into a stop. The stop at Congleton does change the schedule, look at 1H09 and 1M18 for comparison.
I honestly cant see the usage at Barlaston being near the same amount as stone anyway, it could probably be missed mabye??
Have to call one of the XC services then. No one in Macclesfield asked for the non-stop XC to make calls there last May. Congleton needs 2 tph more than Macclesfield needs 4 tph.
What are the logistical challenges in running an 8 car 350 somewhere-Stoke then split to Kidsgrove, Alsager, Crewe / Congleton & Macclesfield.
Bletchleyite's comments did not appear to be based on whether service increases are possible, but whether they are needed. Regardless of logistics or feasibility, Congleton deserves more services than Stone, Kidsgrove & Alsager.
Looks like I have to depend on XC then. Either that or am extra semi fast northern serviceSplitting/joining services in the through platforms at Stoke is almost certainly a resilience/timetable no-no.
Perhaps, but where would such a service start and end on the north side? Stoke-on-Trent has only two south-facing platforms (the through ones), both of which already have a substantial number of services. It doesn't seem feasible to reliably turn around a train there. The single line between Alsager and Crewe is going to cause difficulties there, and even if that weren't an issue, you still have to fit in north of Stoke, which itself seems unlikely without a major signalling upgrade (given there are 7tph already, including three stoppers).
A new southbound bay platform at Stoke might be the easiest solution - but how expensive is that going to be? And just for 1tph?
That's without even considering the southern pathing and termination. Unfortunately Stone is one of those places that is doomed to have a poor service unless everyone else suffers (e.g. stopping every train there, or shortening longer services), simply through the geography of what was built.The other alternative is an inordinate and frankly unjustifiable level of infrastructure investment.
That isn't what I meant, 1H09 gets to Manchester later than any other XC train in the pattern. It isn't a case of a Congleton stop works in all of the trains.That service calls at both MAC and CNG. If you only call at one then it doesn't change.
Completely as it would get ran down by the following XC before it even got to Stone.The easiest thing is extend the Northern train to Stafford & call Barlaston and Stone. Obviously you’d have to retune it though...
The easiest thing is extend the Northern train to Stafford & call Barlaston and Stone. Obviously you’d have to retune it though...
Yes, it calls at both Congleton AND Macclesfield.That isn't what I meant, 1H09 gets to Manchester later than any other XC train in the pattern. It isn't a case of a Congleton stop works in all of the trains.
Once HS2 reaches Crewe, there will be plenty of capacity on the existing WCML routes through Stafford/Stoke with the fast services diverted to HS2.
The current XC service could be reduced to semi-fasts while the fast services run via HS2 and Crewe.
Stoke is unlikely to get 2tph fast to Euston.
Local and regional services could look quite different in 8-ish years.
It's the same debate about what HS2 is for and what impact it will have on current services.
I thought it was pretty much an open secret by now that HS2 will not be reaching Crewe, and may not in fact even leave Euston.
If there are HS2 trains running around the north west two decades from now, I'll eat my hat.
One for the HS2 thread that. But briefly phase one is now in law and Euston is having two platforms closed very soon for building work. And phase one rejoins the mainline at Armitage, so HS2 trains will run to Crewe even if only phase one goes ahead.I thought it was pretty much an open secret by now that HS2 will not be reaching Crewe, and may not in fact even leave Euston.
If there are HS2 trains running around the north west two decades from now, I'll eat my hat.
Yeah I was aware it was going off topic somewhat. Personally i think it will still get binned, law or no law, and if it does get built it will end up years late, billions over budget and cut back to phase one only.
Going back to the subject of the LNR timetable, which is very much tangled up in what happens with HS2, you'd think they could spare a few quid to up the line speeds on the WCML slow lines from 75 to 110. That would offer a quick fix and positive PR, providing faster journey times at what one would assume would be not a great cost in relation to what gets thrown at other projects. Presumably there is some reason why its not been done, but it seems a no brainer to me. Huge swathes of 75 on one of the country's main rail arteries seems very short sighted, and also easily fixed.
The Slows between Crewe and Stafford are already 100mph (done as part of the Stafford upgrade works), as are the Slows throughout the seciton upgraded to 4 tracks in the 2000s, and the Down Slow from Armitage to Colwich.
Perhaps, but where would such a service start and end on the north side? Stoke-on-Trent has only two south-facing platforms (the through ones), both of which already have a substantial number of services. It doesn't seem feasible to reliably turn around a train there. The single line between Alsager and Crewe is going to cause difficulties there, and even if that weren't an issue, you still have to fit in north of Stoke, which itself seems unlikely without a major signalling upgrade (given there are 7tph already, including three stoppers).
A new southbound bay platform at Stoke might be the easiest solution - but how expensive is that going to be? And just for 1tph?
That's without even considering the southern pathing and termination. Unfortunately Stone is one of those places that is doomed to have a poor service unless everyone else suffers (e.g. stopping every train there, or shortening longer services), simply through the geography of what was built.The other alternative is an inordinate and frankly unjustifiable level of infrastructure investment.
Have to call one of the XC services then. No one in Macclesfield asked for the non-stop XC to make calls there last May. Congleton needs 2 tph more than Macclesfield needs 4 tph.
What are the logistical challenges in running an 8 car 350 somewhere-Stoke then split to Kidsgrove, Alsager, Crewe / Congleton & Macclesfield.
Bletchleyite's comments did not appear to be based on whether service increases are possible, but whether they are needed. Regardless of logistics or feasibility, Congleton deserves more services than Stone, Kidsgrove & Alsager.
You would either just catch up with a Class 4 freight or remove freight paths from the timetable. I don't disagree that it shouldn't be increased but that isn't HS2 dependent. You wouldn't necessarily be able to use all the benefits either, especially as a slow line train is going to stop at stations. Might be 3 or 4 minutes to be had if you did all of the up slow from Polesworth to Newbold.
Speaking of polesworth? Anyone know whether its gonna get more than 1 train a day after may?
No. Going to be the same as today. One train towards Crewe as it is.
Shame there isn't an evening one at least then one could do a return with a potential change over to the South at Tamworth.