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

sd0733 · 5 Jul 2019

Baxenden Bank said:
Today:
9K24 (1215 ex Euston), 21 minutes late at Stafford so sent straight up the mainline, arrived 3 minutes late at Crewe, perhaps reasonable.
9K32 (1615 ex Euston, 1820 ex New Street) a mere 8 minutes late at Stafford, yet also sent straight up the mainline to Crewe arriving 10 minutes early.

The trains have a 28 minute lay-over at Crewe but the staff don't (or didn't use to).

Better than Saturday I suppose, last train southbound from Crewe via the wobble at 1602 rather than 2102!

At least 90% of the jobs do have a layover at Crewe off the wobble as most jobs are a double Birmingham via Stoke with the PNBs at Birmingham
The problem with many of the diversions is Crewe is the only depot which signs via Stoke so if we cant cover both driver and guard and another depot covers either role it WILL be sent via Madeley due to route knowledge not the delays.

RailUK Forums

mmh · 5 Jul 2019

RailWonderer said:
Why mess with a timetable that worked fine, wasn't broken?

The new timetable considerably speeds up journeys to the north from Rugby, Nuneaton and all the Trent Valley stations. In that respect it's an improvement.

VT 390 · 5 Jul 2019

mmh said:
The new timetable considerably speeds up journeys to the north from Rugby, Nuneaton and all the Trent Valley stations. In that respect it's an improvement.

I thought it was to introduce more 8 coach services on Trent Valley services but that is a positive effect to when the service actually runs.

Bletchleyite · 5 Jul 2019

VT 390 said:
I thought it was to introduce more 8 coach services on Trent Valley services but that is a positive effect to when the service actually runs.

Yes, that was the primary reason.

mmh · 5 Jul 2019

VT 390 said:
I thought it was to introduce more 8 coach services on Trent Valley services but that is a positive effect to when the service actually runs.

Another side effect of the Trent Valley changes is it's now only approximately 30 minutes longer for London to North Wales journeys via LNR + TFW compared to VT + TFW, with reasonable connection times at Crewe.

Makes LNR's very cheap advances and TFW's reasonable-ish ones very tempting against VT's fares. I suspect I may never use VT again unless I can't book the day before.

Of course if I lived in Stoke or Stone I'd have a far less positive view!

BucksBones · 6 Jul 2019

mmh said:
Another side effect of the Trent Valley changes is it's now only approximately 30 minutes longer for London to North Wales journeys via LNR + TFW compared to VT + TFW, with reasonable connection times at Crewe.

That’s the theory anyway.... Given that the LNR timetable has turned into such an impunctual mess I wouldn’t rate your chances of getting the intended TfW connection! At least VT run to time....

sufian123 · 6 Jul 2019

Is this the solution they’ve come up with rugeley trains terminating early. It arrived rugeley 24 min late. Will it be express to Birmingham or Walsall?

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/P45645/2019/07/06/advanced

RealTrains07 · 6 Jul 2019

sd0733 said:
At least 90% of the jobs do have a layover at Crewe off the wobble as most jobs are a double Birmingham via Stoke with the PNBs at Birmingham
The problem with many of the diversions is Crewe is the only depot which signs via Stoke so if we cant cover both driver and guard and another depot covers either role it WILL be sent via Madeley due to route knowledge not the delays.

Understandable but still unacceptable, if we had a more frequent train service wouldn’t be such an issue

RealTrains07 · 6 Jul 2019

mmh said:
Of course if I lived in Stoke or Stone I'd have a far less positive view!

Still a long way between stafford and crewe on the direct line. Shaves off about 15 minutes i thought

And yes as someone else who unfortunately lives on the wobble it is pretty terrible

Bletchleyite · 7 Jul 2019

On the 1632 Euston to New St. I'd expect this one to be busy but it's very quiet. Anecdotally it does seem passengers are deserting them in droves, presumably due to the punctuality issues.

Hadders · 7 Jul 2019

This time last year GTR completely destroyed the leisure market on the GN side during the shambles. I posted at the time about how quiet the trains were on Saturdays and Sundays.

One particular journey, a Saturday evening, hot summers day, 8 carriage train from Kings Cross to Stevenage you’d expect it to be wedged but just half a dozen passengers got off. Never seen anything like it in over 20 years of regularly using the service.

Thankfully now that the service has settled down compared to last year the passenger numbers appear to have recovered. It’d be interesting to know what the true damage was to the numbers and whether or not they have genuinely recovered.

sd0733 · 7 Jul 2019

Bletchleyite said:
On the 1632 Euston to New St. I'd expect this one to be busy but it's very quiet. Anecdotally it does seem passengers are deserting them in droves, presumably due to the punctuality issues.

Some services we work are noticeably quieter than they were before the timetable change.
They reckon that there has been a big increase in passenger numbers since the TT change though not sure how.

RealTrains07 · 7 Jul 2019

The 19:05 VT euston to lime street on the other hand is rammed.

It annoys me how busy sunday services are... its sunday.

I would be surprised if LNR services were rammed on a sunday but then again that will be different in december

Bletchleyite · 7 Jul 2019

Plenty of people day trip London on Sundays. The early evening services were always busy before. That said perhaps the increase to all 8 car is just doing it's stuff.

Hadders · 7 Jul 2019

RealTrains07 said:
It annoys me how busy sunday services are... its sunday.

Sunday afternoons are one of the busiest times on the network, particularly for long distance travel.

As well as people who've been for a day out somewhere you have people who've been away for the weekend going back home. And a degree of people travelling long distance to be in the right place for work tomorrow morning.

Nothing new about any of this.

Bletchleyite · 7 Jul 2019

Yes, I'd agree that the real peaks for IC (e.g. VTWC) are actually Friday evening and Sunday afternoon, though admittedly the former is more compressed.

RealTrains07 · 9 Jul 2019

Had a thought about liverpool to london LNR services

Would it be possible or better if instead of attaching to an existing euston to brum service that the Birmingham to Liverpool services are attached to a brand new Birmingham to euston service which stops at less stations making it faster??
Creating a faster london - Liverpool service which still stops at birmingham and stops at all/most stations between crewe and liverpool lime

Even if its just 1 fast service an hour and 1 continuing to use the existing brum to euston??

43074 · 9 Jul 2019

RealTrains07 said:
Had a thought about liverpool to london LNR services

Would it be possible or better if instead of attaching to an existing euston to brum service that the Birmingham to Liverpool services are attached to a brand new Birmingham to euston service which stops at less stations making it faster??
Creating a faster london - Liverpool service which still stops at birmingham and stops at all/most stations between crewe and liverpool lime

Even if its just 1 fast service an hour and 1 continuing to use the existing brum to euston??

There are neither stock or paths in the timetable for that between Birmingham and London. LNR shouldn't be trying to be the through train between Liverpool and London with the Birmingham services anyway.

Bletchleyite · 9 Jul 2019

RealTrains07 said:
Had a thought about liverpool to london LNR services

Would it be possible or better if instead of attaching to an existing euston to brum service that the Birmingham to Liverpool services are attached to a brand new Birmingham to euston service which stops at less stations making it faster??
Creating a faster london - Liverpool service which still stops at birmingham and stops at all/most stations between crewe and liverpool lime

Even if its just 1 fast service an hour and 1 continuing to use the existing brum to euston??

No paths.

If you want a fast service from Liverpool/Brum to London use VT. LNR's remit is not to do that.

One of the 3 already is quite fast anyway, it's only Euston-Watford-MKC-Wolverton-Northampton then onto Brum via more stops.

pt_mad · 9 Jul 2019

Bletchleyite said:
No paths.

If you want a fast service from Liverpool/Brum to London use VT. LNR's remit is not to do that.

One of the 3 already is quite fast anyway, it's only Euston-Watford-MKC-Wolverton-Northampton then onto Brum via more stops.

Indeed one of the three I believe does it in roughly 1 hr 59 which is pretty good for a semi fast.

The real advantage of the through Liverpool is connecting Coventry and Birmingham Airport to Runcorn, Lime Street and Merseyrail at South Parkway. As well as John Lennon Airport to the Coventry corridor and Milton Keynes areas.

Perhaps one of the via Birmingham services could have started and terminated at Rugby per hour as there doesn't seem to be a shortage of bay platforms there? And that would achieve linking the Coventry corridor to Merseyside without having to run all the way to London.

RealTrains07 · 9 Jul 2019

pt_mad said:
Indeed one of the three I believe does it in roughly 1 hr 59 which is pretty good for a semi fast.

The real advantage of the through Liverpool is connecting Coventry and Birmingham Airport to Runcorn, Lime Street and Merseyrail at South Parkway. As well as John Lennon Airport to the Coventry corridor and Milton Keynes areas.

Perhaps one of the via Birmingham services could have started and terminated at Rugby per hour as there doesn't seem to be a shortage of bay platforms there? And that would achieve linking the Coventry corridor to Merseyside without having to run all the way to London.

Theirs plenty of LNR connections from rugby so cant see why that wouldn’t work

Commuters may complain in South WCML of poor service though

Bletchleyite · 9 Jul 2019

RealTrains07 said:
Commuters may complain in South WCML of poor service though

Only if you do it by removing an existing south of Northampton service.

E6007 · 9 Jul 2019

There's only one platform bay at Rugby now, and that's south facing!

Silverlink · 10 Jul 2019

Does anyone have the class 319 diagrams to Northampton?

E6007 · 10 Jul 2019

06:51 ex Northampton and 17:53 and 19:54 ex Euston Mon - Fri.

RealTrains07 · 12 Jul 2019

I know this keeps being brought up but i dont see how this timetable will get beyond December, today broken down train South WCML + shortage of crew

Disaster on all routes/services

sufian123 · 12 Jul 2019

RealTrains07 said:
I know this keeps being brought up but i dont see how this timetable will get beyond December, today broken down train South WCML + shortage of crew

Disaster on all routes/services

I’m presuming WMT management are waiting for someone to get hurt. Harsh reality, Bescot mugging the other night. They didn’t listen As they not humans they are bunch of animals. They want stakeholders happy then us. Only somehow we convince passengers not to travel with them at all. Complaints don’t help. We go to parliament ourselves. This is enough! Enough is enough.

bramling · 13 Jul 2019

sufian123 said:
I’m presuming WMT management are waiting for someone to get hurt. Harsh reality, Bescot mugging the other night. They didn’t listen As they not humans they are bunch of animals. They want stakeholders happy then us. Only somehow we convince passengers not to travel with them at all. Complaints don’t help. We go to parliament ourselves. This is enough! Enough is enough.

Something will be done if enough commuters complain, especially at the London end of the route.

The whole thing must really be messing up LNwR’s figures though. The depressing thing is it was so predictable.

It’s also a good point that the Chase Line already had a decent link to London services via Rugeley TV. So apart from the odd through journey to somewhere like Coventry, there really is virtually zero benefit to passengers on this route, against considerable inconvenience and vulnerability to delays.

pt_mad · 13 Jul 2019

bramling said:
Something will be done if enough commuters complain, especially at the London end of the route.

The whole thing must really be messing up LNwR’s figures though. The depressing thing is it was so predictable.

It’s also a good point that the Chase Line already had a decent link to London services via Rugeley TV. So apart from the odd through journey to somewhere like Coventry, there really is virtually zero benefit to passengers on this route, against considerable inconvenience and vulnerability to delays.

Perhaps Walsall was supposed to be the real benefactor of the hourly London? It ain't a small place by any means and must surely have been one of the largest in the UK that distance from London without a regular direct service?

Cannock isn't exactly a village halt either.

DavidGrain · 13 Jul 2019

Walsall has been promised a direct train service to London for many years. It was one of the largest towns in England without at direct service (Yes I know some people disputed that when I mentioned it before). Rugeley was previously served by a local train service from Birmingham which ran no-stop to Tame Bridge Parkway then all stations to Rugeley. It is ridiculous that LNR rather than WMR is expected to tack this local service onto a long distance semi-express service. Yes I know that the timetable shows the service to Birmingham International as WMR but it is in fact worked by LNR.

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

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member