• 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!

LNR new WCML timetable, May 2019 (in open data feeds)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Do we need wolverhampton to walsall that frequent though?

I'm not convinced I would think of it as Wolves-Walsall, it's really two separate services (Brum-Wolves and Brum-Walsall) that are interworked partly for operational convenience and partly as a sop to people because of the closure of the proper Wolves-Walsall service, despite the fact that it's so slow nobody would ever use it for that journey; they would take the bus.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,748
I'm not convinced I would think of it as Wolves-Walsall, it's really two separate services (Brum-Wolves and Brum-Walsall) that are interworked partly for operational convenience and partly as a sop to people because of the closure of the proper Wolves-Walsall service, despite the fact that it's so slow nobody would ever use it for that journey; they would take the bus.
Why do we need it then and how is it 2 separate services?
 

700007

Established Member
Joined
6 May 2017
Messages
1,195
Location
Near a bunch of sheds that aren't 66s.
If Wolverhampton to Rugeley doesn't tickle your taste buds then Birmingham International to Rugeley. I was going for more what Bletchleyite just said, joining two different flows for the sake of operational convenience.

But does that proposal sound more ideal, provided paths could be found to properly make this work? I would want diagrams to mostly be self contained as well. Delivers the links, delivers the reliability and by scaling it back should be able to recover a few units that could be added to make trains longer and removes the occupation of Birmingham New Street.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
But does that proposal sound more ideal, provided paths could be found to properly make this work? I would want diagrams to mostly be self contained as well. Delivers the links, delivers the reliability and by scaling it back should be able to recover a few units that could be added to make trains longer and removes the occupation of Birmingham New Street.

I think this is absolutely crucial, as it allows things to be corrected more easily when they go wrong. While it's less of an issue at the Euston end, if you have a unit and crew that is just doing, say, Brum to Liverpool and back all day, if it ends up very late you can cancel one round trip, keep both unit and crew at Liverpool (say), and it's straight back on time. You can't do that with the present set of diagrams as it's got to end up somewhere totally different and runs on a much longer circuit.

I really think the DfT (if it was them) has got this VERY wrong, and it all needs splitting back up again to a self contained set of diagrams and services thus:

Brum-Euston via Northampton 3tph
Euston-Tring twice hourly interworked with Euston-MKC hourly if this is of benefit
Euston-Liverpool via Trent Valley/Crewe 1tph
Birmingham-Liverpool via Crewe 1tph
Birmingham-Crewe via Stoke (in reality the direct service to Euston via Birmingham is so slow that nobody is going to use it) 1tph
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Years ago they wanted to withdraw the service. Local and MPs didn’t let it happen. They did to keep it to keep public happy.

No, they wanted to withdraw the direct service and actually did. This was done as a sop, but it was pointless as nobody will go between those two places via Birmingham as it takes ages compared with the direct bus every 10 minutes or so.
 

sufian123

Member
Joined
1 May 2017
Messages
1,160
Location
Birmingham
No, they wanted to withdraw the direct service and actually did. This was done as a sop, but it was pointless as nobody will go between those two places via Birmingham as it takes ages compared with the direct bus every 10 minutes or so.

I was thinking it was this one. Thanks for clearing.
 

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,748
Birmingham-Crewe via Stoke (in reality the direct service to Euston via Birmingham is so slow that nobody is going to use it) 1tph
In the weekday mornings and also possibly evenings need more than 1 an hour both ways. Its packed on the loop more so than it was before the timetable the current morning train times dont make sense anyway

But yeah, direct euston we dont need just idiot people who wanted the convenience of having one.

Some could be sent further than brum though since we currently have services which go to Coventry every sunday instead of birmingham for 2 hours
 

sufian123

Member
Joined
1 May 2017
Messages
1,160
Location
Birmingham
In the weekday mornings and also possibly evenings need more than 1 an hour both ways. Its packed on the loop more so than it was before the timetable the current morning train times dont make sense anyway

But yeah, direct euston we dont need just idiot people who wanted the convenience of having one.

Some could be sent further than brum though since we currently have services which go to Coventry every sunday instead of birmingham for 2 hours

Feel sorry for people on the loop on Sunday’s.
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
I think this is absolutely crucial, as it allows things to be corrected more easily when they go wrong. While it's less of an issue at the Euston end, if you have a unit and crew that is just doing, say, Brum to Liverpool and back all day, if it ends up very late you can cancel one round trip, keep both unit and crew at Liverpool (say), and it's straight back on time. You can't do that with the present set of diagrams as it's got to end up somewhere totally different and runs on a much longer circuit.

I really think the DfT (if it was them) has got this VERY wrong, and it all needs splitting back up again to a self contained set of diagrams and services thus:

Brum-Euston via Northampton 3tph
Euston-Tring twice hourly interworked with Euston-MKC hourly if this is of benefit
Euston-Liverpool via Trent Valley/Crewe 1tph
Birmingham-Liverpool via Crewe 1tph
Birmingham-Crewe via Stoke (in reality the direct service to Euston via Birmingham is so slow that nobody is going to use it) 1tph

Should be:

London - Wolverhampton via Birmingham 1tph

London to Crewe via Birmingham 1tph

London to Liverpool via Birmingham 1tph

London to Crewe via Stafford 1tph

London to Liverpool via Stafford 1tph

London to Tring 1tph

London to MKC 2tph

Birmingham International to Rugeley 2tph to be part of the Cross City Network .
 

Spoorslag '70

Member
Joined
29 Oct 2017
Messages
272
Location
Garching (b. München)
How about the following:

London - Wolverhampton via Birmingham 1tph
London - Rugeley TV via Birmingham 2tph
Birmingham International to Liverpool 2tph
London - Crewe via TV (and Stoke?) 2tph
London - Tring 2tph
London - Milton Keynes 1tph

When doing it right, it could give nice 30min frequencies, it should deliver a relatively reliable service and it is symmetric. I don't think it's a good idea to interwork the Eustons with the Rugeley, but that's probably the best you can get when you don't want to terminate stuff at New Street (as the line to Wolverhampton is quite busy).
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The london trains cross new street anyway at least these ones wouldnt split

True.

An advantage of that proposal would be that you could just run everything as permanently coupled 8-car sets all day except the via Stoke train (obtaining more rolling stock if necessary) meaning adequate capacity. Would require some additional 319s though. In the peaks, another 4 could be added/removed at Northampton/Bletchley.
 

adrock1976

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2013
Messages
4,450
Location
What's it called? It's called Cumbernauld
Another problem seems to be with the present timetable creating cross Birmingham New Street journeys here is that the frequencies either side of New Street does not really fit with anything, as it is every 20 minutes or thereabouts New Street - London Euston via Northampton, and for Rugeley Trent Valley via Walsall, and Liverpool Lime Street is every 30 minutes or thereabouts.

When I was at primary school many moons ago, 30 and 20 does not go.

Until when HS2 comes along, I believe a better outcome would be for the ex London Euston - Birmingham NS via Northampton to be as follows:

1tph terminates New Street
1tph runs to Crewe via Stoke-on-Trent
1tph runs to Liverpool Lime Street

The service pattern for the other routes would be:

1tph Birmingham International - Liverpool Lime Street
2tph London Euston - Crewe via ex Trent Valley Railway and the direct route between Stafford and Crewe
2tph Birmingham New Street - Rugeley TV via Walsall
2tph Tring local
2tph London Euston - Milton Keynes Central calling Harrow & Wealdstone, Watford Junction, Tring, Bletchley, and MK Central (if it can fit, with the calling pattern something like that or similar. Unsure how it would work though, or if it would upset a lot of passengers)

When HS2 eventually arrives (off topic for this thread though), I would recommend trimming the Birmingham via Northampton from every 20 minutes or thereabouts to every 30 minutes. I might have a go at designing a Taktplan (clock face departures) to see what a post-HS2 traditional Intercity, local, and regional express would look like along the ex London & Birmingham Railway section of the West Coast Mainline.
 

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,748
Another problem seems to be with the present timetable creating cross Birmingham New Street journeys here is that the frequencies either side of New Street does not really fit with anything, as it is every 20 minutes or thereabouts New Street - London Euston via Northampton, and for Rugeley Trent Valley via Walsall, and Liverpool Lime Street is every 30 minutes or thereabouts.

When I was at primary school many moons ago, 30 and 20 does not go.

Until when HS2 comes along, I believe a better outcome would be for the ex London Euston - Birmingham NS via Northampton to be as follows:

1tph terminates New Street
1tph runs to Crewe via Stoke-on-Trent
1tph runs to Liverpool Lime Street

The service pattern for the other routes would be:

1tph Birmingham International - Liverpool Lime Street
2tph London Euston - Crewe via ex Trent Valley Railway and the direct route between Stafford and Crewe
2tph Birmingham New Street - Rugeley TV via Walsall
2tph Tring local
2tph London Euston - Milton Keynes Central calling Harrow & Wealdstone, Watford Junction, Tring, Bletchley, and MK Central (if it can fit, with the calling pattern something like that or similar. Unsure how it would work though, or if it would upset a lot of passengers)

When HS2 eventually arrives (off topic for this thread though), I would recommend trimming the Birmingham via Northampton from every 20 minutes or thereabouts to every 30 minutes. I might have a go at designing a Taktplan (clock face departures) to see what a post-HS2 traditional Intercity, local, and regional express would look like along the ex London & Birmingham Railway section of the West Coast Mainline.

Is their really a need for 2tph london to crewe via TV?

Their are limited amount of stock available as it is and it doesn’t really solve the problem except isolating rugeley local as well as boost TV services

Iam sure the trent valley will be fine if all trains were 8 car every hour like LNR try to do so now.

(Try being the key word unfortunately)
 

bionic

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2013
Messages
883
Future plans include a Euston to Crewe direct via the Trent Valley and a Euston to Crewe with a wobble after Rugby (via Coventry), rejoining the Trent Valley at Nuneaton. Presumably that will up things to half hourly. Not sure of the thinking behind the via Cov part though.
 

si404

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
1,267
Not sure of the thinking behind the via Cov part though.
I'd imagine keeping 3 fast services an hour at Coventry post-2026, and also providing the Trent Valley with direct service to a large nearby city just off the route (cf the Stafford-Stoke-Crewe route the services took until last month).
 

DavidGrain

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2017
Messages
1,233
The plan is to increase the Coventry Nuneaton service to 2tph but this requires the construction of a new bay platform at Coventry. I don't know if the thinking is to make this additional train part of a through service from Euston to Rugeley and further north post HS2. I am sure the business case for the Rugeley to Euston via Birmingham was based on serving Walsall traffic with a direct service to London. The effect of the new timetable is that LNR trains have replaced WMR trains on the local service Rugeley (TV) to Tame Bridge Parkway then fast to Birmingham. The point of the Chase Line Electrification, I thought was to enable some of the Birmingham to Walsall locals to continue to Rugeley Town just serving Rugeley TV to allow connections to WCML services via Trent Valley.
 

6026KingJohn

Member
Joined
8 May 2019
Messages
88
Future plans include a Euston to Crewe direct via the Trent Valley and a Euston to Crewe with a wobble after Rugby (via Coventry), rejoining the Trent Valley at Nuneaton. Presumably that will up things to half hourly. Not sure of the thinking behind the via Cov part though.
Would also require Coventry-Nuneaton to be electrified.
 

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,748
Signal fault at birmingham new street disrupting services heading back to london and up from london.

Your right about one thing, the routes needs to be isolated. It’s ridiculous the timetable proving a failure and LNR didnt even put any arrangements in place as far as i know

Would have been nice if they sent additional services on a similar timing to timetable like they have done before??
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Signal fault at birmingham new street disrupting services heading back to london and up from london.

Your right about one thing, the routes needs to be isolated. It’s ridiculous the timetable proving a failure and LNR didnt even put any arrangements in place as far as i know

It used to be the case that in the event of something serious like that happening they'd split services at Northampton so the bit on the other side of Northampton from the disruption would remain punctual. Too complex to do that now?
 

87015

Established Member
Joined
3 Mar 2006
Messages
4,901
Location
GEML/WCML/SR
Another absolute shower of a peak with prime trains running ECS instead. Euston in bits with everyone in hiding or declaring not their train company as usual despite the seemingly hundred pointless “security/customer service” bods.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
It used to be the case that in the event of something serious like that happening they'd split services at Northampton so the bit on the other side of Northampton from the disruption would remain punctual. Too complex to do that now?

Surely the basic operation at Northampton hasn't got *that* much more complex? Or is at a case whereby if something gets terminated at Northampton, previously all it was doing was missing a trip to Brum and back, but now it means a missing service for Liverpool/Rugeley/Stoke and back a few hours later, so not keeping drivers in the right place any more?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top